[Article] Dual Carriageways to be re-classified as Motorways

jrar

E92 wrote:

I would like Motorways to have a speed limit of 140 at least, however not until such time as Irish people can drive properly.

Looks like we're stuck with the 120 limit so - at least in our lifetime

E92

On the German sections of the Autobahn where there are no speed limits, the average speed is 150 km/h. So, it would seem that the Germans at least make some use of the fact that they have no speed limit.

I've noticed that in this country we seem to drive slowly on M-ways(like at 90 or 100), and then those same drivers who are well under the speed limit decide that once they are off the Motorway and back onto single carriageway decide that they will now travel at 110!

I don't exceed the speed limit on a Motorway(well the speedo says I'm doing more than 120, but speedos always over read by about 5%), but if there was no speed limit on a Motorway I would certainly drive a lot faster than that, as in as fast as my car would allow me to!

I mean the truth of the matter is that no speed limits on a Motorway doesn't mean that everyone has to or will go flat out. It is expensive to drive very quickly (poorer fuel consumption once you go past around 130 km/h), and I admit that there are enviornmental issues with it(though the difference to pollution would be so small as to have no meaningful increase in CO2 emissions). Some people aren't interested in driving fast either, so why would they drive quickly?

As I said already, the idea of no speed limits is a brilliant one in theory, but the pesky Irish drivers mean that if I could have no speed limits on Motorways in the morning, I'd say no way Jose! I don't think we're safe enough at anymore than 140 at the very most[130 would be the most we could get away with methinks](actually I have doubts about letting some Irish drivers drive at 100 never mind 120:D ).

murphaph

There's an environmental cost to travelling at 150km/h. If anything, speed limits on motorways (Europewide) will be cut in the future to something closer to 100km/h where vehicles operate more efficiently.

Victor

E92 wrote:

There is therefore nothing stopping any Standard DC from having a 120 km/h speed limit.

If all standard DC's had 120 limits, I would have no problem whatsoever with them(I'm more bothered about the fact you can only go 100 on them than anything else).

What do you mean by "Standard DC" - the Stillorgan Road?

it has been shown in Germany where they do drive properly that the parts of the German Autobahn which have no speed limit are every bit as safe as those with a speed limit

Self fulfilling argument. The dangerous bits have reduced limits, the less dangerous bits have higher or no limits.

Victor

Victor wrote:

What do you mean by "Standard DC" - the Stillorgan Road?

Self fulfilling argument. The dangerous bits have reduced limits, the less dangerous bits have higher or no limits.

Too true, but a better approach is to have variable limits (Like the London M25) then when traffic volume exceeds a certain value the limit is changed from 130 to 110Kmh as volumes increase further down to 80 or even 60 and after the "glug" (well traffic modelling is similar to that of water in pipework) increase the limits back up to the maximum.

E92

Victor wrote:

What do you mean by "Standard DC" - the Stillorgan Road?

Well as I don't live in Dublin and in fact have never been on the Stillorgan Road, I can't tell you my answer.

I mean the Cashel Bypass,that's a recently built standard DC.

That deserves a 120 limit(not at the moment, but before they started working on it, I couldn't see any real difference between it and the N8 from Watergrasshill which is a HQDC). Having just come back on the M8, I can't undserrstand why it has a speed limit of 120, when the bit after it has wider lanes and margins, and yet only has a speed limit of 100? If anything, the N8 from the Cork end of the M8 to the Dunkettle is more deserving of a 120 limit than the M8 section(but I won't complain about it having a 120 limit:D ).

As I mentioned already in a previous post, the NRA says the N1 Dundalk to the Border is a standard DC (not haviong gone on it I can't say whether that is true or not, but I take their word for it), yet it can have a 120 limit.

The N18 Limerick to Shannon bit(don't know about the Ennis bypass bit) would be unsafe to have a 120 limit IMO, though 110 would be fine, because you can turn around at certain exits, and I don't think it is wise to have traffic travelling at 120 in the overtaking lane when people can enter certain parts of the said lane starting from 0 km/h.

E92

murphaph wrote:

There's an environmental cost to travelling at 150km/h. If anything, speed limits on motorways (Europewide) will be cut in the future to something closer to 100km/h where vehicles operate more efficiently.

Indeed there is. I am aware of that. But the difference would be so small that it will make no meaningful difference whatsoever to the worlds' CO2 emissions.

Perhaps if the EU spent less of their time telling car makers to redesign their cars so as to reduce their impact on pedestrians (these rules are reckoned to have increased the price of a car by as much as €5,000 , they force cars to weigh a lot more, be a lot bigger, be less aerodynamic etc which hardly makes cars more enviornmentally friendly), and let them get on with the job of reducing cars' CO2 emissions, then cars might actually achieve meaningful reductions in CO2, rather than this ridiculous proposal to have a speed limit of 100 km/h everywhere.

I've heard that proposal before, and knowing the EU, they probably will be dumb enough to do it(eventually), which would be my worst nightmare.

The EU have decided that the car is responsible for all the EUs emission woes, and so the car is the easy target.

Of course, at the same time, they are the same crowd who make a big deal about having the open skies agreement, meaning a lot more flights, hardly the thing to do in order to reduce the worlds' carbon footprint, now is it?