N6 old Athlone to Ballinasloe road

patmac

I have just found out that the road I use everyday that was for all it's life had a 100 km/60 miles ph speed limit has been changed to 80km. This is the old N6 now the R446 from Athlone to Ballinasloe, that until recently took all the traffic that was heading from Dublin to Galway.

Where is the sense in this. There have been little or no accidents on this road. I now will have to travel on the motorway adding an extra 10kms per day to my journey, and I am trying to save fuel as it is.

In the last 6 months I have not seen one guard on the road but twice in the last week a neighbour was stopped just as the limits were introduced.

The whole area is in uproar.

With all the added charges, taxes and every other expense we have had to endure, some stupid bureaucrat decides to introduce this pointless measure.

What a stupid country we live in.

MugMugs

patmac wrote: »

The whole area is in uproar.

You're not Joe Duffy, by any chance, are you?

They do this as the "Moho-way" (said in my Westmeath accent) is now in situ.

The 100KPH isn't required and it's another incentive to push you onto the "moho-way" and pay the Bsloe toll.

Mister Jingles

All the old N roads that had Motorways built near them have become R roads which the speed limit has been reduced to 80 km/h from 100 km/h. Nothing to do with safety what so ever. The old N3 now the R147 is the best example of this, 80 km/h all the way from Dunboyne to Kells. Reason ? Because its to encourage people to use the M3 and pay the two tolls, and when the private operators don't reach their annual (or something like that) targets the government i.e. we the tax payer pays the rest. Saying that most people tend to do around 90-100 km/h.

MugMugs

Mister Jingles wrote: »

Saying that most people tend to do around 90-100 km/h.

There's more Go Safe on that road than there is Asphalt.

Mister Jingles

MugMugs wrote: »

There's more Go Safe on that road than there is Asphalt.

I don't use it that often but I've never seen a speed van on it. The old speed cameras are there still but burned out and have been for many years.

Ronnie Beck

Mister Jingles wrote: »

I don't use it that often but I've never seen a speed van on it. The old speed cameras are there still but burned out and have been for many years.

Rumour has it that they go off at 140 km/h.Went by the dunboyne one at 120 last week and it didn't go off...

It made fairly ridiculous that good roads like that are reduced to 80km/h, when you still have 100km/h limits on some mental roads. Some real dodgy 100km/hr backroads in the west especially, just so that they can say an area is serviced by a primary road.

For example :cool:

dgt

Reducing speed limits on wide main roads? Welcome to County Meath

MugMugs

dgt wrote: »

Reducing speed limits on wide main roads? Welcome to County Meath

Athlone is Westmeath

In saying that, The Dundalk to Mullingar run I do is generally 100KPH the whole way through Louth, hit Meath and 80 / 60 into Westmeath and back up to 100KPH.

Who's running Meath CoCo?

sentient_6

My understanding is when the motorway first opened a few years ago the council used their powers/discretion/whatever to keep it at 100 at the time. Strange that after all this time its been dropped. I drive that road every other day. By the way you mentioned running costs......gentle drive at 80 is mighty for the economy. if you can put with all the big balls in their audis losing their minds.

dgt

MugMugs wrote: »

Athlone is Westmeath

In saying that, The Dundalk to Mullingar run I do is generally 100KPH the whole way through Louth, hit Meath and 80 / 60 into Westmeath and back up to 100KPH.

Athboy to Delvin: 80kmh in Meath, 100kmh in Westmeath.
N51 Navan to Drogheda: 80kmh in Meath, 100kmh in Louth.
Then there's Summerhills ridiculously long 50kmh limit out of the town. Plenty more examples....

A lot of the main roads are well built and structured to handle bigger volumes of faster traffic (*cough R147/Old N3 *cough)

So to answer your question:

MugMugs wrote: »

Who's running Meath CoCo?

Someone working for eurolink would be my guess :pac:

L1011

Ronnie Beck wrote: »

Rumour has it that they go off at 140 km/h.Went by the dunboyne one at 120 last week and it didn't go off...

GoSafe vans don't flash. Infrared

The pole mounted units are all burnt out wrecks.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

MugMugs wrote: »

Athlone is Westmeath

In saying that, The Dundalk to Mullingar run I do is generally 100KPH the whole way through Louth, hit Meath and 80 / 60 into Westmeath and back up to 100KPH.

Who's running Meath CoCo?

Actually, the stretch of road the OP refers to is in Roscommon. We pronounce it mawwwwthurway FYI

MugMugs

deccurley wrote: »

Actually, the stretch of road the OP refers to is in Roscommon. We pronounce it mawwwwthurway FYI

Banged to rights there!

challengemaster

patmac wrote: »

and I am trying to save fuel as it is.

You have a point, but you've undermined yourself with this. 80km/h is better from a fuel saving point of view.

Sam Russell

This practice is particularly prevalent in the vacinity of PPP tolls.

Driving from Galway to Craughwell the signs direct you to the motorway and then exit you onto a narrow boreen back road onto the old N6 on the edge of Craughwell . It should direct you through Oranmore on the N18 and onto the old N6 - a nice wide direct route.

Why do they do this?

RealExpert

As stated by challengemaster 80kph is better from a fuel saving point of view.I also use the old rd to Athlone if im in the town,Its shorter and less wear & tear on the car.Have you considered leaving 5 mins earlier

patmac

Anyway I contacted my local councillor and coincidentally the decision was reversed last night on almost all of the stretch of road so all the money spent on the 80km signs will now have to be re-spent on 100km signs. Local politics don't you just love it!

kippy

patmac wrote: »

Anyway I contacted my local councillor and coincidentally the decision was reversed last night on almost all of the stretch of road so all the money spent on the 80km signs will now have to be re-spent on 100km signs. Local politics don't you just love it!

Idiots tbh.
And who is gonna foot the bill? Idiots like you and me.

MugMugs

kippy wrote: »

Idiots tbh.
And who is gonna foot the bill? Idiots like you and me.

I imagine they can just use the old signs?

kippy

MugMugs wrote: »

I imagine they can just use the old signs?

I'm sure there's a cost involved in the man hours required....... even IF they reuse the old signs........

MugMugs

kippy wrote: »

I'm sure there's a cost involved in the man hours required....... even IF they reuse the old signs........

I can't imagine why they wouldn't use the old signs.

It not going to take a two man crew more than a day to replace the signs either.

kippy

MugMugs wrote: »

I can't imagine why they wouldn't use the old signs.

It not going to take a two man crew more than a day to replace the signs either.

1. We don't know whether they will or they can re-use the old signs. One would assume there is nothing to stop them doing this - however you have to remember who we are dealing with here.
2. Lets assume it takes them one day to put them back up. It took them one day to take them down. 2 days by 2 men = 4 days labour for the guys fitting the signs. Then factor in the time spent by planners, procurement, and indeed those voting on this and you've probably a few more expensive days labour.....

In a country of dwindling finances and cuts to every service imaginable the bad planning and decisions making, probably by just one person initially has cost the state 6 or 7 days labour at least one would suggest. Never mind the cost of signs and any costs we are not aware of.

It's the "small" mistakes like this that add up across the board being honest and it's our acceptance of them that's a big problem.

MugMugs

I'm not getting into a debate on it.

All I said that signs are generally retained for use elsewhere and that it's a two man job at a day max to replace the signs.

Go lobby your council if you want an argument.

kippy

MugMugs wrote: »

I'm not getting into a debate on it.

All I said that signs are generally retained for use elsewhere and that it's a two man job at a day max to replace the signs.

Go lobby your council if you want an argument.

Ah, am just pointing out one very obvious example of "waste" in how our tax euros are going and how absolutely nothing will be done to ensure the same thing happens again.

This type of decision making happens all over the place with the result that, I would suggest, millions are wasted every year because of incompetence.

Saying, ah sure it's only a day here and there, is grand, but when you add all those days up..........

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

We're getting very close to a Public Service bashing thread here.

kippy

deccurley wrote: »

We're getting very close to a Public Service bashing thread here.

Are we?
Really?
I'm just stating the obvious waste of money this one particular incident has turned out to be due to the incompetence of one or more than one person and am stating that I believe this to be just one very obvious example of wasted euros in a system that has no repercussions for the those who make decisions that cost money.
Are you disagreeing what that?

challengemaster

MugMugs wrote: »

It not going to take a two man crew more than a day to replace the signs either.

Then you're seriously deluded about how "efficient" the county council are.

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

kippy wrote: »

Are we?
Really?
I'm just stating the obvious waste of money this one particular incident has turned out to be due to the incompetence of one or more than one person and am stating that I believe this to be just one very obvious example of wasted euros in a system that has no repercussions for the those who make decisions that cost money.
Are you disagreeing what that?

Yes.
We Are.

I agree that this has been a waste of money and I for one have been affected by what was/is, IMO, a complete joke that the Old N6 was limited to 80kph when secondary roads 1/3rd it's width that join it are set at the same limit. But who says it was incompetence? Who knows what stupid directive or rule designated the change in limit? But maybe you're spot on in what you're saying.

coylemj

kippy wrote: »

Idiots tbh.
And who is gonna foot the bill? Idiots like you and me.

Better if they took the money out of the budget used to send councillors on useless conferences though in this case the fault would lie with faceless and unaccountable council officials since councillors have virtually no power to do anything these days.

That's one of the widest single-carriageway roads in the country, absolutely mad to put that speed limit on it. They demolished and rebuilt two pubs (Connaughtons and Milllers) when that road was widened in the 1970s, used to be pretty mad the week of Galway races as people rushed to get to Loughrea before it jammed up completely when it was the major bottleneck between Athlone and Galway.

kippy

deccurley wrote: »

Yes.
We Are.

I agree that this has been a waste of money and I for one have been affected by what was/is, IMO, a complete joke that the Old N6 was limited to 80kph when secondary roads 1/3rd it's width that join it are set at the same limit. But who says it was incompetence? Who knows what stupid directive or rule designated the change in limit? But maybe you're spot on in what you're saying.

Someone somewhere has been incompetent. Whether it be a lawmaker, or a decision maker. Someone somewhere had no idea and no care for the cost implications involved in their decision.

kippy

coylemj wrote: »

Better if they took the money out of the budget used to send councillors on useless conferences though in this case the fault would lie with faceless and unaccountable council officials since councillors have virtually no power to do anything these days.

I dont disagree, the savings should come from both places tbh.

Black_Knight

The old N6 was great since the motorway. Very light traffic, and did Galway-> Athlone in about an hour. Nice alternative if you wanted to dodge the toll and take the scenic route. Many a time driving from Galway-Dublin id take the old N6 from Galway to Ballinasloe, breaks up the drive and divil a bit in the difference.
I can only see the speed drop as a way to try force a few more onto the motorway for the toll.

coylemj

Black_Knight wrote: »

I can only see the speed drop as a way to try force a few more onto the motorway for the toll.

I don't buy that conspiracy theory at all, the officials in Roscommon co. co. have no brief to push people on to motorways because they get no money from the tolls and they don't have to compensate the toll operator if not enough people use the motorway.

More like it was a stupid blanket move with no thought behind it, like the one that put an 80 kmh limit on this road.....

Black_Knight

coylemj wrote: »

I don't buy that conspiracy theory at all, the officials in Roscommon co. co. have no brief to push people on to motorways because they get no money from the tolls and they don't have to compensate the toll operator if not enough people use the motorway.

More like it was a stupid blanket move with no thought behind it, like the one that put an 80 kmh limit on this road.....

Pushing them onto the Motorway means less cars on Roscommon roads, which in turn means less wear and tear on Roscommon CC roads so they dont have to spend money on maintaining them.

Sam Russell

Black_Knight wrote: »

Pushing them onto the Motorway means less cars on Roscommon roads, which in turn means less wear and tear on Roscommon CC roads so they dont have to spend money on maintaining them.

That would suggest some thought went into it. The same happened the old Enfield road when the new (tolled) road openned up. R designation and 80kph speed limit.

It is obvious that it is all to divert traffic onto the (tolled) motorway. It is not done for non-tolled motorways.