The future for the M50, anything in the pipeline?

Caliden

As anyone who uses it on a daily basis between J4 and J14 will know, it's a nightmare and it's only getting worse.

The works at Newland's cross I fear won't really help matters. The flow of Northbound traffic may very well be smoother but you've got a similar flow of traffic coming on at J9.

Most days it's a carpark and after a day's work the last place you want to be is stuck in the car for an hour (God help you if there's a crash).


Does anyone know if there are any plans to improve it in anyway, adding of a fourth lane? Perhaps even allowing the hard shoulder to be used during certain hours similar to highways in the U.S.?

J7 also regularly has over 2km tailbacks or stop-start traffic most evenings so I don't know what can be done there.


I fear that if nothing is started within the next 6 months, 90 minute commutes for 30-40km distances will be the norm.

Mikros

The M50 really is the victim of the terrible planning decisions in this country over the last 10 - 20 years. It was originally intended as a bypass around Dublin but because of the suburban sprawl and location of large shopping centres nearby, it now functions as an orbital distributor with a lot of short journeys taking place. The traffic volumes are increasing and they reckon in 10 years time the volumes will be well above the operating capacity for many sections. That will also result in a lot more collisions, further causing congestion.

Increasing capacity would only help up to a point because the junctions taking traffic off the motorway will quickly be overwhelmed resulting in long tailbacks onto the motorway. The NRA proposal was to try and reduce demand by introducing partial distance based tolling system, so instead of 1 single toll, there would be 4 or 5 toll points. The idea being to manage demand better and push short journeys onto other roads (e.g. onto the outer ring road between N4 and N7).

It would probably be a very unpopular move, so it's debatable if the political will is there to do it. But if traffic continues to grow it will sooner or later be at a complete standstill. It's not going to be an easy fix whatever they do...

nc19

Caliden wrote: »

As anyone who uses it on a daily basis between J4 and J14 will know, it's a nightmare and it's only getting worse.

The works at Newland's cross I fear won't really help matters. The flow of Northbound traffic may very well be smoother but you've got a similar flow of traffic coming on at J9.

Most days it's a carpark and after a day's work the last place you want to be is stuck in the car for an hour (God help you if there's a crash).


Does anyone know if there are any plans to improve it in anyway, adding of a fourth lane? Perhaps even allowing the hard shoulder to be used during certain hours similar to highways in the U.S.?

J7 also regularly has over 2km tailbacks or stop-start traffic most evenings so I don't know what can be done there.


I fear that if nothing is started within the next 6 months, 90 minute commutes for 30-40km distances will be the norm.

Get a motorbike

/thread

Caliden

nc19 wrote: »

Get a motorbike

/thread

It's been on my mind since September and the schools came back.
Off topic: Are you a biker yourself? If so, how easy is it to learn? :pac:

Heard in a short video recently about congestion in California that if 10% of drivers were to switch to a motorbike that traffic jams would decrease by 40%.

Found an article about it (it's an actual study):
http://www.gizmag.com/motorcycles-reduce-congestion/21420/




With regards shifting traffic on to the outer ring road between the N4 & N7, unfortunately that road itself is already congested. Not sure if it's a problem with the speed limit or the sync/priority of the lights but it's definitely a problem already.

I would agree with the toll but it would be interesting to see how many sections (exits) people stay on the M50 for as I doubt anyone would willingly subject themselves to driving on it if there were other options.

seamus

It's been a number of years since I've used the M50 regularly on a commute, but I did use it back in the bad old days of two lanes, roundabouts on every junction and a toll bridge over the Liffey. Since the upgrade, I have never seen it as bad as it was then unless there's a serious accident. Back then between 4pm and 7pm you queued from Tallaght to the toll bridge, every day without exception. Further on a bad day. It took 30-60 minutes just to get down that stretch of road.

Is it still actually that congested, or are there just pain points where traffic slows down? I suspect junctions 10, 11, & 12 are a bit of trouble, they'll probably be next on the list for a freeflow upgrade after Newlands.

Idbatterim

they needed at least another lane in each direction... could they increase the speed limit to 120 for peak periods between the problematic junctions?

Mikros

Idbatterim wrote: »

they needed at least another lane in each direction... could they increase the speed limit to 120 for peak periods between the problematic junctions?

Increasing the limit will make things worse! You'll just get traffic joining the back of the queue faster. If anything you want variable speed limits in advance of congestion to lower the speed limit so you have continuously flowing (albeit slower) traffic.

The faster the traffic the bigger chance you get a standing "traffic wave", as people have to brake harder, causing a ripple back effect. I'm sure you have come across it before where everyone is braking and almost stopping for no apparent reason before speeding up again. Variable speed limits linked to intelligent traffic management systems/sensors can lower the speed of approaching vehicles allowing the wave to break up naturally or prevent it forming in the first place.

Davy

AECOM did a report for the NRA and councils back in April about possible options about tolling options, VMS etc but extra lanes isn't an option in it iirc.

Brief summary of the report:> www.nra.ie/docs/press-releases/M50-Demand-Management-Study.pdf

seamus

Mikros wrote: »

Increasing the limit will make things worse! You'll just get traffic joining the back of the queue faster. If anything you want variable speed limits in advance of congestion to lower the speed limit so you have continuously flowing (albeit slower) traffic.

Yep. Variable speeds limits which reduced the speed limits before problematic junctions at peak times would improve flow through those areas, reduce congestion and reduce the incidence of accidents. That's assuming people paid a blind bit of notice to it instead of just whinging about it.

It's the same as a technological concept known as traffic shaping, where you deliberately slow down or block some forms of traffic during peak loads to ensure that all forms of traffic have equal throughput.

One type of traffic shaping which you could apply to motorways would be an automated barrier which stops each vehicle for half a second before allowing it onto the motorway - the ensures a constant rate of traffic entering the motorway and reduces the congestion caused by big waves of merging vehicles.

Idbatterim

did they not have the space to put in an extra lane in both directions or even in one?

Carawaystick

Idbatterim wrote: »

did they not have the space to put in an extra lane in both directions or even in one?

In fairness, they went from 2 to 4 lanes...

cgcsb

A radical improvement of public transport is the solution adding lanes only adds more cars

testarossa40

A cheap "solution" would be to enforce the law and take provisional drivers off motorways AND fine/prosecute/impound as appropriate...

LXFlyer

cgcsb wrote: »

A radical improvement of public transport is the solution adding lanes only adds more cars

Unfortunately orbital journeys are notoriously difficult to plan public transport for, as no two individual journeys are the same.

Hence our orbital bus routes all divert to pass major traffic generators (shopping centres and hospitals) in order to make them a remotely viable proposition.

No Pants

Carawaystick wrote: »

In fairness, they went from 2 to 4 lanes...

There's plenty of room on the M50 yet, sure the left lane is practically empty.

monument

Idbatterim wrote: »

did they not have the space to put in an extra lane in both directions or even in one?

No.

You're likely talking about rerouting Luas, redoing major junctions again, and demolishing houses, hotels, parts of shopping centres etc

comongethappy

cgcsb wrote: »

A radical improvement of public transport is the solution adding lanes only adds more cars

absolutely.

Do any Dublin Busses use the M50?

when you plonk tens of thousands of housing units right on the motorway, it stops being an orbital road & just another road.

considering the queues to get into Sandyford in the morning, having M50 routes from Tallaght/Lucan/Blanchardstown should be doable.

nc19

Caliden wrote: »

It's been on my mind since September and the schools came back.
Off topic: Are you a biker yourself? If so, how easy is it to learn? :pac:
.

I am indeed a big hairy biker!!

easy to learn these days. You have to do a certain amount of lessons before you're allowed out and about

head over to the motorbike forum. Im sure theres a sticky there explaining everything

Julius Seizure

comongethappy wrote: »

absolutely.

Do any Dublin Busses use the M50?

when you plonk tens of thousands of housing units right on the motorway, it stops being an orbital road & just another road.

considering the queues to get into Sandyford in the morning, having M50 routes from Tallaght/Lucan/Blanchardstown should be doable.

The 76a does but it's not got many trips, and it's difficult to work out where and when it goes! I think a big blocker for an orbital bus route is that it would have to double back on itself quite a bit, which would be irritating to pax who would probably just drive instead. Take someone going from Tallaght to Blanch. They currently go up through Ballyer, onto the Chapelizod bypass and up. If this was to serve LVTC like most 76 buses it would add quite a bit

LXFlyer

As I said above with orbital trips, very few individual trips are identical or even close to being so - which means that any bus service is going to have to deviate to service the major traffic generators en route.

As the previous poster states that's likely to be off-putting to most motorists.

Aard

The answer is to get people off the M50 who don't really need to use it. Then keep traffic at a specific level just below the congestion point. This can be done through tolling, variable speed limits, and ramp metering.

Of course the other side of the coin is to keep incentivising use of public transport, cycling, and walking. Repurposing roadspace for bus lanes and cycle lanes. As long as the road capacity is there, people will use it. The phrase "victim of its own success" can apply to bus routes and cycle routes too, just as it does to the M50, as long as they're given the chance in the first place.

n97 mini

Mikros wrote: »

The idea being to manage demand better and push short journeys onto other roads (e.g. onto the outer ring road between N4 and N7).

The number of traffic lights on the outer ring road, especially at the Woodies/N4 end, really don't spell a better alternative than the M50.

Mikros

n97 mini wrote: »

The number of traffic lights on the outer ring road, especially at the Woodies/N4 end, really don't spell a better alternative than the M50.

Amazing how a few traffic lights might not seem that bad if you had to pay a €1.40 toll for a 1 junction trip on the M50.

Not saying I agree or I'd drive that way myself now, but managing demand for the M50 is going to have to be a reality in the future.

Sheldons Brain

Aard wrote: »

The answer is to get people off the M50 who don't really need to use it. Then keep traffic at a specific level just below the congestion point. This can be done through tolling, variable speed limits, and ramp metering.

The likes of Belgard Road, which carried a lot of traffic before the M50 was built, has been crippled by traffic calming more appropriate to a housing estate. This kind of thing aimed to drive traffic on the M50 and congestion is the result.

There must be some scope for express buses at commuting hours on the M50. For instance, a 75X from Tallaght to the Sandyford Luas and UCD.

KevR

Providing a rail link to Dublin Airport should help. 20+ million passengers per year through the airport all of whom currently access the airport by road!

Aard

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

There must be some scope for express buses at commuting hours on the M50. For instance, a 75X from Tallaght to the Sandyford Luas and UCD.

That sounds like the beginnings of a great idea. Busses on the M50 would be fantastic.

icdg

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

The likes of Belgard Road, which carried a lot of traffic before the M50 was built, has been crippled by traffic calming more appropriate to a housing estate. This kind of thing aimed to drive traffic on the M50 and congestion is the result.

.

Indeed, and the planning conditions for the Outer Ring Road require it to be deliberately not signed as an alternative route to the M50.

Rock of Gibraltar

lxflyer wrote: »

As I said above with orbital trips, very few individual trips are identical or even close to being so - which means that any bus service is going to have to deviate to service the major traffic generators en route.

As the previous poster states that's likely to be off-putting to most motorists.

The point should surely be to have a fast express route on the M50 which interchanges with bus routes crossing the bridges, and never deviates into major traffic generators. Have some kind of protected bus stops under the bridges with lifts to to take passengers to an integrated station to complete their journeys. Even if the route doesn't turn a profit the social benefit from reduced M50 congestion would surely be worth it.

Something like the Bogota BRT
http://www.streetfilms.org/bus-rapid-transit-bogota/

markpb

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

The point should surely be to have a fast express route on the M50 which interchanges with bus routes crossing the bridges, and never deviates into major traffic generators. Have some kind of protected bus stops under the bridges with lifts to to take passengers to an integrated station to complete their journeys. Even if the route doesn't turn a profit the social benefit from reduced M50 congestion would surely be worth it.

Something like the Bogota BRT
http://www.streetfilms.org/bus-rapid-transit-bogota/

The problem with running buses along the m50 is that no one wants to go there so the buses have to leave it at every exit. The exits themselves are where most of the traffic is so already it's not a great option. Plus when you get off, you have to bring people to where they want to go (housing estates, industrial estates, etc). Those are the traffic generators that you want the buses to avoid.

So what you end up with is a bus that does 80kph for 2km and the queues up to leave the m50, goes nowhere near where anyone wants to go and then goes back to the m50 again. You suggested meeting feeder buses when the express bus leaves the m50 and that might work for some people but only if it's very frequent because people hate making connections. Would you take a feeder bus from j13 to Sandyford? Even if you were guaranteed no wait for it would you give up the car to take three buses from your home to a job in sandyford (for example)?

Plopli

nc19 wrote: »

I am indeed a big hairy biker!!

easy to learn these days. You have to do a certain amount of lessons before you're allowed out and about

head over to the motorbike forum. Im sure theres a sticky there explaining everything

Don't get me wrong, I'm also a biker and commute daily to Dublin (including N4 to N7 on the M50) but as easy as it may be to get the learner / full licence for a motorbike, this is not for everyone and being at ease filtering on the M50 at rush hour will definitely need a bit of time.

Now, I won't swap my bike for anything else and the few time I've got to take the car (usually because I've the dog with me), I curse all the way to my destination

n97 mini

Mikros wrote: »

Amazing how a few traffic lights might not seem that bad if you had to pay a €1.40 toll for a 1 junction trip on the M50.

Not saying I agree or I'd drive that way myself now, but managing demand for the M50 is going to have to be a reality in the future.

I think I'd pay to avoid all those lights!

veryangryman

3 pages of posts and yet nothing about the proposed Eastern end of the M50 to complete the circle.

This is surely a no brainer for the greater city to provide a good network at all ends of it.

Aard

It really depends on what the goal of the Eastern Bypass is. We could probably do without another M50-style glorified distributor road. One of the plans for the Eastern Bypass disallowed a junction at Goatstown and recommended only a limited junction with the N11 at UCD, because people would end up using the new motorway mainly as an alternative to the N11 which would impact drivers coming from Tallaght direction.

I'm not convinced that the Eastern Bypass by itself is a good thing. However, if it is accompanied by a large-scale redistribution of road space then I'd be curious. For example (off the top of my head) it could be accompanied by a downgrade of the N11 (much of the urban portion of it is already regional road) by making it more pedestrian, bike, and public transport friendly. Put some trams down the middle of it. Two-way bike lanes either side. If you were really ambitious you could even fit in a kind of a greenway the length of it.

An Eastern Bypass would add HUGE road capacity to the Southside. This capacity will just get eaten up and congestion will return to the surrounding regional and local roads after a short period. The Bypass would be an opportunity to redistribute road space to more efficient and less space-hungry modes. While at the same time allowing noisy and polluting vehicles to be separated from residential areas, and in turn making those residential areas safer by reducing average speeds.

TINA1984

veryangryman wrote: »

3 pages of posts and yet nothing about the proposed Eastern end of the M50 to complete the circle.

That's probably because the Dublin Metropolitan area needs to focus now on addressing the public transport deficit, that's what will take people off the M50, whereas building more roads will just add to M50 congestion.

monument

veryangryman wrote: »

3 pages of posts and yet nothing about the proposed Eastern end of the M50 to complete the circle.

This is surely a no brainer for the greater city to provide a good network at all ends of it.

Remember the bit of noise in the last few years about flood defences in Clontarf?

For the Eastren Bypass you could multiply that outrage by all the Dublin Bay communities and then multiply that number by, say, a million. That's the kind of outrage this would get... An NRA photomontage:

LXFlyer

Rock of Gibraltar wrote: »

The point should surely be to have a fast express route on the M50 which interchanges with bus routes crossing the bridges, and never deviates into major traffic generators. Have some kind of protected bus stops under the bridges with lifts to to take passengers to an integrated station to complete their journeys. Even if the route doesn't turn a profit the social benefit from reduced M50 congestion would surely be worth it.

Something like the Bogota BRT
http://www.streetfilms.org/bus-rapid-transit-bogota/

TINA1984 wrote: »

That's probably because the Dublin Metropolitan area needs to focus now on addressing the public transport deficit, that's what will take people off the M50, whereas building more roads will just add to M50 congestion.

Again, as I and others have posted, the problem with orbital trips is that there is no way that public transport can facilitate the majority of them with a single bus trip. People are starting in different places and all going to different places - which means that virtually every trip is different.

This means that for most people that they would have to change buses at least once en route, and possibly more times. I can't imagine too many car drivers being prepared to forego their cars for that.

It's just simply impossible to provide public transport for all orbital trips, as the vast majority of individual trips differ from one another. That's why the existing orbital routes focus on serving major traffic generators as that is the only way you will ever get sufficient backsides on seats.

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

The likes of Belgard Road, which carried a lot of traffic before the M50 was built, has been crippled by traffic calming more appropriate to a housing estate. This kind of thing aimed to drive traffic on the M50 and congestion is the result.

There must be some scope for express buses at commuting hours on the M50. For instance, a 75X from Tallaght to the Sandyford Luas and UCD.

I don't think that the numbers would stack up - I'd prefer to see (when the money is available) the 75 split into two orbital routes as originally planned in Network Direct, namely:

Route 75 (future alignment)
Tallaght (The Square), Old Blessington Road, Old Bawn Road, Firhouse Road, Butterfield Avenue, Grange Road, Nutgrove Avenue, Churchtown Road, Dundrum, Kilmacud Road Upper, Sandyford Industrial Estate, Leopardstown Road, Stillorgan Road N11, Foxrock Church, Kill Lane, Kill Avenue, Dún Laoghaire Rail Station.

Route 175 (future alignment)
Tallaght (The Square), Old Blessington Road, Old Bawn Road, Killininny Road, St Colmcille’s Way, Scholarstown Road, Ballyboden Way, Taylor’s Lane, Grange Road, Stone Mason’s Way, Broadford Road, Ballinteer Avenue, Wyckham Way, Dundrum Shopping Centre, Sandyford Road, Sandyford Industrial Estate, Stillorgan Shopping Centre, Stillorgan Park, Monkstown Link Road, Monkstown Avenue, Mounttown Road, York Road, Dún Laoghaire Rail Station

It would mean that the buses would still be passing where people live. Look at the 75 anytime and you will realise that it rarely carries people end-to-end, but it does carry an awful lot of people making intermediate trips all along the route.

On the western side, I'd like to see the planned route 166 come into operation - it was to operate as follows:

Route 166 (future alignment)
Tallaght (The Square), Fortunestown Way, Citywest Road, Kingswood Avenue, Old Naas Road (Brownsbarn), Outer Ring Road, Grange Castle Business Park, Castle Road, Willsbrook Road, St. Loman’s Road, Liffey Valley Shopping Centre.

There could definitely be improvements made to the 76a - split it from the 76 so that it used the outer ring road entirely from Tallaght to Liffey Valley (serving the N4 stops), and then after the M50 bridge serving the industrial areas of Blanchardstown en route to the Blanchardstown Centre.

Unfortunately the improved orbital routes were put on the back burner due to lack of funds - hopefully this will change.

Shedite27

As stated above, I can't see the Eastern Bypass getting planning permission for "not on my front door" reasons.

You'd have to look at what the road is being built for. It's clearly not requried as a quicker way to get people from Bray to the Airport, and the north side is completly bypassed anyway (by the tunnel). A quicker route south is needed (think N11 with only 3 exits between Donnybrook and Cabinteely), but this would have to be part of a much wider road realignment.

Also, If ya look at the map of Dublin, the circular layout of the M50 really does go a bit mental. at Sandyford. If a route could be found along the lines of Leopardstown Road -> Newtownpark avenue to Dun Laoghaire it would really open up a lot of that area and also make that port a lot more suitable for traffic volumes (which could then be redirected from Dublin Port).

Obviously, in the real (post Celtic Tiger) world this is all just dreamtalk.

crc

I suggest that the bypass function of the M50 should be taken by a 2+2 DC/Motorway from M7 near Naas to M1 near Drogheda, with junctions only at the M4, M3, M2
Something similar to the setup in Rome

[I was going to post a link to Google maps, but for some reason I cannot because I'm a new user!]

Iseedeadpixels

Friday at 5.30 is the only time I have to use the M50 past the toll and it can be pretty bad but lately I have found it to be a lot better.

Shedite27

crc wrote: »

I suggest that the bypass function of the M50 should be taken by a 2+2 DC/Motorway from M7 near Naas to M1 near Drogheda, with junctions only at the M4, M3, M2

http://www.irishmotorwayinfo.com/inex/roads/m45/m45.html

Chris_5339762

I still think the M45 is a bit of a white elephant. Not much Cork - Belfast traffic (etc) is using the M50 currently at rush hour. Its commuters.

First thing I think that is needed is multi point (or distance) based tolling, or scrap the toll altogether. While the latter would increase traffic on that section it would pull some traffic out of town.

There is no solution. Simple as that. Think 50 years time when the population of Dublin is say, a million more. Massive increase not so much in traffic, but in the number of people that need to commute. That is the problem. And there is nowhere to fit more road capacity in.

We do need some Hogarth Flyovers though.

crc

The M45 is what I was thinking, but possibly with a straighter alignment. It would not just be for Cork-Belfast; such a road would probably form part of the fastest route between most of the Midlands and the extreme north and south of the country. There are many people who currently use the M50 to travel between Belfast and Galway (given the dreadful state of the alternatives).

Carawaystick

I'd say a big improvement could come from closing the short on slips or changing them to allow proper merging, instead of the oncoming traffic barging into lane1, blocking that and jamming the mainline

Irish Steve

The main thing that would improve things on the M50 would be to have a similar system to parts of the States, and put lane change blockers on the carriageways to prevent lane jumping close to the junctions, so that through traffic is allowed to flow without idiots jumping in to fast moving traffic from a queued lane, or queuing to force their way into the exit queue having not joined the back of the line where it was forming.

The practicality is that the right hand 2 lanes for (say) half a mile before and after each junction would be inaccessible from lanes 1 and 2.

Variable speed limits would help, as would better enforcement of lane discipline, I came back round the M50 from Cherrywood to Finglas last night at peak, it wasn't bad, apart from around the N7 area, which should improve once Newlands Cross is complete.

What was noticeable was the lack of vehicles in Lane 1 in some parts, and the number of people sitting in Lane 2 and travelling at well below the posted speed limit of 100 Kph with no good reason for them to be doing so.

The other issue is the manner in which queues form in the exit lane for the major junctions like the N4, and there are some that decide to stay in Lane 1 and then jump in/force their way into the queue closer to the exit, which causes sudden speed changes in Lane 1. The answer to that is not easy, it would need significant changes to the N4 to change the structure of the junction for Liffey Valley to reduce the lane weaving that slows things down so badly at present.


The underlying issue is that the design of the junctions is bad, with very tight curves requiring very low speeds, and short join lanes, unless you have something like a Porsche, it's impossible to join at lane speed, which causes other issues. The worst examples are joining northbound at Red Cow and Liffey Valley from the City side, the descending turn is not safe above about 30 Kph, and it's impossible to accelerate to 100 Kph in the lane distance available. There is also the issue that way too many drivers seem to forget that when they are joining, the traffic already on the motorway has right of way, I've seen plenty of cases where traffic on the motorway has to take significant avoiding action as a result of the failure of a joining vehicle to give way correctly.

Compared to the UK, the traffic volumes on the M50 are not high, and the UK motorways work better, partly because they're better designed, and partly because the standard of driving is better, in terms of lane discipline, speed limits and general road use. The Birmingham area has a population that's close to the entire population of Ireland, and a ring of motorways, which at peak are very busy, and have queues, but they move, and the reality is that the M50 is quiet in comparison, and could carry more traffic without delays if it was used correctly by the people driving on it.

Tabnabs

monument wrote: »

Remember the bit of noise in the last few years about flood defences in Clontarf?

For the Eastren Bypass you could multiply that outrage by all the Dublin Bay communities and then multiply that number by, say, a million. That's the kind of outrage this would get... An NRA photomontage:

They've nailed that coffin firmly shut with this

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/images/en.si.2010.0212.0001.jpg

Macy0161

Irish Steve wrote: »

There is also the issue that way too many drivers seem to forget that when they are joining, the traffic already on the motorway has right of way, I've seen plenty of cases where traffic on the motorway has to take significant avoiding action as a result of the failure of a joining vehicle to give way correctly.

It's another driving standard issue, but there's also a problem with people on the motorway closing gaps/ speeding up so as to block joining cars as well. It's all part of the same problem. Even where the joining lane is long, very few seem to use the full length to get up to speed to merge. Those are wider issues, and apply to every motorway and dual carriageway though.

Variable speed limits work, but only where there is strong enforcement. The M25 in the UK has camera gantries at every variable speed limit sign.

munchkin_utd

Macy0161 wrote: »

<snip>
Variable speed limits work, but only where there is strong enforcement. The M25 in the UK has camera gantries at every variable speed limit sign.

and the M50 will get cameras too eventually and the law is changed to allow the enforcement of variable limits (IIRC)

Sheldons Brain

Macy0161 wrote: »

It's another driving standard issue, but there's also a problem with people on the motorway closing gaps/ speeding up so as to block joining cars as well. It's all part of the same problem. Even where the joining lane is long, very few seem to use the full length to get up to speed to merge. Those are wider issues, and apply to every motorway and dual carriageway though.

Variable speed limits work, but only where there is strong enforcement. The M25 in the UK has camera gantries at every variable speed limit sign.

Those joining (and leaving) motorways might pay greater attention if there was a camera at each ramp too and a ticket for those acting the bollix.

Shedite27

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

...a ticket for those acting the bollix.

I'd love to see that writtien into Irish law. "It is an offence to Act the bollix". Would be a nice little catch all!

Chris_5339762

THat bridge is a hilarious non starter... if it ever happens it'll be a tunnel... probably bored.

Redsoxfan

Irish Steve wrote: »

...and the reality is that the M50 is quiet in comparison, and could carry more traffic without delays if it was used correctly by the people driving on it.

I agree with everything you said in your post but am not going to quote the whole lot. The design issues don't help, but driver behaviour is a huge problem. I use the road every day from J7 to J14 in the morning, with the reverse journey in the evening.