I hate the M50 [Warning post #222]

markpb

LeinsterDub wrote: »

People aren't sitting in 2 hours of traffic for the laugh .They have no other choice

That's not exactly true though. Plenty of people chose to buy further from their workplace so they have a bigger house, bigger garden, etc. Those things are nice to have but the commute is by choice.

Other people want to work in Dublin but refuse to live there because they don't like it. I know several of those people getting up at 6am to commute into the city. Their commute is also by choice. Even if their skillset makes them unemployable outside of a major city, their decision to live away from work makes their commute a choice.

Other people could take public transport, where it's viable, but choose to drive instead because they prefer it. Their commute is by choice.

Roads work in strange ways. A road like the M50 could theoretically carry 100,000 people per day comfortably. Add another 100 people in the morning and the road clogs up for everyone. If some of those people who commute by choice stopped using the M50, it would be much better for everyone.

Ultimately Irish people have decided that driving to work and sitting in traffic is preferable to taking public transport and our politicians have reflected that. When the government spent 1 billion euro upgrading the M50, no-one whimpered. Whey they spent a third of that joining the two Luas lines and opening new parts of the city to more popular public transport, the wailing and knashing of teeth commenced and hasn't stopped since.

LeinsterDub

starshine1234 wrote: »

Self driving cars are on the way.

Once they arrive, and it's reasonable to expect that within five to ten years, there'll be far fewer cars on the road..

I don't see how self driving cars mean less people wanting to go home at 5?

_Kaiser_

starshine1234 wrote: »

Self driving cars are on the way.

Once they arrive, and it's reasonable to expect that within five to ten years, there'll be far fewer cars on the road. Roads will be far less congested, and self driving cars will be much better at driving than some humans, so accidents should also reduce.

Most of the traffic is likely to be caused by a small number of human road users.

There may be less crashes with self driving cars but if they are hacked there could be huge losses.

I think your timescale is a tad optimistic.. particularly in Ireland where a lot of the national fleet is fairly old. Not everyone can afford the brand new models with toys every other year.

Security is a big factor for sure, but there's also things like insurance liability, interoperability between the various brands/manufacturers and each country's traffic laws, signage and practises, as well as reliability of these features after say 3 or 5 years of ownership.

Because the greatest benefit would be on roads like the M50, it'll take even longer to satisfy everyone's concerns (real or inflated) because of the volumes and speed of the traffic involved.. especially until such cars massively outnumber the "legacy" variant.. and what to do with those??

starshine1234

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I don't see how self driving cars mean less people wanting to go home at 5?

I agree that work practices will need to change to allow for this.

There'll be a national fleet of 100,000 cars, or 200,000 cars, whatever. A finite number.

But there's other factors at play. It's unlikely the cars will contain only one passenger. The cars could be mostly full. Cars can stop outside the M50 and distribute the passengers to other cars going to their final location.


Pricing of self driving cars will be new. It won't simply be like taxis.

So, for example, you could pay more to travel on your own, or you could pay more for a luxury car, or you could pay more to get priorty access through traffic lights for example.
You can pay less to travel in groups, to take the long route home, to allow other cars priorty at lights etc.
This will all be controlled by sophisticated software.




It's a whole new way of getting around. I agree everyone will have to work flexitime to keep the cars in use.

L1011

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

"Sensible" for who?.

Society at large.

_Kaiser_

markpb wrote: »

That's not exactly true though. Plenty of people chose to buy further from their workplace so they have a bigger house, bigger garden, etc. Those things are nice to have but the commute is by choice.

Other people want to work in Dublin but refuse to live there because they don't like it. I know several of those people getting up at 6am to commute into the city. Their commute is also by choice. Even if their skillset makes them unemployable outside of a major city, their decision to live away from work makes their commute a choice.

Not entirely...

There's not enough available property within the Dublin area and what there is is expensive, located in undesirable areas (mainly for security reasons), or unsuitable for families like most apartments for example.

Many employers are slow to move to concepts like teleworking or flexible hours. As I mentioned above, most office jobs can be done anywhere these days as unless it's person-to-person, much of it is spent looking at emails, IM and websites anyway.. but many employers will insist you trek in instead so they can "keep an eye" on you (ie: the perception that working from home = doss day)

The rental sector is still pretty much the Wild West in this country - a skim over the topics on the Accommodation forum will show that. With cowboy amateur landlords, dodgy tenants and poor regulations that neither side take seriously coupled with short-term (12-24 month generally) tenancies. Reason? Renting is seen as a temporary thing you have to "endure" on the glorious road to ownership, rather than the professional, viable and indeed DESIRABLE alternative it should be. Result: People are forced into buying as it's the only way to ensure some sort of stability (especially if there's kids involved)

Anyone affected by the above isn't making a choice. They're taking actions they are out of necessity.

_Kaiser_

L1011 wrote: »

Society at large.

It's not that simple though as I've highlighted in the rest of my post(s).

L1011

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

It's not that simple though as I've highlighted in the rest of my post(s).

Solving the issues in the rest of your post solves your complaints about being "forced" out of the car, though.

Any stick suggestions aren't going to do anything, as we have failed to actually have an alternative. When we have one, we're going to need the stick for the last few.

magicbastarder

starshine1234 wrote: »

But there's other factors at play. It's unlikely the cars will contain only one passenger. The cars could be mostly full. Cars can stop outside the M50 and distribute the passengers to other cars going to their final location.

that's as much of a societal change as trying to get people to move to public transport, i'd guess. sharing a car with strangers is not something a lot of people will welcome. still though, will be interesting to see how it pans out.

starshine1234

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I think your timescale is a tad optimistic.. particularly in Ireland where a lot of the national fleet is fairly old. Not everyone can afford the brand new models with toys every other year.

I feel it's unlikely that the cars would be owned by individual owners. I suspect they'd be owned by a single company. As you probably know, self driving cars are now in use in Singapore, for testing. That company doesn't intend to sell its cars; instead it intends to own the fleet and to manage the fleet in other countries.
There are many ways private ownership can be discouraged or prevented, most likely insurance.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Security is a big factor for sure, but there's also things like insurance liability, interoperability between the various brands/manufacturers and each country's traffic laws, signage and practises, as well as reliability of these features after say 3 or 5 years of ownership.

I don't think traffic laws, signage or practises make a difference. Insurance is a big issue, but big companies may self insure. There will have to be standards of some sort between manufacturers. But perhaps there'll only be one manufacturer, ostensibly for safety reasons but really so that one person has a monopoly.
Maintenence will be like aircraft maintenence; very onerous and a serious paper trail would be required. Again, this would tend to restrict private ownership, and make it easier for huge companies.

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Because the greatest benefit would be on roads like the M50, it'll take even longer to satisfy everyone's concerns (real or inflated) because of the volumes and speed of the traffic involved.. especially until such cars massively outnumber the "legacy" variant.. and what to do with those??

I suspect legacy cars will be banned. For safety reasons of course. I have wondered about pleasure driving. Private roads may open up for pleasure driving, or maybe some roads would be human cars only.


Sorry to break up your post to respond line by line. I wouldn't normally do that.

starshine1234

magicbastarder wrote: »

that's as much of a societal change as trying to get people to move to public transport, i'd guess. sharing a car with strangers is not something a lot of people will welcome. still though, will be interesting to see how it pans out.

The cars need not be like current cars.

You could have individual booths within the car. These booths could be configurable, so that you can have one person booths, two person booths etc. You could also have sleeping booths, and booths with entertainment. Happy endings for everyone.

h57xiucj2z946q

@M50Dublin twitter:

‏@M50Dublin 2h2 hours ago
Very long delays this morning S'bound due to earlier collision at J9 & breakdown at J13. Reports of taking 2 hours from M50/M1 to J13!

Nasty!

magicbastarder

starshine1234 wrote: »

I suspect legacy cars will be banned. For safety reasons of course. I have wondered about pleasure driving. Private roads may open up for pleasure driving, or maybe some roads would be human cars only.

another claim which i suspect is decades away at best.

Charles Babbage

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Charles Babbage wrote: »

I'd have the bus fare at 2.50, so people have the choice.

Things are kicking off today

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/monday-morning-traffic-chaos-as-m50-motorists-warned-of-twohour-plus-delays-35003566.html

People aren't sitting in 2 hours of traffic for the laugh .They have no other choice

That is what the thread is about, many people have said that they should have a public transport choice.

Perhaps they should just announce that there are ANPR cameras in operation throughout detecting motor tax and insurance chancers, this should reduce traffic by 5%.

Macy0161

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Perhaps they should just announce that there are ANPR cameras in operation throughout detecting motor tax and insurance chancers, this should reduce traffic by 5%.

And for cars displaying learner plates.

L1011

Macy0161 wrote: »

And for cars displaying learner plates.

No legal impediment to having L plates up. No proof that a learner is driving.

magicbastarder

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Perhaps they should just announce that there are ANPR cameras in operation throughout detecting motor tax and insurance chancers, this should reduce traffic by 5%.

i assume they cannot simply take the feed from the M50 ANPR cameras - used for tolling - and identify cars which are not taxed or insured?

VisibleGorilla

Two things that would improve the road immediately.

• Visual barriers between North/Southbound. This will prevent rubbernecking.
• Barriers much earlier separating the exits. In the wrong lane? Though ****, continue on a exit later.

You should never have to brake on the M50... anticipate 2, 5, 10 cars ahead. You see brake lights you ease off the acceleration, this prevents stop/start traffic.

Such basics yet people cannot help themselves being complete morons.

kidneyfan

L1011 wrote: »

No legal impediment to having L plates up. No proof that a learner is driving.

This seems to me more like something the police should do rather than something that should be automated. Of course in this country the police are too busy collecting the allowances that they get for going on holiday to do any actual work!!!!:mad:

Macy0161

kidneyfan wrote: »

This seems to me more like something the police should do rather than something that should be automated. Of course in this country the police are too busy collecting the allowances that they get for going on holiday to do any actual work!!!!:mad:

No, it should be automated - just make it that you can only display L Plates if a learner is actually driving, with an exception for registered instructors.

There should be much more automated enforcement - APNR's for tax/ insurance/ disqualified drivers, Speed Camera's, Traffic Light camera's. Take as much out of manual processes as possible.

kidneyfan

Macy0161 wrote: »

No, it should be automated - just make it that you can only display L Plates if a learner is actually driving, with an exception for registered instructors.

There should be much more automated enforcement - APNR's for tax/ insurance/ disqualified drivers, Speed Camera's, Traffic Light camera's. Take as much out of manual processes as possible.

I know mate! We don't want to rely on the shoe allowance merchants in anyways!

Seth Brundle

kidneyfan wrote: »

This seems to me more like something the police should do rather than something that should be automated. Of course in this country the police are too busy collecting the allowances that they get for going on holiday to do any actual work!!!!:mad:

kidneyfan wrote: »

I know mate! We don't want to rely on the shoe allowance merchants in anyways!

Tell me, is that just common begrudgery or have you a problem with the Gardai?
Either way, not very helpful in the current thread because your first post assumes that gardai come up with the laws and your second post, well...

Carawaystick

VisibleGorilla wrote: »

T
You should never have to brake on the M50... anticipate 2, 5, 10 cars ahead. You see brake lights you ease off the acceleration, this prevents stop/start traffic.

Such basics yet people cannot help themselves being complete morons.

But if everyone just lifts off and doesn't brake, there'll be no brake lights to warn of vehicles slowing...

Also there are traffic lights on the M50, hard to not use your brakes when these are red...

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

starshine1234

Carawaystick wrote: »

But if everyone just lifts off and doesn't brake, there'll be no brake lights to warn of vehicles slowing...

Also there are traffic lights on the M50, hard to not use your brakes when these are red...

You should be able to see that the traffic is slowing even if there are no brake lights.

Also, where are these traffic lights on the M50?
I'm nearly sure that traffic lights can't appear on motorways.

ohnonotgmail

starshine1234 wrote: »

You should be able to see that the traffic is slowing even if there are no brake lights.

Also, where are these traffic lights on the M50?
I'm nearly sure that traffic lights can't appear on motorways.

There is one set of traffic lights where it merges with the M11.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

ohnonotgmail

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

actually, i take that back. they have only proposed traffic lights for that location. so i am none the wiser as to where the lights carawaystick refers to actually are.

LXFlyer

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

actually, i take that back. they have only proposed traffic lights for that location. so i am none the wiser as to where the lights carawaystick refers to actually are.

Presumably the port tunnel.

GreatDefector

2 major crashes in opposite rush hours
You'd easily know schools are back

*double facepalm meme*

https://mobile.twitter.com/M50Dublin/status/770298062946312192

Desperately need proper motorway policing and cars belonging to some drivers crushed in front of them (with their licence inside)