kub wrote: » The common denominator above seems to be people forgetting about their blind spots.
Roar wrote: » And another two crashes this evening. One at the mahon point junction 10, another at Bloomfield j9.
two wheels good wrote: » Douglas Flyover-South Link. There are panels fitted to the side barriers along the flyover on the town side/east-bound of the flyover. Why weren't they also placed on the village/ west-bound side? Cost savings? From a safety and noise reduction point there ought to be panels on both sides. The view "down below" is an unnecessary distraction and I expect for some people may be disorientating. I heard somewhere that Douglas Community Assoc where making efforts to have barriers installed. Not sure how reliable that info is. I'll enquire.
bee06 wrote: » mordeith wrote: » He said 'down below' I’d say the point Jimmy was making was that the stretch of road the OP is referring to is the South Ring not the South Link. A lot of people use them interchangeably and it drives some people mad.
mordeith wrote: » He said 'down below'
bee06 wrote: » I’d say the point Jimmy was making was that the stretch of road the OP is referring to is the South Ring not the South Link. A lot of people use them interchangeably and it drives some people mad.
Jimmy Bottles wrote: » The South Link Road doesn’t go anywhere near Douglas.
Gru wrote: » Why can't people drive this south link road westbound after the Bloomfield interchange right outside the Rochestown Park Hotel. There are always crashes here and I hate driving this stretch of road. Every time I'm driving here cars will without fail brake for no reason at all causing everyone else to have to slow down and probably cause all the crashes. Why is this? Does the sight of Douglas down below scare people? If so please get off the road Thanks. Or is this just a convenient spot for insurance fraud? If anyone can explain this I'd love to hear it.
whisky_galore wrote: » No. Not without enforcement. People can't seem to drive properly or behave themselves on the road without the big stick drawn out.
TheChizler wrote: » I wonder would bringing the speed limit here down to 80 or 60 at peak hours help prevent some of these crashes. Bringing it down in advance with warning might be safer than the current situation of suddenly coming across a sea of brake lights and panicked lane changes.
munstermagic11 wrote: » It’s still enforcement though. The approach to the Kinsale Rd Rounabout allows for drivers to move in quite late. They need plastic bollards (as they have on the other side) extending back a significant distance as a preventative measure. I was driving in San Diego a few years back and it was a similar issue there. The following day they had large bollards dividing the exit lane, so you had to queue up.
run_Forrest_run wrote: » while it may catch a few I don't believe many of the careless driving is being done by speeding cars. It's the lane hopping and non-courteous driving than I feel is causing many of the incidents. But I'd love to see a member of the traffic corps patrolling that section of the south ring, even just for 2 hours 7-9am.
munstermagic11 wrote: » It's the usual lack of enforcement. One speed van or garda car would have a field day with traffic approaching the Kinsale road roundabout.
whisky_galore wrote: » Some really aggressive driving and chance-taking out there.
ofcork wrote: » Saw a video of this on fb this morning queuing in the driving lane for the tunnel madness!