nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

M50 Congestion

First Up

I had to go from Dalkey to just off the N81 towards Blessington yesterday at about 5pm. The obvious (only?) route was via Cherrywood to the M50 and off at Firhouse. I expected it to be busy but nothing could prepare me for the experience.

No problems getting to the M50 but as I approached the Carrickmines junction the signs were flashing about delays and I could already see the tailback ahead. It then took well over an hour to cover the few miles to Firhouse. There was no sign of any accidents and the traffic programme on Dublin City FM just casually mentioned it was slow but it sounded like they considered this normal.

Is this normal? The motorway on that section is at least 2 and mostly 3 lanes and the only "complications" are a couple of exit and entry points. Is that all it takes to reduce traffic to 5k an hour in first gear? (It seemed to be equally bad further on.)

Do regular users have to put up with this every day?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

MJohnston

First Up wrote: »

A touch of desperation there Mr J.

Cameras and fines in the post for most offences. A bit of Garda action would work wonders for focusing minds too.

Cameras, for what?

First Up

MJohnston wrote:

Cameras, for what?

To record what drivers do. There's 1,800 of them on UK motorways

MJohnston

First Up wrote: »

To record what drivers do. There's 1,800 of them on UK motorways

And how many are you going to put on the M50?

tom1ie

First Up wrote: »

Sounds as if you plan to keep doing it anyway.

Keep doing what?
Go on my phone while driving?
I think you have misread one of my posts.

tom1ie

Hmmmmmm. Possible troll alert I think.
Reverts to accusations when his argument is exposed as bull****.

[Deleted User]

MJohnston wrote: »

And how many are you going to put on the M50?

I’d put one every time the previous one couldn’t make out a reg. Complete blanket coverage and absolutely nail anyone acting the bollocks. Would have them paid for in 6 months.

tom1ie

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

I’d put one every time the previous one couldn’t make out a reg. Complete blanket coverage and absolutely nail anyone acting the bollocks. Would have them paid for in 6 months.

Would these cameras be anpr cameras?
It would be worth noting the "minister for transport" has ruled these out already.

[Deleted User]

tom1ie wrote: »

Would these cameras be anpr cameras?
It would be worth noting the "minister for transport" has ruled these out already.

It’s worth noting a lot of things but we’re all just saying how they should improve things. Another thing is link the fault of an accident to a points penalty as well as the usual monetary one.

MJohnston

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

I’d put one every time the previous one couldn’t make out a reg. Complete blanket coverage and absolutely nail anyone acting the bollocks. Would have them paid for in 6 months.

What's that then, every 50 metres? 100m?

[Deleted User]

MJohnston wrote: »

What's that then, every 50 metres? 100m?

Whatever it would take to stamp out the attitudes on our roads. You’d have so many pricks that would ignore it in the beginning that you could afford to have them every 10 metres.

MJohnston

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Whatever it would take to stamp out the attitudes on our roads. You’d have so many pricks that would ignore it in the beginning that you could afford to have them every 10 metres.

Well, except that the only thing you can actually automatically capture on the M50 is speed enforcement. So you'd still need some way to enforce against tailgating, lane abuse, and anything else that's actually enforceable. Which could only be done with real people.

[Deleted User]

MJohnston wrote: »

Well, except that the only thing you can actually automatically capture on the M50 is speed enforcement. So you'd still need some way to enforce against tailgating, lane abuse, and anything else that's actually enforceable. Which could only be done with real people.

Well you could if you wanted to. Like I said, it’s what they should do.

various artistes

I feel an underground road tunnel through town is a far more worthwhile investment than a railway to the airport, one starting at the foot of the N11 dual carriageway and emerging at the end of the port tunnel would cut the M50 crowd in half- build a few flyovers on the N11 and you could even eliminate the traffic lights on it and up the speed limit to 100kph. People who moan about it being the only European capital without a rail link seem to forget that most European airports aren't a 15 minute drive from the city centre.

First Up

tom1ie wrote:

Keep doing what? Go on my phone while driving? I think you have misread one of my posts.

Sorry if you feel offended but bad driving is not a mistake so please stop excusing it.

Using your phone while driving is not a "mistake". It is deliberate behaviour. Behaviour can change - ideally through education/ persuasion but if necessary through enforcement.

trellheim

various artistes wrote: »

I feel an underground road tunnel through town is a far more worthwhile investment than a railway to the airport, one starting at the foot of the N11 dual carriageway and emerging at the end of the port tunnel would cut the M50 crowd in half- build a few flyovers on the N11 and you could even eliminate the traffic lights on it and up the speed limit to 100kph. People who moan about it being the only European capital without a rail link seem to forget that most European airports aren't a 15 minute drive from the city centre.

I very much doubt it most of the M50 traffic is not N11-M1 its points between

Adding a fourth lane would solve nothing at all

tom1ie

First Up wrote: »

Sorry if you feel offended but bad driving is not a mistake so please stop excusing it.

Using your phone while driving is not a "mistake". It is deliberate behaviour. Behaviour can change - ideally through education/ persuasion but if necessary through enforcement.

So why are you accusing me of this dangerous behavior lol!
I think your clutching at straws.

First Up

tom1ie wrote:

So why are you accusing me of this dangerous behavior lol! I think your clutching at straws.

Shrugging your shoulders about accidents and excusing bad driving as "they happen" suggests you are at least condoning it.

tom1ie

First Up wrote: »

Shrugging your shoulders about accidents and excusing bad driving as "they happen" suggests you are at least condoning it.

No. It’s being called a realist.
I think your living in cloud cuckoo land to be honest.

[Deleted User]

tom1ie wrote: »

No. It’s being called a realist.
I think your living in cloud cuckoo land to be honest.

It could be stopped. The authorities just choose not to bother.

First Up

tom1ie wrote:

No. Itâ€™s being called a realist. I think your living in cloud cuckoo land to be honest.

Cloud cuckoo land to expect people to drive properly?

The M50 is a vital part of our infrastructure. There is huge economic damage caused by the delays and stoppages, a huge part of which are preventable.

Of course we should address it.

tom1ie

First Up wrote: »

Cloud cuckoo land to expect people to drive properly?

The M50 is a vital part of our infrastructure. There is huge economic damage caused by the delays and stoppages, a huge part of which are preventable.

Of course we should address it.

Again, how are you going to enforce this? Anpr cameras have been ruled out and won’t catch every mistake.
You started accusing me of breaking the law for some reason

What’s that about?

tom1ie

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It could be stopped. The authorities just choose not to bother.

Agreed. Steps could be taken to reduce it via anpr cameras but Shane Ross has ruled them out.

First Up

tom1ie wrote:

Agreed. Steps could be taken to reduce it via anpr cameras but Shane Ross has ruled them out.

You don't need anpr to analyse a crash. You use the cctv to see who caused it and punish with fines and points.

Thargor

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

It could be stopped. The authorities just choose not to bother.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate

Seeing as Ireland has some of the safest drivers on the planet can you outline what this magic system for eliminating traffic accidents would look like? Or explain why all the countries below us dont deploy a system like it? Or even just copy Ireland seeing as its so easy to click your fingers and change driver behaviour across the board like you're claiming.

First Up

ReginaldSmythV wrote:

Anyway, when has Shane Ross ever been right about anything? The bluenose has never been in traffic in his life and hopefully wonâ€™t be in the job much longer.

I think the bigger problem is with the RSA. They are only interested in preventing crashes that cause death or injury; the fender benders that block the M50 pass them by.

It needs them to take it seriously but it really needs a wider and coordinated effort starting from driving instruction and the driving licence test right through to monitoring and especially enforcement.

Driver behaviour WILL change and improve if the price of non compliance is high enough.

Charles Babbage

MJohnston wrote: »

Well, except that the only thing you can actually automatically capture on the M50 is speed enforcement. So you'd still need some way to enforce against tailgating, lane abuse, and anything else that's actually enforceable. Which could only be done with real people.

Tailgating, lane abuse etc could be identified by camera, all that is then needed is a finite number of real people to review incidents already tagged.

The problem is not the technology, it is the willingness.

monument

Sorry to inform some of you, but the gantries for variable speed limit and lane control signalling are already in place on the M50 and elsewhere, for example between the N4 and N7 on the M50 there's three such gantries north bound, two south bound and one across both directions.

The electronics just need to be added and the legislation is on the way in the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill.

To be clear:

This is a gantry designed to hold signs:

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3206806,-6.3692225,3a,27.4y,119.87h,100.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sOry9slwQSmNf8Qp-pwHMmA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

This is a gantry designed to hold electric speed limit signs which can switch to lane closed signs:

https://www.google.ie/maps/@53.3231448,-6.3720358,3a,43.1y,145.39h,102.24t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1se5RTqteN1I1DJ0h6I8W2GA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Just to be clear: This is needed for safety. Motorway speed controls will reduced the amount of collision and how bad they are.

monument

various artistes wrote: »

I feel an underground road tunnel through town is a far more worthwhile investment than a railway to the airport, one starting at the foot of the N11 dual carriageway and emerging at the end of the port tunnel would cut the M50 crowd in half- build a few flyovers on the N11 and you could even eliminate the traffic lights on it and up the speed limit to 100kph. People who moan about it being the only European capital without a rail link seem to forget that most European airports aren't a 15 minute drive from the city centre.

It's not mainly about speed, it's about capacity -- a rail tunnel has far higher capacity than a road tunnel. It makes no sense to build more motorways around Dublin and even less sense to build car tunnels in place of a metro tunnel with far greater ability to carry people.

We don't need to keep adding "one more lane" -- we can stop before we get as bad as LA: https://twitter.com/urbanthoughts11/status/1191295205187686400?s=20

X111111111111

Everyones a terrible driver but me.

magicbastarder

monument wrote: »

We don't need to keep adding "one more lane" -- we can stop before we get as bad as LA: https://twitter.com/urbanthoughts11/status/1191295205187686400?s=20

OT, but i read a book a few years ago called 'a burglar's guide to the city'; about how building design and layout of cities plays into how and where crimes are committed. there was a chapter about LA's road layout, and how it led to banks placing branches at highway junctions, as it was easy for people to get to them then. it also led to the preponderance of armed robbery with getaway car, as it was very quick for the car to get back onto the highway; the 'car chase being filmed from a helicopter' phenonmenon started in LA i think.