Four Into Three Doesn’t Go

[jambutty]

Several months ago someone at the Ministry of Transport came up with the idea that to ease motorway congestion, the hard shoulder should be used for normal traffic.

All the motoring organisations, the emergency services and most of the general public deemed this suggestion to be one of the most stupid that this inept government has ever brought forward.

Guess what has happened recently?

Certain motorways at certain times between certain junctions will now allow normal traffic on the hard shoulder.

Just to recap. The hard shoulder is to enable broken down vehicles to remain relatively safe whilst waiting for rescue. And to give the emergency services a path through to the emergency if the other lanes are choc-a-block.

There is one other point that hasn’t been mentioned.

Sooner or later the traffic on the hard shoulder will have to join the bona fide lanes and that is where four into three doesn’t go. Look at the congestion that is created when approaching a road works. Also, as you approach a junction to get off the motorway it is the nearside lane that filters left and the hard shoulders stops to reappear again after the junction. So the four into three doesn’t go scenario will be repeated at every junction.

However what this does highlight is that once the current mob-in-office get an idea, regardless of the public opinion, it is carried through – eventually.

[jaysay]

Well I think we have become used to them after 11 years, can you imagine the last government getting away with what this shower get away with, in three words NOT A CHANCE

[WillowTheWhisp]

It wasn't dreamed up by our lot though. It has been done elsewhere and the results have been less congestion.

If you think about it, it doesn't necessarily mean 3 into 1. If it is used on the most congested parts of a motorway then not used on the parts which are less congested why does the motorway become less congested? It is because people have used those junctions to leave the motorway because they have arrived at where they are heading. The motorway beyond that point doesn't need the 4 lanes because there are fewer vehicles on it.

Mind you, I still think it is a far from ideal solution due to the access problems for emergency vehicles and the lack of anywhere to go if you break down.

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by WillowTheWhisp

It wasn't dreamed up by our lot though. It has been done elsewhere and the results have been less congestion.

If you think about it, it doesn't necessarily mean 3 into 1. If it is used on the most congested parts of a motorway then not used on the parts which are less congested why does the motorway become less congested? It is because people have used those junctions to leave the motorway because they have arrived at where they are heading. The motorway beyond that point doesn't need the 4 lanes because there are fewer vehicles on it.

Mind you, I still think it is a far from ideal solution due to the access problems for emergency vehicles and the lack of anywhere to go if you break down.

If you really thought about it, it would be obvious that four lanes filtering into just three lanes (not 3 into 1. But hey! Why let reality spoil trying to make a point) is going to cause problems and congestion.

It doesn’t matter where this crackpot idea is used. It will not cure congestion except for on a stretch of motorway between junctions. 3 into 4 will go easily but sooner or later the 4 will have to go back into 3.

If you have traffic on a three lanes motorway and the hard shoulder is used, all the problems and congestion will start when the traffic on the hard shoulder wants to carry on down the motorway. That traffic will have to cross into the nearside lane in order to do so. 4 into 3. But of all the lanes the nearside lane is the one that is most likely to be congested.

This idea is so far from ideal that I would call it an accident waiting to happen, over and over and over.

There is one other point. The hard shoulder was not built to withstand continuously rolling heavy traffic. Its safe lifespan is likely to be vastly reduced so that it will need re-laying.

Sorry I forgot, this piece of crass stupidity is a ruse so that the motorway repair people can make lots of taxpayer’s money, making repairs at greatly inflated costs.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by jambutty

But hey! Why let reality spoil trying to make a point

I will refrain from this thread as you are being your usual ignorant, rude little self.

It is a shame you can't post, in what is a good thread, without having to act like a six year old.

[onlyme]

Originally Posted by Neil

I will refrain from this thread as you are being your usual ignorant, rude little self.

It is a shame you can't post, in what is a good thread, without having to act like a six year old.

Very true, nasty comments like this just take away from the validity of the argument.

Going back to the original thread, I'm of the opinion that these 'roadies', are people that havent driven anywhere in their lives.

The roundabout at Whitebirk proves this. Has anyone actually tried to go round the roundabout in their own lane without entering the striped 'no go' area. Impossible. Was the same last time it was redone. Just stupidly dangerous and non sensical. You have an inside lane that stops hlafway rounf, has a bit of a break and then starts up again from nowhere.

Morons lol

[jambutty]

Originally Posted by Neil

I will refrain from this thread as you are being your usual ignorant, rude little self.

It is a shame you can't post, in what is a good thread, without having to act like a six year old.

At least we can now look forward to some intelligent posts.

It takes one to know one.

[slinky]

My god, why does every single thread have to turn into a slanging match!!

I will put the flag up when ONE, just ONE of your thread JB actually stay on track, instead of turning out to be a slanging match.