LGVs banned from Lane 2
Discussion
I read in the paper today that LGVs (trucks over 7.5 tonnes) are to be prohibited from using lane 2 of the M42 (M40 - M6 section I think) between 7am and 7pm. This is to be a trial run, and may be rolled out across the network.
You will of course be expecting me to try and discredit this idea, so I will (in a moment).
On the face of it, it is an excellent way of speeding up the traffic flow in lanes 2&3. Good news for the car driver, or is it?
Before putting a truckies slant on this, lets look at it from the point of view of cars. The Highways Agency are making a huge assumption - that cars will travel at or near the NSL and will observe correct lane discipline. I think that what will actually happen is that lane 2 will have the odd car happily bimbling along at 60-65mph, while lane 3 will have the usual train of cars at 80-90mph with barely a fag packet between them. Time will tell.
From a truckies perspective........
Prior to the restriction. I believe that severe congestion will occur here as trucks merge into lane 1. We know that trucks travel fairly close together (too close I agree), so it will undoubtedly lead to trucks braking in lane one. Given the "caterpillar effect", the 2oth truck in the line will be reducing speed to a crawl. I seriously wonder if there will be enough space at rush hour given the amount of heavies on the road.
In the restriction. Thuck speed will be limited by the slowest. Not all speed limiters are the same - they vary by up to 5mph. This is why we end up with elephant racing. I forsee large gaps in the convoy, with any number of trucks following the slowest. Inevitably, they will bunch up and be travelling far too close.
Now consider the car driver blatting along in lane 3 who suddenly sees the junction he wants. He will have to negotiate a wall of trucks in order to leave the motorway. Many numpties are unable to match their speed and filter in. Most will see a gap, go for it and hit the brakes, slowing down the truck behind. Again considering the caterpillar action, somewhere back down the line, a truck will end up doing an emergency stop. Similar problems will occur for car drivers wishing to join the motorway.
after the restriction. All the trucks which are capable of 58mph will pull out to overtake the slow one travelling at 53mph. We will then have one slow truck in lane 1, with a convoy virtually blocking lane 2.
This has solved the problem in the restricted area, but just moved the elephant racing further up the road.
I dont even want to think about the chaos which could be caused by a special types truck (wide or heay load} cruising up the motorway at 40mph. And what about Mr & Mrs numpty caravanner who crawl along at 50mph or less?
I realise that many will disagree with the post, but that is how I see it. just another ill thought out idea in order to avoid constructing a workable infrastructure.
And before anyone posts that this is how it`s done in Germany - I know. I have spent many frustrating hours crawling along in a convoy stuck behind some piece of crap east european truck. The system doesn`t work!
Successive governments have screwed up this country`s transport system so much that almost all of the freight goes by road now. Given that truckies simply cannot drive a bit longer if they are held up, massive investment (not just in roads) is required to ensure that goods arrive at the right place at the right time, therefore ensuring that the country works eficiently and economically.
"Quick fixes" such as the one proposed are simply not the answer.
Now off to don my flameproof suit.
Steve
You will of course be expecting me to try and discredit this idea, so I will (in a moment).
On the face of it, it is an excellent way of speeding up the traffic flow in lanes 2&3. Good news for the car driver, or is it?
Before putting a truckies slant on this, lets look at it from the point of view of cars. The Highways Agency are making a huge assumption - that cars will travel at or near the NSL and will observe correct lane discipline. I think that what will actually happen is that lane 2 will have the odd car happily bimbling along at 60-65mph, while lane 3 will have the usual train of cars at 80-90mph with barely a fag packet between them. Time will tell.
From a truckies perspective........
Prior to the restriction. I believe that severe congestion will occur here as trucks merge into lane 1. We know that trucks travel fairly close together (too close I agree), so it will undoubtedly lead to trucks braking in lane one. Given the "caterpillar effect", the 2oth truck in the line will be reducing speed to a crawl. I seriously wonder if there will be enough space at rush hour given the amount of heavies on the road.
In the restriction. Thuck speed will be limited by the slowest. Not all speed limiters are the same - they vary by up to 5mph. This is why we end up with elephant racing. I forsee large gaps in the convoy, with any number of trucks following the slowest. Inevitably, they will bunch up and be travelling far too close.
Now consider the car driver blatting along in lane 3 who suddenly sees the junction he wants. He will have to negotiate a wall of trucks in order to leave the motorway. Many numpties are unable to match their speed and filter in. Most will see a gap, go for it and hit the brakes, slowing down the truck behind. Again considering the caterpillar action, somewhere back down the line, a truck will end up doing an emergency stop. Similar problems will occur for car drivers wishing to join the motorway.
after the restriction. All the trucks which are capable of 58mph will pull out to overtake the slow one travelling at 53mph. We will then have one slow truck in lane 1, with a convoy virtually blocking lane 2.
This has solved the problem in the restricted area, but just moved the elephant racing further up the road.
I dont even want to think about the chaos which could be caused by a special types truck (wide or heay load} cruising up the motorway at 40mph. And what about Mr & Mrs numpty caravanner who crawl along at 50mph or less?
I realise that many will disagree with the post, but that is how I see it. just another ill thought out idea in order to avoid constructing a workable infrastructure.
And before anyone posts that this is how it`s done in Germany - I know. I have spent many frustrating hours crawling along in a convoy stuck behind some piece of crap east european truck. The system doesn`t work!
Successive governments have screwed up this country`s transport system so much that almost all of the freight goes by road now. Given that truckies simply cannot drive a bit longer if they are held up, massive investment (not just in roads) is required to ensure that goods arrive at the right place at the right time, therefore ensuring that the country works eficiently and economically.
"Quick fixes" such as the one proposed are simply not the answer.
Now off to don my flameproof suit.
Steve
Steve, for the main part, British drivers just want us out of the way. A lot of people will think this a fantastic idea
Personally I think it's poorly thought out. You're absolutely right, this is going to make the situation worse, dangerously so. Imagine 50 trucks stuck behind a STGO load at 40Mph, then some captain of industry decides that he's reached his junction, and it's time to get out of his way. Would you be happy to pull back causing more problems behind you, just to make his day? I'm not sure I would, and I don't think 50 frustrated truckers would be either.
It's been said before, remove the stupid speed limit, that would make a much greater difference in the way traffic flows.
Phil
.......waiting for legislation that says we must clean car drivers windows when we are in a jam
Personally I think it's poorly thought out. You're absolutely right, this is going to make the situation worse, dangerously so. Imagine 50 trucks stuck behind a STGO load at 40Mph, then some captain of industry decides that he's reached his junction, and it's time to get out of his way. Would you be happy to pull back causing more problems behind you, just to make his day? I'm not sure I would, and I don't think 50 frustrated truckers would be either. It's been said before, remove the stupid speed limit, that would make a much greater difference in the way traffic flows.
Phil
.......waiting for legislation that says we must clean car drivers windows when we are in a jam
towman said:
I read in the paper today that LGVs (trucks over 7.5 tonnes) are to be prohibited from using lane 2 of the M42 (M40 - M6 section I think) between 7am and 7pm. This is to be a trial run, and may be rolled out across the network.
You will of course be expecting me to try and discredit this idea, so I will (in a moment)......
...............at the right place at the right time, therefore ensuring that the country works eficiently and economically.
"Quick fixes" such as the one proposed are simply not the answer.
Now off to don my flameproof suit.
Steve
I said more or less the same thing on this thread www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?p=2&f=23&t=140985&h=0 yesterday
I would agree with this rule in rush hour periods (lets say for example 7.30am -9am and 4.30 - 6pm evenings on weekdays). This is from observations on the M1 especially a few weeks ago.
But as for the 7-7 thing - nah. After about 9 / 9.30 its not really a problem (so long as they indicate for more than a microsecond) and its a bit silly to do it for so long.
Travelling back as a passenger from Milton Keynes the motorway was very busy - but only at places where a lorry was overtaking another lorry. And most of them were doing the stereotype overtake. We timed one and it took them 7 minutes to finally overtake (we were behind them in lane 2). Again not really a problem when the traffic dies down but during the rush - not good.
I see tractors on the A380 during rusn hour in the morning down here as well and guess what - traffic backs up and stops
But as for the 7-7 thing - nah. After about 9 / 9.30 its not really a problem (so long as they indicate for more than a microsecond
) and its a bit silly to do it for so long. Travelling back as a passenger from Milton Keynes the motorway was very busy - but only at places where a lorry was overtaking another lorry. And most of them were doing the stereotype overtake. We timed one and it took them 7 minutes to finally overtake (we were behind them in lane 2). Again not really a problem when the traffic dies down but during the rush - not good.
I see tractors on the A380 during rusn hour in the morning down here as well and guess what - traffic backs up and stops
TripleS said:
Could we have a system whereby the 56 mph speed limiter could be over-ridden for short periods - like 30 seconds for example - to allow for overtaking?
Best wishes all,
Dave.
It wouldn't work. The biggest problem with the slow overtaking is with the driver of the lorry being overtaken. What generaly happens is the lorry at the back pulls out from the slipstream of the one infront, gets level with it and then cant get by when the airflow hits the truck on the outside. So what does the moron on the inside do? he keeps his foot down. All it would take is for him to lift for a few seconds and the outside truck can get on his way.
I drive a lorry and will always lift when being overtaken, it takes no time to regain your speed as all large trucks now have 300 bhp+ unlike when I started driving when 160bhp was for norm and to have 240bhp would have been a luxury for a 32ton truck.
As said on the other thread linked the trial is on the M42 northbound between J10 (Tamworth) and J11 (Appleby Magna) which is also where the M42 ends and becomes the A42.
This is a 3 mile stretch of uphill 2 lane motorway.
There are going to be some frustrated truckers on this. Someone who has been driving on the limiter since Bristol is now going to have to stay behind someone trying to get speed up having just left Tamworth services.
Equally doing a trial on a single stretch of 2 lane and then trying to apply the results to longer stretches of 3 & 4 lane with junctions is going to be fraught with hazards.
OK so some drivers do make poor decisions about when to overtake and how to react when being overtaken, but the base problem is caused by speed limiters.
Soon to get worse with extension of limiters to other vehicles. Possibly Jan 1 2005 is when the legislation comes into force, more likely to be 2008 in reality.
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Saturday 4th December 11:54
This is a 3 mile stretch of uphill 2 lane motorway.
There are going to be some frustrated truckers on this. Someone who has been driving on the limiter since Bristol is now going to have to stay behind someone trying to get speed up having just left Tamworth services.
Equally doing a trial on a single stretch of 2 lane and then trying to apply the results to longer stretches of 3 & 4 lane with junctions is going to be fraught with hazards.
OK so some drivers do make poor decisions about when to overtake and how to react when being overtaken, but the base problem is caused by speed limiters.
Soon to get worse with extension of limiters to other vehicles. Possibly Jan 1 2005 is when the legislation comes into force, more likely to be 2008 in reality.
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Saturday 4th December 11:54
tvradict said:
Speed limiters were fitted to trucks because 56mph was seen as the VMax for the tyres. Apparently, above this speed the tyres on trailers stand more chance of blowing out due to the heat created.
Is this true? I was in favour of the removal of limiters until I read this. Coaches travel faster, abeit I know, much more lightly loaded. Would the change from 60 to 70 mph really make that much difference to them? Anyone?
Well I was told it by an Ex Vehicle Inspectorate bloke, so this must be the official line.
Personally I put it down to the existance of Remoulds.
My Volvo FM12 is an 8 Wheeler, 2 Steer and 2 Drive, 4 axles. 4 tyres at the Front (Not Remoulds) 8 tyres at the back (Remoulds). I have had many many punctures, mainly front and inside rear, usually caused by re-bar, nails and sharp bits of stone. I also find myself with blowouts, maybe once a fortnight. I have never had a front tyre blowout.
The tyres that you see littering our many miles of motorways and dual carriageways nearly always come from trailers and I would be very surprised if there was a company in all of Europe not using Remoulds on their trailers.
Its time they where banned
Ban remoulds, remove limiters and everyone is happy.
Personally I put it down to the existance of Remoulds.
My Volvo FM12 is an 8 Wheeler, 2 Steer and 2 Drive, 4 axles. 4 tyres at the Front (Not Remoulds) 8 tyres at the back (Remoulds). I have had many many punctures, mainly front and inside rear, usually caused by re-bar, nails and sharp bits of stone. I also find myself with blowouts, maybe once a fortnight. I have never had a front tyre blowout.
The tyres that you see littering our many miles of motorways and dual carriageways nearly always come from trailers and I would be very surprised if there was a company in all of Europe not using Remoulds on their trailers.
Its time they where banned
Ban remoulds, remove limiters and everyone is happy.
what about suggestion #2
All trucks must use former hard shoulder as extra inside lane to ease congestion, what a fu'king stupid thing to suggest, genuine break-downs' aside the hard shoulder is naturally broken at slip roads anyway, imagine joining the M6 in Brum' at 7 in the morning, Greek lorry driver racing to catch the ferry in Dover,
isent' going to be too clued up on that one in your rear view mirror i think!
All trucks must use former hard shoulder as extra inside lane to ease congestion, what a fu'king stupid thing to suggest, genuine break-downs' aside the hard shoulder is naturally broken at slip roads anyway, imagine joining the M6 in Brum' at 7 in the morning, Greek lorry driver racing to catch the ferry in Dover,
isent' going to be too clued up on that one in your rear view mirror i think!
tvradict said:
Speed limiters were fitted to trucks because 56mph was seen as the VMax for the tyres. Apparently, above this speed the tyres on trailers stand more chance of blowing out due to the heat created.
I think you will find it is good old EU legislation. 56mph because that equates to the French limit of 90kph for trucks and nothing to do with tyres.
>> Edited by falcemob on Saturday 4th December 17:24
What a shame the people who come up with these ideas can't sit down as Towman has done and logically think it through.
It's absolutely pathetic. I'm quite convinced that people who work for the DfT, and the Highways Agency don't have two GCSE's to rub together between them. If they did they'd been in the private sector.
It's absolutely pathetic. I'm quite convinced that people who work for the DfT, and the Highways Agency don't have two GCSE's to rub together between them. If they did they'd been in the private sector.
Its a lurch for them, from one stupid flipping idea to the next.
Next it'll be move lorries only at un-sociable hours/days in the week, to free up the roads.
The term "being week-ended" in Europe, was common amongst truck drivers in the 80/90's as a car only use time, on the autoroutes. our infrastructure, would never cope with shops minus fresh food, late papers, and just about everything else travelling by road,including the PC's we are all sat before right now!
Next it'll be move lorries only at un-sociable hours/days in the week, to free up the roads.
The term "being week-ended" in Europe, was common amongst truck drivers in the 80/90's as a car only use time, on the autoroutes. our infrastructure, would never cope with shops minus fresh food, late papers, and just about everything else travelling by road,including the PC's we are all sat before right now!
On the issue as a whole, I'm not in favour of the "first lane only rule", sounds good, but in reality it's a non starter. better to remove the limiters and the 60 mph limit on LGV's provided the tyre question is proven. Certainly, ban remoulds on safety grounds.
Start a programme of building crawler lanes on steep uphill sections of motorways. Cheaper than a 4th lane with much the same results.
I've never seen the sense in having multiple speed limits for different vehicles on the same road. The difference between 60 & 70 mph is not worth talking about these days for any vehicle. Traffic flow would be much improved, and with less overtaking req'd, accidents would be decreased.
Start a programme of building crawler lanes on steep uphill sections of motorways. Cheaper than a 4th lane with much the same results.
I've never seen the sense in having multiple speed limits for different vehicles on the same road. The difference between 60 & 70 mph is not worth talking about these days for any vehicle. Traffic flow would be much improved, and with less overtaking req'd, accidents would be decreased.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff