M25. Is there any point in it anymore?

[vikingaero]

Wills2 said:

Exactly, I had a supplier that lived and was based in Tenterden, lovely, lovely part of the world but you cannot get out of there without using the m25.

Why would anyone want to get out of the Garden of England? We have London an hour away, the Channel Tunnel 30 minutes away, Gatwick 30 minutes away, the coast never more than an hour away and our own human cesspit that is The Medway Towns.

[Blib]

TheLordJohn said:

^^ that makes sense^^ - but then surely you'd have the local, more minor, roads even more congested as everyone would have to use the same route as each other to join at a major junction?
I'm not saying I'm right - I'm just presenting what I see as a flaw to your idea so I can be educated in case I've missed something obvious!!

The local traffic would not use the motorway to pop along one junction. They would not drive from say, Cockfosters to Enfield, then get on the M25 to backtrack over to the Barnet exit. Instead, the Cockfosters traffic would noodle down the local roads to Barnet. The Potters Bar junction would not be missed by motorists in the slightest.

The A road and motorway junctions are major roads and would cope with the extra traffic.

The point I'm trying to make is a lot of the traffic on the M25 need not use it. They use it only because it is easily available to them. They could use the local roads.

Edited by Blib on Sunday 8th September 18:56

[DonkeyApple]

Steffan said:

DonkeyApple said:

richwig83 said:

DonkeyApple said:

80bn is the estimate.

It would be smarter to find the point in Britain where non stop fast rail can get from all major English cities in under an hour and build the equivalent of Canary Wharf. An entirely new working city where the big firms can locate and draw labour from outside the SE without that labour needing to physically migrate as it currently does.

The other end of each city line then terminates at a massive car park where existing rail links can meet but primarily it is for people with cars who live around the city rather than in it.

It's the only way to start making England less London centric.

How??

Because firms would be able to shift not just back office operations to the North but also middle office. Then people wouldn't be leaving the North to be part of the SE over population issue.

The reason why the SE is more crowded is not because it breeds quicker (quite the opposite) but because of economic migration.

London rents are over £50 because it's currently easier and cheaper to retain middle office functions in the SE.

I agree with your comments but no political party will address this fact. Therefore I fear the jams will go on and on and on. UK politicians cheerfully ignore the glaring deficiencies in our own economic and social lifestyles and maximise their personal take from their office. Politicians are much more interested in prancing about the world stage at G20 junkets and the like where they can indulge their expensive tastes at the taxpayers expense and suggest daft "solutions" for countries in difficulty who are not helped by our interference. This does seem to be the dreadful level to which all western politicians have now descended.

Middle of the road, centre ground politics. Important stuff only really gets down by extreme parties. Britain, like much of the West has opted for the path of just fudging along under extreme taxation and control.

[Steffan]

DonkeyApple said:

Steffan said:

DonkeyApple said:

richwig83 said:

DonkeyApple said:

80bn is the estimate.

It would be smarter to find the point in Britain where non stop fast rail can get from all major English cities in under an hour and build the equivalent of Canary Wharf. An entirely new working city where the big firms can locate and draw labour from outside the SE without that labour needing to physically migrate as it currently does.

The other end of each city line then terminates at a massive car park where existing rail links can meet but primarily it is for people with cars who live around the city rather than in it.

It's the only way to start making England less London centric.

How??

Because firms would be able to shift not just back office operations to the North but also middle office. Then people wouldn't be leaving the North to be part of the SE over population issue.

The reason why the SE is more crowded is not because it breeds quicker (quite the opposite) but because of economic migration.

London rents are over £50 because it's currently easier and cheaper to retain middle office functions in the SE.

I agree with your comments but no political party will address this fact. Therefore I fear the jams will go on and on and on. UK politicians cheerfully ignore the glaring deficiencies in our own economic and social lifestyles and maximise their personal take from their office. Politicians are much more interested in prancing about the world stage at G20 junkets and the like where they can indulge their expensive tastes at the taxpayers expense and suggest daft "solutions" for countries in difficulty who are not helped by our interference. This does seem to be the dreadful level to which all western politicians have now descended.

Middle of the road, centre ground politics. Important stuff only really gets down by extreme parties. Britain, like much of the West has opted for the path of just fudging along under extreme taxation and control.

Once again I must agree with your analysis. Unfortunately as a direct consequence of the dither and stutter approach of modern politicians to difficult decisions the UK is well on its way to Hell in a Handcart. I find the ability of modern politics to agree internally as a group never to address or even discuss or in any way to allude to really difficult economic and policy decisions perhaps the most disturbing feature of modern politics. And this continues unabated from the USA right across to Europe and beyond. The horrendous consequences are visible to any reasonably cognitive observer.

The extreme taxation and control approach will not address any of the rising tide of disaster. Hell in a Handcart here we come.

[r129sl]

Blib said:

TheLordJohn said:

^^ that makes sense^^ - but then surely you'd have the local, more minor, roads even more congested as everyone would have to use the same route as each other to join at a major junction?
I'm not saying I'm right - I'm just presenting what I see as a flaw to your idea so I can be educated in case I've missed something obvious!!

The local traffic would not use the motorway to pop along one junction. They would not drive from say, Cockfosters to Enfield, then get on the M25 to backtrack over to the Barnet exit. Instead, the Cockfosters traffic would noodle down the local roads to Barnet. The Potters Bar junction would not be missed by motorists in the slightest.

The A road and motorway junctions are major roads and would cope with the extra traffic.

The point I'm trying to make is a lot of the traffic on the M25 need not use it. They use it only because it is easily available to them. They could use the local roads.

Edited by Blib on Sunday 8th September 18:56

Junctions certainly set the scene for the problem of congestion but the cause is spastic driving. First, too many drivers join the motorway too aggressively, zipping straight through two or even three lanes to the "fast lane" where important sales reps and other TDI drivers belong, causing disruption to those already on the motorway. Second, too many drivers passing a junction are inconsiderate about those joining or leaving at that junction, refusing to make space or give way lest they lose a nanosecond of time on their precious journey to the next shopping centre. Third, too many drivers leaving the motorway move left far too late, bombing down lane two or lane three past all of the slower cars, tucking in at the last possible moment, and causing all of those slow cars to brake.

The most effective solution is a cull.

The second most effective solution is to have express and "local" carriageways.

[Lawbags]

vikingaero said:

I think the problem is that there are too many junctions. Motorways seem to be an overflow for local roads when they should be about high speed transit over long distances.

Exactly that. People use it to go 1 junction to go the supermarket.

If it had junctions at 12, 3, 6 and 9 o'clock the traffic would flow much easier.

[RYH64E]

Lawbags said:

Exactly that. People use it to go 1 junction to go the supermarket.

Do people really do that? I wouldn't think that many people live close enough to a junction, and have a destination close enough to a nearby junction, for that type of journey to be worthwhile.

[walsh]

I go from Reigate to St Neots once a month on a Friday
3 1/2 hours one way and then on the sunday return trip about an hour and 45 minutes. I average about 11 miles an hour for a good two hours on the way down.the m25 is crap.

[Wills2]

vikingaero said:

Wills2 said:

Exactly, I had a supplier that lived and was based in Tenterden, lovely, lovely part of the world but you cannot get out of there without using the m25.

Why would anyone want to get out of the Garden of England? We have London an hour away, the Channel Tunnel 30 minutes away, Gatwick 30 minutes away, the coast never more than an hour away and our own human cesspit that is The Medway Towns.

I love the villages in that area, like going back in time, one day I'll retire to a converted oast house!

[Munich]

Dblue said:

richwig83 said:

It would really benefit from 5 lanes all around.... cant see it happening.

Its a few months away from being widened at enormous cost to 4 lanes all the way round. It helps but it doesn't stop the problems completely and neither will 5 lanes or even 6.

Discouraging some use of it will help but it takes will power and political gumption.

and then teach people how to use a 4 lane motorway properly so the space is actually used correctly. My experience of using the M25 between the A3 and Heathrow is that people just sit in the outside 2 lanes....

[Wills2]

Munich said:

Dblue said:

richwig83 said:

It would really benefit from 5 lanes all around.... cant see it happening.

Its a few months away from being widened at enormous cost to 4 lanes all the way round. It helps but it doesn't stop the problems completely and neither will 5 lanes or even 6.

Discouraging some use of it will help but it takes will power and political gumption.

and then teach people how to use a 4 lane motorway properly so the space is actually used correctly. My experience of using the M25 between the A3 and Heathrow is that people just sit in the outside 2 lanes....

Same on the widened section of the M1 from 25-28 people just pick a lane and sit there.

[carl_w]

Cheib said:

Just a word of of advice if you're going to be pedantic make sure you're above criticism. I'd suggest you brush up on your grammar....

"There was a sign at Liverpool St for years that had it wrong too."

I am not sure how a sign can "have it" wrong? Did the sign make itself ?

Last time I checked a sign can't "have" anything.

Unlike me, you're wrong. For example "the sign has black text" is valid. It seems that another local is also peeved at the constant mis-spelling of the name. FWIW I live near both Stansted and Stanstead. But nearer the former.

[f1nn]

I really can't get my head around the school of thought that suggests the answer to the M25 congestion issues is to discourage use.

I live outside of London but within the South East, and personally think I should be given a beer, bacon sandwich and a blowjob every time I use what should be the most efficient road network within the UK.

Can anyone tell me why we would think that joe public would be able to use the existing motorway network efficiently when at no point prior to the issuing of a driving licence has there been any mandatory instruction?

The fact that I can't Fly a plane doesn't make the plane inadequate.

[Cheib]

carl_w said:

Cheib said:

Just a word of of advice if you're going to be pedantic make sure you're above criticism. I'd suggest you brush up on your grammar....

"There was a sign at Liverpool St for years that had it wrong too."

I am not sure how a sign can "have it" wrong? Did the sign make itself ?

Last time I checked a sign can't "have" anything.

Unlike me, you're wrong. For example "the sign has black text" is valid. It seems that another local is also peeved at the constant mis-spelling of the name. FWIW I live near both Stansted and Stanstead. But nearer the former.

The sign was wrong
The sign had it wrong

[carl_w]

Cheib said:

The sign was wrong
The sign had it wrong

You've got to know the rules of grammar in order to bend them with style.

OTOH, spelling things wrong is just... wrong.

[king arthur]

Steffan said:

mybrainhurts said:

Why does the M25 have more Middle Lane Cruisers than your average motorway?

That I do not know but it certainly does. Doubtless a number of socio/academic researchers have waxed lyrical about the "phenomena" at some length. You are correct it does and I have no idea why. Possibly the circuitous nature of a Ringway? I await suggestions more considered than mine.

My theory is that it has a high proportion of Londoners who, because the M25 is probably the only motorway they have ever seen, have no idea how to drive on one.

[Chris Stott]

I’ve got a bit of experience of the western side of the M25 having lived off J11 for the past 16 years, and I travel the J11-M1 section (return) at least once a week. I also drive a number of other UK motorways on a weekly basis (M1, M40, M62, M18, M6, M6 Toll, M42).

Whilst general driving standards on the M25 are by far the worst on any section of motorway I drive, I think it’s the design that causes most of the problems (at least on the Western side).

Heading anticlockwise, blockages always starts at J12 (where the M3 joins) – as traffic levels build up here it rapidly backs up to J14 in even reasonably busy periods and J16 at really busy periods. From here, it doesn’t start to clear until after J10. This shouldn’t really be a surprise as J12 joins anticlockwise with the J11 turn off less than a mile further on, creating lanes of traffic trying to cut across each other from left and right… an awesome piece of road design.

[Chris Stott]

double post.

Edited by Chris Stott on Monday 9th September 11:21

[DonkeyApple]

king arthur said:

Steffan said:

mybrainhurts said:

Why does the M25 have more Middle Lane Cruisers than your average motorway?

That I do not know but it certainly does. Doubtless a number of socio/academic researchers have waxed lyrical about the "phenomena" at some length. You are correct it does and I have no idea why. Possibly the circuitous nature of a Ringway? I await suggestions more considered than mine.

My theory is that it has a high proportion of Londoners who, because the M25 is probably the only motorway they have ever seen, have no idea how to drive on one.

Are that that many Londoners using the M25 as a general %? The majority of users will be provincials, transits and those commuting into London.

[AC43]

DonkeyApple said:

king arthur said:

Steffan said:

mybrainhurts said:

Why does the M25 have more Middle Lane Cruisers than your average motorway?

That I do not know but it certainly does. Doubtless a number of socio/academic researchers have waxed lyrical about the "phenomena" at some length. You are correct it does and I have no idea why. Possibly the circuitous nature of a Ringway? I await suggestions more considered than mine.

My theory is that it has a high proportion of Londoners who, because the M25 is probably the only motorway they have ever seen, have no idea how to drive on one.

Are that that many Londoners using the M25 as a general %? The majority of users will be provincials, transits and those commuting into London.

I live in London and virtually never use the M25. I go in and and out on the M11, M1, M4, M40 or M3. I often use the North Circular to get round London.

If it's a work trip I just jump on a train from the relevant station.

Life's too short.