RE: Roadworks aren't working: PH Blog
Discussion
elementad said:
So the project manager may have to work a little harder. I reckon some German, Spanish or Polish highway agencies would show the UK lot up. Cheaper and quicker.
Here's a suggestion for saving money. Don't order any more cones in this FY's budget
I assume this is meant in jest, but to clarify elements of my post regarding issues with outsourcing to foreign firms:Here's a suggestion for saving money. Don't order any more cones in this FY's budget
The UK ASC's (Asset Support Contract) are a different beast to that in Europe. The ASC(as mentioned previously) was devised around 2011 and the first contracts launched in 2012. It was designed as a way of supporting the network when the funding pool was greatly reduced. The types of schemes and what was allowed to be carried out was reduced, as were staff numbers (by around 50% initially). British Standards still govern a lot of what we do for bridge works because Eurocodes cannot cover assessments of existing structures, therefore outsourcing abroad isn't practical as they simply build to their own standard and there's little crossover. The same is true for Health & Safety processes. We require O&M Manuals / Health & Safety files for each scheme. When you receive a 2 page summary written in French that has been translated by Google (poorly) and passed to you as 'complete' it doesn't cut the mustard and we're not able to accept it.
The shift to reducing road user delays has meant an increase in night time working, or at least doing as much as we can when the roads are quieter. Traffic counts control how soon we can put a lane closure on a night. If it's still above a certain number, we have to wait. It could be midnight before the traffic count is low enough to put TM out, but we still need to be off at 6am, having planned to have TM out between 8-9pm.
Again it comes down to the expectations of road users wanting a first class road network, but expecting it to just appear out of nowhere, with zero delays to their journeys. Factor in that we've had 3 years of doing everything we can with a much reduced budget each year, and I think we're actually doing an alright job considering the circumstances.
Regarding purchase of cones; they're often re-used, sometimes re-striped if the high vis strips are worn out. New ones tend to only be purchased after someone's driven over it.
Whilst on the subject, can anyone explain the thinking behind the cone positioning on the A414 for the present bridge repairs?
Some clever clogs has decided to merge all of the traffic into one lane some 200 yards away from the busy roundabout - for some roadworks which are another mile or so up the road!
Squeezing all that traffic into one lane immediately after the roundabout is nothing short of retarded. Give it another few hundred yards and the merge would be easier with everyone up to a reasonable speed / able to get by HGVs.
Some clever clogs has decided to merge all of the traffic into one lane some 200 yards away from the busy roundabout - for some roadworks which are another mile or so up the road!
Squeezing all that traffic into one lane immediately after the roundabout is nothing short of retarded. Give it another few hundred yards and the merge would be easier with everyone up to a reasonable speed / able to get by HGVs.
C.A.R. said:
Whilst on the subject, can anyone explain the thinking behind the cone positioning on the A414 for the present bridge repairs?
Some clever clogs has decided to merge all of the traffic into one lane some 200 yards away from the busy roundabout - for some roadworks which are another mile or so up the road!
Squeezing all that traffic into one lane immediately after the roundabout is nothing short of retarded. Give it another few hundred yards and the merge would be easier with everyone up to a reasonable speed / able to get by HGVs.
Ah! That'll be the thaumasite gypsum sulfates causing rebar movement leaving voids around the curing concrete. Some clever clogs has decided to merge all of the traffic into one lane some 200 yards away from the busy roundabout - for some roadworks which are another mile or so up the road!
Squeezing all that traffic into one lane immediately after the roundabout is nothing short of retarded. Give it another few hundred yards and the merge would be easier with everyone up to a reasonable speed / able to get by HGVs.
fuelracer496 said:
The flaw is that it doesn't matter how many workers you throw at maintenance and repair work, it will not speed up the process.
Generally speaking, concrete works are the most time consuming and have the greatest impact to programme. Once the concrete is cast, to say a pier repair, there's a time period for it to reach the desired strength, allowing the shuttering to be removed. The mix design and weather conditions will affect this. Typically it would take 5 days to reach a safe minimum to remove shutters. You cannot do a lot else around that element during that time. Bearing in mind that whilst additives that adjust the strength gain are available, they often lead to a final strength much greater to that of the existing structure which leads to a hard point that isn't necessarily an advantage.
We have run shifts on schemes to help programme but in the case of say, deck concrete repairs, you'd have to run very specific TM to get traffic away from the repair area as vibration from traffic will cause rebar movement leaving voids around the curing concrete. In this instance it would mean removing lanes to allow the concrete the best chance to cure in a hurry. Less lanes is frowned upon.
So it's not as easy as it seems.
Actually there is a relatively easy engineering solution. Build more roads!Generally speaking, concrete works are the most time consuming and have the greatest impact to programme. Once the concrete is cast, to say a pier repair, there's a time period for it to reach the desired strength, allowing the shuttering to be removed. The mix design and weather conditions will affect this. Typically it would take 5 days to reach a safe minimum to remove shutters. You cannot do a lot else around that element during that time. Bearing in mind that whilst additives that adjust the strength gain are available, they often lead to a final strength much greater to that of the existing structure which leads to a hard point that isn't necessarily an advantage.
We have run shifts on schemes to help programme but in the case of say, deck concrete repairs, you'd have to run very specific TM to get traffic away from the repair area as vibration from traffic will cause rebar movement leaving voids around the curing concrete. In this instance it would mean removing lanes to allow the concrete the best chance to cure in a hurry. Less lanes is frowned upon.
So it's not as easy as it seems.
Adding a lane to a motorway costs more than building a new one, doing maintenance on a road running at lower capacity (because traffic goes else where) would allow you to close lanes.
Unfortunately building more roads isn't considered possible in the current political climate, it represents a failure of leadership that current politicians haven't managed to change this status quo.
I went up the M1 to Nottingham a couple of weeks ago and was amused by some of the signs laid out in the three sections of roadworks between London and Notts. One in particular was very honest and truthful: "You Might Not Always See Us" the sign told me. Damn right I didn't see you! Not one person on any of the roadworks I went through. Two days later I went from Notts to Leeds and saw a handful of workers on the two sections of roadworks I went through.
I'm always a cynic and these "Managed Motorways" just strike me as being Big Brother affairs aimed at generating money via arbitrary speed limits. The amount of cameras on those roadwork sections was crazy, with most of them not being the yellow SPECS type.
I'm always a cynic and these "Managed Motorways" just strike me as being Big Brother affairs aimed at generating money via arbitrary speed limits. The amount of cameras on those roadwork sections was crazy, with most of them not being the yellow SPECS type.
We already have the highest density of roads to area of any European country, possibly barring tiny places like Belgium - there isn't a need for more roads, there's a need to transfer goods traffic back onto the railways and open up the roads to cars - and make it a hang sight more difficult to get a driving license to keep some of the idiots off the road...
Dan Trent said:
Thanks for the very detailed and interesting post; I did have a 'working' invitation to a centre lined up but it then got elevated to national level and they said 'not until after the election' so probably time to start exploring that again. 
Appreciate the time taken to put up that response though. Will be in touch.
And to those saying 'do your research' etc... this and previous stories on the topic ARE based on reading lots of very heavyweight Highways England PDFs (linked from the other pieces) and are - yes - intended as provocative opinion pieces written from the perspective of a 'customer'. As and when we get this visit to a control centre and chance to speak with those formulating and implementing the policies we'll look at it more objectively. For now just the odd blog/rant!
Cheers,
Dan
Dan pm me and i'll give you a tour of our control roomAppreciate the time taken to put up that response though. Will be in touch.
And to those saying 'do your research' etc... this and previous stories on the topic ARE based on reading lots of very heavyweight Highways England PDFs (linked from the other pieces) and are - yes - intended as provocative opinion pieces written from the perspective of a 'customer'. As and when we get this visit to a control centre and chance to speak with those formulating and implementing the policies we'll look at it more objectively. For now just the odd blog/rant!
Cheers,
Dan
C.A.R. said:
Whilst on the subject, can anyone explain the thinking behind the cone positioning on the A414 for the present bridge repairs?
Some clever clogs has decided to merge all of the traffic into one lane some 200 yards away from the busy roundabout - for some roadworks which are another mile or so up the road!
Squeezing all that traffic into one lane immediately after the roundabout is nothing short of retarded. Give it another few hundred yards and the merge would be easier with everyone up to a reasonable speed / able to get by HGVs.
You don't think that, perhaps, just maybe, having all lanes in the run-up to the r'a'b, then one lane off the r'a'b might just bung the r'a'b up totally? And, as soon as it does bung, that r'a'b is totally fubar for anybody going in any direction, not just in the direction of the roadworks?Some clever clogs has decided to merge all of the traffic into one lane some 200 yards away from the busy roundabout - for some roadworks which are another mile or so up the road!
Squeezing all that traffic into one lane immediately after the roundabout is nothing short of retarded. Give it another few hundred yards and the merge would be easier with everyone up to a reasonable speed / able to get by HGVs.
FFS, it's hardly a difficult concept.
IF we don't invest in roads, our costs of operation (or lack of due t gridlock) are going to drag us under.
It's not just the usual, wealthy, European suspects like Germany and Switzerland whose road projects are putting us to shame:
http://www.khl.com/magazines/international-constru...
It's not just the usual, wealthy, European suspects like Germany and Switzerland whose road projects are putting us to shame:
http://www.khl.com/magazines/international-constru...
KHL international construction said:
A joint venture between Yapı Merkezi and SK Engineering & Construction (YMSK) has broken through on the new 3.34 km Bosphorus road tunnel project in Istanbul, Turkey. The bore was completed using a 13.66 m diameter Mixshield tunnel boring machine (TBM) from Herrenknecht in water pressures up to 11 bar – equivalent to a water depth of some 110 m.
The tunnel forms part of a new 14.6 km highway which is expected to cut journey times across the Bosphorus from the current 100 minutes by car ferry to 15 minutes. The is also expected to relieve congestion on existing bridges.
The tunnel forms part of a new 14.6 km highway which is expected to cut journey times across the Bosphorus from the current 100 minutes by car ferry to 15 minutes. The is also expected to relieve congestion on existing bridges.
Digga said:
DonkeyApple said:
Not strictly true is it? 
Move the price up and people will find an alternative. In reality, the actual alternative for the majority is to not make the journey at all but to switch to digital solutions. Those that do would have near empty trains to use off peak.
As we saw when oil was tapping 150, firms took staff off the roads and pushed digital meetings etc.
The massive growth in car ownership and usage way beyond population growth clearly shows that motoring has become cheaper and cheaper and crossed the threshold that meant people could live far more remotely from employment centres. Increasing that cost will not flood other networks but shift use off altogether as usuage is highly elastic.
This ignores the increases in movements of goods and services required.Move the price up and people will find an alternative. In reality, the actual alternative for the majority is to not make the journey at all but to switch to digital solutions. Those that do would have near empty trains to use off peak.
As we saw when oil was tapping 150, firms took staff off the roads and pushed digital meetings etc.
The massive growth in car ownership and usage way beyond population growth clearly shows that motoring has become cheaper and cheaper and crossed the threshold that meant people could live far more remotely from employment centres. Increasing that cost will not flood other networks but shift use off altogether as usuage is highly elastic.
Granted, a bunch of creatives can Skype together equally effectively, if not more so than face to face (and with less risk of Edwardian explorer beards tangling like velcro) but there are other services which require the man or woman (often plus tools, spares and equipment) to be on site and in a quick response period.
If you don't invest in the road network, or try to drive traffic off it through taxation, you are simply tying the economy's shoe laces together.
RoverP6B said:
We already have the highest density of roads to area of any European country, possibly barring tiny places like Belgium - there isn't a need for more roads, there's a need to transfer goods traffic back onto the railways and open up the roads to cars - and make it a hang sight more difficult to get a driving license to keep some of the idiots off the road...
I'd agree but favour using the network to benefit true commerce by pricing off the roads as many plg's as needed starting with the people who live on credit and use their cars to travel to shops to buy things they have no actual need of with money that isn't theirs. DonkeyApple said:
RoverP6B said:
We already have the highest density of roads to area of any European country, possibly barring tiny places like Belgium - there isn't a need for more roads, there's a need to transfer goods traffic back onto the railways and open up the roads to cars - and make it a hang sight more difficult to get a driving license to keep some of the idiots off the road...
I'd agree but favour using the network to benefit true commerce by pricing off the roads as many plg's as needed starting with the people who live on credit and use their cars to travel to shops to buy things they have no actual need of with money that isn't theirs. 
t. We have dense roads because of the very fact we are a densely populated island. This is the flipside for countries such as, for one example Iceland, but you are merely looking at a single metric and drawing the wrong conclusion.
Digga said:
DonkeyApple said:
RoverP6B said:
We already have the highest density of roads to area of any European country, possibly barring tiny places like Belgium - there isn't a need for more roads, there's a need to transfer goods traffic back onto the railways and open up the roads to cars - and make it a hang sight more difficult to get a driving license to keep some of the idiots off the road...
I'd agree but favour using the network to benefit true commerce by pricing off the roads as many plg's as needed starting with the people who live on credit and use their cars to travel to shops to buy things they have no actual need of with money that isn't theirs. t. We have dense roads because of the very fact we are a densely populated island. This is the flipside for countries such as, for one example Iceland, but you are merely looking at a single metric and drawing the wrong conclusion.
Ergo, the logical conclusion would be to reduce the amount of superfluous vehicles on the existing network in order to allow the necessary users to operate more efficiently.
It seems illogical, for example, to have commercial traffic held up at key points around the M25 by an excess of personal car users queing to go shopping. Same can be said for the A40 and A406 which is now regularly blocked because of the new flow of personal traffic into Westfield.
And we all saw, first hand, at the peak price of petrol that private users were both reducing the size of their cars and the number of journeys. It showed us quite clearly that pricing does assist in helping flow so why not price up private usage while leaving commercial as is?
If we accept that our road network cannot be expanded anywhere near the rate of growth to match the increasing numbers of private journeys then why not act to reduce the latter?
I think a bit of stick and carrot is needed. Tolls, for example, would logically stop a lot of the local traffic that does not need to use the motorway network but that merely displaces the load back on to local roads or reduces local economic activity (even if it is pointless, mindless shopping it's still GDP and tax generating).
There are still places though where the network is poor and there are opportunities to improve connections. Upgrading local A roads could relieve motorways of a lot of traffic - a prime candidate being the (dumbed-down) A34 between Brum and Mcr.
There are still places though where the network is poor and there are opportunities to improve connections. Upgrading local A roads could relieve motorways of a lot of traffic - a prime candidate being the (dumbed-down) A34 between Brum and Mcr.
Digga said:
I think a bit of stick and carrot is needed. Tolls, for example, would logically stop a lot of the local traffic that does not need to use the motorway network but that merely displaces the load back on to local roads or reduces local economic activity (even if it is pointless, mindless shopping it's still GDP and tax generating).
There are still places though where the network is poor and there are opportunities to improve connections.
Yup. Trouble with tolls is that we've spent 50 years building bypasses so switching to tolls would, as you say, Unfo those earlier benefits unless of course it's about building all new superhighways for the wealthy and time sensitive etc like the M6 toll. There are still places though where the network is poor and there are opportunities to improve connections.
And of course, where there is space and validity for expansion it should continue but we have to accept that the real nub of the issue is that motoring has become so cheap that even people without jobs can partake. The uncomfortable reality is that the only solution is to shift up the cost. It will make all people cut down on some journeys and shift others to alternate means. If done properly it would lead to an increase in the efficiency of the bus networks and their growth and even slow the growth of out of town shopping and reinvigorate local commercial spaces.
All in, I see quite a few social benefits to reducing the number of cars owned and the number of journeys made, albeit that sounds shocking as a car enthusiast. But then as an enthusiast, I would benefit hugely as I would accept the higher cost as it would be a personal lifestyle choice and at the same time actually be able to drive without so many eurobox utility transports queuing up for Lakeside or whatever.
speedyguy said:
iamAlegend said:
I'm sure some of those signs are mad up by some guy with a sick sense of humour.
The newest one i saw is YOU MAY NOT ALWAYS SEE US.....No st!!! You'd have to actually be out doing some work for us to see you!!!!! 
No Sh!t !!! They could be under you The newest one i saw is YOU MAY NOT ALWAYS SEE US.....No s
t!!! You'd have to actually be out doing some work for us to see you!!!!! 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-17...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/4242...
Must admit, I hadn't thought of that one.
DonkeyApple said:
All in, I see quite a few social benefits to reducing the number of cars owned and the number of journeys made, albeit that sounds shocking as a car enthusiast....
Dad, is that you?All good, but we'd all have to put up with significant cost inflation for goods and services - everything from your online shopping delivery to the journey made by the guy servicing your washing machine/central heating/wife.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff