M25. Is there any point in it anymore?
Discussion
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.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.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 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
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??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.
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.
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??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.
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.
The extreme taxation and control approach will not address any of the rising tide of disaster. Hell in a Handcart here we come.
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.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 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
The most effective solution is a cull.
The second most effective solution is to have express and "local" carriageways.
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.
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.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.
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.
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."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.
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.
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.
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."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.
The sign had it wrong
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.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.
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.
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.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.If it's a work trip I just jump on a train from the relevant station.
Life's too short.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff