IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> A34 broken again, (holds breath for scorn of the boy/girl racers)
Adrian Hollister
post Jun 26 2012, 05:45 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 299
Joined: 6-January 10
Member No.: 613



Do I dare bring up that the A34 is yet again closed? I know it dropped out of our local headlines, but the road continues to be marred with accidents every week. Seems WBC, OCC and the HA have yet to join up and sort the problem.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Jo Pepper
post Jun 26 2012, 05:51 PM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 56
Joined: 12-March 12
Member No.: 8,652



I've missed this debate smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Timbo
post Jun 26 2012, 06:08 PM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 639
Joined: 3-May 12
Member No.: 8,715



So the last handful of accidents (infact the last 4 if I recall) are all due to slow moving vehicles, such as HGVs or Tractors. So I presume when you say "sort the problem" I assume you mean "lower the speed limit". Which won't solve anything? Because these accidents have all been non-speed related..
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
lordtup
post Jun 26 2012, 06:20 PM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 554
Joined: 27-June 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 164



One of life's great mysteries is why a straight piece of dual carriageway should have more than it's fair share of accidents.
I know most of it is caused by poor driving practice ( speeding / slowing / lane changing etc) but surely the number of bad drivers is finite and they must be an endangered species by now ( pun unintentional ).

I have often thought that a police car patrolling on a continuous loop between Newbury and Oxford would be cost effective, as would the use of the the countless cameras that seem to adorn every bridge but appear to be devoid of film.


--------------------
Rem tene verba sequentur
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jun 26 2012, 06:22 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



The only way to "sort the problem" is to make it a 3 lane motorway.
That simply ain't going to happen so what do we do?
It is a 2 lane dual carriageway carrying the traffic of a 3 lane motorway, crashes are a certainty.
What do we do?
By the way have you noticed the way that heavy lorries completely ignore the outside lane weight restriction on the hill northbound away from East Ilsley?? dry.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Jun 26 2012, 06:41 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (lordtup @ Jun 26 2012, 07:20 PM) *
One of life's great mysteries is why a straight piece of dual carriageway should have more than it's fair share of accidents.
I know most of it is caused by poor driving practice ( speeding / slowing / lane changing etc) but surely the number of bad drivers is finite and they must be an endangered species by now ( pun unintentional ).

I'm pretty sure the problem is as Adrian Hollister says, slow moving lorries on the numerous up-hill sections. There does appear to be an unusual number of accidents and I agree that it's time to impose a 50mph limit.

There's also a problem with the acceleration and deceleration lanes being much too short, a particular problem is joining north-bound at Wash Water, you either gun it and hope for the best, or take it carefully and risk being run down by a lorry. Rubbish design, I'd have thought road engineers had standard safe specifications for this kind of thing.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Jun 26 2012, 07:02 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jun 26 2012, 07:41 PM) *
There does appear to be an unusual number of accidents and I agree that it's time to impose a 50mph limit.

I thought we'd already established in earlier debates on this subject that speed does not cause accidents?? blink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jun 26 2012, 07:17 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jun 26 2012, 08:02 PM) *
I thought we'd already established in earlier debates on this subject that speed does not cause accidents?? blink.gif

With slower speeds, there's less likelihood of a serious accident.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Jun 26 2012, 07:32 PM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jun 26 2012, 08:02 PM) *
I thought we'd already established in earlier debates on this subject that speed does not cause accidents?? blink.gif

That's too broad an argument. What's important here is that reducing the speed on this bit of road will reduce the number of accidents because they're caused by slow lorries mixing with fast cars.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Timbo
post Jun 26 2012, 08:06 PM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 639
Joined: 3-May 12
Member No.: 8,715



So ban lorries! You can't expect everything to be reduced to the lowest common denominator... or restrict lorries to the inside lane only! Not just on the time trial, and enforce with cameras. Easy and cheap.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Berkshirelad
post Jun 26 2012, 09:15 PM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 810
Joined: 13-August 09
Member No.: 271



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Jun 26 2012, 07:22 PM) *
By the way have you noticed the way that heavy lorries completely ignore the outside lane weight restriction on the hill northbound away from East Ilsley?? dry.gif


Because they know it is unenforceable.

It was in place for an experimental period that expired long ago.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Berkshirelad
post Jun 26 2012, 09:18 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 810
Joined: 13-August 09
Member No.: 271



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jun 26 2012, 07:41 PM) *
There's also a problem with the acceleration and deceleration lanes being much too short, a particular problem is joining north-bound at Wash Water, you either gun it and hope for the best, or take it carefully and risk being run down by a lorry. Rubbish design, I'd have thought road engineers had standard safe specifications for this kind of thing.


I absolutely agree. This is especially true of the bypass;where you can see that the land was available to have longer slips. I'm surprised that there are not more accidents at the junctions.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Berkshirelad
post Jun 26 2012, 09:20 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 810
Joined: 13-August 09
Member No.: 271



QUOTE (lordtup @ Jun 26 2012, 07:20 PM) *
I have often thought that a police car patrolling on a continuous loop between Newbury and Oxford would be cost effective, as would the use of the the countless cameras that seem to adorn every bridge but appear to be devoid of film.


What would cameras do?

They are only Home Office approved for speed enforcement (or traffic lights or bus lanes). You cannot prosecute other driving offences on the basis of camera evidence alone.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Berkshirelad
post Jun 26 2012, 09:22 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 810
Joined: 13-August 09
Member No.: 271



QUOTE (Adrian Hollister @ Jun 26 2012, 06:45 PM) *
I know it dropped out of our local headlines, but the road continues to be marred with accidents every week. Seems WBC, OCC and the HA have yet to join up and sort the problem.



The A34 is a trunk road and the responsibility of the HA.

Councils like WBC and OCC act only as agents of the HA and have no executive power.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Adrian Hollister
post Jun 27 2012, 08:06 AM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 299
Joined: 6-January 10
Member No.: 613



QUOTE (Berkshirelad @ Jun 26 2012, 09:22 PM) *
The A34 is a trunk road and the responsibility of the HA.

Councils like WBC and OCC act only as agents of the HA and have no executive power.

The effect of a broken A34 is broken roads in the WBC and OCC area. Tail backs of over a mile getting into Wantage and the cars racing and overtaking dangerously to get to this queue were travelling through West Berks.

It's all a matter of speed differential and traffic management. Put up a variable speed limit, a method of actively monitoring it and cameras to enforce it - simple.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
theone09
post Jun 27 2012, 09:37 AM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 14-September 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 341



Was there another lorry crash this morning? Or is it just NWN not checking stories before publishing them?! http://www.newburytoday.co.uk/2012/a34-re-...lorry-yesterday

QUOTE
Police were called to the northbound carriageway near East Ilsley at about 4.06am after a Scania car transporter had overturned.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Jun 27 2012, 09:45 AM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



I think it's pretty clear that the story is referring to 4.06 am yesterday, since the fact it happened yesterday had already been mentioned.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
theone09
post Jun 27 2012, 10:45 AM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 213
Joined: 14-September 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 341



QUOTE (JeffG @ Jun 27 2012, 10:45 AM) *
I think it's pretty clear that the story is referring to 4.06 am yesterday, since the fact it happened yesterday had already been mentioned.


It happened at 4.06PM yesterday, not AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Jun 27 2012, 11:11 AM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (theone09 @ Jun 27 2012, 11:45 AM) *
It happened at 4.06PM yesterday, not AM

OK - thanks for the information. I just thought there was confusion about the day. A good case for using the 24-hour clock!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
desres123
post Jun 27 2012, 12:36 PM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 95
Joined: 29-January 12
Member No.: 8,528



QUOTE (Simon Kirby @ Jun 26 2012, 08:32 PM) *
That's too broad an argument. What's important here is that reducing the speed on this bit of road will reduce the number of accidents because they're caused by slow lorries mixing with fast cars.


So reducing the speed limit is the answer even though no cars were involved and was caused when a hgv was trying to overtake two other hgv's. Even if the speed limit was reduced it wouldnt stop this from happening
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 25th January 2022 - 05:57 PM