|
Latest Heathrow master plan
In article , Roland Perry
writes I have never in my life seen construction companies do this even when the new road is well away from the old route It costs millions extra to do it that way Come and look at the A14 rebuild between Girton and Swavesey. It's being done in a similar way. And there's only disruption to the through traffic for two isolated overnight periods (while they switch some virtual points)? You have got-to-be-joking. Let's see when it happens. At the moment, the next disruption is a closure this weekend to demolish what's left of the old Bar Hill flyover. Closures for this sort of thing, or installing gantries, seem to be more disruptive than switching the alignment. -- Clive D.W. Feather |
Latest Heathrow master plan
tim... wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 12:43:48 +0100, "Clive D.W. Feather" wrote: In article , Roland Perry writes The only disruption will come at the end, when the traffic is diverted to the new route. My guess is that the northbound traffic will be moved first, with a few weeks of lane 1 closures required while they connect the new to the old carriageways, then an overnight closure for the final switch to be made. The same procedure would then be followed a few months later to divert the southbound carriageway to the new alignment. The amount of work you would be expecting them to do "overnight" beggars belief. I disagree. Build the two new carriageways. At each end, cut them off very close to the edge of northbound lane 1 (there's no hard shoulder, right? if there is, adjust description accordingly). Cone off northbound lane 1. Spend a week or two filling in the narrow gap between the old and new northbounds at each end. Not sure that you even need a closure to switch over. Simply move all the cones. Repeat for the southbound (though this time you're closing lane 4). Yes, that's what I'm expecting. I have never in my life seen construction companies do this even when the new road is well away from the old route It costs millions extra to do it that way Why would it cost any extra? because you have to build a "throw away" access road to the new build road. I take it you've never looked at a map of the area, or even Google Maps? The alternative of accessing via the current road is "free" but causes some of that road to need closing There are plenty of other existing roads, including the A4, they can use for access to the work sites. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
tim... wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 19/06/2019 22:06, Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? Of course! They can fly everything in on the new runway. -- Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to Prefab Sprout - 1985 - Steve McQueen |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 19/06/2019 21:07, Recliner wrote:
You first connect the completed new carriageway and its M4 slip road to the old slip road just before it splits into the east and west bound links. For the next few months, traffic heading for the M4 will be diverted to the new northbound carriageway, while through traffic will continue to use the existing carriageway. During this time, the new carriageway will be built through the old northbound slip road to connect to the ood carriageway. Again, there will be and closures for a few weeks and an overnight complete closure as the final connection is made. Southbound is easier, but, again, connecting traffic from the M4 might continue to use the old carriageway for a little while after the through M25 traffic has been diverted to the new carriageway. I don't know what the limit is on how close junctions are allowed to be on motorways, but that might put the T5 junction and the M4 junction too close together during the interim, leading to dangerous weaving. -- Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to Feist - 2011 - Metals |
Latest Heathrow master plan
Basil Jet wrote:
On 19/06/2019 21:07, Recliner wrote: You first connect the completed new carriageway and its M4 slip road to the old slip road just before it splits into the east and west bound links. For the next few months, traffic heading for the M4 will be diverted to the new northbound carriageway, while through traffic will continue to use the existing carriageway. During this time, the new carriageway will be built through the old northbound slip road to connect to the ood carriageway. Again, there will be and closures for a few weeks and an overnight complete closure as the final connection is made. Southbound is easier, but, again, connecting traffic from the M4 might continue to use the old carriageway for a little while after the through M25 traffic has been diverted to the new carriageway. I don't know what the limit is on how close junctions are allowed to be on motorways, but that might put the T5 junction and the M4 junction too close together during the interim, leading to dangerous weaving. Why would they be any closer than they are now? In any case, there are much closer motorway junctions elsewhere. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 20/06/2019 00:09, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote: On 19/06/2019 21:07, Recliner wrote: You first connect the completed new carriageway and its M4 slip road to the old slip road just before it splits into the east and west bound links. For the next few months, traffic heading for the M4 will be diverted to the new northbound carriageway, while through traffic will continue to use the existing carriageway. During this time, the new carriageway will be built through the old northbound slip road to connect to the ood carriageway. Again, there will be and closures for a few weeks and an overnight complete closure as the final connection is made. Southbound is easier, but, again, connecting traffic from the M4 might continue to use the old carriageway for a little while after the through M25 traffic has been diverted to the new carriageway. I don't know what the limit is on how close junctions are allowed to be on motorways, but that might put the T5 junction and the M4 junction too close together during the interim, leading to dangerous weaving. Why would they be any closer than they are now? Because at the moment the traffic for the M4 leaves the main carriageway a fair distance north of the A4, whereas you would have this traffic using the new tunnel route (and the through M25 traffic using the old route) for a few months, which puts the bifurcation point inches north of the convergence point at the north end of the T5 junction. That's not going to work. Similar for the southbound. The traffic to and from the M4 and the traffic to and from Watford has to remain together throughout the construction to avoid dangerous weaving at the north end of the T5 junction (although obviously the northbound can switch to the new tunnel months before the southbound does). -- Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to Feist - 2011 - Metals |
Latest Heathrow master plan
Basil Jet wrote:
On 20/06/2019 00:09, Recliner wrote: Basil Jet wrote: On 19/06/2019 21:07, Recliner wrote: You first connect the completed new carriageway and its M4 slip road to the old slip road just before it splits into the east and west bound links. For the next few months, traffic heading for the M4 will be diverted to the new northbound carriageway, while through traffic will continue to use the existing carriageway. During this time, the new carriageway will be built through the old northbound slip road to connect to the ood carriageway. Again, there will be and closures for a few weeks and an overnight complete closure as the final connection is made. Southbound is easier, but, again, connecting traffic from the M4 might continue to use the old carriageway for a little while after the through M25 traffic has been diverted to the new carriageway. I don't know what the limit is on how close junctions are allowed to be on motorways, but that might put the T5 junction and the M4 junction too close together during the interim, leading to dangerous weaving. Why would they be any closer than they are now? Because at the moment the traffic for the M4 leaves the main carriageway a fair distance north of the A4, whereas you would have this traffic using the new tunnel route (and the through M25 traffic using the old route) for a few months, which puts the bifurcation point inches north of the convergence point at the north end of the T5 junction. That's not going to work. Similar for the southbound. The traffic to and from the M4 and the traffic to and from Watford has to remain together throughout the construction to avoid dangerous weaving at the north end of the T5 junction (although obviously the northbound can switch to the new tunnel months before the southbound does). I don't think it would be possible for the northbound through and M4 junction traffic to stay together throughout, as the new through route cuts through the existing slip road to the M4. So there would have to be at least a short period of a few weeks of separation while the through route is linked at the northern end, through the current M4 junction slip road. Maybe there would have to be restrictions on the use of the junctions during that transition period? For example, T5 to M4 traffic might be rerouted. Southbound might be easier, and it might be possible to keep the traffic flows together. Or, again, M4 to T5 traffic could be temporarily rerouted for a few weeks. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 20/06/2019 01:04, Recliner wrote:
Basil Jet wrote: On 20/06/2019 00:09, Recliner wrote: Basil Jet wrote: On 19/06/2019 21:07, Recliner wrote: You first connect the completed new carriageway and its M4 slip road to the old slip road just before it splits into the east and west bound links. For the next few months, traffic heading for the M4 will be diverted to the new northbound carriageway, while through traffic will continue to use the existing carriageway. During this time, the new carriageway will be built through the old northbound slip road to connect to the ood carriageway. Again, there will be and closures for a few weeks and an overnight complete closure as the final connection is made. Southbound is easier, but, again, connecting traffic from the M4 might continue to use the old carriageway for a little while after the through M25 traffic has been diverted to the new carriageway. I don't know what the limit is on how close junctions are allowed to be on motorways, but that might put the T5 junction and the M4 junction too close together during the interim, leading to dangerous weaving. Why would they be any closer than they are now? Because at the moment the traffic for the M4 leaves the main carriageway a fair distance north of the A4, whereas you would have this traffic using the new tunnel route (and the through M25 traffic using the old route) for a few months, which puts the bifurcation point inches north of the convergence point at the north end of the T5 junction. That's not going to work. Similar for the southbound. The traffic to and from the M4 and the traffic to and from Watford has to remain together throughout the construction to avoid dangerous weaving at the north end of the T5 junction (although obviously the northbound can switch to the new tunnel months before the southbound does). I don't think it would be possible for the northbound through and M4 junction traffic to stay together throughout, as the new through route cuts through the existing slip road to the M4. So there would have to be at least a short period of a few weeks of separation while the through route is linked at the northern end, through the current M4 junction slip road. Maybe there would have to be restrictions on the use of the junctions during that transition period? For example, T5 to M4 traffic might be rerouted. Southbound might be easier, and it might be possible to keep the traffic flows together. Or, again, M4 to T5 traffic could be temporarily rerouted for a few weeks. The M4 to T5 or T5 to M4 isn't the problem, because it keeps left through the pinch point. The problem northbound is the Gatwick to Slough traffic cutting from right to left exactly where the T5 to Watford traffic is cutting from left to right, and southbound the Slough to Gatwick traffic cutting from left to right exactly where the Watford to T5 traffic is cutting from right to left. So there is no way the bifurcation point or merge point south of the M4 junction will be moved to the north end of the T5 junction even for a one minute period, unless the motorway was down to one lane there, which is only feasible in the middle of the night. -- Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to Feist - 2017 - Pleasure |
Latest Heathrow master plan
Basil Jet wrote:
On 20/06/2019 01:04, Recliner wrote: Basil Jet wrote: On 20/06/2019 00:09, Recliner wrote: Basil Jet wrote: On 19/06/2019 21:07, Recliner wrote: You first connect the completed new carriageway and its M4 slip road to the old slip road just before it splits into the east and west bound links. For the next few months, traffic heading for the M4 will be diverted to the new northbound carriageway, while through traffic will continue to use the existing carriageway. During this time, the new carriageway will be built through the old northbound slip road to connect to the ood carriageway. Again, there will be and closures for a few weeks and an overnight complete closure as the final connection is made. Southbound is easier, but, again, connecting traffic from the M4 might continue to use the old carriageway for a little while after the through M25 traffic has been diverted to the new carriageway. I don't know what the limit is on how close junctions are allowed to be on motorways, but that might put the T5 junction and the M4 junction too close together during the interim, leading to dangerous weaving. Why would they be any closer than they are now? Because at the moment the traffic for the M4 leaves the main carriageway a fair distance north of the A4, whereas you would have this traffic using the new tunnel route (and the through M25 traffic using the old route) for a few months, which puts the bifurcation point inches north of the convergence point at the north end of the T5 junction. That's not going to work. Similar for the southbound. The traffic to and from the M4 and the traffic to and from Watford has to remain together throughout the construction to avoid dangerous weaving at the north end of the T5 junction (although obviously the northbound can switch to the new tunnel months before the southbound does). I don't think it would be possible for the northbound through and M4 junction traffic to stay together throughout, as the new through route cuts through the existing slip road to the M4. So there would have to be at least a short period of a few weeks of separation while the through route is linked at the northern end, through the current M4 junction slip road. Maybe there would have to be restrictions on the use of the junctions during that transition period? For example, T5 to M4 traffic might be rerouted. Southbound might be easier, and it might be possible to keep the traffic flows together. Or, again, M4 to T5 traffic could be temporarily rerouted for a few weeks. The M4 to T5 or T5 to M4 isn't the problem, because it keeps left through the pinch point. The problem northbound is the Gatwick to Slough traffic cutting from right to left exactly where the T5 to Watford traffic is cutting from left to right, and southbound the Slough to Gatwick traffic cutting from left to right exactly where the Watford to T5 traffic is cutting from right to left. So there is no way the bifurcation point or merge point south of the M4 junction will be moved to the north end of the T5 junction even for a one minute period, unless the motorway was down to one lane there, which is only feasible in the middle of the night. Perhaps the simplest approach would be to close the T5/M25 northbound connection for a short period while they work round the clock to connect the new through carriageway at the northern end, cutting through the existing slipway. T5 traffic could be diverted via the A3113 or Colnbrook Bypass. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:57:14AM +0100, tim... wrote:
but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable I suppose it's also unreasonable that people who have no business with Crossrail are suffering years of disruption while that is built? -- David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic Anyone willing to give up a little fun for tolerance deserves neither |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 08:09:04AM +0100, Basil Jet wrote:
I suspect they'll build a temporary road either side of the motorway, divert the traffic onto that and then dig down and build a roof where the old carriageway was. There'll probably be a 50 mph limit for a year while the temporary road is being used. A 50mph limit? Horrors! Why, that's the same speed that that part of the motorway normally runs at! -- David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence engineer: n. one who, regardless of how much effort he puts in to a job, will never satisfy either the suits or the scientists |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 20/06/2019 10:48, David Cantrell wrote:
On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 08:09:04AM +0100, Basil Jet wrote: I suspect they'll build a temporary road either side of the motorway, divert the traffic onto that and then dig down and build a roof where the old carriageway was. There'll probably be a 50 mph limit for a year while the temporary road is being used. A 50mph limit? Horrors! Why, that's the same speed that that part of the motorway normally runs at! In your dreams! -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 10:42:18 +0100, David Cantrell
wrote: On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:57:14AM +0100, tim... wrote: but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable I suppose it's also unreasonable that people who have no business with Crossrail are suffering years of disruption while that is built? Ditto with HS2 |
Latest Heathrow master plan
"Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? I've looked at the map there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it and once you access it via the motorway you are into the realms of closing lanes |
Latest Heathrow master plan
"David Cantrell" wrote in message k... On Tue, Jun 18, 2019 at 10:57:14AM +0100, tim... wrote: but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable I suppose it's also unreasonable that people who have no business with Crossrail are suffering years of disruption while that is built? Yup tim |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..."
wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? I've looked at the map there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road? There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role. and once you access it via the motorway you are into the realms of closing lanes Yes, but you've given no credible reason for why access via the M25 would be needed. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? I've looked at the map there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road? There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role. They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in. Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15 (M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are going to square that circle. The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15. Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1, there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders. -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote: On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? I've looked at the map there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road? There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role. They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in. Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15 (M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are going to square that circle. The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15. Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1, there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders. Looking further into the future, the new runway is likely to cause a big increase of traffic to T5, as it (and its extensions) will serve the new runway. So, even if the long-discussed two new western rail links are built, there will still probably be a significant increase in road traffic to J14A. I wonder if it might make sense for T5 to have direct links to the M4 that don't briefly share the M25? |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 20/06/2019 16:02, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote: On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote: On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? I've looked at the map there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road? There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role. They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in. Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15 (M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are going to square that circle. The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15. Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1, there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders. Looking further into the future, the new runway is likely to cause a big increase of traffic to T5, as it (and its extensions) will serve the new runway. So, even if the long-discussed two new western rail links are built, there will still probably be a significant increase in road traffic to J14A. I wonder if it might make sense for T5 to have direct links to the M4 that don't briefly share the M25? Where are they going to go with the new runway between the two? You can get from the M4 to T5 without going on the M25 already: M4 Spur - A4 - Stanwell Moor Rod and Western Perimeter road. -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 20/06/2019 16:02, Recliner wrote: Graeme Wall wrote: On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote: On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? I've looked at the map there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road? There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role. They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in. Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15 (M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are going to square that circle. The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15. Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1, there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders. Looking further into the future, the new runway is likely to cause a big increase of traffic to T5, as it (and its extensions) will serve the new runway. So, even if the long-discussed two new western rail links are built, there will still probably be a significant increase in road traffic to J14A. I wonder if it might make sense for T5 to have direct links to the M4 that don't briefly share the M25? Where are they going to go with the new runway between the two? You can get from the M4 to T5 without going on the M25 already: M4 Spur - A4 - Stanwell Moor Rod and Western Perimeter road. It's currently a fairly minor road with very limited capacity, that will probably be lost under the new taxiways between the runways (along with the northern car parks). |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In message , at 21:59:12 on Wed, 19 Jun
2019, Clive D.W. Feather remarked: In article , Roland Perry writes I have never in my life seen construction companies do this even when the new road is well away from the old route It costs millions extra to do it that way Come and look at the A14 rebuild between Girton and Swavesey. It's being done in a similar way. And there's only disruption to the through traffic for two isolated overnight periods (while they switch some virtual points)? You have got-to-be-joking. Let's see when it happens. At the moment, the next disruption is a closure this weekend to demolish what's left of the old Bar Hill flyover. Closures for this sort of thing, or installing gantries, seem to be more disruptive than switching the alignment. Today I had the [dis]pleasure of driving the Girton to Milton section again, and it's not noticeably further on than six months ago. Lots of weaving contra-flow lanes, single in places, through traffic down to 30mph, and masses of work to do to even restore the original alignment - let alone switch people from one free-flowing dual carriageway to another with a set of overnight 'points'. -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In message , at 20:27:09 on Wed, 19 Jun
2019, Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 20:09:11 on Wed, 19 Jun 2019, Basil Jet remarked: I currently do have sight problems but that diagram clearly shows the slip roads from the new alignment being foul of the existing layout. I'm hoping to go and see the actual documents in the library tomorrow so may get a better idea then. The bridges are all in the centres of the junctions, and the roads in those area are unchanged, unlike the roads on the southern part of the M4 junction or the northern part of the T5 junction. (I'm not counting gantries as bridges.) Talking of gantries; along with lamp-posts, central reservation barriers, and all the other street furniture, they'd have to be removed along the affected stretches to make the "set of points, with road cones swapping the flow overnight" operation postulated up-thread. Yes, that's true. There would need to be some overnight closures leading up to the actual switch. Some items could be removed well in advance, during other works. Removal of overhead gantries would obviously require overnight closures, but could be done well in advance. Presumably there won't be more than one overhead gantry in each of the shirt connection zones. But quite a lot could be done with just lane closures. For example, the central reservation won't be affected while the northbound carriageway is moved across in two stages. Later, when it's time to move the southbound traffic, much of the structure removal and connection work will be done during closures of the fast lane. The final switchover will require an overnight closure while the 'points are switched'. This is all so far removed from current practice (even if it were possible) that discussing the detail is like rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic. -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 20/06/2019 16:40, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote: On 20/06/2019 16:02, Recliner wrote: Graeme Wall wrote: On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote: On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? I've looked at the map there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road? There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role. They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in. Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15 (M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are going to square that circle. The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15. Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1, there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders. Looking further into the future, the new runway is likely to cause a big increase of traffic to T5, as it (and its extensions) will serve the new runway. So, even if the long-discussed two new western rail links are built, there will still probably be a significant increase in road traffic to J14A. I wonder if it might make sense for T5 to have direct links to the M4 that don't briefly share the M25? Where are they going to go with the new runway between the two? You can get from the M4 to T5 without going on the M25 already: M4 Spur - A4 - Stanwell Moor Rod and Western Perimeter road. It's currently a fairly minor road with very limited capacity, that will probably be lost under the new taxiways between the runways (along with the northern car parks). There's an alternative route from the M4 via the Colnbrook by-pass. One of the options for the M25 is to remove the southern slip roads from J15 and route all the interchange traffic to the south via the Colnbrook interchange to the west. -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 20/06/2019 16:40, Recliner wrote: Graeme Wall wrote: On 20/06/2019 16:02, Recliner wrote: Graeme Wall wrote: On 20/06/2019 12:47, Recliner wrote: On Thu, 20 Jun 2019 12:20:35 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 10:57:29 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... tim... wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message ... https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48668001 well I don't know about the rest, but I for one think that the idea that people who have little or no business at the airport are going to have to suffer 5 years of disruption whilst they rebuild the M25 to create this Hub airport entirely unreasonable Why do you think M25 users will suffer five years of disruption? It's more likely to be a few night time closures or lane restrictions. they are going to put the whole road in a tunnel (presumably from the way it's described not by building a raft on top of it) how can that not cause major disruption? You've obviously not looked at the map, what is "The Map" - I guess there is one, but no I didn't get to see it (You can blame that on my out of date browser if the original article included a link) or read this thread. as one of the first to reply, that would have been difficult If you now read the thread, I pointed out that the buried/bridged motorway will be built on a new alignment, to the west of the current M25, so building it won't disrupt the existing motorway or flights. The plans that I can see show the new road so close that the idea that it wont disrupt the current M25 is fiction. Only the short period of linking the old carriageways and new diversion will cause any disruption, and that should be short (mainly a few days or weeks of lane closures, then a few hours of complete closure while the traffic is switched to the new route). If you think that they can link a new route into a current motorways by only diverting traffic for a few weeks then you have never seen how they do this IME they narrow the road where the connection is to be made for the full term of the works. They do this because they need access to the new road for construction vehicles - how else are they going to build it? They won't need access to the existing M25 to build the new structures to the west — why would they? because they don't helicopter all the construction stuff in, do they Of course not. Why don't you at least look at a map before posting an inane question like that? I've looked at the map there will be no easy access to the site of this new road except via the current motorway or by building a road specifically to access it Huh? What about the A4 Colnbrook By-pass and Bath Road? There's also rail access, which will probably play a big role. They are talking about using the rail line for bringing materials in. Looking at the more detailed plans they have problems with not only J15 (M4) but J14A (T5). There isn't space between the latter and the proposed tunnel mouth for the appropriate weaving space and the Highways Agency don't want weaving in the tunnel itself. Any major work on J14A is A) going to cost a lot and B) cause major disruption on the M25. A cursory read through the documentation doesn't really show how they are going to square that circle. The map we've been referring to is variation 3B, v1 being just lower the motorway or raise the runway keeping the present alignment. Non-starter for many reasons. 3B has around 7 subvariants depending on various tweaks to the two interchanges, J14A and J15. Anyone hunting out the documentation it's Structure Plan Vol2 Ch1, there's around a dozen volumes on ecological impact first. I couldn't find a proper index to the contents, the full colour A3 executive summary is not actually very helpful. I get the impression it is just there to look pretty for those who can't face 30 odd white A4 ring binders. Looking further into the future, the new runway is likely to cause a big increase of traffic to T5, as it (and its extensions) will serve the new runway. So, even if the long-discussed two new western rail links are built, there will still probably be a significant increase in road traffic to J14A. I wonder if it might make sense for T5 to have direct links to the M4 that don't briefly share the M25? Where are they going to go with the new runway between the two? You can get from the M4 to T5 without going on the M25 already: M4 Spur - A4 - Stanwell Moor Rod and Western Perimeter road. It's currently a fairly minor road with very limited capacity, that will probably be lost under the new taxiways between the runways (along with the northern car parks). There's an alternative route from the M4 via the Colnbrook by-pass. One of the options for the M25 is to remove the southern slip roads from J15 and route all the interchange traffic to the south via the Colnbrook interchange to the west. Or at least an enhanced version of that road could be the signposted route between T5 and the M4 to the west. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 11:02:24AM +0100, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 20/06/2019 10:48, David Cantrell wrote: A 50mph limit? Horrors! Why, that's the same speed that that part of the motorway normally runs at! In your dreams! No, in my fairly regular experience. -- David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice For every vengeance, there is an equal and opposite revengeance. -- Cartoon Law XI |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 21/06/2019 16:23, David Cantrell wrote:
On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 11:02:24AM +0100, Graeme Wall wrote: On 20/06/2019 10:48, David Cantrell wrote: A 50mph limit? Horrors! Why, that's the same speed that that part of the motorway normally runs at! In your dreams! No, in my fairly regular experience. It moves that fast? -- Graeme Wall This account not read. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In article , Roland Perry
writes Today I had the [dis]pleasure of driving the Girton to Milton section again, and it's not noticeably further on than six months ago. Lots of weaving contra-flow lanes, single in places, through traffic down to 30mph, and masses of work to do to even restore the original alignment - let alone switch people from one free-flowing dual carriageway to another with a set of overnight 'points'. That's a completely different situation. From Histon to Milton they're widening from 2+2 to 3+3 on the same alignment in a narrow space. It's not surprising that they need to narrow the lanes and have disruption. I have no idea what is going on between Girton and Histon and nobody seems to be able to tell me. We went through years of chaos while they widened it from 2+2 to 3+3 *before* the A14 work started. So I can't see what needs to be done now. As for the Girton interchange itself, given how much is being altered it's not surprising. None of this is remotely similar to a new alignment being built out of the way and connected up when ready. -- Clive D.W. Feather |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In message , at 09:02:34 on Sat, 22 Jun
2019, Clive D.W. Feather remarked: In article , Roland Perry writes Today I had the [dis]pleasure of driving the Girton to Milton section again, and it's not noticeably further on than six months ago. Lots of weaving contra-flow lanes, single in places, through traffic down to 30mph, and masses of work to do to even restore the original alignment - let alone switch people from one free-flowing dual carriageway to another with a set of overnight 'points'. That's a completely different situation. From Histon to Milton they're widening from 2+2 to 3+3 on the same alignment in a narrow space. It's not surprising that they need to narrow the lanes and have disruption. I have no idea what is going on between Girton and Histon and nobody seems to be able to tell me. We went through years of chaos while they widened it from 2+2 to 3+3 *before* the A14 work started. So I can't see what needs to be done now. The 'new' disruption is indeed very disappointing, especially as there's not much happening on a day to day basis. Must be something to do with building the new intersection at Histon. As for the Girton interchange itself, given how much is being altered it's not surprising. None of this is remotely similar to a new alignment being built out of the way and connected up when ready. On the contrary, the majority of the new Girton interchange is being built "out of the way", but they are making no attempt whatsoever to get it finished first, with the existing roads operating normally, and then "throwing the points" in the manner that's been advocated for the M25. It's quite clear they simply don't care how much they disrupt the traffic, for years on end. Exactly the same happened at the new A14/M1 junction, which they again did incrementally with several years of disruption, when the new east-west route was a completely new alignment. -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On Sun, 23 Jun 2019 10:22:58 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: In message , at 09:02:34 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019, Clive D.W. Feather remarked: In article , Roland Perry writes Today I had the [dis]pleasure of driving the Girton to Milton section again, and it's not noticeably further on than six months ago. Lots of weaving contra-flow lanes, single in places, through traffic down to 30mph, and masses of work to do to even restore the original alignment - let alone switch people from one free-flowing dual carriageway to another with a set of overnight 'points'. That's a completely different situation. From Histon to Milton they're widening from 2+2 to 3+3 on the same alignment in a narrow space. It's not surprising that they need to narrow the lanes and have disruption. I have no idea what is going on between Girton and Histon and nobody seems to be able to tell me. We went through years of chaos while they widened it from 2+2 to 3+3 *before* the A14 work started. So I can't see what needs to be done now. The 'new' disruption is indeed very disappointing, especially as there's not much happening on a day to day basis. Must be something to do with building the new intersection at Histon. As for the Girton interchange itself, given how much is being altered it's not surprising. None of this is remotely similar to a new alignment being built out of the way and connected up when ready. On the contrary, the majority of the new Girton interchange is being built "out of the way", but they are making no attempt whatsoever to get it finished first, with the existing roads operating normally, and then "throwing the points" in the manner that's been advocated for the M25. It's quite clear they simply don't care how much they disrupt the traffic, for years on end. That probably wouldn't be a permitted option with the M25 at Heathrow. Exactly the same happened at the new A14/M1 junction, which they again did incrementally with several years of disruption, when the new east-west route was a completely new alignment. |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In message , at 16:24:25 on
Mon, 24 Jun 2019, Recliner remarked: It's quite clear they simply don't care how much they disrupt the traffic, for years on end. That probably wouldn't be a permitted option with the M25 at Heathrow. I'm sure they'll have pressure to reduce the disruption a little. But nothing as drastic as your plan has ever happened before. Well, perhaps since they stuck a platform over Oxford Circus overnight, to rebuild the ticket hall, when I was a lad. But in those days they'd re-lay whole major station throats in a matter of days, not months. -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In message , at 17:54:39 on Wed, 19 Jun
2019, tim... remarked: [route for the M25] The only disruption will come at the end, when the traffic is diverted to the new route. My guess is that the northbound traffic will be moved first, with a few weeks of lane 1 closures required while they connect the new to the old carriageways, then an overnight closure for the final switch to be made. The same procedure would then be followed a few months later to divert the southbound carriageway to the new alignment. The amount of work you would be expecting them to do "overnight" beggars belief. I disagree. Build the two new carriageways. At each end, cut them off very close to the edge of northbound lane 1 (there's no hard shoulder, right? if there is, adjust description accordingly). Cone off northbound lane 1. Spend a week or two filling in the narrow gap between the old and new northbounds at each end. Not sure that you even need a closure to switch over. Simply move all the cones. Repeat for the southbound (though this time you're closing lane 4). Yes, that's what I'm expecting. I have never in my life seen construction companies do this For once I agree with Tim. While it's not quite the M25, the A14 is one of the busiest dual carriageways in the country. They've recently finished (ahead of schedule) building the green-fields bypass round the southwest of Huntingdon, and now just need to splice it onto the old road towards Cambridge and the M11. Plenty of opportunity to stagger this, achieve it by some crafty re-arrangement of bollards etc. But no. They've closed the road from 9pm yesterday until 5am on Monday. ps The competition now is to see how long the new road takes to get on various mapping sites, satnavs etc. Tom Tom's doing the best, fsvo, with not just the road but as I type a 3.5mile eastbound queue on it before it's even open. Contractors vehicles, the speculation is. -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On 07/12/2019 15:49, Roland Perry wrote:
While it's not quite the M25, the A14 is one of the busiest dual carriageways in the country. They've recently finished (ahead of schedule) building the green-fields bypass round the southwest of Huntingdon, and now just need to splice it onto the old road towards Cambridge and the M11. Plenty of opportunity to stagger this, achieve it by some crafty re-arrangement of bollards etc. But no. They've closed the road from 9pm yesterday until 5am on Monday. ps The competition now is to see how long the new road takes to get on Â*Â* various mapping sites, satnavs etc. Tom Tom's doing the best, fsvo, Â*Â* with not just the road but as I type a 3.5mile eastbound queue on it Â*Â* before it's even open. Contractors vehicles, the speculation is. It's surprising that the new alignment starts east of Fenstanton. Over 7 miles of existing dual carriageway with every junction already grade separated is partly being removed and partly becoming very quiet. Admittedly the new alignment is 3+3 where the old one was 2+2, but it still looks like they had money to burn. -- Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to Various Artists - 1988 - Fast 'N' Bulbous.. A Tribute To Captain Beefheart |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In message , at 18:24:11 on Sat, 7 Dec 2019,
Basil Jet remarked: On 07/12/2019 15:49, Roland Perry wrote: While it's not quite the M25, the A14 is one of the busiest dual carriageways in the country. They've recently finished (ahead of schedule) building the green-fields bypass round the southwest of Huntingdon, and now just need to splice it onto the old road towards Cambridge and the M11. Plenty of opportunity to stagger this, achieve it by some crafty re-arrangement of bollards etc. But no. They've closed the road from 9pm yesterday until 5am on Monday. ps The competition now is to see how long the new road takes to get on ** various mapping sites, satnavs etc. Tom Tom's doing the best, fsvo, ** with not just the road but as I type a 3.5mile eastbound queue on it ** before it's even open. Contractors vehicles, the speculation is. It's surprising that the new alignment starts east of Fenstanton. Over 7 miles of existing dual carriageway with every junction already grade separated is partly being removed and partly becoming very quiet. Admittedly the new alignment is 3+3 where the old one was 2+2, but it still looks like they had money to burn. The viaduct on the old dual carriageway, over the ECML, is life expired (and some) and that section is only 2-lane and not practical to widen, and hugely congested. So the solution is to bypass the whole sorry mess, and downgrade the old route to "local", including a diversion down to ground level (the railway is in a cutting) and back up, to get past the line. As for money to burn, it started as a toll road, but then got swept up into a government-funded "shovels ready" project to stimulate the economy due to the construction jobs created. -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
"Basil Jet" wrote in message ... On 07/12/2019 15:49, Roland Perry wrote: While it's not quite the M25, the A14 is one of the busiest dual carriageways in the country. They've recently finished (ahead of schedule) building the green-fields bypass round the southwest of Huntingdon, and now just need to splice it onto the old road towards Cambridge and the M11. Plenty of opportunity to stagger this, achieve it by some crafty re-arrangement of bollards etc. But no. They've closed the road from 9pm yesterday until 5am on Monday. ps The competition now is to see how long the new road takes to get on various mapping sites, satnavs etc. Tom Tom's doing the best, fsvo, with not just the road but as I type a 3.5mile eastbound queue on it before it's even open. Contractors vehicles, the speculation is. It's surprising that the new alignment starts east of Fenstanton. Over 7 miles of existing dual carriageway with every junction already grade separated is partly being removed and partly becoming very quiet. not sure which bit (new or old) you are referring to, but the original road was totally inadequate, it needed to be at least 3+3 or preferably 4+4. I think the replacement is to be 3+3 plus a 1+1 local road And there were too many junctions, too close together, and whilst they were grade separated they were not all high speed turnouts. The number of junctions onto the dual carriageway has been reduced with other roads just joining onto the local road. Admittedly the new alignment is 3+3 where the old one was 2+2, but it still looks like they had money to burn. HMG challenged people to come up with a cheaper solution that would solve the problem no-one did tim |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In message , at 19:25:36 on Sat, 7 Dec 2019,
tim... remarked: "Basil Jet" wrote in message ... On 07/12/2019 15:49, Roland Perry wrote: While it's not quite the M25, the A14 is one of the busiest dual carriageways in the country. They've recently finished (ahead of schedule) building the green-fields bypass round the southwest of Huntingdon, and now just to splice it onto the old road towards Cambridge and the M11. Plenty of opportunity to stagger this, achieve it by some crafty re-arrangement of bollards etc. But no. They've closed the road from 9pm yesterday until 5am on Monday. ps The competition now is to see how long the new road takes to get on various mapping sites, satnavs etc. Tom Tom's doing the best, fsvo, with not just the road but as I type a 3.5mile eastbound queue on it before it's even open. Contractors vehicles, the speculation is. It's surprising that the new alignment starts east of Fenstanton. Over 7 miles of existing dual carriageway with every junction already grade separated is partly being removed and partly becoming very quiet. not sure which bit (new or old) you are referring to, but the original road was totally inadequate, it needed to be at least 3+3 or preferably 4+4. I think the replacement is to be 3+3 plus a 1+1 local road And there were too many junctions, too close together, and whilst they were grade separated they were not all high speed turnouts. And "grade separated" has nuances. It doesn't really apply to a junction where the majority of the traffic has to negotiate a roundabout, even if a minority sails through on an underpass. The number of junctions onto the dual carriageway has been reduced with other roads just joining onto the local road. Admittedly the new alignment is 3+3 where the old one was 2+2, but it still looks like they had money to burn. HMG challenged people to come up with a cheaper solution that would solve the problem no-one did tim -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... As for money to burn, it started as a toll road, but then got swept up into a government-funded "shovels ready" project to stimulate the economy due to the construction jobs created. And there was me thinking that after the M6T disaster all of the constriction companies told HMG to "go swivel" when they sounded them out about taking on the risk of the tolling tim -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
In message , at 23:53:02 on Sat, 7 Dec 2019,
tim... remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... As for money to burn, it started as a toll road, but then got swept up into a government-funded "shovels ready" project to stimulate the economy due to the construction jobs created. And there was me thinking that after the M6T disaster all of the constriction companies told HMG to "go swivel" when they sounded them out about taking on the risk of the tolling The difference with the A14, and why being a toll road was always a rather dodgy public policy decision, is that it would effectively have a monopoly on that particular flow, something which could never have been said about the M6T. Think more like the Dartford Crossing. -- Roland Perry |
Latest Heathrow master plan
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 23:53:02 on Sat, 7 Dec 2019, tim... remarked: "Roland Perry" wrote in message ... As for money to burn, it started as a toll road, but then got swept up into a government-funded "shovels ready" project to stimulate the economy due to the construction jobs created. And there was me thinking that after the M6T disaster all of the constriction companies told HMG to "go swivel" when they sounded them out about taking on the risk of the tolling The difference with the A14, and why being a toll road was always a rather dodgy public policy decision, is that it would effectively have a monopoly on that particular flow, something which could never have been said about the M6T. Think more like the Dartford Crossing. AIUI it wasn't suggested as a monopoly as the plan was to have through traffic tolled, local traffic un-tolled. And the insurmountable problem with that was "how do you construct it so that it is fair to local traffic without having a non-negligible volume of through traffic trying to become local traffic and clogging up the local route, whilst leaving the through route underused". tim |
Latest Heathrow master plan
On Sat, 7 Dec 2019 15:49:26 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 17:54:39 on Wed, 19 Jun 2019, tim... remarked: [route for the M25] The only disruption will come at the end, when the traffic is diverted to the new route. My guess is that the northbound traffic will be moved first, with a few weeks of lane 1 closures required while they connect the new to the old carriageways, then an overnight closure for the final switch to be made. The same procedure would then be followed a few months later to divert the southbound carriageway to the new alignment. The amount of work you would be expecting them to do "overnight" beggars belief. I disagree. Build the two new carriageways. At each end, cut them off very close to the edge of northbound lane 1 (there's no hard shoulder, right? if there is, adjust description accordingly). Cone off northbound lane 1. Spend a week or two filling in the narrow gap between the old and new northbounds at each end. Not sure that you even need a closure to switch over. Simply move all the cones. Repeat for the southbound (though this time you're closing lane 4). Yes, that's what I'm expecting. I have never in my life seen construction companies do this For once I agree with Tim. While it's not quite the M25, the A14 is one of the busiest dual carriageways in the country. They've recently finished (ahead of schedule) building the green-fields bypass round the southwest of Huntingdon, and now just need to splice it onto the old road towards Cambridge and the M11. And don't the local residents know it. I have some relatives who live in a village near there. 2 years ago it was lovely green fields down the road from their house , now theres a bloody dual carraigeway with all the accompanying noise and pollution they'll soon have to enjoy to follow on from all the construction work. All so trucks can save 10 mins on their way from Felixstow instead of putting the containers on trains where they should be. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk