daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old June 13th, 2016, 11:09 PM   #3761
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,559
Likes (Received): 19352

I'm in Sunndalsøra currently, there was a sign with the closest train station; 68 kilometers away. I also saw the train to Åndalsnes, it looked more like a bus on rails than an actual train. The train to Bergen is probably scenic, it takes a different route across Hardangervidda than Rv. 7.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 14th, 2016, 12:13 AM   #3762
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Air traffic in Norway (and a small comment about Sunndalsøra & Åndalsnes)

Sunndalsøra is of course quite close to the railway compared with many places at the west coast and northern Norway. You have excellent hiking terrain around Sunndalsøra, if that is your cup of tea. Sunndalsøra itself is an example of industrialization relying on shipping, and in the early days, cheap hydropower close at hand. From an environmental perspective, the Åndalsnes railway is meaningless, as it is not electrified, but it is very beautiful.


Since I like quantifying things, I have looked into traffic numbers on some domestic air routes in Norway. The route with highest pax number in Norway, in fact Europe's 4th busiest route, is Trondheim - Oslo, which had above 1.9 million pax in 2014. This number probably has risen to about 2 million/year since then, or 5500 per day. Now, it is not straight forward to convert this to road AADT, and there will always be some air traffic and road traffic on alternative routes. On the other hand, a motorway will induce some extra traffic in total, and there may be some transfer from railway. Assuming an average 1.8 person per car (corresponding to leisure travel, the overall average in Norway is 1.55), this converts to around 3000 extra AADT. Under the given assumption, this means that a Trondheim - Oslo motorway could have around 7600 AADT if it were to open today, at the least trafficated sections and ignoring any general traffic growth in the years ahead. For Bergen - Oslo, the traffic both by car and air is a little less, but the tendency is the same.
__________________

Mathias Olsen, berlinwroclaw liked this post

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; June 14th, 2016 at 10:38 AM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 01:15 AM   #3763
hammersklavier
Feral
 
hammersklavier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 597
Likes (Received): 423

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
While light compared with eg German and Dutch transit routes, truck traffic has a significant share of traffic on the loneliest sections of the main Norwegian domestic transit routes.
Keep in mind that the expected amount of truck traffic is what the road has to be built to handle. Road wear from cars is marginal compared to that of trucks.

I would suppose that Norway's heaviest roads, if an increase in truck traffic is expected, would need to be built to something akin to U.S. Interstate, British or Japanese motorway, or Polish expressway standards rather than the very heavy roads along the main trade routes in the heart of the continent.
hammersklavier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 09:14 AM   #3764
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

I am no expert in the field, but two additional factors have to be taken into account in the Nordics :
  • Cold winters: The ground in Norway is many places relatively tight, such that there is naturally a lot of water in the surface layers. Hence, the drained foundation of the road has to go deep and wide enough to avoid freezing water which could lead to serious heave. Recent examples have shown that Norwegian road authorities still do not master this art.
  • Use of studded tires and chains lead to increased wear, of course, as do repeatedly freezing and thawing. Choice of top layer hence is important for maintenance intervals.

Last edited by 54°26′S 3°24′E; June 14th, 2016 at 09:24 AM.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 10:53 AM   #3765
Mathias Olsen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 125
Likes (Received): 149

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Since I like quantifying things, I have looked into traffic numbers on some domestic air routes in Norway. The route with highest pax number in Norway, in fact Europe's 4th busiest route, is Trondheim - Oslo, which had above 1.9 million pax in 2014. This number probably has risen to about 2 million/year since then, or 5500 per day. Now, it is not straight forward to convert this to road AADT, and there will always be some air traffic and road traffic on alternative routes. On the other hand, a motorway will induce some extra traffic in total, and there may be some transfer from railway. Assuming an average 1.8 person per car (corresponding to leisure travel, the overall average in Norway is 1.55), this converts to around 3000 extra AADT. Under the given assumption, this means that a Trondheim - Oslo motorway could have around 7600 AADT if it were to open today, at the least trafficated sections and ignoring any general traffic growth in the years ahead. For Bergen - Oslo, the traffic both by car and air is a little less, but the tendency is the same.
Good habit to get the things in numbers It is interesting that air traffic Trondheim - Oslo is busier than Bergen - Oslo and Stavanger - Oslo. I expect the combination Bergen and Stavanger to Oslo will be not far from factor 2 of Trondheim. So, using your calculations, we may expect 6000 extra AADT for E134 Stavanger/Haugesund/Bergen- Oslo. The threshold to go by car is lower than to go by plane, so people the frequency of car usage can be calculated higher. That is good news for motorway construction. We can get the people from the dirty aircraft into the more comfortable and environment friendly electric cars.

Not all people like flying. There is a group who doesn't want to fly at all, while another group doesn't want to fly in bad weather. For those people, motorways between the big cities of Norway will be a great solution.
__________________

berlinwroclaw liked this post

Last edited by Mathias Olsen; June 14th, 2016 at 12:41 PM.
Mathias Olsen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 11:15 AM   #3766
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

In 2014 the numbers were like this:

Trondheim: 1 918 005
Bergen: 1 823 062
Stavanger: 1 569 883

I.e. TRD was 57 % of BGO+SVG. That percentage is probably on the rise with the downturn of the oil industry on which BGO and SVG depend more than TRD. The april 2016 numbers saw a 2.9% rise on domestic travel from TRD compared with -2.8 and 1.6 for BGO and SVG, respectively.
__________________
Norway needs a new transport infrastructure network, let's start now!
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 11:26 AM   #3767
Mathias Olsen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 125
Likes (Received): 149

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
I am no expert in the field, but two additional factors have to be taken into account in the Nordics :
  • Cold winters: The ground in Norway is many places relatively tight, such that there is naturally a lot of water in the surface layers. Hence, the drained foundation of the road has to go deep and wide enough to avoid freezing water which could lead to serious heave. Recent examples have shown that Norwegian road authorities still do not master this art.
  • Use of studded tires and chains lead to increased wear, of course, as do repeatedly freezing and thawing. Choice of top layer hence is important for maintenance intervals.


Motorway will close later than an airport in hard winter weather. Snow melting has become much more efficient and also more environment friendly with new information technology guided snow machines and more environment friendly materials. It is true that good driver skills are an important factor in bad winter weather. Also the better cars and improved winter tires are a help for winter conditions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Recent examples have shown that Norwegian road authorities still do not master this art.

It is indeed a big problem on Rv7 Hardangervidda, but less on Haukeli. Therefore the long sustainable E134 Haukeli tunnel is necessary.

New sustainable technology is available to use road surface heating with electric cables. Not a cheap solution, but environment friendly and some European motorways already use this technology, e.g. M1 and M4 near London (UK) and A4 Zgorgelec (Poland). Norway should also use it and become a leader in environment friendly road heating.

Last edited by Mathias Olsen; June 14th, 2016 at 11:37 AM.
Mathias Olsen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 06:22 PM   #3768
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

I take as granted that roads between between major cities generally never get closed due to bad weather. This is already the situation today with Rv 3 and, I believe, E16. It may be the case with E6 (rarely closed today), E134 and rv 52 with major improvements, eg tunnels. But the air traffic is also rarely affected. I consider this a non-issue.

Note that heave is caused by freezing below the surface, in the foundations of the road, and not on the surface itself. Hence salting does not necessarily help, in fact it may make the situation worse since the surface temperature decreases. Heating all the motorways in Norway I consider an insane and unsustainable solution. In any case, many people will need or at least prefer studded tires in order to safely drive on remote side roads which will not be free from ice or snow in the foreseeable future.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 08:08 PM   #3769
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,559
Likes (Received): 19352

I drove E6 from Oppdal to Trondheim today. It became markedly busier after the Rv. 3 merges onto E6. The Trondheim bypass is rather busy and I didn't even drove there during rush hour.

E14 is completely devoid of truck traffic, I did not see a single truck on the hour-long drive to the Swedish border.
__________________

my clinched highways / travel mapping • highway photography @ Flickr and Youtube

berlinwroclaw liked this post
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 10:32 PM   #3770
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,604
Likes (Received): 584

Quote:
Originally Posted by berlinwroclaw View Post
Electric cars, no more pollution. Norway has already 25% of its cars electric.
Actually it's 3 %. 15 % of new cars sold are electric.
__________________
I want to see some construction!

berlinwroclaw liked this post
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 10:44 PM   #3771
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,559
Likes (Received): 19352

New car sales are usually only a third or less of all car sales. If you drive in Norway you'll see a lot of EL plates near bigger cities, but almost none in rural areas, in fact I noticed there are a lot of full-size pickup trucks like Chevrolet Silverado or Ford F-250. Vintage American cars also appear popular.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 10:51 PM   #3772
berlinwroclaw
Kamienna
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 139
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Slovakia and Croatia are not really comparable to the Norwegian topography.
For the topography argument, here is another case study to compare E134 Bergen-Oslo: A1 Bukarest- Timisoara.

A new section of motorway E134 Bergen-Oslo? No, it is the A1 Bukarest- Timisoara in Romania.

image hosted on flickr



Let’s compare the plans of the E134 Bergen-Oslo motorway (or a first half profile stage of it) with the A1 Bukarest-Timisoara motorway. The facts:

Length A1 Bukarest-Timisoara: 547 km, operational: 342; under construction: 89, planning: 116
Length E139 Bergen-Oslo: 480 km, operational: 0; under construction: 0; planning: 480

Motorway tunnel E134 Bergen-Oslo? No, it is the A1 Timisoara-Bukarest in Romania.



Mountain section A1 Pitesti-Sibiu 2x2 motorway compared with E139 1x2 road Seljestad – Vagsli

Map A1 section Pitesti-Sibiu:
http://media.hotnews.ro/media_server...esti-sibiu.jpg

Map E139 section Seljestad – Vagsli:
http://g.api.no/obscura/API/dynamic/...jpg?chk=28B79E

The mountain section of A1 Pitesti-Sibiu is longer.

Length mountain section: A1: 116 km - E134: 61 km
Total length tunnels: A1: 8,3 km - E134: 15 km
Number of tunnels: A1: 9 - E134: 2 (downsized version: 4)
Total length structures: A1: 21 km or more - E134: 15 km
Costs: A1: 19 billion NOK – E134: 14 billion NOK (downsized version: 7 billion NOK)

The A1 Pitesti-Sibiu mountain section is more expensive than the E139 Seljestad – Vagsli mountain section.

To compare the two roads better it is possible to add the alternative section E134 Seljestad - Vagsli - Gvammen with 23 km tunnels. For the E134 we have than a section of 120 km and the estimated costs are then 17 billion NOK (downsized version) and 28 billion NOK for halfprofile motorway.

For the road traffic, Norway has 177 more car owners per 1000 people than Romania. E139 is the only direct way of Bergen to Europe, while the A1 is not the only way to Europe for eastern Romania. The population of Oslo agglomeration is fast growing with 2% every year, the highest growth in Europe, while many people in Romania immigrate to other countries. No country in the world is so rich as Norway, while Romania belongs to the poorest countries in Europe, see GDP per capita http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD


GDP per capita Romania: 9 200
GDP per capita Norway: 101 000

Why is Norway is not able to build a motorway between its two biggest agglomerations of 0.5 million and 1.5 million over 480 km?

Topographical blockades cannot be a problem as explained by the example of the Romanian motorway.
__________________
Have a safe trip!

Mathias Olsen liked this post
berlinwroclaw no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2016, 11:03 PM   #3773
berlinwroclaw
Kamienna
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 139
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
Actually it's 3 %. 15 % of new cars sold are electric.
Yes, it is true there are only 2.6% registered full electric cars in Norway.
https://www.ssb.no/en/transport-og-r...aar/2016-03-30

I retrieved my info from a calculation with hybrid cars in a percentage of 25%.
http://insideevs.com/norway-electric...t-share-march/
__________________
Have a safe trip!
berlinwroclaw no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 12:10 AM   #3774
Sunfuns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Basel
Posts: 2,426
Likes (Received): 361

Is anyone here really arguing that a motorway through Norwegian mountains is technically not feasible? Of course it could be built, the argument only is whether that is a good use of money...
Sunfuns no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 12:31 AM   #3775
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

No, I have not seen anybody saying that would be impossible technically.
__________________

berlinwroclaw, Mathias Olsen liked this post
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 01:22 AM   #3776
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 811
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
I drove E6 from Oppdal to Trondheim today. It became markedly busier after the Rv. 3 merges onto E6. The Trondheim bypass is rather busy and I didn't even drove there during rush hour.

E14 is completely devoid of truck traffic, I did not see a single truck on the hour-long drive to the Swedish border.
You really explore the sorry state of Norwegian highways! Where to next, straight to Stockholm via E4an?

Norwegian rural traffic will pick up significantly in little more than a week when school holidays start, the opposite effect will be seen in the cities. The Trondheim eastern bypass (E6) has about 45 000 AADT, just south of the split to the city center the traffic is somewhat higher, but with more lanes.
54°26′S 3°24′E no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 07:22 AM   #3777
hammersklavier
Feral
 
hammersklavier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 597
Likes (Received): 423

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
I am no expert in the field, but two additional factors have to be taken into account in the Nordics :
  • Cold winters: The ground in Norway is many places relatively tight, such that there is naturally a lot of water in the surface layers. Hence, the drained foundation of the road has to go deep and wide enough to avoid freezing water which could lead to serious heave. Recent examples have shown that Norwegian road authorities still do not master this art.
  • Use of studded tires and chains lead to increased wear, of course, as do repeatedly freezing and thawing. Choice of top layer hence is important for maintenance intervals.
I suspect the use of snow chains primarily affects the pavement, rather than the subsurface roadbed. It's also worth pointing out that several other nations (the other Nordics, the U.S., Canada, China, Russia, Japan, and maybe South Korea?) have motorways in similar climatic conditions as Norway; the use of snow chains therefore appear to have a marginal effect on the overall maintenance cycle.

Your point about the subsurface conditions is much more interesting. Norway is old and mountainous; most other motorways in cold mountainous environments run through far younger and therefore looser terrain. The greater expense associated with building for this terrain may well cancel out the cost savings associated with not expecting as much truck traffic.
hammersklavier no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 09:23 AM   #3778
berlinwroclaw
Kamienna
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 139
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunfuns View Post
Is anyone here really arguing that a motorway through Norwegian mountains is technically not feasible? Of course it could be built, the argument only is whether that is a good use of money...
Good use of money is called in social economy “netto social benefits”. The impact for the society minus costs. The netto social benefits for a motorway Bergen-Oslo, or something as close as possible to it, are + 19 billion NOK.



You know that in Switzerland 64 percent of Swiss voters accepted the new double tube Gotthard base tunnel in a 1992 referendum. Project costs 8.85 billion euro = 83 billion NOK. Compare this with 40 billion NOK for the motorway Bergen – Oslo! All costs of the tunnels were done by the Swiss, a country not in EU, not so rich as Norway and more challenging topography. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gotthard_Base_Tunnel
__________________
Have a safe trip!

Mathias Olsen liked this post
berlinwroclaw no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 10:23 AM   #3779
berlinwroclaw
Kamienna
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 139
Likes (Received): 46

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
on the hour-long drive to the Swedish border.
I am curious about your impression of the Swedish E4 motorway under construction.
__________________
Have a safe trip!
berlinwroclaw no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2016, 10:41 AM   #3780
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,559
Likes (Received): 19352

I won't be going on E4 this trip, I'll take E45 south from Östersund.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
norway

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium