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 May 20th, 2010, 04:58 PM   #1041
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kjello0 View Post
110 km/h, expressways, minimum 11,5 meters.
Those are not motorways, no roads without a real divider can have such a speed limit.
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 20th, 2010, 06:50 PM   #1042
Fargo Wolf
Resident Smartass.
 
Fargo Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Port Kepler, Galilei Continent, Chakona
Posts: 685
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
Those are not motorways, no roads without a real divider can have such a speed limit.
Why not? The Coquihalla (pronounced Coke-a-halla) Motorway between Kamloops and Hope, here in Canada has grass medians in several areas that are of similar widths, just south west of Merritt. The posted limit along the entire length is 110 KM/H. The rest just have a 110 cm high No-Post (Concrete guardrail) on other sections.
Fargo Wolf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2010, 06:51 PM   #1043
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

They also have 110 limits on 2+1 roads in Luxembourg.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2010, 07:32 PM   #1044
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 812
Likes (Received): 155

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiwiRob View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Regarding the speedlimit, I think perhaps 110 is too much.
How do you propose stopping people flying when



you think that 110km is too high. On a decent motorway 110-130 should be safe and easy to achieve, with electronic signs it will be easy to adjust the speed limit to weather conditions.
Sorry, I did not express my self clearly / as intended here. I was only talking about the 110 km / h limit on the 11.5 m wide highway without divider or median. In retrospect, however, 110 km / h could be acceptable as a max limit on a few such roads provided that:
  • Their traffic is low (below 1000 AADT?) and goes through rural areas
  • Speed limits are electronically controlled (and I do not mean enforced here), adjusting for factors such as weather conditions / surface friction and traffic
  • Geometry of road is good, no at-level junctions, side terrain cleared and secured against crossings of cows, sheep, moose, bears and other large sized wildlife (but with frequent tunnels / bridges for wildlife)

For good motorways in rural Norway, I think 130 (enforced as today's limits) and even 150 (more strictly enforced than the current limits) could be feasible with electronically controlled (again, not enforced) speed limits. Probably I would prefer the former of environmental reasons though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiwiRob View Post
People won't stop flying when there is no decent alternative on offer, at the moment the proposed high speed rail network is pretty pathetic and certainly wouldn't stop me flying, unless the motorways are improved and the speed limits raised to a sensible level I wouldn't take my car either.
I though this was my point. I don't think high speed rail network will ever reach Molde...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fargo Wolf View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
Those are not motorways, no roads without a real divider can have such a speed limit.
Why not? The Coquihalla (pronounced Coke-a-halla) Motorway between Kamloops and Hope, here in Canada has grass medians in several areas that are of similar widths, just south west of Merritt. The posted limit along the entire length is 110 KM/H. The rest just have a 110 cm high No-Post (Concrete guardrail) on other sections.
Firstly, we are talking about two-lane roads without even a median. Secondly, as long as Canada has significantly higher number of deaths both per capita and driven km than Norway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ted_death_rate ), your argument will not impress the safety possessed Norwegian public.
__________________
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 May 21st, 2010, 03:50 PM   #1045
KiwiRob
BANNED
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,366
Likes (Received): 5

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
I though this was my point. I don't think high speed rail network will ever reach Molde...
.
I don't expect it to either, I very much doubt it will even reach Ålesund.

There just aren't enough people living in enough densely populated areas to make HSR viable in Norway, if it is built I suspect it will be heavily subsidised and I'm sure the govt will have to put additional taxes on the air routes it will compete against to force people to use it.
KiwiRob no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2010, 05:39 AM   #1046
Kjello0
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 70

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Kjello0
Interesting system you propose here! I agree to most of what you are writing, but I think that a fence or barrier is required even with 4 m median. Also, I think that a narrow motorway could be a fairly good solution on low-traffic motorways, at least if the width of bridges, overpasses, tunnels etc. is large enough for inexpensive expansion of road surface width once the traffic numbers call for it? What would be your criteria for the different standards? And why not making rv 1 continous to Kirkenes?
First, a 27 meter wide motorway with a 4 meter wide median should of course have regular crash barriers.

If you want a inexpensive expansion from narrow motorway to a regular motorway, the cost for a narrow motorway would be so close to a regular motorway in the first place, that it wouldn't make a big enough difference to be chosen. The advantages would be to small compared to the disadvantages.

The criteria I'll come back to when I'm back at my apartment this evening.

Why not Rv 1 all the way to Kirkenes? The main reason is that it in no way would be the preferred route between Finnmark and eastern Norway. Driving through Sweden will always be shorter. However, between Trøndelag and Finnmark it would become the preferred route if it has modern roads with decent speed limits.
The other reason is that I couldn't find the need for Rv 9 elsewhere.

The two same reasons is also why I have two routes on what's now E39 between Trondheim and Kristiansand. E39 would in no way be the preferred route between Trondheim and Kristiansand. Østerdalen/E18 is the preferred route there. At max E39 is the preferred route for Trondheim - Stavanger and Kristiansand - Ålesund. And hence two routes with Bergen as the meeting point seems natural.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Regarding the speedlimit, I think perhaps 110 is too much. In any case, speed limits should be controlled according to the road surface (i.e. whether it is dry, wet, soaking wet or icy) rather than the calendar.
Road conditions should of course affect the speed limit. My point was that under good conditions, the highest speed limit should be 130 km/h on motorways during summer, and 110 km/h during winter. Special conditions should of course lead to an even lower speed limit. When it comes to the 110 km/h on a 11,5 meter expressway, I think it's acceptable on low traffic roads with high standard and good road conditions. When I say low traffic I mean between 3000 and 6000 AaDT. The now 10 meter wide expressway with 80 km/h is designed for traffic between 4000 and 8000 AaDT.
Sweden has had 110 km/h on regular roads in northern Sweden for years without having problems with many accidents. Though most of them now has 100 km/h after they started using 10 km/h steps. 110 km/h during summer at low traffic expressways is in my opinion a acceptable speed limit. To take a local example. E39 between Orkanger and Klett was opened as expressway in 2005. The road is 10 meter wide, though without rumble felt and is signposted 80 km/h. The traffic is 7000 between Orkanger and Børsa, 8750 between Børsa and Buvika, 9400 between Buvika and Øysand, and 11 000 between Øysand and Klett (Not expressway). Since the opening there has only been two accidents on the road. Both times one of the cars drove close to 200 km/h. Driving 110 km/h during summer would not be dangerous during summer on a such road. And then we are talking about a road that has much higher traffic than what I propose for my 11,5 meter expressway with 110 km/h. It's also 1,5 meter more narrow and don't have rumble felt like I propose.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
This is not really coherent with route 1 on your map, and I certainly disagree. I had a rather long and sometimes heated debate about this very issue a couple of years ago , which I am not very inclined to repeat (for one reason, I do not have the time, I you feeel the urge,
I do of course agree with you, and hence Rv 1 up Østerdalen on my map. However, I fear that the politicians don't. Whenever there is talk of a motorway between Oslo and Trondheim they pretty much always talk about up Gudbrandsdalen. Even organisations like BilAksjonen and BedreVeier.org use Gudbrandsdalen in their proposed network. And even tough you may be right about the costs, I think politicians will choose Gudbrandsdalen with the argument that it's much shorter between Otta and Ulsberg than Rena/Elverum - Ulsberg. And hence the cost must be lower. Sadly a classic way of thinking in Norway.
Kjello0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 24th, 2010, 01:35 PM   #1047
54°26′S 3°24′E
Registered User
 
54°26′S 3°24′E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 812
Likes (Received): 155

As I have pointed out, the Otta-Ulsberg is only 70 km shorter than Rena-Ulsberg, but you are right that the Gudbrandsdal local politicians are making a lot of noise branding the E6 as the main Oslo-Trondheim road (which is far from the truth), and most national politicians are unfortunately mostly ignorant fools.... Regarding the speed limits, I think 110 km / h should not be used on a two-lane road unless it is of very high standard and with traffic below 1000 AADT (or perhaps even 500). Otherwise I agree with most of what you are writing. Bilaksjonen and Bedreveier seem currently quite dormant, BTW, perhaps we should start something new
__________________
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 May 24th, 2010, 09:17 PM   #1048
Kjello0
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 70

This road in Sweden is signposted 100 km/h, and was until recently signposted 110 km/h.



So why can't this road be signposted 110 km/h?



My proposed 11,5 meter expressway will be 1,5 meter wider than this road, and have a 1 meter rumble felt in the middle. Making it much safer than both these roads. So I don't see 110 km/h during summer and very good road conditions as dangerous. Under special conditions such as bad weather or very high traffic Vegvesenet may reduce the speed limit as they have electronic signs remotely controlled.

I've actually considered to start a organisation of some kind. But I have so many projects going on that I don't have time to work on half of them. I started writing the post with my plans in february.
Kjello0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2010, 12:31 AM   #1049
Jeroen669
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 787
Likes (Received): 13

Quote:
Originally Posted by 54°26′S 3°24′E View Post
Sorry, I did not express my self clearly / as intended here. I was only talking about the 110 km / h limit on the 11.5 m wide highway without divider or median. In retrospect, however, 110 km / h could be acceptable as a max limit on a few such roads provided that:
  • Their traffic is low (below 1000 AADT?) and goes through rural areas
  • Speed limits are electronically controlled (and I do not mean enforced here), adjusting for factors such as weather conditions / surface friction and traffic
  • Geometry of road is good, no at-level junctions, side terrain cleared and secured against crossings of cows, sheep, moose, bears and other large sized wildlife (but with frequent tunnels / bridges for wildlife)
I saw 110km/h limits on 2+1 roads (without divider) in Luxembourg, yet it didn't feel unsafe to drive that fast there. Your demands are a bit too restrictive imo. Controlling every more quite main road is just too expensive, people need to take their own responsibility to adjust the speed when driving conditions worsen.
Jeroen669 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 26th, 2010, 08:55 PM   #1050
ElviS77
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 564
Likes (Received): 54

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen669 View Post
I saw 110km/h limits on 2+1 roads (without divider) in Luxembourg, yet it didn't feel unsafe to drive that fast there. Your demands are a bit too restrictive imo. Controlling every more quite main road is just too expensive, people need to take their own responsibility to adjust the speed when driving conditions worsen.
Well, the point is that such roads with such speed limits make any driver error potentially fatal. You will not survive a head-on crash at such speeds. This is the basic principle behind "Nullvisjonen" - zero fatalities vision - which is a guideline both in Norway and - even more so - in Sweden. Other countries might have different opinions, and in extreme circumstances (like Australia), speed limits beyond 90-100 kph might make sense. IMHO, I believe that one should focus on far safer 1+1/2+1 roads, where such limits make perfect sense.
ElviS77 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2010, 01:18 AM   #1051
Jeroen669
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 787
Likes (Received): 13

Hitting a pedestrian in a residential area at 30km/h can already be "potentially fatal" too.

How do people get in the wrong lane in the first place? Rarely because of speeding, but because of things like slippery roads, drunk driving, unadjusted speed in worse weather circumstances etc. A zero fatilities vision is just unrealistic. If you want that you should ban motorized traffic...
Jeroen669 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2010, 02:42 AM   #1052
Fargo Wolf
Resident Smartass.
 
Fargo Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Port Kepler, Galilei Continent, Chakona
Posts: 685
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElviS77 View Post
Well, the point is that such roads with such speed limits make any driver error potentially fatal. You will not survive a head-on crash at such speeds. This is the basic principle behind "Nullvisjonen" - zero fatalities vision - which is a guideline both in Norway and - even more so - in Sweden. Other countries might have different opinions, and in extreme circumstances (like Australia), speed limits beyond 90-100 kph might make sense. IMHO, I believe that one should focus on far safer 1+1/2+1 roads, where such limits make perfect sense.
That's quite interesting. I lived in Alberta for a while, first as a kid, then later when I was working in the Northern part of the province. the posted limit is 100 KM/H (No barrier either), Being Alberta, one always adds 10KM/H to the posted limit. With the exception between Valleyview and Whitecourt, I felt perfectly safe doing 110 KM/H on a two lane, two way highway. Having said that though, I only did so in the summer, NEVER in the winter, or adverse conditions. Another factor I took into account, is that North Central Alberta is FLAT. You will see headlights on the horizon, but it MAY take more than an hour for that vehicle to reach you.

Having never been to Norway, or Sweden, I can't really comment with any accuracy, but will say that IF, and that's a big "if" the highway is designed properly, it is entirely possible for such a road to have a 110 KM/H limit.
Fargo Wolf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2010, 10:16 AM   #1053
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeroen669 View Post
How do people get in the wrong lane in the first place? Rarely because of speeding, but because of things like slippery roads, drunk driving, unadjusted speed in worse weather circumstances etc.
I believe most head-on accidents occur when a car gets off the road on the right side, then steer abruptly to the left and crash on an oncoming vehicle.
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2010, 03:02 PM   #1054
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

The most ridiculous bridge project ever starts construction soon

Basicly the Mega-bridge will give Askvoll, (a dead end village with population at 566) ferry free connection village on the other side of the fjord named Dale, population 980. Oh yeah, did i mention Askvoll already has a ferry-free road to closest town Førde and mainroad E39 and that AADT for the ferry is wooping 45 vehicles per day?





The roadproject consists of a suspension bridge with span at 523 meters, 4,2 km new tunnels and 5,2 km with new surface-road.

http://www.vareveger.no/article247195.ece

Who said we had horrible roads in Norway, eh?

http://www.dalsfjordbrua.no/
http://www.vegvesen.no/Vegprosjekter...ektbeskrivelse
__________________
I want to see some construction!

Last edited by Ingenioren; May 27th, 2010 at 03:08 PM.
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2010, 08:24 PM   #1055
Kjello0
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 70

Well, It should never have been stoped in the first place as over half the road from Rivedal and eastwards was build in the period 1975-81.

It will also be the chosen route for my new Rv 8 from Bergen to Trondheim
Kjello0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2010, 10:37 PM   #1056
Þróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Þróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2268

Nordre Avlastningsvei in Trondheim opened today. Here is a few very bad pictures i took this late cloudy evening.

[IMG]http://i50.************/2u5gh84.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i46.************/1z1tvko.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i46.************/vo53ic.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i48.************/30ax5lj.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i48.************/b7yl95.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i48.************/2pzcjgw.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i49.************/2r6l9h0.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i48.************/67lgmh.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i49.************/2daae1l.jpg[/IMG]
Þróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2010, 10:40 PM   #1057
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,591
Likes (Received): 19378

Quote:
Nordre Avlastningsvei in Trondheim
Can we translate that als "northern relief road"? It sounds remarkably much like Dutch (noordelijke ontlastingsweg).
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 27th, 2010, 10:45 PM   #1058
Þróndeimr
Adventurous!
 
Þróndeimr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 12,216
Likes (Received): 2268

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
Can we translate that als "northern relief road"? It sounds remarkably much like Dutch (noordelijke ontlastingsweg).
Yes exactly. This is the first step to make downtown Trondheim car-free. With this road much of the traffic going from east-west direction can go on the new road instead of through the downtown.
Þróndeimr no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2010, 02:56 AM   #1059
Fargo Wolf
Resident Smartass.
 
Fargo Wolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Port Kepler, Galilei Continent, Chakona
Posts: 685
Likes (Received): 17

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
I believe most head-on accidents occur when a car gets off the road on the right side, then steer abruptly to the left and crash on an oncoming vehicle.
Impatient drivers, drivers who misjudge the distance of oncoming vehicles (Has happened to me on several occasions where I've had to get out of the way of such a driver)

The scenario you present, would be if the road has a gravel or no shoulder. The tires drop off the pavement edge and the driver panics, steering too sharply in an attempt to get back onto the roadway.
Fargo Wolf no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 28th, 2010, 01:32 PM   #1060
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

Why would they use green signing for 706? Imo this should be limited to Stamveger, and Stamveger should be limitided to road numbers from (Rv) 1-99 (and E-routes).
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese 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 08:25 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