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 April 30th, 2011, 09:41 PM   #221
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,550

Rerouting E roads around places/between places doesn't involve the UNECE and modifying the AGR - so Norways' E6 move to Rv3, France's move of the E21 to be via the A39 or moving an E road onto a city's ring road wouldn't require changing the AGR at all. Likewise, I don't think that something like the Oresund bridge would need informing UNECE and adjusting the AGR, though as a sea gap turning into a road, it may have done. Certainly cross-border realignments that don't change the itinerary wouldn't.

However, if Spain extends the E07 to Valencia, they have to tell UNECE to make it an official E road, even though it affects no other countries. Ditto France and the E7 along the A65. While not de jure E roads, I'd argue that these extensions of the E7 are de facto E roads, due to the signage (and you have other E roads that are de jure but not de facto, like the ones in the UK).

France a spur or two (E9 along the Autoroute and V.E. part of it's former route south of Toulouse - despite the V.E. being renumbered and the non-V.E. bits having their E9 signs removed), overruns (E606 north of Anglomene, E7 north of Pau) and even a duplicate (E401 from St Quentin south on the A16) signed. Not to mention that they have been fairly slow wrt removing old signs on the A6/A7 in Lyon.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 30th, 2011, 09:54 PM   #222
-Pino-
Funkin' down the Track
 
-Pino-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 706
Likes (Received): 127

Sounds sensible. Which then means that the proposed rerouting of the E6 in Norway (source: Norwegian wiki) is is question of domestic delays more than anything else. Anybody from Norway with a status update on that point?
__________________
http://www.brombeer.net/signs
-Pino- no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 30th, 2011, 10:14 PM   #223
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,550

Actually, looking at the itinerary in the AGR agreement, it seems that they will have to modify it, as it won't go via Lillehammer anymore. However they'd want to extend the E136 to the new E6 (probably along the old E6), so would have to send a letter to the AGR about it. If you look at Norway/Sweden's E16 application to modify the E16's route (extend it across Sweden) then you'd realise that this is really easy to do, and the changes would get made at the next meeting.

Given that the E16 rerouting has been ratified, but it's not signed yet, I'd say that domestic things like resigning routes is the delaying factor (though if the AGR meeting is every April, that makes submitting a route change at this point a long wait). Submitting something controversial, like a number that is out of place would make it hard to get it through (though a lot of the recent submissions have been renumbering active E roads to be correctly numbered, per the rules), but other than that, they tend to rubber stamp proposals.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2011, 01:21 AM   #224
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Pino- View Post
Sounds sensible. Which then means that the proposed rerouting of the E6 in Norway (source: Norwegian wiki) is is question of domestic delays more than anything else. Anybody from Norway with a status update on that point?
Don't hold your breath. Not in the picture today.

According to the latest documents, they want to develop Rv3 only as an alternative to the current E6, + they want to make better connections to Rv2 and Rv20 to the south, making an alternate way to Sweden for mid-Norway that doesn't pass Oslo.
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2011, 05:42 PM   #225
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

Rerouting E6 to Rv3? First i hear of it, certainly a good idea tough! I believe i've read signs for E16 extension will appear first during the summer.
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2011, 02:56 AM   #226
Kjello0
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 70

There has never been any real attempt to get E6 rerouted.
Kjello0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2011, 11:01 AM   #227
-Pino-
Funkin' down the Track
 
-Pino-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 706
Likes (Received): 127

Suggests that Wikipedia is wrong then. Or Google Translate, which gave me a hand in trying to understand the Norwegian text.

As much as I look at this from a distance, the most direct Oslo - Trondheim route runs via Rv3 and not via the E6. So from that perspective, rerouting appears sensible. Other than the cost burden of doing so, is there anything that should stand in the way of E6 being rerouted via Rv3?
__________________
http://www.brombeer.net/signs
-Pino- no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2011, 12:49 PM   #228
IceCheese
Scandi-friendly
 
IceCheese's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Canada is my city
Posts: 7,228
Likes (Received): 925

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Pino- View Post
Suggests that Wikipedia is wrong then. Or Google Translate, which gave me a hand in trying to understand the Norwegian text.

As much as I look at this from a distance, the most direct Oslo - Trondheim route runs via Rv3 and not via the E6. So from that perspective, rerouting appears sensible. Other than the cost burden of doing so, is there anything that should stand in the way of E6 being rerouted via Rv3?
E6 has more traffic, and serves a larger area with some importants cities, such as Ålesund. Also, a lot of E6 will be upgraded in the coming years.

Plus poltics, of course. It was a lot of fuzz when the main route was established, from cities in both the two valleys Gudbrandsdalen (E6) and Østerdalen (Rv3).
__________________
Oslo/Copenhagen - The True Capital of Scandinavia.


Take a look at my Photo Mess!
IceCheese no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2011, 01:11 PM   #229
Ingenioren
Registered User
 
Ingenioren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oslo
Posts: 5,605
Likes (Received): 584

E6 isn't supposed to be the shortest route for all travels. Imagine the shortest route to Kirkenes from Oslo, Trondheim or even Alta... But to be the backbone of road transportation withinn Norway so it connects with important crosscountry routes and interior towns. I think there should be a sign pointing to Trondheim/Oslo and number of kilometers when Rv3 meets E6 tough. Why the northern ferry at Tysfjord is being used instead of the Rv827 is more puzzling...
__________________
I want to see some construction!
Ingenioren no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2011, 02:46 PM   #230
-Pino-
Funkin' down the Track
 
-Pino-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 706
Likes (Received): 127

I can surely appreciate that backbone argument, but I'm not sure whether I would make this very choice on the route between Oslo and Trondheim. Essentially, you'd have to weigh the advantage of serving towns like Lillehammer and a cross-country connection to Alesund against a quicker route to or from Trondheim and a large part of the area North of that. In doing so, you obviously need to take into account that routes to the very far North are likely to run via Sweden. The importance of Trondheim (third city of the country) alone is larger the importance of the area benefiting from the E6 detour. The fact that E6 wll be expanded in the next few years is probably the result of the route alignment as selected, not an argument for the current alignment in itself.

But well, that's politics. Something that I don't have to bother with when working out how I would have done the E-grid, but for the rest a reality that cannot be avoided. Not in Norway, not elsewhere (ever looked at the E22 in the Netherlands?). Good signposting at the E6-Rv3 intersection then seems the best result achievable...

The situation at Tysfjord probably relates to the fact that Rv827 only opened in its current form in 1992. And again, either nobody bothered to seek the change or there may have been local opposition to the change (loss of business along the old route).
__________________
http://www.brombeer.net/signs

Last edited by -Pino-; May 3rd, 2011 at 02:55 PM.
-Pino- no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2011, 05:00 PM   #231
Kjello0
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 394
Likes (Received): 70

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ingenioren View Post
E6 isn't supposed to be the shortest route for all travels. Imagine the shortest route to Kirkenes from Oslo, Trondheim or even Alta... But to be the backbone of road transportation withinn Norway so it connects with important crosscountry routes and interior towns. I think there should be a sign pointing to Trondheim/Oslo and number of kilometers when Rv3 meets E6 tough. Why the northern ferry at Tysfjord is being used instead of the Rv827 is more puzzling...
The purpose of the main European Routes is supposed to be a network between the most important links in Europe and it's countries. Going north from Oslo the only important link in a European perspective is Trondheim. Even in a national perspective I feel the only really important link is Trondheim.

E 136 should have been extended to Hamar or perhaps even Oslo using Rv 4.

The stretch Ulsberg - Dombås pretty much only has regional traffic. And should be renamed Riksvei XX.
Kjello0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 11:55 AM   #232
NordikNerd
Rail & Road traveller
 
NordikNerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Linköping
Posts: 2,747
Likes (Received): 1408

The E16 a fantasy route ?

The E16 beginns in Belfast N. Ireland where it's cut off by the Irish Sea then continues to Edinburgh and Norway, but there is a 700km of North Sea inbetween.

There are no ferrys awailable on any of these connecting points, so I believe noone has ever travelled the E16 all the way, so why do we need such a road ?

In Brittain there are no E-roads at all and they probably get along well anyway.

In Sweden there is the E4 but it only covers swedish territory so I don't see a reason why it should be called an E-road.

Anymore fantasy routes outthere ?
NordikNerd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 01:00 PM   #233
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,798
Likes (Received): 614

The European roads are basically meant to make a grid, not a set of contiguous routes.

The E4 extends to Finland for one kilometre. The numbering dates back to the Nordic countries not being satisfied with the first proposed numbering system in 1983. Norway, Sweden and Finland withdrew their support to the ADR agreement, and made their own proposal with a number of changes. That was accepted in 1991 after which those countries begun deploying the current system replacing the old one.

There is no rule that E road should cross a border. Several A Class roads are internal to a single country: E03, E24, E26, E32, E37, E51, E63, E64, E69, E72, E76, E78, E84, E86, E88, E92, E94, and E96, at least.
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 01:01 PM   #234
Coccodrillo
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 7,200
Likes (Received): 766

Quote:
Originally Posted by NordikNerd View Post
Anymore fantasy routes outthere ?
Most of them
__________________
1.6.2016: Basistunnel!

für Güter die Bahn ~ pour vos marchandises le rail ~ chi dice merci dice ferrovia
Coccodrillo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 01:04 PM   #235
CNGL
Leudimin
 
CNGL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Huesca
Posts: 7,447
Likes (Received): 1931

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
The European roads are basically meant to make a grid, not a set of contiguous routes.

The E4 extends to Finland for one kilometre. The numbering dates back to the Nordic countries not being satisfied with the first proposed numbering system in 1983. Norway, Sweden and Finland withdrew their support to the ADR agreement, and made their own proposal with a number of changes. That was accepted in 1991 after which those countries begun deploying the current system replacing the old one.

There is no rule that E road should cross a border. Several A Class roads are internal to a single country: E03, E24, E26, E32, E37, E51, E63, E64, E69, E72, E76, E78, E84, E86, E88, E92, E94, and E96, at least.
And E33 in Italy, now E31 (There's another E31 in Germany & Netherlands), but I still call it E33.
__________________
Neque porro quisquam est qui dolorem ipsum, quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non nunquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem - Cicero, De finibus bonorum et malorum, from which placeholder text is derived.
CNGL no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 01:30 PM   #236
g.spinoza
Lord Kelvin
 
g.spinoza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Torino
Posts: 9,483
Likes (Received): 2101

There are indeed E31 signs on the Parma-La Spezia autostrada, which is odd because everywhere in the internet is still considered E33... why has it been renamed, considering that another E31 was already present?
g.spinoza no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 01:40 PM   #237
NordikNerd
Rail & Road traveller
 
NordikNerd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Linköping
Posts: 2,747
Likes (Received): 1408

Quote:
Originally Posted by MattiG View Post
The European roads are basically meant to make a grid, not a set of contiguous routes.

The E4 extends to Finland for one kilometre.
I remember that the E4 used to cover the route Helsinki-Lisbon (1980ies ?)via Haparanda. That is what I call pure imagination e-road.


They later renamed it to E47 from Helsingör and southwards.

Actually the E47 starts in Helsingborg, but exactly where? must be the shortest E-road in one country. I really think it beginns in the water.

Malmö, sweden is connected with four E-roads E6, E20, E22, E65 but still there is only one of these connecting to the continent. I wonder is there any single e-roadsection that covers more than 2 e-road numbers ?

Last edited by NordikNerd; June 9th, 2011 at 01:51 PM.
NordikNerd no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 02:04 PM   #238
-Pino-
Funkin' down the Track
 
-Pino-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 706
Likes (Received): 127

Quote:
Originally Posted by g.spinoza View Post
There are indeed E31 signs on the Parma-La Spezia autostrada, which is odd because everywhere in the internet is still considered E33... why has it been renamed, considering that another E31 was already present?
May be related to the jump of 2 as described on http://sites.google.com/site/roadnum...regions/europe (see under history). In other words, the Italians simply started to use the number E31 which was assigned to Parma - La Spezia and never adopted the jump that followed. Well, that's Italy.

As to E-routes not crossing borders, I don't care. The rationale behind E-numbers is that they are routes of European importance. And the E4, as main North-South route of Sweden, would clearly qualify as such. Besides, the E4 in Sweden is a bit of an odd story. It was originally supposed to be part of E55, but the Swedes liked the old number and eventually got things their way, i.e. they could retain E4 and E55 now stops pretty much on the Swedish border.
__________________
http://www.brombeer.net/signs
-Pino- no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 02:18 PM   #239
MattiG
Registered User
 
MattiG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Espoo FI
Posts: 1,798
Likes (Received): 614

Quote:
Originally Posted by NordikNerd View Post
Malmö, sweden is connected with four E-roads E6, E20, E22, E65 but still there is only one of these connecting to the continent. I wonder is there any single e-roadsection that covers more than 2 e-road numbers ?
In Malmö or in general?

On the Malmö ring road, the leg between junctions Petersborg and Kronetorp Norra is a multiplex of E6, E20, and E22.

Close to Helsingborg, the leg Helsingborg Södra to Kropp is a multiplex of E4, E6, and E20.

On the Danish side, there is a multiplex of E20, E47, and E55 to the southwest of Copenhagen.
MattiG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2011, 02:23 PM   #240
g.spinoza
Lord Kelvin
 
g.spinoza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Torino
Posts: 9,483
Likes (Received): 2101

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Pino- View Post
May be related to the jump of 2 as described on http://sites.google.com/site/roadnum...regions/europe (see under history). In other words, the Italians simply started to use the number E31 which was assigned to Parma - La Spezia and never adopted the jump that followed. Well, that's Italy.

As to E-routes not crossing borders, I don't care. The rationale behind E-numbers is that they are routes of European importance. And the E4, as main North-South route of Sweden, would clearly qualify as such. Besides, the E4 in Sweden is a bit of an odd story. It was originally supposed to be part of E55, but the Swedes liked the old number and eventually got things their way, i.e. they could retain E4 and E55 now stops pretty much on the Swedish border.
So the Italian way is agreeing to the change and then leaving all as it was before, while the Swedish way is disagreeing to the change and then leaving all as it was before.
g.spinoza no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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 06:27 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