[fosters son]

Here is some information about European routes in Britain
Why aren't E-Routes signed in Britain?

The government decided many years ago that European routes wouldn't be signposted in Britain, unless they were entirely rerouted onto the motorway network. For a short time, an E-route marker was available for use, though as far as I know it never was used. It was a green rectangle with the E-number in white in the taller "Motorway white" font (used for other road numbers on motorway signs).

Where are the E-routes?

Since they aren't signposted, it's hard to tell. Many are redundant since they only follow one road, like the E-13 which is the M1 by any other name. Others criss-cross the country as well, joining with Europe by ferry lines. Therefore the E15 starts at Malaga, but ends up following the A1 and A9, and ends at Wick.

Here is Map of E-routes in Britain

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fb/European_Highways_UK-EI.png

Notice that where the E-Routes run, major investment has been recieved on these roads in the past few years.

As many of you will have found, when driving on the Continant the E Routes signs are very helpful. I believe that now we should have them here to becuase nearly all of the routes now run on Motorways and or Dual Carrigeways.

Please Post your thought here. Thanks

 

[sjwmoore]

I think they should be- when driving on the continent its usefull to just follow one road number across several countries- I see no reason why they shouldnt follow to their end should that be in the UK. Maps dating back 35 years show Euro numbers (in UK also), so its nothing new, despite what the Mail/Express axis of evil would have its gullible readers believe

 

[Accura4Matalan]

Yeh, dont see why not. The M6 and the M1 would be good places to start.

 

[Gareth]

The UK's island nature renders them completely pointless as far as I'm concerned. Think of Hawaii and the US system.

 

[jetsetwilly]

The UK's island nature renders them completely pointless as far as I'm concerned. Think of Hawaii and the US system.

I agree. If you could drive from say, Paris to London non-stop, then I could see a purpose. But that's not physically possible. The only place I could see it being relevant would be integrating cross border routes between North and South Ireland, but since that's another island nation, what would be the point of all that expense?

 

[samsonyuen]

^I agree, pointless cost

 

[Vertighost]

Same here. For Europeans going to the UK the only important thing is the ferry port and your destination. You'll be lucky if the Euro route fits.

 

[Bikkel]

Waste of money and only prone to cause confusion. Belgium puts 'em on top, we clogs attach smaller sings. Signs are confusing enough already:

Drowning by numbers.

 

[Guest]

Can't see the harm in it personally, be handy for European route planners - just mention the channel crossing.

 

[eusebius]

Most drivers would use navigation systems 'anyway'.

 

[Leeds No.1]

Yes they should. To cut costs though, new signs should have them anyway and they should be phased in on smaller signs above existing signs as shown earlier in Belgium.

 

[JDRS]

I don't see the point. If we were connected to Europe by land then there's a good case to make for them but otherwise it's a pointless waste of money.

 

[pricemazda]

The UK's island nature renders them completely pointless as far as I'm concerned. Think of Hawaii and the US system.

Some parts of the UK do have a land border with another EU member state.

 

[pricemazda]

I don't see the point. If we were connected to Europe by land then there's a good case to make for them but otherwise it's a pointless waste of money.

You wouldn't replace them all in one go, secretly while babies were sleeping. You would just replace them as they need to be replaced.

 

[zfreeman]

Some parts of the UK do have a land border with another EU member state.

Where? other than the link with Eire and N. Ireland then there is no connection and they already use the same route numbers i beleive.

 

[eusebius]

I'm still not convinced. The different numbers remind the continental drivers to drive on the wrong side of the road for example. Moreover A-roads on the continent equal M-roads in Britain, whilst N-roads on the continent equal A-roads in Britain.

 

[eusebius]

Where? other than the link with Eire and N. Ireland then there is no connection and they already use the same route numbers i beleive.

It's just coincidence but the A12 in the NL kind of continues in East Anglia! Let's rename the Harwich ferry! A12 Ferry.

 

[Guest]

Lets just build a cross channel A12 tunnel.

 

[JDRS]

You wouldn't replace them all in one go, secretly while babies were sleeping. You would just replace them as they need to be replaced.

I know, but why bother? It would only make signs more complicated and some can be quite confusing as it is. They'd barely be used so I don't see the point.

 

[JGG]

Maybe the UK should change its complete road numbering system, because it is rather confusing and inconsistent. But to add another number to an already cluttered road sign system makes no sense at all; in fact it would just make it worse.

The main problem of the road signs in the UK is that A roads can be either crappy little roads or highways. Some A roads should just be called M roads in my opinion. And A roads running next to motorways should never have the same number. I just love the mess: Axx running next to Mxx, then Axx merging with Mxx, then Mxx becoming Axx again, and then a bit further Axx(M).