Jump to content

Talk:M42 motorway

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Continues as A42 to/from The North, Nottingham East Midlands Airport & M1

Coordinates

[edit]

I was surprised and disappointed to see the coordinates removed from this article with an edit summary of "remove travel guide info per WP:NOT", since coordinates are not a "travel guide" and consensus on WP:NOT is that coordinates are acceptable content. I trust that they will now be restored. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 22:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Source requested

[edit]

I know the general rules but a fine primary source (The Highways Agency) provided these emails which show that it is not specifically original research to put the quotations in, but a reliable (primary) source to which I had access:

Email 23/05/05

Mr Spencer,

Thank you for your email regarding the works on the M42 junctions 3A - 7...

You are correct that the markers have been removed along this section. The reason for this is that count down markers should only be used at diverge junctions and are not currently used on lane drops, which will be the case during 4 lane (hard shoulder) running.

Having said this we are aware that the removal of these markers is causing some confusion amongst travellers along this section. Due to this we are currently reviewing this part of the design of the scheme with our consultants.

If you have any further queries please contact the Highways Agency Information Line 08457 50 40 30, contact us by email at [email protected] or visit our web site at www.highways.gov/ATM.

Email 9/6/06

Mr Spencer,

Thank you for you email regarding the Active Traffic management project on the M42 junctions 3A - 7

Following your previous email of May last year we have looked into the countdown marker issue further and it was found to be more complicated that we first envisioned.

The original decision to remove the exit marker boards (countdown markers) from this section of the network was taken following discussions between the scheme designers, the Highways Agency's Signs Team and the Department for Transport. This decision was taken because of changes to the design of the junctions to operate the motorway as both a three lane and a four lane carriageway using the hardshoulder as a running lane.

Following the removal of the countdown markers as part of the construction works we have received feedback from a number of organisations that there have been instances of vehicles swooping to exit the motorway at these junctions and recommending that the countdown markers be reinstated. A Road Safety Audit has also recommended that the countdown markers should be reinstated to overcome this issue. Our designers have been reviewing the feedback with all those involved in the original decision to remove the countdown markers and have now obtained their agreement to reinstate them at the majority of locations.

Our designers have now undertaken detailed design of the countdown markers locations with respect to the revised diverge layouts that have been introduced as part of the scheme. This has identified a conflict between the countdown marker locations and the Emergency Refuge Areas (ERA) at three of the motorway exits. ERA's are provided at nominal 500m intervals to provide a safe haven for vehicle breakdowns under hardshoulder running.

The conflict occurs when at least one of the countdown markers should be provided prior to an ERA: as soon as a driver has passed a countdown marker they could think that the broken line across the ERA represented the start of the diverge to the exit slip road. For this reason it has been deemed less safe to put the countdown markers back than to leave it in its current state.

Further discussions were undertaken with the Highways Agency's Signs & Geometrics Teams and it was agreed that the countdown markers will not be reinstated at these locations on clear safety grounds.

New countdown markers have now been manufactured and installed at the four other motorway exits within the scheme. The table below contains a summary of the locations where the countdown markers have been provided. 

 Approach to 
Countdown markers 
Comments

Junction 4 Northbound 

No
300y & 200y markers would have been prior to ERA

Junction 5 Northbound 

Yes

Junction 6 Northbound 

Yes

Junction 7 Northbound 

Yes

Junction 6 Southbound 

Yes

Junction 5 Southbound 

No
300y marker would have been prior to ERA

Junction 4 Southbound 

No
300y marker would have been prior to ERA

Junction 3A Southbound 

N/A
Lane drop during normal 3 lane operation

Unfortunately, it has not been possible to reinstate the countdown markers at all of the motorway exits within the scheme for the reasons detailed above.

Regarding the issue of hard shoulder running:

The HA Business Plan Target for the commencement of hard shoulder running is by March 2007 and the project is on schedule to deliver to this target. We are implementing the Active Traffic Management pilot scheme in phases and hard shoulder running is the final phase of ATM operation. The different regimes are being introduced in phases for two reasons:

Firstly, to give drivers time to become used to the signs and signals and safely use the scheme prior to introducing the use of the hard shoulder, which is a significant change for English drivers.

Secondly, to allow our Monitoring consultants time to gather enough data and assess the impact of the various different aspects of the Active Traffic Management pilot. The aim of the pilot is to assess the effectiveness of a number of new technologies and different traffic management measures on tackling congestion. There is a period of monitoring and evaluation separating the introduction of each of the phases. Conclusions regarding the effectiveness of all of the various measures are not expected until 2008. Prior to the introduction of hard shoulder running we have a national publicity campaign planned which is aimed at educating the general public in our intended use of the hard shoulder and how they should use it in a safe manner. I hope that this is helpful and addresses your concerns. If you have any further queries or comments please do not hesitate to contact us by email at [email protected].

Obviously, I am not making up the entry, but someone might wish to tweak the wording if they find that it is too controversial for their tastes. The lack of countdowns is plain fact, the reasoning is essentially a paraphrase of provided primary source, not an OR analysis. This is not something that the HA have publicised on their web site which was mainly set up before the pilot commenced. I could quote [1] as a ropey source, but as I wrote it, I don't think that really meets the Wiki criteria, if you are minded to be pedantic. Spenny 22:33, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on M42 motorway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:09, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on M42 motorway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:08, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on M42 motorway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:21, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion

[edit]

I propose to merge A42 road (England) to here since that road is basically a continuation of the M42, just not a motorway. This is very similar to the A74(M) motorway being merged to M74 motorway and later renamed of the two motorways combined. In other words, the A74M is basically a continuation of the M74. JuniperChill (talk) 09:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense to me, so no objection. 10mmsocket (talk) 11:02, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But there is a difference: the M74 and A74(M) are both motorways, but the A42 is not. I'm not sure whether we have any articles that combine a motorway with a non-motorway. For example, we have separate articles for the A1 road (Great Britain) and the A1(M) motorway.  Dr Greg  talk  11:30, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of which, what will happen if the A42 gets upgraded to the M42? Would we keep this article or redirect/merge it with M42? If it gets upgraded to A42(M) instead, I think it will be like the A74/M74 (which I call both M74) situation? This is unlikely going to happen anytime soon but what would happen if it ever did? JuniperChill (talk) 16:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One example I can think of where we have a non-motorway and a motorway article together is at N3 road (Ireland), where M3 motorway (Ireland) redirects there. That is the other way around, where the article title is titled at its non-motorway road. The A42 is pretty much a continuation of the M42, maybe because it was initially supposed to be built as the M42 and the junction numbers carry actually carry on. The M42 terminates at junction 11 and junctions 12-14 are carried by the A42, so its more than likely that the A42 is actually an extension/continuation of the M42. But the M3 and A3 are totally separate routes, just as the A1 and M1 are. JuniperChill (talk) 19:24, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:M42_motorway&oldid=1240315352"