Congestion results when the weight of traffic exceeds the capability of the roads to handle it.

Ideally, traffic should flow freely as vehicles enter, use and leave major roads and motorways.

In reality this does not happen because the weight of traffic forces those who wish to get on to the roads to wait on side roads or sliproads building up congestion there.

On the roads or motorways, the weight of traffic forces drivers to drive more slowly or indeed to come to a standstill.

Leaving a major road or a motorway is difficult because the subsidiary roads to which they are linked are not able to cope with the sudden deluge of traffic exiting onto them.

On major roads, congestion is caused by traffic lights and their settings, pedestrian crossings, drivers turning right in narrow roads, on street parking and lack of easily accessible parking space, buses stopping at bus stops blocking through traffic i.e no layby, cyclists unable to keep up with the flow of traffic, bad driving or journey planning, poor traffic management systems etc.

On motorways, congestion is caused mainly by entering and leaving the motorway as congestion on slip roads causes drivers to force their way into the motorway flow which slows to accommodate them. Similarly, there are points where the rate at which traffic exits the motorway is so slow that traffic backs up causing on-motorway congestion.

This too is further complicated by accidents, roadworks and poor road design and is worsened by the fact that often there is not an alternative route for traffic to use to bypass the offending obstacle.

In coming up with solutions to the congestion problems, planners need to take all these factors into consideration and need to plan accordingly.

We need to control not only the amount and pace of traffic on major roads and motorways but also the type of traffic and the conditions under which it is moving. Motorists also need to plan their journeys more carefully so as not to worsen congestion.

Widening motorways, as the government proposes, will concentrate more traffic in the same place and make the congestion worse and allowing traffic to use the hard shoulder will cut off the emergency services access when an accident occurs, making their task impossible and allowing congestion to continue.

I thought they were going to do varible speed limits to slow people down futher up the motorway? This way it kept the traffic moving more freely.:)

As far as I know they can do that now with the overhead speed indicators and by adjusting the settings on traffic lights controlling motorway slip roads to allow only a limited amount of traffic onto the sliproad. Why they need to spend £7 Billion pounds astounds me.

Thats what I thought, I remember they did a test somewere to see if it worked and it showed that if everyone was slowed down to 50Mph people actually got where they were going quicker!! Sounds silly but when people swap lanes at higher speeds other drivers tend to brake causing other drivers to hit the break making a chain reaction of delay. They found this didn't happen and delays eased.

I suppose things never work out as they plan with the great british public.;)

Yes, it works quite successfully on that stretch of the M25 that is already the most congested road in the UK. The caveat of course is that people have to stick to the variable speed limit. There are speed cameras hidden behind some of the overhead gantries on this stretch of motorway, and it is in these specific applications that I think sophisticated speed detection is completely justified. There should be actively used speed cameras on every gantry within a variable speed limit zone, because if people stick to the limits they really do work.

Looks like our discussion has just saved the UK £7 Billion. Do you think we'll qualify for a commission? ;)

I could do with a cut of it, that's for sure ...

There isn't nothing that can't be solved with a good discussion.:) Hmmm why don't they talk things through I wonder? As for speed cameras yes plenty keeps people to the speed limit and below.:) Trouble is odd ones round town tend to get people hit the breaks heavy then the moment they are passed back up to top speed.:(

Perhaps we are more likely to see speed limiters fitted to cars?

I just think all this investment will be like ****ing against the wind. Demand will always exceed supply eventually. It needs something radical. As radical as charging for every mile you drive, but a radical scheme that actually sorts the route cause, re-testing drivers to reduce the amount on our roads and ensure those that do drive are the safer ones, not the richer ones.

Surely though restesting drivers would cost a small fortune and put a huge strain on the Testing Centres? For that matter the majority of those tested may well pass, making it not worth while. If I took my driving test now I'm sure I would pass, how many other peeps would be the same? Taking another test would be just a formality and not cut down the loads of cars needed to make a difference. Fair enough it would weed out the dangerous drivers but I think they could be weeded out by other means.

I read an article ages ago that said most accidents where caused by people who had just past there test and under 25.

What I said in post #13 would buy us a few more years, we need to make better, more intelligent, use of our existing resources.
.....and stop letting in so many more people onto this already crowded island.

you must remember that a lot of this money will be taken up with everyone lining their pockets...by the time they have sold the contracts, then those at the top get their cut, and so it goes on...

Those measures are more realistic.:) Lets face it we need to sort out all this congestion.:) The biggest problem is people use the car to make up time, instead of setting off sooner. Everyone is so agressive on the roads Friday being the worst.

I know someone who goes out at 4-5pm when its mad busy in the car to get a paper.:) We need to change peoples thinking, but alas its all me me me.:(

I don't think it would be a formality. I think essentially what you'd be doing is still costing people money to drive, but costing those who are worst and would take longest to pass their test again more. So you are charging people based on their ability to drive safely on roads. You'd find so many people just found it such an expensive option that they would use public transport of their own accord.

I also think if people knew you'd be constantly re-tested as a driver over the years they may think twice about taking it up in the first place. I would also like to see the test increased in difficulty. It shouldn't be 1 single test. The difficulty of the test should be determind by how long you've been driving. So although its very strict for a first time driver, when that person hits 5 years and sits the re-test the new test should take account of the experience hes had in 5 years and reflect that. Of course it would become complicated as you could have a licence and not drive very much.

I don't really have all the answers considering its a radical approach. But surely restricting the number of cars on the roads on the basis of ability to drive safely is a better way to do it than on the ability to simply pay.

Don't worry, if such a thing ever happened I'm sure the Government would set the fees to ensure the exchequer wasn't left out of pocket.

And as for being sure you would pass ... I watched one of the old Top Gear presenters (can't remember his name - tall, balding, not Jeremy Clarkson) re-sit his test just to see what happened. He failed. I think you might be surprised how many bad habits you have picked up, or techniques you perform so well that you've forgotten they're an automatic fail on a test.