Ontario Highways

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Update: Both drivers were identified and the trunk driver didn’t know what happened. He had to pull over and run back to the highway to attend the sedan. None were seriously injured thankfully.
https://www.cp24.com/news/driver-of-truc...-401-wasn-t-aware-of-crash-opp-1.4768002

I hope a dash cam from the other side shows the car cutting the truck off. I then hope this is use to remind people to not cut people off.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

I hope a dash cam from the other side shows the car cutting the truck off. I then hope this is use to remind people to not cut people off.

Let’s not jump to conclusions yet. We will see. At least so far we are able to clear the truck driver of any possible malicious intent with another video.

Edit: I see your point now. If I could say that much about the truck driver, more likely than not the sedan driver was being dumb...

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Cool. I guess they've been wasting money all these years on walls because of that short bit of data.

There isn't a comparable highway cross-section in Ontario. The concrete walls only make sense if the highway is widened to six lanes, and the highway traffic is only about 70% of what would typically warrant a six lane highway. And traffic isn't really growing on the 401 through C-K

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Probably not a lot that also have the same narrow grass strip median, most I've seen in the US have been quite wide, and also carry the same type of traffic as the 401.

I can pretty much guarantee you have not seen nearly the miles on the US Interstate network that I have. I'm going to sound arrogant, but I don't think there is another person on this forum who knows more about roads than I do. I've personally driven more than 50% of the interstate highway network. Half of a 46,876 mile network.

Tell me these highways don't look exactly like the 401:
I-94, Michigan:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@42.2647457,-...zUIYcMmGd7fCsJHs54jOQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I-65, Indiana:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@39.3421655,-...itch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

I-49, Missouri:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@38.6929796,-...9O8sq1i4-vE7n5dVmmELg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I-40, Oklahoma:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@35.5297021,-...itch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

I-30, Arkansas:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@34.2743301,-...l3eV0F0CJIedVNpIa8EIA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

I-20, Louisiana:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@32.5769791,-...7Dn84FZ5JbZ3GSVuwSdVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

I-20, Georgia:
https://www.google.ca/maps/@33.7165636,-...itch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i16384!8i8192

And there's plenty more.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_Ontario_Highway_401_crash

Would you feel a cable barrier would have prevented this? It is the accident that gave the area the nickname of "carnage alley"

A median barrier won't eliminate fog. Widening to six lanes does space vehicles out more, but that's true on any highway, not just the 401 through Essex or C-K.

Interestingly, these unique (by MTO standards) fluorescent tube lights on the 401 at the Trent River Bridge were installed as a result of a fatal collision that occurred as a result of fog from the river on an otherwise clear day. They were installed as "fog lighting" but from what I have read, the fog lights didn't have a measurable effect on highway safety. The lights have subsequently been replaced with modern fixtures:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.1273748,-...bLw!2e0!5s20090801T000000!7i13312!8i6656

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

A median barrier won't eliminate fog. Widening to six lanes does space vehicles out more, but that's true on any highway, not just the 401 through Essex or C-K.

Interestingly, these unique (by MTO standards) fluorescent tube lights on the 401 at the Trent River Bridge were installed as a result of a fatal collision that occurred as a result of fog from the river on an otherwise clear day. They were installed as "fog lighting" but from what I have read, the fog lights didn't have a measurable effect on highway safety. The lights have subsequently been replaced with modern fixtures:

https://www.google.ca/maps/@44.1273748,-...bLw!2e0!5s20090801T000000!7i13312!8i6656

A median Barrier can prevent both sides being involved in the carnage. It prevents most vehicles from crossing over into oncoming traffic.

[Dengler Avenue]

Engineers and politicians just never get along...

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by swimmer_spe

A median Barrier can prevent both sides being involved in the carnage. It prevents most vehicles from crossing over into oncoming traffic.

My comment was specific to the 1999 Crash:

from wiki:

On the morning of Friday, September 3, 1999, a malfunction at the Windsor Airport Observation Station failed to detect foggy conditions, and no fog warnings were issued. The malfunction was not discovered until later.[7] Around 8:00 am near the Manning Road overpass, a tractor-trailer entered a very dense fog patch and slowed suddenly, causing a following tractor-trailer to jack-knife.[8] Reports indicated that the fog reduced visibility to less than 1 metre (3.3 ft).[9] The initial crash set off a chain reaction of five further separate collisions, as other drivers unable to see the obstruction continued into the dense fog and colliding with crashed vehicles for several minutes.[4] Although no vehicles crossed the median, there were collisions in both directions. 87 vehicles were involved, many burnt and destroyed. Many people were injured in their vehicles or struck as they attempted to flee the pile-up. Seven people died at the scene and one more died later in hospital; 45 people were injured.[4]

[Dengler Avenue]

I quoted that in my response to swimmer_spe too.

I think a lot of us simply get up in our arms when trucks start passing one another like a slow poke. Can we allow trucks to pass at 110 km/h instead of 105 km/h? Speed limiters can cap speeds at 110 too.

[sonysnob]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I quoted that in my response to swimmer_spe too.

I think a lot of us simply get up in our arms when trucks start passing one another like a slow poke. Can we allow trucks to pass at 110 km/h instead of 105 km/h? Speed limiters can cap speeds at 110 too.

It's really annoying waiting for two trucks to pass on the 401. Unquestionably. The question comes down to, is that a billion dollar problem?

[swimmer_spe]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I quoted that in my response to swimmer_spe too.

I think a lot of us simply get up in our arms when trucks start passing one another like a slow poke. Can we allow trucks to pass at 110 km/h instead of 105 km/h? Speed limiters can cap speeds at 110 too.

Originally Posted by sonysnob

It's really annoying waiting for two trucks to pass on the 401. Unquestionably. The question comes down to, is that a billion dollar problem?

I have a better idea.... but no one will like it.

Higher speeding fines and more enforcement.

Right now, the fines are minuscule. $200 for 20 over? Not a big deal. And... if you pass a cop at 20 over, they don't even bother with you. So, lets add a zero to those fines. Make it be at least $1000 for 10 over. Then, have the cops out enforcing it.

The next thing to do is what is done on the interstates, lower speed limits for large trucks. So, 100km/hr for cars, 90km/hr for trucks. Then, add the higher fines, and the higher enforcement, and the problem will solve itself and the government gets more money.

[Horus]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

I quoted that in my response to swimmer_spe too.

I think a lot of us simply get up in our arms when trucks start passing one another like a slow poke. Can we allow trucks to pass at 110 km/h instead of 105 km/h? Speed limiters can cap speeds at 110 too.

It really has nothing to do with the speed limiter being set at 105 or 110. It's the speed of the trucks relative to each other. When a truck going 0.1km/h faster than another truck tries to pass, it's going to take a long time whether at 105.1 or 110.1

The problem is a direct result of the use of limiters, not the speed at which those limiters are set.

[Dengler Avenue]

Originally Posted by Horus

It really has nothing to do with the speed limiter being set at 105 or 110. It's the speed of the trucks relative to each other. When a truck going 0.1km/h faster than another truck tries to pass, it's going to take a long time whether at 105.1 or 110.1

The problem is a direct result of the use of limiters, not the speed at which those limiters are set.

Speed differential for sure matters, but I’ve always wondered whether getting stuck behind a truck going 110 km/h with the other one at 109 km/h is as frustrating as getting stuck behind one going 105 km/h with the other one at 104 km/h. I’m leaning towards no because I’m technically okay with doing 110 km/h. Lol if the truck’s passing at 120 km/h, I definitely won’t complain (although OPP will).

I was initially going to suggest making the use of limiter optional but thought that it would have been too outrageous.

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

I can pretty much guarantee you have not seen nearly the miles on the US Interstate network that I have. I'm going to sound arrogant, but I don't think there is another person on this forum who knows more about roads than I do. I've personally driven more than 50% of the interstate highway network. Half of a 46,876 mile network.

Tell me these highways don't look exactly like the 401

I haven't looked at these too closely, but I am curious if their car/truck volumes are comparable to the 401? Do they have a similar amount of curves/geography? Are they just as 'important' as the 401? Do they have nearby alternate routes?

I do get what you are saying, and I don't think you're coming off as arrogant. You have a 'stern' position based on your experiences and that a reasonable and prudent perspective to offer on this project.

To me however, why not do this? Yes it costs money but southwest region may be up for another share of the province's funds for a project now that the extension in Windsor is done. The 402 is fine, except for maybe some electronic signs and tree plantings to help with sudden weather changes.

All the other provincial highways that aren't downloaded are in decent shape in southwest region.

To me this stretch of the 401 'could' be widened. It's 6 lanes on either side so this 4 lane gap seems a little odd. Traffic will likely increase with the new Gordie Howe Bridge completed.
-The 401 doesn't have a good alternative route for this stretch. The last good one is the 402 interchange in London and that only works if you are US-bound.
-Delays on this stretch are no good for the economy. Just in time trade is high on this corridor.
-The 401 is arguably the most important highway in Ontario, if not southern/eastern Canada. As the South Park song goes, Canada only has one road, I see this as the 401/Autoroute 20
-401 connects to the busiest international crossing in North America.

Does it need to get done? No, but would be a nice to have.

[Dengler Avenue]

Delays on this stretch are no good for the economy. Just in time trade is high on this corridor.

This is one of the arguments I get behind too.
401 through C-K gets closed too often...

Then there’s also GTA West to consider. I didn’t realize how expensive it is for trucks to from one end to another of 407 until I checked the price between 3:30 pm and 6 pm eastbound.

It’s $141.76 and $211.76, respectively. No wonder truckers don’t wanna use it. The industrial hub around Bramelea Go was built “to no use”.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by Dengler Avenue

Speed differential for sure matters, but I’ve always wondered whether getting stuck behind a truck going 110 km/h with the other one at 109 km/h is as frustrating as getting stuck behind one going 105 km/h with the other one at 104 km/h. I’m leaning towards no because I’m technically okay with doing 110 km/h. Lol if the truck’s passing at 120 km/h, I definitely won’t complain (although OPP will).

I was initially going to suggest making the use of limiter optional but thought that it would have been too outrageous.

105 is the upper limit the limiter can be set, but many companies also set them lower than that. Speed limit is 100 (other than those few places at 110), so maybe all vehicles should be set to 100 then. Problem solved. I'm sure the general motoring public would love that lol.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by Horus

It really has nothing to do with the speed limiter being set at 105 or 110. It's the speed of the trucks relative to each other. When a truck going 0.1km/h faster than another truck tries to pass, it's going to take a long time whether at 105.1 or 110.1

The problem is a direct result of the use of limiters, not the speed at which those limiters are set.

As a truck driver, this pisses me off almost more than anything. The guy being passed is being a dickhead with a "you aren't getting one up on me if I can help it" attitude. If someone is trying to pass me, it's no skin off my ass to back out of it for a few seconds to let him by.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by sonysnob

There isn't a comparable highway cross-section in Ontario. The concrete walls only make sense if the highway is widened to six lanes, and the highway traffic is only about 70% of what would typically warrant a six lane highway. And traffic isn't really growing on the 401 through C-K





I can pretty much guarantee you have not seen nearly the miles on the US Interstate network that I have. I'm going to sound arrogant, but I don't think there is another person on this forum who knows more about roads than I do. I've personally driven more than 50% of the interstate highway network. Half of a 46,876 mile network.

.

I don't care one way or the other if they make it 4 lanes or 6 lanes, but after the wall and median sewers are installed, the roadway is that wide so it might as well be 6 lanes. Whether it meets whatever standard currently exists for 6 lanes now is irrelevant since that bridge is going to greatly increase 401 traffic.

As for the highway pictures, I don't know what the point of those is. So those states put cables in, is that supposed to be it for us then until every US state decides to put a wall in? I get it, you want your part of the province to get more highway spending. Telling me that my part of the province shouldn't get highway money before yours because of some pics of US highways doesn't fly with me, sorry. Congrats on the all the Interstate experience though

[haljackey]

Originally Posted by Djeffery

Telling me that my part of the province shouldn't get highway money before yours because of some pics of US highways doesn't fly with me, sorry.

To be fair, there's some points to be had here. Limited funds should be allocated to areas that need the most help and/or best bang for your buck.

Central Ontario region has some congested highways that could really benefit from some extra capacity, alternative routes or alternative transport like commuter rail.

The provincial highways in Southwest region don't really suffer from congestion all that much. The main aim of the 6-laning is safety improvements with the new concrete median, not capacity relief.

With all the cable barriers installed and the highway mostly reconstructed between Tilbury and London, I am surprised this project is progressing. I'd probably wait until the highway needs complete reconstruction again, which won't be for a few decades (hopefully).

I drive to Windsor a lot and the third lane would be nice, but many years of a 1-lane 401 will be needed due to the construction period.

[Dengler Avenue]

C-K has always been pushing and hoping for a third lane each direction.
Wynne’s Liberals decided to go with cable barriers instead.
Then Ford decided to put that third lane in.

[Djeffery]

Originally Posted by haljackey

I drive to Windsor a lot and the third lane would be nice, but many years of a 1-lane 401 will be needed due to the construction period.

The 401 east of London was rarely single lane in either direction during that whole project, and when it was, it was daily closures, not an ongoing thing. They widen and pave the right shoulders and then put the temporary walls part way inside the left lane. Still maintained 2, albeit skinnier, lanes. That also provided the road bed for the 3 lanes each way once the wall was installed.