More Motorway Bans Unlikely
Page 42
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
A LTHOUGH a London firm of PA hauliers with 100 vehicles have banned their drivers from using •the London-Birmingham motorway, similar action bymany other operators is unlikely. A spokesman for the Road Haulage Association said last week that there had been no complaints from members about Ml. Indications were that it was highly satisfactory. A representative of British Road Services stated that they had no intention of prohibiting drivers from •using M I.
Messrs. James Shirley and Sons, London, S.E.15, who send eight or 10 vehicles to the north daily, have instructed their drivers to avoid the •Ml despite the time it would save. During the first week that the motorway was open two of the firm's drivers were killed in crashes on Ml.
An executive told The Commercial Motor that the ban would stay until the
" hard " shoulders to the motorway were widened and made more firm. He thought that braking systems of vehicles should be improved for motorway operation.
Criticisms of the motorway were made by Mr. H. A. Barnes, Baltimore Traffic Commissioner and a leading American traffic authority, last week. He did not like the narrowness of the dividing strip between carriageways, lack of a speed limit, absence of reflectors on flyover bridge supports, and the lack of centre barriers to prevent headlight dazzle.
Mr. Barnes was finishing a two-month visit to Europe as consultant to the International Road Federation.
In the House of Commons last week, Mr. John Hay, Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport, said that special precautions against accidents in fog on the MI would not be introduced, nor would there be a speed limit. Speed should be suited to 'conditions. .