[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by Brigand

I stand ready to be corrected, however one thing I have noticed over last 30 years or so, is how well some of the roads in Scotland are looked after. Only referring to highlands and A9 upwards.

I imagine Glasgow will be as bad as anywhere else.

Very variable over this side of the highlands. A82 is definitely the poor relative to many of the roads east of the A9. Don't mention Loch Lomond side, terrible condition, many of us now choose the A9, rather than the shortest route out of the highlands down the A82.

Patched repairs are to a very low standard (laughable in fact) and even new surfaces break up in a short period. Whatever materials have been adopted in the last few years is a big mistake, we cannot believe how quickly we start getting break up on totally resurfaced roads. Powers that be are heading for huge expenditure, (even for recently reworked roads) or we shall see even the decent surfaces all broken up.

HighlandPete

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by stu14t

Having said that, highway maintenance budgets have been seen as an easy target but Transport Scotland have been better at adopting innovation than the Highways Agency, realising better value and making budgets go further.

A little off topic, but I gather you are in the highways sector. What's the problem with newly surfaced roads breaking up in a couple of years or so? We've got sections of road around us (A82/A86) which have been re-laid of recent times, breaking up and full of patches, compared to sections of road in reasonably good condition which have not been resurfaced for at least 17 years.

Is it the use of environmentally friendly materials, instead of the good old tar products?

HighlandPete

[stu14t]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

Very variable over this side of the highlands. A82 is definitely the poor relative to many of the roads east of the A9. Don't mention Loch Lomond side, terrible condition, many of us now choose the A9, rather than the shortest route out of the highlands down the A82.

Patched repairs are to a very low standard (laughable in fact) and even new surfaces break up in a short period. Whatever materials have been adopted in the last few years is a big mistake, we cannot believe how quickly we start getting break up on totally resurfaced roads. Powers that be are heading for huge expenditure, (even for recently reworked roads) or we shall see even the decent surfaces all broken up.

HighlandPete

Highland Pete,

Agreed, since the mid to late 1990's a stone mastic asphalt (SMA) surfacing has been the material of choice. Now this has a proven track record on the continent and is safer and easier to lay than the old Hot Rolled Asphalt (HRA). However, when SMA was introduced in this country, someone thought it was a good idea to modify it for the UK, to provide what is called a texture depth. What happened there was the material became previous and let water percolate through. Water and asphalt don't mix (Think of Loch Lomond side) and this led to premature failure.

Put it this way, HRA can last up to 25 years and some sections of roads in scotland, surfaced with HRA, are still in good condition well beyond that. SMA materials, in ideal conditions, typically last 8 - 10 years.

The other issue with the roads in Scotland outside the central belt, especially in the Highlands, the roads are generally unengineered and have evolved from the old military road network and then Telfords roads. Apart from the A9, which was built to modern standards in the 80's. This makes maintenance difficult to predict because of previous and ad-hoc maintenance.

Transport Scotland has developed a new more resilient SMA but this is considered a premium product and tends only to be used on high volume roads.

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by stu14t

Put it this way, HRA can last up to 25 years and some sections of roads in scotland, surfaced with HRA, are still in good condition well beyond that. SMA materials, in ideal conditions, typically last 8 - 10 years.

Thanks for the reply.

Shame when we see that "8 - 10 year expectation", reduced to just a couple of years before we see it start breaking up. Then we drive around for years on poorly patched up surfaces, until the next scheduled resurfacing.

As I see it, "false economy" comes to mind, when using inferior materials.

It appear authorities don't look long term.

It is like trying to paint a house up here with less than the best. Butinox is expensive, but painted with Butinox (labour is no more expensive) lasts for years, compared with saving £20 on materials and needing to paint every couple of years.

HighlandPete

[....,,,,..,,..]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

Thanks for the reply.

Shame when we see that "8 - 10 year expectation", reduced to just a couple of years before we see it start breaking up. Then we drive around for years on poorly patched up surfaces, until the next scheduled resurfacing.

As I see it, "false economy" comes to mind, when using inferior materials.

It appear authorities don't look long term.

It is like trying to paint a house up here with less than the best. Butinox is expensive, but painted with Butinox (labour is no more expensive) lasts for years, compared with saving £20 on materials and needing to paint every couple of years.

HighlandPete

For some reason, our local authority has resurfaced an entire section of road, rather than the usual spots of odd pot hole filling.
Hopefully, they have seen the common sense side of things and realised constant bandage treatment is not working.

[stu14t]

Roads should be treated like cars and "Serviced" at regular intervals throughout their life. It's called proactive maintenance. However, the public have the perception that the road should be in a dilapidated state before you do anything. We have regularly heard "Why have you done resurfaced this road, it looks fine?"

Would you only take your car to the dealer when the oil has ran dry and the engine seized and pay thousands for a new engine, or spend a few hundred at regular intervals? The analogy to toad maintenance should be the same.

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

Thanks for the reply.

Shame when we see that "8 - 10 year expectation", reduced to just a couple of years before we see it start breaking up. Then we drive around for years on poorly patched up surfaces, until the next scheduled resurfacing.

As I see it, "false economy" comes to mind, when using inferior materials.

It appear authorities don't look long term.

It is like trying to paint a house up here with less than the best. Butinox is expensive, but painted with Butinox (labour is no more expensive) lasts for years, compared with saving £20 on materials and needing to paint every couple of years.

HighlandPete

Highway maintenance is still very annual and often up-front costs are considered over whole life cost.

[dannywooly77]

Living in East Anglia I don't get roads like this without a 7 hour ride on traffic heavy A/M roads so jealous!

[HighlandPete]

Originally Posted by stu14t

Roads should be treated like cars and "Serviced" at regular intervals throughout their life. It's called proactive maintenance.

That would be a good idea, I'm all for it but it just doesn't happen, until the road is beyond repair. See it so often.

I'll give an example, if you are familiar with the A82, the section south of Spean Bridge around the Highbridge junction. A resurfaced section is falling to pieces, the patch up is to so low a standard. If any garage serviced cars like that they'd be out of business in weeks. What was a superb surface is now a disgrace.

Workmanship of repairs on our local roads is so poor it would often be better if they didn't even bother to intervene. Obviously no repair standard or training... I just can't get my head around the mentality of poor repairs, or why they pick one defect and leave a far worse defect 100 metres away.

I'll stop... as I'm getting on a soap box.

HighlandPete

[stu14t]

Originally Posted by HighlandPete

That would be a good idea, I'm all for it but it just doesn't happen, until the road is beyond repair. See it so often.

I'll give an example, if you are familiar with the A82, the section south of Spean Bridge around the Highbridge junction. A resurfaced section is falling to pieces, the patch up is to so low a standard. If any garage serviced cars like that they'd be out of business in weeks. What was a superb surface is now a disgrace.

Workmanship of repairs on our local roads is so poor it would often be better if they didn't even bother to intervene. Obviously no repair standard or training... I just can't get my head around the mentality of poor repairs, or why they pick one defect and leave a far worse defect 100 metres away.

I'll stop... as I'm getting on a soap box.

HighlandPete

@HighlandPete I could go on and on too, it annoys me too as a highways engineer. This is the result of "Competitive Tendering" where the lowest bid wins. There seems to be a disconnect between cost and value.

[....,,,,..,,..]

Something else to check out.

I will be doing the wales one as there on holiday.

http://www.drivingforpleasure.co.uk/...urs.php?page=1

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by stu14t

Agreed, since the mid to late 1990's a stone mastic asphalt (SMA) surfacing has been the material of choice. Now this has a proven track record on the continent and is safer and easier to lay than the old Hot Rolled Asphalt (HRA). However, when SMA was introduced in this country, someone thought it was a good idea to modify it for the UK, to provide what is called a texture depth.

I missed the development of this thread in to something of great interest to me!

Curious as to what you mean by Texture depth? Is this where having laid what looks to me (civil engineering ignoramous) a perfectly nice flat road surface, someone then comes along and puts a load of stones over it?

Always seemed to ruin a perfectly good road surface when I've seen it - noisier, less smooth, throws up lots of stones...

However, my guess is that it is supposed to improve how the road manages water and reduce wear?

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by stu14t

Roads should be treated like cars and "Serviced" at regular intervals throughout their life. It's called proactive maintenance.

This does make sense, though i will point out that getting your car serviced is a few hours inconvenience every year or so, whereas when roads start getting down it seems to inconvenience you for weeks!

This whole issue where upfront cost in a given year determines decisions rather than full life and longer term costs is massive issue in not only roads though.. it blights so many infrastructure projects in the UK and a lot of business decisions generally.

In companies I've worked for I can't believe the number of bad decisions I've seen based on a finance decision in order to hit a spurious quarterly budget figure, irrespective of the longer term business impact.

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by dannywooly77

Living in East Anglia I don't get roads like this without a 7 hour ride on traffic heavy A/M roads so jealous!

Great roads and the highlands are what I miss most having moved from perthshire to hertfordshire!

[stu14t]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

I missed the development of this thread in to something of great interest to me!

Curious as to what you mean by Texture depth? Is this where having laid what looks to me (civil engineering ignoramous) a perfectly nice flat road surface, someone then comes along and puts a load of stones over it?

Always seemed to ruin a perfectly good road surface when I've seen it - noisier, less smooth, throws up lots of stones...

However, my guess is that it is supposed to improve how the road manages water and reduce wear?

All new road surfaces, whether maintenance or new has a texture depth requirement and this is to allow water to disperse under your tyre, reduce the risk of aquaplaning and helps with high speed skidding resistance. It ranges from 0.7mm to 1.5mm depending of the type of surfacing and is either positive or negative. Most of the new surfacing types have a negative texture and like your tyre water is dispersed in valleys. Older HRA and surface dressing (where the put dry chippings on the road after spraying down bitumen) has a positive texture depth where you ride on the peaks of the stone above the mortar of the surfacing.

Surface dressing is used as a short term maintenance solution to improve skid resistance and seal the pavement from water ingress. This is one of the difficulties of where the public perception is an apparently good road being either resurfaced or surface dressed. What has happens to lead up to this is a measurement of skid resistance and a risk assessment has found the skidding resistance has fallen below an acceptable limit and needs to be improved. Because skidding only happens in emergency situations, what is replaced and improved is intangible unless you have to slam on.

I'm not a fan of surface dressing but it has its place in road maintenance and some see it as a cheap solution.

[Tengocity]

Thanks Stu- explanation much appreciated.

When I drive in Europe, especially the French motorway network I feel and hear a huge difference... always feels smoother, and always sounds quieter...

What are the differences at play here and how come we don't build roads like they do? Is it too simple to say that it's down to the cost?

[stu14t]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

Thanks Stu- explanation much appreciated.

When I drive in Europe, especially the French motorway network I feel and hear a huge difference... always feels smoother, and always sounds quieter...

What are the differences at play here and how come we don't build roads like they do? Is it too simple to say that it's down to the cost?

The French don't have a texture depth requirement and this results is a smoother and quieter road. They mitigate the risk of high speed skid resistance and aquaplaning by reducing the speed limit during rain.

They also close roads completely when maintaining and building and this lets them use bigger machines to lay the whole width of road in one go. less joints and better level control

[RobUK]

The A170 (Sutton Bank) in North Yorkshire... if for no other reason than caravans are OFFICIALLY BANNED from using it

[Tengocity]

Originally Posted by stu14t

The French don't have a texture depth requirement and this results is a smoother and quieter road. They mitigate the risk of high speed skid resistance and aquaplaning by reducing the speed limit during rain.

They also close roads completely when maintaining and building and this lets them use bigger machines to lay the whole width of road in one go. less joints and better level control

Ok sort of makes sense, though their reduced speed limit of 110kph is pretty much the same as our 70mph.

[stu14t]

Originally Posted by Tengocity

Ok sort of makes sense, though their reduced speed limit of 110kph is pretty much the same as our 70mph.

No road is glass smooth, there is always a texture depth and tyre technology has improved since the requirement was introduced in the 1970's. It's debatable if it still has any relevance today.

[stu14t]

Back on Topic :

A93 At Glenshee. I think Jezza Clarkson drove a Ferrari F12 through there