WI M34, M41 & M45 Motorways instead of M6?

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
What if, instead of building the first section of M6 motorway from Birmingham to Preston, the UK govt built a M41 motorway following the A41 from Wolverhampton all the way to Chester then Birkenhead then Liverpool via the Mersey tunnels.

Also again following the A34, built a M34 motorway from the NE of Birmingham through Walsall, Stafford , Stoke-on-Trent, then up to Manchester.

Then on the east of Birmingham, a M45 motorway was built following the A45, past the airport towards Coventry where it would meet the current M45 to connect the network to London. This would negate the need to build the current M6 to north of Rugby

Would this be possible, especially around the early '70's when the M6 was first built.?

How would the NIMBY and Green lobby react?

Would it help traffic flow having 2 motorways built instead of having just the one north of Birmingham, especially as the current M6 is always near to capacity?

Regards filers
 
Last edited:
The main problem I can see for building two roughly parallel roads is that to justify the costs you'd have to be expecting that a single M6 was going to run out of capacity in a couple of decades which as far as I'm aware, not being an expert, no-one was thinking was likely or had evidence to suggest. As for dealing with NIMBYs and the green lobby the simplest solution is to build them in the 1950s or '60s when they either weren't really a thing yet or could be easily ignored, but that's outside the scope that you're talking about.
 
You couldn't get the A41 all the way to Birkenhead as a motorway. All the way though from Birkenhead to at least Eastham it's bounded on both sides by houses.
 
Don't know, but some sections of those roads have been upgraded to dual carriageway so building them to Expressway or Motorway standard in the first place might be plausible.

The A45 between Birmingham and the M45 is all dual carriageway.

About a third of the A34 between Birmingham and Manchester is dual carriageway.

I think that the A41 could not be justified as a full-scale motorway, but possibly as a dual carriageway with roundabouts. However, the M40 has replaced the A41 between Bicester and Birmingham Furthermore the dual carriageway section of the A41 between Aylesbury and the M25 was built in place of an A41(M) whose southern terminus was to have been with the M1.

There was a thread about 6 months on what if the motorway programme had begun in the 1920s instead of the 1950s. The earlier start might allow your schemes to be built in the 1960s.
 

Nick P

Donor
You would benefit from asking this on SABRE at www.sabre-roads.org.uk where I'm sure this has been thought about a lot. Do also look at www.pathetic.org.uk all about planned and unbuilt motorways.

1- Your M41 would avoid the industrial areas of Warrington and west Liverpool. It also denies a simpler route to the North West, Lake District and Scotland avoiding the Runcorn bottleneck. Having all that traffic running through the middle of Liverpool would not be welcome. Not sure the Mersey tunnels could handle all the traffic either.
The Widnes-Runcorn Transporter Bridge might survive a few more years! :D

2- Your M34 IS pretty what happened OTL only as the M6. Running between Liverpool and Manchester was intended to link both major cities with just one major road in the countryside.
That said, you could divert the M6 after Knutsford to join the M60 ringroad via todays M56. The ripple effect then is there is no direct route to Liverpool Docks and the industries in Warrington.
Where would the M34 go in Walsall? You'd have to demolish a lot of housing. The M6 followed the railway and took up cheap industrial lands.

3- To get your M45 from the edge of Birmingham to the centre you are demolishing a lot of housing in an affluent area - "That's a very brave decision, Minister" :).
I'd be interested to see the M45 go all the way across to the M5 via what is now the M42. Trouble is this avoids north/central Birmingham with all its industry and residential needs.

4- The M6 was complete by 1972, certainly the section from Walsall to Preston was done by 1968. http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=M6 Having it take a different route or two in the 1950s planning stage is your best bet.
The Preston bypass (1958) and Lancaster Bypass (1960) would be built anyway as they were notorious bottlenecks for traffic heading up the west coast. They might remain as an A6 upgrade anyway.
Motorways were built with business in mind, ideally to replace the expensive railways and to get Britain's economy going. You have to consider linking up all the main industrial areas for this to work (Cost Benefit Analysis etc).

5- The Green/NIMBY lobby would have the same effect as OTL, some but not a lot. Motorways generally run in the country for cheaper land values and lack of neighbours.

6- Traffic flow via 2 motorways would be very different and you don't address the big question of linking to Scotland. The A6 over Shap Summit was terribly slow and known for many truck crashes in the heavy snows.
The M6 may be near to capacity today, certainly in central Birmingham, but I doubt it'd be predicted that way in 1955-65.

Lots to think about here and I'd be interested in seeing a map of your proposals.
 

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
You would benefit from asking this on SABRE at www.sabre-roads.org.uk where I'm sure this has been thought about a lot. Do also look at www.pathetic.org.uk all about planned and unbuilt motorways.

1- Your M41 would avoid the industrial areas of Warrington and west Liverpool. It also denies a simpler route to the North West, Lake District and Scotland avoiding the Runcorn bottleneck. Having all that traffic running through the middle of Liverpool would not be welcome. Not sure the Mersey tunnels could handle all the traffic either.
The Widnes-Runcorn Transporter Bridge might survive a few more years! :D

2- Your M34 IS pretty what happened OTL only as the M6. Running between Liverpool and Manchester was intended to link both major cities with just one major road in the countryside.
That said, you could divert the M6 after Knutsford to join the M60 ringroad via todays M56. The ripple effect then is there is no direct route to Liverpool Docks and the industries in Warrington.
Where would the M34 go in Walsall? You'd have to demolish a lot of housing. The M6 followed the railway and took up cheap industrial lands.

3- To get your M45 from the edge of Birmingham to the centre you are demolishing a lot of housing in an affluent area - "That's a very brave decision, Minister" :).
I'd be interested to see the M45 go all the way across to the M5 via what is now the M42. Trouble is this avoids north/central Birmingham with all its industry and residential needs.

4- The M6 was complete by 1972, certainly the section from Walsall to Preston was done by 1968. http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=M6 Having it take a different route or two in the 1950s planning stage is your best bet.
The Preston bypass (1958) and Lancaster Bypass (1960) would be built anyway as they were notorious bottlenecks for traffic heading up the west coast. They might remain as an A6 upgrade anyway.
Motorways were built with business in mind, ideally to replace the expensive railways and to get Britain's economy going. You have to consider linking up all the main industrial areas for this to work (Cost Benefit Analysis etc).

5- The Green/NIMBY lobby would have the same effect as OTL, some but not a lot. Motorways generally run in the country for cheaper land values and lack of neighbours.

6- Traffic flow via 2 motorways would be very different and you don't address the big question of linking to Scotland. The A6 over Shap Summit was terribly slow and known for many truck crashes in the heavy snows.
The M6 may be near to capacity today, certainly in central Birmingham, but I doubt it'd be predicted that way in 1955-65.

Lots to think about here and I'd be interested in seeing a map of your proposals.

Still trying how to put graphics on to this thread, so bare with me, I'm pretty new to this type of thing.

As for linking Scotland, how about both the M56 & M62 both being built, but also the A49 from Shrewsbury (called the M49) being built to motorway specs, past Whitchurch with an interchange with the M41 then carrying on following the A49 until Warrington where it connects with the M6 proper running over the Threwell viaduct past Lymm then onto Preston.

Then the A6 is made to motorway spec's from Manchester, past Bolton (A666) then Chorley following A6 towards Preston at the M6/M65 interchange.

When the M49 meets the M6, it then becomes the M6 proper.

Would this help with linking the motorway network with Scotland?

Regards filers
 

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
You couldn't get the A41 all the way to Birkenhead as a motorway. All the way though from Birkenhead to at least Eastham it's bounded on both sides by houses.

Correct, I know the place well, deliver there weekly around the corner where the "RFA Orangeleaf" is berthed, right next to the tunnel exit's.

Looks like a load of bulldozers at the request of HM Govt are going to have to level the place for the extra lane and hard shoulder.

Regards filers.
 
Correct, I know the place well, deliver there weekly around the corner where the "RFA Orangeleaf" is berthed, right next to the tunnel exit's.

Looks like a load of bulldozers at the request of HM Govt are going to have to level the place for the extra lane and hard shoulder.

Regards filers.

I doubt very much whether Levers are going to let you demolish half of Port Sunlight without a very lengthy court battle. I believe the entire village is Grade II listed so it's not just as simple as rocking up in a bulldozer and levelling all the houses along New Chester Road (A41).

New Ferry and Rock Ferry you can use to test Trident so long as my Nan and Granddad get enough notice to make themselves scarce...
 
Top