Control Methodology of the U.K. Road Traffic System

  • M. R. C. McDowell
  • Dale F. Cooper
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 3)


We have been engaged in one aspect of operational research on the U.K. Road Traffic system (hereafter “the system”) for over a decade. It rapidly became apparent to us that our efforts, and those of similar groups, were directed towards understanding and possibly sub-optimizing only our own part of the system, without any real model of the links of this part with the whole. Of course, sub-optimization is not an unusual feature of O.R. on large scale systems with multiple or indeed fuzzy objectives. However, in our case the problem was not our blindness, but the refusal of certain elements in the control mechanism to allow the investigation necessary for constructing a wider model to proceed. This was our original motivation for looking at the whole system.


Road User Road Accident Transport Policy Traffic System Minor Road 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Transport Policy, A Consultation Document. HMSO, London, 1976, two volumes.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leblanc, L.J. An algorithm for the discrete network design problem. Transportation Science, Vol. 9, pp. 183–199, 1975.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    OECD Road Research Group. Research on Traffic Law Enforcement. OECD, Paris, 1974.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Freckleton, S., N. Ferguson and M.E. Moncaster. Traffic policing effectiveness measurement and resource allocation. NATO Conference on Environmental Assessment of Socio-Economic Systems, Istanbul, Turkey, 4–8 October 1976.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Operation 101 Final Report. Department of California Highway Patrol, State of California. Phase I, 1966; Phase II, 1969; Phase III, 1970.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Operation 500 Final Report. Department of California Highway Patrol, State of California, 1970.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    University of Durham/Durham Constabulary Joint Research Project on Trunk Road Patrolling, Second Report, 1969.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Munden, J.M. An experiment in enforcing the 30 mile/h speed limit. RRL Report LR24, Road Research Laboratory, Harmondsworth, 1966.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    On-the-spot accident investigation. TRRL Leaflet LF 392 Issue 2, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, 1975.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Russam, K. and B.E. Sabey. Accidents and traffic conflicts at junctions. TRRL Report LR 514, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, 1972.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spicer, B.R. A study of traffic conflicts at six intersections. TRRL Report LR 551, Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, 1973.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cooper, D.F. and M.R.C. Mcdowell. Traffic studies at T-junctions: 4. Conflict simulation and driver behaviour. Paper to be presented to O.R. Society Conference, Swansea, 21–23 September, 1976.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Troy, P.N. and N.G. Butlin. The Cost of Collisions. Cheshire Publishing, Melbourne, 1971.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Road Accidents in Great Britain 1974. HMSO, London, 1976.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dawson, R.F.F. Cost of road accidents in Great Britain. RRL Report LR79, Road Research Laboratory, Crowthorne, 1967.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dawson, R.F.F. Current cost of road accidents in Great Britain. RRL Report LR 396, Road Research Laboratory, Crovthorne, 1971.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1978

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. R. C. McDowell
    • 1
  • Dale F. Cooper
    • 1
  1. 1.University of LondonEngland

Personalised recommendations