Smart Motorways

[Scythe]

All well and good unless you or passengers are not able to safely get out of harms way such as disabled people, young children or animals. I remember a harrowing video of a 999 call of a person who had broken down on the M6 near my home, who had children in the car and only been stopped in lane 1 for seconds before a truck hit them.

smart motorways with no refuge turn a simple mechanical break down, such as a puncture, into a potentially life threatening situation very easily with no option.

 

[[TW]Fox]

The only thing that confuses me about this is that the entire debate seems to assume that Smart Motorways are the only 70mph roads without a hard shoulder which isn't the case, is it?

 

[Kenai]

Which I imagine is great fun if your in lane 2 or 3 (of 4).

Surely any scenario that results in you being broken down in lanes 2,3,4,etc are unchanged? If you can't get across to Lane 1, you wouldn't have got across to the hard shoulder anyway?

 

[a1ex2001]

The only thing that confuses me about this is that the entire debate seems to assume that Smart Motorways are the only 70mph roads without a hard shoulder which isn't the case, is it?

I don't think it assumes that at all and a lot of 70mph dual carriage ways have soft verges the M1 near Sheffield has a steel barrier to keep you in the danger zone for a lot of it's length. The issue is that smart motorways badly implemented have made motorways less safe than they were which is a retrograde step, there are plenty of national speed limit roads around the country that are single lane tracks with grass up the middle just because a lower standard exists don't mean we should aim for it.

The really stupid thing here is done well smart motorways are safe and work well, I've regularly driven the length of the M42/A42 both before and after the introduction fo the smart section and traffic flow has definitely been improved how this then became the crazy section of the M1 near Sheffield with permanent hard shoulder running and tiny emergency refuges a mile and a half apart I have no idea.

 

[Shadowness]

Most of the issues I have are trusting what the messages actually say! How often do you drive through a reduced speed section, where it says there's an obstruction etc, to then get the 70 limit all of a sudden, having not passed a single issues!

 

[Conscript]

Most of the issues I have are trusting what the messages actually say! How often do you drive through a reduced speed section, where it says there's an obstruction etc, to then get the 70 limit all of a sudden, having not passed a single issues!

This question has asked and answered before. Quoting my response to someone else earlier in this thread:

And as for "...for no obvious reason at all." - has it not occurred to you that if you don't see the reason for the speed limits changing, then the variable speed limits are doing their job? They are slowing down the traffic well in advance of the congestion you are approaching to smooth the traffic flow. That's the whole point, they don't just activate the limit half a mile from the problem, they do it further back. If you slow down as directed, you'll likely never end up having to come to a complete stop in congestion that's a few miles up the road in front of you.

They reduce the speed limit well in advance of whatever the problem is. By slowing down the approaching traffic, you reduce the amount of vehicles encountering the problem over a certain period, and therefore reduce congestion which would slow traffic even more, or force it to stop entirely.
So although you might never see whatever caused the reduced speed limit to be triggered, that doesn't mean that nothing happened - just that it was cleared before you encountered it, so speed limits were returned to normal.

Think of it like when you approach red lights. What's more efficient - drive up to the light at normal speed, stop at the line, then pull away when it turns green? Or....slow down gradually on the approach, so that there's a higher chance that by the time you get to the lights, they will be turning green meaning you don't have to stop at all?
It's a similar logic to smart motorway speed reductions, but because there isn't a reason you can see (ie, a red light), the perception is often that the limit was enforced for no reason. When in reality, it just means that it did it's job, because while you had to slow down. you were able to return to the normal speed without encountering congestion caused by whatever the problem was.

 

[Howard]

I don't have a problem with the variable speed limits and messages aspect of smart motorways - they do work as Conscript mentioned above.

Getting out of my stricken car into a live lane would mildly terrify me though. The hard shoulder is scary enough.

I know breakdowns that stop the car from being able to drive on are rare for a properly-maintained car, but there are other reasons you might need to suddenly stop.

 

[wolfie138]

i think these will only fully work when cars are more "intelligent" and have the ability to talk to each other, passing the message on down the line that the lane is now blocked by a stationary vehicle. Not that i don't trust people....but i don't.

 

[Rroff]

I know breakdowns that stop the car from being able to drive on are rare for a properly-maintained car, but there are other reasons you might need to suddenly stop.

Maybe rare vs volume of traffic - but I rarely do one longer trip without seeing at least one broken down car at the side of the road.

The only thing that confuses me about this is that the entire debate seems to assume that Smart Motorways are the only 70mph roads without a hard shoulder which isn't the case, is it?

Not a hard and fast rule but as above most of the dual carriageways I travel on have reasonable size verges for the most part while large sections of the motorways either have a barrier or steep bank at the side.

 

[Steampunk]

The only thing that confuses me about this is that the entire debate seems to assume that Smart Motorways are the only 70mph roads without a hard shoulder which isn't the case, is it?

It's not about a hard shoulder or not, it's about a road that has a hard shoulder that is sometimes a hard shoulder, and is sometimes a full speed lane of traffic, sometimes both, and often it takes 20 minutes for the system to realise when one has turned into the other.

You're taking the hard shoulder (a safety feature) and intermittently turning it into a full speed lane, effectively putting 70 mph traffic in the same place where people might be stopped. The constant changing and people not knowing what that inner lane is designated as is why you get these kinds of big and often fatal accidents.

Smart motorway accidents happen because the concept does not take into account the human factor of dealing with a confusing system that often does not alert drivers in a timely fashion to what is ahead of them, and is mistrusted because of a lack of transparency and understanding in how and why speed restrictions are in place.

Smart motorways are confusing, so drivers get confused, and accidents ensue.

 

[robj20]

One thing that really bugs me is when you have a 40mph section for what ever reason then it technically doesn't end the signs just go blank. Supposed to get a 70 or NSL sign before you speed back up.

 

[tom_e]

One thing that really bugs me is when you have a 40mph section for what ever reason then it technically doesn't end the signs just go blank. Supposed to get a 70 or NSL sign before you speed back up.

And then the next one has a limit on it again and you're driving along with no idea if you've just been speeding between the last 2 gantries or not

 

[robj20]

And then the next one has a limit on it again and you're driving along with no idea if you've just been speeding between the last 2 gantries or not

Yeah I'd love something official on this, I guess if you could see a slip road which also doesn't have a speed reduction you could speed up.
It did it to me on the M60 last week, 40mph at 3 gantries then nothing at what point can you speed up.

 

[Rroff]

Don't think a single one of our drivers at work have a good thing to say about them either - some of the HGV drivers have had scary experiences on them involving people broken down with a lane still live.

 

[Resident]

Don't think a single one of our drivers at work have a good thing to say about them either - some of the HGV drivers have had scary experiences on them involving people broken down with a lane still live.

SEVENTEEN MINUTES.

You are probably now asking what that means. Seventeen minutes is the AVERAGE time it takes to be spotted by Highways when you're stopped in a live smart motorway lane. This average includes the lesser times where the victim has managed to stop near an emergency phone. It can take 3-4 mins for signage to be changed upstream, so 20 mins where you have a vehicle stopped in a live lane frequented by 44ton vehicles travelling at 56mph.

There have been 38 deaths attributed to smart motorways with the statement that the presence of a hard shoulder would have, in all likelihood, prevented.

Pretty much every motoring organisation in the UK was against smart motorways. Yet Sir Mike Penning approved their construction.

Recently he has claimed that he was mislead regarding the safety aspects and told the refuges would be 500m apart not 2500. The proposals was presented to Penning by the then head of Highways Agency, Archie Robertson, replaced in 2008 by Graham Dalton.

All 3 of these people had the power to stop smart motorways from being built. Neither did.

For me, if it is true that Robertson mislead Penning, he (Robertson) should be charged with 38 counts, at minimum, of criminal negligence causing bodily harm and death, with each count having a maximum of 14 years in jail. I cannot find injury figures unfortunately.
I, personally do not believe Penning as he chose to expand the smart motorway program even after the first deaths.

A BBC report focused on a section of the M25 which was converted, in the 5 years prior there were 72 'near misses' recorded, in the 5 years since the SM was introduced that figure was 1,485.
A "near miss" is counted every time there is an incident with "the potential to cause injury or ill health".

 

[Rroff]

I liked the wording at the end of the BBC article:

In March, the government published a report which found that "in most ways smart motorways are as safe as, or safer than, conventional ones", the agency added.

That use of "most ways" seems to be deliberately skewing to avoid the troubling bit - doesn't matter if many aspects are safer if there individual aspects that are less than an acceptable level of safe.

I tend to agree in situations like this people should be held accountable otherwise you end up with stuff like the 737 MAX, etc.

 

[hans gruber]

Here's a question. As you approach a gantry showing a speed limit, isn't that speed limit effective only after you pass the gantry? Many times I've been in a 40 zone and can see NSL ahead. Everyone around me goes for it early but I hold at 40 until I pass the gantry, usually annoying people behind me. I notice the speed cameras don't flash, so I'm guess they are fine with people doing this? Am I wrong here?

 

[robj20]

Here's a question. As you approach a gantry showing a speed limit, isn't that speed limit effective only after you pass the gantry? Many times I've been in a 40 zone and can see NSL ahead. Everyone around me goes for it early but I hold at 40 until I pass the gantry, usually annoying people behind me. I notice the speed cameras don't flash, so I'm guess they are fine with people doing this? Am I wrong here?

Depends on the system, not all are average speed cameras the M60 I believe is like a series of standard speed cameras so you can in theory speed between them and slam on for the camera.

 

[theone8181]

Surely any scenario that results in you being broken down in lanes 2,3,4,etc are unchanged? If you can't get across to Lane 1, you wouldn't have got across to the hard shoulder anyway?

I assume most cars breaking down have enough momentum to make it to the hard shoulder si wouldn't be an issue on a normal motorway.

 

[CaptainRAVE]

Narrow lanes, constantly changing speed limits, constantly changing lanes that can or can’t be used, bumper to bumper traffic, what could possibly go wrong. I’d hate to break down on one, that’s for sure.