# Smart Motorways



## SaintHacker (Feb 26, 2021)

Being talked about in the news quite a lot at the moment.
I'm a professional driver (pcv) so I've done many thousands of miles up and down the country and used smart motorways a lot. In my opinion they work well, if people obey the rules. Unfortunately sa with most things some people think the rules don't apply to them and thats where problems happen.
People seem to be under the impression that its just about using, or not having, a hard shoulder, but there's more to them than that. They are designed to pre-empt traffic build up and slow approaching traffic down before the concertina effect takes full hold and everything grinds to a halt. 
You do have to ask though with the newly built ones if there's enough room to build the refuge areas then surely there's enough room for a full hard shoulder?


----------



## CliveW (Feb 26, 2021)

In Scotland there are no hard shoulders on the majority of the motorways. Drivers also leave more distance between themselves and the vehicle in front thus giving more reaction time. In my opinion it is the drivers rather than the road to blame


----------



## USER1999 (Feb 26, 2021)

If the M25 is an example, they are garbage. The speed limit is a random number generator, which has very little to do with traffic density, and a lot to do with raising money via the cameras.


----------



## SteveW86 (Feb 26, 2021)

As with most things, it’s human error that is the cause of the issues


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 26, 2021)

'Stuff' should fit the end user not the other way round...
Especially when it comes to safety...


----------



## SaintHacker (Feb 26, 2021)

murphthemog said:



			If the M25 is an example, they are garbage. The speed limit is a random number generator, which has very little to do with traffic density, and a lot to do with raising money via the cameras.
		
Click to expand...

M25 is beyond repair. They could increase it to 8 lanes and it still wouldn't be enough


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 26, 2021)

As a former emergency services worker I consider them one of the worst day's work that those responsible have ever done.  There is an HA stat that the average time a vehicle was stationary on the hard shoulder before being hit is 11 minutes.  Given that vehicles are struck that quickly, and that was on dedicated hard shoulders, I cannot fathom out how anyone thought it was a good idea for broken down vehicles to sit in a LIVE traffic lane; yes, I know there are safety pockets, but realistically how often can people get to them?  The realistic prospect will be broken down or accident damaged vehicles sitting in a live lane.  And when there is an incident, the lack of a hard shoulder makes the job of the emergency services getting to the scene that much harder, and leaves many more issues in sorting out the mess.  Utterly ridiculous idea, which is being recognised by coroners and others.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56198979

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-55708791

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-56089258


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 26, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			M25 is beyond repair. They could increase it to 8 lanes and it still wouldn't be enough
		
Click to expand...

The error with the M25 was too many junctions which encourages too much traffic (too many local journeys rather than long distance traffic).


----------



## Deleted member 3432 (Feb 26, 2021)

CliveW said:



			In Scotland there are no hard shoulders on the majority of the motorways. Drivers also leave more distance between themselves and the vehicle in front thus giving more reaction time. In my opinion it is the drivers rather than the road to blame
		
Click to expand...

It's a pleasure to drive in Scotland. I only ever venture south of Lancaster if going to Manchester Airport and only go there if I can't get to my destination from Glasgow.....

Feel sorry for road users down south, too many people and too many cars.


----------



## SaintHacker (Feb 26, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			As a former emergency services worker I consider them one of the worst day's work that those responsible have ever done.  There is an HA stat that the average time a vehicle was stationary on the hard shoulder before being hit is 11 minutes.  Given that vehicles are struck that quickly, and that was on dedicated hard shoulders, I cannot fathom out how anyone thought it was a good idea for broken down vehicles to sit in a LIVE traffic lane; yes, I know there are safety pockets, but realistically how often can people get to them?  The realistic prospect will be broken down or accident damaged vehicles sitting in a live lane.  And when there is an incident, the lack of a hard shoulder makes the job of the emergency services getting to the scene that much harder, and leaves many more issues in sorting out the mess.  Utterly ridiculous idea, which is being recognised by coroners and others.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56198979

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-55708791

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-56089258

Click to expand...

Totally respect what you're saying, but if people do what they're suppoaed to do then it won't be a live lane, as it will have been shut by red x's. But thats relying on people sticking to rules, and not using it as their own personal fast lane 🙄
Maybe the answer is to massively increase penalties for ignoring the signs, say 6 points fot every sign that is ignored?


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 26, 2021)

South Yorkshire smart motorways are death traps. The coroner has said as much numerous times.
A little story from my daughter who went to an accident one night.
A car had broke down.The guy gets out of car and climbs over the barrier.The woman is obese and cannot climb over the barrier so walked 20 yards further down the motorway and sat on the barrier. Sometime later A lorry slammed into the back of the broken down car. It in turn shot forward hit the woman and de sloughed every bit of soft tissue off her lower legs. Despite attempts of my daughter, her workmate, paramedics and a dr who stopped to help she died. 
There is just not enough places to pull over should ther be a breakdown Or emergency. Even though there is room to build them.
I think the concept of smart motorways to have extra lanes is fine, but you could have 10lanes and folk would still hog lanes.


----------



## Golfmmad (Feb 26, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			M25 is beyond repair. They could increase it to 8 lanes and it still wouldn't be enough
		
Click to expand...

Sorry but I have to disagree. The M25 is vital to the area that it covers. Without it, the areas around London would be gridlocked! Any one remember the South and North circular roads around London? They would certainly come to a standstill. 
In my job I use the M25 from J5 to J12at least half dozen times a week. The variable speed cameras between J9 and J12 in normal times are completely necessary to slow traffic down in a safe way. But are not always switched on to catch speeding at say 40-50mph.
Nobody ever mentioned no escape lanes on most dual carriageways, which are just as dangerous at speeds of 70mph plus!


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Feb 26, 2021)

I have mixed views on smart motorways, and yes I use the M25 quite a bit. To my  mind, peoples lane discipline and willingness to obey the lane closure signs should be looked at first.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 26, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Totally respect what you're saying, but if people do what they're suppoaed to do then it won't be a live lane, as it will have been shut by red x's. But thats relying on people sticking to rules, and not using it as their own personal fast lane 🙄
Maybe the answer is to massively increase penalties for ignoring the signs, say 6 points fot every sign that is ignored?
		
Click to expand...

Equally, I respect your point, but there will be circumstances where it is not possible to make the refuge area (cam belt failure for one) and in those circumstances the lack of a hard shoulder literally can be the difference between life & death.  Turning on the red X's may well be reliant on the number of control room staff and the amount of equipment provided, and I have heard suggestions that they have been built down to a price rather than up to a standard.

As professional drivers (albeit I'm not still an active one), I think we can agree that driving standards are not what they used to be and play some part, but I would still put the bulk of the blame on the design in this instance.


----------



## Hobbit (Feb 26, 2021)

Maybe there's two aspects to the number of serious accidents on Smart Motorways. Drivers are conditioned to hard shoulders and free running traffic. And then there's the speed. Travelling at 70mph and coming up behind a stationary vehicle must be a shock to many as they drive along in auto pilot.

One thing is for sure, the name Smart is a misnomer. There doesn't seem much Smart about them.


----------



## SteveW86 (Feb 26, 2021)

I think the problem is that the nation as a whole probably doesn’t obey traffic laws very well. I’m sure “everyone” on here as gone too fast at one point and the amount of people you see on their phones/texting is staggering. The rules can only be enforced to a certain extent and therefore overall I would say that driving standards are pretty poor in this country as too many people get away with it.

We are/were all used to motorways being a certain way and the majority of them were built a long time ago when there were significantly fewer cars on the road and they are now difficult to adapt to the demand we now have on the roads. Whilst I don’t think Smart motorways are perfect, I would always prefer to have a designated safe lane should I break down or need assistance, I would bet that the majority of incidents are caused by drivers not paying attention or driving too fast. 

If the powers that be want them to work, then the rules should be stricter. Any time there is a reduced speed limit, then next overhead display and each one after it should have a camera on it to catch anyone that hasn’t slowed down.


----------



## Imurg (Feb 26, 2021)

Any system relies on the people using it.
From what I can tell, roads, junctions, Smart motorways etc etc are designed to work well of everyone plays to the rules.
The trouble is, as we all, know, some don't.
And as soon as one plays by a different set of rules all he'll is going to break loose.
Most of us don't pay enough attention to what's going on around us, especially on motorways
Let's face it, baring mechanical failure causing a car to speed up, slow down or swerve there shouldn't be any crashes on a motorway at all.
We're all going the same direction, at a similar speed.
There are nice white lines defining lanes and big signs giving us plenty of warning when our exit nears...
There are no dangerous roads ( apart from ones along the edges of a crumbling cliff) it's  those who drive on them that make them dangerous


----------



## Pants (Feb 26, 2021)

I read the other day that they are possibly going to use radar to quickly detect stationary vehicles.

I can just see that working ...


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Feb 26, 2021)

murphthemog said:



			If the M25 is an example, they are garbage. The speed limit is a random number generator, which has very little to do with traffic density, and a lot to do with raising money via the cameras.
		
Click to expand...

Speed limits on m/ways are not only to do with traffic density but also road surface noise impact on adjacent residential or other areas.


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 26, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Totally respect what you're saying, but if people do what they're suppoaed to do then it won't be a live lane, as it will have been shut by red x's. But thats relying on people sticking to rules, and not using it as their own personal fast lane 🙄
Maybe the answer is to massively increase penalties for ignoring the signs, say 6 points fot every sign that is ignored?
		
Click to expand...

If people drove on motorways as they should, eg pull over once you have overtaken someone instead of hogging lanes. There would be no need to have four lanes or smart motorways.


----------



## SaintHacker (Feb 26, 2021)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			Speed limits on m/ways are not only to do with traffic density but also road surface noise impact on adjacent residential or other areas.
		
Click to expand...

Really? As far as I'm aware all motorways are 70mph unless a variable limit is in place, which only becomes active when traffic conditions dictate


----------



## Beedee (Feb 26, 2021)

(Pre-covid) my commute to work involves 1 junction of smart motorway (J4 jn20 -> jn19).  On days when the hard shoulder was back to being hard shoulder it would add about 15 minutes to my journey time.

I must admit I'd hate to break down on a smart motorway, but the motorways desperately need the extra lane.


----------



## USER1999 (Feb 26, 2021)

I have been driving round the M25 (quite often really, more than I would like), with the over heads showing 50, but consecutive overheads show 50, 40, 30, 60, 50, glf, 40, 60, etc, when there are about 3 cars within view.
I have also sat on the bonnet of my car talking to the driver of the next car, when the gantries have flagged from 60 to 40, and no one has moved for 30 minutes.

Smart? Not in my view.

Trouble is, when they are this inconsistent, people get in the habit of viewing the numbers with a pinch of salt. Then, when it all goes wrong, it gets nasty quite quickly.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 26, 2021)

How can it be acceptable to have a motorway where someone breaking down and not capable of driving to an escape area is in danger of death by a heavy duty vehicle ploughing into the back of them. It's also dangerous for the vehicle approaching.  Absolutely mindless in my opinion.

Also, why arnt the inside lanes returned to hard shoulders outside of peak flow times.


----------



## SaintHacker (Feb 27, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			How can it be acceptable to have a motorway where someone breaking down and not capable of driving to an escape area is in danger of death by a heavy duty vehicle ploughing into the back of them.* It's also dangerous for the vehicle approaching.*  Absolutely mindless in my opinion.

Also, why arnt the inside lanes returned to hard shoulders outside of peak flow times.
		
Click to expand...

But thats the whole point, they're not meant to be approaching as the lane is supposed to be closed for some considerable distance, which is why I think the penalties for ignoring the lane closure signs shoudl be ramped up massively.
One other question. Dual carriagway A roads. 2 or 3 lanes, 70mph limit, never had hard shoulders. Whats the difference?


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			But thats the whole point, they're not meant to be approaching as the lane is supposed to be closed for some considerable distance, which is why I think the penalties for ignoring the lane closure signs shoudl be ramped up massively.
One other question. Dual carriagway A roads. 2 or 3 lanes, 70mph limit, never had hard shoulders. Whats the difference?
		
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree with your point would volume of traffic but the answer to your question? Motorways are normally busier which more cars equates to more risk ?


----------



## SaintHacker (Feb 27, 2021)

Possibly, but all those cars on the motorways got there from A roads


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Possibly, but all those cars on the motorways got there from A roads
		
Click to expand...

Again true. However it's the amount of A roads 

Just take the M25 between 30 and 27

You have 
A13
A127
A12
M11

And that's just one section of it


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 27, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			But thats the whole point, they're not meant to be approaching as the lane is supposed to be closed for some considerable distance, which is why I think the penalties for ignoring the lane closure signs shoudl be ramped up massively.
One other question. Dual carriagway A roads. 2 or 3 lanes, 70mph limit, never had hard shoulders. Whats the difference?
		
Click to expand...


Over the years there have been some horrendous accidents on the A40, near here, involving stationary [broken down] vehicles... A possible indication that a 'hard shoulder' might have been a better [safer] option to a third lane...


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

MegaSteve said:



			Over the years there have been some horrendous accidents on the A40, near here, involving stationary [broken down] vehicles... A possible indication that a 'hard shoulder' might have been a better [safer] option to a third lane...
		
Click to expand...

But isn't that a cost to compensation argument? (Which I completely disagree with)

After the moorgate rail disaster it was said that all signals had to have what's called a train stop (when signal red it pops up and trips the trains breaks if they go past red) fail safe 

Legal requirement

Network rail have so many signals in remote areas they decided it would cost less to pay the fine and compo to the families if things go wrong


----------



## ScienceBoy (Feb 27, 2021)

As a very infrequent user I am not fond of them, much prefer a permanent hard shoulder. I do like the variable speed limits and additional traffic management brought by all the monitoring.

I am all for making motorways smart, sadly progress will be tarnished by a poorly chosen name for just one feature of a true smart motorway.


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

ScienceBoy said:



			As a very infrequent user I am not fond of them, much prefer a permanent hard shoulder. I do like the variable speed limits and additional traffic management brought by all the monitoring.

I am all for making motorways smart, sadly progress will be tarnished by a poorly chosen name for just one feature of a true smart motorway.
		
Click to expand...

I liked the "use hard shoulder" during the peak hours rather than completely removing the hard shoulder 

Was it like 7-9 they turned on permission to use it then turned it off


----------



## ScienceBoy (Feb 27, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			I liked the "use hard shoulder" during the peak hours
		
Click to expand...

I didnt.


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

ScienceBoy said:



			I didnt.
		
Click to expand...

Surely better than no hard shoulder?


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Feb 27, 2021)

Has any analysis been done into how many accidents have been caused on smart motorways when broken down vehicles have nowhere to go safely?


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

drive4show said:



			Has any analysis been done into how many accidents have been caused on smart motorways when broken down vehicles have nowhere to go safely?
		
Click to expand...

https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/...ndful of other,road deaths per million people.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Feb 27, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/...ndful of other,road deaths per million people.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks. I'm surprised the stats say they are safer but I'm not surprised by the public perception.


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

drive4show said:



			Thanks. I'm surprised the stats say they are safer but I'm not surprised by the public perception.
		
Click to expand...

It's the same with motorways in general though isn't it 

Statistics show the safest roads and less accidents

However when their is an accident it's huge!!!!

Like superman says flying is statically the safest way to travel... But when a plane has a problem it's headline news ain't it! Don't get that if a bus catches fire and everyone just walks off to safety


----------



## ScienceBoy (Feb 27, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Surely better than no hard shoulder?
		
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand what you are talking about.

I just said I prefer motorways with a hard shoulder and I didn't like the hard shoulder part of "Smart" motorways.


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

ScienceBoy said:



			I don't quite understand what you are talking about.

I just said I prefer motorways with a hard shoulder and I didn't like the hard shoulder part of "Smart" motorways.
		
Click to expand...

I prefer when there is a hard shoulder but it could be used when directed rather than no hard shoulder and a full time lane


----------



## Billysboots (Feb 27, 2021)

I absolutely acknowledge the fact that collisions on motorways may largely be a result of significant driver error, however, that in no way absolves those responsible for approving the roll out of these horrific roads of blame. Human behaviour HAS to be a consideration at the design stage.

I speak as someone who has worked in and around motorways for over twenty years, and has investigated countless collisions on them. Anyone who has ever stood on a hard shoulder of a motorway and had traffic thundering by will tell you, categorically, that the hard shoulder is a scary place. I would go as far as saying they are the most dangerous part of the network. I will never forget watching a lorry driving through a 100m taper of illuminated cones, straight into the back of a liveried patrol car which itself was lit up like a Christmas tree. On the “safe” hard shoulder. I have investigated fatal collisions where recovery contractors have been struck whilst loading broken down vehicles onto recovery trucks. On the “safe” hard shoulder.

Turn that hard shoulder into a live lane, where you rely on drivers to adhere to lane closure warnings (in the event they even activate promptly), and it is a clear recipe for disaster. An absolutely ludicrous concept which will continue to cost lives.


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			I absolutely acknowledge the fact that collisions on motorways may largely be a result of significant driver error, however, that in no way absolves those responsible for approving the roll out of these horrific roads of blame. Human behaviour HAS to be a consideration at the design stage.

I speak as someone who has worked in and around motorways for over twenty years, and has investigated countless collisions on them. Anyone who has ever stood on a hard shoulder of a motorway and had traffic thundering by will tell you, categorically, that the hard shoulder is a scary place. I would go as far as saying they are the most dangerous part of the network. I will never forget watching a lorry driving through a 100m taper of illuminated cones, straight into the back of a liveried patrol car which itself was lit up like a Christmas tree. On the “safe” hard shoulder. I have investigated fatal collisions where recovery contractors have been struck whilst loading broken down vehicles onto recovery trucks. On the “safe” hard shoulder.

Turn that hard shoulder into a live lane, where you rely on drivers to adhere to lane closure warnings (in the event they even activate promptly), and it is a clear recipe for disaster. An absolutely ludicrous concept which will continue to cost lives.
		
Click to expand...

Is smart motorways step one in the automatic driving stage when that gets off the ground? So the cars should drive better than a human in some aspects


----------



## Billysboots (Feb 27, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Is smart motorways step one in the automatic driving stage when that gets off the ground? So the cars should drive better than a human in some aspects
		
Click to expand...

Possibly, but that day is so far off, if indeed it ever happens, that we are left with inherently unsafe roads in the meantime.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Feb 27, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			I absolutely acknowledge the fact that collisions on motorways may largely be a result of significant driver error, however, that in no way absolves those responsible for approving the roll out of these horrific roads of blame. Human behaviour HAS to be a consideration at the design stage.

I speak as someone who has worked in and around motorways for over twenty years, and has investigated countless collisions on them. Anyone who has ever stood on a hard shoulder of a motorway and had traffic thundering by will tell you, categorically, that the hard shoulder is a scary place. I would go as far as saying they are the most dangerous part of the network. I will never forget watching a lorry driving through a 100m taper of illuminated cones, straight into the back of a liveried patrol car which itself was lit up like a Christmas tree. On the “safe” hard shoulder. I have investigated fatal collisions where recovery contractors have been struck whilst loading broken down vehicles onto recovery trucks. On the “safe” hard shoulder.

Turn that hard shoulder into a live lane, where you rely on drivers to adhere to lane closure warnings (in the event they even activate promptly), and it is a clear recipe for disaster. An absolutely ludicrous concept which will continue to cost lives.
		
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the people who make these decisions don’t seem to listen to the people on the ground like you.
They see stats on a spread sheet not bodies in bags.
That’s the tragedy for me.
They should be scrapped ASAP.


----------



## Tashyboy (Feb 27, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			I absolutely acknowledge the fact that collisions on motorways may largely be a result of significant driver error, however, that in no way absolves those responsible for approving the roll out of these horrific roads of blame. Human behaviour HAS to be a consideration at the design stage.

I speak as someone who has worked in and around motorways for over twenty years, and has investigated countless collisions on them. Anyone who has ever stood on a hard shoulder of a motorway and had traffic thundering by will tell you, categorically, that the hard shoulder is a scary place. I would go as far as saying they are the most dangerous part of the network. I will never forget watching a lorry driving through a 100m taper of illuminated cones, straight into the back of a liveried patrol car which itself was lit up like a Christmas tree. On the “safe” hard shoulder. I have investigated fatal collisions where recovery contractors have been struck whilst loading broken down vehicles onto recovery trucks. On the “safe” hard shoulder.

Turn that hard shoulder into a live lane, where you rely on drivers to adhere to lane closure warnings (in the event they even activate promptly), and it is a clear recipe for disaster. An absolutely ludicrous concept which will continue to cost lives.
		
Click to expand...

An excellent and sobering read. What I cannot understand is when I have been on speed awareness  courses. They sing the praises of the safety of motorways re miles driven and accidents, yet " smart motorways" must account for a fair percentage of the fatalities. Thus the safety of motorways could and should be better.


----------



## Billysboots (Feb 27, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			Unfortunately the people who make these decisions don’t seem to listen to the people on the ground like you.
They see stats on a spread sheet not bodies in bags.
That’s the tragedy for me.
They should be scrapped ASAP.
		
Click to expand...

I am yet to speak to a single practitioner anywhere in the country who was part of any consultation process. 

These roads are totally reliant on driver behaviour. And as we have never taught people to drive in this country, merely how to pass a driving test, the potential for catastrophic consequences should have been clear from the outset.


----------



## Billysboots (Feb 27, 2021)

Tashyboy said:



			An excellent and sobering read. What I cannot understand is when I have been on speed awareness  courses. They sing the praises of the safety of motorways re miles driven and accidents, yet " smart motorways" must account for a fair percentage of the fatalities. Thus the safety of motorways could and should be better.
		
Click to expand...

Motorways should be the safest roads in the country. Everything is travelling in the same direction, after all.

But years of motorway overhead gantries warning of hazards ahead, only for there to be no hazard (the warning having not been promptly cleared) has resulted in deeply engrained complacency. We all see it - clear warning of a lane closure ahead which too many drivers simply ignore until they reach the hazard. The potential for disaster should have been clear from the very outset.

The word smart is as inappropriate as it could possibly be.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Feb 27, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			I am yet to speak to a single practitioner anywhere in the country who was part of any consultation process.

These roads are totally reliant on driver behaviour. And as we have never taught people to drive in this country, merely how to pass a driving test, the potential for catastrophic consequences should have been clear from the outset.
		
Click to expand...

Like a lot of things this relies on people watching CCTV then turning signs on , that a lot of drivers just ignore.!
Tech can solve many things but creates its own problems .
This is a bit of both 
But driving standards here are shocking imo.
But to save a bit of a traffic jam they put the general public in to much danger for my liking.


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 27, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			Motorways should be the safest roads in the country. Everything is travelling in the same direction, after all.

But years of motorway overhead gantries warning of hazards ahead, only for there to be no hazard (the warning having not been promptly cleared) has resulted in deeply engrained complacency. We all see it - clear warning of a lane closure ahead which too many drivers simply ignore until they reach the hazard. The potential for disaster should have been clear from the very outset.

The word smart is as inappropriate as it could possibly be.
		
Click to expand...

Trusting the public to do the right thing is always hard. Sticking to speed limits is an easy example 

Then you have different standards of what people deem acceptable condition to keep their cars in

Was it murph saying he only puts top brand tyres on his car . Their will be people with part worn or budget brands (not unsafe budget but part warn are)

Then some people I know just let their cars become rust buckets


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Feb 27, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			I absolutely acknowledge the fact that collisions on motorways may largely be a result of significant driver error, however, that in no way absolves those responsible for approving the roll out of these horrific roads of blame. Human behaviour HAS to be a consideration at the design stage.

I speak as someone who has worked in and around motorways for over twenty years, and has investigated countless collisions on them. Anyone who has ever stood on a hard shoulder of a motorway and had traffic thundering by will tell you, categorically, that the hard shoulder is a scary place. I would go as far as saying they are the most dangerous part of the network. I will never forget watching a lorry driving through a 100m taper of illuminated cones, straight into the back of a liveried patrol car which itself was lit up like a Christmas tree. On the “safe” hard shoulder. I have investigated fatal collisions where recovery contractors have been struck whilst loading broken down vehicles onto recovery trucks. On the “safe” hard shoulder.

Turn that hard shoulder into a live lane, where you rely on drivers to adhere to lane closure warnings (in the event they even activate promptly), and it is a clear recipe for disaster. An absolutely ludicrous concept which will continue to cost lives.
		
Click to expand...

Amen to that brother! 

The solution is not to keep adding more lanes, it is alternative forms of transport. Add more lanes and you encourage more cars on the motorways but when they come off the motorways our towns and cities don't have the capacity to cope with the additional vehicles.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 27, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			I am yet to speak to a single practitioner anywhere in the country who was part of any consultation process.

These roads are totally reliant on driver behaviour. *And as we have never taught people to drive in this country, merely how to pass a driving test,* the potential for catastrophic consequences should have been clear from the outset.
		
Click to expand...

The biggest issue of the lot, spot on.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 27, 2021)

drive4show said:



			Thanks. I'm surprised the stats say they are safer but I'm not surprised by the public perception.
		
Click to expand...

I'm not seeing any substance in that article to substantiate the claim, particularly any comparative stats.


----------



## jim8flog (Feb 27, 2021)

murphthemog said:



			If the M25 is an example, they are garbage. The speed limit is a random number generator, which has very little to do with traffic density, and a lot to do with raising money via the cameras.
		
Click to expand...

 on a lot of the M25 on the left hand side drivers do not even use the 2 out of 4 lanes even when they are completely empty.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 27, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			on a lot of the M25 on the left hand side drivers do not even use the 2 out of 4 lanes even when they are completely empty.
		
Click to expand...

Once pulled up alongside a driver in traffic in my working clothes on the firm’s bike and motioned to the driver to wind down his window. He seemed a little surprised and asked what the matter was. I asked him “Where did you get that sticker?” He started smiling. 

In the rear window, in the blue and white font of motorway signs, was a sticker that read ; M25 inside lane club. Visitors welcome. 

Turned out a mate of his had gone and had a batch made up.   Summed up the issue with motorway users quite succinctly.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 27, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			But thats the whole point, they're not meant to be approaching as the lane is supposed to be closed for some considerable distance, which is why I think the penalties for ignoring the lane closure signs shoudl be ramped up massively.
One other question. Dual carriagway A roads. 2 or 3 lanes, 70mph limit, never had hard shoulders. Whats the difference?
		
Click to expand...

That's fine when the lane is closed but not for the person who has just broken down.  How many seconds would you be happy to sit in your stationary car on the inside lane of a motorway.

To answer your question it's the volume of traffic and heavy goods vehicles. On most A roads and dual carriageways there is normally a grass verge/pavement to pull onto.


----------



## Billysboots (Feb 27, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			That's fine when the lane is closed but not for the person who has just broken down.  How many seconds would you be happy to sit in your stationary car on the inside lane of a motorway.
		
Click to expand...

Whenever I was sitting in a fully striped up, lit up patrol car on the hard shoulder I would spend my entire time with my eyes glued to the rear view mirror, looking as far back down the motorway as I could see. I never, ever, felt comfortable.

The thought of sitting in my own car in a live lane is not something I ever want to contemplate.


----------



## SammmeBee (Feb 27, 2021)

Lorries are the worst and should all be restricted to lane 1 only rather than pulling out and taking 7 miles to overtake someone, which causes everyone else to cram into the other lanes to try to get past them......


----------



## jim8flog (Feb 27, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			Once pulled up alongside a driver in traffic in my working clothes on the firm’s bike and motioned to the driver to wind down his window. He seemed a little surprised and asked what the matter was. I asked him “Where did you get that sticker?” He started smiling.

In the rear window, in the blue and white font of motorway signs, was a sticker that read ; M25 inside lane club. Visitors welcome.

Turned out a mate of his had gone and had a batch made up.   Summed up the issue with motorway users quite succinctly.
		
Click to expand...

  I always remember travelling home about 11 pm new years eve 2019. The M25 was absolutely empty.  I was in the nearside lane and was overtaken by someone on the extreme right lane on one of the 4 lane sections. He never moved over after passing me either.


----------



## SaintHacker (Feb 27, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			That's fine when the lane is closed but not for the person who has just broken down.  How many seconds would you be happy to sit in your stationary car on the inside lane of a motorway.
		
Click to expand...

I wouldnt,  I would be out of the car and over the barrier, even if that meant climbing over the seats and out the passenger side


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 27, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			I always remember travelling home about 11 pm new years eve 2019. The M25 was absolutely empty.  I was in the nearside lane and was overtaken by someone on the extreme right lane on one of the 4 lane sections. He never moved over after passing me either.
		
Click to expand...

Not right, but I have far less of an issue with that than having to go out to lane 3 or 4 to overtake a vehicle doing a solid 50mph in lane 2 or 3 of an empty motorway.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 27, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			I wouldnt,  I would be out of the car and over the barrier, even if that meant climbing over the seats and out the passenger side
		
Click to expand...

And in case you haven't seen the video, stay well back from the barrier.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Feb 27, 2021)

SammmeBee said:



			Lorries are the worst and should all be restricted to lane 1 only rather than pulling out and taking 7 miles to overtake someone, which causes everyone else to cram into the other lanes to try to get past them......
		
Click to expand...

And what about when there is no lorries about and lanes 1 and 2 are empty, and yet still the cars sit in lanes 3 and 4?


----------



## SammmeBee (Feb 27, 2021)

Bunkermagnet said:



			And what about when there is no lorries about and lanes 1 and 2 are empty, and yet still the cars sit in lanes 3 and 4?
		
Click to expand...

Doesn’t happen on the M25......


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Feb 27, 2021)

SammmeBee said:



			Doesn’t happen on the M25......
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps you cant see the inside 3 lanes from the 4th lane then


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Feb 27, 2021)

I love driving on the M25. Full of muppets in lanes 2, 3 & 4, you have a clear stress free run in lane 1 👍


----------



## Pants (Feb 27, 2021)

M25 quiet tonight.  No-one to be seen in lane 1.


----------



## DanFST (Feb 27, 2021)

jim8flog said:



			I always remember travelling home about 11 pm new years eve 2019. The M25 was absolutely empty.  I was in the nearside lane and was overtaken by someone on the extreme right lane on one of the 4 lane sections. He never moved over after passing me either.
		
Click to expand...

I do that. People are idiots and I want to be as far away as possible from them.

I'll sit there if its empty, unless someone is behind me.


----------



## USER1999 (Feb 28, 2021)

I don't often drive in lane 1. When I do, it is so badly rutted through hgv use that my car tramlines which doesn't feel safe, and probably induces wear into the car mechanicals.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 28, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			I wouldnt,  I would be out of the car and over the barrier, even if that meant climbing over the seats and out the passenger side
		
Click to expand...

So you agree breaking down on a smart motorway is extremely dangerous.  Imagine if it was a disabled or frail person, what chance would they have?


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 28, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			So you agree breaking down on a smart motorway is extremely dangerous.  Imagine if it was a disabled or frail person, what chance would they have?
		
Click to expand...

Everything is more dangerous for certain people it's impossible to make safer for all 

Did you know what the protocol is for disabled customers if fire breaks out on a tube station?

They are to be escorted to behind a firedoor and told the fire service will be briefed of your location

Not safe but in emergency you can't make everything fully safe to same levels for everyone


----------



## SaintHacker (Feb 28, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			So you agree breaking down on a smart motorway is extremely dangerous.  Imagine if it was a disabled or frail person, what chance would they have?
		
Click to expand...

I agree that breaking down on any road could be dangerous


----------



## SaintHacker (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Everything is more dangerous for certain people it's impossible to make safer for all

Did you know what the protocol is for disabled customers if fire breaks out on a tube station?

They are to be escorted to behind a firedoor and told the fire service will be briefed of your location

Not safe but in emergency you can't make everything fully safe to same levels for everyone
		
Click to expand...

Yep. We are told in an evacuation situation get as many out as possible as quickly as possible, to the point of leaving a wheelchair user in the coach/bus if it puts me at risk getting them out. Harsh but it is what it is. That said we're also taught if it catches fire in a tunnel to drive it out. Yeah, ok then...😱🤣


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Everything is more dangerous for certain people it's impossible to make safer for all

Did you know what the protocol is for disabled customers if fire breaks out on a tube station?

They are to be escorted to behind a firedoor and told the fire service will be briefed of your location

Not safe but in emergency you can't make everything fully safe to same levels for everyone
		
Click to expand...


I think you are missing the point that the move to 'smart' motorways is making them a lot less safe than they already are...
A step, therefore, in the wrong direction... IMHO...


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 28, 2021)

MegaSteve said:



			I think you are missing the point that the move to 'smart' motorways is making them a lot less safe than they already are...
A step, therefore, in the wrong direction... IMHO...
		
Click to expand...

I'd argue it's not the smart motorways that have made them less safe

It's a combination of increased driver numbers meaning more accidents 
A decrease in drivers skill levels 
A lax attuide to speeding

The motorways would work perfectly fine if people did


How often do you see it.. 800 yards lane closure .. people form a nice queue to get over ... Then you get idiots bombing down until the last second


----------



## MegaSteve (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			I'd argue it's not the smart motorways that have made them less safe

It's a combination of increased driver numbers meaning more accidents
A decrease in drivers skill levels
A lax attuide to speeding

The motorways would work perfectly fine if people did


How often do you see it.. 800 yards lane closure .. people form a nice queue to get over ... Then you get idiots bombing down until the last second
		
Click to expand...


There's the thing... Life ain't like that... If it was we'd all be scratch golfers...
If we never dropped owt we wouldn't have the need for safety boots in the workplace...
If it don't fit the end user it's not likely to be safe...
Human nature won't change so pointless to expect it to...


----------



## USER1999 (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			I'd argue it's not the smart motorways that have made them less safe

It's a combination of increased driver numbers meaning more accidents
A decrease in drivers skill levels
A lax attuide to speeding

The motorways would work perfectly fine if people did


How often do you see it.. 800 yards lane closure .. people form a nice queue to get over ... Then you get idiots bombing down until the last second
		
Click to expand...

Been brought up before, but why does anyone pull over with 800 yards to go. Everyone should go up to the point at which their lanes closes. What you describe above would be impossible.

No one is right on this. All lanes should be used til they close, and in cueing traffic, no one should be driving in a lane that will close, at an unsuitable speed.


----------



## funkycoldmedina (Feb 28, 2021)

Do they work in other countries? I have a vague recollection of them being used for years in Germany.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			The motorways would work perfectly fine if people did

*How often do you see it.. 800 yards lane closure .. people form a nice queue to get over ... Then you get idiots bombing down until the last second*

Click to expand...

Yup, if only people used the motorways correctly... 

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/driving-advice/zip-merging/


----------



## Imurg (Feb 28, 2021)

I think the biggest issue in driving on a types of road is a lack of awareness.
What's your first thought when you see a red X on a motorway..?


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 28, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			Yup, if only people used the motorways correctly... 

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/driving-advice/zip-merging/

Click to expand...

Lots of the word "could" used there

Expected something more black and white from your background.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 28, 2021)

Imurg said:



			I think the biggest issue in driving on a types of road is a lack of awareness.
What's your first thought when you see a red X on a motorway..?
		
Click to expand...

How did I miss the lane ahead closed arrow indicator on the previous gantries?


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 28, 2021)

Imurg said:



			I think the biggest issue in driving on a types of road is a lack of awareness.
What's your first thought when you see a red X on a motorway..?
		
Click to expand...

To me, lane closed don't use that lane


----------



## Imurg (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			To me, lane closed don't use that lane
		
Click to expand...

How about...
Is there a vehicle in that lane that needs to get into mine? Do I need to change lanes to let them in or can I back off a touch.?
And most people don't look far enough ahead and anticipate
Seeing a lorry change from the X lane to yours probably means everything slowing down. So backing off early keeps you'd distance
Too many distractions in the cabin?
Simply not concentrating enough?
All this and more....


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 28, 2021)

Imurg said:



			How about...
Is there a vehicle in that lane that needs to get into mine? Do I need to change lanes to let them in or can I back off a touch.?
And most people don't look far enough ahead and anticipate
Seeing a lorry change from the X lane to yours probably means everything slowing down. So backing off early keeps you'd distance
Too many distractions in the cabin?
Simply not concentrating enough?
All this and more....
		
Click to expand...

Which id say is what people do when they leave the lane early and not the last min

Reading the road 

Even that zip merge article finished with 

"Despite the studies, opinions still differ on zip-merging, please let us know in the comments what you think best practice should be and take our poll so we can find out what the majority thinks."


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Which id say is what people do when they leave the lane early and not the last min

Reading the road

Even that zip merge article finished with

"Despite the studies, opinions still differ on zip-merging, please let us know in the comments what you think best practice should be and take our poll so we can find out what the majority thinks."
		
Click to expand...

There are two threads on this forum that never end well and just end up going around in circles. Dress code and whether to merge early or late.

Get out now, now I tell you


----------



## pauljames87 (Feb 28, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			There are two threads on this forum that never end well and just end up going around in circles. Dress code and whether to merge early or late.

Get out now, now I tell you 

Click to expand...

I'll wait until the last min.. it will go better 🤔🤣


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Everything is more dangerous for certain people it's impossible to make safer for all

Did you know what the protocol is for disabled customers if fire breaks out on a tube station?

They are to be escorted to behind a firedoor and told the fire service will be briefed of your location

Not safe but in emergency you can't make everything fully safe to same levels for everyone
		
Click to expand...

Breaking down in a lane where traffic is driving at 70 plus mph is horribly unsafe.  Smart motorways with no hard shoulder are dangerous and I just can't see how anyone can defend it.


----------



## SocketRocket (Feb 28, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			I agree that breaking down on any road could be dangerous
		
Click to expand...

And Smart Motorways are the most dangerous.  Stupid design.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Lots of the word "could" used there

Expected something more black and white from your background.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly how many times is the word "could" used in the article?

The headline is "Why drivers who merge at the last minute are right" ; that's pretty black & white.

The Highway Code says "*Merging in turn is recommended* but only if safe and appropriate *when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed*, e.g. *when approaching road works* or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.”  That's pretty black & white as well.

Here's some more articles that explain it;

https://www.theorytestpro.co.uk/posts/zip-merging-need-learn/

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/105986/70-per-cent-of-drivers-don-t-know-how-to-merge-in-turn

https://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/legal/merge-in-turn

https://blog.greenflag.com/2019/the-zip-merging-debate/

All pretty black & white, all the same conclusion.

Perhaps you could provide us a link that shows you should dive into the one open lane the moment you see the signs & settle the debate?


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Feb 28, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			It's the same with motorways in general though isn't it

Statistics show the safest roads and less accidents

However when their is an accident it's huge!!!!

Like superman says flying is statically the safest way to travel... But when a plane has a problem it's headline news ain't it! Don't get that if a bus catches fire and everyone just walks off to safety
		
Click to expand...

Exactly. There are statistics and there are statistics.
"Flying is the safest mode of transport" is not necessary true.
Judged on miles travelled, - yes(?)
Judged on  the number of journeys made - No (?)


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			Exactly how many times is the word "could" used in the article?

The headline is "Why drivers who merge at the last minute are right" ; that's pretty black & white.

The Highway Code says "*Merging in turn is recommended* but only if safe and appropriate *when vehicles are travelling at a very low speed*, e.g. *when approaching road works* or a road traffic incident. It is not recommended at high speed.”  That's pretty black & white as well.

Here's some more articles that explain it;

https://www.theorytestpro.co.uk/posts/zip-merging-need-learn/

https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/105986/70-per-cent-of-drivers-don-t-know-how-to-merge-in-turn

https://www.theaa.com/driving-advice/legal/merge-in-turn

https://blog.greenflag.com/2019/the-zip-merging-debate/

All pretty black & white, all the same conclusion.

Perhaps you could provide us a link that shows you should dive into the one open lane the moment you see the signs & settle the debate?
		
Click to expand...

I stand by my original statement 

You get people forming an orderly queue and then idiots bombing down to the last second. I'e not even slowing down

"Zip" merging or not you know in 800 yards you got to get over why are you still traveling at 70 until then?


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Breaking down in a lane where traffic is driving at 70 plus mph is horribly unsafe.  Smart motorways with no hard shoulder are dangerous and I just can't see how anyone can defend it.
		
Click to expand...

Because people don't like change. 

Are they more dangerous than normal motorways?
Statistically, overall, the evidence suggests not: in figures analysed by the Department for Transport between 2015 and 2018, the death toll on smart motorways by traffic volume has been slightly lower than on conventional motorways, possibly because speeds are often limited.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/19/what-are-smart-motorways-and-are-they-safe

Design wise they aren't unsafe. However you can't account for human error.


----------



## SaintHacker (Mar 1, 2021)

It will be interesting to see the stats in a few years, assuming they don't can the whole thing. As far as I'm aware the older 'upgraded' motorways, M25, M42 are controlled by a human who relies on seeing incidents on a cctv screen. The newer ones that are being built, M6 M3 M27 are computer ontrolled. The computer constantly monitors traffic flow and if it senses a problem does something about it far quicker than a human could. But as with anything it doesn't matter what the technology is it amostly comes down to driver behaviour.

On a slightly different note I had a good chat with a road engineer a few years ago. His answer to solve problems is very simple, bring the speed limits down, not up. Sounds mad? He said to me if you bring the speed down to say 50mph, the stopping gaps reduce to almost half what you need at 70-80mph, thus you can get a lot more traffic through a given length of road. Also people will be far more inclined to use lane 1 as they won't have the problem of getting stuck behind an HGV doing 56 and trying to get out into a lane moving at 70+ to get round it. 
Makes a lot of sense when you think about it, it'll never catch on...


----------



## Blue in Munich (Mar 1, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			It will be interesting to see the stats in a few years, assuming they don't can the whole thing. As far as I'm aware the older 'upgraded' motorways, M25, M42 are controlled by a human who relies on seeing incidents on a cctv screen. The newer ones that are being built, M6 M3 M27 are computer ontrolled. The computer constantly monitors traffic flow and if it senses a problem does something about it far quicker than a human could. But as with anything it doesn't matter what the technology is it amostly comes down to driver behaviour.

On a slightly different note I had a good chat with a road engineer a few years ago. His answer to solve problems is very simple, bring the speed limits down, not up. Sounds mad? He said to me *if you bring the speed down to say 50mph,* the stopping gaps reduce to almost half what you need at 70-80mph, thus you can get a lot more traffic through a given length of road. Also people will be far more inclined to use lane 1 as they won't have the problem of getting stuck behind an HGV doing 56 and trying to get out into a lane moving at 70+ to get round it.
Makes a lot of sense when you think about it, it'll never catch on...
		
Click to expand...

You've only got to look at how well, generally, traffic flows in sections of motorways controlled by average speed cameras to see how that could work.  Huge fuel savings as well in a lot of instances.  Not sure I buy the more traffic argument as it will take longer to get traffic through a section, unless he was talking about counting traffic past a point, in which case I see it.

Now, hands up all those who want to turn a 5 hour 350 mile journey into a 7 hour one...?  And there is your issue.


----------



## SaintHacker (Mar 1, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			You've only got to look at how well, generally, traffic flows in sections of motorways controlled by average speed cameras to see how that could work.  Huge fuel savings as well in a lot of instances.  Not sure I buy the more traffic argument as it will take longer to get traffic through a section, unless he was talking about counting traffic past a point, in which case I see it.

Now, hands up all those who want to turn a 5 hour 350 mile journey into a 7 hour one...?  And there is your issue.
		
Click to expand...

Obviously it wouldn't work all the time, who in there righ mind is going to sit at 55 on an empty motorway at 2am? Not me!. But he reckoned for rush hours and generally busier roads (M25 anyone?) you'd find your journey time would actually come down as you'd be doing a constant 55, instead of 75,40,25,stop,30,stop,40,70 etc etc
thats the theory anyway, it will never work as some idiot will come along and mess it all up as usual


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Mar 1, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			It will be interesting to see the stats in a few years, assuming they don't can the whole thing. As far as I'm aware the older 'upgraded' motorways, M25, M42 are controlled by a human who relies on seeing incidents on a cctv screen. The newer ones that are being built, M6 M3 M27 are computer ontrolled. The computer constantly monitors traffic flow and if it senses a problem does something about it far quicker than a human could. But as with anything it doesn't matter what the technology is it amostly comes down to driver behaviour.

On a slightly different note I had a good chat with a road engineer a few years ago. His answer to solve problems is very simple, bring the speed limits down, not up. Sounds mad? He said to me if you bring the speed down to say 50mph, the stopping gaps reduce to almost half what you need at 70-80mph, thus you can get a lot more traffic through a given length of road. Also people will be far more inclined to use lane 1 as they won't have the problem of getting stuck behind an HGV doing 56 and trying to get out into a lane moving at 70+ to get round it.
Makes a lot of sense when you think about it, it'll never catch on...
		
Click to expand...

Did in the States, didn't it?     IIRC the general speed limit is 55, where ours is 70.
I'm not 100% sure on that, but no doubt someone here knows for certain.
The argument  above makes sense to me.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Mar 1, 2021)

Swinglowandslow said:



			Did in the States, didn't it?     IIRC the general speed limit is 55, where ours is 70.
I'm not 100% sure on that, but no doubt someone here knows for certain.
The argument  above makes sense to me.
		
Click to expand...

IIRC the 55mph speed limit was brought in because of the oil embargo in the 70's to reduce consumption; nothing to do with free flow or safety.  And they enforce it rigidly, unlike the latitude here.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

Swinglowandslow said:



			Did in the States, didn't it?     IIRC the general speed limit is 55, where ours is 70.
I'm not 100% sure on that, but no doubt someone here knows for certain.
The argument  above makes sense to me.
		
Click to expand...


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

Swinglowandslow said:



			Did in the States, didn't it?     IIRC the general speed limit is 55, where ours is 70.
I'm not 100% sure on that, but no doubt someone here knows for certain.
The argument  above makes sense to me.
		
Click to expand...

The speed limits in the US are strict.
But they change so much as your driving you need your wits about you they can change from 55 mph to 30 back to 55 then 40.
It’s very easy to get caught out.
But the changes usually make sense , schools, small town etc.

There’s a 50mph limit on M62 junction with M6 causes a 7 mile tailback every morning pre COVID.
So not to sure of the 50 mph argument.
But it might work in smaller pinch points.


----------



## Robster59 (Mar 1, 2021)

I have never liked motorways where you don't have a permanent hard shoulder.  People on motorways tend to drift into a different world as they are going for miles and miles at the same speed.  Cruise control compounds this situation.  Their mind drifts and they don't pay attention to road signs.  I've seen that often in my travels.
In my company, something like this would never have got through our Risk Assessment process.  We work on fatalities every x thousand years.  Divide that by the number of installations (in our case) and then that gives you an indication of the potential of death.  On a motorway it just takes one person out of hundreds potentially passing a stricken vehicle not to be paying attention, and you have an accident waiting to happen.
There are too many variables to make it safe.  The use of the term "smart motorways" is an oxymoron in my opinion.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

Robster59 said:



			I have never liked motorways where you don't have a permanent hard shoulder.  People on motorways tend to drift into a different world as they are going for miles and miles at the same speed.  Cruise control compounds this situation.  Their mind drifts and they don't pay attention to road signs.  I've seen that often in my travels.
In my company, something like this would never have got through our Risk Assessment process.  We work on fatalities every x thousand years.  Divide that by the number of installations (in our case) and then that gives you an indication of the potential of death.  On a motorway it just takes one person out of hundreds potentially passing a stricken vehicle not to be paying attention, and you have an accident waiting to happen.
There are too many variables to make it safe.  The use of the term "smart motorways" is an oxymoron in my opinion.
		
Click to expand...

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/safety-on-smart-motorways

An actual risk assessment or what we think it would be?

Evidence indicates that smart motorways are helping to improve safety. The first nine of the latest generation of smart motorways have reduced casualty rates by more than 25 per cent.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Mar 1, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			It will be interesting to see the stats in a few years, assuming they don't can the whole thing. As far as I'm aware the older 'upgraded' motorways, M25, M42 are controlled by a human who relies on seeing incidents on a cctv screen. The newer ones that are being built, M6 M3 M27 are computer ontrolled. The computer constantly monitors traffic flow and if it senses a problem does something about it far quicker than a human could. But as with anything it doesn't matter what the technology is it amostly comes down to driver behaviour.

On a slightly different note I had a good chat with a road engineer a few years ago. His answer to solve problems is very simple, bring the speed limits down, not up. Sounds mad? He said to me if you bring the speed down to say 50mph, the stopping gaps reduce to almost half what you need at 70-80mph, thus you can get a lot more traffic through a given length of road. Also people will be far more inclined to use lane 1 as they won't have the problem of getting stuck behind an HGV doing 56 and trying to get out into a lane moving at 70+ to get round it.
Makes a lot of sense when you think about it, it'll never catch on...
		
Click to expand...

There is a pinch point south of Newcastle, A1 Western Bypass going past the Angel of the North, if anyone is interested. It goes past the Angel, Metro Centre, Team Valley Trading Estate and beyond. It was widened a few years ago and whilst that was happening they reduced the limit to 50mph. When it was finished they kept the limit to 50mph. I don't use it regularly but when I do go through it it seems to work well, the traffic flows. 

There is another pinch point north of the city, near Gosforth, and the same is happening. I can see that being retained as well as that is working so far.

It feels painful to travel at that speed so I would not want the whole network limited that way but I agree with your engineer that it works well. No severe braking, no concertina effect so you keep moving rather than the stop start that blights hotspots.


----------



## SaintHacker (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



https://www.gov.uk/government/news/safety-on-smart-motorways

An actual risk assessment or what we think it would be?

Evidence indicates that smart motorways are helping to improve safety. The first nine of the latest generation of smart motorways have reduced casualty rates by more than 25 per cent.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



https://www.gov.uk/government/news/safety-on-smart-motorways

An actual risk assessment or what we think it would be?

Evidence indicates that smart motorways are helping to improve safety. The first nine of the latest generation of smart motorways have reduced casualty rates by more than 25 per cent.
		
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ys-present-ongoing-risk-of-death-says-coroner

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-referred-to-cps-over-m1-smart-motorway-death

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/new...p-police-commissioner-after-m1-deaths-3110187

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/ne...hs-unavoidable-citys-smart-motorways-19908121

Maybe it's not exactly as you suggest.  Using percentages of accidents to support a no hard shoulder policy is spurious data.  Any deaths due to vehicles breaking down in the inside lane is unacceptable and offsetting these lives against gains in traffic flow is not acceptable.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ys-present-ongoing-risk-of-death-says-coroner

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-referred-to-cps-over-m1-smart-motorway-death

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/new...p-police-commissioner-after-m1-deaths-3110187

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/ne...hs-unavoidable-citys-smart-motorways-19908121

Maybe it's not exactly as you suggest.  Using percentages of accidents to support a no hard shoulder policy is spurious data.  Any deaths due to vehicles breaking down in the inside lane is unacceptable and offsetting these lives against gains in traffic flow is not acceptable.
		
Click to expand...

Misread the entire point tho. Rob said it wouldn't get past risk assessment

However the risk assessment proved safer than current 

Didn't say it meant they were 100% safer ...

Plus when does the blame for break downs get put more on those who don't maintain their cars? Poor state of repair .. running out of fuel..

Blow outs and punctures are two of the few random chances but even punctures can be down to poor condition tyres


----------



## Imurg (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



https://www.gov.uk/government/news/safety-on-smart-motorways

An actual risk assessment or what we think it would be?

Evidence indicates that smart motorways are helping to improve safety. The first nine of the latest generation of smart motorways have reduced casualty rates by more than 25 per cent.
		
Click to expand...

I dislike data that uses "killed or seriously injured"....
More than 100 KSI on hard shoulders every year  - so what is it?
1 killed and 99 serious injuries? Still 1 too many killed but its not a big number.
Or is it 50:50..?
They must have the actual numbers...print them.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

Imurg said:



			I dislike data that uses "killed or seriously injured"....
More than 100 KSI on hard shoulders every year  - so what is it?
1 killed and 99 serious injuries? Still 1 too many killed but its not a big number.
Or is it 50:50..?
They must have the actual numbers...print them.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Misread the entire point tho. Rob said it wouldn't get past risk assessment

However the risk assessment proved safer than current

Didn't say it meant they were 100% safer ...

Plus when does the blame for break downs get put more on those who don't maintain their cars? Poor state of repair .. running out of fuel..

Blow outs and punctures are two of the few random chances but even punctures can be down to poor condition tyres
		
Click to expand...

What a weak argument to protect the unprotectable.  Do you really believe that!


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			What a weak argument to protect the unprotectable.  Do you really believe that!
		
Click to expand...

How can you not? A lot newer cars on the road , due to various reasons (company cars, leasing, people paying things on finance) meaning less break downs overall 

Better maintained roads (repairing pot holes) and kept clean of debris means less punctures 

Reducing risk overall 

All these figures will have come into play


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

https://www.shponline.co.uk/road-safety/how-safe-are-smart-motorways/

The near misses since smart motorways were installed back up a lack of education on the subject 

As the poll says only 48% 

More needs to be done to educate in use of anything new..


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			How can you not? A lot newer cars on the road , due to various reasons (company cars, leasing, people paying things on finance) meaning less break downs overall

Better maintained roads (repairing pot holes) and kept clean of debris means less punctures

Reducing risk overall

All these figures will have come into play
		
Click to expand...

So someone gets a puncture, a juggernaut ploughs into them and it's their fault. Really!


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			So someone gets a puncture, a juggernaut ploughs into them and it's their fault. Really!
		
Click to expand...

Feel free to completely twist the discussion to suit your agenda ..

🙄


----------



## Imurg (Mar 1, 2021)

Apart from the obvious difference of having extra lanes, driving on a Smart motorway with all lanes open is little different to driving on a dual carriageway with no hard shoulder.
If you break down you face the same scenario.
The speed limits are the same, the dangers are the same.
There's 1 difference 
Smart motorways are being monitored and advance warning, by means of signs or speed limit changes, is given to give people time to react.
Who's watching the dual carriageways..?
Do we junk them too?


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Feel free to completely twist the discussion to suit your agenda ..

🙄
		
Click to expand...

That's what you intimated.  If you realise it was the wrong thing to say then it's OK to take it back.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			That's what you intimated.  If you realise it was the wrong thing to say then it's OK to take it back.
		
Click to expand...

.https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-n...-are-the-top-cause-of-car-breakdown-call-outs

Would you shift the Blame to the car industry? Removing the spare wheel from cars .. (progress and cost saving much like smart motorways)

If somebody changed their wheel on the hard shoulder opposed to waiting for a break down van does that not reduce the risk of being hit?

Change is a balance of risk and cost


----------



## Imurg (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			.https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-n...-are-the-top-cause-of-car-breakdown-call-outs

Would you shift the Blame to the car industry? Removing the spare wheel from cars .. (progress and cost saving much like smart motorways)

If somebody changed their wheel on the hard shoulder opposed to waiting for a break down van does that not reduce the risk of being hit?

Change is a balance of risk and cost
		
Click to expand...

Changing a wheel on the hard shoulder is the last thing you should be doing..


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

Imurg said:



			Changing a wheel on the hard shoulder is the last thing you should be doing..
		
Click to expand...

How many people do you see doing it tho before carrying on their journey? With the warning triangle behind 

But your right it shouldn't be done, you should just call the aa (or other company)


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

Imurg said:



			Apart from the obvious difference of having extra lanes, driving on a Smart motorway with all lanes open is little different to driving on a dual carriageway with no hard shoulder.
If you break down you face the same scenario.
The speed limits are the same, the dangers are the same.
There's 1 difference
Smart motorways are being monitored and advance warning, by means of signs or speed limit changes, is given to give people time to react.
Who's watching the dual carriageways..?
Do we junk them too?
		
Click to expand...

Most dual carriageways have grass shoulders/ pavements so it's possible to get off the carriageway.  The traffic flows tend to be lower.  There is a chance of someone running into you on them and it's not an ideal situation. I would suggest any new dual carriageways should include a safety lane.

The issue with smart motorways is the danger being designed into them with full understanding of the danger they give.  The M4 is currently being converted between Reading and Heathrow with pull in areas still one and a half miles apart.  This is dangerous.


----------



## DanFST (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			How many people do you see doing it tho before carrying on their journey? With the warning triangle behind

But your right it shouldn't be done, you should just call the aa (or other company)
		
Click to expand...


Just call the police. 

They'll tow you to somewhere safe off the next exit.


----------



## DanFST (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			The M4 is currently being converted between Reading and Heathrow with pull in areas still one and a half miles apart.  This is dangerous.
		
Click to expand...

Why?

Data please.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

DanFST said:



			Just call the police.

They'll tow you to somewhere safe off the next exit.
		
Click to expand...

Has never accured to me

The one time it happened to me I was in process of having two premium banks so had rac with and aa with the other so called them both and raced them to my location 

Ironically cancelled one as the other said was 10 mins away and the cancelled one showed up first 

Had a full size spare in that car which left to them to fix then carried on


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

DanFST said:



			Why?

Data please.
		
Click to expand...

This is what gets me. Fair enough they seem unsafe and people's opinions they are entitled it view like that

But actual data doesn't back up the claim

The world is data driven after all


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

DanFST said:



			Why?

Data please.
		
Click to expand...

Read the links I posted earlier. Anyhow it doesn't need data to prove something's dangerous. As I have pointed out earlier, how many seconds would you feel safe broken down on the inside lane of a smart motorway.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Has never accured to me

The one time it happened to me I was in process of having two premium banks so had rac with and aa with the other so called them both and raced them to my location

Ironically cancelled one as the other said was 10 mins away and the cancelled one showed up first

Had a full size spare in that car which left to them to fix then carried on
		
Click to expand...

Had you not been maintaining the tyres?


----------



## DanFST (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Anyhow it doesn't need data to prove something's dangerous.
		
Click to expand...

That's where you're objectively wrong.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Had you not been maintaining the tyres?
		
Click to expand...

Car was 1 month old and the road hadn't been maintained (as mentioned in another post) hit debree in the snow and caused a flat 

But feel free to use for your agenda socket....


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			This is what gets me. Fair enough they seem unsafe and people's opinions they are entitled it view like that

But actual data doesn't back up the claim

The world is data driven after all
		
Click to expand...

Your world may be data driven but I've got a head between my shoulders and am quite capable of assessing when a risk is unacceptable. Data won't save your life when your broken down on a motorway.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Your world may be data driven but I've got a head between my shoulders and am quite capable of assessing when a risk is unacceptable. Data won't save your life when your broken down on a motorway.
		
Click to expand...

Why hasn't the department of transport approached you then? If in your expert opinion is so highly regarded?

Or is it simply just an opinion that has no data to back it up and it's just a perceived opinion on safety?

If you have data that fully backs it up that's fine then you actually have a point .. but so far the data doesn't back up any part of what you have said.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Why hasn't the department of transport approached you then? If in your expert opinion is so highly regarded?

Or is it simply just an opinion that has no data to back it up and it's just a perceived opinion on safety?

If you have data that fully backs it up that's fine then you actually have a point .. but so far the data doesn't back up any part of what you have said.
		
Click to expand...

Read the links I sent you again where professionals have pointed out the dangers of smart motorways.

Sticking pins in my eyes is dangerous but I don't need to study data to stop me doing it.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 1, 2021)

Imurg said:



			I think the biggest issue in driving on a types of road is a lack of awareness.
*What's your first thought when you see a red X on a motorway..?*

Click to expand...

Check mirrors... Slow down...


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Read the links I sent you again where professionals have pointed out the dangers of smart motorways.
		
Click to expand...

A very much cost Vs risk balance which is at the forefront of all progress 

Ideal world you would have what 5 lane motorway with a hard shoulder 

But people need education on smart motorways ..even the transport minister says as much ...

Very few people know every 1.5 miles is an emergency area

These debates have been going on for years .. and will forever .. progress , cost Vs risk

When they removed the guard from trains they said it would increase to customers getting caught in doors and being dragged ..

They will have the same discussions when driverless trains happen one day with the tech to detect people caught in doors .. some will say it's safer to keep it staffed forever ..

Driverless cars in the future people will be saying it's safer for humans to be in charge .. but the roll out of smart motorways are proving humans to be the factor that is making them the most unsafe


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 1, 2021)

DanFST said:



			Why?

Data please.
		
Click to expand...


A world driven by data... A frightening thought indeed...
If you want a complete and utter Horlicks involve an algorithm ... IMHO of course...


----------



## Patster1969 (Mar 1, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			IIRC the 55mph speed limit was brought in because of the oil embargo in the 70's to reduce consumption; nothing to do with free flow or safety.  And they enforce it rigidly, unlike the latitude here.
		
Click to expand...

I love driving in the States - always find it very stress free on the freeways (apart from driving through LA & NY at rush hour and as long as you have a satnav). Cruise control to 55 and point it at the horizon. 
I always find I'm slightly more awake/vigilant when I'm driving there though because you get overtaken on both sides - the wife hates it


----------



## Blue in Munich (Mar 1, 2021)

Imurg said:



			I dislike data that uses "killed or seriously injured"....
More than 100 KSI on hard shoulders every year  - so what is it?
1 killed and 99 serious injuries? Still 1 too many killed but its not a big number.
Or is it 50:50..?
They must have the actual numbers...print them.
		
Click to expand...

Killed: Human casualties who sustained injuries which caused death less than 30 days (before 1954, about two months) after the accident. Confirmed suicides are excluded.

Serious injury: An injury for which a person is detained in hospital as an “in-patient”, or any of the following injuries whether or not they are detained in hospital: fractures, concussion, internal injuries, crushings, burns (excluding friction burns), severe cuts, severe general shock requiring medical treatment and injuries causing death 30 or more days after the accident. An injured casualty is recorded as seriously or slightly injured by the police on the basis of information available within a short time of the accident. This generally will not reflect the results of a medical examination, but may be influenced according to whether the casualty is hospitalised or not. Hospitalisation procedures will vary regionally.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...rted-road-casualties-gb-notes-definitions.pdf

There's a reason why they lump the two in together for accident analysis & prevention purposes; basically any accident with sufficient force involved to cause a serious injury has the capability to be fatal.  The circumstances that led to the death may be related to other factors.  Take two practically identical RTA's at the same location, resulting in the same injuries; the first proves fatal, the second only results in serious injury.  The reason the first victim died is because the air ambulance was dealing with another issue & was unavailable & the land ambulance took too long to get there to provide the necessary life saving care.  The second victim survived because the air ambulance was available & performed the critical care at the side of the road not available to the first victim.  Therefore, for the purposes of accident investigation & prevention, as per the HA's duty under the Road Traffic Act, the starting point for numbers is killed and seriously injured in the one bracket.  It avoids the scenario whereby a junction with 3 fatalities  & 1 seriously injured is prioritised over a junction with no fatalities but 20 serious injuries.

The figures will be available to exactly which happened where (killed or seriously injured), but for the initial investigations KSI works better in identifying the trouble spots.  Damage only RTA's are never counted for these purposes as there is no liability to report them to the police.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

MegaSteve said:



			A world driven by data... A frightening thought indeed...
If you want a complete and utter Horlicks involve an algorithm ... IMHO of course...
		
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I think.
The families of people killed on these smart motorways would think the data is wrong.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			This is exactly what I think.
The families of people killed on these smart motorways would think the data is wrong.
		
Click to expand...

That's the same of any family tho isn't it, if a member of your family died on a normal motorway on the hard shoulder there would still be blame

Every death is tragic , but also with every death blame is somewhere and part of grief is blame isn't it? (Under anger I'd say)

We had blame with tiger last week 

First it was he drunk,was he high , was he speeding 

All looking for blame to something tragic


----------



## patricks148 (Mar 1, 2021)

TBH this is the first  time i've even heard of Smart Motorways. up here Dual carridgeways are few and far between let alone a motorway, i've got to drive for 3 hours before we even have any motorways


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			That's the same of any family tho isn't it, if a member of your family died on a normal motorway on the hard shoulder there would still be blame

Every death is tragic , but also with every death blame is somewhere and part of grief is blame isn't it? (Under anger I'd say)

We had blame with tiger last week

First it was he drunk,was he high , was he speeding

All looking for blame to something tragic
		
Click to expand...

If you break down on a motorway you go on the hard shoulder!
If you break down on a smart motorway your in a live lane .
That’s not smart imo.

That just proved tiger is a poor driver the lack of any other reason.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

patricks148 said:



			TBH this is the first  time i've even heard of Smart Motorways. up here Dual carridgeways are few and far between let alone a motorway, i've got to drive for 3 hours before we even have any motorways
		
Click to expand...

Lucky you.


----------



## Imurg (Mar 1, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			Killed: Human casualties who sustained injuries which caused death less than 30 days (before 1954, about two months) after the accident. Confirmed suicides are excluded.

Serious injury: An injury for which a person is detained in hospital as an “in-patient”, or any of the following injuries whether or not they are detained in hospital: fractures, concussion, internal injuries, crushings, burns (excluding friction burns), severe cuts, severe general shock requiring medical treatment and injuries causing death 30 or more days after the accident. An injured casualty is recorded as seriously or slightly injured by the police on the basis of information available within a short time of the accident. This generally will not reflect the results of a medical examination, but may be influenced according to whether the casualty is hospitalised or not. Hospitalisation procedures will vary regionally.

https://assets.publishing.service.g...rted-road-casualties-gb-notes-definitions.pdf

There's a reason why they lump the two in together for accident analysis & prevention purposes; basically any accident with sufficient force involved to cause a serious injury has the capability to be fatal.  The circumstances that led to the death may be related to other factors.  Take two practically identical RTA's at the same location, resulting in the same injuries; the first proves fatal, the second only results in serious injury.  The reason the first victim died is because the air ambulance was dealing with another issue & was unavailable & the land ambulance took too long to get there to provide the necessary life saving care.  The second victim survived because the air ambulance was available & performed the critical care at the side of the road not available to the first victim.  Therefore, for the purposes of accident investigation & prevention, as per the HA's duty under the Road Traffic Act, the starting point for numbers is killed and seriously injured in the one bracket.  It avoids the scenario whereby a junction with 3 fatalities  & 1 seriously injured is prioritised over a junction with no fatalities but 20 serious injuries.

The figures will be available to exactly which happened where (killed or seriously injured), but for the initial investigations KSI works better in identifying the trouble spots.  Damage only RTA's are never counted for these purposes as there is no liability to report them to the police.
		
Click to expand...

Completely understand why they're lumped together in the way you've outlined - makes perfect sense.
My beef is that when they publish reports to the general public saying, for example, why such and such has been done i always feel they've been lazy if they don't print the actual numbers. Just in this report - more than a hundred KSI...well, how many more.? Was it 101 or 110 or more?
I guess it's a random irritation


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			If you break down on a motorway you go on the hard shoulder!
If you break down on a smart motorway your in a live lane .
That’s not smart imo.

That just proved tiger is a poor driver the lack of any other reason.
		
Click to expand...

The hard shoulder is still dangerous , however not all smart motorways don't have hard shoulders .. 

This debate could go on forever. The data says they are safer , however when they do go wrong critics say it could have been avoided 

They need tech to improve (ie break down detection)


----------



## DanFST (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			If you break down on a motorway you go on the hard shoulder!
If you break down on a smart motorway your in a live lane .
That’s not smart imo.

That just proved tiger is a poor driver the lack of any other reason.
		
Click to expand...


There's 24 collisions involving cars stuck on the hard shoulder a week.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			The hard shoulder is still dangerous , however not all smart motorways don't have hard shoulders ..

This debate could go on forever. The data says they are safer , however when they do go wrong critics say it could have been avoided

They need tech to improve (ie break down detection)
		
Click to expand...

That’s the main problem I think !
The most dangerous time is the couple of minutes just after you stop.
Until all the systems are up and running you are a sitting duck.

With a puncture just keep driving slowly until you reach a safety area.
Might cost you a tyre or wheel but the alternative is more serious.

I had a blow out years ago on M6 I drove along the hard shoulder.
A HGV got behind me and protected me from the traffic until the junction.
Great driving from him which I really appreciated, a very scary Situation.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

DanFST said:



			There's 24 collisions involving cars stuck on the hard shoulder a week.
		
Click to expand...

At the end of the day hitting a stationary vehicle on any road is bad driving.


----------



## SaintHacker (Mar 1, 2021)

OKthis is from experience not from data/statistics, just what I've seen whilst out on the road. You break down on a normal motorway, get to the hard shoulder. What speed is traffic in lane 1 coming past. 55mph minimum.
Break down in lane 1 of a smart motorway, now assuming the signage works as it should. The signs immediatley close the lane and slow approaching traffic to 50. Traffic then has to merge from lane 1 to 2 as 1 is now closed, this causes a further slowing of lane 2. And then add in the rubber necking that no one is capable of not doing, and that brings down the speed of passing traffic to probably 30mph. So would you rather be passed by traffic going 60 or 30? And yes, I realise this assumes everyone follows the rules


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			That’s the main problem I think !
The most dangerous time is the couple of minutes just after you stop.
Until all the systems are up and running you are a sitting duck.

With a puncture just keep driving slowly until you reach a safety area.
Might cost you a tyre or wheel but the alternative is more serious.

I had a blow out years ago on M6 I drove along the hard shoulder.
A HGV got behind me and protected me from the traffic until the junction.
Great driving from him which I really appreciated, a very scary Situation.
		
Click to expand...

Just as a question which I don't know the answer to 

If each Emergancy area is 1.5 miles 

If you get a blow out, a puncture or other issue you should in theory be able to limp through to one 

Only issues when you can't is accident or total power loss , which wouldn't you be in same situation as now?


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Just as a question which I don't know the answer to

If each Emergancy area is 1.5 miles

If you get a blow out, a puncture or other issue you should in theory be able to limp through to one

Only issues when you can't is accident or total power loss , which wouldn't you be in same situation as now?
		
Click to expand...

No. If you get a power loss on a normal motorway you drift into the hard shoulder, put on the hazards and get away from the car.  If you're on a Smart motorway you have to either sit in the car or get out with traffic going around you, or into you. It's not the same situation.


----------



## CliveW (Mar 1, 2021)

The M8 Motorway was the first motorway to be built in Scotland in the 1970s. Linking Edinburgh and Glasgow, the original part is two lanes each way with a hard shoulder. As the volume of traffic increased over the years it was proposed that the hard shoulder be used as a third lane to alleviate congestion but it was found that the base of the hard shoulder was not substantial enough to take the weight of traffic and the idea was shelved as the cost of reinforcing it was too prohibitive. 

The M90 is also two lanes and has no hard shoulder, only emergency lay-bys. As said in a previous post, two lorries overtaking can take ages but other road users do not have the luxury of moving out to lane three of four.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			No. If you get a power loss on a normal motorway you drift into the hard shoulder, put on the hazards and get away from the car.  If you're on a Smart motorway you have to either sit in the car or get out with traffic going around you, or into you. It's not the same situation.
		
Click to expand...

Two points

1 they say you drift to an emergency area if you can and if not as far over as possible (same as going to hard shoulder)

2. As Saint points out the idea of the smart motorways is to reduce the speed of traffic around you. So it should slow the remaining traffic to 30mph and such .. so they arent flying past at 70

Is that not a good thing?

Also again not all smart motorways remove the hard shoulder


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			OKthis is from experience not from data/statistics, just what I've seen whilst out on the road. You break down on a normal motorway, get to the hard shoulder. What speed is traffic in lane 1 coming past. 55mph minimum.
Break down in lane 1 of a smart motorway, now assuming the signage works as it should. The signs immediatley close the lane and slow approaching traffic to 50. Traffic then has to merge from lane 1 to 2 as 1 is now closed, this causes a further slowing of lane 2. And then add in the rubber necking that no one is capable of not doing, and that brings down the speed of passing traffic to probably 30mph. So would you rather be passed by traffic going 60 or 30? And yes, I realise this assumes everyone follows the rules
		
Click to expand...

OK.  I'm driving on a smart motorway and my engine packs in and won't restart, I come to a halt and put on my hazard warning lights. At this moment the lane I'm in will not be closed, cars and trucks will be advancing towards me and most of the time in large numbers.  I may have my family in the car even a baby strapped in. How can this be as safe as when I'm pulled over into a hard shoulder,  I now need to get myself and my family out of the car in a live lane. No amount of Data or suggestion that smart motorways are safe is going to help me or my family at this moment in time.

Some aspects of smart motorways are ok, if controlled in a smart manner they can regulate the flow of traffic through peaks and troughs.
The lack of a continuous hard shoulder is a mistake, it would be better if the inside lanes were shut down during quieter times of the day so they became a hard shoulder, there should be more escape bays, one and a half miles is too far apart and has only been made like this to save money.

The links I provided where a Coroner and a Police Chief has suggested they are responsible for deaths and not acceptable is all the data I need.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Two points

1 they say you drift to an emergency area if you can and if not as far over as possible (same as going to hard shoulder)

2. As Saint points out the idea of the smart motorways is to reduce the speed of traffic around you. So it should slow the remaining traffic to 30mph and such .. so they arent flying past at 70

Is that not a good thing?

Also again not all smart motorways remove the hard shoulder
		
Click to expand...

I keep telling you the problem is at the point of stopping and not when the lane is subsequently closed off.

Are you seriously suggesting someone should drift with no power for a mile or more, really!


----------



## Swango1980 (Mar 1, 2021)

SteveW86 said:



			As with most things, it’s human error that is the cause of the issues
		
Click to expand...

Of course it is human error, accidents are not caused by the road jumping out of place and smashing into a driver's windscreen. However, the whole point of highway design (or a very important aspect of it) is to improve safety. Otherwise there would be no such thing as speed limits, speed bumps, deflection into roundabouts, many traffic lights would not be there and there would not be a massive amount of legislation to ensure consistency, so drivers know what to expect.

Whilst we have humans in control of cars, we cannot rule out the dozy / tired / distracted driver on the road. Sadly, it seems many deaths on the roads are those that have had to stop in a live lane and have been rear ended by an HGV. Their lives are ruined, their families lives have been ruined and the HGV driver's life has been ruined for an unfortunate mistake that has probably happened to many of us, but 99.9% of the time we get away with it. It is easy to blame the driver (which of course blame must be attributed to), but I bet those whose lives have been ruined take little comfort from that, and wonder "what if" if there had only been a hard shoulder. 

My personal opinion is that the only reason smart highways are there is to improve capacity on the motorways. Most drivers will probably be happy with that, save time on their journeys. The price we may have to pay for that however is a few more deaths.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			I keep telling you the problem is at the point of stopping and not when the lane is subsequently closed off.

Are you seriously suggesting someone should drift with no power for a mile or more, really!
		
Click to expand...

So if they are every 1.5 miles they have said if traveling at 70mph you will pass one every 90 seconds .. so unless all your power goes just as you have past one surely you won't be going over a mile to the next one..

Unless we are going real dooms day .. a blow out right as you go past one.. the wheel falls off and you spin out of control into lane 3... Oh but you wouldn't make the hard shoulder anyways 🤔


----------



## Imurg (Mar 1, 2021)

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet...
On a Smart motorway the hard shoulder is only used at peak times to provide an extra lane when traffic is busy.
Speeds are also limited to 60, often less, when the hard shoulder is used as a driving lane.
My experience of Smart motorways is that when the hard shoulder is in use speeds of 40 are often unobtainable due to the weight of traffic.

This doesn't get around the potential danger in the first few moments of breakdown but it does mean that impact speeds should be considerably lower than on a normal motorway where a vehicle has swerved into the hard shoulder and potentially lower than on many other roads.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

Imurg said:



			Something that hasn't been mentioned yet...
On a Smart motorway the hard shoulder is only used at peak times to provide an extra lane when traffic is busy.
Speeds are also limited to 60, often less, when the hard shoulder is used as a driving lane.
My experience of Smart motorways is that when the hard shoulder is in use speeds of 40 are often unobtainable due to the weight of traffic.

This doesn't get around the potential danger in the first few moments of breakdown but it does mean that impact speeds should be considerably lower than on a normal motorway where a vehicle has swerved into the hard shoulder and potentially lower than on many other roads.
		
Click to expand...

That isn't all smart motorways tho

There are 3 types 

The one you just said.. I like them 

The ones with no hard shoulder at all . Not a massive fan but understand the logic 

And then ones with hard shoulders just managed smartly with speed


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			So if they are every 1.5 miles they have said if traveling at 70mph you will pass one every 90 seconds .. so unless all your power goes just as you have past one surely you won't be going over a mile to the next one..

Unless we are going real dooms day .. a blow out right as you go past one.. the wheel falls off and you spin out of control into lane 3... Oh but you wouldn't make the hard shoulder anyways 🤔
		
Click to expand...

So how far do you think it's achievable to coast to the next bay, what if it's uphill, let's say you are midway for example and on the flat, would you be able to coast three quarters of a mile!  You're not convincing me at all that it's safe.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			So how far do you think it's achievable to coast to the next bay, what if it's uphill, let's say you are midway for example and on the flat, would you be able to coast three quarters of a mile!  You're not convincing me at all that it's safe.
		
Click to expand...

As per the guidelines they say you should coast to lane one, as far over as possible with your hazards on

Only if you can't reach the emergency area 

Which if you had a flat or other issue you most likely could drive there .. cost of a wheel or tyre 

How common is a total power loss? If you have an accident at speed you can't get over to the hard shoulder anyways so really isn't it just a total power loss the main situation you would stop?

What else would mean you couldn't make it?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Just as a question which I don't know the answer to

If each Emergancy area is 1.5 miles

If you get a blow out, a puncture or other issue you should in theory be able to limp through to one

Only issues when you can't is accident or total power loss , which wouldn't you be in same situation as now?
		
Click to expand...

The Zip merging for me is the problem people still drive right up to the stricken car at speed and then try merge in with traffic.
But the biggest killer for me is there are still to many drivers on their phones they are just not looking where they are going.
So they don’t see the red X to close the lane.
Hard shoulder they will just pass you ( hopefully)
Live lane different outcome.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			The Zip merging for me is the problem people still drive right up to the stricken car at speed and then try merge in with traffic.
But the biggest killer for me is there are still to many drivers on their phones they are just not looking where they are going.
So they don’t see the red X to close the lane.
Hard shoulder they will just pass you ( hopefully)
Live lane different outcome.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting zip merging deemed safer but then it wouldn't be at speed would be greatly reduced and also they would close the lane before no?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Interesting zip merging deemed safer but then it wouldn't be at speed would be greatly reduced and also they would close the lane before no?
		
Click to expand...

Yes but as I said only to the ones that actually see the red X.

I have seen lots of vids on you tube where cars are approaching a stationary car when the car in front pulls into lane 2 and the muppet behind just ploughs into the stationary one.
Yes in theory that’s the drivers fault but imo the live lane make that a possibility where hard shoulder nobody should be in it unless broken down.
Everyone has their own view.
I see it as an unnecessary hazard just to save a bit of time and congestion.
A bit like HS2.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			Yes but as I said only to the ones that actually see the red X.

I have seen lots of vids on you tube where cars are approaching a stationary car when the car in front pulls into lane 2 and the muppet behind just ploughs into the stationary one.
Yes in theory that’s the drivers fault but imo the live lane make that a possibility where hard shoulder nobody should be in it unless broken down.
Everyone has their own view.
I see it as an unnecessary hazard just to save a bit of time and congestion.
A bit like HS2.

Click to expand...

Apparently HS2 long term is going to take more of the goods industry again with the move away from fossil fuels .. getting rid of a lot of HGV from motorways which will make them safer


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 1, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Apparently HS2 long term is going to take more of the goods industry again with the move away from fossil fuels .. getting rid of a lot of HGV from motorways which will make them safer
		
Click to expand...

I thought they were selling it as getting to London 30 mins quicker.
Moving goods dosnt have to be that fast surley.
Anyway that’s another thread.
With lots of different opinions. Especially if they are demolishing your house to do it.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			I thought they were selling it as getting to London 30 mins quicker.
Moving goods dosnt have to be that fast surley.
Anyway that’s another thread.
With lots of different opinions. Especially if they are demolishing your house to do it.
		
Click to expand...

It's part of it are goods and speed of travel to London

Make Birmingham into more of a powerhouse 

But yes destroying houses

It's a mess


----------



## Imurg (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			I thought they were selling it as getting to London 30 mins quicker.
/QUOTE]
That idea died when they realised that where they were building the terminals at either end would mean a 10-15minute taxi to get into the middle of either city...so you could get a normal train and take the same time....
		
Click to expand...


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

Erm HS2 goes into Euston ? Which is central 

Maybe the other end ..


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Mar 1, 2021)

I guess a smart motorway is only as smart as the people driving on it 

Seen plenty of times on the M1 and M25 where they have reduced the speeds etc and people still fly past

The idea is good one but would worry me if there was no hard shoulder


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I guess a smart motorway is only as smart as the people driving on it

Seen plenty of times on the M1 and M25 where they have reduced the speeds etc and people still fly past

The idea is good one but would worry me if there was no hard shoulder
		
Click to expand...

Prob the most sensible answer so far. Worries you personally but sees the idea has promise

Rather than oh I don't agree with it there for it's rubbish


----------



## SaintHacker (Mar 1, 2021)

Which is why i feel the penalties for ignoring the closure signs are nowhere near harsh enough. Instead of a fixed penalty fine it should be points. 6 points per sign passed, so pass 2 and bye bye licence. That should focus peoples attention on what they're supposed to be doing.


----------



## DanFST (Mar 1, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Your world may be data driven but I've got a head between my shoulders and am quite capable of assessing when a risk is unacceptable.
		
Click to expand...

Good on you! I look forward to this spirit when many break the Lockdown rules this weekend slightly early!


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 1, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Which is why i feel the penalties for ignoring the closure signs are nowhere near harsh enough. Instead of a fixed penalty fine it should be points. 6 points per sign passed, so pass 2 and bye bye licence. That should focus peoples attention on what they're supposed to be doing.
		
Click to expand...

Answer might be average speed checks on motorways regardless of limit so even when 70 it's a flat 70

The stretch of road I use for work is average speed and it's the one you pay most attention to


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Mar 1, 2021)

I've done a few trips down to Devon in the past week prepping my new house.  The A30/A303 - everyone drives really sensibly - two lanes, pull to the inside if clear.   No-one makes idiotic moves but wait for the next dual carriageway section.

Then you get on to the M3.   Middle lane morons - third lane idiots - outside lane cretins.


----------



## Swango1980 (Mar 1, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Which is why i feel the penalties for ignoring the closure signs are nowhere near harsh enough. Instead of a fixed penalty fine it should be points. 6 points per sign passed, so pass 2 and bye bye licence. That should focus peoples attention on what they're supposed to be doing.
		
Click to expand...

Just out of interest, as someone who drives these frequently, do you feel constantly looking for the signs (especially at times when manoeuvring around traffic) to see if the speed limit has changed causes a minor distraction. As opposed to knowing the road you are on has a fixed speed limit and so you do not need to check?

I don't drive them often, but I often find myself (at least my perception)  spending more time looking at the gantry signs rather than the road.


----------



## SaintHacker (Mar 1, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Just out of interest, as someone who drives these frequently, do you feel constantly looking for the signs (especially at times when manoeuvring around traffic) to see if the speed limit has changed causes a minor distraction. As opposed to knowing the road you are on has a fixed speed limit and so you do not need to check?

I don't drive them often, but I often find myself (at least my perception)  spending more time looking at the gantry signs rather than the road.
		
Click to expand...

Not really, looking at signs is just a normal part of driving.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 1, 2021)

DanFST said:



			Good on you! I look forward to this spirit when many break the Lockdown rules this weekend slightly early! 

Click to expand...

I won't be.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 1, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			I thought they were selling it as getting to London 30 mins quicker.
Moving goods dosnt have to be that fast surley.
Anyway that’s another thread.
*With lots of different opinions*. Especially if they are demolishing your house to do it.
		
Click to expand...


Erm... There is only one opinion in these parts...
Totally unanimous... BIN IT!


----------



## doublebogey7 (Mar 2, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			I thought they were selling it as getting to London 30 mins quicker.
Moving goods dosnt have to be that fast surley.
Anyway that’s another thread.
With lots of different opinions. Especially if they are demolishing your house to do it.
		
Click to expand...

My understanding is that HS2 will take passenger traffic off the current "slow" tracks releasing capacity for goods traffic to utilise.


----------



## sunshine (Mar 2, 2021)

In the UK, driving seems to improve the further you get from London. It can be quite pleasant driving around Devon or Scotland, everyone is courteous and follows the rules. Then on the M25 and inside it is just a free for all. On the M25 I just drive in whatever lane seems to be moving fastest (usually lane 1 / nearside lane), no point changing lane to overtake.

As for driving in central London, it's more like driving in Mumbai or Mogadishu than anywhere else in Britain.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 2, 2021)

sunshine said:



			In the UK, driving seems to improve the further you get from London. It can be quite pleasant driving around Devon or Scotland, everyone is courteous and follows the rules. Then on the M25 and inside it is just a free for all. On the M25 I just drive in whatever lane seems to be moving fastest (usually lane 1 / nearside lane), no point changing lane to overtake.

As for driving in central London, it's more like driving in Mumbai or Mogadishu than anywhere else in Britain.
		
Click to expand...

As a Londoner I find this completly true! I love driving up north


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Mar 2, 2021)

sunshine said:



			In the UK, driving seems to improve the further you get from London. It can be quite pleasant driving around Devon or Scotland, everyone is courteous and follows the rules. Then on the M25 and inside it is just a free for all. On the M25 I just drive in whatever lane seems to be moving fastest (usually lane 1 / nearside lane), no point changing lane to overtake.

As for driving in central London, it's more like driving in Mumbai or Mogadishu than anywhere else in Britain.
		
Click to expand...

Is this not about shear weight of traffic? I'm in Northumberland and things are generally chilled, apart from individual nutters of course. When I head south, in normal times, I find my stress levels rise as I pass Preston on the M6 southbound, west side, and Leeds, A1M on the east. More cars, not enough space for them all. People want to blame driving standards, back in the day......., but the number of cars out there is the critical point, imo.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 2, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			Is this not about shear weight of traffic? I'm in Northumberland and things are generally chilled, apart from individual nutters of course. When I head south, in normal times, I find my stress levels rise as I pass Preston on the M6 southbound, west side, and Leeds, A1M on the east. More cars, not enough space for them all. People want to blame driving standards, back in the day......., but the number of cars out there is the critical point, imo.
		
Click to expand...

No it's not just that 

People are very aggressive drivers here


----------



## Swango1980 (Mar 2, 2021)

sunshine said:



			In the UK, driving seems to improve the further you get from London. It can be quite pleasant driving around Devon or Scotland, everyone is courteous and follows the rules. Then on the M25 and inside it is just a free for all. On the M25 I just drive in whatever lane seems to be moving fastest (usually lane 1 / nearside lane), no point changing lane to overtake.

As for driving in central London, it's more like driving in Mumbai or Mogadishu than anywhere else in Britain.
		
Click to expand...

I have no doubt this is true, but that will simply be down to traffic volume rather than attitude of drivers in a certain area of the UK. If areas of Scotland were as busy as central London or the M25, that will result in much worse behaviour. Purely down to human frustrations and impatience when there is not sufficient capacity on the road network.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 2, 2021)

As we've now gone from the op to the M25...
I believe the biggest issue with driving standards [on the M25] are infrequent users... Folk get overawed with the volumes and whole scale of it especially in the section adjacent to Heathrow... You can usually pick them out as they appear to be transfixed on their device(s) advising what to do where to go...


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Mar 2, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			No it's not just that

People are very aggressive drivers here
		
Click to expand...

But perhaps it is the volume of traffic that makes them aggressive? One leads to another. I think Swango's post below yours sums it up.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 2, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			But perhaps it is the volume of traffic that makes them aggressive? One leads to another. I think Swango's post below yours sums it up.
		
Click to expand...

See id say no, if people drive calm the traffic flows .. can even have nice drives round the 406 but when people cut each other up for no reason it becomes a wee wee contests


----------



## USER1999 (Mar 2, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			See id say no, if people drive calm the traffic flows .. can even have nice drives round the 406 but when people cut each other up for no reason it becomes a wee wee contests
		
Click to expand...

Driving in London is a shocker. I used to think driving in China was terrible, but London has exceeded this, and is now worse. I can't wait until I can stop doing it. 
If you try to drive by the highway code, you won't get anywhere, and 100% you will have an accident.


----------



## Tashyboy (Mar 2, 2021)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-56254169


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 2, 2021)

Tashyboy said:



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-56254169

Click to expand...

See this is where for me it's a grey area

Stopping to exchange details in a live lane? Emergency point 1.5 miles max... Just go there

When I got hit at lights I knew there was garage 500 yards away I just drove there rather than block the 406 and risk injury


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 2, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			See this is where for me it's a grey area

Stopping to exchange details in a live lane? Emergency point 1.5 miles max... Just go there

When I got hit at lights I knew there’s was garage 500 yards away I just drove there rather than block the 406 and risk injury
		
Click to expand...

If you just keep driving to the refuge area / garage the other guy might think your trying to run away!
That can have worse consequences if he chases you.
But your correct it’s the right thing to do.
I just think they are very dangerous and should be banned.
Bring them back when we’re fully driverless.
The fact we’re debating it shows a lot of people really don’t like them.
Some love them . Can’t please everyone.
But until it happens to you personally we can only imagine what it’s like to be stranded there.


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 2, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			If you just keep driving to the refuge area / garage the other guy might think your trying to run away!
That can have worse consequences if he chases you.
But your correct it’s the right thing to do.
I just think they are very dangerous and should be banned.
Bring them back when we’re fully driverless.
The fact we’re debating it shows a lot of people really don’t like them.
Some love them . Can’t please everyone.
But until it happens to you personally we can only imagine what it’s like to be stranded there.
		
Click to expand...

Wouldn't say love them, more understand the need and don't see them as the massive danger they are portrayed as 

If you put your hazards on and drive to the next area they aren't going to think your doing a runner surely . Be a bit out there!

Seems like a lot of education is needed on smart motorways as people just don't know how to use them 

Same with everything .. people never read the highway code (not all but a vast majority don't)

I went on a speed awareness course and national speed limit down a country lane what's the speed you had the correct answers and then 40 50 and 70

Amount of people who don't know stuff is scary


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 2, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Wouldn't say love them, more understand the need and don't see them as the massive danger they are portrayed as

If you put your hazards on and drive to the next area they aren't going to think your doing a runner surely . Be a bit out there!

Seems like a lot of education is needed on smart motorways as people just don't know how to use them

Same with everything .. people never read the highway code (not all but a vast majority don't)

I went on a speed awareness course and national speed limit down a country lane what's the speed you had the correct answers and then 40 50 and 70

Amount of people who don't know stuff is scary
		
Click to expand...

My daughter passed her test 2 yrs ago .
I asked her a couple of fairly easy road signs ! Not a clue.
I think a bit of the motorway trouble is we never went on a motorway until after you passed your test.
That was crazy at the time , it’s changed now but the older ones still havnt got a clue.
Your right it’s scary


----------



## Tashyboy (Mar 2, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Wouldn't say love them, more understand the need and don't see them as the massive danger they are portrayed as

If you put your hazards on and drive to the next area they aren't going to think your doing a runner surely . Be a bit out there!

Seems like a lot of education is needed on smart motorways as people just don't know how to use them

Same with everything .. people never read the highway code (not all but a vast majority don't)

I went on a speed awareness course and national speed limit down a country lane what's the speed you had the correct answers and then 40 50 and 70

Amount of people who don't know stuff is scary
		
Click to expand...

Ave done a couple of speed awareness courses. I was showing my grandson how the speed limit changes on the sat nav to what the Speed limit signs show. We had gone down the rd for a good bit and there were no signs,  he asked what the speed limit was. I told him it was 30. “ how do you know, there’s no signs “ he said. I said “Because if there’s no signs and theres lamp posts it’s 30”.  He said “ that’s silly just put signs up so you know like everywhere else”. 
That just about sums it up.


----------



## sunshine (Mar 5, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			I have no doubt this is true, but that will simply be down to traffic volume rather than attitude of drivers in a certain area of the UK. If areas of Scotland were as busy as central London or the M25, that will result in much worse behaviour. Purely down to human frustrations and impatience when there is not sufficient capacity on the road network.
		
Click to expand...

I think it's a combination of issues.

1. Sheer volume leads to more stress / aggression. 
2. If you learnt to drive in Baghdad, you will probably drive the same way everywhere. Many drivers in central London learnt to drive elsewhere and have little understanding / consideration of the rules.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 5, 2021)

If folk think driving in London is 'dog eat dog' try Paris... Herself advises driving in Sicily isn't exactly 'friendly' either... Not much laid back Mediterraneanous at all...


----------



## DanFST (Mar 5, 2021)

MegaSteve said:



			If folk think driving in London is 'dog eat dog' try Paris... Herself advises driving in Sicily isn't exactly 'friendly' either... Not much laid back Mediterraneanous at all...
		
Click to expand...

Unsure, The Redbridge roundabout on the 406 resembles Baghdad in 1992.


----------



## SocketRocket (Mar 5, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			Wouldn't say love them, more understand the need and don't see them as the massive danger they are portrayed as

If you put your hazards on and drive to the next area they aren't going to think your doing a runner surely . Be a bit out there!

Seems like a lot of education is needed on smart motorways as people just don't know how to use them

Same with everything .. people never read the highway code (not all but a vast majority don't)

I went on a speed awareness course and national speed limit down a country lane what's the speed you had the correct answers and then 40 50 and 70

Amount of people who don't know stuff is scary
		
Click to expand...

Many don't understand that National Speed Limits doesn't mean 70 or 60 but depends on what type of vehicle you are driving.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 5, 2021)

DanFST said:



			Unsure, The Redbridge roundabout on the 406 resembles Baghdad in 1992.
		
Click to expand...

I first drove to Paris in the early 70's and came home with a degree in French profanity ...


----------



## pauljames87 (Mar 5, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Many don't understand that National Speed Limits doesn't mean 70 or 60 but depends on what type of vehicle you are driving.
		
Click to expand...

Does when your a non towing car driver who thinks the limit is 40. Worrying.

Least nobody said 80


----------



## Tashyboy (Mar 5, 2021)

MegaSteve said:



			If folk think driving in London is 'dog eat dog' try Paris... Herself advises driving in Sicily isn't exactly 'friendly' either... Not much laid back Mediterraneanous at all...
		
Click to expand...

Bad driving in London is not a new thing, I drove in London for the first time about 35 years ago and it was rammel then. Drove a Fiat 500 in Sicily for a week. It had 14km on the clock. 1100 km when I handed it back in. Loved every minute of it. First thing you do when you get in a car in Italy, try the horn. Twice. Trying the horn in the UK is usually followed by 2 fingers.


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 5, 2021)

Tashyboy said:



			Bad driving in London is not a new thing, I drove in London for the first time about 35 years ago and it was rammel then. Drove a Fiat 500 in Sicily for a week. It had 14km on the clock. 1100 km when I handed it back in. Loved every minute of it. First thing you do when you get in a car in Italy, try the horn. Twice. Trying the horn in the UK is usually followed by 2 fingers.
		
Click to expand...


Define "bad driving"... I knew the streets of London well and as a younger bloke would admit to being intolerant of dawdlers and probably [certainly] didn't cut them any slack... I knew exactly where I was going and if you didn't move over and let me by I'd make you uncomfortable until you did...

I did say to herself, when she returned from Sicily, she was probably being too polite... She did note she wouldn't mind having the sole concession for gaffer tape there... As all cars, including the prancing horses, appeared to be held together with the stuff...


----------



## Tashyboy (Mar 5, 2021)

MegaSteve said:



			Define "bad driving"... I knew the streets of London well and as a younger bloke would admit to being intolerant of dawdlers and probably [certainly] didn't cut them any slack... I knew exactly where I was going and if you didn't move over and let me by I'd make you uncomfortable until you did...

I did say to herself, when she returned from Sicily, she was probably being too polite... She did note she wouldn't mind having the sole concession for gaffer tape there... As all cars, including the prancing horses, appeared to be held together with the stuff...
		
Click to expand...

It’s odd, but I enjoyed driving in italy/ Sicily etc. But the only place I would not drive is Naples. I cannot ever remember seeing a car in Italy without having some kind of scrape on it. Driving up Monte Cassino was interesting. One place I would love to drive but would scare the bejesus out of me, the Amalfi coast.Wheni first drove in London it was the first time I saw folk had no patience.
I once drove to Brittany from Dover in 2007 in a Corsa VXR. It was a lovely drive. Talking to the. Fits out there they remarked how relaxing it was. As soon as we got off the ferry in Dover it was like a rat race to drive towards London.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Mar 5, 2021)

MegaSteve said:



			Define "bad driving"... I knew the streets of London well and as a younger bloke would admit to being intolerant of dawdlers and probably [certainly] didn't cut them any slack... I knew exactly where I was going and if you didn't move over and let me by I'd make you uncomfortable until you did...

I did say to herself, when she returned from Sicily, she was probably being too polite... She did note she wouldn't mind having the sole concession for gaffer tape there... As all cars, including the prancing horses, appeared to be held together with the stuff...
		
Click to expand...

Having been born in London & brought up on London driving, I wonder how much of it is worse standards in London, and how much of it is out-of-towners simply not being used to the sheer volume of traffic in London?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 5, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			Having been born in London & brought up on London driving, I wonder how much of it is worse standards in London, and how much of it is out-of-towners simply not being used to the sheer volume of traffic in London? 

Click to expand...

I think any big city centre is not really fit for the amount of traffic.
The roads are just not designed for the sheer volume of cars.
And in them cars there are always a few idiots.
I have never driven in London and don’t want to by the sound of it on here.
Best place I have ever driven was Minorca it was so quiet.


----------



## USER1999 (Mar 5, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			Having been born in London & brought up on London driving, I wonder how much of it is worse standards in London, and how much of it is out-of-towners simply not being used to the sheer volume of traffic in London? 

Click to expand...

I have driven in North London 5 days a week for 20 years. Year on year, driving standards have got worse. It's one of the reasons I now commute in a rattle trap banger. No way am I risking my pride and joy round staples corner every day.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Mar 5, 2021)

murphthemog said:



			I have driven in North London 5 days a week for 20 years. *Year on year, driving standards have got worse.* It's one of the reasons I now commute in a rattle trap banger. No way am I risking my pride and joy round staples corner every day.
		
Click to expand...

I wouldn't disagree with that Murph, but I suspect that also applies across the country and not just to London.


----------



## USER1999 (Mar 5, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			I wouldn't disagree with that Murph, but I suspect that also applies across the country and not just to London.
		
Click to expand...

 Certainly has, but I haven't seen the decline quite like London. It is gradually spreading to Watford, but flipping heck has it got some way to go. Rounabouts are undoubtedly the best. 
staples corner, my favourite, get in the right hand lane, take the first exit, left hand lane? Third exit obviously. Every day. It's bonkers. You need eyes in the back of your head, and there is no longer a way of driving it that would put you in the right on an insurance claim. The bus lane has alot to answer for, as if you don't drive in it, it's impossible to get in the correct lane, and if you do, you are part of the problem.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 5, 2021)

murphthemog said:



			Certainly has, but I haven't seen the decline quite like London. It is gradually spreading to Watford, but flipping heck has it got some way to go. Rounabouts are undoubtedly the best.
staples corner, my favourite, get in the right hand lane, take the first exit, left hand lane? Third exit obviously. Every day. It's bonkers. You need eyes in the back of your head, and there is no longer a way of driving it that would put you in the right on an insurance claim. The bus lane has alot to answer for, as if you don't drive in it, it's impossible to get in the correct lane, and if you do, you are part of the problem.
		
Click to expand...

Yes I think road planning and layouts have something to answer for.
One that annoys me is two lanes at traffic lights,left lane is turning left only.
But get one car turning right in the other lane and you have a Hugh queue while the left lane is empty.
It should be the other way around as there is nothing stopping cars turning left .
But oncoming traffic stopping you turning right.
Bonkers.


----------



## srixon 1 (Mar 5, 2021)

Some lunatic cyclist was caught by the police in Yorkshire today cycling on the motorway.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Mar 6, 2021)

srixon 1 said:



			Some lunatic cyclist was caught by the police in Yorkshire today cycling on the motorway.
		
Click to expand...

I use a cycle lane on a dual carriageway and that’s scary enough.
Can’t imagine what a motorway is like.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Mar 6, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			Yes I think road planning and layouts have something to answer for.
		
Click to expand...

All day long.
The constant lane reductions to allow bus lanes and now the extra sectioned off cycle lanes they have put in has funnelled all the non buses and cycles into a single lane that just cannot go anywhere, Then of course you get the buses and cycles wanting to  join that dormant traffic flow slowing it up even more.


----------



## sunshine (Mar 6, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			Yes I think road planning and layouts have something to answer for.
One that annoys me is two lanes at traffic lights,left lane is turning left only.
But get one car turning right in the other lane and you have a Hugh queue while the left lane is empty.
It should be the other way around as there is nothing stopping cars turning left .
But oncoming traffic stopping you turning right.
Bonkers.
		
Click to expand...

That's not a problem in London, everyone just drives in whatever lane they want so you would never have an empty lane


----------



## MegaSteve (Mar 6, 2021)

sunshine said:



			That's not a problem in London, everyone just drives in whatever lane they want so you would never have an empty lane 

Click to expand...


Everyone ...


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 2, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			Yes I think road planning and layouts have something to answer for.
One that annoys me is two lanes at traffic lights,left lane is turning left only.
But get one car turning right in the other lane and you have a Hugh queue while the left lane is empty.
It should be the other way around as there is nothing stopping cars turning left .
But oncoming traffic stopping you turning right.
Bonkers.
		
Click to expand...

Every junction is different, and the design should account for expected traffic patterns, especially during the busy periods. Without knowing anything else, the ahead movement would use the nearside lane with left-turning traffic for the reason you describe. However, if there was a heavy left-turn and very light right-turn, from a capacity perspective it could be much more efficient to have the aheads use the offside lane with the right-turn. Especially if there is storage within the junction for right-turns to queue and/or the opposing movement is not too heavy itself. Furthermore, the location of pedestrian crossings can have an impact, especially if it is possible to have peds running in parallel with non-conflicting traffic movements rather than requiring an all red pedestrian stage. It should be the sort of thing that is / should tested in modelling before a final design is produced, although whether that always happens is another question entirely.

Anyway, only reason I saw this was I see Smart Highways are on the news again. Seems increasingly difficult to agree that these are any safer than motorways with a hard shoulder. Perhaps the government are just too invested in them, along with the companies that are involved, to admit they are less safe that before (along with any legal implications that may involve).


----------



## Golfmmad (Nov 2, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			Yes I think road planning and layouts have something to answer for.
One that annoys me is two lanes at traffic lights,left lane is turning left only.
But get one car turning right in the other lane and you have a Hugh queue while the left lane is empty.
It should be the other way around as there is nothing stopping cars turning left .
But oncoming traffic stopping you turning right.
Bonkers.
		
Click to expand...

There is a similar junction round here. Traffic lights, left hand lane has marked arrow to turn left And straight on plus a straight on arrow in right hand lane. Most traffic will queue in the right lane leaving the left lane clear, crazy! There are merge in arrows 50yds after junction so the planners expected both lanes to be used when going straight on.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 2, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Anyway, only reason I saw this was I see Smart Highways are on the news again. Seems increasingly difficult to agree that these are any safer than motorways with a hard shoulder. Perhaps the government are just too invested in them, along with the companies that are involved, to admit they are less safe that before (along with any legal implications that may involve).
		
Click to expand...

You will not find a single police officer with experience in motorway policing, especially those who work in collision investigation as I did for over 20 years, who will tell you that Smart motorways are anything other than a catastrophe. That should tell you all you need to know.

And I don’t know of a single colleague nationwide who took part in any sort of consultation in the planning stages. Not one. Typical, really - if you want to drive through a project as massive and controversial as this, don’t consult with experts, particularly those who will tell you unequivocally that your plans are a crock of 💩.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 2, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			You will not find a single police officer with experience in motorway policing, especially those who work in collision investigation as I did for over 20 years, who will tell you that Smart motorways are anything other than a catastrophe. That should tell you all you need to know.

And I don’t know of a single colleague nationwide who took part in any sort of consultation in the planning stages. Not one. Typical, really - if you want to drive through a project as massive and controversial as this, don’t consult with experts, particularly those who will tell you unequivocally that your plans are a crock of 💩.
		
Click to expand...

Nice cheap way to boost highway capacity, put safety to one side or on the hush? Cynical I know, but it also amazes me when generally, individual junction designs and other highway issues need to go through several safety audits during the different stages of the design process, conducted by independent experts (not to say the final junction has potential issues, but it certainly irons things out immensely in most cases). So, when something as big as this is rolled out, you'd think it would undergo huge safety analysis, and probably fall at an early hurdle.

Personally, I'm all for smart motorways in the sense that they can use cameras and close lanes if any incidents are detected. But, not at the expense of removing the hard shoulder. It is like saying we are getting rid of seat belts because cars have air bags. I've never really thought about it too much, I rarely drive on them. But, when I do get thinking about it, I truly do wonder what I'd do if my car broke down on one. By sounds of it, the cameras frequently do not even detect a breakdown, so no warning is sent to drivers behind. Even if it does, there will be a lag between the breakdown, when the warning is sent and also drivers will already have passed the Variable Message Sign before the warning appears. I never even considered what someone with a disability would do. Apparently you're meant to leave your car and hop over the metal barrier. Good luck for those with mobility issues.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 2, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Apparently you're meant to leave your car and hop over the metal barrier. Good luck for those with mobility issues.
		
Click to expand...

The advice is to do the same even with a hard shoulder. Easier to do in kinder weather than in the cold and rain but that is the safety advice.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 2, 2021)

Lord Tyrion said:



			The advice is to do the same even with a hard shoulder. Easier to do in kinder weather than in the cold and rain but that is the safety advice.
		
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but I'd still rather have the safety of a hard shoulder before working out how to get over that barrier. I'm guessing there are gaps in the barrier at certain intervals, so that someone with mobility issues can get through it? If so, easier to find that gap on the hard shoulder, rather than along a live lane


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Nov 2, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Fair enough, but I'd still rather have the safety of a hard shoulder before working out how to get over that barrier. I'm guessing there are gaps in the barrier at certain intervals, so that someone with mobility issues can get through it? If so, easier to find that gap on the hard shoulder, rather than along a live lane
		
Click to expand...

Totally agree with you


----------



## SaintHacker (Nov 2, 2021)

I've said it before and I still stick with my view, the road isn't to blame, its the idiots that use it.
We've driven for years on two and three lane dual carriageways that don't have hard shoulders, or smart technology, without worry. Whats the difference? Its still a 70mph road.
A hard shoulder is all very well if you can get to it, what if you break down ib lane 3/4 and can't get across? And if you are unlucky enough to break down in a live lane and not make it to a refuge, would you prefer to have to traffic slowed to 40/50 mph by the signs as it passes or sit on a 'safe' hard shoulder with traffic still thundering by at 70+?
I agree the technology need to be improved to respond to breakdowns quicker but once that happens then a smart road will be no more dangerous than any other. Its the bloody morons who drive on a closed lane that need removing, in  my view ut should be 6 points per sign passed. Pass 2 and its a ban, end of.


----------



## Rooter (Nov 2, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			I've said it before and I still stick with my view, the road isn't to blame, its the idiots that use it.
		
Click to expand...

Can leave it there. Perfect, nail on the head.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 2, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			I've said it before and I still stick with my view, the road isn't to blame, its the idiots that use it.
We've driven for years on two and three lane dual carriageways that don't have hard shoulders, or smart technology, without worry. Whats the difference? Its still a 70mph road.
A hard shoulder is all very well if you can get to it, what if you break down ib lane 3/4 and can't get across? And if you are unlucky enough to break down in a live lane and not make it to a refuge, would you prefer to have to traffic slowed to 40/50 mph by the signs as it passes or sit on a 'safe' hard shoulder with traffic still thundering by at 70+?
I agree the technology need to be improved to respond to breakdowns quicker but once that happens then a smart road will be no more dangerous than any other. Its the bloody morons who drive on a closed lane that need removing, in  my view ut should be 6 points per sign passed. Pass 2 and its a ban, end of.
		
Click to expand...

This is EXACTLY why designs need to be safe. If every single driver could be guaranteed to drive with 100% safety, then there would be zero requirement for safety to be considered at all in design. However, there will always be morons on the road. Furthermore, there will be people who drive just as "safely" as we all like to think we drive, yet end up in a fatal accident anyway. We are all human, so we cannot guarantee that we will be 100% alert 100% of the time. Furthermore, there could be other distractions on the road that we do not notice a stationary car in front. It could be at night and it is pitch black, and the stationary car has no hazards on. You could be over-taking someone, moving back into the nearside lane, not immediately realising a car 50-100m in front is actually stationary, because you've been focused on the vehicle you've just overtaken. There are probably hundreds of scenarios we could come up with that would highlight how having a hard shoulder would eliminate the issue almost entirely.

Most of us, thank goodness, will never be involved in a fatal accident. However, is it not short sighted / arrogant to think that every single person who has been involved in a fatal accident are "idiots" and that we are a much better driver than them? If that was the case, in every single incident there ill always be a prosecution for driving without due care and attention. However, I suspect that does not happen, because often the incident is deemed something that the driver could not be control. There are also the victims. Try telling the relatives of someone killed that the other "idiot" driver is the one to blame, and stop moaning about hard shoulders, as if that is not part of the issue.  

The argument is that removing hard shoulders will increase deaths on the roads. They protect broken down drivers from "idiots" or otherwise. It is difficult to see how not having them is no more dangerous. Just because there might be an occasion that a driver cannot get into it doesn't really excuse not having them. A driver could crash their car, a tree come through the windscreen and kill them instantly. That does not mean we should just forget about wearing seatbelts, because they will not always protect us. We don't say "it is only idiots that cause crashes, and therefore it is not seat belts to blame it is the idiots on the road"


----------



## Robster59 (Nov 2, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			I've said it before and I still stick with my view, the road isn't to blame, its the idiots that use it.
We've driven for years on two and three lane dual carriageways that don't have hard shoulders, or smart technology, without worry. Whats the difference? Its still a 70mph road.
A hard shoulder is all very well if you can get to it, what if you break down ib lane 3/4 and can't get across? And if you are unlucky enough to break down in a live lane and not make it to a refuge, would you prefer to have to traffic slowed to 40/50 mph by the signs as it passes or sit on a 'safe' hard shoulder with traffic still thundering by at 70+?
I agree the technology need to be improved to respond to breakdowns quicker but once that happens then a smart road will be no more dangerous than any other. Its the bloody morons who drive on a closed lane that need removing, in  my view ut should be 6 points per sign passed. Pass 2 and its a ban, end of.
		
Click to expand...

The point is that you should do everything you can to minimise risk.  You have to take into account the stupidity of people when doing your research.  Our company does it all the time.  Sometimes I feel like banging my head about the rules they put in place but taking a stand back you realise that the reasons behind it are logical.  The thing with smart motorways is they have taken something that was designed to keep the driver safer (the hard shoulder), and got rid of it.  How many industries would remove something designed to improve safety, and replace it with something less safe?  I know what would happen if I suggested that.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 2, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			I've said it before and I still stick with my view, the road isn't to blame, its the idiots that use it.
We've driven for years on two and three lane dual carriageways that don't have hard shoulders, or smart technology, without worry. Whats the difference? Its still a 70mph road.
A hard shoulder is all very well if you can get to it, what if you break down ib lane 3/4 and can't get across? And if you are unlucky enough to break down in a live lane and not make it to a refuge, would you prefer to have to traffic slowed to 40/50 mph by the signs as it passes or sit on a 'safe' hard shoulder with traffic still thundering by at 70+?
I agree the technology need to be improved to respond to breakdowns quicker but once that happens then a smart road will be no more dangerous than any other. Its the bloody morons who drive on a closed lane that need removing, in  my view ut should be 6 points per sign passed. Pass 2 and its a ban, end of.
		
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no such thing as a dangerous road, I totally agree. But unfortunately, if you combine Smart motorway technology with a lot of drivers, you are destined to have one tragedy after another.

I’ve said it many, many times that we do not teach people to drive in this country, we teach them to pass a driving test. There is a huge difference, and whilst many seek to improve their driving once the L plates are off, many more don’t. 

The standard of motorway driving, in particular, is generally appalling. Drivers who used to habitually sit in lane two on an otherwise empty carriageway have now become hoggers of lane three on four lane motorways. Tailgating is a huge problem. But the biggest issue is lack of attention. Far too many ignore lane closure signs on overhead gantries and it is only these which stand between motorists and carnage on a Smart motorway.

Safe in theory? Perhaps. But not when you add the motoring public to the mix. And therein lies your problem.


----------



## IanM (Nov 2, 2021)

I think that "if you break-down, pray it's adjacent to a emergency layby" is not a great way of running motorways to be honest.  

Drove M4 and M25 to St Albans today.  I'm surprised some of these clowns took a test.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 2, 2021)

IanM said:



			I think that "if you break-down, pray it's adjacent to a emergency layby" is not a great way of running motorways to be honest. 

*Drove M4 and M25 to St Albans today.  I'm surprised some of these clowns took a test.*

Click to expand...

Some of them probably haven’t.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Nov 2, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			There is absolutely no such thing as a dangerous road, I totally agree. But unfortunately, if you combine Smart motorway technology with a lot of drivers, you are destined to have one tragedy after another.

*I’ve said it many, many times that we do not teach people to drive in this country, we teach them to pass a driving test. *There is a huge difference, and whilst many seek to improve their driving once the L plates are off, many more don’t.

The standard of motorway driving, in particular, is generally appalling. Drivers who used to habitually sit in lane two on an otherwise empty carriageway have now become hoggers of lane three on four lane motorways. Tailgating is a huge problem. But the biggest issue is lack of attention. Far too many ignore lane closure signs on overhead gantries and it is only these which stand between motorists and carnage on a Smart motorway.

Safe in theory? Perhaps. But not when you add the motoring public to the mix. And therein lies your problem.
		
Click to expand...


Anyone would think you might know something about this... 

Had to attend a lunchtime site meeting at a junction renovation.  As part of the temporary traffic management there is a left turn ban on one arm of the junction; the sign is on an A frame at windscreen height.  Ray Charles & Stevie Wonder couldn't miss it, but I wish I'd had a pound for every driver that decided it didn't apply to them and turned left against it.  On the way back there was a woman sitting at 30mph in lane 2 of 2 on a 40mph limit dual carriageway whilst Lane 1 was empty.  The standard of driving in this country is dire.  Until we bring back decent levels of enforcement it will never change.


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 2, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Fair enough, but I'd still rather have the safety of a hard shoulder before working out how to get over that barrier. I'm guessing there are gaps in the barrier at certain intervals, so that someone with mobility issues can get through it? If so, easier to find that gap on the hard shoulder, rather than along a live lane
		
Click to expand...

Am sure I mentioned earlier in In this thread, my daughter as a copper was called to an accident in the Sheffield area on a smart motorway. A woman was over weight and could not get over the barrier. She was sat on the barrier about 15 yards further along from the broken down car. A lorry slammed into the car, which hit her. Her legs were torn to shreds. The short version is she died. The longer version involves the lasting effect on the coppers, ambulance people, family and the A and E dr who stopped and told everyone they did a fantastic job. 
Oddly enough my lad was on about smart motorways on a course he was on Saturday. The lay-bys which offer “ refuge” are not long enough to fit a class one lorry and recovery vehicle in 😳


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 2, 2021)

Tashyboy said:



			Am sure I mentioned earlier in In this thread, my daughter as a copper was called to an accident in the Sheffield area on a smart motorway. A woman was over weight and could not get over the barrier. She was sat on the barrier about 15 yards further along from the broken down car. A lorry slammed into the car, which hit her. Her legs were torn to shreds. The short version is she died. The longer version involves the lasting effect on the coppers, ambulance people, family and the A and E dr who stopped and told everyone they did a fantastic job.
Oddly enough my lad was on about smart motorways on a course he was on Saturday. The lay-bys which offer “ refuge” are not long enough to fit a class one lorry and recovery vehicle in 😳
		
Click to expand...

I was going to "Like" that comment as it makes a very good point, but the story was so shocking a "Like" seemed insensitive.

If a private company made a decision to remove a safety measure from their product / design, somebody using it died and it was subsequently determined that the death would not have had occurred had that safety measure still been in place, I would imagine the directors of that company would be very very nervous about what was coming their way in the legal forum. Huge fines, prison?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 2, 2021)

For me along with the crap standard of driving.
They have got it the wrong way around.
The technology isn’t good enough but they built “ smart motorways any way”
They should not be opened until the technology is good and reliable enough.
But people are dying while they use them.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 2, 2021)

Golfmmad said:



			There is a similar junction round here. Traffic lights, left hand lane has marked arrow to turn left And straight on plus a straight on arrow in right hand lane. Most traffic will queue in the right lane leaving the left lane clear, crazy! There are merge in arrows 50yds after junction so the planners expected both lanes to be used when going straight on.
		
Click to expand...

I drive a lot in the USA where you can turn right on a red if there is no traffic.
There are some you can’t but they have different lights!( Multi lane highways mostly.)
We should trial turning left on a red light , it’s like any other junction really.


----------



## SaintHacker (Nov 2, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			This is EXACTLY why designs need to be safe. If every single driver could be guaranteed to drive with 100% safety, then there would be zero requirement for safety to be considered at all in design. However, there will always be morons on the road. Furthermore, there will be people who drive just as "safely" as we all like to think we drive, yet end up in a fatal accident anyway. We are all human, so we cannot guarantee that we will be 100% alert 100% of the time. Furthermore, there could be other distractions on the road that we do not notice a stationary car in front. It could be at night and it is pitch black, and the stationary car has no hazards on. You could be over-taking someone, moving back into the nearside lane, not immediately realising a car 50-100m in front is actually stationary, because you've been focused on the vehicle you've just overtaken. There are probably hundreds of scenarios we could come up with that would highlight how having a hard shoulder would eliminate the issue almost entirely.

Most of us, thank goodness, will never be involved in a fatal accident. However, is it not short sighted / arrogant to think that every single person who has been involved in a fatal accident are "idiots" and that we are a much better driver than them? If that was the case, in every single incident there ill always be a prosecution for driving without due care and attention. However, I suspect that does not happen, because often the incident is deemed something that the driver could not be control.

The argument is that removing hard shoulders will increase deaths on the roads. They protect broken down drivers from "idiots" or otherwise. It is difficult to see how not having them is no more dangerous.
		
Click to expand...




Billysboots said:



			There is absolutely no such thing as a dangerous road, I totally agree. But unfortunately, if you combine Smart motorway technology with a lot of drivers, you are destined to have one tragedy after another.

I’ve said it many, many times that we do not teach people to drive in this country, we teach them to pass a driving test. There is a huge difference, and whilst many seek to improve their driving once the L plates are off, many more don’t.

The standard of motorway driving, in particular, is generally appalling. Drivers who used to habitually sit in lane two on an otherwise empty carriageway have now become hoggers of lane three on four lane motorways. Tailgating is a huge problem. But the biggest issue is lack of attention. Far too many ignore lane closure signs on overhead gantries and it is only these which stand between motorists and carnage on a Smart motorway.

Safe in theory? Perhaps. But not when you add the motoring public to the mix. And therein lies your problem.
		
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you. Its utterly laughable that you can pass your test having never even looked at a motorway, leave the test centre and go and drive round the M25! Crazy.

Another point is people seem to be thinking a hard shoulder is some kind of safe zone. It isnt. If i break down i dont care what the weather is doing I'm out of the car and over the barrier.


----------



## Imurg (Nov 2, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			I totally agree with you. Its utterly laughable that you can pass your test having never even looked at a motorway, leave the test centre and go and drive round the M25! Crazy.
.
		
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more but I cant see how it could be incorporated into a test without running into hours rather than the 40 minutes it currently is.
There are many test centres that are nowhere near a motorway so, unless you consolidate test centres into larger units that are closer to motorways, it isn't going to happen.
The problem then becomes one of getting to test centres and the extra costs involved.
If my nearest test centre was Oxford or Luton or Wycombe ( the 3 closest that are on a motorway) then I'd give up because I'd have to charge 40 quid an hour and have 2 hour lessons as a minimum just to make some money. And nobody will pay 40 quid an hour.

The standard of driving is falling..no doubt.
As an Instructor I teach the kids to drive as well as pass the test because the two are different.
As an example...if I had to teach someone to navigate a system like Hanger Lane in order to pass their test it would be useless to them if their route to work goes through there once they've passed.
They'd get eaten alive in seconds because, in real life, it's a free for all and if you drive the way you have to drive to pass the test you're in trouble. 
My Old Man taught me to drive in the early 80s
I had 3 paid lessons to be sure I was ready
I got in the instructors car and he said Drive for 10 minutes, let's see what you can do.
10 minutes later he said " Do you always drive like that?"
Yes was the answer...
Well you'll never pass driving like that, you drive like you've been driving for 10 years..you have to drive like a learner...

Nothing has really changed in 40 years.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 2, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Another point is people seem to be thinking a hard shoulder is some kind of safe zone. It isnt. If i break down i dont care what the weather is doing I'm out of the car and over the barrier.
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely spot on. The hard shoulder is the most dangerous part of a conventional motorway. I’ve dealt with pedestrians killed on it, recovery company drivers killed on it, you name it.

I recall once being at the scene of an earlier collision, with my fully liveried patrol car stationary on the hard shoulder, lit up like a Christmas tree. Didn’t stop a lorry driver piling into it at 58mph. Fortunately nobody was in it.

In the days when I was working on motorway patrol, on the occasions when I was on the hard shoulder on a stop/check I always had one eye on my rear view mirror. Always.

Don’t ever kid yourself a hard shoulder is safe. It’s not.

EDIT: The point of that being, of course, that if you do away with the hard shoulder and try and treat lane one as one in times of need, merely by having a red ‘X’ on an overhead gantry, you multiply the risk several times over. Bonkers.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 2, 2021)

Yeah, I would just like to clarify my earlier points in case my words are misinterpreted.

I do not think the hard shoulder is "safe". If someone broke down, I would absolutely not recommend they stay there and wait for recovery, and get a picnic out. 

Simply saying that, speaking for myself personally, if I was to break down on a motorway I would without doubt prefer it was one with a hard shoulder. Hopefully it will allow me, in most cases, to pull out of a live lane and get to a place of relative safety. And, also put other drivers at less risk by hopefully removing an obstacle on their lane, particularly before the time any VMS signs warn them about it (assuming they're paying attention)


----------



## Ross61 (Nov 2, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			I drive a lot in the USA where you can turn right on a red if there is no traffic.
There are some you can’t but they have different lights!( Multi lane highways mostly.)
We should trial turning left on a red light , it’s like any other junction really.
		
Click to expand...

Bedford has had one of these for about 10 years, although it is only on one of the four entrances to the crossroads. There is lights on the straight on and turn right lanes, but the left lane has a ”give way” sign. This does cause some people who are using it for the first time to wait for lights, but a few toots on the horn sets them right. Apart from that it appears to work very well.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 2, 2021)

Ross61 said:



			Bedford has had one of these for about 10 years, although it is only on one of the four entrances to the crossroads. There is lights on the straight on and turn right lanes, but the left lane has a ”give way” sign. This does cause some people who are using it for the first time to wait for lights, but a few toots on the horn sets them right. Apart from that it appears to work very well.
		
Click to expand...

Yes it would save a lot of time and fuel and shorten a lot of traffic build up.


----------



## Ross61 (Nov 2, 2021)

On the M1 Milton Keynes/ luton sections it is not the all lanes running type but the hard shoulder is use under heavy traffic, which is most of the day! 
 The problem is that around junctions and services it goes to all lanes running, which confuses people when it goes back to 3 lanes and there is then a bottleneck when vehicles then frantically try to move out from the inside lane.
My other gripe is when there is an accident and all four lanes are chocker, the emergency vehicles have problems getting to the scene and valuable time is lost… not safe in my mind


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 5, 2021)

Smart motorways will be scrapped within a few years. It's a ridiculous idea and the money wasted on creating them is staggering. It'll take one bad crash involving a family of kids or a school bus. Too little, too late.

So many drivers on motorways don't pay attention. You've got lorry drivers who are tired and bored, often livening things up by overtaking another lorry at 0.1mph difference or using their phone/watching a film on the iPad. You've got middle lane hoggers who are totally unaware of the issues they cause and that's just for starters. No one takes any notice of closed lanes signs or speed restrictions because the best thing is to carry on in the close laned for the maximum time and filter over. It saves so much time. You'd need new fines for driving in a closed lane before anyone takes it seriously.

Throw in the delays of an amblulance getting to the scene of a crash and the sheer amount of old and unreliable cars on the road. If you drive a lot on the motorways you always see clapped out cars at the side of it broken down. 

The key should be removing traffic from the roads. I'd be in favour of every motorway being a toll road excluding lorries or vans. Higher rates for 1 person in a car too.


----------



## Ye Olde Boomer (Nov 5, 2021)

duplicate post deleted


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 5, 2021)

4LEX said:



			Smart motorways will be scrapped within a few years. It's a ridiculous idea and the money wasted on creating them is staggering. It'll take one bad crash involving a family of kids or a school bus. Too little, too late.

So many drivers on motorways don't pay attention. You've got lorry drivers who are tired and bored, often livening things up by overtaking another lorry at 0.1mph difference or using their phone/watching a film on the iPad. You've got middle lane hoggers who are totally unaware of the issues they cause and that's just for starters. No one takes any notice of closed lanes signs or speed restrictions because the best thing is to carry on in the close laned for the maximum time and filter over. It saves so much time. You'd need new fines for driving in a closed lane before anyone takes it seriously.

Throw in the delays of an amblulance getting to the scene of a crash and the sheer amount of old and unreliable cars on the road. If you drive a lot on the motorways you always see clapped out cars at the side of it broken down.

The key should be removing traffic from the roads. I'd be in favour of every motorway being a toll road excluding lorries or vans. Higher rates for 1 person in a car too.
		
Click to expand...

Agree with most. But, putting tolls on motorways will likely push a lot more traffic onto less suitable roads. Also, there is a balance off, on one hand reducing traffic on roads (environmental, noise pollution, congestion, etc) and increasing it to keep the country well connected, thus boosting economy. I doubt public transport is in a position to be a reasonable alternative to those who currently drive.


----------



## Ye Olde Boomer (Nov 5, 2021)

I never attempt to rent a vehicle in a left side drive nation because my chances of killing somebody and myself would be close to 50 / 50.
I don't know how to drive that way, and I readily admit it.

Then again, I'm on holiday and I don't want to drive anyway.

That's what cabs are for.

Japan surprises me.  Unlike Korea and Taiwan, they do it your way too.
They were never part of the Commonwealth.

I can understand Hong Kong.  You guys screwed them up.
They even speak some weird language called Cantonese,  although many can speak both Mandarin and English as well. 
Which makes them smarter than I, so I guess that I shouldn't criticize their driving.

By the way,  what's a "smart motorway" and how does it differ from a stupid one?


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 5, 2021)

Ye Olde Boomer said:



			I never attempt to rent a vehicle in a left side drive nation because my chances of killing somebody and myself would be close to 50 / 50.
I don't know how to drive that way, and I readily admit it.

Then again, I'm on holiday and I don't want to drive anyway.

That's what cabs are for.

Japan surprises me.  Unlike Korea and Taiwan, they do it your way too.
They were never part of the Commonwealth.

I can understand Hong Kong.  You guys screwed them up.
They even speak some weird language called Cantonese,  although many can speak both Mandarin and English as well.
Which makes them smarter than I, so I guess that I shouldn't criticize their driving.

By the way,  what's a "smart motorway" and how does it differ from a stupid one?
		
Click to expand...

We actually made HK.

And a Smart motorway is actually a stupid one, while a normal one is a smart one. Work that out!


----------



## Ye Olde Boomer (Nov 5, 2021)

4LEX said:



			We actually made HK.

And a Smart motorway is actually a stupid one, while a normal one is a smart one. Work that out!
		
Click to expand...

That helps a lot.  Thanks.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 5, 2021)

Ye Olde Boomer said:



			That helps a lot.  Thanks.
		
Click to expand...

My mates American and he hates driving in the UK.
It’s so easy in the US most roads are in a grid system so are all squares.
I had to laugh the first time he came to a roundabout here, he just couldn’t get his head around it.

A smart motorway is what a tech company would come up with on paper.
Unfortunately we don’t drive on paper we make mistakes, speed ,or are just plain selfish and arrogant so in the real world they are very dangerous and don’t work.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 5, 2021)

My mate told me today he thought they were called Smart Highways because they have WiFi. Serious.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Nov 5, 2021)

The motorways are smart, its the stupid drivers that create the problem.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 5, 2021)

Bunkermagnet said:



			The motorways are smart, its the stupid drivers that create the problem.
		
Click to expand...

Is breaking down on the motorway with no hard shoulder while a truck rams into the back of your car considered stupid.  I would say removing the hard shoulder is stupid.


----------



## pauljames87 (Nov 5, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Is breaking down on the motorway with no hard shoulder while a truck rams into the back of your car considered stupid.  I would say removing the hard shoulder is stupid.
		
Click to expand...

What do you do when you break down on a dual carriageway ?


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 5, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			What do you do when you break down on a dual carriageway ?
		
Click to expand...

Two wrongs don't make a right and dual carriageways don't tend to have the same volume of heavy goods vehicles.  The point with smart motorways is they did have a hard shoulder which has been removed.


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 5, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			What do you do when you break down on a dual carriageway ?
		
Click to expand...

Put the hazards lights on, get out of car stand on pavement away from the car. Possibly have a Costa. There are so many things you can do when you break down on a dual carriage way that you cannot do on a “ Smart motorway“. Now correct be if I am wrong, the speed limit is 70 on a motorway. It can be anything from 30-70 on a dual lane carriageway. So I don’t think there is any comparison what so ever between breaking down on the two highways.


----------



## pauljames87 (Nov 5, 2021)

Tashyboy said:



			Put the hazards lights on, get out of car stand on pavement away from the car. Possibly have a Costa. There are so many things you can do when you break down on a dual carriage way that you cannot do on a “ Smart motorway“. Now correct be if I am wrong, the speed limit is 70 on a motorway. It can be anything from 30-70 on a dual lane carriageway. So I don’t think there is any comparison what so ever between breaking down on the two highways.
		
Click to expand...

A smart motorways limit changes constantly to adapt to road conditions

Especially broken down cars 

Anything from 30-70

They are comparable in some aspects 

Smart motorways are great in theory 

Idiot drivers and poorly used tech is most of the issue


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 5, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			A *smart motorways limit changes constantly to adapt to road conditions

Especially broken down cars*

Anything from 30-70

They are comparable in some aspects

Smart motorways are great in theory

Idiot drivers and poorly used tech is most of the issue
		
Click to expand...

I think this is mainly the problem, they don’t alter quick enough which causes the problems ☹️


----------



## pauljames87 (Nov 5, 2021)

Tashyboy said:



			I think this is mainly the problem, they don’t alter quick enough which causes the problems ☹️
		
Click to expand...

Even when they do.. people ignore the limits, ignore the red X 

People are the cause and solution for most issues


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 5, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			A smart motorways limit changes constantly to adapt to road conditions

Especially broken down cars

Anything from 30-70

They are comparable in some aspects

Smart motorways are great in theory

Idiot drivers and poorly used tech is most of the issue
		
Click to expand...

They alter nothing for traffic following the broken down vehicle. There is a lag between breakdown  and warning signs appearing. Sometimes a long leg, because cameras do not pick up the breakdown.

Certain large vehicles have reduced speed limits on A Roads compared to Motorways. Motorways also tend to consist of longer, wider roads with few distractions like junctions, roundabouts to negotiate. So, you have more long distance drivers on motorways who have not had to hit the brakes for many many miles. I wouldn't want to break down on a dual carriageway, but I would much prefer that than on a smart motorway.

There are idiot drivers out there. But, if it is one of them that smashes me to pieces because I had no hard shoulder to pull over on, it won't give me a lot of comfort.


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 5, 2021)

These will be scrapped in a few years, the best thing the average person can do is make sure your car is fairly new, serviced and reliable. Don't take a risk with tyres, always buy the best.

If I personally broke down on a smart motorway, I'd be half tempted to look in the mirror and put my brakes on so the car behind crashed into me at a controlled pace so I've got protection.


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 5, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Agree with most. But, putting tolls on motorways will likely push a lot more traffic onto less suitable roads. Also, there is a balance off, on one hand reducing traffic on roads (environmental, noise pollution, congestion, etc) and increasing it to keep the country well connected, thus boosting economy. I doubt public transport is in a position to be a reasonable alternative to those who currently drive.
		
Click to expand...

Road tax is too cheap, it should be ramped up. Outside of logistics and business it should start at £5k and rise accordingly. Most of the traffic in inner cities and B roads are people who are too lazy to get public transport and run bangers. They're the cause of most issues. Price them off the roads and it's a game changer.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 5, 2021)

4LEX said:



			Road tax is too cheap, it should be ramped up. Outside of logistics and business it should start at £5k and rise accordingly. Most of the traffic in inner cities and B roads are people who are too lazy to get public transport and run bangers. They're the cause of most issues. Price them off the roads and it's a game changer.
		
Click to expand...

Try using public transport in rural areas and particularly if you are old or disabled.  The well off will be able to pay those taxes, are suggesting punishing the infirm and poor.  Not a fair policy.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			Road tax is too cheap, it should be ramped up. Outside of logistics and business it should start at £5k and rise accordingly. Most of the traffic in inner cities and B roads are people who are too lazy to get public transport and run bangers. They're the cause of most issues. Price them off the roads and it's a game changer.
		
Click to expand...

If you live in London fine. Maybe some other cities. But public transport is woeful most other places.

Also, good luck to golf clubs. You'll price people out of driving a car, and remove their mode of transport to go play golf. I certainly wouldn't be bringing my trolley and clubs onto a bus to try and make my 7.24am tee time.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			Road tax is too cheap, it should be ramped up. Outside of logistics and business it should start at £5k and rise accordingly. Most of the traffic in inner cities and B roads are people who are too lazy to get public transport and run bangers. They're the cause of most issues. Price them off the roads and it's a game changer.
		
Click to expand...

I live in a village several miles from the nearest town, and we have a bus once every two hours. My nearest train station is eight miles away. Does that make me “lazy”?


----------



## chrisd (Nov 6, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			I live in a village several miles from the nearest town, and we have a bus once every two hours. My nearest train station is eight miles away. Does that make me “lazy”?
		
Click to expand...

Me too, good thing that people with crazy ideas don't get to implement them!


----------



## chrisd (Nov 6, 2021)

pauljames87 said:



			What do you do when you break down on a dual carriageway ?
		
Click to expand...

Take the same position as they advise you on an airplane and pray - not that praying helps one jot


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			If I personally broke down on a smart motorway, *I'd be half tempted to look in the mirror and put my brakes on so the car behind crashed into me at a controlled pace* so I've got protection.
		
Click to expand...

You’re joking, right? Please tell me you’re joking.


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			Road tax is too cheap, it should be ramped up. Outside of logistics and business it should start at £5k and rise accordingly. Most of the traffic in inner cities and B roads are people who are too lazy to get public transport and run bangers. They're the cause of most issues. Price them off the roads and it's a game changer.
		
Click to expand...

I would guess with that comment you live in an area were public transport is excellent. For the vast majority of people, travel is not a luxury.


----------



## BiMGuy (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			These will be scrapped in a few years, the best thing the average person can do is make sure your car is fairly new, serviced and reliable. Don't take a risk with tyres, always buy the best.

*If I personally broke down on a smart motorway, I'd be half tempted to look in the mirror and put my brakes on so the car behind crashed into me at a controlled pace so I've got protection.*

Click to expand...

I’ve read some absolute garbage on here. But this wins by a long way. I you genuinely think this. Please do the rest of us a favor and hand your license back.


----------



## Tashyboy (Nov 6, 2021)

BiMGuy said:



			Have you

I’ve read some absolute garbage on here. But this wins by a long way. I you genuinely think this. Please do the rest of us a favor and hand your license back.
		
Click to expand...

At least he has proven that some of the drivers on motorways don’t know how to drive on them ☹️😡 either that or he is a WUM and got the response he was after.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			These will be scrapped in a few years, the best thing the average person can do is make sure your car is fairly new, serviced and reliable. Don't take a risk with tyres, always buy the best.

If I personally broke down on a smart motorway, I'd be half tempted to look in the mirror and put my brakes on so the car behind crashed into me at a controlled pace so I've got protection.
		
Click to expand...

What if he swerves and causes a multi car pile up.?


----------



## Fade and Die (Nov 6, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			What if he swerves and causes a multi car pile up.?
		
Click to expand...

He wants protection, so the family that rear ends him gets wiped out by a lorry driver watching YouTube on his phone rather than him!!Seriously one of the strangest things I have read on here.


----------



## CliveW (Nov 6, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Two wrongs don't make a right and dual carriageways don't tend to have the same volume of heavy goods vehicles.  The point with smart motorways is they did have a hard shoulder which has been removed.
		
Click to expand...

Living beside the A90, the major trunk road to and from Aberdeen, I would say there is a higher volume of HGVs than there is on the motorway network in Scotland. We also have a very small motorway network and most of that is two lanes with no hard shoulder  or lighting, particularly north of the Central belt. What I do notice when driving down south is the complete lack of distance between vehicles which leaves little or no reaction time if something happens in front of you.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

Fade and Die said:



			He wants protection, so the family that rear ends him gets wiped out by a lorry driver watching YouTube on his phone rather than him!!Seriously one of the strangest things I have read on here.
		
Click to expand...

A quick glance at the law relating to dangerous driving and, heaven forbid, causing death by dangerous driving, and he might take a slightly different view. I’m still clinging on to the hope it’s a wind up.


----------



## chrisd (Nov 6, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			I’m still clinging on to the hope it’s a wind up.
		
Click to expand...

I'm clinging to the hope that he doesn't ever drive down here on the M20 near Ashford, Folkestone and Dover - we alrea have enough foreign drivers with a death wish to cope with !


----------



## clubchamp98 (Nov 6, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			A quick glance at the law relating to dangerous driving and, heaven forbid, causing death by dangerous driving, and he might take a slightly different view. I’m still clinging on to the hope it’s a wind up.
		
Click to expand...

I don’t think most of us would have the reactions to do something like that.
It’s putting everyone at risk and if proved should be an offence.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

clubchamp98 said:



			I don’t think most of us would have the reactions to do something like that.
It’s putting everyone at risk and if proved should be an offence.
		
Click to expand...

If you look at the definition of dangerous driving, deliberately causing a collision on a motorway more than ticks the boxes.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 6, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			If you look at the definition of dangerous driving, deliberately causing a collision on a motorway more than ticks the boxes.
		
Click to expand...

I think he should be arrested now, better that than wait for him to actually commit the crime. Bit like the film Minority Report


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			I think he should be arrested now, better that than wait for him to actually commit the crime. Bit like the film Minority Report
		
Click to expand...

Well, prevention is better than cure I suppose…….


----------



## SaintHacker (Nov 6, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			Two wrongs don't make a right and dual carriageways don't tend to have the same volume of heavy goods vehicles.  .
		
Click to expand...

How do the HGVs get to the motorways?


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 6, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			How do the HGVs get to the motorways?
		
Click to expand...

What does that statement mean? Are you saying non-motorway roads are busier than motorways because traffic need to get to the motorway? Strange logic.


----------



## SaintHacker (Nov 6, 2021)

BiMGuy said:



			I’ve read some absolute garbage on here. But this wins by a long way. I you genuinely think this. Please do the rest of us a favor and hand your license back.
		
Click to expand...

Reading some of his other posts I'm not sure he's at an age yet that he can a licence in the first place...


----------



## drdel (Nov 6, 2021)

It's well known the injury severity is pretty much directly proportion to the differential speed of the two objects at impact. Hence why in motor sport relatively few serious injuries arise (plus a few other factors).

Having broken down stationary vehicles in the same lane as the normal rate of flow is against all highway design logic other than the build cost v safety.


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 6, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			How do the HGVs get to the motorways?
		
Click to expand...

My point was that it's not acceptable not to provide a safe place for vehicles too pull off a carrageway where the permitted speeds are fast.  Just because this may be the case on a dual carriageway isn't a defence for there being no hard shoulder on a motorway.      Does anyone actually think it's safe to pull up on the inside lane on a motorway with no hard shoulder, really!


----------



## Ye Olde Boomer (Nov 6, 2021)

I really miss the huge turnpike battleships that we used to drive in the sixties here in the US.
We could smash into one another at will.  They didn't even have to enforce the drunk driving laws back then.

But, as we all know, nothing lasts forever.


----------



## SaintHacker (Nov 6, 2021)

SocketRocket said:



			My point was that it's not acceptable not to provide a safe place for vehicles too pull off a carrageway where the permitted speeds are fast.  Just because this may be the case on a dual carriageway isn't a defence for there being no hard shoulder on a motorway.      Does anyone actually think it's safe to pull up on the inside lane on a motorway with no hard shoulder, really!
		
Click to expand...

Ok, I'll ask my earlier question again as no one answered it last time and this thread is going round in circles. If you had a choice would you prefer to break down on a hard shoulder with traffic thundering past at 70+ mph, or would you prefer a live,but closed, lane or emergency refuge with the adjacent lanes slowed to 30? I know which one I'd choose,and it doesnt involve hard shoulders.


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 6, 2021)

Fade and Die said:



			He wants protection, so the family that rear ends him gets wiped out by a lorry driver watching YouTube on his phone rather than him!!Seriously one of the strangest things I have read on here.
		
Click to expand...

It was used to highlight the ridiculous nature of smart motorways and selfish mentality of some drivers. Of course in reality I'd never intentionally cause a crash but they'll be many drivers that would do exactly that. I apologise if it came across badly. But as a caveat, anyone that rear ends someone is at fault for not giving space or not paying attention, via the law. It's why insurance scams are so tough to prove and why insurance is so high.

I almost died in a high speed RTA years ago and have seen first hand the carnage it brings. Seeing your friend with half his arm missing changes your outlook.

Those responsible for these smart motorways should be held accountable for corporate manslaughter IMO.


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 6, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Reading some of his other posts I'm not sure he's at an age yet that he can a licence in the first place...
		
Click to expand...

Ouch. I've had a licence for 15 years and have 15 years no claims with only 3 points for driving at 33 in a 30


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 6, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Ok, I'll ask my earlier question again as no one answered it last time and this thread is going round in circles. If you had a choice would you prefer to break down on a hard shoulder with traffic thundering past at 70+ mph, or would you prefer a live,but closed, lane or emergency refuge with the adjacent lanes slowed to 30? I know which one I'd choose,and it doesnt involve hard shoulders.
		
Click to expand...

Hard shoulder, easy. Especially as in the alternative option,  the lane will not be closed to traffic immediately behind me.


----------



## Foxholer (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			... But as a caveat, anyone that gets rear ended is 100% at fault for not giving space or not paying attention, via the law...
		
Click to expand...

Eh! What?!
Please explain, as I think you have that the wrong way around!

FWIW, I'm not a fan of 'smart' motorways/use of hard shoulder for traffic. I believe safety is compromised far too much for the marginal benefit.


----------



## BiMGuy (Nov 6, 2021)

Foxholer said:



			Eh! What?!
Please explain, as I think you have that the wrong way around!

FWIW, I'm not a fan of 'smart' motorways/use of hard shoulder for traffic. I believe safety is compromised far too much for the marginal benefit.
		
Click to expand...

This is similar to the golfers making up rules thread. We now have drivers making up laws.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			But as a caveat, anyone that gets rear ended is 100% at fault for not giving space or not paying attention, via the law.
		
Click to expand...

Codswallop.


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 6, 2021)

Foxholer said:



			Eh! What?!
Please explain, as I think you have that the wrong way around!

FWIW, I'm not a fan of 'smart' motorways/use of hard shoulder for traffic. I believe safety is compromised far too much for the marginal benefit.
		
Click to expand...

I did have it the wrong way round!


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 6, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			Codswallop.
		
Click to expand...

I meant anyone that rear ends someone.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

4LEX said:



			I meant anyone that rear ends someone.
		
Click to expand...

Even then they’re not responsible 100% of the time. The law is not quite that simple.


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 6, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			Even then they’re not responsible 100% of the time. The law is not quite that simple.
		
Click to expand...

I was taught to give the correct distance from the car infront if they hit the brakes, to have enough space to stop. But it all feeds into the too many cars on roads debate, in many occasions it's not possible. Some motorways have chevrons for distance and literally no one sticks to it due to volume of traffic. The only time it's not 100% is when it's an insurance scam with enough evidence to prove it.

Anyways, smart motorways are crap and I'm a good driver OK


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

Sorry. I’ll bow to your experience of traffic law. The 20+ years I spent enforcing it and investigating fatal collisions was clearly wasted.

🙄


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 6, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			Sorry. I’ll bow to your experience of traffic law. The 20+ years I spent enforcing it and investigating fatal collisions was clearly wasted.

🙄
		
Click to expand...

That's what I was taught, always happy to be corrected and educated by someone with more knowledge


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 6, 2021)

If someone rear ends the vehicle in front because their own vehicle has suffered from a mechanical failure they’re very unlikely to be legally responsible for the collision via a manner of driving offence, although there may be offences in relation to vehicle condition.

If they suffer a medical episode at the wheel, the same will apply. Very unlikely to be guilty of any offence or in any way responsible for the collision, unless it was a medical condition they were aware of, or in some way responsible for initiating.

If someone suffers an unexpected bout of sneezing, for example, there is a defence in law known as automatism.

And then, of course, you have the actions of other drivers. Like, for example, the person who, in the process of breaking down on a motorway, decides to deliberately cause the driver behind to collide with their vehicle. Yes, the following driver may possibly be guilty of careless driving. But the driver who deliberately caused it is more than likely guilty of the more serious offence of dangerous driving.

Just a few examples of where the following driver may not be 100% liable for a rear end shunt, if at all. There are others, but I hope you get the gist.


----------



## 4LEX (Nov 6, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			If someone rear ends the vehicle in front because their own vehicle has suffered from a mechanical failure they’re very unlikely to be legally responsible for the collision via a manner of driving offence, although there may be offences in relation to vehicle condition.

If they suffer a medical episode at the wheel, the same will apply. Very unlikely to be guilty of any offence or in any way responsible for the collision, unless it was a medical condition they were aware of, or in some way responsible for initiating.

If someone suffers an unexpected bout of sneezing, for example, there is a defence in law known as automatism.

And then, of course, you have the actions of other drivers. Like, for example, the person who, in the process of breaking down on a motorway, decides to deliberately cause the driver behind to collide with their vehicle. Yes, the following driver may possibly be guilty of careless driving. But the driver who deliberately caused it is more than likely guilty of the more serious offence of dangerous driving.

Just a few examples of where the following driver may not be 100% liable for a rear end shunt, if at all. There are others, but I hope you get the gist.
		
Click to expand...

I do get the gist but never considered medical emergencies in my comments as that's obviously an accident. I was talking general driving.

Intrigued about the sneezing episode though, how would that be proven/unproven in a court if there was no evidence? If someone caused a crash and had a good lawyer who used that as a defence, is that a way some people get off?


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 7, 2021)

4LEX said:



			Intrigued about the sneezing episode though, how would that be proven/unproven in a court if there was no evidence? If someone caused a crash and had a good lawyer who used that as a defence, is that a way some people get off?
		
Click to expand...

Very difficult in the absence of independent witness evidence. But it’s not for a defence lawyer to prove their client’s innocence - it’s for the prosecution to prove guilt. All the defence needs to introduce is an element of reasonable doubt.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Nov 7, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Ok, I'll ask my earlier question again as no one answered it last time and this thread is going round in circles. If you had a choice would you prefer to break down on a hard shoulder with traffic thundering past at 70+ mph, or would you prefer a live,but closed, lane or emergency refuge with the adjacent lanes slowed to 30? I know which one I'd choose,and it doesnt involve hard shoulders.
		
Click to expand...

Great in theory. But, in truth, one is a reality, it is there as a physical refuge for you to pull on to.
The other is only going to happen if a lot of people hit the right switch in time, and obey the signals and do what they tell you.
Knowing drivers, I know which I would rely on most.😀


----------



## SocketRocket (Nov 7, 2021)

SaintHacker said:



			Ok, I'll ask my earlier question again as no one answered it last time and this thread is going round in circles. If you had a choice would you prefer to break down on a hard shoulder with traffic thundering past at 70+ mph, or would you prefer a live,but closed, lane or emergency refuge with the adjacent lanes slowed to 30? I know which one I'd choose,and it doesnt involve hard shoulders.
		
Click to expand...

The hard shoulder every time. You can pull up and get out of the car without traffic thundering up behind you at 70+ mph.    The absolute danger on a smart motorway is the moment you pull up when your car packs in, there will be no lane closure and humping great trucks driving behind you.  How many have to die before this gets changed.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Nov 7, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			Very difficult in the absence of independent witness evidence. But it’s not for a defence lawyer to prove their client’s innocence - it’s for the prosecution to prove guilt. All the defence needs to introduce is *an element of reasonable doubt.*

Click to expand...

Unreasonable doubt will suffice if it is a jury trial.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 7, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			Unreasonable doubt will suffice if it is a jury trial.
		
Click to expand...

Indeed 🙄


----------



## drdel (Nov 7, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			If someone rear ends the vehicle in front because their own vehicle has suffered from a mechanical failure they’re very unlikely to be legally responsible for the collision via a manner of driving offence, although there may be offences in relation to vehicle condition.

If they suffer a medical episode at the wheel, the same will apply. Very unlikely to be guilty of any offence or in any way responsible for the collision, unless it was a medical condition they were aware of, or in some way responsible for initiating.

If someone suffers an unexpected bout of sneezing, for example, there is a defence in law known as automatism.

And then, of course, you have the actions of other drivers. Like, for example, the person who, in the process of breaking down on a motorway, decides to deliberately cause the driver behind to collide with their vehicle. Yes, the following driver may possibly be guilty of careless driving. But the driver who deliberately caused it is more than likely guilty of the more serious offence of dangerous driving.

Just a few examples of where the following driver may not be 100% liable for a rear end shunt, if at all. There are others, but I hope you get the gist.
		
Click to expand...

But in fairness to 4Lex these incidents are a very low percentage of read end shunts.


----------



## Billysboots (Nov 7, 2021)

drdel said:



			But in fairness to 4Lex these incidents are a very low percentage of read end shunts.
		
Click to expand...

Not strictly true. My last point was slightly tongue in cheek, but if you really drill down into a lot of rear end shunts there will be blame on both sides.

Take motorways and dual carriageways for example. At busy periods there are lots of so called concertina collisions on these roads, where one vehicle slows or stops, and there then follows a number of vehicles running into the one in front. Now I don’t dispute for one moment if you collide with a vehicle in front there is likely to be an element of carelessness on your part. But what about the very front vehicle? Is that driver blameless, because that is what 4Lex suggests? In an awful lot of cases I would say not. If a driver has to slam the brakes on whilst driving on a motorway or dual carriageway I would argue their attention has been every bit as lacking as the drivers behind - they merely haven’t collided with anything in front of them. That is how an awful lot of these collisions start. Had their anticipation been better, then the likelihood is their braking could have been more progressive, and the carnage behind might even have been avoided entirely.

What 4Lex is referring to is, I suspect, the stance adopted by insurance companies. You need to bear in mind that, unless there is an injury involved, the police will rarely go to the extent of investigating straightforward rear end shunts. They will advise all involved to refer to their insurers, who will then resolve it. Invariably those companies will adopt the stance that the following driver is to blame. Whilst the following driver, by failing to stop in the distance they can see to be clear, doubtless is blameworthy to an extent, it just seems too problematic for insurers to pursue the leading driver, even though legally they may also be culpable.

So to argue that 100% of following drivers are liable in law is not really correct. In insurance company terms, possibly, but legally it is nowhere near that simple.


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 7, 2021)

Billysboots said:



			Not strictly true. My last point was slightly tongue in cheek, but if you really drill down into a lot of rear end shunts there will be blame on both sides.

Take motorways and dual carriageways for example. At busy periods there are lots of so called concertina collisions on these roads, where one vehicle slows or stops, and there then follows a number of vehicles running into the one in front. Now I don’t dispute for one moment if you collide with a vehicle in front there is likely to be an element of carelessness on your part. But what about the very front vehicle? Is that driver blameless, because that is what 4Lex suggests? In an awful lot of cases I would say not. If a driver has to slam the brakes on whilst driving on a motorway or dual carriageway I would argue their attention has been every bit as lacking as the drivers behind - they merely haven’t collided with anything in front of them. That is how an awful lot of these collisions start. Had their anticipation been better, then the likelihood is their braking could have been more progressive, and the carnage behind might even have been avoided entirely.

What 4Lex is referring to is, I suspect, the stance adopted by insurance companies. You need to bear in mind that, unless there is an injury involved, the police will rarely go to the extent of investigating straightforward rear end shunts. They will advise all involved to refer to their insurers, who will then resolve it. Invariably those companies will adopt the stance that the following driver is to blame. Whilst the following driver, by failing to stop in the distance they can see to be clear, doubtless is blameworthy to an extent, it just seems too problematic for insurers to pursue the leading driver, even though legally they may also be culpable.

So to argue that 100% of following drivers are liable in law is not really correct. In insurance company terms, possibly, but legally it is nowhere near that simple.
		
Click to expand...

Also, on motorways, drivers are often switching lanes. So, I could have left plenty of room between me and the car in front for me to react if I need to. However, another driver suddenly pulls into my lane in front of me. In that instant, I am now closer to car in front. If they had to suddenly slam the breaks just as they pulled into my lane, I would say there is 0% blame on me for slamming into the back of them?

I also hear of people who like to brake test people behind them. In that case, a lot of blame likely to go to the leading driver for doing such a thing?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Nov 7, 2021)

Swango1980 said:



			Also, on motorways, drivers are often switching lanes. So, I could have left plenty of room between me and the car in front for me to react if I need to. However, another driver suddenly pulls into my lane in front of me. *In that instant, I am now closer to car in front. If they had to suddenly slam the breaks just as they pulled into my lane, I would say there is 0% blame on me for slamming into the back of them?*

I also hear of people who like to brake test people behind them. In that case, a lot of blame likely to go to the leading driver for doing such a thing?
		
Click to expand...

In the standard of driving that Billy & I would have been held accountable to, the moment that car starts to move across into your lane, or indicates that it is going to move and take away your braking distance is the moment you should be doing something about it; easing off the throttle, light braking or even changing lanes if that is appropriate.  

If that vehicle has changed lanes because of something happening ahead that they have seen & reacted to but which you've failed to notice, why should you get a free pass?


----------



## Swango1980 (Nov 7, 2021)

Blue in Munich said:



			In the standard of driving that Billy & I would have been held accountable to, the moment that car starts to move across into your lane, or indicates that it is going to move and take away your braking distance is the moment you should be doing something about it; easing off the throttle, light braking or even changing lanes if that is appropriate. 

If that vehicle has changed lanes because of something happening ahead that they have seen & reacted to but which you've failed to notice, why should you get a free pass?
		
Click to expand...

Absolutely. However, the scenario I am talking about is when a car suddenly decides to change lanes. Often they do not indicate, or pull across and almost pointlessly start to indicate as they make the move. Often, it is to quickly overtake a car in wearside lane and they decide they can nip out in front of you. Or, they overtake me but pull in very close in front of me instead of going a bit further and pulling across. It is also why I added that if they had to brake suddenly as soon as they switched lanes. Because obviously I would / should adjust my speed to make that gap safe asap.


----------



## Tashyboy (Jan 12, 2022)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59956911

it comes as no great suprise.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jan 12, 2022)

Tashyboy said:



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-59956911

it comes as no great suprise.
		
Click to expand...

I would say it's being hidden behind safety ... I'd say it's more the cost whilst the economy recovers


----------



## Billysboots (Jan 12, 2022)

pauljames87 said:



			I would say it's being hidden behind safety ... I'd say it's more the cost whilst the economy recovers
		
Click to expand...

Probably true to an extent, but the cost to the economy of having motorways shut for hours on end whilst serious collisions are dealt with is absolutely astronomical.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jan 12, 2022)

Billysboots said:



			Probably true to an extent, but the cost to the economy of having motorways shut for hours on end whilst serious collisions are dealt with is absolutely astronomical.
		
Click to expand...

however thats not planned for, tragic as it sounds you cant plan or budget for it.


----------



## Swango1980 (Jan 12, 2022)

pauljames87 said:



			however thats not planned for, tragic as it sounds you cant plan or budget for it.
		
Click to expand...

You can. You can make roads safer. Health and safety plays a big part in highway / junction design.

That doesn't mean safety standards are 100% perfect in every area, and this particular thread highlights an area where the safety aspect of Smart Motorways is highly questionable. So, why where they introduced? Well, motorways carry the largest number of vehicles during peak periods. From an economical point of view, it was probably decided that the economic saving to generally improving capacity (and without having to get the diggers out) was more of a benefit, than the potential cost of having to close the motorway when there is an horrific accident (and I'm sure they assumed this would hopefully be infrequent). I'm guessing it was also justified that, the hard shoulder would only be open during busy periods, when they'd assume traffic would be moving more slowly anyway? To be fair, the above is just an assumption from me, I've not read all the reports into giving Smart Motorways the green light to begin with. But, there is no doubt that Smart Motorways were only ever brought about to solve an economic problem, not a safety one.

However, now that they've been in existence for a while, the number of tragic accidents that have been caused as a direct impact there being no hard shoulder cannot be ignored.


----------



## pauljames87 (Jan 12, 2022)

Swango1980 said:



			You can. You can make roads safer. Health and safety plays a big part in highway / junction design.

That doesn't mean safety standards are 100% perfect in every area, and this particular thread highlights an area where the safety aspect of Smart Motorways is highly questionable. So, why where they introduced? Well, motorways carry the largest number of vehicles during peak periods. From an economical point of view, it was probably decided that the economic saving to generally improving capacity (and without having to get the diggers out) was more of a benefit, than the potential cost of having to close the motorway when there is an horrific accident (and I'm sure they assumed this would hopefully be infrequent). I'm guessing it was also justified that, the hard shoulder would only be open during busy periods, when they'd assume traffic would be moving more slowly anyway? To be fair, the above is just an assumption from me, I've not read all the reports into giving Smart Motorways the green light to begin with. But, there is no doubt that Smart Motorways were only ever brought about to solve an economic problem, not a safety one.

However, now that they've been in existence for a while, the number of tragic accidents that have been caused as a direct impact there being no hard shoulder cannot be ignored.
		
Click to expand...

That is not the point I said at all.

I said it can't be budgeted for 

For example network rail had to bring in train stops at all signals on their network after moorgate rail disaster

Legal requirement

The costs were deemed too high.. so instead if they have an accident and it involves a signal without a train stop they will compo the families instead 

So they have not spent the cash (like smart motorways) but not budgeted for the hit for death etc 

I'm not saying they can't plan better I'm saying they won't be saying right it costs this much every day it's closed for an accident


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jan 12, 2022)

pauljames87 said:



			...

I'm not saying they can't plan better* I'm saying they won't be saying right it costs this much every day it's closed for an accident*

Click to expand...

Highways Economic Note 1

http://www.medicine.mcgill.ca/epidemiology/courses/EPIB654/Summer2010/CBA/UK Economic Note Value for a life.pdf

I believe it can come under either Lost Output or Human Costs, but there is a calculation as to how much it costs having a road closed for an accident.  It is used as part of a Cost Benefit Analysis when deciding if an accident prevention scheme is economically justified.

Apologies to @Billysboots for any flashbacks caused as a result of this post


----------



## pauljames87 (Jan 12, 2022)

Blue in Munich said:



			Highways Economic Note 1

http://www.medicine.mcgill.ca/epidemiology/courses/EPIB654/Summer2010/CBA/UK Economic Note Value for a life.pdf

I believe it can come under either Lost Output or Human Costs, but there is a calculation as to how much it costs having a road closed for an accident.  It is used as part of a Cost Benefit Analysis when deciding if an accident prevention scheme is economically justified.

Apologies to @Billysboots for any flashbacks caused as a result of this post 

Click to expand...

fair enough, wasnt aware of that .

I doubt that the safety of them is behind this decision at all and I stand by that. 

we are skint and everything is being scaled back


----------



## Blue in Munich (Jan 12, 2022)

pauljames87 said:



			fair enough, wasnt aware of that .

*I doubt that the safety of them is behind this decision at all* and I stand by that.

we are skint and everything is being scaled back
		
Click to expand...

They are not in a good place with these.  As far as I am aware they were well warned of the dangers before they put them in; despite that they continued to install them, and the chickens are now coming home to roost.  They may finally be realising the error of their ways.

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/la...charges-over-smart-motorway-death-05-01-2021/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...mpaign-abolished-hard-shoulders-b1831591.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/22/are-smart-motorways-safe

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/smart-motorway-jr/


----------



## clubchamp98 (Jan 12, 2022)

pauljames87 said:



			I would say it's being hidden behind safety ... I'd say it's more the cost whilst the economy recovers
		
Click to expand...

I think it’s a mixture of safety and cost.
What’s next HS2.


----------



## Imurg (Jan 12, 2022)

They've either finished the groundwork at 3 sites around here and moved on or they've been halted.
Work still going on at the 4th local one for now....
Not heard either way from local news.....


----------



## SocketRocket (Jan 12, 2022)

Blue in Munich said:



			They are not in a good place with these.  As far as I am aware they were well warned of the dangers before they put them in; despite that they continued to install them, and the chickens are now coming home to roost.  They may finally be realising the error of their ways.

https://www.newcivilengineer.com/la...charges-over-smart-motorway-death-05-01-2021/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...mpaign-abolished-hard-shoulders-b1831591.html

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/22/are-smart-motorways-safe

https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/smart-motorway-jr/

Click to expand...

I thought the way they would be operated was to close the inside lane most of the time as a hard shoulder and only open it on times of high volume slow moving traffic but they are keeping it open all the time.

They've just converted the M4 from Reading to Heathrow which is a potential deathtrap.


----------



## Billysboots (Jan 12, 2022)

Blue in Munich said:



			Apologies to @Billysboots for any flashbacks caused as a result of this post 

Click to expand...

Forgiven.


----------

