Smart Motorways

[PJ87]

Just call the police.

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

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

 

[PJ87]

Why?

Data please.

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]

Why?

Data please.

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]

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

Had you not been maintaining the tyres?

 

[DanFST]

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

That's where you're objectively wrong.

 

[PJ87]

Had you not been maintaining the tyres?

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]

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

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.

 

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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..?

Check mirrors... Slow down...

 

[PJ87]

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

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]

Why?

Data please.

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

 

[Patster1969]

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.

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]

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.

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]

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

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

 

[PJ87]

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

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]

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]

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

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]

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

Lucky you.

 

[Imurg]

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.

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