Smart Motorways

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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.

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

 

[clubchamp98]

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)

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]

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

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

 

[SaintHacker]

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

 

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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?

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]

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.

 

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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

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]

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

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]

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

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.

 

[PJ87]

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!

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]

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.

 

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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 ?

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.

 

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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?

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.

 

[PJ87]

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.

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]

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?

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.