Jump to content

Smart motorway roll out halted


Engine Doctor
 Share

Recommended Posts

I see on Sky News today that the roll out of the so called " smart motorways" has been halted due to safety concerns after an inquiry . Yes it took an inquiry to come to that conclusion!

It's a pity they can't roll back time and prevented the deaths caused by these dangerous roads. Why Higways uk hasn't been charged with corporate manslaughter is just wrong. 

The smart individuals who pushed these on the driving public should be named ,shamed and disgraced. My take would be that they were probably just out of uni with .little or no driving experience but huge egos. 

What do others think ?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, EarlyBird said:

It's was a political cheap fix?

No idea about the politics. But it was a cheap fix to increase capacity, and it watered down the concept to a sanctuary area in the system, and warnings were given about the risks before the roll out started. Ministry of transport chose a cheap,quick option. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is they reduce capacity in the event of a breakdown. I used to drive on the M25 each week and even with a broken down car on the hard shoulder the remaining 4 lanes were still zipping along at normal speed. With smart motorway, a simple breakdown brought the whole road down to 40mph on those overhead signs and we all crawled along for mile after mile. 

 

This was especially annoying when you found that the problem was as simple as a flat tyre. Often the car had stopped only a short distance from a refuge area but was surrounded by highways agency high vis cones having a day out closing the lane. Maybe tow it to the refuge area? with just a flat im sure it would drive if you went slowly...no, best close the lane for 3 hours waiting for a recovery vehicle and leave the rest of the motorway stuck at 40mph. 

 

not impressed. Especially as the inside lane is always empty anyway due to lane hogging becoming the national sport. 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The trouble is that I heard some time ago, a proponent of all lane running coming up with a load of data that showed that ALR was in fact safer than having a hard shoulder. Depending on how one gathers and manipulates data I suppose you can make a case for anything, but it doesn't take much to come to the conclusion that not having a continuously available safety escape area i.e a hard shoulder, will increase the possibility of a broken down car becoming stuck in a live lane and getting hit from behind. They talk about radar technology controlling the above lane signs and closing the blocked lane, but how reliable is it and how quickly will a stranded vehicle be flagged up to the other road users? Then there is the question of  idiot drivers who regularly ignore such warning signs as we've all probably seen.

Not having a hard shoulder is gambling with lives, with the odds derived from some pretty suspect data IMHO and I sincerely hope that they don't continue with them and those that are built have the number of refuge areas increased considerably.

Edited by Cuban8
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Engine Doctor said:

the roll out of the so called " smart motorways" has been halted due to safety concerns after an inquiry .

 

I will happily thank anybody's chosen deity, for that. These things were always a disaster waiting to happen.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Engine Doctor said:

The smart individuals who pushed these on the driving public should be named ,shamed and disgraced. My take would be that they were probably just out of uni with .little or no driving experience but huge egos. 

What do others think ?

It has become clear to me over time that some, if not all, planners who devise the layout etc, of roads and junctions have never driven in their lives. Just the sheer stupidity of some junction layouts, signage, etc. is mindboggling, and even more annoying because it would cost no more to do it 'properly' in the 1st place.

And yes, the 'smart' motorway is an accident waiting to happen, given that broken down cars / emergency crews have been wiped out whilst on the hard shoulder, what chance would they have in a lane 'closed' by a few flashing lights.

Kim

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am in full agreement about the idea that a sign will do nothing to stop crashes. 

 

If you cannot see an illuminated AA van or emergency vehicle, or for that matter any stationary vehicle sat on a hard shoulder and then somehow manage to not see that you have left your lane and hit it, the chances of an illuminated sign discouraging you from hitting the stationary car in your own lane are slim to nil. 

 

The footage from the US posted below sort of shows what i mean. The stranded car is being illuminated by a spotlight but no one seems to notice. I think modern cars with all these lane keeping and other gadgets in them are not helping as they basically tell the driver they no longer need to pay attention. 

 

 

Edited by Jon - Laser Engines
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As already mentioned they shouldn't have been made in the first place. Been driving up the M1 to Leeds and its not a comfortable experience, and still takes longer than 20 years ago!! 

Bad news is they do not intend to reinstate the hard shoulders, SAVE MONEY NOT LIVES is the Goverment cry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can certainly think of several examples where our local council has implemented schemes which have caused traffic chaos for no discernible reason other than seemingly wanting to be seen to be “doing something”.  One totally unnecessary new set of traffic lights on a roundabout which flowed well even at the busiest of times was switched off and quietly removed within a few days - as was a similar scheme that they persisted with for several weeks until public pressure (iirc supported by the police due to numerous minor accidents) had the junction reverted to its previous configuration. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take on the video Jon posted, in the USA or in Europe, is it shows typical get up the road behavior. No one thought to stop and protect the crashed cars. No one showed any interest if there was injured human beings in there. I saw cars grinding by the wreckage, ABS lit up, and within a few meters, going for what is perceived a clearer lane. Race track without safety cars, no Race Marshall’s, no rules.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I started driving before motorways were built (and before any speed limits other than the 30 mph - which were usually actually 40 mph in practice).  I was living/working in Welwyn Garden City when the M1 and M10 opened and there were almost more cars steaming on the hard shoulder than on the road itself ?  I only had a motorcycle at the time (a BSA Golden Flash) and rarely used the motorways because it was so boring. How times have changed

 

When I have used a so-called smart motorway I avoid using the former hard shoulder simply because if there's an obstruction that's where it's most likely to be.  Normally I use the clearest, most leftward lane and as often as possible lane 1 but having no hard shoulder on a fast multi-lane road makes me very nervous.  I'm glad they've stopped adding to them and hope they reinstate the hard shoulder on the others.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the emergency services and motoring organisations slammed them when they were introduced but the idiots at Highways England thought they knew better. 

Probably Trillions of pounds later someone has the sense to see the problem. Let's hope its not over-ridden again  by another government ego in waiting . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fairness, don’t do a Daily Mail. “slammed” is a Mailism.
It was judged that a dangerous places to do your job is not going to get better.

 

And homicidal maniacs, licensed as competent by gibbering idiots called licence examiners, were not going to revert to type. And you can use the phone, and tune through the radio spectrum, and have a heated conversation with the passengers, while pushing the speed limit, eating a doughnut, perhaps while doing your hair, makeup, shave, delete as appropriate.  Maintaining the vehicle is optional. 
 

Cheap, quick fix for lack of roads. Lack of enforcement of rules. Even lack of backup for enforcement. 
 

More roads represent a political decision. But have a look at road building, repair, maintenance budgets, year on year, and then criticize the people seeking to shove a quart into a pint pot. And that is not a political statement, if the decision is to allow gridlock, so be it, there has to be an end to road building, or bury the land under roads, so be it. 

 

But this debacle shows you just have to have some space that is not racetrack, a hard shoulder. As invented, 60 years ago. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Don Fry said:

 

Cheap, quick fix for lack of roads. Lack of enforcement of rules. Even lack of backup for enforcement. 
 

Or are they a cheap (ha!), quick (haha!) fix (hahaha!) For too much traffic, a lack of cheap, clean, safe, direct, reliable mass transit networks and a decade of underinvestment in, and running down of, law enforcement?

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...