Rather than try (and fail) to encourage motorists to keep away from broken down cars I'd like to see our short sighted government abandon the proposed "Smart" motorways. We'll soon be seeing deaths every week on the new non-existent hard shoulders.
www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-6264765/UK-breakdown-providers-join-forces-call-improved-motorway-safety-rules.html
|
>> We'll soon be seeing deaths every week on the new non-existent hard shoulders.
>>
There's plenty of smart motorways already. When will the weekly deaths be starting?
|
The first one opened in 2006!
Pat
|
>> >> We'll soon be seeing deaths every week on the new non-existent hard shoulders.
>> >>
>> There's plenty of smart motorways already. When will the weekly deaths be starting?
>>
More stats from Department for Transport.
tinyurl.com/ycdx2rmf
From those figures motorways have got a bit of catching up to do.
Motorways carry 20% of traffic, but have 6% of fatalities
Urban roads 40% traffic, 32% fatalities
Rural roads 40% traffic 62% fatalities.
|
OK, OK . . .
now tell me .. would you be happy breaking down and stopping in the inside lane of a motorway on a dark, wet autumn night ? Of course you would - you are protected, after about 10 minutes at best, by a big red X above the road a couple of hundred metres back.
Got to be safe innit.
|
>> From those figures motorways have got a bit of catching up to do.
>>
>> Motorways carry 20% of traffic, but have 6% of fatalities
>> Urban roads 40% traffic, 32% fatalities
>> Rural roads 40% traffic 62% fatalities.
>>
Not sure how comparable those figures are. % of traffic probably means % of vehicle miles. Who is included in the fatalities?
The motorway figure is substantially based presumably on roads on which no stopping is allowed, there is a relatively safe refuge (hard shoulder) for emergency halts, separate overtaking lanes, no pedestrians cycles or horses, and all traffic is going in the same direction. If everybody was reasonably careful then there would be no fatalities at all. Remove the H/S and the game changes. Stop in a live lane and if another vehicle doesn't hit you then it might well swerve violently and start a pinball session in the other 3 lanes. I don't like 'em at all.
Last edited by: Manatee on Mon 15 Oct 18 at 13:13
|
|
If we all drive in the 'fast' lane and refuse to move over that should solve the problem - shouldn't it?
|
>> If we all drive in the 'fast' lane and refuse to move over that should
>> solve the problem - shouldn't it?
We do, and it hasn't.
I dont like "smart motorways". I've used many for quite a few years, they dont seem at all smart to me, no real journey improvement time, and they "feel" inherently unsafe.
|
>> I dont like "smart motorways". I've used many for quite a few years, they dont
>> seem at all smart to me, no real journey improvement time, and they "feel" inherently
>> unsafe.
Is that experience mostly in your home locale - M25/M3 etc?
All lane running has vastly improved progress on the M1 J16-19; it's no longer a concertina of 60+/near halt/60+. Whether it's the extra lane or the variable speed limit that's facilitated that is worthy of research. The section between the same junction numbers on the M6, is also being converted to ALR. It runs much more smoothly with the roadworks 50 limit and all the works paraphernalia in place then it did before the project commenced.
The bit that is frightening, and I see it again and again, is traffic ignoring the lane closure indications up to and beyond the red X. Some poor Traffic Officer has to stand 50metres in rear of the incident desperately waving the cretins out.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 16 Dec 18 at 09:39
|
>> Is that experience mostly in your home locale - M25/M3 etc?
Nope, I clock up 18k miles a year, you dont do that on the M25! Its my experience based on its first incarnation on the m42. I am often up the M1 (specially now the A1 has a hole in the middle)
and I have found the smart bit to be terribly dumb, and traffic worse, specially southbound after Luton.
>> The bit that is frightening, and I see it again and again, is traffic ignoring
>> the lane closure indications up to and beyond the red X. Some poor Traffic Officer
>> has to stand 50metres in rear of the incident desperately waving the cretins out.
Its almost universally ignored. They should have some form of camera enforcing it, carrying an automatic DD40 type penalty.
|
>> >> The bit that is frightening, and I see it again and again, is traffic ignoring
>> >> the lane closure indications up to and beyond the red X.
>> Some poor Traffic Officer has to stand 50 metres in rear of the incident desperately waving the cretins out.
>>
>> Its almost universally ignored. They should have some form of camera enforcing it, carrying an
>> automatic DD40 type penalty.
>>
I agree with an auto camera for red X jumpers.
Many years ago a very bright lady I worked with got fined for ignoring the red X.
" Others were ignoring it and I was just following them"
Not so bright on that day! :-(
|
It seems to be generally accepted that hard-shoulders are dangerous places to stop on because of the risk of being hit by another car.
If there isn't a hard-shoulder, then lane one would by default have to supply all the functions of a hard-shoulder. Surely therefore lane one would become at least as dangerous as the hard-shoulder?
|
I remain to be convinced by smart motorways and agree with Zero's comment about "feeling safe"!
Even when they are it not a lot of traffic around, speed signs reduce the limit, even well in to the night with only a few visible cars, the limit can be set artificially low for no apparent reason (fair enough if there are workers in the road or congestion further on).
One observation is that the refuge zones used for breakdowns seem to be quite safe because they are separate from the main carriageway.
Of course you need to get to one and they can be up to 1.5 miles apart so if you suffer a catastrophic failure then you could be in trouble and as said above - that's not a situation I would want to find myself in on a stormy Friday autumn evening.
|
|
missed the edit - that should be "not feeling safe"
|
.
Last edited by: henry k on Sun 16 Dec 18 at 00:17
|
A group of MPs want halt to smart motorway rollout over safety concerns
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-46553654
BBC Radio 5 live Investigates is on at 11:00 GMT on Sunday 16 December and afterwards on BBC Sounds.
|
They should ban roadside repairs on Motorways - many countries never allowed it.
Recovery only.
|
The BBC article states:
"Figures from Highways England, obtained by the RAC via a Freedom of Information request, show that at the end of 2017 there were 100 miles of ALR motorway in England.
Last year, on these stretches there were 16 crashes across all lanes which caused injury involving stationary vehicles, such as broken-down cars.
The figures also show that over the same period, there were 29 similar crashes involving vehicles parked up on the hard shoulder for the whole of the rest of the network in England - which includes about 1,800 miles of road."
And yet they tell us they are safe - as I said before, it's lies and madness so they can save a few bob.
|
Slow Down - Move Over - Bill Payer
