Tailgating (was: Opinions on smart motorways)

[rhyds]

Not great that the safety systems identify a stopped vehicle so quickly and close the lane, instead you are reliant entirely on people paying full attention.

I think you're always reliant on people paying full attention. People causing accidents by not paying full attention happens on all kinds of road, not just Smart Motorways.

A normal hard shoulder isn't exactly safe either, especially from tired/distracted truckers weaving in lane 1

[Jeni]

Not great that the safety systems identify a stopped vehicle so quickly and close the lane, instead you are reliant entirely on people paying full attention.

I think you're always reliant on people paying full attention. People causing accidents by not paying full attention happens on all kinds of road, not just Smart Motorways.

A normal hard shoulder isn't exactly safe either, especially from tired/distracted truckers weaving in lane 1

I would argue that the fact that a full hard shoulder gives people a false sense of safety makes it less safe.

I would guess (no stats, just a guess) that you find more people waiting in their car when broken down on a hard shoulder than when broken down in L1 of ALR.

[rhyds]

I think you're always reliant on people paying full attention. People causing accidents by not paying full attention happens on all kinds of road, not just Smart Motorways.

A normal hard shoulder isn't exactly safe either, especially from tired/distracted truckers weaving in lane 1

I would argue that the fact that a full hard shoulder gives people a false sense of safety makes it less safe.

I would guess (no stats, just a guess) that you find more people waiting in their car when broken down on a hard shoulder than when broken down in L1 of ALR.

Also, the CCTV provision on ALR sections should make being spotted pretty easy.

[Berk]

Well there were 60 limits and warnings of ‘Pedestrians on the carriageway’ or similar when I was on the M25 on Friday (between J24-26).

You wouldn’t think a warning could extend about 5 miles, but it did. Never did see swarms of pedestrians either.

[Jeni]

Well there were 60 limits and warnings of ‘Pedestrians on the carriageway’ or similar when I was on the M25 on Friday (between J24-26).

You wouldn’t think a warning could extend about 5 miles, but it did. Never did see swarms of pedestrians either.

If you're in a control center and you get a call saying there are pedestrians in the carriageway from a member of the public with a rather vague location, do you...

a) Pander to the needs of the entitled motorist because they might be a bit inconvenienced and butthurt by a 60 limit and ignore it
or
b) Appreciate that the report of pedestrians on a motorway is very serious and play it safe and set a 60 limit over the entire section of the vague area until confirmed

[Berk]

To be fair, I see where you’re coming from. But it was so vague, they might as well have run the warning all the way to Dartford.

The command chain definitely needs to look at reviewing messages more frequently than at present (cf my Clacket Lane post, from the same evening).

[Jeni]

To be fair, I see where you’re coming from. But it was so vague, they might as well have run the warning all the way to Dartford.

The command chain definitely needs to look at reviewing messages more frequently than at present (cf my Clacket Lane post, from the same evening).

What do you propose? I presume you know what time the report went in and what time the message was removed/refined/upgraded? I presume you know where all the available resources were at that particular moment? I presume you're 100% sure that there were no pedestrians?

If you think you can improve on the current system then there is a vacancy that looks like it may suit

[Simon_GNR]

Interesting article about Smart Motorways has appeared on the Telegraph website here https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... ave-money/, but behind the paywall. The writer Ross Clark thinks it is obvious that smart motorways are a cost-saving measure to increase capacity that is inherently less safe for travellers than a continuous hard shoulder. I must say I agree with him - it seems obvious to me too.

[RichardA35]

Interesting article about Smart Motorways has appeared on the Telegraph website here https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... ave-money/, but behind the paywall. The writer Ross Clark thinks it is obvious that smart motorways are a cost-saving measure to increase capacity that is inherently less safe for travellers than a continuous hard shoulder. I must say I agree with him - it seems obvious to me too.

It would be great if you could post some links to evidence cited by the writer as I feel sure he didn't just rely on feelings and would have researched his case thoroughly and backed up his opinion with hard facts.

[Ruperts Trooper]

Interesting article about Smart Motorways has appeared on the Telegraph website here https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... ave-money/, but behind the paywall. The writer Ross Clark thinks it is obvious that smart motorways are a cost-saving measure to increase capacity that is inherently less safe for travellers than a continuous hard shoulder. I must say I agree with him - it seems obvious to me too.

It would be great if you could post some links to evidence cited by the writer as I feel sure he didn't just rely on feelings and would have researched his case thoroughly and backed up his opinion with hard facts.

Highways England conside Smart Motorways to be 216% more dangerous than conventional Motorways https://fleetworld.co.uk/dangers-of-sma ... nd-report/

[owen b]

Interesting article about Smart Motorways has appeared on the Telegraph website here https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/0 ... ave-money/, but behind the paywall. The writer Ross Clark thinks it is obvious that smart motorways are a cost-saving measure to increase capacity that is inherently less safe for travellers than a continuous hard shoulder. I must say I agree with him - it seems obvious to me too.

It would be great if you could post some links to evidence cited by the writer as I feel sure he didn't just rely on feelings and would have researched his case thoroughly and backed up his opinion with hard facts.

Highways England conside Smart Motorways to be 216% more dangerous than conventional Motorways https://fleetworld.co.uk/dangers-of-sma ... nd-report/

That's not what the article says. The article refers to a report and states that in one particular scenario (ie. a breakdown in a live lane), a smart all lanes running motorway is 216% more dangerous, but does not refer to the other scenarios eg. on a traditional motorway with a hard shoulder the incidents that occur on the hard shoulder, very often when a vehicle has stopped in a non-emergency situation. Highways England says that smart motorways are as safe as traditional motorways : https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/fleet- ... ys-england

[Debaser]

Jesus wept. What do they say about a little knowledge? Google "M4 Hazard Log Smart Motorway". You should get a report, once used only for smart motorways, now adopted for all HE schemes, which compares the before and after hazards, explaining the scoring system used. In short, hazards can be scored 0 to 12. The scoring system is exponential. Scores below 7.5 are essentially discounted as together they account for about 10% of the total hazard score and reducing them has no effect on the total risk score of the scheme.

ETA
I draw your attention to hazard H155 'vehicle stops in running lane'. Before score 7.0, after score 7.5, an increase in risk of 216%, but a change from a low score to a low score.

[ManomayLR]

I saw a textbook lane closure on the M25 the other day.

I videotaped it but for privacy reasons can not put it up.

The first MS4 said clearly "Lane closure ahead" with a 50 limit

The next one had move over signs and then the red cross.

Interestingly though, when the red X is signed on MS4 when only lane 1 was closed, they had a red X and then 3 arrows.
But when they had closed both lanes 1 and 2, the lane closure diagrams gained a tiny pair of flashing red lights. And this was on a verge mounted MS4. I've seen that before but for it not to be there when only one lane is closed then to appear afterwards is somewhat peculiar. But there have been lots of M25 lane closures and as far as I can see, people obey.

[Chris5156]

Also there seemed to be a lot of work on drainage, which was rejigged from the side of the hard shoulder and which required associated works sometimes well back into the landscaping.

We are having to do that on M6 J16-19, original plan was to reuse the existing carrier drains under the hard shoulder using relining techniques across much of the existing system, but investigation of similar schemes suggested that leaving 100s of manhole covers in what would become lane 1 of ALR, would be a disaster ! So the current plan is to move the drainage from under the hard shoulder into the verge as much as possible, reducing the number of manholes in what will be lane 1.

TBH you don't need much operational motorway experience to learn that manholes covers and frames in running lanes are a really, really BAD thing. Particularly if the lids end up in one of the wheel tracks.

Whoever thought up the original plan needs to go for a long, slow walk in LBS4

ZERO manholes in LBS1 must be the target - presumably the designers are talking to the maintainers to get their view on the matter? And if said view isn't, "Get them ALL out of LBS1", the maintainers need to join the LBS4 Rambling Club.

"...as much as possible..." is totally inadequate, no matter what it costs or how difficult it is to achieve, because a collapsed manhole lid in LBS1 is a very nasty and expensive accident waiting to happen. Been there, done that, etc.

I don't care how much the risk assessment has been (cough) "adjusted" to say the risk of leaving them in a trafficked lane is "acceptable" or "minimal", sorting out a broken one in future is far more pain than doing it right now.

Just resurrecting this ancient post to offer the observation that manholes in live motorways lanes are now, apparently, fine. It occurred to me today that we'd had a conversation about them on SABRE a few years ago, as I drove over one after another in succession, so I came back to find it!

Here's one (of hundreds) on the M3 Smart Motorway - there are probably others on recent ALR schemes.

They're obviously fine now because the road is newly finished, but they look like an absolute maintenance liability to me.

[RichardA35]

Just resurrecting this ancient post to offer the observation that manholes in live motorways lanes are now, apparently, fine. It occurred to me today that we'd had a conversation about them on SABRE a few years ago, as I drove over one after another in succession, so I came back to find it!

Here's one (of hundreds) on the M3 Smart Motorway - there are probably others on recent ALR schemes.

They're obviously fine now because the road is newly finished, but they look like an absolute maintenance liability to me.

To be consistent, many motorway widening schemes similarly have chamber covers in lane 1- M25 anticlockwise Junction 10 - 9 being a good example since about 1996.

[swissferry]

There are several manholes on the Woodside Viaduct of the M8 in Glasgow. Most are in lane 1 and would have originally been on the hard shoulder before it was widened in the 80s(?). At least one is in lane 2. Two of them collapsed within 24 hours of each other in 2001 causing lengthy delays.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/1620490.stm
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/121 ... ses-on-m8/

[Conekicker]

Leaving manhole lids in a wheeltrack on a motorway is grossly incompetent. There's no excuse for it.

[ais523]

Just resurrecting this ancient post to offer the observation that manholes in live motorways lanes are now, apparently, fine. It occurred to me today that we'd had a conversation about them on SABRE a few years ago, as I drove over one after another in succession, so I came back to find it!

Here's one (of hundreds) on the M3 Smart Motorway - there are probably others on recent ALR schemes.

They're obviously fine now because the road is newly finished, but they look like an absolute maintenance liability to me.

I like what they did on the M6 J2-J4 smart section: the drains are all beside lane 1, outside the white line marking the edge of the road (and thus the wheelpath) but inside the barrier. That means that if you break down in lane 1, you can open the passenger-side doors over where the drains are and use them as space to step on while getting out of your vehicle, neatly solving two problems at once (the "I'm stopped in a live lane but can't get out" issue and the "where do we put the drains when there isn't a hard shoulder" issue); the actual construction of the drains are much wider than usual (although the actual path for the water is narrow).

IIRC, the consultation on that smart motorway section only had three comments. Mine was a suggestion for changing how the VMS were used (which was adopted). Another was a request to improve the drainage on that section of motorway so that it would stop flooding the respondent's village. Putting large drains beside lane 1 seems to be how that issue was (hopefully) resolved.