All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
Micro The Maniac
Member
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 13:14
Location: Gone

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Micro The Maniac »

SteveA30 wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 07:41 Safer than not having one. I'll bet most of that 1/12th are drivers falling asleep or staring at gadgets, nothing to do with the HS itself.
An interesting perspective...

Clearly HE think not having laybys on the A303 and A34 makes the road safer than having them... hence most are currently coned off.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19205
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by KeithW »

Big L wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 09:02
SteveA30 wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 07:41
The HS is not a safe refuge. 1/12 of motorway deaths are on it.
Safer than not having one. I'll bet most of that 1/12th are drivers falling asleep or staring at gadgets, nothing to do with the HS itself.
That's a truly incredible statement.
Indeed , apart from anything else vehicles were hitting cars on the hard shoulder long before either gadgets or smart motorways came along. A major factor has always been driver fatigue with the accompanying loss of attention and worse people falling asleep at the wheel. I saw both happen in the 1970's.
SteveA30
Member
Posts: 6019
Joined: Fri May 06, 2005 12:52
Location: Dorset

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by SteveA30 »

Only a breakdown of the 1/12th HS accidents (of the total) will determine how many are due to fatigue and gadget distraction. What other reasons could there be? They can't all be heart attacks or similar.
Doesn't alter the fact that having an HS is safer than not having one. (for the breakdowns and other emergencies, that would otherwise have to sit in a running lane) Was it really necessary to explain that?

That M3 lorry driver who was hit by an object thrown from a bridge, pulled over onto the HS, stopped safely, then died. That was on the section now laughingly called 'Smart'.
Roads and holidays in the west, before motorways.
http://trektothewest.shutterfly.com
http://holidayroads.webs.com/
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Stevie D »

SteveA30 wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 19:28 Doesn't alter the fact that having an HS is safer than not having one.
Having a hard shoulder is generally safer than not having one, if all other factors are equal. But a D4M ALR smart motorway and a D3M+HS traditional motorway are not "all other factors equal". The extra capacity means better traffic flow and reduced accidents. The smart technology can allow for better mitigation of incidents leading to fewer accidents. The benefits of smartification can easily outweigh the benefits of the hard shoulder.
User avatar
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Johnathan404 »

RichardA35 wrote: Wed Feb 19, 2020 20:20 A whisper reaches me that, on a current scheme in construction, the technology will not be ready in time but HE state the scheme MUST be opened by April. One of the options for opening being looked at is to risk assess 4 lane running with a mandatory 40 which at least gets the traffic management off the road....
I understand that this has now been implemented at M20 J3-5.
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
User avatar
Arcuarius
Member
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 17:14
Location: Sherwood

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Arcuarius »

SteveA30 wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 19:28Doesn't alter the fact that having an HS is safer than not having one.
Except that it does. In every way.
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
- some extreme-right nutcase


1973-2007 Never forgotten
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1596
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by jervi »

Arcuarius wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 11:52
SteveA30 wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 19:28Doesn't alter the fact that having an HS is safer than not having one.
Except that it does. In every way.
*In every way, except minor injuries.
User avatar
the cheesecake man
Member
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
Location: Sheffield

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by the cheesecake man »

Arcuarius wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 11:52
SteveA30 wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 19:28Doesn't alter the fact that having an HS is safer than not having one.
Except that it does. In every way.
It depends what you're comparing. Whatever the merits of smart D4 v D3M, I suspect proper D4M with good old-fashioned hard shoulders is safer than smart D4 without and I'm certain it's safer than unsmart D4 without.
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Stevie D »

the cheesecake man wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 10:09I suspect proper D4M with good old-fashioned hard shoulders is safer than smart D4 without.
Well, as long as you "suspect" that that's the case, I guess we don't need to bother looking at any evidence or studies on the matter then :roll:
User avatar
Arcuarius
Member
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 17:14
Location: Sherwood

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Arcuarius »

the cheesecake man wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 10:09
Arcuarius wrote: Tue Apr 07, 2020 11:52
SteveA30 wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 19:28Doesn't alter the fact that having an HS is safer than not having one.
Except that it does. In every way.
It depends what you're comparing. Whatever the merits of smart D4 v D3M, I suspect proper D4M with good old-fashioned hard shoulders is safer than smart D4 without and I'm certain it's safer than unsmart D4 without.
I suspect that confirmation bias has more to do with that. The majority of problems on D4M have nothing to do with any presence or absence of a hard shoulder, any more than it is on the A46, for example.
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
- some extreme-right nutcase


1973-2007 Never forgotten
Phil
Member
Posts: 2271
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Phil »

Micro The Maniac wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 11:50
SteveA30 wrote: Sat Mar 14, 2020 07:41 Safer than not having one. I'll bet most of that 1/12th are drivers falling asleep or staring at gadgets, nothing to do with the HS itself.
An interesting perspective...

Clearly HE think not having laybys on the A303 and A34 makes the road safer than having them... hence most are currently coned off.
Given the sub-standard nature of many of said Lay-bys, then technically HE may well be correct.

However that sort of response ignores the REAL issue.....

... Namely that in any other western European country such key roads would NOT be bog standard A roads in the first place!

Instead they would be motorways WITH hard shoulders!

Go and compare the motorway network of western Europe and you will find the UK stands out as having one of the smallest motorway networks for its size - and a disproportionate number of all purpose dual carriageways (e.g. A34, A14, A42, A1, A11, A12, A55, A23, A38, A43 etc.... performing the function of motorways elsewhere*.

* Even if they are not motorways such as in Brittany - many will be equipped with hard shoulders (take a look at Michean maps which highlight such things).
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1596
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by jervi »

Phil wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 23:11 Given the sub-standard nature of many of said Lay-bys, then technically HE may well be correct.

However that sort of response ignores the REAL issue.....

... Namely that in any other western European country such key roads would NOT be bog standard A roads in the first place!

Instead they would be motorways WITH hard shoulders!

Go and compare the motorway network of western Europe and you will find the UK stands out as having one of the smallest motorway networks for its size - and a disproportionate number of all purpose dual carriageways (e.g. A34, A14, A42, A1, A11, A12, A55, A23, A38, A43 etc.... performing the function of motorways elsewhere*.

* Even if they are not motorways such as in Brittany - many will be equipped with hard shoulders (take a look at Michean maps which highlight such things).
Well, that's why "Expressways" are half on the table. Upgrade said routes that you mentioned to a motorway standard (slightly relaxed standards in some places as where a HQDC meets 120KMH APDC requirements, works to increase them to motorway standards aren't required IIRC), and boosh, our "Motorway" network contains thousands of more miles. And most of the "Expressway" standards are greater than other western EU countries motorway (or equivalent) standards minus Hardshoulder Standards (as there is none)
Phil
Member
Posts: 2271
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Phil »

Stevie D wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 10:54
the cheesecake man wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 10:09I suspect proper D4M with good old-fashioned hard shoulders is safer than smart D4 without.
Well, as long as you "suspect" that that's the case, I guess we don't need to bother looking at any evidence or studies on the matter then :roll:
As ever, it depends on what you are comparing and as such 'the Cheesecake man' has a point.

A D4M+HS bog standard motorway WILL be safer than a D4M-HS bog standard motorway, so can all the road 'professionals' stop pretending it won't be.

Given both are D4 then maximum traffic volumes can be assumed be the same for both

Also please remember that a D4M+HS will still have advisory Matrix signs every mile, a good smattering of CCTV cameras, speed sensors, etc so its not as if there is no supervision or ability to warn drivers of hazards ahead.

The key point to remember is that the 'Smart' technology should in theory compensate for the lack of a hard shoulder and make a D4M-HS Smart motorway just as safe, if not safer than an ordinary, non Smart, D4M+HS setup.

Yes Smart motorway technology might well bring all sorts of other benefits, but that is irrelevant to the central charge of whether it does enough to mitigate against the loss of a hard shoulder.

In other words which can be better protect the occupants of a vehicle breakdown. Does closing the lane they are stranded in provide the same (or better) protection from being hit by other vehicles compared to having a space to pull into that is banned from being used by traffic.

THAT is the simple question to be answered - and its rather tiresome when road professionals keep trying to divert the discussion onto A roads or capacity benefits etc

Now, in principle, the addition of variable limits, frequent & highly visible (and mandatory) message signage, frequent emergency lay-bys, not to mention 24hr continuous CCTV coverage by operatives who have the ability to act instantly to alter such signage should be more than enough to compensate for the lack of a hard shoulder, which is still a dangerous place to be - (though not as dangerous as a live traffic lane with traffic coming at you at 50+mph).

The problem is when your emergency refuges are miles apart, and your CCTV operatives take 8 minutes or longer to spot a broken down vehicle then it raises serious questions over whether the quoted 'safety benefits' of Smart motorways really are enough to mitigate the lack of a hard shoulder.

At least two families believe it doesn't and are in the process of taking legal action against HE / the DfT. They believe (with considerable justification) that their loved ones would still be alive today had there been a hard shoulder for them to pull into.

So to summarise, Yes, in theory Smart Motorways can be safer than 'ordinary motorways' BUT an awful lot depends on the 'Smart' elements being applied thoroughly enough. As always in the UK, we started well - but then tried to cut costs and do 'Smart motorways' on the cheap. That cheapness has come at the cost of devaluing many of the features which should make Smart motorways safer than ordinary ones. I'm of the opinion that the current Smart motorway schemes are in fact LESS safe than having a hard shoulder, not because of the Smart motorway concept - but rather because they have been done on the cheap - not enough laybys not enough control room staff, slow to investigate / peruse stationary vehicle technology.
User avatar
Arcuarius
Member
Posts: 4664
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2006 17:14
Location: Sherwood

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Arcuarius »

Phil wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 23:11However that sort of response ignores the REAL issue.....

... Namely that in any other western European country such key roads would NOT be bog standard A roads in the first place!

Instead they would be motorways WITH hard shoulders!
That's the sort of cloud cuckoo land thinking I just love to see on SABRE :lol:
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
- some extreme-right nutcase


1973-2007 Never forgotten
User avatar
rhyds
Member
Posts: 13724
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 15:51
Location: Beautiful North Wales

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by rhyds »

Arcuarius wrote: Thu Apr 09, 2020 16:14
Phil wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 23:11However that sort of response ignores the REAL issue.....

... Namely that in any other western European country such key roads would NOT be bog standard A roads in the first place!

Instead they would be motorways WITH hard shoulders!
That's the sort of cloud cuckoo land thinking I just love to see on SABRE :lol:
I think there's a couple of pertinent questions to be asked here:

Phil: which European countries are you referring to specifically? France's road network is massively different to the Netherlands for example

Arcuarius: While sarcasm can be entertaining, it's rarely informative. Can you expand on your reasoning?
Built for comfort, not speed.
Herned
Member
Posts: 1363
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 09:15

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Herned »

Arcuarius wrote: Thu Apr 09, 2020 16:14 That's the sort of cloud cuckoo land thinking I just love to see on SABRE :lol:
Why is it? No one else in Europe builds strategic roads as anything other than motorways, with hard shoulders. Where non-motorway dual carriageways exist they are very often of a similar standard to motorways (except in Italy).
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16909
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Chris5156 »

Phil wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 23:53In other words which can be better protect the occupants of a vehicle breakdown. Does closing the lane they are stranded in provide the same (or better) protection from being hit by other vehicles compared to having a space to pull into that is banned from being used by traffic.

THAT is the simple question to be answered - and its rather tiresome when road professionals keep trying to divert the discussion onto A roads or capacity benefits etc
Indeed. But equally, the flip side of that coin is never engaged with either: namely, that a large percentage of all vehicles stopped on the hard shoulder are not stopped for emergencies, they are stopped for phone calls or toilet trips in the undergrowth or to get something out of the boot, and the drivers making those non-emergency stops are putting themselves in huge danger because they incorrectly perceive that there is somewhere safe for them to pull over. Accidents happen in significant numbers that would be entirely avoided if those vehicles were not stopped and their drivers had found some safer place to stop off the motorway.

Removing the hard shoulder removes the temptation. Does the absence of all those vehicles unnecessarily and dangerously stopped on a live motorway provide a safety improvement, compared to a world where people are routinely trying to change tyres or getting toddlers out of the car for a wee next to a 70mph live lane?
Piatkow
Member
Posts: 2175
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 13:59

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Piatkow »

Chris5156 wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 05:13
Phil wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 23:53In other words which can be better protect the occupants of a vehicle breakdown. Does closing the lane they are stranded in provide the same (or better) protection from being hit by other vehicles compared to having a space to pull into that is banned from being used by traffic.

THAT is the simple question to be answered - and its rather tiresome when road professionals keep trying to divert the discussion onto A roads or capacity benefits etc
Indeed. But equally, the flip side of that coin is never engaged with either: namely, that a large percentage of all vehicles stopped on the hard shoulder are not stopped for emergencies, they are stopped for phone calls or toilet trips in the undergrowth or to get something out of the boot, and the drivers making those non-emergency stops are putting themselves in huge danger because they incorrectly perceive that there is somewhere safe for them to pull over. Accidents happen in significant numbers that would be entirely avoided if those vehicles were not stopped and their drivers had found some safer place to stop off the motorway.

Removing the hard shoulder removes the temptation. Does the absence of all those vehicles unnecessarily and dangerously stopped on a live motorway provide a safety improvement, compared to a world where people are routinely trying to change tyres or getting toddlers out of the car for a wee next to a 70mph live lane?
I agree about the hard shoulder giving a false sense of security. A friend of mine suffered life changing injuries after his car was rear ended on the HS while he had his head under the bonnet trying to fix a problem himself.
User avatar
rhyds
Member
Posts: 13724
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 15:51
Location: Beautiful North Wales

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by rhyds »

Piatkow wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 08:39
Chris5156 wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 05:13
Phil wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 23:53In other words which can be better protect the occupants of a vehicle breakdown. Does closing the lane they are stranded in provide the same (or better) protection from being hit by other vehicles compared to having a space to pull into that is banned from being used by traffic.

THAT is the simple question to be answered - and its rather tiresome when road professionals keep trying to divert the discussion onto A roads or capacity benefits etc
Indeed. But equally, the flip side of that coin is never engaged with either: namely, that a large percentage of all vehicles stopped on the hard shoulder are not stopped for emergencies, they are stopped for phone calls or toilet trips in the undergrowth or to get something out of the boot, and the drivers making those non-emergency stops are putting themselves in huge danger because they incorrectly perceive that there is somewhere safe for them to pull over. Accidents happen in significant numbers that would be entirely avoided if those vehicles were not stopped and their drivers had found some safer place to stop off the motorway.

Removing the hard shoulder removes the temptation. Does the absence of all those vehicles unnecessarily and dangerously stopped on a live motorway provide a safety improvement, compared to a world where people are routinely trying to change tyres or getting toddlers out of the car for a wee next to a 70mph live lane?
I agree about the hard shoulder giving a false sense of security. A friend of mine suffered life changing injuries after his car was rear ended on the HS while he had his head under the bonnet trying to fix a problem himself.
Its stories like this that have made me decide that, HS or not, if my car develops an issue (puncture etc) I'm carrying on as quickly/safely as possible to a junction, ERA or other "safer" area than the HS, even at the risk of further damage to my car. It only takes one unaware driver to wander from L1 across the line to cause, as you describe, life changing injuries.
Built for comfort, not speed.
Phil
Member
Posts: 2271
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Phil »

Piatkow wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 08:39
Chris5156 wrote: Fri Apr 10, 2020 05:13
Phil wrote: Wed Apr 08, 2020 23:53In other words which can be better protect the occupants of a vehicle breakdown. Does closing the lane they are stranded in provide the same (or better) protection from being hit by other vehicles compared to having a space to pull into that is banned from being used by traffic.

THAT is the simple question to be answered - and its rather tiresome when road professionals keep trying to divert the discussion onto A roads or capacity benefits etc
Indeed. But equally, the flip side of that coin is never engaged with either: namely, that a large percentage of all vehicles stopped on the hard shoulder are not stopped for emergencies, they are stopped for phone calls or toilet trips in the undergrowth or to get something out of the boot, and the drivers making those non-emergency stops are putting themselves in huge danger because they incorrectly perceive that there is somewhere safe for them to pull over. Accidents happen in significant numbers that would be entirely avoided if those vehicles were not stopped and their drivers had found some safer place to stop off the motorway.

Removing the hard shoulder removes the temptation. Does the absence of all those vehicles unnecessarily and dangerously stopped on a live motorway provide a safety improvement, compared to a world where people are routinely trying to change tyres or getting toddlers out of the car for a wee next to a 70mph live lane?
I agree about the hard shoulder giving a false sense of security. A friend of mine suffered life changing injuries after his car was rear ended on the HS while he had his head under the bonnet trying to fix a problem himself.
This is indeed a valid point - but...

(1) What is the statistical split between 'genuine' emergencies (such as punctures) and 'fake' emergencies like needing the loo*? A split of say 25% versus 75% would suggest that removing the hard shoulder is better while a 75% versus 25% would say that the hard shoulder should stay.

(2) How many of those Hard shoulder incidents are due to poor driver practices when stopped on the HS? The official advice is to NEVER try and repair a vehicle yourself - phone for help and get a recovery service to do it or tow you to a safer place. On Smart motorways we still have poor driver behaviour - driving through red Xs for example so its quite possible that removing the hard shoulder merely swaps one dangerous practice for another.

(3) How many people on Smart motorways stop in the 'Emergency refuges' for non emergencies and then pull straight out into traffic so as to not draw the attention of the police even though its a very dangerous act? The lack of an acceleration lane the HS provides makes such 'non emergency stops even more dangerous and the net effect could end up being worse than ordinary 'non emergency HS' stops.
Post Reply