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 »

DB617 wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2020 13:56 One of the worst examples of this - though rather less relevant as of this year - is the state of the E30 route, relevant almost exclusively for European freight, between the Channel Ports and Fishguard.
On a related theme, I recently* had the pleasure of the overnight Harwich-Hoek ferry (and back) while visiting family... this included the more dubious pleasure of the A120, which encounters exactly the same issues, east of Colchester :( Other than money, there appear to be no obstacles to upgrading it to (at least) D2, while getting rid of the roundabouts would be a welcome relief!


* Pre-current panic!
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8738
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by trickstat »

Micro The Maniac wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 10:40
DB617 wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2020 13:56 One of the worst examples of this - though rather less relevant as of this year - is the state of the E30 route, relevant almost exclusively for European freight, between the Channel Ports and Fishguard.
On a related theme, I recently* had the pleasure of the overnight Harwich-Hoek ferry (and back) while visiting family... this included the more dubious pleasure of the A120, which encounters exactly the same issues, east of Colchester :( Other than money, there appear to be no obstacles to upgrading it to (at least) D2, while getting rid of the roundabouts would be a welcome relief!


* Pre-current panic!
This thread from 2018 discusses proposed changes to the A120.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=36926&hilit=a120&start=40

I don't know what the current state of play is with this scheme. As it involves re-routing rather than a simple widening or straightforward bypass I assume there may be some delays?
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 »

trickstat wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 11:30 This thread from 2018 discusses proposed changes to the A120.
Thanks... but that is talking about the eastern end of the western half (Braintree to Marks Tey) whereas I'm on about the eastern end of the eastern half (Colchester to Harwich) - the multiplex with the A12 being the middle bit.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by jackal »

trickstat wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 11:30
Micro The Maniac wrote: Sun Apr 12, 2020 10:40
DB617 wrote: Sat Apr 11, 2020 13:56 One of the worst examples of this - though rather less relevant as of this year - is the state of the E30 route, relevant almost exclusively for European freight, between the Channel Ports and Fishguard.
On a related theme, I recently* had the pleasure of the overnight Harwich-Hoek ferry (and back) while visiting family... this included the more dubious pleasure of the A120, which encounters exactly the same issues, east of Colchester :( Other than money, there appear to be no obstacles to upgrading it to (at least) D2, while getting rid of the roundabouts would be a welcome relief!


* Pre-current panic!
This thread from 2018 discusses proposed changes to the A120.

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=36926&hilit=a120&start=40

I don't know what the current state of play is with this scheme. As it involves re-routing rather than a simple widening or straightforward bypass I assume there may be some delays?
I've updated that thread with info from the RIS2 document.
User avatar
Justin Smith
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2021 23:16

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Justin Smith »

Roadtripper_Ian wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2020 18:11 An interesting debate. Question - why do we call some of these motorways "smart" when its pretty clear that there aren't a lot of cameras, there aren't the people/systems to monitor the few cameras they have, and should they need to shut a lane there's minimal signage as you drive to show a closure as no overhead signs and well spaced MS4s.

The M1 south of Sheffield being one example. Its not smart. Its dumb.

Yes I know why we are here. People don't want to pay any tax. People don't want anything built anywhere. And ordinarily politicians sit there and worry about getting re-elected. However, not this time. Johnson has a thumping majority and no opposition. Even if Labour get their act together its very very unlikely they can win the next election. Which gives Johnson 10 years. Having been elected onto a platform of spending money to reshape post Brexit Britain for the better.

Never mind Sebastian Fox sitting there and saying "as Transport Secretary I've ordered a review", get the diggers out and get building. Whilst the people who ordinarily would get in a steaming rage about any money being spent on anything are too busy waving their union jacks. Its the same with HS2. Just build the thing already.
I have never been comfortable with the idea of "Smart motorways" but we need extra capacity for as little money and land as possible so I reckon I could cope with Smart motorways provided they are like the original M42 was. That was significantly different in that originally the hard shoulder was BY DEFAULT a non running lane and only became a running lane when traffic was in danger of grinding to a halt. Critically when the hard shoulder became a running lane there was a blanket 50mph speed restriction enforced with speed cameras. I believe that is a compromise that people could live with.
Some people may think 50mph is too slow, but I do not, it's paradise compared with being stood still or in a walking pace traffic queue.
JRN
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun May 16, 2021 20:11

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by JRN »

Justin Smith wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 21:26
Roadtripper_Ian wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2020 18:11 An interesting debate. Question - why do we call some of these motorways "smart" when its pretty clear that there aren't a lot of cameras, there aren't the people/systems to monitor the few cameras they have, and should they need to shut a lane there's minimal signage as you drive to show a closure as no overhead signs and well spaced MS4s.

The M1 south of Sheffield being one example. Its not smart. Its dumb.

Yes I know why we are here. People don't want to pay any tax. People don't want anything built anywhere. And ordinarily politicians sit there and worry about getting re-elected. However, not this time. Johnson has a thumping majority and no opposition. Even if Labour get their act together its very very unlikely they can win the next election. Which gives Johnson 10 years. Having been elected onto a platform of spending money to reshape post Brexit Britain for the better.

Never mind Sebastian Fox sitting there and saying "as Transport Secretary I've ordered a review", get the diggers out and get building. Whilst the people who ordinarily would get in a steaming rage about any money being spent on anything are too busy waving their union jacks. Its the same with HS2. Just build the thing already.
I have never been comfortable with the idea of "Smart motorways" but we need extra capacity for as little money and land as possible so I reckon I could cope with Smart motorways provided they are like the original M42 was. That was significantly different in that originally the hard shoulder was BY DEFAULT a non running lane and only became a running lane when traffic was in danger of grinding to a halt. Critically when the hard shoulder became a running lane there was a blanket 50mph speed restriction enforced with speed cameras. I believe that is a compromise that people could live with.
Some people may think 50mph is too slow, but I do not, it's paradise compared with being stood still or in a walking pace traffic queue.
I liked the original M42 implementation, but subsequent Dynamic HSR schemes were worse than ALR to be honest.

Most of the ALR schemes are pretty similar and consistent. The M4 scheme is a little different construction-wise due to extensive bridge replacement, but will deliver a similar driver experience.

Contrarywise, each DHSR scheme is pretty much unique, and I think this contributed to the perception that they were confusing.

The M42 scheme used the HS as an additional running lane for extra capacity between junctions; each junction was a lane drop to D3M, the hard-shoulder turned into the slip-road for the next junction. It wasn't that confusing.

But subsequent schemes tried various ways (there was more than 1 implementation) of providing "through-junction" running, and I think that's where it became too much for the average motorist.

Also the M62 scheme was a rather odd mish-mash of DHSR, ALR, and Managed Motorway on an existing (widened) D4M.
User avatar
Justin Smith
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2021 23:16

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Justin Smith »

JRN wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 22:32
Justin Smith wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 21:26
Roadtripper_Ian wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2020 18:11 An interesting debate. Question - why do we call some of these motorways "smart" when its pretty clear that there aren't a lot of cameras, there aren't the people/systems to monitor the few cameras they have, and should they need to shut a lane there's minimal signage as you drive to show a closure as no overhead signs and well spaced MS4s.

The M1 south of Sheffield being one example. Its not smart. Its dumb.

Yes I know why we are here. People don't want to pay any tax. People don't want anything built anywhere. And ordinarily politicians sit there and worry about getting re-elected. However, not this time. Johnson has a thumping majority and no opposition. Even if Labour get their act together its very very unlikely they can win the next election. Which gives Johnson 10 years. Having been elected onto a platform of spending money to reshape post Brexit Britain for the better.

Never mind Sebastian Fox sitting there and saying "as Transport Secretary I've ordered a review", get the diggers out and get building. Whilst the people who ordinarily would get in a steaming rage about any money being spent on anything are too busy waving their union jacks. Its the same with HS2. Just build the thing already.
I have never been comfortable with the idea of "Smart motorways" but we need extra capacity for as little money and land as possible so I reckon I could cope with Smart motorways provided they are like the original M42 was. That was significantly different in that originally the hard shoulder was BY DEFAULT a non running lane and only became a running lane when traffic was in danger of grinding to a halt. Critically when the hard shoulder became a running lane there was a blanket 50mph speed restriction enforced with speed cameras. I believe that is a compromise that people could live with.
Some people may think 50mph is too slow, but I do not, it's paradise compared with being stood still or in a walking pace traffic queue.
I liked the original M42 implementation, but subsequent Dynamic HSR schemes were worse than ALR to be honest.

Most of the ALR schemes are pretty similar and consistent. The M4 scheme is a little different construction-wise due to extensive bridge replacement, but will deliver a similar driver experience.

Contrarywise, each DHSR scheme is pretty much unique, and I think this contributed to the perception that they were confusing.

The M42 scheme used the HS as an additional running lane for extra capacity between junctions; each junction was a lane drop to D3M, the hard-shoulder turned into the slip-road for the next junction. It wasn't that confusing.

But subsequent schemes tried various ways (there was more than 1 implementation) of providing "through-junction" running, and I think that's where it became too much for the average motorist.

Also the M62 scheme was a rather odd mish-mash of DHSR, ALR, and Managed Motorway on an existing (widened) D4M.
Is my memory right ? The original M42 was NOT permanent all lane running ? The hard shoulders were by default NON running lanes and, critically (from a safety point of view) ONLY became running lanes with a 50mph limit ?
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 »

Justin Smith wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 07:26
Is my memory right ? The original M42 was NOT permanent all lane running ? The hard shoulders were by default NON running lanes and, critically (from a safety point of view) ONLY became running lanes with a 50mph limit ?
The M42 between J3A and 7 was the trial site for managed motorways and all lane running so its hardly surprising it was a rather different configuration than later implementations. As I recall it used dynamic hard shoulders which in my opinion is the worst possible mix. A hard shoulder that can be driven on at certain times is almost certain to cause confusion. The statistics backed this up with 33% MORE drivers being killed on motorways using DHS than ALR.
https://uk.motor1.com/news/502395/dynam ... -motorways.
User avatar
solocle
Member
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 18:27

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by solocle »

KeithW wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 08:32
Justin Smith wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 07:26
Is my memory right ? The original M42 was NOT permanent all lane running ? The hard shoulders were by default NON running lanes and, critically (from a safety point of view) ONLY became running lanes with a 50mph limit ?
The M42 between J3A and 7 was the trial site for managed motorways and all lane running so its hardly surprising it was a rather different configuration than later implementations. As I recall it used dynamic hard shoulders which in my opinion is the worst possible mix. A hard shoulder that can be driven on at certain times is almost certain to cause confusion. The statistics backed this up with 33% MORE drivers being killed on motorways using DHS than ALR.
https://uk.motor1.com/news/502395/dynam ... -motorways.
Surely it's not confusing? The hard shoulder is a breakdown lane. But when traffic is heavy, we'll open it up, but you have to go slower (but still faster than a tailback).

DHSR makes more sense than ALR imo, although stick with normal/managed motorways is my preference.
JRN
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun May 16, 2021 20:11

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by JRN »

Justin Smith wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 07:26
JRN wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 22:32
Justin Smith wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 21:26

I have never been comfortable with the idea of "Smart motorways" but we need extra capacity for as little money and land as possible so I reckon I could cope with Smart motorways provided they are like the original M42 was. That was significantly different in that originally the hard shoulder was BY DEFAULT a non running lane and only became a running lane when traffic was in danger of grinding to a halt. Critically when the hard shoulder became a running lane there was a blanket 50mph speed restriction enforced with speed cameras. I believe that is a compromise that people could live with.
Some people may think 50mph is too slow, but I do not, it's paradise compared with being stood still or in a walking pace traffic queue.
I liked the original M42 implementation, but subsequent Dynamic HSR schemes were worse than ALR to be honest.

Most of the ALR schemes are pretty similar and consistent. The M4 scheme is a little different construction-wise due to extensive bridge replacement, but will deliver a similar driver experience.

Contrarywise, each DHSR scheme is pretty much unique, and I think this contributed to the perception that they were confusing.

The M42 scheme used the HS as an additional running lane for extra capacity between junctions; each junction was a lane drop to D3M, the hard-shoulder turned into the slip-road for the next junction. It wasn't that confusing.

But subsequent schemes tried various ways (there was more than 1 implementation) of providing "through-junction" running, and I think that's where it became too much for the average motorist.

Also the M62 scheme was a rather odd mish-mash of DHSR, ALR, and Managed Motorway on an existing (widened) D4M.
Is my memory right ? The original M42 was NOT permanent all lane running ? The hard shoulders were by default NON running lanes and, critically (from a safety point of view) ONLY became running lanes with a 50mph limit ?
Sorry for any confusion. Your memory is correct. The original M42 was not, and still is not, permanent All Lane Running (ALR). It was (and is) Dynamic Hard Shoulder Running (DHSR).

What I meant by my post about how the M42 scheme was implemented was that that is how it works when the scheme was in operation.

As in, when the Hard Shoulders are open, they are open between junctions, and then there is a sign that says hard shoulder ends, and then the hard shoulder effectively turns into the sliproad for the next junction. It's a neat way of adding a little extra capacity between junctions.

The M42 is not the only DHSR scheme. A few schemes on the M6 in the Birmingham area also used DHSR, and outside the West Midlands so did the:
M4/M5 scheme by Almondsbury (Bristol)
M62 scheme around Leeds (Mixture of DHSR, ALR, and Managed Motorway on a widened motorway with Hard Shoulders)
M1 Jct 10-13

However many of these schemes chose to use rather more complicated variants of DHSR, including ways of allowing extra capacity through junctions, which increases the complexity, and potential for driver confusion.
In general I think ALR is superior to these schemes.

All the DHSR sections of Motorway are set to be converted to ALR by 2025.

Also I believe the Max speed allowed for when the hard shoulder is open on DHSR schemes is 60 mph.
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 »

solocle wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 08:35
Surely it's not confusing? The hard shoulder is a breakdown lane. But when traffic is heavy, we'll open it up, but you have to go slower (but still faster than a tailback).

DHSR makes more sense than ALR imo, although stick with normal/managed motorways is my preference.
All lane running is obvious, you have 3 or more lanes all marked with dashed lines and refuges

DHSR has the hard shoulder marked with a solid line, sometimes it works like a conventional hard shoulder but other times its open to live running. The potential for confusion is obvious and they were found to be considerably LESS safe than ALR which is why they are being phased out.
Attachments
M62 DHSR.jpg
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Bryn666 »

KeithW wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:49
solocle wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 08:35
Surely it's not confusing? The hard shoulder is a breakdown lane. But when traffic is heavy, we'll open it up, but you have to go slower (but still faster than a tailback).

DHSR makes more sense than ALR imo, although stick with normal/managed motorways is my preference.
All lane running is obvious, you have 3 or more lanes all marked with dashed lines and refuges

DHSR has the hard shoulder marked with a solid line, sometimes it works like a conventional hard shoulder but other times its open to live running. The potential for confusion is obvious and they were found to be considerably LESS safe than ALR which is why they are being phased out.
DHSR would have been a lot safer if it was designed using the principles the rest of the world follow - e.g. normal road markings with green arrows/red crosses as appropriate. As ever the "innovators" at HE decided to reinvent the wheel and it's come back to bite them very hard on the backside.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by jackal »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:57
KeithW wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:49
solocle wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 08:35
Surely it's not confusing? The hard shoulder is a breakdown lane. But when traffic is heavy, we'll open it up, but you have to go slower (but still faster than a tailback).

DHSR makes more sense than ALR imo, although stick with normal/managed motorways is my preference.
All lane running is obvious, you have 3 or more lanes all marked with dashed lines and refuges

DHSR has the hard shoulder marked with a solid line, sometimes it works like a conventional hard shoulder but other times its open to live running. The potential for confusion is obvious and they were found to be considerably LESS safe than ALR which is why they are being phased out.
DHSR would have been a lot safer if it was designed using the principles the rest of the world follow - e.g. normal road markings with green arrows/red crosses as appropriate. As ever the "innovators" at HE decided to reinvent the wheel and it's come back to bite them very hard on the backside.
Other countries have made much less use of smart motorways so it is less studied and has rarely if at all been politicised. That doesn't mean their DHS are safer and may mean the opposite.

IMV dynamic HS is inherently confusing, at least until they invent similarly dynamic lane markings.
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 »

jackal wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:14 So merges and diverges would (from the perspective of a vehicle in the HS) have no lane markings whatever - they just happen? Surprise!
Usually Lane 0 (Old HS) runs through the junction as ALR, so when driving in the open HS it appears as it would on a normal motorway. Its similar the merge which can be confusing since people may think they have merged onto a running lane, but actually merged onto the aux lane (or L0 / HS) which becomes the closed hard shoulder. I've seen that a few times.
Signage is usually clear about if it is a lane drop or not or how lanes merge, although 95% of people don't look at the signs it seems.

Static Road markings with dynamic lane purposes with odd merges and diverges is why I dislike dynamic HS.
If road markings could also dynamically change I would support DHSR, although in reality that is not going to happen in the foreseeable future.
Its better to just stick with basic and obvious rules such as don't cross solid thiccc lines & don't drive in a lane marked with a red X. So that's why I think Managed Motorways or ALR are the best choice.

One benefit of DHSR is that when active, I usually get an empty L1 to "undertake" everyone.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:14
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:57
KeithW wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:49

All lane running is obvious, you have 3 or more lanes all marked with dashed lines and refuges

DHSR has the hard shoulder marked with a solid line, sometimes it works like a conventional hard shoulder but other times its open to live running. The potential for confusion is obvious and they were found to be considerably LESS safe than ALR which is why they are being phased out.
DHSR would have been a lot safer if it was designed using the principles the rest of the world follow - e.g. normal road markings with green arrows/red crosses as appropriate. As ever the "innovators" at HE decided to reinvent the wheel and it's come back to bite them very hard on the backside.
Other countries have made much less use of smart motorways so it is less studied and has rarely if at all been politicised. That doesn't mean their DHS are safer and may mean the opposite.

IMV dynamic HS is inherently confusing, at least until they invent similarly dynamic lane markings.
I take the view that we already had a series of lines and signs in the Highway Code that apply to tidal flow roads and other forms of lane control (e.g. in tunnels), no-one would have been inherently confused by things that already existed being made more widespread. DHSR decided to ignore this existing set-up in favour of something they could write glossy brochures about instead.

Even the biggest moron on the planet can work out what a green arrow means.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Justin Smith
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2021 23:16

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Justin Smith »

I agree that whatever they do it should be the same on all motorways.
I am still of the view that the hard shoulder by default should not be a running lane, the line should be "solid".
Traffic should be directed to use the hard shoulder only at busy times and DEFINITELY with a 50mph speed limit
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by jackal »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:45
jackal wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:14
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:57

DHSR would have been a lot safer if it was designed using the principles the rest of the world follow - e.g. normal road markings with green arrows/red crosses as appropriate. As ever the "innovators" at HE decided to reinvent the wheel and it's come back to bite them very hard on the backside.
Other countries have made much less use of smart motorways so it is less studied and has rarely if at all been politicised. That doesn't mean their DHS are safer and may mean the opposite.

IMV dynamic HS is inherently confusing, at least until they invent similarly dynamic lane markings.
I take the view that we already had a series of lines and signs in the Highway Code that apply to tidal flow roads and other forms of lane control (e.g. in tunnels), no-one would have been inherently confused by things that already existed being made more widespread. DHSR decided to ignore this existing set-up in favour of something they could write glossy brochures about instead.

Even the biggest moron on the planet can work out what a green arrow means.
As far as I know tidal flow roads either don't have merges/diverges or they handle them in the same way as a normal road does, i.e. with permanent road markings that never change their meaning. Dashed line tells you there's a merge/diverge, etc. Here are a couple of examples:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.50584 ... 384!8i8192
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.40862 ... 384!8i8192

DHS do not have that luxury as, by their very nature, their merges and diverges move laterally depending on whether the hard shoulder is open. For instance the nose of the merge/diverge moves 3.5m or so to the left when a hard shoulder is open and then 3.5m back to the right when it closes. It is impossible to mark such dynamic geometry with paint. Nor is the basic binary communication of a green arrow able to communicate the necessary spatial information.

If you have an example of a tidal flow or tunnel that has a similarly dynamic merge or diverge then by all means, share it, so we can see how that would work - I genuinely do not know of any.
Last edited by jackal on Tue Jun 22, 2021 12:31, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Justin Smith
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2021 23:16

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Justin Smith »

KeithW wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:49
solocle wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 08:35
Surely it's not confusing? The hard shoulder is a breakdown lane. But when traffic is heavy, we'll open it up, but you have to go slower (but still faster than a tailback).

DHSR makes more sense than ALR imo, although stick with normal/managed motorways is my preference.
All lane running is obvious, you have 3 or more lanes all marked with dashed lines and refuges

DHSR has the hard shoulder marked with a solid line, sometimes it works like a conventional hard shoulder but other times its open to live running. The potential for confusion is obvious and they were found to be considerably LESS safe than ALR which is why they are being phased out.
Was that with a strictly enforced 50mph limit ?
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 12:22
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:45
jackal wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 11:14
Other countries have made much less use of smart motorways so it is less studied and has rarely if at all been politicised. That doesn't mean their DHS are safer and may mean the opposite.

IMV dynamic HS is inherently confusing, at least until they invent similarly dynamic lane markings.
I take the view that we already had a series of lines and signs in the Highway Code that apply to tidal flow roads and other forms of lane control (e.g. in tunnels), no-one would have been inherently confused by things that already existed being made more widespread. DHSR decided to ignore this existing set-up in favour of something they could write glossy brochures about instead.

Even the biggest moron on the planet can work out what a green arrow means.
As far as I know tidal flow roads either don't have merges/diverges or they handle them in the same way as a normal road does, i.e. with permanent road markings that never change their meaning. Dashed line tells you there's a merge/diverge, etc. Here are a couple of examples:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.50584 ... 384!8i8192
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.40862 ... 384!8i8192

DHS do not have that luxury as, by their very nature, their merges and diverges move laterally depending on whether the hard shoulder is open. For instance the nose of the merge/diverge moves 3.5m or so to the left when a hard shoulder is open and then 3.5m back to the right when it closes. It is impossible to mark such dynamic geometry with paint. Nor is the basic binary communication of a green arrow able to communicate the necessary spatial information.

If you have an example of a tidal flow or tunnel that has a similarly dynamic merge or diverge then by all means, share it, so we can see how that would work - I genuinely do not know of any.
DHSR doesn't have the hatched/chevron area change position though - they knew immediately that it wasn't workable so that is why through junction running was trialled on the M42 after a few months; before this the M42 was just gaining a weaving lane. This set up could still be marked simply with red X, green arrows, and white move over arrows when the merge lane ends. You'd only need a hazard warning line (1004.1) in lieu of the hard shoulder line. The MS4s on DHSRs already show this in a roundabout fashion.

DHSR has diluted the meaning of solid white lines. This is where the danger has come from.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
Herned
Member
Posts: 1363
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 09:15

Re: All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

Post by Herned »

jackal wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 12:22 If you have an example of a tidal flow or tunnel that has a similarly dynamic merge or diverge then by all means, share it, so we can see how that would work - I genuinely do not know of any.
The tidal lane through the tunnel and bridge at Saltash on the A38 uses lit catseyes to show when the lane is open or not - they show red here when the lane is closed.
Post Reply