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.
A303Chris wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 13:40
I personally have no problem with ALR and its definitely better than HSR. However if these AA findings within this report are true, it does seem penny pinching was involved in the design and number, size and spacing of emergency areas.
Daily Mail wrote:...when the 'primary goals' was 'not improving safety' but to 'ensure that the scheme is no less safe than the safety baseline'...
They seem to have gone big on this phrase, which again is completely meaningless out of context, as it doesn't actually state what that safety baseline is/was.
If the safety baseline was the safety performance (over the previous 5 years) of the D3M that the SM was replacing then we have to know how that section of motorway was performing against the national average. It may have been that that section of the M1 was actually performing better than an average D3M, in which case the baseline is quite high. On the other hand if this section was performing worse than an average D3M then that's a poor baseline to set (and would likely not have been used).
At present, for non-SM upgrades the baseline generally being applied appears to be to perform better, or certainly no worse than, an average motorway in England. Remember, these RIS1, RIS2 and SM upgrades are by their nature on sections of the network which are congested, unsafe, or otherwise poorly performing, so what may seem at first an unambitious target (to meet the national average) may in fact be an order of magnitude better than the DxAP or DxM the scheme is replacing, and is therefore massively improving safety.
Berk wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2020 19:39
I’m surprised that had never occurred to me. I genuinely believed loading gauge was the main issue.
Take a look at the dimensions....
(Oh yes, overseas trains are also wider to start with which means the tracks need to be further apart, etc)
Yes. An additional issue is the length of railway carriags as well as onger coaches have a bigger overhang on curved sections of rail. However I believe that modern British Rail passenger main line rolling stock is standardised at 26 metres, the same as in continental countries.
Vierwielen wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 22:31
Yes. An additional issue is the length of railway carriags as well as onger coaches have a bigger overhang on curved sections of rail. However I believe that modern British Rail passenger main line rolling stock is standardised at 26 metres, the same as in continental countries.
No, unsurprisingly there isn't a single standard. Carriages on suburban services in London and the south east are generally 20m long, elsewhere they are nominally 23m. The new IETs are 26m long with tapered ends and are restricted as to which routes they are used on
Vierwielen wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 22:31
Yes. An additional issue is the length of railway carriags as well as onger coaches have a bigger overhang on curved sections of rail. However I believe that modern British Rail passenger main line rolling stock is standardised at 26 metres, the same as in continental countries.
No, unsurprisingly there isn't a single standard. Carriages on suburban services in London and the south east are generally 20m long, elsewhere they are nominally 23m. The new IETs are 26m long with tapered ends and are restricted as to which routes they are used on
And I believe Pacer carriage lengths were measured in inches
I had a bad experience of the M5 smart motorway running up to the M42 south of Birmingham this week. On this stretch in the dark a van had broken down in the inside (lane 1) and had luckily found enough space to get most of the vehicle off the live lanes.
However every other vehicle braked suddenly and I had to do an emergency brake from 70mph in lane three when vehicles pulled into that lane. All in the dark. Without any warning signs.
The vans occupants were wearing yellow vests so it hadn't just happened either.
Yet no warning/speed reduction signs until I had driven five miles northwards when suddenly 40mph signs showed, causing me in the third lane being undertaken by HGVs in lanes one and two.
Norfolktolancashire wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2020 22:30
I had a bad experience of the M5 smart motorway running up to the M42 south of Birmingham this week. On this stretch in the dark a van had broken down in the inside (lane 1) and had luckily found enough space to get most of the vehicle off the live lanes.
However every other vehicle braked suddenly and I had to do an emergency brake from 70mph in lane three when vehicles pulled into that lane. All in the dark. Without any warning signs.
The vans occupants were wearing yellow vests so it hadn't just happened either.
Yet no warning/speed reduction signs until I had driven five miles northwards when suddenly 40mph signs showed, causing me in the third lane being undertaken by HGVs in lanes one and two.
Horrible.
Truly terrible, that section if I remember correctly used to be lit as well? Why lighting has been removed from our network is a complete sham.
Debaser wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 16:22
They seem to have gone big on this phrase, which again is completely meaningless out of context, as it doesn't actually state what that safety baseline is/was.
It all depends also on how it is being measured. If it is accidents per kilometre then they must stay at the previous level. If it is accidents per vehicle-km and the extra lane delivers an extra 33% of capacity then you can have a 30% increase in number of accidents and still claim it's safer ...
Norfolktolancashire wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2020 22:30
I had a bad experience of the M5 smart motorway running up to the M42 south of Birmingham this week. On this stretch in the dark a van had broken down in the inside (lane 1) and had luckily found enough space to get most of the vehicle off the live lanes.
However every other vehicle braked suddenly and I had to do an emergency brake from 70mph in lane three when vehicles pulled into that lane. All in the dark. Without any warning signs.
The vans occupants were wearing yellow vests so it hadn't just happened either.
Yet no warning/speed reduction signs until I had driven five miles northwards when suddenly 40mph signs showed, causing me in the third lane being undertaken by HGVs in lanes one and two.
Horrible.
Truly terrible, that section if I remember correctly used to be lit as well? Why lighting has been removed from our network is a complete sham.
HE's new excuse for removing carriageway lighting is that "young people feel overconfident and speed on lighted motorways."
Seriously?
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
Norfolktolancashire wrote: ↑Sat Feb 15, 2020 22:30
I had a bad experience of the M5 smart motorway running up to the M42 south of Birmingham this week. On this stretch in the dark a van had broken down in the inside (lane 1) and had luckily found enough space to get most of the vehicle off the live lanes.
However every other vehicle braked suddenly and I had to do an emergency brake from 70mph in lane three when vehicles pulled into that lane. All in the dark. Without any warning signs.
The vans occupants were wearing yellow vests so it hadn't just happened either.
Yet no warning/speed reduction signs until I had driven five miles northwards when suddenly 40mph signs showed, causing me in the third lane being undertaken by HGVs in lanes one and two.
Horrible.
Truly terrible, that section if I remember correctly used to be lit as well? Why lighting has been removed from our network is a complete sham.
HE's new excuse for removing carriageway lighting is that "young people feel overconfident and speed on lighted motorways."
Seriously?
It may seem like an excuse, but research suggests street lighting improves the safety of older drivers, but reduces the safety of younger drivers. Seriously.
ETA.
Young driver accidents in the UK: The influence of age, experience, and time of day wrote:‘Time of day’ analyses suggested that the problems of accidents in darkness are not a matter of visibility, but a consequence of the way young drivers use the roads at night. There appears to be a large number of accidents associated with voluntary risk-taking behaviours of young drivers in ‘recreational’ driving.
A303Chris wrote: ↑Tue Feb 04, 2020 13:40
I personally have no problem with ALR and its definitely better than HSR. However if these AA findings within this report are true, it does seem penny pinching was involved in the design and number, size and spacing of emergency areas.
Daily Mail wrote:...when the 'primary goals' was 'not improving safety' but to 'ensure that the scheme is no less safe than the safety baseline'...
They seem to have gone big on this phrase, which again is completely meaningless out of context, as it doesn't actually state what that safety baseline is/was.
If the safety baseline was the safety performance (over the previous 5 years) of the D3M that the SM was replacing then we have to know how that section of motorway was performing against the national average. It may have been that that section of the M1 was actually performing better than an average D3M, in which case the baseline is quite high. On the other hand if this section was performing worse than an average D3M then that's a poor baseline to set (and would likely not have been used).
At present, for non-SM upgrades the baseline generally being applied appears to be to perform better, or certainly no worse than, an average motorway in England. Remember, these RIS1, RIS2 and SM upgrades are by their nature on sections of the network which are congested, unsafe, or otherwise poorly performing, so what may seem at first an unambitious target (to meet the national average) may in fact be an order of magnitude better than the DxAP or DxM the scheme is replacing, and is therefore massively improving safety.
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....
RichardA35 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 20:20A 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....
Yikes!
By "the technology", do you mean the general Smart Motorway technology, or specifically the newer stranded vehicle detection stuff?
HE's new excuse for removing carriageway lighting is that "young people feel overconfident and speed on lighted motorways."
Seriously?
I reckon there's good correlation on that statistic. When the M1 was lit on the long straight sections through Herts, Beds, and Northants, at half two in the morning with no traffic around and no speed cameras you could see far into the distance and that there were no hazards and therefore could drive very quickly.
I'd say that I probably do tend to drive slower when it's pitch black as it's far more difficult to see wild animals or objects in the road ahead, particularly if there's traffic coming the other way and you can't put the main beam on...
RichardA35 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 20:20A 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....
Yikes!
By "the technology", do you mean the general Smart Motorway technology, or specifically the newer stranded vehicle detection stuff?
Would this mandatory 40 be on a stretch that has had a 50 limit during many months of roadworks ?
In the last week or two about 2 miles of all-lane running, at national speed limit, has opened up on the northbound M6 down the hill towards J3A. The world still seems to be spinning.
Make poetry history.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
RichardA35 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 20:20A 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....
Yikes!
By "the technology", do you mean the general Smart Motorway technology, or specifically the newer stranded vehicle detection stuff?
The general technology - it would be a very unsmart motorway.
RichardA35 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 20:20A 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....
Yikes!
By "the technology", do you mean the general Smart Motorway technology, or specifically the newer stranded vehicle detection stuff?
The general technology - it would be a very unsmart motorway.
Couldn't they just open it with NSL and a solid white line separating lane 1 from the rest (making it a good old-fashioned hard shoulder), and then change the line to a broken one and bring that lane into use once the technology is in place?
Owain wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:48
Couldn't they just open it with NSL and a solid white line separating lane 1 from the rest (making it a good old-fashioned hard shoulder), and then change the line to a broken one and bring that lane into use once the technology is in place?
Surely a coned off Lane 1 (no paint) and 60mph roadworks speed limit would be fine. They use this set up for "technology testing" after all.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Owain wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 11:48
Couldn't they just open it with NSL and a solid white line separating lane 1 from the rest (making it a good old-fashioned hard shoulder), and then change the line to a broken one and bring that lane into use once the technology is in place?
Surely a coned off Lane 1 (no paint) and 60mph roadworks speed limit would be fine. They use this set up for "technology testing" after all.
