All Lane Running - Smart Motorways ?

[Conekicker]

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.

.... which sounds even more sensible!

Except the coning would need to be maintained. £££.

[mikehindsonevans]

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....

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.

Also enjoyed this small reduction in roadworks. Gets you to the M6N j13 to 15/16 works (with 19.5 miles of 50mph narrow lanes and some contraflow) a good two minutes quicker. Setting off from Cambridge around 1530 today.

[Bryn666]

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.

.... which sounds even more sensible!

Except the coning would need to be maintained. £££.

Whereas a 40 limit would be routinely ignored unless SPECS were left in situ, which also need to be maintained.

Is it just time everyone admitted HE doesn't work and tried something new?

[Conekicker]

.... which sounds even more sensible!

Except the coning would need to be maintained. £££.

Whereas a 40 limit would be routinely ignored unless SPECS were left in situ, which also need to be maintained.

Is it just time everyone admitted HE doesn't work and tried something new?

SPECS either is either working or it isn't. There's no way for a passing motorist to tell which it is. So the deterrent effect works very well. The speed limit can be set to anything, 40, 50, 60 or 70, with the cameras adjusted to suit, if they are actually working at all. No one is going to be stupid enough to try to find out. Are they?

There's far less call for maintenance with SPECS than a couple of lines of cones, which will get dirty and knocked out of position. Someone would at least need to give the cones a drive through once a day as a bare minimum. With SPECS, no need for a site visit unless someone calls in a problem.

Of course the daily cost of hire for the SPECS system is likely to be more than the cones but the workforce exposure and risk to the public from cones getting knocked into live lanes is far less.

[Bryn666]

But there's still going to be a 4 lane motorway with no hard shoulder or 'full technology'; does driving into the back of someone in the dark at 40 instead of 70 tick all the boxes for these people?

[Owain]

I don't work on the roads and I do not work for the police, so I'm not claiming to know any better than anybody who does!

Nonetheless, my impression as a driver is that any kind of speed camera on a motorway is only a deterrent when a speed limit lower than NSL has been applied. If it's NSL most car drivers appear to carry on as normal (i.e. in excess of NSL).

[Truvelo]

Nonetheless, my impression as a driver is that any kind of speed camera on a motorway is only a deterrent when a speed limit lower than NSL has been applied. If it's NSL most car drivers appear to carry on as normal (i.e. in excess of NSL).

Are you referring to Specs with a "camera not in use" sign next to it or the permanent gantry mounted HADECS cameras? If it's the former than yes, the camera will be non functioning. If it's the latter then good luck if you're travelling at 79+. The tolerance for these has come down since the latest the latest generation were introduced. The threshold in NSL for the old style cameras was something like 95 but the new ones are set to 10% +2mph.

[Conekicker]

Nonetheless, my impression as a driver is that any kind of speed camera on a motorway is only a deterrent when a speed limit lower than NSL has been applied. If it's NSL most car drivers appear to carry on as normal (i.e. in excess of NSL).

Are you referring to Specs with a "camera not in use" sign next to it or the permanent gantry mounted HADECS cameras? If it's the former than yes, the camera will be non functioning. If it's the latter then good luck if you're travelling at 79+. The tolerance for these has come down since the latest the latest generation were introduced. The threshold in NSL for the old style cameras was something like 95 but the new ones are set to 10% +2mph.

There's no legal requirement for a "camera not in use" sign to be in place when the system isn't working. The sensible reaction when you see a SPECS post and no sign is to assume it's functioning. Unless one likes to collect points of course...

HADECS are spot-speed cameras, so some drivers do speed between them. The SPECS system gives far better compliance.

[DB617]

As an aside, I had a colleague at training who has since departed the business (in disgrace) who thought he was clever when the M1 J45 works were on. Because they were trialling the 55mph speed limit at the time, the SPECS was 'not in use' until the approval for the 55 limit was given. The signs were duly removed and the cameras turned on and clever man managed to get 12 points worth of fines in one week (and even then I think he was lucky as he would've passed the cameras 12 times) because he sped through at 70 not noticing the 'not in use' signs had vanished. He subsequently recieved a court date (in Leeds; we were back in Caerphilly by then), handed back his hire van with £2000 worth of crash damage and was given his marching orders. Turns out blatantly illegal driving didn't go down well with our employer. Oops. No sympathy from me...

[JonH]

I don't work on the roads and I do not work for the police, so I'm not claiming to know any better than anybody who does!

Nonetheless, my impression as a driver is that any kind of speed camera on a motorway is only a deterrent when a speed limit lower than NSL has been applied. If it's NSL most car drivers appear to carry on as normal (i.e. in excess of NSL).

I can safely say that I have seen the speed cameras on the M3 "smart" section working when there are no gantry signs and NSL applies. Watch someone hammer the brakes after being flashed by one.

[A303Chris]

I don't work on the roads and I do not work for the police, so I'm not claiming to know any better than anybody who does!

Nonetheless, my impression as a driver is that any kind of speed camera on a motorway is only a deterrent when a speed limit lower than NSL has been applied. If it's NSL most car drivers appear to carry on as normal (i.e. in excess of NSL).

I can safely say that I have seen the speed cameras on the M3 "smart" section working when there are no gantry signs and NSL applies. Watch someone hammer the brakes after being flashed by one.

They usual go off at 90mph plus, doing a steady 80mph seems fine. What annoys me are the drivers going along at 75, hitting there breaks to 60mph under every gantry or MS4

[Owain]

I don't work on the roads and I do not work for the police, so I'm not claiming to know any better than anybody who does!

Nonetheless, my impression as a driver is that any kind of speed camera on a motorway is only a deterrent when a speed limit lower than NSL has been applied. If it's NSL most car drivers appear to carry on as normal (i.e. in excess of NSL).

I can safely say that I have seen the speed cameras on the M3 "smart" section working when there are no gantry signs and NSL applies. Watch someone hammer the brakes after being flashed by one.

Which rather supports my point - if you see people getting zapped, then the camera isn't a deterrent!

A friend of mine was zapped recently by a camera on the 'smart' section of the M3, in the middle of the night when the road was empty and the signs were turned off. However, he was doing a speed that the overwhelming majority of drivers would never do (98mph), so I was hardly surprised that he received a fine.

On the M1 near Sheffield, the signs often show the NSL symbol, and the VMS near each camera states "speed cameras". That seems to slow people down to NSL more effectively than the mere presence of cameras when all the signs are switched off.

[Arcuarius]

The motorway should not open at 70 without all technology in place INCLUDING stopped vehicle detection.

I'd like to see that without accusations of incompetence being thrown around...

[XC70]

Out of interest if there is a sign which says "camera not in use" and it actually is in use, and you get done by it, does:-

a. The prosecution stand because you broke the limit?
b. The prosecution not stand because you were entrapped by the sign?

[Bryn666]

Given you can't be entrapped into doing something illegal in the first place... the former.

[FleetlinePhil]

Another quite lengthy report on the smart motorway debate on BBC's Breakfast Time this morning, although there doesn't seem to be any supporting story on their website. I think the basis of it was an admission from HE that the cameras were not constantly monitored - I'm not sure if this really is new information?

[Bendo]

Another quite lengthy report on the smart motorway debate on BBC's Breakfast Time this morning, although there doesn't seem to be any supporting story on their website. I think the basis of it was an admission from HE that the cameras were not constantly monitored - I'm not sure if this really is new information?

Surely it is common sense, to monitor them contantly would require one person per camera. Obviously that isn't going to happen.

[FleetlinePhil]

Another quite lengthy report on the smart motorway debate on BBC's Breakfast Time this morning, although there doesn't seem to be any supporting story on their website. I think the basis of it was an admission from HE that the cameras were not constantly monitored - I'm not sure if this really is new information?

Surely it is common sense, to monitor them contantly would require one person per camera. Obviously that isn't going to happen.

No, it isn't. However, from my own experience of monitoring CCTV on railway stations, I would have thought it possible for an operator to cover quite a number of cameras if the display system rotates through them. No doubt others on here have a better idea of how the control room displays actually work. That does assume that the operator isn't undertaking any other task, which might be the case at times. The crux of the BBC report, to my understanding, was an admission by HE that cameras were not being monitored at all at times, leading to the delays in detecting stopped vehicles previously discussed on this thread.

[JonH]

Another quite lengthy report on the smart motorway debate on BBC's Breakfast Time this morning, although there doesn't seem to be any supporting story on their website. I think the basis of it was an admission from HE that the cameras were not constantly monitored - I'm not sure if this really is new information?

Saw that report - there is nothing currently on the BBC website. Not that there'd be much point - reading comments here, it's clear that many highways "experts" attitudes to road deaths is "meh"

[c2R]

I witnessed this morning on the England M1 a large amount of HGV traffic in the hard shoulder between J12 and J13 travelling at between 50 and 60mph - however all the gantries were off, meaning the hard shoulder wasn't in operation.... It was a mixture of UK and contintental vhicles, as well as road maintenance type vehicles, presumably heading for the works site from 13 northbound...

It's very clear that there is a definite gulf in understanding of motorists how and when to use these roads.