The future of 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
Bendo
Member
Posts: 2257
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 02:52
Location: Liverpool

Re: The future of smart motorways

Post by Bendo »

EpicChef wrote: Wed Jul 07, 2021 00:04 When we drove up M1 in early June, there were cases where a limit wasn’t even set on the VMS, but the cameras were strictly doing 10% + 2, and people cruising through at 80 were duly flashed.

Equally, there was an issue where a 40 limit was set for no apparent reason - people who ignored it and sped on at 50 or higher got flashed too.

And the HADECS3 cameras do have a visible flash, at least at night.
There has been many debates on what they are set to when no limit is displayed. Personally I've no idea why anyone would want to try it out but there you go.

Also just because they are flashing, doesn't mean tickets are necessarily being issued. There's one on the M5 near the M4 junction that has flashed me a few times at 77 but never has a ticket from it.

At that speed I'd be slightly peeved to get one, but then that's the risk I'm taking and if I do well that's just the way it is.
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Stevie D »

WHBM wrote: Sat Jul 17, 2021 15:04Sure. But it doesn't justify the "Yaa boo, we're going to engineer out the safety provision because you're a plonker and I'm not" attitude.
That isn't what it's about at all.

The hard shoulder of a motorway is a dangerous place to be. If removing the hard shoulder means that pretty much of those "non-emergency" stops are eliminated (or at least moved to the much safer ERA) then that could easily offset any increased risk to drivers who do have to stop in an emergency in a live lane, making the motorway safer all round.
WHBM
Member
Posts: 9696
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 18:01
Location: London

Re: The future of smart motorways

Post by WHBM »

Having passed probably thousands of stopped vehicles on the shoulder, I do find it surprising to hear of this intense use by people for irrelevant reasons. I wonder what the actual misuse is, and maybe how much any figures on this were selectively chosen to support the ALR cheapness.

The one I have noticed is HGVs (typically European) pulling over at times of delays and queueing. The M25 seems particularly prone to this. However this seems to have INCREASED with ALR, when consecutive ERAs can have one (sometimes two squeezed in) blocking it. This seems a consequence of tachograph regulations, where it's a hard penalty if you exceed the limit, notwithstanding having been stuck in a jam, and detected afterwards, whereas if you are unlawfully stopped in the ERA the police if they come across you will typically, and quite reasonably, just move them on as quickly as possible, rather than start taking details from someone with limited English.
Herned
Member
Posts: 1357
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 09:15

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Herned »

Stevie D wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 11:06
The hard shoulder of a motorway is a dangerous place to be. If removing the hard shoulder means that pretty much of those "non-emergency" stops are eliminated (or at least moved to the much safer ERA) then that could easily offset any increased risk to drivers who do have to stop in an emergency in a live lane, making the motorway safer all round.
Whilst I understand that the risks in total may well be reduced, that still seems a pretty poor trade off for any poor sod who does genuinely break down. Do we accept such increased individual risks for the "greater good" in any other circumstances?
WHBM
Member
Posts: 9696
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 18:01
Location: London

Re: The future of smart motorways

Post by WHBM »

The most surprising thing is that since post-WW2 motorway standard roads were built all round the world, they invariably have a shoulder, and this is always presented as for "safety reasons". This includes the pre-war Autobahnen in the former GDR (and Poland), which were progressively and substantially rebuilt in the 1990s-2000s with shoulders. Quite how Highways England came to the opposite conclusion is really difficult to believe.

The standard spec for all purpose roads in this country has also long included a verge, typically grass, rather than miles of close-proximity Armco, so we now have the ludicrous situation where the busiest roads in the country are the only ones which do not have this feature. Lets have a look at the most recent new A-road, the A14 past Huntingdon. Oh look, it's got grass verges ! Even under bridge structures, which are of appropriate span !

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.2951503 ... 384!8i8192
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19178
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: The future of smart motorways

Post by KeithW »

WHBM wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 13:48 The most surprising thing is that since post-WW2 motorway standard roads were built all round the world, they invariably have a shoulder, and this is always presented as for "safety reasons". This includes the pre-war Autobahnen in the former GDR (and Poland), which were progressively and substantially rebuilt in the 1990s-2000s with shoulders. Quite how Highways England came to the opposite conclusion is really difficult to believe.

The standard spec for all purpose roads in this country has also long included a verge, typically grass, rather than miles of close-proximity Armco, so we now have the ludicrous situation where the busiest roads in the country are the only ones which do not have this feature. Lets have a look at the most recent new A-road, the A14 past Huntingdon. Oh look, it's got grass verges ! Even under bridge structures, which are of appropriate span !

https://www.google.com/maps/@52.2951503 ... 384!8i8192
Well these don't
A174 - just driven along it
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.54723 ... authuser=0

A14 - Bury St Edmunds
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.25066 ... authuser=0

A19
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.53538 ... authuser=0

A34 Oxford Southern Bypass
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.73884 ... authuser=0

A50
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.88493 ... authuser=0

A66
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.46411 ... authuser=0


Even where grass verges exist they are rarely hard enough to prevent vehicles getting bogged down or wide enough to get the vehicle out of lane 1
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Stevie D »

Herned wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 13:27Whilst I understand that the risks in total may well be reduced, that still seems a pretty poor trade off for any poor sod who does genuinely break down. Do we accept such increased individual risks for the "greater good" in any other circumstances?
It is very unlikely that any measures we take will reduce risk or harm universally – pretty much everything involves a trade-off. If a course of action results in different people being at risk of being killed or seriously injured, but significantly fewer of them overall, then on balance it is probably the right course of action to take.
Herned
Member
Posts: 1357
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 09:15

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Herned »

Stevie D wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 16:04 It is very unlikely that any measures we take will reduce risk or harm universally – pretty much everything involves a trade-off.
Really? So all of the advances in car design, passive safety of road signs, changes in hgv drivers hours etc have been a trade off which has increased risk somewhere else? Not convinced by that argument at all
User avatar
ManomayLR
Social Media Admin
Posts: 3321
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by ManomayLR »

Herned wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 19:48
Stevie D wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 16:04 It is very unlikely that any measures we take will reduce risk or harm universally – pretty much everything involves a trade-off.
Really? So all of the advances in car design, passive safety of road signs, changes in hgv drivers hours etc have been a trade off which has increased risk somewhere else? Not convinced by that argument at all
As for passive safety, passively safe street lights are so expensive they don't even have any lighting on managed motorways anymore. Absolutely dangerous, we need continuous LED lighting
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
Bendo
Member
Posts: 2257
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2007 02:52
Location: Liverpool

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Bendo »

EpicChef wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 23:34
Herned wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 19:48
Stevie D wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 16:04 It is very unlikely that any measures we take will reduce risk or harm universally – pretty much everything involves a trade-off.
Really? So all of the advances in car design, passive safety of road signs, changes in hgv drivers hours etc have been a trade off which has increased risk somewhere else? Not convinced by that argument at all
As for passive safety, passively safe street lights are so expensive they don't even have any lighting on managed motorways anymore. Absolutely dangerous, we need continuous LED lighting
Do the stats bear that out though? My old S40 had awful headlights (permanently on for 200K+ miles doesn't do much for the reflective coating) and I can't say it ever felt really unsafe. It may have been hairy had I encountered a stationary vehicle sideways on with no reflectors visible, but that's a few and far between scenario.

There an awful lot of FUD spread about smart motorways.Once SVD is in place,there really is no reason they can't be perfectly safe.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35714
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Bryn666 »

EpicChef wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 23:34
Herned wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 19:48
Stevie D wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 16:04 It is very unlikely that any measures we take will reduce risk or harm universally – pretty much everything involves a trade-off.
Really? So all of the advances in car design, passive safety of road signs, changes in hgv drivers hours etc have been a trade off which has increased risk somewhere else? Not convinced by that argument at all
As for passive safety, passively safe street lights are so expensive they don't even have any lighting on managed motorways anymore. Absolutely dangerous, we need continuous LED lighting
Lighting is a bit of a red herring to be fair, it was introduced along motorways which were prone to heavy pollution related fog, hence why the main lit stretches have always been the M1, M6, and M62. As heavy industrial smog has become mostly a thing of the past the rationale for lighting motorways has reduced. At the same time vehicle lights are much better than they were; look up the term 'lighting arms race' and you'll see what this means.

The M62, notably, is still lit across the Pennines because it is regularly foggy up there. An attempt to have a part night switch off was an abysmal failure.

There may be a case for small scale illumination of ERAs so someone waiting in one doesn't stumble into live lanes in the dark.
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
Bomag
Member
Posts: 946
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 23:26

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Bomag »

Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:57
EpicChef wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 23:34
Herned wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 19:48
Really? So all of the advances in car design, passive safety of road signs, changes in hgv drivers hours etc have been a trade off which has increased risk somewhere else? Not convinced by that argument at all
As for passive safety, passively safe street lights are so expensive they don't even have any lighting on managed motorways anymore. Absolutely dangerous, we need continuous LED lighting
Lighting is a bit of a red herring to be fair, it was introduced along motorways which were prone to heavy pollution related fog, hence why the main lit stretches have always been the M1, M6, and M62. As heavy industrial smog has become mostly a thing of the past the rationale for lighting motorways has reduced. At the same time vehicle lights are much better than they were; look up the term 'lighting arms race' and you'll see what this means.

The M62, notably, is still lit across the Pennines because it is regularly foggy up there. An attempt to have a part night switch off was an abysmal failure.

There may be a case for small scale illumination of ERAs so someone waiting in one doesn't stumble into live lanes in the dark.
Street Lighting provides over 5 seconds of preview time to road users of the road and road markings ahead. The minimum to avoid fatigue is 2.2 seconds. For a 4 lane unlit road (i.e. ALR) with a Class R4 (200mcd) road marking, somebody in lane 3 will get 2.5 seconds worth of preview time for a brand new set of LEDs/bulbs. Factor in reduction in performance over time and glare from oncoming vehicles the only 50% of road users will get the required preview time after 12 months - if you are over 65 then forget it.

Headlights have fixed geometry, increasing output will have limited benefit.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35714
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Bryn666 »

Bomag wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 13:37
Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:57
EpicChef wrote: Sun Jul 18, 2021 23:34
As for passive safety, passively safe street lights are so expensive they don't even have any lighting on managed motorways anymore. Absolutely dangerous, we need continuous LED lighting
Lighting is a bit of a red herring to be fair, it was introduced along motorways which were prone to heavy pollution related fog, hence why the main lit stretches have always been the M1, M6, and M62. As heavy industrial smog has become mostly a thing of the past the rationale for lighting motorways has reduced. At the same time vehicle lights are much better than they were; look up the term 'lighting arms race' and you'll see what this means.

The M62, notably, is still lit across the Pennines because it is regularly foggy up there. An attempt to have a part night switch off was an abysmal failure.

There may be a case for small scale illumination of ERAs so someone waiting in one doesn't stumble into live lanes in the dark.
Street Lighting provides over 5 seconds of preview time to road users of the road and road markings ahead. The minimum to avoid fatigue is 2.2 seconds. For a 4 lane unlit road (i.e. ALR) with a Class R4 (200mcd) road marking, somebody in lane 3 will get 2.5 seconds worth of preview time for a brand new set of LEDs/bulbs. Factor in reduction in performance over time and glare from oncoming vehicles the only 50% of road users will get the required preview time after 12 months - if you are over 65 then forget it.

Headlights have fixed geometry, increasing output will have limited benefit.
The answer there is to maintain studs and lining, not spend millions on environmentally damaging lighting schemes to turn the entire countryside into a floodlit theme park for the benefit of those who, if their eyesight is deficient, shouldn't be driving.
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
ManomayLR
Social Media Admin
Posts: 3321
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by ManomayLR »

Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 13:41
Bomag wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 13:37
Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:57

Lighting is a bit of a red herring to be fair, it was introduced along motorways which were prone to heavy pollution related fog, hence why the main lit stretches have always been the M1, M6, and M62. As heavy industrial smog has become mostly a thing of the past the rationale for lighting motorways has reduced. At the same time vehicle lights are much better than they were; look up the term 'lighting arms race' and you'll see what this means.

The M62, notably, is still lit across the Pennines because it is regularly foggy up there. An attempt to have a part night switch off was an abysmal failure.

There may be a case for small scale illumination of ERAs so someone waiting in one doesn't stumble into live lanes in the dark.
Street Lighting provides over 5 seconds of preview time to road users of the road and road markings ahead. The minimum to avoid fatigue is 2.2 seconds. For a 4 lane unlit road (i.e. ALR) with a Class R4 (200mcd) road marking, somebody in lane 3 will get 2.5 seconds worth of preview time for a brand new set of LEDs/bulbs. Factor in reduction in performance over time and glare from oncoming vehicles the only 50% of road users will get the required preview time after 12 months - if you are over 65 then forget it.

Headlights have fixed geometry, increasing output will have limited benefit.
The answer there is to maintain studs and lining, not spend millions on environmentally damaging lighting schemes to turn the entire countryside into a floodlit theme park for the benefit of those who, if their eyesight is deficient, shouldn't be driving.
But see, I’d have all of M1, M6, M62, M60, M5, and M25 lit continuously because they’re the busiest ones.
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7539
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: The future of smart motorways

Post by jackal »

From the recent update to the HE delivery plan:
Install radar Stopped Vehicle Detection (SVD) technology on every existing ALR
scheme by end of September 2022. All new schemes will have radar SVD
technology installed before they open, including the six schemes currently in
construction
https://highwaysengland.co.uk/media/bz3 ... sion-1.pdf
Herned
Member
Posts: 1357
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 09:15

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Herned »

EpicChef wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 17:47 But see, I’d have all of M1, M6, M62, M60, M5, and M25 lit continuously because they’re the busiest ones.
Why? Every car I have ever owned was fitted with very good headlights. Motorways benefit least from lighting IMO, as they have consistent lane widths and no weird obstructions or any of the other oddities that older roads have. By all means light the junctions but there is no justification for lighting miles of countryside. Even the Belgians are getting rid of motorway lighting
User avatar
Ruperts Trooper
Member
Posts: 12025
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 13:43
Location: Huntingdonshire originally, but now Staffordshire

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Ruperts Trooper »

Herned wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 18:56
EpicChef wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 17:47 But see, I’d have all of M1, M6, M62, M60, M5, and M25 lit continuously because they’re the busiest ones.
Why? Every car I have ever owned was fitted with very good headlights. Motorways benefit least from lighting IMO, as they have consistent lane widths and no weird obstructions or any of the other oddities that older roads have. By all means light the junctions but there is no justification for lighting miles of countryside. Even the Belgians are getting rid of motorway lighting
Agreed - once cars had moved away from pathetic sealed beam units, the more modern units just don't need universal street lighting - motorway lighting should only be installed/retained where it makes a positive contribution to road safety compared with vehicle headlights alone.
Lifelong motorhead
Bomag
Member
Posts: 946
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 23:26

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Bomag »

Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 13:41
Bomag wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 13:37
Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 12:57

Lighting is a bit of a red herring to be fair, it was introduced along motorways which were prone to heavy pollution related fog, hence why the main lit stretches have always been the M1, M6, and M62. As heavy industrial smog has become mostly a thing of the past the rationale for lighting motorways has reduced. At the same time vehicle lights are much better than they were; look up the term 'lighting arms race' and you'll see what this means.

The M62, notably, is still lit across the Pennines because it is regularly foggy up there. An attempt to have a part night switch off was an abysmal failure.

There may be a case for small scale illumination of ERAs so someone waiting in one doesn't stumble into live lanes in the dark.
Street Lighting provides over 5 seconds of preview time to road users of the road and road markings ahead. The minimum to avoid fatigue is 2.2 seconds. For a 4 lane unlit road (i.e. ALR) with a Class R4 (200mcd) road marking, somebody in lane 3 will get 2.5 seconds worth of preview time for a brand new set of LEDs/bulbs. Factor in reduction in performance over time and glare from oncoming vehicles the only 50% of road users will get the required preview time after 12 months - if you are over 65 then forget it.

Headlights have fixed geometry, increasing output will have limited benefit.
The answer there is to maintain studs and lining, not spend millions on environmentally damaging lighting schemes to turn the entire countryside into a floodlit theme park for the benefit of those who, if their eyesight is deficient, shouldn't be driving.
I see equality doesn't matter. You are confusing visual acuity with light sensitivity. Even with 6/6 vision every 13 years of your adult life your light sensitive rods and cylinders need twice as much light energy to fire. So even with completely lawful eyesight 65 year olds are not routinely being provided with a level of delineation deemed needed for safe driving. Even as a champion of roads markings and studs, no improvement in products or reduction in maintenance cycle can make a D4 ALR perform better when considering delineation. One lighting engineer (or non-lighting engineer) keeps on telling me that I should be improving markings and studs, unfortunately physics get in the way. I feel a Scotty quote coming on.

For the avoidance of doubt D3 isn't as much as an issue, its D4 carriageways.
Bomag
Member
Posts: 946
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 23:26

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Bomag »

Ruperts Trooper wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 19:01
Herned wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 18:56
EpicChef wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 17:47 But see, I’d have all of M1, M6, M62, M60, M5, and M25 lit continuously because they’re the busiest ones.
Why? Every car I have ever owned was fitted with very good headlights. Motorways benefit least from lighting IMO, as they have consistent lane widths and no weird obstructions or any of the other oddities that older roads have. By all means light the junctions but there is no justification for lighting miles of countryside. Even the Belgians are getting rid of motorway lighting
Agreed - once cars had moved away from pathetic sealed beam units, the more modern units just don't need universal street lighting - motorway lighting should only be installed/retained where it makes a positive contribution to road safety compared with vehicle headlights alone.
Please see the point above, light output above 10000cd is mostly pointless due to the physical restrictions on where the light goes when using normal headlights.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35714
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: breaking down on smart motorways

Post by Bryn666 »

Bomag wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 21:39
Bryn666 wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 13:41
Bomag wrote: Mon Jul 19, 2021 13:37

Street Lighting provides over 5 seconds of preview time to road users of the road and road markings ahead. The minimum to avoid fatigue is 2.2 seconds. For a 4 lane unlit road (i.e. ALR) with a Class R4 (200mcd) road marking, somebody in lane 3 will get 2.5 seconds worth of preview time for a brand new set of LEDs/bulbs. Factor in reduction in performance over time and glare from oncoming vehicles the only 50% of road users will get the required preview time after 12 months - if you are over 65 then forget it.

Headlights have fixed geometry, increasing output will have limited benefit.
The answer there is to maintain studs and lining, not spend millions on environmentally damaging lighting schemes to turn the entire countryside into a floodlit theme park for the benefit of those who, if their eyesight is deficient, shouldn't be driving.
I see equality doesn't matter. You are confusing visual acuity with light sensitivity. Even with 6/6 vision every 13 years of your adult life your light sensitive rods and cylinders need twice as much light energy to fire. So even with completely lawful eyesight 65 year olds are not routinely being provided with a level of delineation deemed needed for safe driving. Even as a champion of roads markings and studs, no improvement in products or reduction in maintenance cycle can make a D4 ALR perform better when considering delineation. One lighting engineer (or non-lighting engineer) keeps on telling me that I should be improving markings and studs, unfortunately physics get in the way. I feel a Scotty quote coming on.

For the avoidance of doubt D3 isn't as much as an issue, its D4 carriageways.
The industry saying that they have created a situation where drivers can be lawful in terms of eyesight yet not provided for in terms of what they actually require leads to only two conclusions:

1: the minimum eyesight requirement is too lax
2: the industry standard is too onerous

Neither of these are issues of equality; one suggests the law is turning - to coin a phrase - a blind eye to deficient drivers, the other is the industry saying the materials they have are not fit for purpose.

Neither are good answers.

Perhaps some of the innovation funds wasted over the years on purple cones and worded signs repeating "end of roadworks" messages could go on materials development or using more of the mains powered LED studs such as those used at Switch Island to show where the edge of the carriageways are. The fact HE still insist on using stick on studs on unlit motorways which are pinged off by HGVs after a week suggests not much effort is being put into lining or studs at all.
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
Post Reply