"The days of conventional motorways are over"
Moderator: Site Management Team
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
On the other hand Mike Penning, a former Transport Minister, was featured on BBC news yesterday (10th April) saying that he has concerns over people's safety on smart motorways. I believe he states that when he approved them during his watch he was misled.
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england- ... -in-danger
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/uk-england- ... -in-danger
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
However this one was actually built when the M25 J25-26 was made "smart" (and with the proper hard shoulder taken away).
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6809019 ... 384!8i8192
-
- SABRE Developer
- Posts: 11057
- Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 21:58
- Location: Belfast N Ireland
- Contact:
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
The M2 foreshore was built with twin hardshoulders as both carriageways were constructed with the long term aim of being a 3 mile weaving section between a D3M and D2M. The NI MTR explicitly permit use of the “wrong” hard shoulders on a D4M or D5M on the same terms as nearside hard shoulders, but the offside phones were bagged up a few years ago because the retrofitted concrete jersey barriers had narrowed the width available.
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
Downright depressing, isn't it? And a lot of this will happen soon enough that I can't even manage hoping it'll at least be put off until after I'm dead.Micro The Maniac wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:50And to think, Orwell's 1984 was warning, not a manifesto
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
Many of soft verges on the dual carriageways are actually primarily intended for drainage and putting your car on them can be a big mistake. Do it here and there is a good chance that the car will not only get stuck but suffer damage to floorpan and exhaust.Micro The Maniac wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 11:53Typically, dual carriageways have a soft verge, where it is possible to get a car off the road.Johnathan404 wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 23:29 What is the practical difference between a smart motorway and a dual carriageway which will probably have lay-bys and smart technology?
Typically, smart motorways have a barrier along the edge of the carriageway, meaning there is nowhere to escape.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.49446 ... 6656?hl=en
Even where it is possible a good portion of the car is likely to be still within the running lane and it only takes a slight misjudgement for a truck to wipe you out and unlike a motorway there is no armco to get behind and often no monitoring to pick up the problem or VMS to warn other drivers. I would not want to stop here.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.54697 ... 6656?hl=en
Of course we also have ye olde fashioned motorways with no hard shoulder.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.97585 ... 8192?hl=en
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.49113 ... 8192?hl=en
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
I notice that that stretch of the A19 has lay-bys more regularly than Smart Motorways have refuges.
- Chris Bertram
- Member
- Posts: 15744
- Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
- Location: Birmingham, England
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
Well yes, but those are urban motorways with low speed limits.KeithW wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 13:33 Of course we also have ye olde fashioned motorways with no hard shoulder.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.97585 ... 8192?hl=en
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.49113 ... 8192?hl=en
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
That's just in keeping with HEs unwritten policy of making motorways as ugly as possible by removing all soft landscaping.WHBM wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:12However this one was actually built when the M25 J25-26 was made "smart" (and with the proper hard shoulder taken away).
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6809019 ... 384!8i8192
Official line is coning off lanes for grass cutting causes delays and danger to operatives.
They seem determined to ensure that smart motorway furniture is as ugly as possible. See the giant foundation design for all signs too. Everything on concrete blocks the size of Balfron Tower... HIDEOUS.
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
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
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
Cost is clearly a significant driver in the adoption of these new style roads, it is all well and good accusing designers and developers of penny pinching/cost saving, whatever you care to call it. But the reality is that it is "our" money which is being spent; as is well demonstrated every day the battle to secure government funding for anything is subject to all manner of complicated criteria.
No doubt there will be many who contribute to the public purse (i.e. us - taxpayers) who would want to prioritise spending on roads, and who would be perfectly accepting of the additional cost of providing hard shoulders on all motorways at the expense of other demands (I might even be one!). However not every taxpayer is a petrol head/driver who would prioritise this way; because the funds are not freely available then compromises have to be made; and at the moment our political masters (who we put in place) are happy to swing their influence behind Smart motorways. Somewhere no doubt there is a risk assessment that balances off the cost advantage of Smart motorway against the increased risk of collisions and the resulting financial and human cost of dealing with them. No doubt there will be some who agree and others who disagree with the balance.
I really don't see any likelihood at all of Smart motorways being 'undone' and redeveloped with hard shoulders. In the time it would take to build more Smart motorways, run them and then decide it was the wrong thing to do and plan for redevelopment our motoring will have changed beyond recognition. We will see the implementation of autonomous technology in vehicles and that will take care of many of the human error factors which result in collisions/accidents, call them what you will.
Hard shoulders where they do exist may seem like a preferred choice to roads where it is all lane running with refuges at regular distances, however; hard shoulders themselves are extremely dangerous and people get killed on them as it is.
I have no idea what the cost differential is but would expect that somewhere there is costing data that states that for £Xm's we can have either Z miles of motorway with hard shoulder or 2xZ miles of Smart motorway.
- RichardA35
- Committee Member
- Posts: 5705
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 18:58
- Location: Dorset
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
To be strictly correct what is identified as an "offside hard shoulder" here is actually a hardened central reserve in an area with a wider than normal central reserve. The centre edge line has not moved and that section is not constructed to full pavement depth so could not be used as a running lane even in traffic management.WHBM wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:12However this one was actually built when the M25 J25-26 was made "smart" (and with the proper hard shoulder taken away).
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6809019 ... 384!8i8192
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
You're starting to sound like me!Bryn666 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 14:59That's just in keeping with HEs unwritten policy of making motorways as ugly as possible by removing all soft landscaping.WHBM wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 12:12However this one was actually built when the M25 J25-26 was made "smart" (and with the proper hard shoulder taken away).
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6809019 ... 384!8i8192
Official line is coning off lanes for grass cutting causes delays and danger to operatives.
They seem determined to ensure that smart motorway furniture is as ugly as possible. See the giant foundation design for all signs too. Everything on concrete blocks the size of Balfron Tower... HIDEOUS.
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
A little, my view is if we are going to irreparably change the landscape we should at least make an effort to make it look better.
Same in towns. Even streetlights are ugly as sin these days.
Same in towns. Even streetlights are ugly as sin these days.
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
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
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
Point is that generally we pour resources into making things safer, accepting loss in capability and opportunity.
Here we are making it more dangerous and justifying that by saying we get more for our money. Quite obviously if you do things on the cheap you can have more of it. Until you have to spend more to do it again that is.
This seems a retrograde step.
Add in the very misleading statements on safety hence the view these officials are actually politicians. No change from senior officials in any dept really - they just dont have to be elected so aren’t even accountable!
As for many times, twice in the last 9 months but all of the events: engine blowouts/power failures, overheating, punctures, sick children/adults, loss of lights, electrical issues, damage to windscreen (object damage), obscured windscreen (gunk from car in front, failure of bonnet catch!), fuel blockages and running out of fuel. That’s just me as driver - throw in others as pax!
Perhaps I should just be wealthier with a new car and never make a mistake? I know, I’ll make a resolution to be that.
Again - has anyone broken down on a smart motorway?
How do emergency services get about and how do you safely exit a 100m ERA into full flow?
Here we are making it more dangerous and justifying that by saying we get more for our money. Quite obviously if you do things on the cheap you can have more of it. Until you have to spend more to do it again that is.
This seems a retrograde step.
Add in the very misleading statements on safety hence the view these officials are actually politicians. No change from senior officials in any dept really - they just dont have to be elected so aren’t even accountable!
As for many times, twice in the last 9 months but all of the events: engine blowouts/power failures, overheating, punctures, sick children/adults, loss of lights, electrical issues, damage to windscreen (object damage), obscured windscreen (gunk from car in front, failure of bonnet catch!), fuel blockages and running out of fuel. That’s just me as driver - throw in others as pax!
Perhaps I should just be wealthier with a new car and never make a mistake? I know, I’ll make a resolution to be that.
Again - has anyone broken down on a smart motorway?
How do emergency services get about and how do you safely exit a 100m ERA into full flow?
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
I think the announcement that the days of building "conventional" motorways are over in the UK is regrettable. To me it sounds both defeatist and caving into NIMBY/anti-development sentiment.
Many developed countries still heavily invest in their motorway programmes, and where and when this investment is not forthcoming it invariably leads to traffic congestion, distorted economic development patterns and a reduced quality of life.
I am very aware that Britain, especially England, is very densely populated and developed and concreting/tarring over every square metre of countryside is obviously what no-one wants but there is scope for significant improvements to the motorway network, and that includes building new routes.
Britain clearly has a standard of road - expressways - that would/could be motorway standard in other countries but due to the very narrow and high standard definition of a motorway in the UK - it seems to rank rather low in terms of its motorway density per head of population which is rather misleading but even factoring in these types of road, Britain still scores below other OECD countries. This is lamentable given how relatively well developed the UK was in terms of infrastructure 40 or 50 years ago and the ambitions of the 1960s.
The problem as I see it is a relatively skeletal motorway network with very little redundancy in the system - this dates back to the 1950s/60s when the network was planned and a lack of foresight in terms of long term strategic planning after the 1980s, largely driven by a changed political and socio-economic landscape.
As for "smart" motorways? IMO the jury is still very much out on their merits.
Many developed countries still heavily invest in their motorway programmes, and where and when this investment is not forthcoming it invariably leads to traffic congestion, distorted economic development patterns and a reduced quality of life.
I am very aware that Britain, especially England, is very densely populated and developed and concreting/tarring over every square metre of countryside is obviously what no-one wants but there is scope for significant improvements to the motorway network, and that includes building new routes.
Britain clearly has a standard of road - expressways - that would/could be motorway standard in other countries but due to the very narrow and high standard definition of a motorway in the UK - it seems to rank rather low in terms of its motorway density per head of population which is rather misleading but even factoring in these types of road, Britain still scores below other OECD countries. This is lamentable given how relatively well developed the UK was in terms of infrastructure 40 or 50 years ago and the ambitions of the 1960s.
The problem as I see it is a relatively skeletal motorway network with very little redundancy in the system - this dates back to the 1950s/60s when the network was planned and a lack of foresight in terms of long term strategic planning after the 1980s, largely driven by a changed political and socio-economic landscape.
As for "smart" motorways? IMO the jury is still very much out on their merits.
Last edited by Enceladus on Thu Apr 11, 2019 18:45, edited 3 times in total.
Certified Roads Geek ... and proud of it!
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
Even without a mechanical failure in lane 3/4/5, one where a car has stopped in lane 1 can be scary enough. I know this is quite normal on dual carriageways, but on those roads most drivers will try to get their car partially onto the verge. I had the unpleasant experience of suddenly encountering a car that was in lane 1 of the M5 because the driver had been unable to move it onto the verge because there was no verge; just a concrete barrier. I was (unusually) only doing about 65mph, and encountering the vehicle - which was not visible from far away because of the curve in the road - resulted in an emergency manoeuvre. I'm glad the traffic was light, and that I was just bimbling along.Berk wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 23:13 I am (slowly) coming round to this idea (although I find the concept of smart motorways being ‘safer’ than conventional ones a strange one).
However, I wonder how much thought had been given to a sudden mechanical failure in lanes 3/4/5. Would that be managed by closing the lane down, just like the hard shoulder??
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
If there is a stranded vehicle in a live lane, that lane will be closed, whichever lane it is. If that isn't an edge lane then it is entirely possible that additional lanes would be closed to avoid having traffic passing the stranded vehicle on both sides, although I don't think I've ever seen that situation crop up.
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
There is the old rule "if it can possibly happen, it will happen, we just don't know when". So a huge prang with many deaths will occur, probably involving HGVs and coach or minibus, where the passenger carrying vehicle had to stop for some reason. It will probably be dark as well.
Near me the M6 ALR section between Jns 16-19 has just opened. I see very few cars using Lane 1 and I am reluctant to use it too. The truckies use it, but they're able to barge anything that is stopped out of the way, so are not in danger of losing their life.
I opinion is that there should be a discontinuous hard shoulder where ALR is introduced to existing motorways. This means the cost of putting in new bridges is not necessary. The ERs are far to widely spaced for safety at the traffic levels we now have. I suppose it's like the aircraft industry, progress only occurs during wars or after major fatal accidents !
Near me the M6 ALR section between Jns 16-19 has just opened. I see very few cars using Lane 1 and I am reluctant to use it too. The truckies use it, but they're able to barge anything that is stopped out of the way, so are not in danger of losing their life.
I opinion is that there should be a discontinuous hard shoulder where ALR is introduced to existing motorways. This means the cost of putting in new bridges is not necessary. The ERs are far to widely spaced for safety at the traffic levels we now have. I suppose it's like the aircraft industry, progress only occurs during wars or after major fatal accidents !
Last edited by fras on Thu Apr 11, 2019 19:31, edited 1 time in total.
Re: "The days of conventional motorways are over"
You have things rather the wrong way round. ALR is a fraction of the cost of conventional widening, which has freed funds allowing many new build motorway schemes to get back on the agenda - A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon, LTC, A1(M) north of Doncaster, Manchester NW Quadrant, Trans-Pennine Tunnel, etc. If there were a return to conventional widening, which even a decade ago could run to over a billion for a single scheme, the offline motorway schemes would be the first on the chopping block.Enceladus wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 18:36 I think the announcement that the days of building "conventional" motorways are over in the UK is regrettable. To me it sounds both defeatist and caving into NIMBY/anti-development sentiment.
Many developed countries still heavily invest in their motorway programmes, and where and when this investment is not forthcoming it invariably leads to traffic congestion, distorted economic development patterns and a reduced quality of life.
I am very aware that Britain, especially England, is very densely populated and developed and concreting/tarring over every square metre of countryside is obviously what no-one wants but there is scope for significant improvements to the motorway network, and that includes building new routes.
"The days of conventional motorways are over" essentially means we are going to do lots of ALR, online AND offline, rather than just lots of conventional widening, which was the previous (and I would argue rather unsuccessful) policy.