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.
fras wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 11:52
The latest edition of Private Eye (19th January, No 1615), has an article by "Hedgehog" in his regular "Roadrage" spot, about National Highways installations of stopped vehicle detection systems, (SVDs) on Smart Motorways. The article also then looks at Smart Motorway accident figures by analysing the latest five-year accident data. Whilst it is true that total KSI rates on ALRs are lower, (although not by much), once accidents involving only moving vehicles are excluded, then for stopped vehicles on ALRs, the KSI/mile rate is more than double that of normal motorways with hard shoulders., and the Personal Injury Collision rate almost double.
So ALRs have substantially increased the risk for people who have been forced to stop on the motorway.
Maybe so, but I'd still rather be on a motorway that is net safer overall and has the additional benefit of substantially increased capacity thereby giving faster and more reliable journeys.
It will be interesting to see how the safety stats change (hopefully significantly improve) when the benefit of the safety improvements on smart motorways which are currently being implemented are evident.
fras wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 11:52
The latest edition of Private Eye (19th January, No 1615), has an article by "Hedgehog" in his regular "Roadrage" spot, about National Highways installations of stopped vehicle detection systems, (SVDs) on Smart Motorways. The article also then looks at Smart Motorway accident figures by analysing the latest five-year accident data. Whilst it is true that total KSI rates on ALRs are lower, (although not by much), once accidents involving only moving vehicles are excluded, then for stopped vehicles on ALRs, the KSI/mile rate is more than double that of normal motorways with hard shoulders., and the Personal Injury Collision rate almost double.
So ALRs have substantially increased the risk for people who have been forced to stop on the motorway.
Indeed just as Bomag pointed out the promoters have gone for a global risk equivalency by trading off risks for different groups rather than ensuring the risks for all groups were mitigated to as low as reasonably practicable. It wouldn't wash in many other industries e.g. nuclear where all risks mitigated to ALARP is standard.
Is the "KSI/mile rate" per route mile or travelled mile? If it's the former it's quite a poor metric for measuring a programme targeted at the busiest roads in the country.
I suppose we should be grateful that smart motorways weren't handed to Fujitsu and the Post Office, you'd have been crashed into thanks to software bugs telling people you weren't blocking a lane at all and then prosecuted for fraud.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
fras wrote: ↑Sat Jan 20, 2024 11:52
The latest edition of Private Eye (19th January, No 1615), has an article by "Hedgehog" in his regular "Roadrage" spot, about National Highways installations of stopped vehicle detection systems, (SVDs) on Smart Motorways. The article also then looks at Smart Motorway accident figures by analysing the latest five-year accident data. Whilst it is true that total KSI rates on ALRs are lower, (although not by much), once accidents involving only moving vehicles are excluded, then for stopped vehicles on ALRs, the KSI/mile rate is more than double that of normal motorways with hard shoulders., and the Personal Injury Collision rate almost double.
So ALRs have substantially increased the risk for people who have been forced to stop on the motorway.
Indeed just as Bomag pointed out the promoters have gone for a global risk equivalency by trading off risks for different groups rather than ensuring the risks for all groups were mitigated to as low as reasonably practicable. It wouldn't wash in many other industries e.g. nuclear where all risks mitigated to ALARP is standard.
Is the "KSI/mile rate" per route mile or travelled mile? If it's the former it's quite a poor metric for measuring a programme targeted at the busiest roads in the country.
Per travelled mile. Source : the table on page 44 here, the final column ("KSI per hmvm")* : https://nationalhighways.co.uk/media/ra ... -final.pdf "Table 1
Headline five-year average (2017-2021) injury-adjusted metrics per road type
Description: Across all collisions, all three types of smart motorway continue to be better than conventional motorways for those metrics which consider the most significant impacts, uch as deaths or serious injuries
Source: Analysis from National Highways
Data based on STATS19 with minor amendment"
*Killed and seriously injured (KSI) rate : The KSI rate takes the KSI metric and controls for the volume of traffic on the road and is more specifically defined as the number of KSI casualties per hundred million vehicle miles travelled. (From the glossary, page 98)
Today we went up the M6 from Jn17 to Jn 23, (East Lancs Road A580)
The SM works seem to be going on for ever, and one thing I did notice were notices saying they were installing emergency refuges. This puzzled me, as I would have thought these would have been almost complete by now. Are extra ones now being installed to reduce the distance between refuges, and the project timescale extended ?
fras wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 17:53
Today we went up the M6 from Jn17 to Jn 23, (East Lancs Road A580)
The SM works seem to be going on for ever, and one thing I did notice were notices saying they were installing emergency refuges. This puzzled me, as I would have thought these would have been almost complete by now. Are extra ones now being installed to reduce the distance between refuges, and the project timescale extended ?
Yes : https://nationalhighways.co.uk/article/ ... 6-upgrade/
"National Highways is to double the number of emergency areas it is providing as part of the upgrade of the M6 between junction 21a and junction 26 between Warrington and Wigan.
It means that when the upgraded road opens, drivers will have more places to stop if they need to in an emergency.
The original plan was for 10 emergency areas along the upgraded stretch of motorway. But the project team has now been given the green light to add up to a dozen more.....
The M6 upgrade, between junction 21a at Croft near Warrington in Cheshire and junction 26 at Orrell in Greater Manchester, started in March 2021 and was due to be completed this spring but is now likely to open in Spring 2025."
fras wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 17:53
Today we went up the M6 from Jn17 to Jn 23, (East Lancs Road A580)
The SM works seem to be going on for ever, and one thing I did notice were notices saying they were installing emergency refuges. This puzzled me, as I would have thought these would have been almost complete by now. Are extra ones now being installed to reduce the distance between refuges, and the project timescale extended ?
Yes : https://nationalhighways.co.uk/article/ ... 6-upgrade/
"National Highways is to double the number of emergency areas it is providing as part of the upgrade of the M6 between junction 21a and junction 26 between Warrington and Wigan.
It means that when the upgraded road opens, drivers will have more places to stop if they need to in an emergency.
The original plan was for 10 emergency areas along the upgraded stretch of motorway. But the project team has now been given the green light to add up to a dozen more.....
The M6 upgrade, between junction 21a at Croft near Warrington in Cheshire and junction 26 at Orrell in Greater Manchester, started in March 2021 and was due to be completed this spring but is now likely to open in Spring 2025."
For comparison the complete rebuild of M1 J6A-10 (approx the same distance) took from March 2006 to December 2008 to finish, so just short of 3 years. An extra year to do what amounts to replacing central reservations, communications equipment, and building lay-bys makes one wonder what is so difficult to build here?
The M56 SM works between J6-7 were also painfully slow to be delivered; it paints a very negative picture of the industry when you have 4 years of disruption to then have a road everyone thinks is unsafe at the end of it.
Is anyone ever going to be held accountable?
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
fras wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 17:53
Today we went up the M6 from Jn17 to Jn 23, (East Lancs Road A580)
The SM works seem to be going on for ever, and one thing I did notice were notices saying they were installing emergency refuges. This puzzled me, as I would have thought these would have been almost complete by now. Are extra ones now being installed to reduce the distance between refuges, and the project timescale extended ?
Yes : https://nationalhighways.co.uk/article/ ... 6-upgrade/
"National Highways is to double the number of emergency areas it is providing as part of the upgrade of the M6 between junction 21a and junction 26 between Warrington and Wigan.
It means that when the upgraded road opens, drivers will have more places to stop if they need to in an emergency.
The original plan was for 10 emergency areas along the upgraded stretch of motorway. But the project team has now been given the green light to add up to a dozen more.....
The M6 upgrade, between junction 21a at Croft near Warrington in Cheshire and junction 26 at Orrell in Greater Manchester, started in March 2021 and was due to be completed this spring but is now likely to open in Spring 2025."
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 22:11
The M56 SM works between J6-7 were also painfully slow to be delivered; it paints a very negative picture of the industry when you have 4 years of disruption to then have a road everyone thinks is unsafe at the end of it.
Is anyone ever going to be held accountable?
And the surface is still dreadful through most of it. And there's no shortage of pot holes between the Airport and Preston Brook.
chriscumbria wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 13:39
...during that time the police arrived and gave me a telling off for getting out of my car insisting that unless I got back in I would be charged with being a pedestrian on the motorway. Bearing in mind it was 5pm at night in December it felt irresponsible to insist that I sat as a sitting duck in a stationary car in the dark with no hazards on, but when asked they insisted when I asked that if you break down on a MM in a live lane you must remain in your vehicle until assistance arrives. As we're always told quite rightly that if you're on the HS you should get out of you vehicle, could we not make SMs safer by changing the law to allow you to do the same when it's safe to do so?
That's a bizarre request, fairly sure I would have ignored that up to and including being arrested by them. Where was the police car? I guess if that was behind yours then that offers some level of protection
Indeed so. Being an artic driver l don't wish to be killed by one by sitting in a dead car. Hang the police & their ridiculous instructions.
If l were in a dead artic mind, l'd probably stay put.
Monday night l came across a dead artic in the centre lane of the N/B M40 just before the M42 slip. It had been coned off by the HA.
chriscumbria wrote: ↑Wed Jan 17, 2024 13:39
...during that time the police arrived and gave me a telling off for getting out of my car insisting that unless I got back in I would be charged with being a pedestrian on the motorway. Bearing in mind it was 5pm at night in December it felt irresponsible to insist that I sat as a sitting duck in a stationary car in the dark with no hazards on, but when asked they insisted when I asked that if you break down on a MM in a live lane you must remain in your vehicle until assistance arrives. As we're always told quite rightly that if you're on the HS you should get out of you vehicle, could we not make SMs safer by changing the law to allow you to do the same when it's safe to do so?
That's a bizarre request, fairly sure I would have ignored that up to and including being arrested by them. Where was the police car? I guess if that was behind yours then that offers some level of protection
Indeed so. Being an artic driver l don't wish to be killed by one by sitting in a dead car. Hang the police & their ridiculous instructions.
If l were in a dead artic mind, l'd probably stay put.
Monday night l came across a dead artic in the centre lane of the N/B M40 just before the M42 slip. It had been coned off by the HA.
Also the request contradicts Highway Code rule 277.
fras wrote: ↑Sun Jan 21, 2024 17:53
Today we went up the M6 from Jn17 to Jn 23, (East Lancs Road A580)
The SM works seem to be going on for ever, and one thing I did notice were notices saying they were installing emergency refuges. This puzzled me, as I would have thought these would have been almost complete by now. Are extra ones now being installed to reduce the distance between refuges, and the project timescale extended ?
Yes : https://nationalhighways.co.uk/article/ ... 6-upgrade/
"National Highways is to double the number of emergency areas it is providing as part of the upgrade of the M6 between junction 21a and junction 26 between Warrington and Wigan.
It means that when the upgraded road opens, drivers will have more places to stop if they need to in an emergency.
The original plan was for 10 emergency areas along the upgraded stretch of motorway. But the project team has now been given the green light to add up to a dozen more.....
The M6 upgrade, between junction 21a at Croft near Warrington in Cheshire and junction 26 at Orrell in Greater Manchester, started in March 2021 and was due to be completed this spring but is now likely to open in Spring 2025."
Almost like they should join them up and call it a hard shoulder.
I have a feeling this will end up costing significantly more than an IHS would have. Is there any evidence that IHS is unsafe? Or are we just sticking to ALR as a religious belief at this point?
52 new emergency bays about to be built on smart motorways in the South East - this isn't just a proposal / announcement - construction is actually starting on 25th April 2024:
M25 J23 to J27: 15 new bays
M25 J5 to J7: 9 new bays
M3 J2 to J4A: 10 new bays
M4 J10 to J12: 12 new bays
M20 J3 to J5: 4 new bays
M27 J4 to J11: 2 new bays
MikeL wrote: ↑Sat Apr 13, 2024 17:59
52 new emergency bays about to be built on smart motorways in the South East - this isn't just a proposal / announcement - construction is actually starting on 25th April 2024:
M25 J23 to J27: 15 new bays
M25 J5 to J7: 9 new bays
M3 J2 to J4A: 10 new bays
M4 J10 to J12: 12 new bays
M20 J3 to J5: 4 new bays
M27 J4 to J11: 2 new bays
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 12:37
I still think the lane 1 issue is massively overplayed. We do not have thousands of deaths on all-purpose roads with no hard shoulder.
A driver hitting a stopped vehicle is bad planning and ignorance. Those who think overhead signs don't apply to them
I see your point but i think that driving all all purpose road with one or two lanes either side is very different to motorway driving which needs a hard shoulder to keep it running.
MikeL wrote: ↑Sat Apr 13, 2024 17:59
52 new emergency bays about to be built on smart motorways in the South East - this isn't just a proposal / announcement - construction is actually starting on 25th April 2024:
M25 J23 to J27: 15 new bays
M25 J5 to J7: 9 new bays
M3 J2 to J4A: 10 new bays
M4 J10 to J12: 12 new bays
M20 J3 to J5: 4 new bays
M27 J4 to J11: 2 new bays
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 12:37
I still think the lane 1 issue is massively overplayed. We do not have thousands of deaths on all-purpose roads with no hard shoulder.
A driver hitting a stopped vehicle is bad planning and ignorance. Those who think overhead signs don't apply to them
I see your point but i think that driving all all purpose road with one or two lanes either side is very different to motorway driving which needs a hard shoulder to keep it running.
Why does a motorway need a hard shoulder to keep it running?
Consider all the D2 motorways. The difference between them and an all purpose D2 is a hard shoulder, and yet they have the same speed limit for almost all vehicles except buses too old to have a speed limiter, by 8mph. The all purpose road will also have no emergency warning system and probably have inferior sightlines. Altogether, comparing a motorway without hard shoulders and a dual carriageway of any width, a motorway with SVD is going to be vastly superior to any all-purpose road. What matters is for drivers to realise that they still have an obligation to look where they are going and see whether it is safe to do so before trying.
As for threatened prosecution for being a pedestrian on a motorway, there are two statutory exemptions in the regulations. Reg 13 (England and Wales)) specifies using it to reach a hard shoulder (which, according to reg 3 (2 in Scotland, 1 in NI) includes any sort of refuge area intended to take the weight of a car) and Reg 15(1)(b) (13 in Scotland and NI) specifies if your car has broken down under Reg 7 (6 in Scotland and NI).
In any case, the most a police officer could do is threaten to report you for being on the motorway, to which your response is "You do that. I will take your number and make an official complaint."
Their Inspector would laugh at them when he saw the investigation file before telling them in no uncertain terms that the first priority in the event of a breakdown is to get the car occupants to a place of safety. Whoever does police complaints for the force would laugh before they told the District Commander to have a "constructive discussion" with the officer.
