To think smart motorways should be got rid of

[Helpmechangemymindsetplease]

Apparently 40 people have died after stopping on smart motorways “hard shoulders”.

What was the rationale behind them - money saving ??

AIBU to think they shouldn’t be made “safer” , they should be scrapped.

smart motorways’ hard shoulders

They're horribly dangerous. There is nowhere for broken down vehicles to get out of the way. I don't drive fast at all, and I've had a couple of near misses with vehicles stopped in the slow lane and nothing to indicate that I should expect it. Neither had hazard lights on and they were just sitting ducks.

Yanbu they are absolutely awful, so so dangerous

I like the variable speed limits but they should ditch the idea of using the hard shoulder as an extra lane

I get the principle of the variable speed limits but not having a hard shoulder is dangerous.

But you need to compare the death rate with a normal motorway. The hard shoulder of a motorway is known to be an extremely dangerous place, and sadly many people have died on conventional hard shoulders.

On googling, it appears that the death rate on smart motorways, is lower than on normal ones:

inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/cars/the-safety-issues-around-the-highways-explained-after-38-deaths-in-five-years-1377934

'Overall, between 2014 and 2018 there were 503 deaths on UK motorways. The Panorama investigation found that 38 of these were on smart motorways, amounting to seven per cent of fatalities while smart motorways now account for around 17 per cent of the motorway network'.

Obviously extremely sad that anyone dies in a road accident, and there are probably improvements that could be made on the monitoring technology, and driver education. But it doesn't appear to be the case that smart motorways are inherently more dangerous than conventional ones.

They are completely insane. I had a near miss almost going into the back of a broken down vehicle, honestly I'm totally at a loss as to who the hell EVER considered them a good idea.

YANBU at all. They were introduced to help traffic flow (apparently). The idea is that, in the event of a stationary vehicle, the huge red crosses above the lane instruct vehicles to move out of that lane. In theory it should be safe but ….. it relies on people doing the right thing. And, as someone on a different thread pointed out, 52% of people are arseholes.

They need to go.

I think hard shoulders should stop being used as regular lanes. That is unbelievably stupid and dangerous. I'm not surprised there have been so many deaths.

The variable speed limits I don't have a problem with. I use a combination of smart and non-smart motorways daily and find that drivers are more restrained on the smart motorway then when they move onto the other one they suddenly put the throttle down and act like idiots. I've had far more near misses on the other motorway than on the smart one. It's the hard shoulder situation that makes the smart motorways horrifically dangerous so yes that aspect should be scrapped without a doubt!

We all know that hard shoulders are horrendously dangerous, I am sure you can find stats of the number of people killed on them. If you want to commit suicide, just be on the hard shoulder after an accident or a break down. you won't last long (I think it's 6 minutes?)

Who thought for a minute a "smart motorway" was a good idea is beyond me.

Props to Barbara's comment.

They were discussing this on the radio this morning and one of the contributors mentioned that one of the other key issues with them is that there aren't frequent enough safe refuge spots.
Generally, you know something is wrong and could slowly get your car a short distance to get off the motorway, but if there is nothing for 2.5 miles, you may well not make it.

There was a petition doing the rounds a few weeks ago on change.org

The monitoring is mostly manual (as in some people watching lots of screens rather than each section being continously watched) and the government decided to double the 'recommended' distance between refuges.

I absolutely loathe them but not perhaps for the reasons a lot of people do.

To me they are a constant reminder that middle-lane hogging has won the argument in the UK.

We previously had three lane motorways that would have operated reasonably well if people actually stayed to the left lane unless overtaking.

Nope...I was driving back from London at 0200 on the M25 recently, four lanes. In lane 1 is me doing just under 70 on cruise control. Lane 2 is completely empty, bizarrely. Lane 3 has a Prius doing 60 (?!) and Lane 4 has a Merc coupe doing roughly the same.

Everyone loves the idea of having their own little lane, their own space to pootle around in rather than being "hemmed in" to the lorry-lane of lane 1.

As a result I think we have the phenomenon of "induced demand". Doesn't matter how many lanes you put out there, people will fill them and go at the same speed because of the camera gantrys.

It boils my piss to be frank. Why can't people actually respect the Highway Code?

It's my very uninformed view that smart motorways are a result of middle lane hogging and shit driving discipline. And every time I've been on one? Every lane is occupied with lemmings doing the same speed, no one actually overtaking and moving back in.

The queues on the M25 are nowhere near as bad as they used to be 15 years ago, so something is working. Probably the variable speed stuff. I doubt traffic is lighter.

@BeetrootRocks

Agreed re the queues, but couldn't they just have the gantry speed signs without losing the hard shoulder?

I don't mind at all being asked to slow to 40 or whatever just to make sure the traffic flows.

I do mind breaking down in a "lane" which is populated by fast moving traffic.

I'm not keen on no hard shoulder

I used to hate the variable speed limits for no obvious reason but suspect it works well

I mean when they changed the limit for no obvious reason

Not that I didn't have a reason lol

I think they're fine, the whole point is that the hard shoulder is only in use when there is a speed restriction in force.

The stats I've seen seem to suggest they are actually safer.

I refuse to drive in the hard shoulder and I notice most will just use the inside lane instead.
Stupid and dangerous.
I think variable speed limits alone are easing the congestion.

@BeetrootRocks

That's the whole point of the 'smart' bit - is that they slow down traffic before it hits the congestion and keeps it flowing at a lower speed rather than the stop-start queuing and concertina effects that happen everytime someone taps their breaks in highspeed traffic.

FixTheBone Mon 09-Mar-20 14:22:09
'I think they're fine, the whole point is that the hard shoulder is only in use when there is a speed restriction in force.'

That's true for only some - in others, the hard shoulder is a permanent inside lane, eg. sections of the M60 around Manchester, and the M62 near Leeds.

Variable speed limits, great.

No hard shoulder. Fucking horrific idea. I’m so pleased they are starting to look into it. Cars don’t always conveniently coast for a mile to a stop. If your in the shit, your in the shit.
I’ve seen the rac really struggle to pull out of refuge areas when towing.
I’ve seen them full, what do you do then??
You get one lorry in them and your stuffed.
There’s also no way you can rejoin the running lanes at anywhere near a good speed from one.

Why they thought it was a good idea I will never know.

Ive been using smart motorways in a couple of places and found them fine. They do improve the traffic.

They should just build roads of an adequate size instead 🤷‍♀️. If they can find money for public libraries and swimming pools then surely they should be able to provide the most basic essential infrastructure first.