Smart motorways... utterly bonkers???

[Silvercatowner]

I get that smart motorways are meant to ease congestion, but surely there isn't the capacity to make them smart enough to actually be safe?? The refuges aren't close enough together, and I don't understand how the traffic will be that closely monitored to be able to close off a lane as soon as someone breaks down or has an accident. The whole thing is deeply scary...

Had an incident last week when I had to suddenly move from the outside lane into the hard shoulder. Luckily it wasn't a smart motorway. Had my young DC with me. If it had been smart I'm not sure I'd be here to post this.

YANBU.

They've been made dangerous by cheaping out on what was already a cheap out solution. The refuges were supposed to be much more frequent and the monitoring better. Costs were cut and that's killed people.

The variable speed limits work well to improve traffic flow I think, but the all lane running as it's set up is unsafe.

I think the cameras and adjustable speed limits are brilliant. You don’t get that sudden stop and off you go traffic that you used to (unless there is a genuine issue) but the lack of hard shoulder is madness

They say they're safer, but I'd like to see stats for like-for-like accidents (i.e. broken down and hit from behind, either in-lane or on the hard shoulder, depending on the type of motorway) to assess that myself.

Oh, and if people didn't hog lanes for miles, we probably wouldn't need extra motorway. They should've spent the 'upgrade' money on more traffic police to sort shit driving.

Listen to the podcast "more or less" by Tim Harford on BBC sounds . They have looked into this and concluded they are probably safer than you would expect , but not as much as the government are claiming
www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000wsf0

@pointythings Thanks for explaining the differences in smart motorways. Are there any articles or research you could point me to in terms of the differences and the safety of each and how they each work.

I spend a lot of time on motorways driving backwards and forwards to Sheffield. In my experience the majority of drivers avoid the hard shoulder like like plague, whether it's open or not.
I bloody hate them myself, it just feels unsafe and I pray I never have car trouble whilst I'm on one.

We were on one the other day and the lack of hard shoulder was very unneeverving. Two lanes were closed off due to a stranded vehicle but there were countless cars driving on them anyway! Just ignoring the signs! So when they eventually came across the stranded vehicle they were pushing their way back into the open lanes causing huge congestion so we got straight off the motorway at the next junction. It was awful.

Well, they're not so smart if you're the poor sod who breaks dow, are they? I hate them with a vengeance, and will drive out of my way to avoid them. I'm still trying to work out how you rejoin the carriageway safely from pretty much a standing start once the car is fixed.

One of the major issued is that the refuges are too far apart. The original design was meant to be refuges every 500m. They are actually about 2500m apart. The CCTV monitoring means it takes 17 minutes to spot a stopped vehicle and close the lane and another 17 minutes for Highway Patrols to arrive. The idea works in principle but as usual the execution has been done on the cheap without the measures to reduce deaths
There was a long article recently in the Guardian
www.theguardian.com/world/2021/may/22/are-smart-motorways-safe

YANBU. People have died on these because they have broken down and not made it to the hard shoulder

YANBU.
Who knows for the future but I think we need to proceed more cautiously at this stage.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/smart-motorways-campaign-abolished-hard-shoulders-b1831591.html

One of the major issued is that the refuges are too far apart

Imagine how useful it would be if there was (gasp) a whole lane that could be used as a refuge so you could almost always pull safely out of the traffic...

If I’m on a smart motorway, I do my best to avoid the hard shoulder/first lane, because I don’t have confidence in the system and can’t trust that a broken down vehicle won’t be in my path.

@poppycat10

I don't mind them but I think it depends where you are. The M3 is ok.

People used to die on hard shoulders too. The real issue is the fact that lorry drivers don't pay attention and plough into the back of cars.

Whoa, I think you may need to walk that comment back a bit.

Lorry drivers are trained to a much higher standard than car drivers for a start. Secondly more of the crashes involving lorries are caused by idiot car drivers doing stupid manoeuvres on the motorway.

Smart motorways are a great idea, unfortunately they require smart drivers of which this country doesn't have many. The times they mainly operate is during rush hour, and as someone who drives 3000km a week I can tell you some shocking stories of rush hour driving!!!

@NoWordForFluffy

Oh, and if people didn't hog lanes for miles, we probably wouldn't need extra motorway. They should've spent the 'upgrade' money on more traffic police to sort shit driving.

This is my absolute pet hate! Gives me the pure rage

I had a sudden puncture / blowout on the M4 during the current conversion to a smart motorway. There was no hard shoulder so managed to get the car to stop safely in lane 1. I couldn't get out of the car safely as the lanes were narrowed.

So I rang 999 and massively apologised to the operator who told me I had done the right thing and then instructed me to move my seat as far back and make sure my seat belt was on and be prepared for impact. She stayed on the phone for the 20 mins it took for the traffic police to get to me and close the lane off. As the smart motorway was still being constructed, I couldn't get out the other side through the passenger side as there was a massive hole with exposed pipes etc.

The way the 999 operator spoke to me made me made me wonder what experiences she had had with this situation. She took it very seriously.

It was bloody terrifying, and it was daylight, and luckily at peak rush hour, so it didn't take long for traffic to build up, which I think massively helped. Wouldn't want to break down at night on an emptier motorway, that would be horrendous.....

Totally against them. Would rather the money was spend on a joined up public transport system.

...... and be prepared for impact

Says it all, doesn’t it. And how on earth do you prepare for being struck from behind at 70+mph? Start praying?

Yup, particularly the stretch of M6 through birmingham where there is NOWHERE else for you to go, get out of your vehicle and then what... climb the barrier and perch precariously above houses and factories hoping something doesn't smash into you?

Or just sit in it and wait to die.

At least in some areas there is somewhere for the people in the vehicle to get out and go and sit up an embankment, but even then they are a stupid idea.

Typical case of what was built was NOT what was modelled, planned for or designed, with refuges further apart (5 x further) and camera tech not actually used... I hate the 'smart' stretches we have to do regularly (living near the top end of the M5, not a lot of choice).

For a smart motorway to operate safely, if someone breaks down in a live lane, and can’t get to an emergency refuge, you need someone to notice IMMEDIATELY that a car is blocking a live lane, the gantry needs to show a Red Cross to indicate a closed lane IMMEDIATELY, and motorists need to notice and take appropriate action IMMEDIATELY. And none of this is going to happen.

@Silvercatowner

I get that smart motorways are meant to ease congestion, but surely there isn't the capacity to make them smart enough to actually be safe?? The refuges aren't close enough together, and I don't understand how the traffic will be that closely monitored to be able to close off a lane as soon as someone breaks down or has an accident. The whole thing is deeply scary...

They are monitored by cameras linked to a control centre than can alter signs immediately.

The thing is, if you suddenly break down in one of the "fast" lanes it doesn't matter if there's a hard shoulder or not - you're equally stranded. As soon as you ring police they should alert the control centre to close the lane in the matrix signs. On an old fashioned motorway they don't have such frequent matrix signs and there's no way to warn approaching traffic.

The smart motorways still have an edge,/verge. If you get a problem while moving and can't reach a refuge, you could still get over to the left, stop close to the barrier and if possible get over onto the grass , like on a dual carriageway (then ring 999).

I saw in Facebook someone who's SEN child got out of their harness whilst driving and she stopped on the HS for 2 hours until he calmed down. I read it after the event but I felt sick. The HS is not a safe place, stopped vehicles are often hit after a few minutes. I think people have a false sense of security about it.

The early smart motorways pilot had a good safety record but there needs to be a combination of frequent refuges, stopped vehicle detection and driver education.

@WithoutALookout this article explains it all well. It's long but detailed.

I know a HGV driver who had a car break down in front of him, couldn’t move out to get passed so ended up slamming on and someone went up the back of him. If they other driver could have used a hard shoulder it would have prevented an accident