To think smart motorways were never a good idea?

[bluebottle23]

I've just been watching a news segment about smart motorways and can't fathom how they ever got approved. Literally an accident waiting to happen and sadly many did. I hate driving on a smart motorway, especially with my daughter and just seeing aerial footage of one there is literally nowhere safe for you to get out stand and wait. I'd rather be stuck in slow moving traffic than risk my family's life on one of these motorways.

I thought they were a good, efficient use of space assuming they were used correctly.

I don't feel that the design is the problem, more the way people drive and it sounds as though the tech wasn't up to it.

I see people really resistant to change because they won't change their behaviour- things like how dangerous electric cars and scooters are for people with visual impairments because they are quiet, despite them being louder than bikes which are also dangerous to pedestrians.
If we want to progress, we need to accommodate change.

I'd say a classic case of Government reducing spending.

Those that think they're a "good idea " I wonder if you'd feel the same if you got stuck on one and or lost a loved one like others have.

I didn't have the child lock on properly (hands up my own stupid fault) and my 2yo got the door open going West on the "smart" stretch of the M4. It was two miles to the next emergency refuge. It really hit home how effed we'd have been in a more serious emergency. I'm also not entirely clear what one would do if they made it to an emergency point and there's already someone in there blocking it.

Baffling that they can prohibit building more because of safety doubts but allow the existing ones to continue as is.

They are a terrible idea. I never understood why they were agreed in the first place. But I'm glad they're going.

I refuse to drive on the ex hard shoulders.

I have had this too. It was scary for the people in the car just stuck in the left hand lane, no warning signs, and cars speeding up behind.

I agree with the OP 100%. Just a cheap way of trying to build wider roads instead of dealing with the fundamental of reducing car use. Such as better rail services and actually banning drivers who commit road crimes or have health issues.

People saying isn't it just the same as duel carriage ways. The breakdowns I have seen on duel carriage ways, the driver has always taken the car onto the grass verge. That is not possible on motorways.

They were a good idea in my opinion - much more comfortable to drive on compared to congested motorways where the middle lane is often full of overtaking lorries. Also variable speed limits are a good thing. But - they are let down by poor traffic management and cameras not switched on to catch excessively speeding drivers.

The majority of the time, it seems that due to driver inattention, ect that most accidents happen.

What the hell happens when it’s dark? Sounds terrifying.

Yes you are supposed to get out of your car. On some smart motorways there is very little space to stand on the other side of the barrier. And the breakdown people still have to work on the inside lane. They are at more risk.

I like the overhead warnings. The variable speed limits are rarely up to date. About half the time it is about a breakdown that has already been removed. The lack of accuracy means less people pay attention to them.

They were designed by people with new cars that don't have to really consider breakdowns. Our family car is just coming up to a year old and has run flats if we had an issue we would keep going to the next exit vs stopping.

But in the majority of cases it was driver error that caused the crashes- drivers not paying attention to the warnings.

Electric cars and scooters are much faster & heavier than bikes and you know, can actually kill people? No where near the same risk as a bike. Sometimes common sense had to be used when considering new tech, not solely for the sake of 'progress'.

I'm not a driver and had never heard of them. Just looked them up.

The thought of no hard shoulder and a constantly changing speed limit on such a long stretch of road gives me the chills. Honestly, the concept sounds terrible.

Bikes should not be on pavements either.
Disabiled people pointing out something is dangerous for them is them being resistant to change?

Drpet most crashes are driver error. No system should be designed assuming drivers do not make errors.

"I don't feel that the design is the problem, more the way people drive and it sounds as though the tech wasn't up to it."

The way people drive is in cars, and even the best drivers can't prevent machines sometimes going wrong unexpectedly. I know exactly no people who drive who haven't had to deal with a sudden breakdown at least once. No one seems to be questioning whether our cars should be better or more reliable but lots of people seem keen to blame the drivers.

Drpet most crashes are driver error. No system should be designed assuming drivers do not make errors

Exactly this. For instance look at the constantly developing road network in Doha. Literally designed to mitigate a truly abysmal standard of driving as far as possible.

I regularly have to drive on a smart motorway and I dread it. Particularly worrying is the awful driving of many lorries - they come right up close behind you and leave no stopping distance.

It doesn't have to be things like your engine going bang either, more simple things like a broken petrol gauge meaning people run out of petrol unexpectedly, overheating gear box, brakes suddenly starting to fail.

Honestly I think the only real problem people have with smart motorways is the hard shoulder thing so they might as well rebrand the other kinds (with variable speed limits but retaining a HS) as something else and keep on doing those.

Also I notice many drivers pay no attention to the signs and carry on in the 'x' marked lane for as long as they can to overtake traffic,despite the fact that they don't know where the obstruction is going to be.