Government publishes smart motorways ‘stocktake’

[Jaws]

Published on 12 March 2020 by Mike Waters
Tags: , , , ,
Filed under Category:
The Department for Transport (DfT) has published a ‘stocktake’ of evidence it has gathered on smart motorways after an investigation by the BBC’s Panorama prompted an urgent review.

As the BMF , the programme found that the 200-mile smart motorway network has been plagued by near-misses and unreliable equipment. A Freedom of Information (FoI) request by the programme revealed that there were 1,485 near-miss incidents in the last five years on the M25 alone. Furthermore, there have also been 38 deaths across the smart motorway network as a whole.

Today, Transport Minister Grant Shapps MP published a statement outlining the results of that review. While noting that “Smart motorways have helped us cope with a 23 percent rise in traffic since 2000”, Mr Shapps also conceded that “their growth, however, has not always been well explained, there is not uniformity and concerns exist over safety.”

As a result, Mr Shapps also announced the launched of “an extended package of measures – an action plan – to raise the bar on smart motorway safety.”

The measures include the abolition of “dynamic hard shoulder” smart motorways, cutting Highways England Traffic Patrol target response times from 17 minutes to 10 minutes, making emergency areas more visible and an update of the Highway Code, among other steps.

“By these measures, we ensure safety is at the heart of our smart motorway programme and assure public confidence in the motorway network. We will continue to monitor the data and work with campaigners to ensure that improvements are delivered,” Mr Shapps concluded.

 

[ambulancekidd]

So called Smart Motorways scare the living bejeevers out of me.
If it really was safe we would never have had hard shoulders in the first place.

Common sense is required from the government but, the sad thing is that common sense isn't that common.

 

[Mark and Mindy]

I do agree that a hard shoulder is essential and smart motorways are madness but on the M25 it will be a real shame to lose the secret lane which is used by no one but me and where I can steadily cruise along unimpeded while the traffic in lane 4 is stop start. If there is slow traffic or a traffic jam ahead then use lane 1. Slow is faster.

Mark

 

[hilldweller]

>>> The measures include the abolition of “dynamic hard shoulder” smart motorways

Does that mean the restoration of all hard shoulders, now with added extra safe bumps in them ?

 

[romany]

>>> The measures include the abolition of “dynamic hard shoulder” smart motorways

Does that mean the restoration of all hard shoulders, now with added extra safe bumps in them ?

No from what I have seen it will either go back to a permanent hard shoulder or more likely stay as a live lane permanently I think the Dynamic refers to the lane changing from hard shoulder to smart lane

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[hilldweller]

more likely stay as a live lane permanently

So they are prepared to accept the deaths then. Quite a small number but inconvenient if one is the dead one.

 

[romany]

So they are prepared to accept the deaths then. Quite a small number but inconvenient if one is the dead one.

they have said they were going to increase the number of safe areas so they were closer together my opinion is smart motorways were a cheap cost dumb idea high in death cost

 

[Camdoon]

So they are prepared to accept the deaths then. Quite a small number but inconvenient if one is the dead one.

The alternative is to have traffic jams which put more traffic onto local roads which have higher death rates. Cars are becoming more intelligent and by 2023 all the new ones will have to obey speed limits with autonomous cars coming shortly thereafter. Driving a new BMW the other day, I noticed when you set the cruise control it would default to the speed limit rather than anything above the limit for the zone you were in. It knew what the speed limit was and went by the speedometer rather than true speeds measured by sat nav.

 

[jongood]

The alternative is to have traffic jams which put more traffic onto local roads which have higher death rates. Cars are becoming more intelligent and by 2023 all the new ones will have to obey speed limits with autonomous cars coming shortly thereafter. Driving a new BMW the other day, I noticed when you set the cruise control it would default to the speed limit rather than anything above the limit for the zone you were in. It knew what the speed limit was and went by the speedometer rather than true speeds measured by sat nav.

Another good reason to buy an older car IMO.

 

[jongood]

Smart Motorways always were a fudge, and since inception they have been fudged further by pushing refuge areas up to 1 mile apart and making them too small to be of much practical use anyway. day after day we see rear enders caused by broken down vehicles having nowhere to go but sit on a live lane with a red cross above it which too many people ignore because the techno is unreliable. Why has so much of it got barriers preventing you from pulling off? Then when there is a n incident the emergency services struggle to get there and have no option but to call the air ambulance and closing both sides.

The only proper answer to this is to build more motorways, is all very well for the green brigade to complain about laying concrete through the countryside but we really do have no choice. The most obvious one for me is to upgrade and extend the A470 through to Chester or Bangor as this would take so much traffic away from M6 M5, but there are also many more.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Camdoon]

Another good reason to buy an older car IMO.

Actually began to appreciate it. You are driving along leaving a town, a clear road and you wonder whether the speed limit is 30/40/50- one click and it takes you to the correct maximum speed. You can click through to go at sat nav speeds, where safe to do so. Might be handy in France.

 

[PeteH]

Smart Motorways always were a fudge, and since inception they have been fudged further by pushing refuge areas up to 1 mile apart and making them too small to be of much practical use anyway. day after day we see rear enders caused by broken down vehicles having nowhere to go but sit on a live lane with a red cross above it which too many people ignore because the techno is unreliable. Why has so much of it got barriers preventing you from pulling off? Then when there is a n incident the emergency services struggle to get there and have no option but to call the air ambulance and closing both sides.

The only proper answer to this is to build more motorways, is all very well for the green brigade to complain about laying concrete through the countryside but we really do have no choice. The most obvious one for me is to upgrade and extend the A470 through to Chester or Bangor as this would take so much traffic away from M6 M5, but there are also many more.

And DUAL the A15 at least as far as Lincoln, from the M180. It`s a death trap currently.

 

[Paddywack]

I wonder how those figures compare with other countries, like the Netherlands, who have adopted them?

 

[jongood]

Actually began to appreciate it. You are driving along leaving a town, a clear road and you wonder whether the speed limit is 30/40/50- one click and it takes you to the correct maximum speed. You can click through to go at sat nav speeds, where safe to do so. Might be handy in France.

So how would it cope with smart motorway matrix signs then?

I spent two days last week in a new DAF , when asked what I thought of it, I said take all the electronic crap off it and fit a clutch and it would be OK.

 

[ctc]

I do agree that a hard shoulder is essential and smart motorways are madness but on the M25 it will be a real shame to lose the secret lane which is used by no one but me and where I can steadily cruise along unimpeded while the traffic in lane 4 is stop start. If there is slow traffic or a traffic jam ahead then use lane 1. Slow is faster.

Mark

What do you mean "IF there is a traffic jam ahead"

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[wotme]

I'm getting used to driving at 50mph on motorways so why not make this the max limit, you may then get to where you're going without an incident, but then again, I doubt it

 

[jongood]

I'm getting used to driving at 50mph on motorways so why not make this the max limit, you may then get to where you're going without an incident, but then again, I doubt it

IMO speed is rarely the cause of collisions, I put inattention/distraction as number 1 so the longer you spend on the motorway the greater the chances.

 

[emjaiuk]

I'm getting used to driving at 50mph on motorways so why not make this the max limit, you may then get to where you're going without an incident, but then again, I doubt it

IMO speed is rarely the cause of collisions, I put inattention/distraction as number 1 so the longer you spend on the motorway the greater the chances.

I find it more difficult to maintain concentration on endless lengths of 50mph than I do on deresticted motorways.

 

[Wagoneer]

Prior to Smart Motorways we had Variable Speed Motorways (aka, Controlled Motorways).

The Variable Speed Motorways with hardshoulder controlled the speed of traffic during periods of high congestion, thereby making them safer to use, ie. reducing the need for frustrated motorists to change lane. Also, lower speeds actually improve capacity due to the reduced headway distance between vehicles.

Smart Motorways are based on the same principle. However, following the current review, it's likely IMO that the lefthand lane (formally hard shoulder) will only be used when traffic is restricted to very low speeds, avoiding/reducing the potential for high speed rear-end shunts. This situation still doesn't address the restricted access for emergency vehicles.

Overall, the Smart Motorway rollout has been a financial/operational disaster, as it's main aim to..."improve network capacity in a safe manner", hasn't been achieved.

The only saving grace is that we've now got a better electronically controlled Motorway system than we had previously

 

[Camdoon]

Prior to Smart Motorways we had Variable Speed Motorways (aka, Controlled Motorways).

The Variable Speed Motorways with hardshoulder controlled the speed of traffic during periods of high congestion, thereby making them safer to use, ie. reducing the need for frustrated motorists to change lane. Also, lower speeds actually improve capacity due to the reduced headway distance between vehicles.

Smart Motorways are based on the same principle. However, following the current review, it's likely IMO that the lefthand lane (formally hard shoulder) will only be used when traffic is restricted to very low speeds, avoiding/reducing the potential for high speed rear-end shunts. This situation still doesn't address the restricted access for emergency vehicles.

Overall, the Smart Motorway rollout has been a financial/operational disaster, as it's main aim to..."improve network capacity in a safe manner", hasn't been achieved.

The only saving grace is that we've now got a better electronically controlled Motorway system than we had previously

The best speed is 18mph as that allows the optimum flow of vehicles and any accidents would rarely be fatal which would free up the traffic police, traffic enforcement officers, ambulances and fire brigade re-enforced by higher speeding fines and points.
I think we've nailed it.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[SpeedyDux]

Published on 12 March 2020 by Mike Waters
Tags: , , , ,
Filed under Category:
The Department for Transport (DfT) has published a ‘stocktake’ of evidence it has gathered on smart motorways after an investigation by the BBC’s Panorama prompted an urgent review.

Today, Transport Minister Grant Shapps MP published a statement outlining the results of that review. While noting that “Smart motorways have helped us cope with a 23 percent rise in traffic since 2000”, Mr Shapps also conceded that “their growth, however, has not always been well explained, there is not uniformity and concerns exist over safety.”

Seems bl**dy obvious to me why there has been a 23% rise in traffic since 2000.

No government minister will admit this is a direct consequence of policies that have failed to control immigration. Following on from that, lack of forward planning and investment in additional infrastructure to meet foreseeable increased demand for road capacity, especially on the motorway network. Staggering incompetence and sticking heads in the sand hoping smart motorways will delay the need to tackle the actual problem.

 

[Kannon Fodda]

There are 100s of miles of dual carriageway roads without hard shoulder that people thunder along. If the motorway was being invented today rather than in the 1960s, would the hard shoulder have been thought necessary, especially as modern vehicles compared to the 1960s version are probably a lot more reliable.

Of course accidents (ir in road speak, collisions as there is nearly always a cause) will happen, as will some breakdowns. And provision needs to be made for that. Some countries have arrangements that in standing traffic vehicles pull to left and right leaving the centre for emergency access. Simple enough to ask that to be adopted here (even though there will be some idiot who thinks the rules don't apply and tries to go down the middle). So it's really the stalled vehicle that is the real problem and clearly greater provision of regular layby areas is needed - especially if the modern electric car will grind to a halt quickly if it runs low on power (it is an offence to be out of fuel so no doubt that also applies to out of battery power).

The most dangerous type of "smart" (who ever coined that term was having a laugh given the state of the tech controlling it) must be the dynamic type - I really hate the M42 version - where it's on and off and distracted driver will be thinking they can use the lane when they shouldn't and someone else thinks it's "safe" to have pulled over in their "emergency". It's good that those dynamic smart motorways are being reviewed.

But what they really need to do is look at the accuracy of the control systems. They need to promptly identify stationary vehicles. They need to also correctly identify when traffic is slowing so speed and obstruction signs are appropriate. At the moment, signage is pants and inaccurate and thus rarely believed and often ignored and a major source of frustration.

 

[thebriars]

IMO speed is rarely the cause of collisions, I put inattention/distraction as number 1 so the longer you spend on the motorway the greater the chances.

If there was no speed there would be no collisions.