Smart Motorways

[muon]

I’m talking about the whole concept of smart motorways where there is no hard shoulder but four running lanes, one of which gets closed by a red cross when there’s a stationary vehicle.


A quick google is saying that the accident rate on smart motorways is double that of non smart ones. This isn’t just a few articles, it’s everything.

Clickbait. Anyone saying it is double is a terrible reporter at best.

https://nationalhighways.co.uk/media/uivj2zem/smart-motorways-stocktake-second-year-2022.pdf

If you go to the annexes you will see there is no real significant difference unless you cherry pick statistics.

Also the only real difference theoretically, are where a car is stationary and stuck in a lane, but we don't really observe any compared to wider casualties. (See page 93 and 95)

If there happen to be more drivers crashing due to losing control on smart motorways, how is that relevant to anything? It's likely due to random variation in the small sample data.

Injuries caused by live lane breakdowns are incredibly low, and this is an emotional reaction. Not one based on data.

Even using broader metrics, they aren't more dangerous.

 

[muon]

The RAC for example are ignoring the broader data and multiple measures, to focus on some very small number statistics which are in the single digits. If we for example, only focus on the single digit KSI number then ALRs are unsafe (0.19), but controlled smart motorways are much safer (0.06). In reality neither number can be trusted. As a few serious injuries through random variation, changes the picture completely.

This is why people who don't really understand statistics should be allowed to play to people's emotions.

 

[a1ex2001]

I’m talking about the whole concept of smart motorways where there is no hard shoulder but four running lanes, one of which gets closed by a red cross when there’s a stationary vehicle.


A quick google is saying that the accident rate on smart motorways is double that of non smart ones. This isn’t just a few articles, it’s everything.

And here in is the issue I’ve pointed out over and over the original concept of smart motorways that was tested didn’t include all lane running the hard shoulder was only used during times of congestion with a reduced speed limit. The refuges were also far more frequent and the signage more regular and consistent. Even the statistics as used by the RAC and the AA show this mode of operation to be only very slightly more dangerous and that data includes roads that weren’t built to the original spec as the government vey quickly stopped working to the same standards as the trial. The government should be getting an absolute pasting for unleashing the all lane model on the public untested and unproven and then pushing ahead with it all in the name of penny pinching.

 

[SpellowHouse]

Typical government, thought they could cheap out and use something that is "smart" for the average UK driver, who is anything but.
How much money did THIS waste?

In passing, I remember when they first opened the motorways!!! You would not believe how empty they were. And they were empty for decades too.

What I find amazing, is the number of people who now find it necessary to do so much travelling. Where are they all going?

 

[Hagar]

Typical government, thought they could cheap out and use something that is "smart" for the average UK driver, who is anything but.
How much money did THIS waste?

In passing, I remember when they first opened the motorways!!! You would not believe how empty they were. And they were empty for decades too.

What I find amazing, is the number of people who now find it necessary to do so much travelling. Where are they all going?

Actually I think the Highways agency developed and promoted the scheme to government. Government are not experts in much, relying on the expertise of the agencies and civil servants to advise.

Having said that and as a driver of 50+ years and a civil engineer as well, I agree it was a bad idea. A 'political solution' to avoid taking another strip of land alongside the motorway.

I also remember the steady 90mph, averaging 70mph cruises for the length of the country (Southampton to Aberdeen), the majority on motorways with low traffic levels.

I feel that we are in end times even so for the private car, another few decades maybe. I have bought probably my last car, 1000cc, 3 cylinder, petrol driven.

 

[sandys]

What I find amazing, is the number of people who now find it necessary to do so much travelling. Where are they all going?

Mostly to work where the well paying jobs are.

 

[200sols]

In passing, I remember when they first opened the motorways!!! You would not believe how empty they were. And they were empty for decades too.

What I find amazing, is the number of people who now find it necessary to do so much travelling. Where are they all going?

Were they really though, empty for decades? E.g they were empty until the 1990s?

 

[Hagar]

Were they really though, empty for decades? E.g they were empty until the 1990s?

No they were free flowing though with few bottlenecks. I travelled many miles on them in the seventies and later. It used to be quite pleasurable to drive M1/ M6.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

I’m talking about the whole concept of smart motorways where there is no hard shoulder but four running lanes, one of which gets closed by a red cross when there’s a stationary vehicle.

I hadn't realised there was variations. On the M6 near J7 it is a hand shoulder than temporarily becomes alive. That seems to work fine?

I guess you are talking about bits of other motorways where there is no hard shoulder at all?

 

[Semple]

I hadn't realised there was variations. On the M6 near J7 it is a hand shoulder than temporarily becomes alive. That seems to work fine?

I guess you are talking about bits of other motorways where there is no hard shoulder at all?

After the first few, they moved to all lane-running rather than opening the fourth only as and when needed.

 

[robj20]

Typical government, thought they could cheap out and use something that is "smart" for the average UK driver, who is anything but.
How much money did THIS waste?

In passing, I remember when they first opened the motorways!!! You would not believe how empty they were. And they were empty for decades too.

What I find amazing, is the number of people who now find it necessary to do so much travelling. Where are they all going?

No extra traveling just faster to get to the destination.

 

[Deleted User 298457]

After the first few, they moved to all lane-running rather than opening the fourth only as and when needed.

Interesting - can't say I've noticed an issue with either. Most crashes I see happen are in Lane 4 due to tailgating. Roads like the North Circular are much worse IMO.

 

[Semple]

Interesting - can't say I've noticed an issue with either. Most crashes I see happen are in Lane 4 due to tailgating. Roads like the North Circular are much worse IMO.

Unfortunately some on here will have you thinking the hard shoulder will still protect you if you had a blow out, or couldn't brake in time in the outside lane.

 

[a1ex2001]

After the first few, they moved to all lane-running rather than opening the fourth only as and when needed.

And at the same time reduced the amount of signage overhead and spaced the emergency bays out much further than the original designs used. It’s funny I regularly get the direct comparison driving to and from my parents as the route takes in the m1 south of Sheffield which is all lane running and the m42 which only uses the hard shoulder during congestion has the original signing and emergency bays and the contrast is so stark that they should be considered entirely different systems! All lane running without radar control for the overhead signage was a bonkers choice!

 

[jpaul]

aren't the speed limit/sign recognition on newer cars adept at telling driver when they should not be in a lane & interpreting smart intent (or even initiating a lane shift)

Even using broader metrics, they aren't more dangerous.

even the broader comparison with conventional motorways are questionable those conventional motorways are different roads with different congestion levels,
it is not a (golden) before and after comparison on the same road,
to wit - the slightly increased ksi & fwi per hmvm for conventional M way seems counter intuitive I can't see they try to explain those ? more congested with tighter vehicle spacing ? or, because they are different roads.

The RAC for example are ignoring the broader data and multiple measures, to focus on some very small number statistics which are in the single digits. If we for example, only focus on the single digit KSI number then ALRs are unsafe (0.19), but controlled smart motorways are 50% safer (0.06). In reality neither number can be trusted. As a few serious injuries through random variation, changes the picture completely.

the stopped vehicle data the rac cherry pick doesn't have conventional statistical confidence intervals you'd expect to see, to expose the small/limited data set implications,
in the absence of that, although, if you have maintained your car(run-flats too?) you shouldn't be stopped, the additional smart risk if you do have to stop seems indisputable.

 

[SpellowHouse]

Were they really though, empty for decades? E.g they were empty until the 1990s?

Well, decade. Perhaps not decades. I am really talking about the M4, which was built in the 60's. Certainly in the 70's it was pretty much empty.

 

[Rroff]

Were they really though, empty for decades? E.g they were empty until the 1990s?

I remember from about the mid 80s onwards using the M5 a lot. Peak season was horrific - though all part of the fun as a kid going on holiday when it took like 3+ hours to get from one side of the M5 and M6 junctions at Birmingham to the other - probably not so much fun for my parents. Outside of peak seasons though it was nothing like now - some days aside from intermittent convoys of lorries it would be practically dead until the 90s.

Likewise with the A303 which we did a lot - the first few years I remember it would be light traffic mostly aside from rush hour, not like now when it is 2 solid streams of cars much of the day.

 

[Hagar]

I remember from about the mid 80s onwards using the M5 a lot. Peak season was horrific - though all part of the fun as a kid going on holiday when it took like 3+ hours to get from one side of the M5 and M6 junctions at Birmingham to the other - probably not so much fun for my parents. Outside of peak seasons though it was nothing like now - some days aside from intermittent convoys of lorries it would be practically dead until the 90s.

Likewise with the A303 which we did a lot - the first few years I remember it would be light traffic mostly aside from rush hour, not like now when it is 2 solid streams of cars much of the day.

The M5 was built (wrongly in my view) as a two lane motorway with hard shoulder. My father worked on it in the early sixties. It was widened in the nineties to a three lane motorway but much of the high level sections near to the M6 remained as two lanes. This may now have been rectified but I have not driven the M5 for a long time.

 

[SpellowHouse]

The M5 was built (wrongly in my view) as a two lane motorway with hard shoulder. My father worked on it in the early sixties. It was widened in the nineties to a three lane motorway but much of the high level sections near to the M6 remained as two lanes. This may now have been rectified but I have not driven the M5 for a long time.

Yes, well, typical government, they wildly underestimated the traffic.

 

[Hagar]

Yes, well, typical government, they wildly underestimated the traffic.

At that time, early sixties we had few motorway miles in place. The Preston bypass in 1958 was the first, later becoming the M6. I agree a bit more foresight would have been good but also I expect the money was not there.

There are too many cars on the road today anyway. At some point some government is going to have to say enough and start pricing cars off the road in large numbers.