No new Smart Motorways

[Mike4]

If smart motorways are safer why aren't they building any more of them?

A government 15 points behind in the polls and this. In particular, oldies don't like them (79:11 against), whereas the young are relatively fine with them (35:38), possibly because they're the ones who actually travel at rush hour...

I'd suggest it is more probably because the younger a driver is, the less likely they are to have had personal experience of breaking down on a motorway and appreciate the dangers in stopping on the hard shoulder. let alone truly understand the risks of stopping in a live, running lane which must feel at least an order of magnitude higher.

[Dod101]

A government 15 points behind in the polls and this. In particular, oldies don't like them (79:11 against), whereas the young are relatively fine with them (35:38), possibly because they're the ones who actually travel at rush hour...

I'd suggest it is more probably because the younger a driver is, the less likely they are to have had personal experience of breaking down on a motorway and appreciate the dangers in stopping on the hard shoulder. let alone truly understand the risks of stopping in a live, running lane which must feel at least an order of magnitude higher.

Yes and younger drivers generally consider themselves invincible and able to avoid damage.

Dod

[9873210]

Younger drivers have also driven much more reliable cars. Older drivers may be recalling trips in 2CVs and Austin Minis with a mean distance between failure of a few km.

Also better tyres. I haven't had a flat while driving* since '86.

* I've had a few slow leaks discovered the next morning by tyre pressure sensors. Perhaps on an older car without a sensor I might have driven off and be surprised by a failure at speed.

[tjh290633]

Younger drivers have also driven much more reliable cars. Older drivers may be recalling trips in 2CVs and Austin Minis with a mean distance between failure of a few km.

Also better tyres. I haven't had a flat while driving* since '86.

* I've had a few slow leaks discovered the next morning by tyre pressure sensors. Perhaps on an older car without a sensor I might have driven off and be surprised by a failure at speed.

Older people remember tyres with inner tubes and cars dating back to 1930 or earlier. Some friends of mine toured Europe in a 1928 Austin Taxi and averaged a puncture every 40 miles. I had previously borrowed it to take my luggage home and did 150 miles with no problem. The starter pinion and the flywheel were almost strangers, because of missing teeth, so it was either started with the handle or by pushing. The petrol tank was under the driver's seat and fed an autovac. It was common to stop for petrol, leaving the engine running. The pump attendant was often shocked to find a bone dry tank, yet the engine was still happily turning over.

TJH

[AF62]

A government 15 points behind in the polls and this. In particular, oldies don't like them (79:11 against), whereas the young are relatively fine with them (35:38), possibly because they're the ones who actually travel at rush hour...

I'd suggest it is more probably because the younger a driver is, the less likely they are to have had personal experience of breaking down on a motorway and appreciate the dangers in stopping on the hard shoulder. let alone truly understand the risks of stopping in a live, running lane which must feel at least an order of magnitude higher.

But how many breakdowns are there?

Monday I did a 350 mile trip on a mixture of dual carriageway and motorway. Number of vehicles I passed that had broken down - zero.

And of course had any broken down on the 70mph dual carriageway with no hard shoulder would they have been campaigning to turn those into single lane roads with a reduced speed limit?

[Crazbe7]

Since the current refuge areas replace the old hard shoulder, surely the obvious answer is to join them up into a new hard shoulder. It needs a little bit more land, which may not be available everywhere, but where it is, like on most of the M23, why not do that?

TJH

It will also take a whole lot of time, but in view of the support for the Smart motorway from some here I was surprised to read in my newspaper of what seems to be widespread support from motorists for the Government's action in stopping them, to the extent that some want what is now the inside lane 1 to revert to the hard shoulder but I can imagine that that would cause a huge amount of confusion.

Dod

But it would cause a whole lot of congestion. The traffic won't just disappear. That's why Smart Motorways were introduced in the first place. It is just gesture politics to ban further conversions into Smart motorways. No one wants to have an accident or breakdown on a motorway, but the lack of a hard shoulder is meaningless for any incident on the third or fourth (some times fifth) lane of a motorway.

Crazbe7

[Crazbe7]

If the Lane One monitoring worked reliably and there was a better method of "closing" Lane One*, smart motorways might be causing a lot fewer deaths. .

Not all the smart motorways are the same. What may have been a prototype, the M42 round Birmingham, is different from later designs. The inner lane has tarmac in a different colour and is signed as only for use as a congestion buster. Also the refuge areas are very frequent. Elsewhere the inner lane just looks like any, the recently completed M4 near Reading being an example.

There are three typical types of 'Smart' motorway used in England. These are: -

Dynamic hard shoulder: where the hard shoulder’s temporarily opened up to traffic - This is the M42 scenario

All lane running (ALR): where the full width of the road is usable with emergency refuge areas alongside - These are the smart motorway that will unfortunately no longer be built. They currently cover (from memory) parts of the M25, M27, M4, M5, M6 etc.

Controlled: Three or more lanes, a hard shoulder and variable speed limits from overhead gantries- These include parts of the M25, M40, M1, etc.

There is then 'Standard motorways' with a hard shoulder, no variable speed limits from over head gantries, no Red X for people to drive through and only advisory speed limits from either displays on the verge or central reserve. Parts of the M11 and M3 from memory.

Crazbe7

[richlist]

Every other new car currently sold has a tyre repair kit instead of a spare wheel.

[Dod101]

It will also take a whole lot of time, but in view of the support for the Smart motorway from some here I was surprised to read in my newspaper of what seems to be widespread support from motorists for the Government's action in stopping them, to the extent that some want what is now the inside lane 1 to revert to the hard shoulder but I can imagine that that would cause a huge amount of confusion.

Dod

But it would cause a whole lot of congestion. The traffic won't just disappear. That's why Smart Motorways were introduced in the first place. It is just gesture politics to ban further conversions into Smart motorways. No one wants to have an accident or breakdown on a motorway, but the lack of a hard shoulder is meaningless for any incident on the third or fourth (some times fifth) lane of a motorway.

Crazbe7

I have occasionally wondered about that but we hear very little about it.

Dod

[Mike4]

I'd suggest it is more probably because the younger a driver is, the less likely they are to have had personal experience of breaking down on a motorway and appreciate the dangers in stopping on the hard shoulder. let alone truly understand the risks of stopping in a live, running lane which must feel at least an order of magnitude higher.

But how many breakdowns are there?

Monday I did a 350 mile trip on a mixture of dual carriageway and motorway. Number of vehicles I passed that had broken down - zero.

And of course had any broken down on the 70mph dual carriageway with no hard shoulder would they have been campaigning to turn those into single lane roads with a reduced speed limit?

I suspect you weren't noticing them. I drive an average of 50 motorway miles a day, week in, week out and I'd guess I see a vehicle stopped on the hard shoulder about once every ten miles. A good number of them with a visible flat tyre.

I'll pay more attention in future and take a note.

[AF62]

But how many breakdowns are there?

Monday I did a 350 mile trip on a mixture of dual carriageway and motorway. Number of vehicles I passed that had broken down - zero.

And of course had any broken down on the 70mph dual carriageway with no hard shoulder would they have been campaigning to turn those into single lane roads with a reduced speed limit?

I suspect you weren't noticing them. I drive an average of 50 motorway miles a day, week in, week out and I'd guess I see a vehicle stopped on the hard shoulder about once every ten miles. A good number of them with a visible flat tyre.

I'll pay more attention in future and take a note.

Not noticing them - nonsense!

Aside from anything a broken down car would be incredibly disruptive on a dual carriageway, but there were none. Absolutely zero.

[MrFoolish]

I suspect you weren't noticing them. I drive an average of 50 motorway miles a day, week in, week out and I'd guess I see a vehicle stopped on the hard shoulder about once every ten miles. A good number of them with a visible flat tyre.

I'll pay more attention in future and take a note.

You see breakdowns every 10 miles, many of them with flat tyres? I do more mileage than you and see nothing like this number of breakdowns. Maybe people don't maintain their vehicles in your part of the world?

[dealtn]

I suspect you weren't noticing them. I drive an average of 50 motorway miles a day, week in, week out and I'd guess I see a vehicle stopped on the hard shoulder about once every ten miles. A good number of them with a visible flat tyre.

I'll pay more attention in future and take a note.

I know which version of the truth I find more likely. I drive up to 500 miles a week. I'd be surprised if I saw more than one breakdown a day. An average of every 10 miles, or up to 50 a week just isn't credible.

[servodude]

I suspect you weren't noticing them. I drive an average of 50 motorway miles a day, week in, week out and I'd guess I see a vehicle stopped on the hard shoulder about once every ten miles. A good number of them with a visible flat tyre.

I'll pay more attention in future and take a note.

I know which version of the truth I find more likely. I drive up to 500 miles a week. I'd be surprised if I saw more than one breakdown a day. An average of every 10 miles, or up to 50 a week just isn't credible.

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/motorway-breakdowns-britain-rise-fifth-five-years/

Data from the government-run company shows 224,225 cars broke down on Britain’s busiest roads between April 2018 and March 2019, which equates to around 25 vehicles every hour

I'm sure with another couple of clicks one could work out the distance that covers - and work backwards from the expected speed

[MrFoolish]

On a long journey, it's not uncommon to spot someone who has clearly stopped on the hard shoulder for a p***. Whilst I don't condone this, it has to be said that a few more service stations would not go amiss. But as per usual, nobody is going to make the investment in such things.

[AF62]

I know which version of the truth I find more likely. I drive up to 500 miles a week. I'd be surprised if I saw more than one breakdown a day. An average of every 10 miles, or up to 50 a week just isn't credible.

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/motorway-breakdowns-britain-rise-fifth-five-years/

Data from the government-run company shows 224,225 cars broke down on Britain’s busiest roads between April 2018 and March 2019, which equates to around 25 vehicles every hour

I'm sure with another couple of clicks one could work out the distance that covers - and work backwards from the expected speed

25 vehicles an hour breaking down on the motorway network that covers 2,300 miles.

Recovery of broken down vehicles from motorways is a priority and they are not left waiting for ages, so assuming an average time they are there waiting to be observed of one hour, then if the breakdowns are evenly distributed then at any point in time that would be one broken down car every 90 miles.

And so if travelling at 70mph then there is a 78% possibility of seeing one broken down car, but 22% of seeing none.

Obviously arguments about traffic density, time of day, etc. but one every 10 miles...

[Lootman]

there is a political dimension which Sunak is perfectly entitled to acknowledge. I think you are looking at this from a very narrow perspective but then I do not live near any Smart Motorway (or any other Motorway for that matter).

yes it’s a political decision, and like most political decisions panders to the press and doesn’t consider the facts.

Politics is not about facts which, in any event, can be cherry-picked, exaggerated or plain made up. Political decisions are about public perceptions and, in a democracy, it is how voters feel that decides such things.

Whilst I can see how smart motorways "may" be safer, depending exactly how you choose to measure that, I resent the ever-increasing ways in which the government tries to micro-manage my life and freedom in the interests of some higher allegedly communal goal. It is really only my safety I care about, and I feel safer when I have more control, not less.

[BigB]

https://www.driving.co.uk/news/motorway-breakdowns-britain-rise-fifth-five-years/



I'm sure with another couple of clicks one could work out the distance that covers - and work backwards from the expected speed

25 vehicles an hour breaking down on the motorway network that covers 2,300 miles.

Recovery of broken down vehicles from motorways is a priority and they are not left waiting for ages, so assuming an average time they are there waiting to be observed of one hour, then if the breakdowns are evenly distributed then at any point in time that would be one broken down car every 90 miles.

And so if travelling at 70mph then there is a 78% possibility of seeing one broken down car, but 22% of seeing none.

Obviously arguments about traffic density, time of day, etc. but one every 10 miles...

I'm only an occasional user of motorways now, maybe 3-4 trips a month, but it always involves one or more of M3/M4/M25 in what feels like a traffic heavy area (outside M25 nr to Heathrow) and I think the one every 90 miles is a little distorted. You did say if you distribute evenly (presumably both for time and location) then it could be one in 90 miles. If you adjust for time and traffic location, around here that could easily double to 1 every 45 miles, and from my admittedly limited current usage, I'd expect to see at least 1 or 2 if I drove locally on motorways for 45 miles.

[didds]

On a long journey, it's not uncommon to spot someone who has clearly stopped on the hard shoulder for a p***. Whilst I don't condone this, it has to be said that a few more service stations would not go amiss. But as per usual, nobody is going to make the investment in such things.

or maybe somewhere to just pull off and pee , rather than run the gamut of umpteen shops the other side of a huge carpark, taking ages to complete...