Smart motorways are 'inherently unsafe'

[Eldorado 57,425]

Smart motorways are 'inherently unsafe' and 'should be abandoned', a police and crime commissioner says.

Dr Alan Billings, PCC for South Yorkshire, has written to the Government saying the abolition of the hard shoulder should be 'abandoned' before more people die. 

In a letter to Transport Secretary Grant Shapps, Dr Billings accused Highways England of trading 'driver safety for lower costs' and using 'flawed' logic to justify smart motorways, The Telegraph reports.

Full Mail report at MSN

Edited January 24 by Eldorado

[acute 67,878]

It was always a stupid idea. It defies common sense.

 

Edited January 24 by acute

[ouija ouija 35,485]

Quote

- post removed -

To get back on topic,  it is absolutely beyond me how this stupid idea ever came to be considered, never mind put into practice. On a busy motorway there will always be drivers who feel ill, passengers who feel ill, vehicles that malfunction, loads that shift and become dangerous, items on the road that are a danger to traffic, etc. etc.. All these events desperately require a hard shoulder. Honestly, how do these absolute morons get into positions of power?! 

Edited January 24 by ouija ouija
Added quote box to avoid confusion

[Mr.United_Nations 2,915]

Wasted money, if they wanted to increase lanes, then extend the width of the motorways? Sure in places you cant be able to do that and expensive 

[ouija ouija 35,485]

I have been thinking some more about this and have become increasingly puzzled/worried. Which other bodies were consulted about this proposition? The three emergency services? Local hospitals? Lorry drivers? Joe Public? AA/RAC? Motorway maintenance? any other group of people you can think of?! Because if they were, I can't imagine that a single one of them would think it was a good idea and approve it. More likely they would throw their hands in the air and yell "Are you out of your minds?". So how was this passed and brought into being? Who benefitted from it? 

[Cookie Monster 8,212]

1 hour ago, ouija ouija said:

To get back on topic,  it is absolutely beyond me how this stupid idea ever came to be considered, never mind put into practice. On a busy motorway there will always be drivers who feel ill, passengers who feel ill, vehicles that malfunction, loads that shift and become dangerous, items on the road that are a danger to traffic, etc. etc.. All these events desperately require a hard shoulder. Honestly, how do these absolute morons get into positions of power?! 

The fact that comes from a PCC makes we wonder how this utterly incompetent moron got his job. I mean this blunder is simply astonishing lmao.

It is so bad I dont think he could even be given a back office job licking stamps.

Edited January 24 by Cookie Monster

[stevewinn 12,622]

Its all about money, as its projected in the future 2030 that car ownership is going to decrease.and continue to so each year afterwards, so while we need extra capacity on certain roads now we wont in the future. so the hard shoulder being used is a stop gap measure. - no point building extra lanes when they wont be needed in 9 years time. it seems a few deaths in the meantime is of no consequence when compared to spending Billions. sad isn't it.

 

[L.A.T.1961 1,938]

There must have been an understanding of the safety issues as if the smart M- ways are safe there would be no need for speed reductions. They should support 70 mph at all times unless accident or road works. 

My moms uncle was on the local council when Telford new town was built and the motorway designed, at that time engineers built the road to support 100 mph max speeds and this was when many cars would struggle to do a constant 75-80.

I am expecting that speeds on these smart M- ways will be permanently dropped to 60 or even 50 mph in the not to distant future.

[godnodog 1,440]

My apologies, but I'm having trouble understanding.

Can someone explain in simplier english what is this about? is this person against the "security lane" on the left of the highways? 

[ouija ouija 35,485]

Just now, godnodog said:

My apologies, but I'm having trouble understanding.

Can someone explain in simplier english what is this about? is this person against the "security lane" on the left of the highways? 

Yes. Our 'hard shoulder' is a spare lane, only to be used in an emergency . . . . or it was until this fool came along! Now some motorways have no spare lane.

[godnodog 1,440]

18 minutes ago, ouija ouija said:

Yes. Our 'hard shoulder' is a spare lane, only to be used in an emergency . . . . or it was until this fool came along! Now some motorways have no spare lane.

wait, you no longer have this in some highways? wtf

[ouija ouija 35,485]

1 hour ago, godnodog said:

wait, you no longer have this in some highways? wtf

'WTF' indeed!

[acute 67,878]

8 hours ago, godnodog said:

wait, you no longer have this in some highways? wtf

Actually, some major highways.

With "Smart" Motorways, there is no exit to safety. 

 

Edited January 27 by acute

[acute 67,878]

On 24/01/2021 at 9:08 PM, L.A.T.1961 said:

My moms uncle was on the local council when Telford new town was built and the motorway designed,

My best friend lives in Welly.

Telford is designed around motor vehicles.  Hopefully, they will reverse that policy eventually, as Birmingham did.

 

Edited January 27 by acute

[Wepwawet 1,856]

If there were a hell, then for those responsible for "smart motorways" will find themselves driving around the M25 for eternity. There will be no junctions to get off, no hard shoulder and the traffic will be bumper to bumper across all the lanes and going at break neck speed. These "planners" and their political masters will be permanently, and urgently, in need of the lavatory, but will never gain respite. The radio in their car will be permanently on, and will play a looped recording of Margaret Thatcher saying "We will go on and on".

[toast 17,164]

I think to increase the speed limit would do the trick here. I`m too lazy for the math yet but if the speed limit would be increased to a level that the traffic volume of 4 lanes at 60mls/h could be managed with 3 lanes only (and a not used free hard shoulder) at a speed of ??mls/h, becasue it would pose a much smaller risk for car accidents.

[L.A.T.1961 1,938]

I have to say I have given up using M-Ways unless there is no alternative. I live close to a section of M6 here in the midlands and there have been road works around this area for more than 10 years. Whatever happens with the new system it will be impossible to get back the lost time and money from those roadworks and lower speed limits.

The fact it is now unfit for purpose and the road will never achieve its planed flow rates is just the icing on the cake for local users and through traffic that have put up with the inconvenience of rebuilding.

I did find an online consultation for changes to the M6 north of Stoke, by chance, and made some comments.

When the hearing results were published my comments, although mentioned in passing had been largely sidestepped.  
I had wanted to know why speed cameras were operated 24/7 and not used only when reduced speeds were in operation amongst other things.

The reply was that it was police who were responsible for speed limit enforcement. Even though the public consultation was partly about permission for introducing variable speed limits. 

I now use local cross country roads which are often more direct and still have 50/60 speed limit so as fast as the average M-way speed.

[Susanc241 1,358]

My husband and I will always find an alternative route to using the M6.  Don’t think I have been on it in years and certainly not since the Smart Lanes were introduced.  As said above, motorways don’t always save any time anyway.