Managed Motorways - safety

[dombooth]

A - north or East
B - South or west

Junctions:
J
K
L
M


Dom

[Mike H]

A - north or East
B - South or west

Junctions:
J
K
L
M


Dom

???
A = Away (from start)
B = Back (to origin)

In the case of the M4, west bound, Away from London. East bound, Back to London.

In the case of the M5, South bound Away from Birmingham. North bound Back to Birmingham.

And yes, re junctions

[fungus]

I am very much against managed motorways. The hard shoulder was designed to be a place of relative safety in the event of an emergency, but taking this away can only increase danger to both the occupants of the broken down vehicle, and those of other vehicles using the motorway. IMHO this is the HA doing things on the cheap. British motorists pump something in the region of £50 billion into the exchquer per annum yet only about £6-8 billion is put back into the road infrastructure.

[Horse]

'Cheap'? I think your definition is different from mine

However, part of the difficulty of going to four running lanes plus hs would be the massive land grab required - I'd guess particularly difficult in urban areas . . . and elevated sections, of course! [I think that a 'hung off the side ERA has been built!]

[Ralge]

There's managed motorways and smart motorways.
The former involves the hard shoulder being opened up as a live lane at congested times of the day with mandatory lower limits.
The latter involves permanent four-lane running (I.e. There's no hard shoulder ever.)
Both have refuge areas (effectively lay-by's) for emergencies and are flooded with CCTV technology for HA operators to spot problems and initiate lane closures and attendance by HA/Police.

Like others I feel concern about HA response times and about the exposure of being stuck in live lanes. South Yorks Police also have/had the same misgivings. Time will tell, of course.

[Stephen]

Chaps,
As one who Police's the Motorway on a regular basis the best has yet to come believe me, the Police used to take every call and prioritise it then farm out the non urgent jobs.

Now, the boot is on the other foot and a role reversal we get what the HA cant handle and sometimes it's too late and who takes the blame think about it.

Road safety is not a priority as if it were then the sort of things that are happening shouldn't in a month of Sunday's but wait and see what happens when an incident happens in the early hours of the morning when traffic is light and not enough to bring the signs on doesnt bare thinking about.
Stephen

[triquet]

It's going to happen sooner or later. Some poor family with a flat tyre is going to be eliminated by an HGV roaring up the hard shoulder foot down to the limit of his limiter while he watches a movie on his flatthing. The nights are drawing in ...

[michael769]

One thing I would say is that the M8 in Glasgow lost it's hard shoulders at the end of the 1980s. Despite being one of Europe's busiest sections of road, and lacking the extra support that MMs have, casualty rates are not significantly higher than other motorways.

There are other sections of motorway in Scotland that never had hard shoulders, some of which run at the full 70mph and lack modern VMS signs (we still use the 1970s style flashing wig wag lights).

[Big Err]

(we still use the 1970s style flashing wig wag lights).

Most if not all of these have vanished from the Scottish Motorway Network now.

[Slink_Pink]

One thing I would say is that the M8 in Glasgow lost it's hard shoulders at the end of the 1980s. Despite being one of Europe's busiest sections of road, and lacking the extra support that MMs have, casualty rates are not significantly higher than other motorways.

To be fair, getting much speed up on the M8 (particularly around Glasgow) can be quite a challenge. Yesterday, I averaged about 15-20mph between the Kingston bridge and Springburn (thats J21 to J15 for anyone looking at the map). I can think of a few occasions where breakdowns/accidents have occurred in live lanes recently but it slows the entire traffic (usually both sides) to a complete crawl during peak hours such that the risk of further collisions is really down to rear end shunts for those not paying attention to the queue ahead, in my very unqualified opinion. Still amazes me just how many people drive straight through red Xs though.

[michael769]

It is only slow at peak times.

Speeds are often well in excess of 70 at quieter times, though they are falling now that Police Scoland are so visible.

[Gromit37]

I think some people are expecting too much. On the one hand most people on this forum seem to agree that driving is the responsibility of drivers, that the nanny state interferes too much. So what is it to be? Do we really need to spend millions of pounds for cameras, operators to watch them and expensive software/hardware to automatically pick up on breakdowns? Let's face it, the money could certainly be better spent on upgrading and repairing roads and pavements that are in a generally horrendous state. Most roads do not have hard shoulders and emergency telephones, cameras and overhead signs. They do have unsighted bends, pinch points, bus stops and pedestrians. But we still travel at 60mph+ along them. There is a limit where things become silly. Before long, fully automated, computer guided cars will be the norm, humans won't actually drive cars. Then you'll all be complaining like mad. And somebody will point out complaints like the one at the beginning of this thread as justification.

[Horse]

people on this forum . . .

. . . Are a very small percentage of the driving population. But the 'system' has to cope with everyone, so we have 'lowest common denominator' philosophies in place to cope. What's the alternative?

[Gromit37]

The alternative is simply to let people get on with things without trying to wrap them in cotton wool. You cannot, will not and must not attempt to remove all danger and responsibility from individuals. How else are societies supposed to progress?

People make mistakes, they learn from them. Others learn from them. Shifting responsibility for your actions on the road to a computer system or a person sitting in a remote location teaches us nothing.
"The sign wasn't lit", "I didn't see the warning", "it's not my fault, the sign should be bigger, brighter, earlier". Really?

When the blob in your lane gets bigger, you're closing on an obstruction. If it has flashing orange lights, it's even easier to see. Slow down, change lanes, learn to fly, teleport to another dimension if you like. If you can't do any of those, Darwin gets another brownie point. It isn't fun or pretty, but eventually it works. Monkeys occasionally fall out of trees, but they still swing about up there.

The level of the lowest common denominator needs raising.

[Slink_Pink]

While I accept and agree with a number of the points from last 3-4 posts, but I think in this particular thread the concerns are based more on concerns about changing the rules of the game. It's one thing to introduce, e.g. live hard shoulders, with promise of 'smart' systems to monitor/act/protect. It's another when the actual working of the systems are shown to be something less than promised.