Smart Motorways

[Harry Bloomfield]

Yet another outage, of the 'stopped vehicle detection system' - they were unable to detect stopped vehicles, nor show a red X for a closed lane.

Surely, the obvious fail safe is if the 'stopped detection system' is not working, then the one time hard shoulder, should automatically just show the red X.

 

[Brigadier]

I wrote some exams for newbies last year.

Of the dozen or so candidates to take the exam, not a single one had any idea of the concept of "failsafe"........

 

[cwhaley]

I was going to bring these up in my thread about joining a motorway, however just found this.

I was approaching junction 25 (southbound M1) yesterday, and I knew it would be busy because there are so many roadworks on at the moment.

My plan was to go past it and come off at 24a to avoid the traffic. As I was getting closer, none of the overhead gantry signs were showing warnings (such as "queue on slip road") as they usually do. I thought this was a bit odd. At the 1 mile marker, there were still no warnings of traffic so I prepared to come off at 25. I couldn't see ahead due to the bend, but still maintained a speed of about 55 mph at a good distance from a HGV.

As I got around the bend in the motorway (about 1/2 mile from the junction), I saw the slip road up ahead completely full of traffic with vehicles queuing on the hard shoulder. There were also five vehicles sat completely stationary in the live lane 1 sat indicating waiting for a gap! For me that presented the huge risk of a potentially fatal accident. The fact that there were no warnings at all on the approach to this junction baffles me...

Unsure if this was due to the failure of a system as mentioned above, but it was alarming.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

As I got around the bend in the motorway (about 1/2 mile from the junction), I saw the slip road up ahead completely full of traffic with vehicles queuing on the hard shoulder. There were also five vehicles sat completely stationary in the live lane 1 sat indicating waiting for a gap! For me that presented the huge risk of a potentially fatal accident. The fact that there were no warnings at all on the approach to this junction baffles me...

I would describe myself as a very well-trained, experienced, and exceptionally safe driver, but to be honest, those Smart Motorways scare the hell out of me. I don't have any concerns about me running into the rear of a stopped vehicle, because my obs are first-rate, rather my concern is one of breaking down, and have some numskull run into me.

 

[foxhole]

They should be renamed Cheap motorways as their only purpose is to save money , not lives.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

'Smart' motorways should only become a thing once the high majority of people are driving around in semi-autonomous vehicles that are linked to the 'smart' system, thus ensuring AVSD (Automatic Vehicle Slow Down) engages when a vehicle breaks down or stops for whatever reason.

Agreed, just a money saving exercise.

 

[motorbiking]

I was going to bring these up in my thread about joining a motorway, however just found this.

I was approaching junction 25 (southbound M1) yesterday, and I knew it would be busy because there are so many roadworks on at the moment.

My plan was to go past it and come off at 24a to avoid the traffic. As I was getting closer, none of the overhead gantry signs were showing warnings (such as "queue on slip road") as they usually do. I thought this was a bit odd. At the 1 mile marker, there were still no warnings of traffic so I prepared to come off at 25. I couldn't see ahead due to the bend, but still maintained a speed of about 55 mph at a good distance from a HGV.

As I got around the bend in the motorway (about 1/2 mile from the junction), I saw the slip road up ahead completely full of traffic with vehicles queuing on the hard shoulder. There were also five vehicles sat completely stationary in the live lane 1 sat indicating waiting for a gap! For me that presented the huge risk of a potentially fatal accident. The fact that there were no warnings at all on the approach to this junction baffles me...

Unsure if this was due to the failure of a system as mentioned above, but it was alarming.

If you can stop safely in the distance you can see to be clear, then you aren't going too fast. If you can't, then you are going to fast.

A safe speed is not a number, its based on what you can/can't see.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

If you can stop safely in the distance you can see to be clear, then you aren't going too fast. If you can't, then you are going to fast.

A safe speed is not a number, its based on what you can/can't see.

Sorry but I only partly agree with this. Example, my mum lives in a high rise and you get a great view of the main road that runs beside it. On one side of the road there's a path and beside this greenery, so that side's not built up. On the other side is a path and beside this the high rises, however they're set well back. So when you're driving along that stretch of road, you have a clear view ahead and either side.

It's a 30 limit however quite a few cars exceed this. Although difficult to gauge, I reckon a few are touching 50 or even a bit more as they use that stretch. Is that 'safe' to do because the driver sees a clear road ahead and no pedestrians on either pavements?

Just because you don't see a potential hazard at a given point in time doesn't mean one might not appear from nowhere?

 

[fixitflav]

Sorry but I only partly agree with this. Example, my mum lives in a high rise and you get a great view of the main road that runs beside it. On one side of the road there's a path and beside this greenery, so that side's not built up. On the other side is a path and beside this the high rises, however they're set well back. So when you're driving along that stretch of road, you have a clear view ahead and either side.

It's a 30 limit however quite a few cars exceed this. Although difficult to gauge, I reckon a few are touching 50 or even a bit more as they use that stretch. Is that 'safe' to do because the driver sees a clear road ahead and no pedestrians on either pavements?

Just because you don't see a potential hazard at a given point in time doesn't mean one might not appear from nowhere?

But you should still obey speed limits. I don't think anybody's suggesting you can go as fast as like as long as you consider it safe.

 

[Brigadier]

Just because you don't see a potential hazard at a given point in time doesn't mean one might not appear from nowhere?

Hazards can't appear from "nowhere".
They might "appear" (to the observer) at very short notice; in which case, the observer's speed should be lowered to account for this likelihood.

The safe speed is the speed from which you can safely stop, should a foreseeable (which is different to "visible") hazard become apparent.

Which might be a pedestrian emerging from between two parked cars.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

Hazards can't appear from "nowhere".
They might "appear" (to the observer) at very short notice; in which case, the observer's speed should be lowered to account for this likelihood.

The safe speed is the speed from which you can safely stop, should a foreseeable (which is different to "visible") hazard become apparent.

Which might be a pedestrian emerging from between two parked cars.

Hopefully most got my point when I used that commonly used phrase, however thanks for correcting me.

 

[Alec_t]

Just because you don't see a potential hazard at a given point in time doesn't mean one might not appear from nowhere?

Many moons ago a relative of mine was driving through the New Forest. 'Out of nowhere' a deer ran across in front of his car, inside his stopping distance. Deer got disembowelled and front of car was severely damaged. Driver's set belt protected him from serious injury.

 

[securespark]

Yet another outage, of the 'stopped vehicle detection system' - they were unable to detect stopped vehicles, nor show a red X for a closed lane.

Surely, the obvious fail safe is if the 'stopped detection system' is not working, then the one time hard shoulder, should automatically just show the red X.

But that's if you, me or anyone here has designed the system. Not the idiots who have designed the system, if van call it design......

 

[ellal]

Never use the hard shoulder 'lane' and never will...

Of course a fine for not doing so will soon be imposed...

Why don't they call it what is is - a Death Lane!

 

[motorbiking]

Sorry but I only partly agree with this. Example, my mum lives in a high rise and you get a great view of the main road that runs beside it. On one side of the road there's a path and beside this greenery, so that side's not built up. On the other side is a path and beside this the high rises, however they're set well back. So when you're driving along that stretch of road, you have a clear view ahead and either side.

It's a 30 limit however quite a few cars exceed this. Although difficult to gauge, I reckon a few are touching 50 or even a bit more as they use that stretch. Is that 'safe' to do because the driver sees a clear road ahead and no pedestrians on either pavements?

Just because you don't see a potential hazard at a given point in time doesn't mean one might not appear from nowhere?

There can be reason's to go slower other than road safety. Noise pollution etc..

But ultimately if you can see enough clear space to stop on your own side of the road, then it doesn't matter what comes in to view, you have enough time to stop. There is one exception to this rule - single track roads, where you need double the distance as you have to allow for a vehicle coming the other way.