M1 roadworks (Leeds and Chesterfield)

[samsparro 10]

I suppose that depends on the quality of the monitoring. I can't answer that question though.

 

If a car in front starts breaking the people behind will automatically break. They won't cruise into it.

 

Motorways are actually very, very safe. But time will tell if this one is more dangerous after the change.

 

Your right they are, because we are all travelling the same way and there is virtually no chance of meeting anything coming the opposite direction!

 

But, people won't automatically brake when something happens. That's the problem. Drivers don't pay attention fully on the motorway because of how safe they are. How many times have you seen that last minute braking by someone when traffic slows in front of them?

 

Example for you, on top of the viaduct a car towing a caravan stops completely as the car looses power and the driver doesn't even have time to get to the hard shoulder. HGV following on behind too close drives into the rear of the caravan and destroys it. Collision in a live lane. No amount of technology would have prevented that.

 

Another example, the fatal a few years ago in West Yorkshire involving the minibus that suffered a power failure and was crawling up the M62 as the hard shoulder was coned off for roadworks. HGV Drives into the minibus and unfortunately people are killed and seriously injured.

 

Taking the hard shoulder away removes an option for someone to get away from the main carriage away should a problem occur, putting the reliance on technology.

 

Until you've been stood in lane 4 of a motorway on a cold and wet December evening with traffic bearing on you at 70mph (which they will do as I can't see any speed cameras being installed on this stretch, but I will bow to Haydn if he knows for definite) then no amount of facts and figures will make me think 'this is safe, the technology will protect me'...

 

Yes I might sound dramatic, but when your the first point of call to the motorway when something happens, it's something I'm quite passionate about

[tinfoilhat 11]

Your right they are, because we are all travelling the same way and there is virtually no chance of meeting anything coming the opposite direction!

 

But, people won't automatically brake when something happens. That's the problem. Drivers don't pay attention fully on the motorway because of how safe they are. How many times have you seen that last minute braking by someone when traffic slows in front of them?

 

Example for you, on top of the viaduct a car towing a caravan stops completely as the car looses power and the driver doesn't even have time to get to the hard shoulder. HGV following on behind too close drives into the rear of the caravan and destroys it. Collision in a live lane. No amount of technology would have prevented that.

 

Another example, the fatal a few years ago in West Yorkshire involving the minibus that suffered a power failure and was crawling up the M62 as the hard shoulder was coned off for roadworks. HGV Drives into the minibus and unfortunately people are killed and seriously injured.

 

Taking the hard shoulder away removes an option for someone to get away from the main carriage away should a problem occur, putting the reliance on technology.

 

Until you've been stood in lane 4 of a motorway on a cold and wet December evening with traffic bearing on you at 70mph (which they will do as I can't see any speed cameras being installed on this stretch, but I will bow to Haydn if he knows for definite) then no amount of facts and figures will make me think 'this is safe, the technology will protect me'...

 

Yes I might sound dramatic, but when your the first point of call to the motorway when something happens, it's something I'm quite passionate about

 

Well inadvertently you've proved how we don't really need hard shoulders and traffic works it self out in the event of a breakdown. A1, A42, A34 etc all really busy bits of duel carriageway and whilst traffic bunches and delays occur there's not deaths, thankfully, all the time. And that's without gantries.

[samsparro 10]

Well inadvertently you've proved how we don't really need hard shoulders and traffic works it self out in the event of a breakdown. A1, A42, A34 etc all really busy bits of duel carriageway and whilst traffic bunches and delays occur there's not deaths, thankfully, all the time. And that's without gantries.

 

Not too sure how I've done that!

 

Those roads you mention are completely different to the M1, in terms of number of vehicles on the road. Plus I'm not arguing for the introduction of a hard shoulder, more stating my opinions that removing a hard shoulder is what is dangerous.

 

Haydn, another serious question over the planning. What has been planned to cope with a collision that blocks the motorway completely, and to allow emergency services to arrive initially, then followed by recovery vehicles to remove the blockage? How do they get to the collision of all four lanes are blocked?

[truman 10]

Not too sure how I've done that!

 

Those roads you mention are completely different to the M1, in terms of number of vehicles on the road. Plus I'm not arguing for the introduction of a hard shoulder, more stating my opinions that removing a hard shoulder is what is dangerous.

 

Haydn, another serious question over the planning. What has been planned to cope with a collision that blocks the motorway completely, and to allow emergency services to arrive initially, then followed by recovery vehicles to remove the blockage? How do they get to the collision of all four lanes are blocked?

 

Do you have figures to prove this? Or is it just opinion?

[Cyclone 10]

Your right they are, because we are all travelling the same way and there is virtually no chance of meeting anything coming the opposite direction!

 

But, people won't automatically brake when something happens. That's the problem. Drivers don't pay attention fully on the motorway because of how safe they are. How many times have you seen that last minute braking by someone when traffic slows in front of them?

 

Example for you, on top of the viaduct a car towing a caravan stops completely as the car looses power and the driver doesn't even have time to get to the hard shoulder. HGV following on behind too close drives into the rear of the caravan and destroys it. Collision in a live lane. No amount of technology would have prevented that.

 

Another example, the fatal a few years ago in West Yorkshire involving the minibus that suffered a power failure and was crawling up the M62 as the hard shoulder was coned off for roadworks. HGV Drives into the minibus and unfortunately people are killed and seriously injured.

 

Taking the hard shoulder away removes an option for someone to get away from the main carriage away should a problem occur, putting the reliance on technology.

 

Until you've been stood in lane 4 of a motorway on a cold and wet December evening with traffic bearing on you at 70mph (which they will do as I can't see any speed cameras being installed on this stretch, but I will bow to Haydn if he knows for definite) then no amount of facts and figures will make me think 'this is safe, the technology will protect me'...

 

Yes I might sound dramatic, but when your the first point of call to the motorway when something happens, it's something I'm quite passionate about

 

I suppose you'd have to look at the statistics and how these accidents happened, compared to accidents occurring on hard shoulders...

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2015 at 13:14 ----------

 

Not too sure how I've done that!

 

Those roads you mention are completely different to the M1, in terms of number of vehicles on the road. Plus I'm not arguing for the introduction of a hard shoulder, more stating my opinions that removing a hard shoulder is what is dangerous.

 

Haydn, another serious question over the planning. What has been planned to cope with a collision that blocks the motorway completely, and to allow emergency services to arrive initially, then followed by recovery vehicles to remove the blockage? How do they get to the collision of all four lanes are blocked?

 

By coming down the motorway (which is closed) in the wrong direction from the next junction I'd assume.

[truman 10]

By coming down the motorway (which is closed) in the wrong direction from the next junction I'd assume.

 

Yep,exactly the same as they do now in some circumstances...

[samsparro 10]

Do you have figures to prove this? Or is it just opinion?

 

Erm no, as I've said before, it's my opinion. I don't always subscribe to the 'facts and figures' brigade when I can use my own experiences to form my own opinions.

 

As cyclone has said, time will tell.

 

It will be interesting to get the OPINION of the first person to break down in the SMART motorway in our area, and to ask them if they felt safer than if they were sat on the hard shoulder...

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2015 at 13:22 ----------

 

I suppose you'd have to look at the statistics and how these accidents happened, compared to accidents occurring on hard shoulders...

 

---------- Post added 30-09-2015 at 13:14 ----------

 

 

By coming down the motorway (which is closed) in the wrong direction from the next junction I'd assume.

 

Yep,exactly the same as they do now in some circumstances...

 

But if the emergency services can't get to the scene, who decides it's ok to travel the incorrect way down a motorway?

[truman 10]

 

But if the emergency services can't get to the scene, who decides it's ok to travel the incorrect way down a motorway?

 

The HA coupled with BiB I would imagine..as they do now...

[samsparro 10]

The HA coupled with BiB I would imagine..as they do now...

 

And if the highways agency can't get to the scene either? (And there will not be any free recovery either).

 

The point I am trying to make, is if there is a hard shoulder then emergency services use that and are straight to the scene to assist with injuries etc. Even coming the wrong way up the motorway will involve much more of a delay of them getting to the scene. It's a long way between junction 29a and junction 30 to wait for the traffic to clear before they come the wrong way...

 

Difference between life and death? Maybe? Maybe I'm just being mellow dramatic...

[Haydn1971 10]

In the planning phase did you have the chance to experience working on the motorway at all?

 

In my 27 years of work, I've worked in live traffic setting out works, I've worked on motorways next to full speed and reduced 50mph traffic, I've shifted cones, I've pulled rope, I've been nearly killed a few times. So yes, I've an idea of what it's like to work on the motorway and other fast roads.

[truman 10]

And if the highways agency can't get to the scene either? (And there will not be any free recovery either).

 

The point I am trying to make, is if there is a hard shoulder then emergency services use that and are straight to the scene to assist with injuries etc. Even coming the wrong way up the motorway will involve much more of a delay of them getting to the scene. It's a long way between junction 29a and junction 30 to wait for the traffic to clear before they come the wrong way...

 

Difference between life and death? Maybe? Maybe I'm just being mellow dramatic...

 

So what happens now when the only way to an incident is the "wrong" way? It does happen..If the accident happens N bound then the emergency services can approach from the southbound and close lanes/ stop traffic when they get to scene..you talk as though this is untried and untested..

[Haydn1971 10]

Is the main safety feature the fact that speeds are reduced as soon as a breakdown occurs then?

 

I wouldn't say there is a "main" safety feature, but reduce speeds will reduce the risk of a collision happening and will reduce the severity of injuries should a collision occur.

 

You talk about the buffer of traffic behind the broken down vehicle, but once you close that lane that buffer will vanish. I can see why traffic passing at 50 would be safer than passing at 70 (or 80) though.

 

Closing a lane is part of the story, the traffic will still be slowed before the closure - because essentially four lanes of traffic are squeezing into three - even when the motorway isn't busy, the effect of a closure will still create a buffering effect upstream.

 

The fact is sam that these decisions are not made on hunches or without real data. Risk analysis will have been performed, and it will have been established that the smart motorway is statistically safer than the dumb motorway + hard shoulder. It doesn't seem intuitive, but that's why you apply a rigorous approach to proving it, and don't rely on intuition.

 

There is a huge process of reporting that goes into these projects, not just on the safety, but across all parts of the design. These are reviewed over by different independent people, partly to ensure the company the author works for doesn't open up liability for the company, but also by the client, to ensure they are not open for liability through errors and misjudgements - there are various data sources, including collision data, volume and speed data, liaison with the regional control centres, the police, fire and ambulance, traffic officer service, maintaining agents and so on... These data sources are used to update reports as the project progresses through the Project Control Framework, refining as more things become known. Projects often also start with one designer for feasibility then move to another for the next preliminary stage and another for the design stage, providing extra layers of peer review.