tinfoilhat 11 #349 Posted October 25, 2019 It really depends on the stretch of motorway. I think the stretches that are hard shoulders first then a live lane depending on traffic are a better bet than a live lane that covers to a hard shoulder. The stretch north of luton has gantries stretching over 4 lanes that a very very frequent - they might even have proper street lighting (can't remember). That stretch from 30 to 29 has very sporadic LED signs and no street lighting. I've happened across a vehicle on occasion and the nearest gantry hasn't warned me - and it hadn't just happened, as the occupants had already scampered halfway up the embankment. It's not a bad idea, just badly done. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Padders 2,754 #350 Posted October 25, 2019 25 minutes ago, The Joker said: Because the deaths of poor Northerners are an acceptable price to pay when a London-centric government expands a motorway on the cheap? I know us Sheffielders like saving money, but deaths are too high a price to pay, even for a tight-arse skinflint like me These deaths were expected, inevitable, and avoidable Your my kinda guy Joker. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Ridgewalk 90 #351 Posted October 26, 2019 After all the years of disruption on the M1 they've now decided it was a bad idea after all ! Nearly as wasteful as Boris Johnson for stupid ideas Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
tzijlstra 11 #352 Posted October 26, 2019 Has anybody got any data? Quite curious to see if accidents on the M1 stretch by Sheffield have indeed gone up or not. The reason I ask is this - in the Netherlands they changed the hard shoulder to 'rush hour' lanes and even though people kept claiming that it would increase accidents, a study over 5 years showed that it didn't, in fact, compared to 30 years ago there were fewer accidents, despite having twice as much traffic. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Janus 28 #353 Posted October 27, 2019 I recall when the idea of using the hard shoulder was being proposed. The police were very much against it on safety grounds, and quite rightly so. The government still went ahead with it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
jaffa1 10 #354 Posted October 27, 2019 They're not so smart after all, common sense should have told them so before waiting until someone got killed. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
DT Ralge 10 #355 Posted October 28, 2019 On 25/10/2019 at 20:51, The Joker said: Because the deaths of poor Northerners are an acceptable price to pay when a London-centric government expands a motorway on the cheap? I know us Sheffielders like saving money, but deaths are too high a price to pay, even for a tight-arse skinflint like me These deaths were expected, inevitable, and avoidable You need to get out more. There are smart motorways (actual and built) down south as well. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
DT Ralge 10 #356 Posted October 28, 2019 On 26/10/2019 at 15:54, tzijlstra said: Has anybody got any data? Quite curious to see if accidents on the M1 stretch by Sheffield have indeed gone up or not. The reason I ask is this - in the Netherlands they changed the hard shoulder to 'rush hour' lanes and even though people kept claiming that it would increase accidents, a study over 5 years showed that it didn't, in fact, compared to 30 years ago there were fewer accidents, despite having twice as much traffic. You make a good point. Whether they are safe/safer/less safe is simple maths, really. We need to take out emotions and ensure that any data analysis has validity and reliability at its core. i.e examine: How many died on motorways, before and after the introduction of “managed” and “smart”. What lane: hard shoulder or nearside running lane or any other running lane did the fatalities happen in? What were the root initial cause of the incidents: broken down, run out of fuel ... has the incidence of broken down etc stayed the same or changed? What was the alignment of the road at the crash site - I guess “straight”. Has there been a discernible change in figures since the introduction of “managed” and “smart”? Where were the casualties stood/sat? (Where would a public information campaign - if we ever went back to those days - want them to be?) More people die on the hard shoulder than in any other lane, so to think of them as safe havens is perverse. ... and probably a few more questions. Without this analysis, we are left with the emotive cliché, “smart m/w's aren’t that smart” (but, there again, neither are drivers). So, emotions aside, as a professional driver trainer I’d like to ask y’all: if you break down on a motorway (smart or otherwise), where would it be safest to stand? Out of the vehicle, clearly, and over the barrier but stood UPSTREAM, NEXT to the vehicle or DOWNSTREAM from the vehicle? Your choice makes a BIG difference. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
davyboy 17 #357 Posted October 28, 2019 2 hours ago, DT Ralge said: if you break down on a motorway (smart or otherwise), where would it be safest to stand? Out of the vehicle, clearly, and over the barrier but stood UPSTREAM, NEXT to the vehicle or DOWNSTREAM from the vehicle? Your choice makes a BIG difference. And the answer is? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
alchresearch 206 #358 Posted October 28, 2019 This is one of the recent deaths cited: Quote Mr Mercer was involved in a minor crash but when he got out of his car to exchange details he and the other driver, a young man from Mansfield, were hit by a lorry. Both died at the scene. Why weren't they over the other side of the safety barrier and on the embankment? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
nightrider 13 #359 Posted October 28, 2019 On 26/10/2019 at 15:54, tzijlstra said: Has anybody got any data? Quite curious to see if accidents on the M1 stretch by Sheffield have indeed gone up or not. The reason I ask is this - in the Netherlands they changed the hard shoulder to 'rush hour' lanes and even though people kept claiming that it would increase accidents, a study over 5 years showed that it didn't, in fact, compared to 30 years ago there were fewer accidents, despite having twice as much traffic. Don't have the link to hand, but I recall reading a UK government report that showed the removal of the hard shoulder increased deaths. Then it concluded that cost was worth the benefit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Janus 28 #360 Posted October 28, 2019 I was reading an RAC forum yesterday. There was/or is a petition for the police to cease stopping vehicles on the hard shoulder. The suggestion being put forward was to escort them off the motorway before dealing with minor traffic violations. It was not clear how the police would potentially communicate their request to the driver. Maybe it was felt that once stopped the police would simply tell the driver to leave the motorway at the next exit? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...