'Smart' Motorways.

[Janus 28]

2 hours ago, davyboy said:

And the answer is?

I would have thought upstream of the vehicle. If an HGV hits the stationary vehicle,  it is likely that most of the wreckage/debris is going to be propelled in the direction of the momentum, I would guess.

[Brooker11 10]

I raised my concerns about these motorways on another thread and got shouted down by the usual rent-a-mob on here, its ludicrous not to have a place of refuge on a road where huge chunks of metal are flying about at high speed, the one from J31 of the M1 doesn't seem to have eased congestion and if it really is a "smart" system why not let it raise the limit in the right conditions and times. A total waste of millions and a tragic cost to lives.

[alchresearch 215]

3 minutes ago, Brooker11 said:

its ludicrous not to have a place of refuge on a road where huge chunks of metal are flying about at high speed

But there aren't hard shoulders or refuges on 70mph dual carriageways.

[Brooker11 10]

1 minute ago, alchresearch said:

But there aren't hard shoulders or refuges on 70mph dual carriageways.

There are very few (if any) dual carriageways without lay bys and the volume of traffic is much less.

[Obelix 11]

There are more laybys on the smart motorway than on the usual dual carraigeway though. Also the traffic density is not necessarily that different.
 

What is an issue to my mind are the smart motorways without a hard shoulder. Ones where the hard shoulder is converted to an extra running lane at rush hour etc generally seem to be much more responsive than others to safety situations.

[rudds1 102]

3 hours ago, Janus said:

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?

 

 

 

The police would pull in front of offending driver and put on their follow me sign in the rear window of patrol car 

[DT Ralge 10]

6 hours ago, Brooker11 said:

There are very few (if any) dual carriageways without lay bys and the volume of traffic is much less.

There are d/c's with lay-bys but no hard shoulder. 
Volume of traffic and traffic density on these roads less than motorways?

Try the on-ramps A38 around Ripley.
Try the A34 above Newbury on a good day.

Try negotiating the lay-bys hidden around a bend on A61 (“ last lay-by before M1”) or A1 northbound and north of Retford turn-off.   (You may be proving my oft-made training point that some/many drivers are fearful/wary of motorways but not of dual-carriageways because they underrate the level of hazard and risk on d/c's).

7 hours ago, Janus said:

I would have thought upstream of the vehicle. If an HGV hits the stationary vehicle,  it is likely that most of the wreckage/debris is going to be propelled in the direction of the momentum, I would guess.

Indeed, avoid being hit by the vehicle or any debris that comes off it on impact. 

[Brooker11 10]

3 hours ago, DT Ralge said:

There are d/c's with lay-bys but no hard shoulder. 
Volume of traffic and traffic density on these roads less than motorways?

Try the on-ramps A38 around Ripley.
Try the A34 above Newbury on a good day.

Try negotiating the lay-bys hidden around a bend on A61 (“ last lay-by before M1”) or A1 northbound and north of Retford turn-off.   (You may be proving my oft-made training point that some/many drivers are fearful/wary of motorways but not of dual-carriageways because they underrate the level of hazard and risk on d/c's).

Indeed, avoid being hit by the vehicle or any debris that comes off it on impact. 

Ok so smart motorways are no more dangerous than dual carriageways, better ask them to scrap the review into them immediately.

[tinfoilhat 11]

35 minutes ago, Brooker11 said:

Ok so smart motorways are no more dangerous than dual carriageways, better ask them to scrap the review into them immediately.

Nothing wrong with a review. Look at new data and assess how the current system can be improved. 

[Brooker11 10]

9 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

Nothing wrong with a review. Look at new data and assess how the current system can be improved. 

They also mentioned the suspension of creating anymore, that's a little bit more than just looking at improvements but dress it up how you will.

[DT Ralge 10]

17 hours ago, Brooker11 said:

Ok so smart motorways are no more dangerous than dual carriageways, better ask them to scrap the review into them immediately.

I’ve nothing against a review but let’s have it delving into facts and figures.

[Brooker11 10]

Interesting to see that MP’s are now calling for these to be totally suspended after 5 deaths in 16 months between J30 and 35. The AA have also said they will not carry out roadside assistance on smart motorways.

 

Are the usual naysayers on here still for them?