5 ms·

UK government scraps all smart motorway plans

28 points by clouddrover 4y ago

mPReDiToR 4y ago
UK motorways have traditionally have a "hard shoulder" for emergency use. To be able to break down and be out of the flow of traffic (moving at 70mph) keeps passengers and property safe. The "Smart Motorway" has signs to turn this refuge into a full speed lane, leaving a couple of feet for the breakdown area. I never understood how this could be approved by any Minister who wanted to retain their position, but I guess saving money on new road lanes is more important than the lives of the voters and their families. Smart Motorways also try to slow traffic on approach to a bottleneck to ease the arrival of congestion before it brings the road to a standstill. In practice, drivers ignore the signs unless they have a speed camera attached to them, making the investment in the technology mostly useless. Good riddance to this dangerous idea. Don't revisit it while cars have organic drivers.
- yriooa1 4y ago
  I'm surprised by the controversy but also don't know any implementation details. The Netherlands allows temporary usage of the hard shoulder as driving lanes during congestion and in my experience this hasn't increased danger nor 'feeling' of it. https://www.cedr.eu/docs/view/6063273e214d8-en https://www.cedr.eu/docs/view/6063273e214d8-en https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10023/chap4.htm https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10023/chap4.htm https://www.itsinternational.com/its4/feature/traffic-monitoring-and-hard-shoulder-running https://www.itsinternational.com/its4/feature/traffic-monito...
  - adhesive_wombat 4y ago
    That's the other way around: in heavy congestion, using the hard shoulder as a lane is not so bad due to the lower speeds. All-lane running is the reverse: the hard shoulder is completely missing and you have to just hope that if you break down and can't make it to a refuge bay that a camera operator notices your car stationary in the lane, which is still going at full speed, and closes the lane before someone hits it. In personal experience of coming up on stopped cars in live lanes, with no signed warning of any kind, they aren't noticed immediately. A stationary vehicle in a lane comes appears very quickly when the lane is moving at 55-70mph.
    - jaclaz 4y ago
      But (usually) the hard shoulder (emergency lane) is narrower than normal lanes. Typically (here in Italy) the normal lanes are 3.25 to 3.75 meters wide while the emergency lane is 2.50 to 3.00 (it depends on the period the highway was built, I believe) So you need to change horizontal lines/signage and make all lanes, including the hard shoulder/emergency lane, the same width, and this means that in "normal" operation travel lanes will be narrower.
    - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
      > That's the other way around: in heavy congestion, using the hard shoulder as a lane is not so bad due to the lower speeds. On paper, sure. In practice it's the worlds best passing lane because the drivers who make the left lane useless as a passing lane don't self select to use a lane that's narrower than the rest, has a ton of merging traffic and a barrier on the harder to see side of the vehicle.
  - shubb 4y ago
    Especially in the UK, motoring is extremely political. The TV show Top Gear was politically formative fir a lot of people here. Smart motorways are unpopular because they typically include a lot of speed enforcement cameras and lower speed limits, so you can no longer zig zag through traffic at 90 miles an hour. Thus, smart motorways, pollution enforcement zones, and neighbourhood traffic charging schemes are very controversial. The same people who got exercised about face masks will cross the country to protest them. These people are the base of the current government, which needs a culture war as the real issues look unwinnable right now so the civil service are under pressure to find a reason to roll this stuff back.
    - rlpb 4y ago
      No, you are conflating dynamic speed control with the safety issues caused by the lack of a hard shoulder. See the other comments.
- scrlk 4y ago
  From the BBC News article on smart motorways being scrapped, smart motorways can fall in to three categories: * controlled, which have a permanent hard shoulder, but use technology such as variable speed limits to adjust traffic flows * dynamic, where the hard shoulder can be opened up at peak times and used as an extra lane; when this happens, the speed limit is reduced to 60mph * all-lane running, where the hard shoulder has been permanently removed to provide an extra lane; emergency refuge areas are provided at regular intervals for cars that get into trouble https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65288852 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65288852 IMO there shouldn't be any objections to "controlled" smart motorways. All lane running is idiotic; dynamic running is OK but I would say that the speed limit needs to be lowered from 60 mph. As an aside: British drivers have terrible lane discipline on motorways ("middle lane hogging"), which eats up road capacity for no good reason. There's plenty of variable message signs on motorways - they should display "Keep left unless overtaking" if there's no other message to be displayed.
  - adhesive_wombat 4y ago
    From daily experience of 10 miles of the M25, the all-lane-running has had a broken-down car in a live lane (i.e. the lane is not closed with a red X) about twice a year for me. Also there are vague electronic signs saying "reports of obstruction", "report of blocked lane" or "reports of pedestrians" with no further actions (like a lane closure) maybe twice a week. There very rarely actually is an obstruction to be seen in the end, so the signs get ignored, even when there is an actually dangerous hazard like a car in the middle of a lane. > British drivers have terrible lane discipline on motorways They certainly do. They even made it illegal a few years ago, but it's virtually never enforced. For a start, there aren't very many road police to enforce it. A small but significant number of people also completely disregard the red X markers and zoom down closed lanes towards, presumably since they don't usually do the red X for fun, a broken down vehicle or accident. This is very much illegal (though it's only a £100 fine), but again seems not to be enforced sufficiently to prevent it.
  - coastermug 4y ago
    I’ll provide an unpopular opinion. People who rigidly stick to the “furthest left lane at all possible moments” are far more dangerous than middle lane hoggers. I witness many, usually white vans, who seem to want to enforce this rule seemingly moving constantly like a pawn on a chessboard. I think some people (not suggesting you) don’t seem to recognise that in congestion, 3 lanes actually provide more capacity than 1, and that it’s not possible or logical to stick to the left lane at all times/conditions. I will yield that the far right lane is sacred and you really do need to be demonstrating some significant overtaking to be sticking in that lane.
steve_gh 4y ago
A lot of the problem is statistics Vs emotions. People have been killed in traffic accidents on smart motorways because there has been no hard shoulder available. On the other hand, smart motorways save lives because they reduce congestion - and the calculation is that more people are saved by the lack of congestion than are killed by the lack of a hard shoulder. The problem is that you can show the faces of the people killed on smart motorways due to lack of a hard shoulder, but the people who weren't in fatal accidents will always be faceless.
- pharmakom 4y ago
  Is there any evidence that the extra lane reduces congestion in the long run? The studies I have seen found the opposite: a brief period of benefit before increased volume (jevons paradox) leads to as much congestion as before. Downstream roads can then become even more congested. I wonder how many lives could be saved by an efficient and affordable rail network?
- adhesive_wombat 4y ago
  Dynamic speed limits are a good idea, because they allow a global view of the system to be used to improve it. Otherwise the "optimum" behaviour of individual drivers to get there sooner is to go faster, which, in some conditions, produces congestion which slows everyone down. However, I don't think everyone believes the limits are there for a good reason. Actual quote I once heard: "they're just playing silly buggers in their control room, ain't they, they don't know anything". Not helped by many other signs crying wolf about obstructions that often aren't there at all. As for all-lane-running, casual observation of UK driving indicates to me that a blitz on driving standards[1] such as "keep left", "avoid making others brake" and "when you change lane or merge, it's your job to match your speed to the new lane"[2] would be a far quicker way to increase capacity and reduce accidents. And would cost substantially less than the billions spent on smart motorways. [1]: especially as motorway driving isn't on the driving test and learners weren't allowed on motorways at all until 2018, so most drivers have never had any formal motorway training. [2]: Not only cars: I see HGVs doing 58 diving into gaps in 70mph traffic (on two lane roads especially) and causing half a mile of brake lights and converting free flowing traffic into nose-to-tail queues every day.
c7DJTLrn 4y ago
If you like smart motorways, you'll love my new invention: smart planes. By flying without oxygen masks, life jackets, and seatbelts we can shed a significant amount of weight. This will reduce the emissions per flight and save the planet. Of course, the passengers will asphyxiate or drown in an emergency, but it happens so rarely!
- ihatepython 4y ago
  > Of course, the passengers will asphyxiate or drown in an emergency, but it happens so rarely! In the event that this does happen, the overall carbon footprint will be lowered, so I see this as a win-win

28 points by clouddrover 4y ago

UK motorways have traditionally have a "hard shoulder" for emergency use. To be able to break down and be out of the flow of traffic (moving at 70mph) keeps passengers and property safe. The "Smart Motorway" has signs to turn this refuge into a full speed lane, leaving a couple of feet for the breakdown area. I never understood how this could be approved by any Minister who wanted to retain their position, but I guess saving money on new road lanes is more important than the lives of the voters and their families. Smart Motorways also try to slow traffic on approach to a bottleneck to ease the arrival of congestion before it brings the road to a standstill. In practice, drivers ignore the signs unless they have a speed camera attached to them, making the investment in the technology mostly useless. Good riddance to this dangerous idea. Don't revisit it while cars have organic drivers.

yriooa1 4y ago
I'm surprised by the controversy but also don't know any implementation details. The Netherlands allows temporary usage of the hard shoulder as driving lanes during congestion and in my experience this hasn't increased danger nor 'feeling' of it. https://www.cedr.eu/docs/view/6063273e214d8-en https://www.cedr.eu/docs/view/6063273e214d8-en https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10023/chap4.htm https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10023/chap4.htm https://www.itsinternational.com/its4/feature/traffic-monitoring-and-hard-shoulder-running https://www.itsinternational.com/its4/feature/traffic-monito...
- adhesive_wombat 4y ago
  That's the other way around: in heavy congestion, using the hard shoulder as a lane is not so bad due to the lower speeds. All-lane running is the reverse: the hard shoulder is completely missing and you have to just hope that if you break down and can't make it to a refuge bay that a camera operator notices your car stationary in the lane, which is still going at full speed, and closes the lane before someone hits it. In personal experience of coming up on stopped cars in live lanes, with no signed warning of any kind, they aren't noticed immediately. A stationary vehicle in a lane comes appears very quickly when the lane is moving at 55-70mph.
  - jaclaz 4y ago
    But (usually) the hard shoulder (emergency lane) is narrower than normal lanes. Typically (here in Italy) the normal lanes are 3.25 to 3.75 meters wide while the emergency lane is 2.50 to 3.00 (it depends on the period the highway was built, I believe) So you need to change horizontal lines/signage and make all lanes, including the hard shoulder/emergency lane, the same width, and this means that in "normal" operation travel lanes will be narrower.
  - dsfyu404ed 4y ago
    > That's the other way around: in heavy congestion, using the hard shoulder as a lane is not so bad due to the lower speeds. On paper, sure. In practice it's the worlds best passing lane because the drivers who make the left lane useless as a passing lane don't self select to use a lane that's narrower than the rest, has a ton of merging traffic and a barrier on the harder to see side of the vehicle.
- shubb 4y ago
  Especially in the UK, motoring is extremely political. The TV show Top Gear was politically formative fir a lot of people here. Smart motorways are unpopular because they typically include a lot of speed enforcement cameras and lower speed limits, so you can no longer zig zag through traffic at 90 miles an hour. Thus, smart motorways, pollution enforcement zones, and neighbourhood traffic charging schemes are very controversial. The same people who got exercised about face masks will cross the country to protest them. These people are the base of the current government, which needs a culture war as the real issues look unwinnable right now so the civil service are under pressure to find a reason to roll this stuff back.
  - rlpb 4y ago
    No, you are conflating dynamic speed control with the safety issues caused by the lack of a hard shoulder. See the other comments.
scrlk 4y ago
From the BBC News article on smart motorways being scrapped, smart motorways can fall in to three categories: * controlled, which have a permanent hard shoulder, but use technology such as variable speed limits to adjust traffic flows * dynamic, where the hard shoulder can be opened up at peak times and used as an extra lane; when this happens, the speed limit is reduced to 60mph * all-lane running, where the hard shoulder has been permanently removed to provide an extra lane; emergency refuge areas are provided at regular intervals for cars that get into trouble https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65288852 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-65288852 IMO there shouldn't be any objections to "controlled" smart motorways. All lane running is idiotic; dynamic running is OK but I would say that the speed limit needs to be lowered from 60 mph. As an aside: British drivers have terrible lane discipline on motorways ("middle lane hogging"), which eats up road capacity for no good reason. There's plenty of variable message signs on motorways - they should display "Keep left unless overtaking" if there's no other message to be displayed.
- adhesive_wombat 4y ago
  From daily experience of 10 miles of the M25, the all-lane-running has had a broken-down car in a live lane (i.e. the lane is not closed with a red X) about twice a year for me. Also there are vague electronic signs saying "reports of obstruction", "report of blocked lane" or "reports of pedestrians" with no further actions (like a lane closure) maybe twice a week. There very rarely actually is an obstruction to be seen in the end, so the signs get ignored, even when there is an actually dangerous hazard like a car in the middle of a lane. > British drivers have terrible lane discipline on motorways They certainly do. They even made it illegal a few years ago, but it's virtually never enforced. For a start, there aren't very many road police to enforce it. A small but significant number of people also completely disregard the red X markers and zoom down closed lanes towards, presumably since they don't usually do the red X for fun, a broken down vehicle or accident. This is very much illegal (though it's only a £100 fine), but again seems not to be enforced sufficiently to prevent it.
- coastermug 4y ago
  I’ll provide an unpopular opinion. People who rigidly stick to the “furthest left lane at all possible moments” are far more dangerous than middle lane hoggers. I witness many, usually white vans, who seem to want to enforce this rule seemingly moving constantly like a pawn on a chessboard. I think some people (not suggesting you) don’t seem to recognise that in congestion, 3 lanes actually provide more capacity than 1, and that it’s not possible or logical to stick to the left lane at all times/conditions. I will yield that the far right lane is sacred and you really do need to be demonstrating some significant overtaking to be sticking in that lane.

steve_gh 4y ago

A lot of the problem is statistics Vs emotions. People have been killed in traffic accidents on smart motorways because there has been no hard shoulder available. On the other hand, smart motorways save lives because they reduce congestion - and the calculation is that more people are saved by the lack of congestion than are killed by the lack of a hard shoulder. The problem is that you can show the faces of the people killed on smart motorways due to lack of a hard shoulder, but the people who weren't in fatal accidents will always be faceless.

pharmakom 4y ago
Is there any evidence that the extra lane reduces congestion in the long run? The studies I have seen found the opposite: a brief period of benefit before increased volume (jevons paradox) leads to as much congestion as before. Downstream roads can then become even more congested. I wonder how many lives could be saved by an efficient and affordable rail network?
adhesive_wombat 4y ago
Dynamic speed limits are a good idea, because they allow a global view of the system to be used to improve it. Otherwise the "optimum" behaviour of individual drivers to get there sooner is to go faster, which, in some conditions, produces congestion which slows everyone down. However, I don't think everyone believes the limits are there for a good reason. Actual quote I once heard: "they're just playing silly buggers in their control room, ain't they, they don't know anything". Not helped by many other signs crying wolf about obstructions that often aren't there at all. As for all-lane-running, casual observation of UK driving indicates to me that a blitz on driving standards[1] such as "keep left", "avoid making others brake" and "when you change lane or merge, it's your job to match your speed to the new lane"[2] would be a far quicker way to increase capacity and reduce accidents. And would cost substantially less than the billions spent on smart motorways. [1]: especially as motorway driving isn't on the driving test and learners weren't allowed on motorways at all until 2018, so most drivers have never had any formal motorway training. [2]: Not only cars: I see HGVs doing 58 diving into gaps in 70mph traffic (on two lane roads especially) and causing half a mile of brake lights and converting free flowing traffic into nose-to-tail queues every day.

c7DJTLrn 4y ago

If you like smart motorways, you'll love my new invention: smart planes. By flying without oxygen masks, life jackets, and seatbelts we can shed a significant amount of weight. This will reduce the emissions per flight and save the planet. Of course, the passengers will asphyxiate or drown in an emergency, but it happens so rarely!

ihatepython 4y ago
> Of course, the passengers will asphyxiate or drown in an emergency, but it happens so rarely! In the event that this does happen, the overall carbon footprint will be lowered, so I see this as a win-win