RE: Smart motorways are dumb: Tell Me I'm Wrong
Discussion
What if UK commerce / innovation were not so utterly focused upon the Southeast?
Decentralise a la Germany or the US. Disperse growth across major cities throughout the nation. And join these in a grand high-speed limited-access motorway system.
Remember... Autonomous on-demand hire cars will debut in our lifetime. Vehicles per passenger trip will decline (and with this, the propensity for delay).
In short: What if the matter of congestion was redefined as the making of opportunity?
Apologies if this sounds silly.
Armagreggon said:
I too have been through reduced speed sections for roadworks that didn't exist, only to come upon lane closures and workers shortly after in a national speed limit section.
So what your saying is you went through the speed managed section and found the roadworks did exist? Sounds like the smart motorway was doing exactly what it should, reducing speeds before the roadworks to manage flow in to the reduced number of lanes.This is exactly the problem, people can't link the speed reductions to something the can't instantly see. As has been said time and again most of the time you won't see the reason. The jam will have cleared or won't materialise or the danger will have passed.
unsprung said:
What if UK commerce / innovation were not so utterly focused upon the Southeast?
Apologies if this sounds silly.
Nowhere as silly as the post below which seems to forget the other countries generally have double the land mass for a similar population, some of them operate a completely different model using tolls etc, be careful given half the chance the private sector will take over the motorway network and you will end up with a pay and play system with prices according to demand similar to the M6 toll but with much better technology around nowadays to enforce it Apologies if this sounds silly.
daytona365 said:
Shame we can't have road networks like Germany, France, or even Spain.......No, but were British, we make do. Even though average speeds are less now than in the f
king sixties ! Just like the shambolic housing situation. What we need are millions more people/drivers !
king sixties ! Just like the shambolic housing situation. What we need are millions more people/drivers !I share your frustration after seemingly only managing to hit 70 mph for about 10 minutes of my regular 2 hour journey up/down the M6 between Birmingham and Manchester recently. Wasn't the point of the motorway in the first place that a higher average speed than existing A-roads could be achieved?
Another example of failing to inform drivers that really infuriates me is the "M6 JXX - JXX Long Delays" matrix messages. If I'm on a motorway or in an area I'm not familiar with, I have no chance of fishing out a map book or pulling up google maps on my phone (illegally) to find an alternative route so I just end ploughing headlong into the delays I know are waiting for me but have no means of avoiding. Wouldn't "Use AXXX for Wherever" be a useful addition to these messages?
Another example of failing to inform drivers that really infuriates me is the "M6 JXX - JXX Long Delays" matrix messages. If I'm on a motorway or in an area I'm not familiar with, I have no chance of fishing out a map book or pulling up google maps on my phone (illegally) to find an alternative route so I just end ploughing headlong into the delays I know are waiting for me but have no means of avoiding. Wouldn't "Use AXXX for Wherever" be a useful addition to these messages?
I use the m62 frequently which has this smart motorway tech and it is, largely, brilliant. It has completely transformed this section of motorway from a hateful and often dangerous drive, to a pretty relaxing one.
We need the speed cameras, else the limits would be ignored and the whole operation would be a waste of time.
In my opinion, on our conjested rush hour motorways, these smart motorways help us to help ourselves.
However, the years of cones and miles and miles of 50mph limit in order to get a smart motorway is utterly soul destroying if you have to use it daily.
Short term pain, long term gain.
We need the speed cameras, else the limits would be ignored and the whole operation would be a waste of time.
In my opinion, on our conjested rush hour motorways, these smart motorways help us to help ourselves.
However, the years of cones and miles and miles of 50mph limit in order to get a smart motorway is utterly soul destroying if you have to use it daily.
Short term pain, long term gain.
SteveSteveson said:
So what your saying is you went through the speed managed section and found the roadworks did exist? Sounds like the smart motorway was doing exactly what it should, reducing speeds before the roadworks to manage flow in to the reduced number of lanes.
They existed AFTER the limited section, which doesn't sound very smart to me. Slow everyone down on a clear bit of road, then let them speed back up to the NSL in time to go past the roadworks? If that's the kind of logic being applied to smart motorways, then the "smart" name must be ironic.An additional 30 minutes to cover M1 28 - 31 is pushing it abit!
I do the route twice a day, every day - I bet its added 15 minutes at the very most.
To be honest the managed bit between 28 and 26 seems to run pretty well - once you get south of that back into the "normal" section is where the traffic starts to build up again.
I do the route twice a day, every day - I bet its added 15 minutes at the very most.
To be honest the managed bit between 28 and 26 seems to run pretty well - once you get south of that back into the "normal" section is where the traffic starts to build up again.
Some interesting comments. As a user who regularly drives 300-400 miles most weeks on M3/M4/M25/M11 (usually outside of peak hours), I cannot agree more that these 'smart' motorways seem far more frequently to slow down and frustrate than maintain flow. During (and just before) rush hours I can see their use, but at other times it definitely seems mis-used.
Reading some of the rules on their implementation (thank you for posting those) seems instructive, and these seem to need revisiting. Maintaining speed limits until 4 cars have passed going faster than that (risking tickets) is a farce if I have understood that comment correctly. Lower limits should be raised/removed when conditions allow. And adding speed limits (giving examples) where there MAY be a problem that cannot be seen (or when someone phones in with the wrong motorway name) is also frustrating. What is wrong with displaying 'possible incident, beware' or similar, and let drivers judge the situation knowing there may be slightly raised level of risk ahead, rather than enforcing a lower maximum than necessary? Drivers should be able to judge driving safely for themselves on such occasions, and if they can't that is an issue of driver education; slowing everyone down every time seems an incorrect solution from my experiences of these signs, it does become 'the boy who cried wolf', with a lack of trust resulting.
Reading some of the rules on their implementation (thank you for posting those) seems instructive, and these seem to need revisiting. Maintaining speed limits until 4 cars have passed going faster than that (risking tickets) is a farce if I have understood that comment correctly. Lower limits should be raised/removed when conditions allow. And adding speed limits (giving examples) where there MAY be a problem that cannot be seen (or when someone phones in with the wrong motorway name) is also frustrating. What is wrong with displaying 'possible incident, beware' or similar, and let drivers judge the situation knowing there may be slightly raised level of risk ahead, rather than enforcing a lower maximum than necessary? Drivers should be able to judge driving safely for themselves on such occasions, and if they can't that is an issue of driver education; slowing everyone down every time seems an incorrect solution from my experiences of these signs, it does become 'the boy who cried wolf', with a lack of trust resulting.
The SMART motorway on the M62 works a treat ... In that it moves the congestion back down the motorway to Jct. 22.
I even emailed the HA to see if SMART was the actual cause of the 'new' congestion on a stretch where I haven't been held up other than when there had been accidents... needless to say, I'm still waiting for a response.
I even emailed the HA to see if SMART was the actual cause of the 'new' congestion on a stretch where I haven't been held up other than when there had been accidents... needless to say, I'm still waiting for a response.
As somebody who travels up to 40,000 miles per year, probably 60% of that on motorways (smart or not) it is quite obvious to me that the "smart" system is NOT working, this is not the fault of the "smart system" but the fault of the morons who are "operating" it.
It just seems to me that "smart" seems to mean "slower" and this is down to the operators who probably cycle to work !
Bob
It just seems to me that "smart" seems to mean "slower" and this is down to the operators who probably cycle to work !
Bob
Not particularly happy with the generic Audi bashing there, but there is a serious topic to discuss.
The problem with most of these is that it entices people to start switching lanes wildly just to make sure they are 2 cars ahead of you when you get back to NSL. This is by far more dangerous in my eyes. But as an Audi driver that utilises his cruise control at every opportunity, I find that if people actually used the motorway lanes properly (and using the other 2 left lanes), the world would be a safer place. Lane 3 is not for cruising when the inside ones are free!!
The problem with most of these is that it entices people to start switching lanes wildly just to make sure they are 2 cars ahead of you when you get back to NSL. This is by far more dangerous in my eyes. But as an Audi driver that utilises his cruise control at every opportunity, I find that if people actually used the motorway lanes properly (and using the other 2 left lanes), the world would be a safer place. Lane 3 is not for cruising when the inside ones are free!!
The M42 is a lot better than it was in the early days. Whilst you do get the limits which are still there for an issue that has been resolved, it's a long time since I have seen the madness of gantries displaying 50, 40, NSL 40, 40, 60, 40 , blank, blank (did I miss the NSL sign?), 40 that one genuinely witnessed in the early days.
Another one that seemed excessive was southbound one evening as roadworks about to be set out. Limits counted down all the way to 20. Nothing in sight. Text roadworks workers in road all the usual malarkey. For bloody miles.
Then got to where the cone laying vehicles were parked up on the hard shoulder not yet started. Ok so the limit will clear now. Nope still 20.
The drivers were anything from people still sticking to 20 terrified of a ticket to those who had said "eff it" and speeded up. Very dangerous.
At the time queried it and the excuse was that they'd been asked for speed restrictions between junction a and b between the hours of x and y. Can't monitor to check progress. Then why have cctv cameras every half mile or so.
So agree with the person who said it's a good idea but not implemented well.
Also agree with the observation of doing away with the hard shoulder feels wrong but depends a little on the implementation.
Having said all that it must be frustrating when you see what goes on. M40 late at night, road works. Warnings of lane closures, reduced limits and then lanes closed with red x. Not done excessively but it all felt about right. Yet you had idiots banging through the red x at three figure speeds and trying to find gaps in the traffic already over in lane 1 right at the last second before the cones. People like this should have their licences removed.
Then there's the heavies who squeeze through the gap just as the cone lorry is about to finish off the last few yards of a closure. These people also should have their licences removed, and yes that does mean their livelihood. It could be prevented by presence of traffic units with big teeth, but they have been removed largely.
Another one that seemed excessive was southbound one evening as roadworks about to be set out. Limits counted down all the way to 20. Nothing in sight. Text roadworks workers in road all the usual malarkey. For bloody miles.
Then got to where the cone laying vehicles were parked up on the hard shoulder not yet started. Ok so the limit will clear now. Nope still 20.
The drivers were anything from people still sticking to 20 terrified of a ticket to those who had said "eff it" and speeded up. Very dangerous.
At the time queried it and the excuse was that they'd been asked for speed restrictions between junction a and b between the hours of x and y. Can't monitor to check progress. Then why have cctv cameras every half mile or so.
So agree with the person who said it's a good idea but not implemented well.
Also agree with the observation of doing away with the hard shoulder feels wrong but depends a little on the implementation.
Having said all that it must be frustrating when you see what goes on. M40 late at night, road works. Warnings of lane closures, reduced limits and then lanes closed with red x. Not done excessively but it all felt about right. Yet you had idiots banging through the red x at three figure speeds and trying to find gaps in the traffic already over in lane 1 right at the last second before the cones. People like this should have their licences removed.
Then there's the heavies who squeeze through the gap just as the cone lorry is about to finish off the last few yards of a closure. These people also should have their licences removed, and yes that does mean their livelihood. It could be prevented by presence of traffic units with big teeth, but they have been removed largely.
As it happens, there's some genuine maths behind this type of scheme.
If you have a few mins, go have a look a "queue theory".
The basics are really easy. In the case of cars, the more you pack into as small a space as possible, the slow the cars end up actually travelling.
Trying to explain that, when you have insufficient braking distances, volatility of car speeds (e.g. one person pulling off the throttle for no genuine reason) ends up creating a wave effect within the cars. Unless you have a "buffer" space in that queue to break it up, ends up eventually resulting in cars completely stopped. That's why you sometimes have gridlocked motorways for no apparent reason.
The smart motorways, are trying to cut speeds such that cars do not impede into an already crowded location. They're trying to ENCOURAGE larger braking distances.
The solution is actually VERY simple. If drivers just ensured they had decent braking distances, traffic would flow massively more smoothly. Unfortunately, that's just NEVER going to happen unless we end up with autonomous vehicles.
If you have a few mins, go have a look a "queue theory".
The basics are really easy. In the case of cars, the more you pack into as small a space as possible, the slow the cars end up actually travelling.
Trying to explain that, when you have insufficient braking distances, volatility of car speeds (e.g. one person pulling off the throttle for no genuine reason) ends up creating a wave effect within the cars. Unless you have a "buffer" space in that queue to break it up, ends up eventually resulting in cars completely stopped. That's why you sometimes have gridlocked motorways for no apparent reason.
The smart motorways, are trying to cut speeds such that cars do not impede into an already crowded location. They're trying to ENCOURAGE larger braking distances.
The solution is actually VERY simple. If drivers just ensured they had decent braking distances, traffic would flow massively more smoothly. Unfortunately, that's just NEVER going to happen unless we end up with autonomous vehicles.
GDP sapping infrastructure is going to stop the UK from prospering in the new world that awaits us. Ie, making real worth from economic activity.
All this stuff is just a prelude to road charging for congested motorways.
So you pay about 5 times for the same bit of tarmac to get to the job you need to pay all the other taxes (probably ~ 60-70%+ real total taxation on all your financial activity) to support failing services left right and centre.
Smart motorways are not dumb, the general public are dumb for letting their government shaft them dry day in and day out.
Sites like Pistonheads and their journalists are dumb for letting this stuff happen while they think it's benign, and then try have a good ranty winge how bad it's now going to be once it's too late and is slapping them in the face.
With the money motorists pay and have paid in the UK we should have a transport system to envy the entire world. Instead you've paid, and will continue to pay through the nose, for what is mostly crap infrastructure designed to make you suffer more and pay more for daring to have a job to go to.
Now the Highways Agency is some pseudo commercial body certain elements may get 'nicer' due to budgetary cycle improvements (not like they couldn't have done this under a public system)... but since it's now a commercial entity they need a profit margin to make it worth while... enter road charging on busy roads!
And no doubt you'll all go vote for Consevatives in a month or so, letting TTIP take a hold and seeing all our roads become run privately, satellite track/charged on top of all the other charges, and they'll probably be no nicer to drive on because all the extra profits will go to support the 'investors' who own the companies that run them.
Thin end of the wedge to total road charging here... on top of existing costs. But a simple ranty article is the best PH can achieve?
How about using your position of influence to actually make a change?
Dave
All this stuff is just a prelude to road charging for congested motorways.
So you pay about 5 times for the same bit of tarmac to get to the job you need to pay all the other taxes (probably ~ 60-70%+ real total taxation on all your financial activity) to support failing services left right and centre.
Smart motorways are not dumb, the general public are dumb for letting their government shaft them dry day in and day out.
Sites like Pistonheads and their journalists are dumb for letting this stuff happen while they think it's benign, and then try have a good ranty winge how bad it's now going to be once it's too late and is slapping them in the face.
With the money motorists pay and have paid in the UK we should have a transport system to envy the entire world. Instead you've paid, and will continue to pay through the nose, for what is mostly crap infrastructure designed to make you suffer more and pay more for daring to have a job to go to.
Now the Highways Agency is some pseudo commercial body certain elements may get 'nicer' due to budgetary cycle improvements (not like they couldn't have done this under a public system)... but since it's now a commercial entity they need a profit margin to make it worth while... enter road charging on busy roads!
And no doubt you'll all go vote for Consevatives in a month or so, letting TTIP take a hold and seeing all our roads become run privately, satellite track/charged on top of all the other charges, and they'll probably be no nicer to drive on because all the extra profits will go to support the 'investors' who own the companies that run them.
Thin end of the wedge to total road charging here... on top of existing costs. But a simple ranty article is the best PH can achieve?
How about using your position of influence to actually make a change?
Dave
Quhet said:
Flipatron said:
Shame the UK cant just man up and build more motorways.
Where would you build them? I can't really think of anywhere where a new motorway would solve everythingPrior to the motorways, some of these took a good deal more freight traffic than today, at higher speeds, but the thought was that motorways would provide sufficient capacity for them to become local, lower speed roads. A good example is the A34 in the Midlands.
There are plenty of places where new roads could be made or existing ones upgraded, but we need a government with sufficient backbone to not cave in to the crusties and NIMBYs.
Coddy85 said:
Not particularly happy with the generic Audi bashing there, but there is a serious topic to discuss.
The problem with most of these is that it entices people to start switching lanes wildly just to make sure they are 2 cars ahead of you when you get back to NSL.
Two cars rather than one, meaning that they have got a bit of space between their rear end and the front of an Audi, maybe after being tailgated by it over the last few miles? The problem with most of these is that it entices people to start switching lanes wildly just to make sure they are 2 cars ahead of you when you get back to NSL.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff