[AlanHo]

(For the benefit of non-UK readers there is a programme in the UK to convert 3 lane motorways that have emergency hard shoulders, into smart motorways, where at peak times the hard shoulder is used by traffic. This is controlled by overhead gantries displaying when the hard shoulder is open to traffic and the reduced speed limit applicable. Smart motorways have emergency stopping refuges up to a maximum of 1.6 miles apart)


I am getting concerned about the dialogue in the media regarding the danger of stationery cars on the hard shoulder of a smart motorway when it is open to traffic.

Both side of the argument have rightfully pointed out that in the past 5 years a total of 38 people have died in or near their vehicle when stationery on a smart motorway, despite the fact that when the hard shoulder is in use – the speed limit for the motorway is significantly reduced.

They also fail to remind us that in a typical year, over 100 are killed on a motorway which has not yet been made smart, in an accident with a stationary vehicle on the hard shoulder. About 75% of which have remained in or about their vehicle and have not, as advised, evacuated the vehicle and waited the other side of the safety barrier.

Neither are we reminded that there are hundreds (if not thousands) of miles of A roads which have dual carriageway without hard shoulders, safety barriers on the left, or regular refuges, that retain the 70 mph speed limit. I cannot find any information about deaths on these roads involving stationary vehicles. My bet is there are plenty. I can’t recall any public furore about such A roads and have yet to see any mention of the anomaly in the recent furore.

The motorway nearest to my home is the M42 which was a traffic gridlock nightmare before it was made into a smart motorway several years ago and serious accidents were daily. It now has less  accidents and has improved traffic flow at peak times when the hard shoulder is open.

I can only conclude that whilst deaths associated with stationary cars on smart shoulders is regrettable – it is the price we pay for the overall reduction in deaths on motorways. If it was made an offence to stay in the vehicle, and people complied, the death rate would be minimal.

I just wish the present media frenzy took a more clinical and balanced view and that the government don’t make a hasty decision either way.

The trend over the past 10 years has been government’s knee jerk response to the loudest clarion call by vociferous minorities under the illusion it is popular opinion. “Popular opinion is stronger than the truth" appears to be the foundation stone of both politics and journalism. How else do intelligent psychopaths (Hitler/Trump/Blair/Bush et al) get into power.

Unfortunately, the apathy of too many allows the minority to tug them along by the nose. The truth takes effort. We blame politicians and journalists but we should really be looking in the mirror and asking ourselves "Why are we allowing this to happen........everyday of our lives".

Socrates (in the alleged home of democracy), was asked why he didn't run for political office in Athens. "Because honesty and politics don't mix", was his reply. No surprise then that the most honest man in Athens was forced to drink hemlock because he was seen to be "corrupting the youth of Athens".

Not much has changed – has it?

[Greyhound]

The tabloid press and even some UK broadcasters have jumped on the back of some sad cases where stationary vehicles on nearside lane have been run into with fatal consequences. This when the nearside lane (previously hard-shoulder) has been set as a running lane by Highways England.
Even when the lane is losed with red "X" sign, how many people do you see disregarding those.
Alan is lucky. The M42 was the trial site for "Smart Motorways" and I believe has higher density of refuges and equipment.

Stopping on the Motorway hard shoulder is recognised as a serious health and safety risk for highway maintenance workers. There have been fatalities and near misses, even when stopping a high viz vehicle with hazard lamps on a hard shoulder. You will see a crash cushion vehicle placed upstream of the work site to protect the operatives for good reason.

If you are unfortunate to breakdown on a Motorway hard shoulder or lane 1, get out on passenger side and get over the armco barrier. Do not sit in the vehicle or stand around it. It is too dangerous, believe me.

[Lorian]

I drive (oh drove - i dont fly anymore) up the M5 and the M42 every week.

The M42 smart motorway i never put a second thought too - you could always see a refuge, easy to access.

The M5 stretch I didn't have to live with for so long - but my goodness you need to be doing some speed when something goes wrong to make it to a refuge - I think they are 2Km apart in places?

I googled it

"On all lane running sections, the spacing of emergency refuge
areas means that at a speed of 60 miles per hour drivers will
pass one of them roughly every 90 seconds; this is approximately
equal to the spacing of lay-bys on sections of A-road with no
hard shoulder. The average spacing of emergency refuge areas
on this scheme is 1970m. "

90 seconds is a long time when things go wrong.

[AlanHo]

Lorian - fair enough. But what about doing 70 mph on a dual carriageway A road and have a breakdown. You aint gonna find a refuge there.

[wbm00]

These "all lane running" motorways should have been combined with the technology (that is now being rolled out) to detect a stopped vehicle and automatically switch on upstream warning signs. It can take Highways England up to 15 minutes to see a stopped vehicle via a camera and manually activate a warning sign.

The M5 south of Birmingham could quite feasibly had its left lane closed with a red X on the gantry signs during hours of darkness, given that the stretch is unlit and a stopped vehicle that may not be lit, may only be seen in lane 1 when it is too late. Traffic is never severe here. Agree with Alan on the M42 which has seen better flow since conversion to a smart motorway.

[Steve117]

Not much has changed – has it?

[/u]

There is the saying that the more things change, the more they stay the same. Also when has the media ever neutrally reported something?

Regarding the refuges, in an emergency situation even 1,6 miles can seem a very long distance.

I agree with AlanHo, it should really be made illegal to stay in the car.

[Greyhound]

Here is one hard shoulder near-miss video I have seen before and which has stuck in my mind:
Hard Shoulder near miss, stay safe - YouTube

[AlanHo]

And that video was not on a smart motorway.

[Lorian]

And that video was not on a smart motorway.

yeah, lucky, otherwise it could have been two dead with a huge collision.

[Greyhound]

FYI. Official statement re safety on Smart Motorways from September 2019:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/safety-on-smart-motorways

I guess the public do not generally read this, only as interpreted by the media.

[AlanHo]

My crude research produced the following.

There are 2300 miles of motorways in the UK including smart motorways
There are 100 deaths per year on motorways
Hence deaths per 100 miles = 4.2 per year

There are 400 miles of smart motorways in the UK
There have been 38 deaths on smart motorways in 5 years = 7.6 deaths per year.
Hence deaths per 100 miles = 1.9 per year

It seems to me that smart motorways are reducing the overall death rate which would come down even further if better monitoring of stationary vehicles on all motorways was improved and people would evacuate their stationary vehicles and get to the other side of the safety barrier - even in smart refuges

[Shambles]

An interesting development...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-56030027

Smart motorways: Highways England referred to CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] over M1 death

[AlanHo]

The Highways Agency advice for when you break-down on a motorway, is to evacuate your vehicle and get well behind the safety barriers.

I no longer have a copy - but I vaguely remember that the Highway Code does not give any advice about what to do if you are forced to stop on a motorway or even mention smart motorways.

That unfortunate woman was out of the car - but waiting in front of it - and was hit by her own car when it was rammed from behind.

I imagine the lawyers will be having an interesting tussle in Court.