Are smart motorways smart

[Wully]

First time I went to America I thought the laws of the road were mad but after visiting for a few years and getting used to the overtaking or undertaking on motorways it seems to let the traffic flow better. We have too many tubes sitting in middle lane doing between 40 50 miles an hour and if you come up on the inside lane at 55 you have to move right across to fast lane to pass these muppets I’ve noticed this more in England than in Scotland drivers doddering along in middle the lane with no consideration or thought of what’s going on around them. The undertaking thing definitely seems to help the traffic flow.

 

[mark61]

First time I went to America I thought the laws of the road were mad but after visiting for a few years and getting used to the overtaking or undertaking on motorways it seems to let the traffic flow better. We have too many tubes sitting in middle lane doing between 40 50 miles an hour and if you come up on the inside lane at 55 you have to move right across to fast lane to pass these muppets I’ve noticed this more in England than in Scotland drivers doddering along in middle the lane with no consideration or thought of what’s going on around them. The undertaking thing definitely seems to help the traffic flow.

Undertaking is allowed in some situations according to highway code.

 

[Trotter]

Undertaking is allowed in some situations according to highway code.

According to the RAC , it’s not illegal, but would be considered as “ careless driving “ in court.

 

[RichardHelen262]

Undertaking is allowed in some situations according to highway code.

It wasn’t allowed by the police when I got done for it about 15 years ago on the m1, I was only doing about 60 mph in the middle lane overtaking trucks in the left hand lane when I came across a car in the third lane that was only doing about 50mph so I just carried on at my speed in my lane undertaking him, next thing their was a plain silver BMW with blue lights telling me to pull over onto the hard shoulder, when I pointed out that the car in the third lane was only doing about 50 he agreed that the driver was wrong for driving so slow in the third lane, but it was no excuse for me to undertake.
3 points and a £60 fine I got the message

 

[mark61]

According to the RAC , it’s not illegal, but would be considered as “ careless driving “ in court.

I think they use a term like "Undertaking recklessly".

 

[Trotter]

I’ve only ever been done for speeding. Last time was 33 mph. £60 and 2 hours listening to some jobs worth. So I’m no expert on traffic law. I do think that there’s a bit difference between Careless and Reckless

 

[mark61]

It wasn’t allowed by the police when I got done for it about 15 years ago on the m1, I was only doing about 60 mph in the middle lane overtaking trucks in the left hand lane when I came across a car in the third lane that was only doing about 50mph so I just carried on at my speed in my lane undertaking him, next thing their was a plain silver BMW with blue lights telling me to pull over onto the hard shoulder, when I pointed out that the car in the third lane was only doing about 50 he agreed that the driver was wrong for driving so slow in the third lane, but it was no excuse for me to undertake.
3 points and a £60 fine I got the message

I was always under the impression it was not allowed, and pretty sure that was the case when I started driving.. Obviously barring when the M ways are very congested.

It is allowed now though, in certain circumstances, and has been for a fair few years.

I don't make the rules, I just read them.

 

[RichardHelen262]

I was always under the impression it was not allowed, and pretty sure that was the case when I started driving.. Obviously barring when the M ways are very congested.

It is allowed now though, in certain circumstances, and has been for a fair few years.

I don't make the rules, I just read them.

it isn’t allowed but when you have trucks In the left lane doing 55mph and some nob in the third lane doing 50mph but a clear middle lane and your doing 60mph what are you supposed to do ?

 

[TissyD]

The original plan was to have refuges at 500 yard intervals. It is usually possible to nurse an ill vehicle that far to safety, not least because you can see the refuge. When they decided that the distance was going to be 1.5 miles then things are very different.

When we broke down it was the gearbox ceased and if I hadn't banged the clutch in quick we would gone from 50to zero in a matter of yards.

 

[mark61]

it isn’t allowed but when you have trucks In the left lane doing 55mph and some nob in the third lane doing 50mph but a clear middle lane and your doing 60mph what are you supposed to do ?

Wait, in that case.
or do what the Germans do.

 

[TissyD]

In your scenario, no matter what type of motorway you’re on, you’re screwed.
And a breakdown, as opposed to a collision, doesn’t just happen. You’ll usually have a bit of notice. Time enough to pull over, and possibly reach the refuge. Not possible in nose to tail traffic. I accept, but then surrounding traffic would see the problem. These fatalities, I understand, occur when , folks have been stopped for a little while, and then someone with their thumb up their bum plows into them. If you get to the refuge, or out of, and away from the vehicle , you’ll ensure your safety. Again, I accept there’s a time factor here.
Just random thourghs.

Unfortunately there was no,previous warning it literally went bang. If there had been hard shoulder I could have at least rolled onto it. They insisted that motorways had hard shoulders when the M1 had First opened and a lorry driver was killed on the First night.

 

[Fisherman]

In your scenario, no matter what type of motorway you’re on, you’re screwed.
And a breakdown, as opposed to a collision, doesn’t just happen. You’ll usually have a bit of notice.

Sorry Trotter but that is not the case, three times in the past 20 years I have had sudden problems on roads with absolutely no warning. Twice on motorways and once on the A80 between Glasgow and Cumbernauld. Two of the incidents involved tyres blowing out and loss of control. But my worse experience was on the M8 eastbound whilst I was heading for Hamilton. My engine literally blew up leading to a loss of power, vision as the smoke blinded me, I also lost power for brakes and power steering. My car then needed a new engine and gearbox. It turned out that 6 weeks earlier I had went through a puddle and without knowing it I had hydrauliced (their term) my engine. This damaged a con rod which gave way whilst I was doing 70mph on the outside lane whilst overtaking. I was fortunate the other drivers seen what had happened and kept out of my road whilst I tried to get to the hard shoulder. When I did get there at approx 40-50 mph I tried to break but I had lost all hydraulic power. I gradually applied the handbrake and brought my car to a stop. At this point I was still blinded with the smoke coming from the engine.

 

[Trotter]

In your scenario, no matter what type of motorway you’re on, you’re screwed.
And a breakdown, as opposed to a collision, doesn’t just happen. You’ll usually have a bit of notice. Time enough to pull over, and possibly reach the refuge. Not possible in nose to tail traffic. I accept, but then surrounding traffic would see the problem. These fatalities, I understand, occur when , folks have been stopped for a little while, and then someone with their thumb up their bum plows into them. If you get to the refuge, or out of, and away from the vehicle , you’ll ensure your safety. Again, I accept there’s a time factor here.
Just random thourghs.

Should I have underlined the word USUALLY

 

[Fisherman]

Should I have underlined the word USUALLY

Trotter I was not having a go, just training to put forward a POV.
I noted your usually, but I have not found in my experience that I usually have had no notice when things are about to go wrong. They have all came about suddenly with no warning whatsoever. Smart motorways are in my honest opinion dangerous that’s why I started this thread to debate them.

 

[Fisherman]

Trotter I spent most of my working life in the fire service and sadly I witnessed some horrible accidents, and many of them on our motorway system. But fortunately I never had to deal with “smart motorways “, the thought of having to try to get to people with no hard shoulder in what would become a traffic jam scares me. These people in these accidents had no idea that they would end up dead, or in hospital when they stepped into their vehicles at the start of their journeys.

 

[mark61]

I think I've only broken down and had to use the hard shoulder once in about 20 years. You lot need to maintain your vehicles better and stop buying dodgy tyres,

I know exactly what's going to happen now, next time I'm on an M way.

 

[QFour]

They said that they would be monitored so that they can change the lane signs to warn drivers BUT then Highways England admits that they are not always monitored. Have a look HERE If they are not monitored and something goes wrong what are you supposed to do if you finish up in a live lane. Even the AA and RAC don't want to work in them. Don't blame them really. Risk assessment would fail for a start.

Having ventured out the other day I was amazed how the lorries have taken over the first two lanes. Cars now seem to drive in the outer two lanes and don't move over.

 

[Trotter]

Please don't think I'm a fan of Smart Motorways. I'm not.
But I can see the need for them, or rather something like them. I believe we live in the most populated country in Europe. We are still in Europe? We certainly have more vehicles per sq km. than elsewhere.
Policed, and used properly they should work. I remember hearing a recording of a motorist talking to the Emergency service, begging for help, immediately before impact. That's the moment I knew that I, and the DOT bean counters had got it wrong.
AFAIK, the only answers to the current traffic problems are:- , Smart motorways, more motorways, less traffic or longer grid lock of our roads.
I'm glad it's not me who has to decide.

 

[Fisherman]

Please don't think I'm a fan of Smart Motorways. I'm not.
But I can see the need for them, or rather something like them. I believe we live in the most populated country in Europe. We are still in Europe? We certainly have more vehicles per sq km. than elsewhere.
Policed, and used properly they should work. I remember hearing a recording of a motorist talking to the Emergency service, begging for help, immediately before impact. That's the moment I knew that I, and the DOT bean counters had got it wrong.
AFAIK, the only answers to the current traffic problems are:- , Smart motorways, more motorways, less traffic or longer grid lock of our roads.
I'm glad it's not me who has to decide.

I agree Trotter, fortunately in Scotland we don’t have your type of smart motorways, we don’t have the same problems you have in England, which is the most densely populated country in Europe. For me smart motorways rely on everyone doing the right thing, and everything running perfect, there is no latitude for human error. Also most accidents and breakdowns occur with very little or no warning, making it impossible in most cases to take the actions required to mitigate as much as possible any consequences. And I also post on a fire service forum, and some of the comments on there are scary. Bottom line they are anything but smart, and they have and will cost lives. The question is are the risks and loss of life acceptable for the benefits they offer in terms of reducing congestion. I think not, but others may disagree. But what angers me is I reckon the term smart motorways is deliberately misleading and for obvious reasons.

 

[Trotter]

I agree Trotter, fortunately in Scotland we don’t have your type of smart motorways, we don’t have the same problems you have in England, which is the most densely populated country in Europe. For me smart motorways rely on everyone doing the right thing, and everything running perfect, there is no latitude for human error. Also most accidents and breakdowns occur with very little or no warning, making it impossible in most cases to take the actions required to mitigate as much as possible any consequences. And I also post on a fire service forum, and some of the comments on there are scary. Bottom line they are anything but smart, and they have and will cost lives. The question is are the risks and loss of life acceptable for the benefits they offer in terms of reducing congestion. I think not, but others may disagree. But what angers me is I reckon the term smart motorways is deliberately misleading and for obvious reasons.

I agree wholeheartedly. Your point about risks carry the most weight. . Someone will have to make that decision.