Well not entirely, often it takes a ksi incident before their licence is withdrawn, so more lose,win,win.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Proposed abandonment of Smart Motorways
- Thread starter Bletchleyite
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Good point, though turning the cameras on set to 0mph in "red X" lanes and prosecuting those who pass them (with a "common sense" filter to avoid fining people who on the photograph, assuming they take one, couldn't have moved over and did move over straight after) would be an excellent idea to give such people a kick.
bramling
Veteran Member
I agree. It won’t happen though - “my car is my lifeline” would be heard all too frequently.
The answer to that should be "the way you drive it could be the 'deathline' of others!"
Techniquest
Veteran Member
Yes! Thoroughly agree with that view and the one previously about taking licences away. I am a bit biased as a non-driver (there's almost no point, as my place of work is 11-12 minutes away by foot. By car, apart from early mornings, it would take on average 7 minutes) of course, but it would cut down on the amount of foolish drivers who cut across pedestrian crossings when it's on green for me and not the drivers for example. Or those who seem to not believe in using indicators, or those who drive at speed even on very wet roads sending water everywhere including all over the pavements. I'm sure I could think of plenty more examples of drivers who take the redundant waters...
My city does have a tendancy to create traffic problems with seemingly no cause that take hours to fix, so the less foolish drivers on the road the better as far as I'm concerned. I'd love to see some people lose their licence!
'It's my lifeline!' would fall on deaf ears here. I'd better stop before I get carried away!
I find the plea pathetic as well. Those whose work is dependent on the use of a motor vehicle are not entitled to leniency that isn't granted to others, indeed, if their dependence is so important to them, it is encumbered on them to be more cautious when on the road. If not driving jeopardises their employment, it should be regarded as an act of stupidity, not an excuse for clemency.
dcsprior
Member
Well yes, but... you should surely design your signage to be as easily understood as posssible, and I don't think the red "X" is the clearest and most unambiguous symbol that could've been choosen, I would have gone with a no-entry sign (seeing as the displays seem to be capable of both red and white, this should've been doable)
Back to the point of smart motorways themselves, I'm really not a fan. It's bad enough having to slow down for traffic on the road, but it's really infuriating having to slow down well in advance of the traffic, so that the extent to which you're delayed is far worse.
If correct, this seems daft. On a normal motorway, a vehicle in the hard shoulder wouldn't result in lane 1 being closed; so on a smart motorway a vehicle stopped (wholly) in lane 1 should not result in lane 2 being closed.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Personally I always move to lane 2 to pass someone on the hard shoulder if it's safe to do so. There is nothing to be gained by shooting past 6 inches away from their ear. I get quite angry when people see this as an opportunity to make an extremely dangerous undertake rather than moving to lane 3 to pass.
So yes, I think it is a good idea to do that given how many collisions involving stationary vehicles there are.
underbank
Established Member
I agree, but it's also stupid to have a 40mph limit shown on a gantry when the actual traffic speed is 5-10mph which is the norm around Manchester. What's even worse is where there are 4 lanes, 2 going left and 2 going right, the two right are at a standstill with 40mph limit shown, but the two left are shown as clear/national speed limit with traffic passing at 70+ mph which is severely dangerous - surely the two left lanes, although clear, should have speed restriction too, to reduce the risks of cars moving between lanes 2 and 3 (and vice versa) where there's a speed differential of 60+ mph which is of course very high risk of collisions, especially cars speeding to the front of the queue at 70mph then stopping abruptly to try to force themselves into lane 3 from lane 2, likely to be rear ended by cars at 70mph behind them in lane 2 going at that speed because the overhead gantry is showing clear/national speed limit!
And as for the huge "info" screens - they're never any use. Yes, they tell you there's congestion ahead, or slow traffic between jcts 12-16, but what actually use is that when the traffic is already at a snail's pace and they're not giving you any alternative route information?
The Manchester smart motorway is about as much use as a chocolate fireguard and there isn't even the benefit of using the hard shoulder.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I would agree that all lanes on a contiguous carriageway (i.e. one with no physical barrier in place between the two parts) should show the same limit, and similarly that a queue on a slip lane near the carriageway should invoke a 40 on the main carriageway.
One thing that works is the variable speed limits. On the northern part of the M25 traffic is far less likely to come to a halt. Pootling along at 50 can be frustrating but it is better than charging up to a traffic jam and hitting the hazzard lights in case the guy behind isn't as observant as you.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I was using the M25 daily during the period when it wasn't present, then during the works, then for a while after implementation. There was a significant improvement, and that is a section without hard shoulder running.
That is no excuse at all. How long do you think a red X or wig-wags have been in the Highway Code? For Motorways it says
1988 is a long time ago, and if a driver hasn't twigged what it means yet then they definitely are not fit to drive.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
No, that system works because its design, implementation, maintenance and legal framework is massively better than MK. The prohibition even has some exceptions so some people can bike on the road but few do unless they must (due to bikeway width restrictions or similar) because the bikeways are so good. If you think MK is anything like that, then your observation skills are poor and maybe you should not be licensed to drive, smart motorway or not! Mk is third grade Danish maybe. Not Dutch.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
MK is very good for the UK, and as a result you do see a significant amount of utility cycling. But the point stands - walking all over the grid roads is dangerous and totally unnecessary, and only happens because of a (completely incorrect) perception that there's a criminal hiding under every underpass when the crime statistics simply do not bear that out.
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Here red wig wags are in the 1968 Highway Code https://normandyhistorians.co.uk/hwc/1968hwc/p15.html
There can be no excuse for being 50 years behind the law!
ashkeba
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2019
- Messages
- 2,171
Part of that is bad design with too many having blind corners on entry and exit. Another part is lack of visible policing or enforcement against anti social behavior - the same thing that hinders Smart Motorways.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
There is almost no ASB on the Redways. It's 99% perception. Most of the ASB occurs in the places it does in other towns e.g. parades of shops.
If you move to the 2nd lane because you have seen them, you have seen them anyway so you are not going to collide with them anyway.
A more realistic danger is someone getting out of an offside door and stepping out. I do pull out to the outer edge of the inner lane but would not go into lane 2 unless there were something funny going on with the parked vehicle (eg smoke, loose children, or someone acting in headless chicken mode). Even then probably not enough to let someone undertake me.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I meant more to make their experience less fearful.
tsr
Established Member
Agreed for the north and north west side, which have recently been OK when I've driven them at all sorts of times of day. On the other hand, the variable speed limits on the south west side of the M25 are sadly utterly useless and overwhelmed by almost anything.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
For clarity it was the north west side, specifically between MK (M1) and Slough (M4).
I disagree. The variable speed keeps things trundling along much more smoothly than the previous stop start, and also encourages much better use of all lanes rather than Lane 4 being a tailgating queue with the other three much sparser.
Tom B
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Jul 2005
- Messages
- 4,602
I agree, far too many motorists are ignorant of the need to look after their vehicle. Perhaps, since most cars no longer need regular adjustment of e.g. c/b points etc, people think they need not open the bonnet at all until it stops working!
I failed an MoT earlier this year and, speaking to the tester afterwards, said I was embarrassed to have done so. He pointed out that the failure was only detectable with the apparatus in the VTS, and reeled off a list of things that people presented cars for test with - obvious failures such as wipers, lamps, tyres etc which routine checks would have picked up and which, clearly, had been neglected for some time.
A red cross? Red is almost exclusively a danger colour!
This section, as well as across to South Mimms, does seem to be reasonable. The Heathrow area, on the odd occasion that I have had the misfortune of using it, has congestion but that's not related to the smart motorway system, just over use!
Which makes it utterly bonkers to be considering increasing the traffic using Heathrow!
They claim to be able to build a third runway and increase the number of passengers dramatically without increasing airport related road traffic.
and there will be no more noise or pollution either because planes will magically have got quieter and more fuel-efficient...
I haven't seen a name for it but I have come across people who simply don't grasp that an icon or pictogram can have an inherent meaning. So just because the red X on an LUL ticket gate means that it is closed doesn't imply that a red X over a motorway lane means the same thing.
(The case that made me realise this was explaining a phone to somebody who just didn't see that a button with a picture of a phone "on the hook" coloured "red for stop" automatically meant that you should press it to end the call)
Greybeard33
Established Member
A significant proportion of drivers have red-green colour blindness, which makes red a dubious choice for the danger colour. Red and green traffic signals can usually be distinguished by their relative vertical position, but this does not apply to overhead signs.
People with this condition are barred from becoming train drivers but not from holding a driving licence.
Distinguishing red from green in isolation (like seeing a colour light signal at night, or a distinguishing between a ship's red and green navigation lights) might be a problem, (depending on the degree of impairment) but being completely unable to see a big red X and flashing lights would probably mean that someone was too blind to be allowed to drive at all!
- Status