8 February (Part 5) - Not so Smart Motorways
Every couple of weeks I meet up with some mates so that we can put the world
to rights. Just recently the subject of Smart Motorways has been high on their list of concerns.
I don’t like them, the Motorways that is not the mates, nobody seems to like them. Why would they when 38 people have
been killed while broken down on what used to be the hard shoulder?
The government
is being blamed and rightly so for extending the gap between refuge points from
500 metres to 2,500 metres. That’s more than a mile and a half.
More refuges will help but it is not the complete answer, people will still break down in between.
I have a friend who lives in Norfolk where roads are wide and straight and
largely empty by local standards. His electric car is identical to mine and he tested hitting
the ‘emergency’ Neutral button at 70 m.p.h. and free wheeled for two whole miles but
that won’t work for a tyre blow out and not everyone will remember the Neutral
button. I tested mine once and it has remained untouched ever since.
I have seen suggestions that the old hard shoulder lane should be permanently
limited to 50 m.p.h. which is a two-edged sword. You might be banged up the rear
end at a lower speed but your rolling distance would be a lot less. It might force
faster lorries into Lane 2 which may possibly be a good idea
There is
a petition against the whole idea of Smart Motorways but I have not signed
it so I might not be very popular with the aforesaid mates. (I never sign any petitions; it’s a good way of
having your email address sold on.)
It’s the unthinking speed restrictions that annoy me. I had a towed caravan in
front of me a few weeks ago which was weaving around all over the place at
around 65 m.p.h. I decided to get by in a hurry and
as I drew ahead spotted a camera gantry a few yards on. I glanced at the speedo, 76, and instinctively jumped on the brake.
There was probably no need as I suspect I was doing no more than 73 and less
when I got within camera range, but the sudden slow down could have caused an
accident. I doubt the Highways Agency cares, it’s the revenue that counts.
I asked a road safety expert for an opinion.
Whilst the 38 deaths were not in dispute the other statistics you may have read
about in your newspaper were likely all made up because the Highways Agency
appears not to have the requisite columns on their spreadsheet. They don’t even know
when the restrictions are in place and when they are not making accident
statistics difficult to analyse. The suspicion is that
what statistics there are have come from nothing better than an opinion poll among staff.
I doubt we will see the end of Smart Motorways although I would like to see
more refuges. The best way of achieving that is for all breakdown services to
refuse to attend breakdowns on an unprotected running lane. I believe the AA has already done so.
Meanwhile it remains a fact that Motorways are the safest roads and
restricted speeds and hard shoulders as running lanes has only resulted in
motorists being killed in different ways - but fewer of them overall.
Refuge intervals need addressing but as usual, he who shouts loudest grabs the attention of the authorities.