[Lily]

Hello everyone!

We do love a bit of a debate here in the RAC Community and smart motorways are quite controversial (to say the least!).

Smart motorways were introduced to reduce congestion and improve journey times, but from the very start, many drivers have had concerns, particularly around safety. Turning the hard shoulder into a live lane sounds good when you are in a hurry, but what happens if you break down? Where do you stop?

While the Department for Transport says these schemes increase capacity and reduce congestion, public opinion remains divided. In fact, plans for new smart motorways were scrapped in 2023. Out of16 smart motorway schemes, only 3 are on track to meet their goals.

What do you ladies and gents think? Have smart motorways improved your driving experience or made it worse? or not change at all?

Should we scrap smart motorways altogether?

[Rolebama]

I went to Birmingham just after they opened the hard shoulder as a live lane. Unfortunately, I left during the evening, in winter, so dark, in heavy rain to come home. So there we are in stop-start traffic with all these idiots doing 70mph down the hard shoulder, in reduced visibility, until we come to the next slip rad where they all pull into the traffic amidst a cacophony of horns. That was the M42. I lost all interest in going ever again to Birmingham.
As to the M3, why is it necessary to have a seemingly permanent 50mph speed limit at all times of the day? Purely to raise revenue, maybe?
Those are the only 2 I have used, and I hate them.

[olduser]

They are more dangerous than a normal motorway, end of message, and should have been end of idea.
Yes broken-down vehicles can be dealt with, if the cameras are working and cover that spot, and if the operators are not being distracted by other events.
What of the driver of the broken down vehicle, how do they know they have been seen, how long will assistance be, had they better move to somewhere safer?

No, it's just asking for trouble.

[Beelzebub]

The hard shoulder on a "normal" motorway is a very dangerous place. I have had to use them on at least six occasions, and it is not an experience I'd recommend.

Replacing them with something even more dangerous beggars belief.

[Santa]

Originally Posted by Rolebama

I went to Birmingham just after they opened the hard shoulder as a live lane. Unfortunately, I left during the evening, in winter, so dark, in heavy rain to come home. So there we are in stop-start traffic with all these idiots doing 70mph down the hard shoulder, in reduced visibility, until we come to the next slip rad where they all pull into the traffic amidst a cacophony of horns. That was the M42.

At that time I was driving a truck for a living. I had a regular afternoon collection that meant driving down the M42 at around 5pm every day. The works required to create the smart motorway took a long time and caused much congestion, so when it was finished, it was a tremendous benefit.

For a long time after it was opened, I often found that while lanes 2, 3, and 4 were jammed, lane 1 (the hard shouder) was empty. This meant that I would cruise happily past the jam. Yes, I did have to change lanes at junctions but never had any problem finding a gap.

My main problem was that as I drove along an empty lane, I had to keep a sharp eye out for cars that suddenly pulled across in front of me without warning.

Whenever the hard shoulder was used as a lane, there was always a 50mph limit in operation.

I drove down the M42 this afternoon, and there were only three lanes in use as traffic was light.

[Lily]

@Rolebama this is a classic joke about Birmingham, but there's no good reason to go there! 😂 even Queen Victoria thought so, apparently.

Now, I lived there for a year (the longest year of my life) and while not a fan, it has some charm here and there.

I completely get why you are not a fan of smart motorways after your experience going to Brum. 😅

@Beelzebub We had to stop once because of a minor family emergency, and it was terrifying. My husband stepped out of the car just as around 20 lorries thundered past. I told him, “Never again!” Unless it’s absolutely unavoidable, we’re not doing that again.

Do you remember why you had to stop?

@Santa "My main problem was that as I drove along an empty lane, I had to keep a sharp eye out for cars that suddenly pulled across in front of me without warning."

Did you see anyone trying to stop on the hard shoulder?

Thanks for sharing your experience, as a lorry driver you are truly an expert.

[Beelzebub]

Originally Posted by Lily

@Beelzebub We had to stop once because of a minor family emergency, and it was terrifying. My husband stepped out of the car just as around 20 lorries thundered past. I told him, “Never again!” Unless it’s absolutely unavoidable, we’re not doing that again.

Do you remember why you had to stop?

The ones I recall were

1. Hit by a part of an exhaust system falling from an HGV, on the M^, which took out my front LH wheel. Had to get from lane 3 to the hard shoulder on three wheels, which was interestin.

2. Total engine failure. Again, in lane 3 (M1)

3. Puncture (M42)

4. Tyre blow-out. (M5)

All in newish well-maintained company cars.

[TC1474]

People may not believe this but the KSI rate on the new smart Motorways is down in many regions by as much as 86% for a whole number of reasons which will take too long here to explain, but suffice to say many of my former colleagues love them as it has saved so much carnage and misery.

The issue lies not with the new smart motorway's but the originals such as the M42 in Birmingham where the hard shoulder doubles up as a running lane and the signing has been known to cause confusion meaning some people use the shoulder as a running lane whilst others are broken down.

On new smart Motorways much of the problem does not exist because of technology and how it is monitored, the mandatory speed limits that are put in place alongside the lane closure up to 5 miles before the hazard or obstruction and of course the better use of CCTV and speed cameras.

On top of which, 90% of drivers have no idea how to drive on a Motorway. My brother in law is an ADi and gets paid to take learners onto the Motorway. I had to spend 2 days with him explaining, teaching and showing him how a Motorway should be driven and he is supposed to be the font of all knowledge to the learners and inexperienced.

Much of the bad reputation comes from a woman who slated the Smart Motorways after her husband was killed on a SM and it was all the fault of the SM.

What she did not mention was that her brilliantly clever husband suffered a puncture, but instead of rolling over to lane 1 and stopping, he stopped in lane 4 against the central barrier, got out and proceeded to change his rear nearside wheel. He got wiped out, but according to his wife that was not hubby's fault it was all down to the SM even though the result would have been the same on any motorway. Unfortunately the press latched on, did not bother to check facts and they and the politicians all jumped on the bandwagon.

The failed to recognise that on a SM, speed limits are dropped to a mandatory 50 or lower, so in the unlikely event of an impact the damage will be less severe, early warnings get traffic moving over sooner and unlike on a normal motorway where the speed limit using the matrix is not enforceable (except in some cases where they can be booked for careless or dangerous) and you do not get pedestrians being sucked in by the vortexes that can be considerable (and I have seen many a pedestrian splattered down the carriageway), so the number of KSi is seriously reduced in the same way we used to prevent major pile ups in pea souper fogs back in the day when we used to run fog convoys with cars being led at a steady speed just a few feet apart so any impacts were minimal rather than catastrophic collisions.

You cannot prevent crashes or catastrophic collisions 100% anywhere, you never will, and there always going to be exceptions to every rule. I have even had a vehicle drive through a lane closure and plough into the back of my patrol car all lit up like a Xmas tree to the point it was hit so hard only one headlight was salvageable. The drivers excuse (despite being dark, the patrol car was visible from a mile and a half away and all the signs flashing? He didn't see us! 🙄

So to those who are opposed to Smart Motorways, I would suggest doing a bit of research before slagging them off.

[Lily]

@Beelzebub 🤯 the first one! Have you watched the movie Final Destination? That's one of my worst fears.

Why always in lane 3 😟 that's so hard to navigate

[Lily]

@TC1474 hey there! So good to see you. 😊 Love how you bring a totally different perspective to this discussion, and your experience as an officer is invaluable.Thanks for explaining why you think (base on your experience) SMs are actually safer.


"On top of which, 90% of drivers have no idea how to drive on a Motorway. My brother in law is an ADi and gets paid to take learners onto the Motorway. I had to spend 2 days with him explaining, teaching and showing him how a Motorway should be driven and he is supposed to be the font of all knowledge to the learners and inexperienced."

My conclusion is that a few more educational campaigns are needed to ensure the general public can use them safely.

I did a bit of a research and this campaign took place in 2021:

I also Googled the case you mentioned (or maybe I found a different one), the two guys losing their lives. Such a terrible loss. The lorry driver was jailed as well. 😥

Hey, if someone who's learning to drive is reading our discussion, here's a couple of resources I found useful, it explains what to do in case you need to stop while driving on a smart motorway or how to drive on them:

Another one, even more detailed:

So, I imagine your colleagues would rather keep them?

[Drivingforfun]

The impression I get is they're a good idea, if people used them properly. For example, reading the signs, or not ignoring the red "X" signs above the lanes.

I think it's accurate to say they've failed but I wonder who's more daft ... the general public for not being able to follow simple instructions, or the authorities who trusted that the general public would be able to follow simple instructions? 😆

[Nick]

There's also the techonology element here - neither technology nor humans are infallible, so when something relies on technology as these smart motoroways do then there are unfortunately going to be consequences. We have a stretch of Smart Motorway near me on the M62 and a couple of years ago the technology failed for a month.

It's also worth pointing out, as not everyone realises, that there are three types of Smart Motorway:

• Controlled Motorway - adding variable and mandatory speed limits to a conventional motorway, along with overhead warning signs. Maintains a permanent hard shoulder.
• ALR Motorways permanently convert the hard shoulder to a running lane and have emergency refuge areas
• Dynamic Hard Shoulder (DHS) Motorways convert the hard shoulder selectively, when the speed limit is lower and warning signs are in use to guide motorists

[Rolebama]

For the first two years of being in use, the M25 was rated as the most dangerous motorway in the country. The reason being that there were, apparently more deaths, serious injuries and other incidents than all other motorways combined.
It is now plugged as one of the safest roads in the country. Simply because there are less deaths, serious injuries and other incidents per mile travelled on it. Bearing in mind that most of those miles are in stop-start rush hours.

[Rolebama]

Most of the negative incidents I encountered were whilst working for the AA as I spent most of my time on motorways. Non-work related incidents included: Being overtaken by a Jaguar on its roof going backwards on the M40, being overtaken by a roof rack that came adrift on the M23, being 'launched into the air' by hitting a girder fallen from a lorry, (it dug into the road surface and acted as a ramp) that was M25.
I have had 2 punctures on the M25. On both occasions it was in lane 3, but I did manage to get safely onto the grass behind the hard shoulder. (On both occasions it was an offside rear.) I have, luckily, not been involved in multi car collisions caused by trailers coming adrift in front of me, or caused by poor visibility in fog.
On the majority of occasions listed above I was travelling at 70mph, except for fog incidents where I was travelling at various speeds relevant.

[olduser]

Reinforcement of the argument, society accepts a level of 'incidents' (life threatening) in exchange for convenience.
Actually that infers a rational choice, which is far from the truth, we got our first motorway because other country's had something similar and we didn't, interestingly at first with no upper speed limit, so we got the convenience first followed by the acceptance that people got injured or killed after.
Cars of that era, were not designed for sustained speed, this tended to keep speeds down at first.

When speed limits were brought in they were temporary introduced as a means of reducing fuel consumption.
These caused bunching, increasing the risk of multiple vehicle crashes.

From what I can remember, prior to speed limits traffic tended to be spread out along the motorway, the only bunching would be because of a restriction, say two lorries passing, causing faster traffic to wait but these tended to clear after the lorries had finished their competition.
As the quicker traffic settled back into their differing cruising speeds but of course the density of traffic was lower.

[Santa]

It's an interesting fact that reducing the speed limit on crowded motorways can actually reduce journey times.

Contrary to concerns, studies show that reducing speed limits does not significantly impact travel times. In fact, research in Switzerland found that 30km/h limits improved overall traffic efficiency by reducing stop-and-go congestion. France’s decision to lower the speed limit from 90km/h to 80km/h on some two-lane rural roads faced backlash from drivers fearing longer journeys. However, data shows the actual impact was minimal – to lose five minutes, a driver would need to cover 300km. Studies consistently show that drivers overestimate both the time lost due to lower speed limits and the gains from speeding.

Auto advice: How lowering speed limits on the roads saves lives without increasing journey time | Irish Independent