Justin Smith Posted May 8, 2016 Author Share Posted May 8, 2016 (edited) What`s all this guff about "people who breakdown will almost always make it to the emergency refuges", and if they don`t they`ll turn on the 50mph limit "almost instantly" ? On the way back from Leeds today there was a Land Rover Discovery stopped on the side on the (not so) smart M1 motorway just north of Wakefield. He`d got as far over onto the side as he could with two wheels up on the kerb, but the hard shoulder was still being used as a running lane and there was no 50mph limit. We also noticed that the M62 east if the M1 has a genuinely smart motorway with the hard shoulder not routinely used a running lane and a 50mph limit when it is (just like the M42). It seems those travelling to South Yorkshire aren`t worthy of such facilities. But then we know West Yorkshire always has had more money spent on it than South Yorkshire....... Added 20 Aug 16 I only use the motorways on average 2or 3 times a week, yet yesterday we saw another example of a stranded vehicle perched on the side of the motorway where there was no hard shoulder and the limit was still 70mph. It was on the south bound M1 about a mile north of Woodall services. A small van was there, we assume it`d run out of fuel because a few hundred yards further on we saw a chap walking down to Woodall service with a fuel can in his hand. It was lagging it down whilst he was walking with vehicles flying past his right ear at 60 to 70mph, not knowing if his van would be smashed up upon his return ! I felt very sorry for him, though it did occur to me he could have been one of those who support (probably supported......) the idea of 4 lane running at 70mph with no hard shoulder. If that was the case I`m afraid I`d feel rather less sympathy for him ! Added 26 Mar 17 Driving up the M1 today, northbound approaching Junc 35, there was not one, but two stranded vehicles. Admittedly the second one was in the hatched area just beyond the exit slip road, but the first must have been there for a few minutes because the occupants were in the field next to the motorway on their mobile phone. The "strandee" by Junc 35 also had a Highways Agency 4WD with it. Despite the above there was no 50mph limit, i.e 70mph (plus) traffic and no hard shoulder with two vehicles stranded. The above does suggest that it would have been a good idea if the coping stones edging the motorway were made a bit lower with a shallow angle on them, and, where possible, the Armco barriers were made a few yards further back, thus one could get more of ones vehicle off the motorway if necessary. The counter argument being the kerbing helps keep vehicles on the road if the drivers nod off ? Edited April 5, 2017 by Justin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iansheff Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 Just wondered when the M1 road works are complete, will the Tinsley viaduct have it's third lane reinstated or are they going to keep it at two lanes. I have had a look can't see anything, seems a bit silly having a smart motorway going down to two lanes when there used to be three lanes on the viaduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geared Posted October 28, 2016 Share Posted October 28, 2016 yesterday we saw another example of a stranded vehicle perched on the side of the motorway where there was no hard shoulder and the limit was still 70mph. It was on the south bound M1 about a mile north of Woodall services. A small van was there, we assume it`d run out of fuel because a few hundred yards further on we saw a chap walking down to Woodall service with a fuel can in his hand. It was lagging it down whilst he was walking with vehicles flying past his right ear at 60 to 70mph, not knowing if his van would be smashed up upon his return Sorry but if you run out of fuel there you probably deserve your van to be smashed up on your return, he couldn't be more than a couple of miles past the J31 exit. If there weren't any warning signs up it indicates not only did he stop on the motorway, but then didn't phone the police to tell them what he'd done. The Emergency refuge point and the Emergency Telephone is located less than a mile from Woodall Services. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Ralge Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Sorry but if you run out of fuel there you probably deserve your van to be smashed up on your return, he couldn't be more than a couple of miles past the J31 exit. If there weren't any warning signs up it indicates not only did he stop on the motorway, but then didn't phone the police to tell them what he'd done. The Emergency refuge point and the Emergency Telephone is located less than a mile from Woodall Services. That's plain wrong. There's nothing wrong in phoning to alert the authorities but one of the main features of a smart m/w (that has passed you by?) is the cctv coverage of every metre of the m/w - you must have passed the van at the time prior to the Highways Agency spotting it and putting up the "stranded vehicle" sign. The HA suggests this is possible within 20 seconds to 2 minutes of an event. Personally, I wouldn't fancy being anywhere near the stranded vehicle for up to 2 minutes, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted October 29, 2016 Share Posted October 29, 2016 Having travelled a fair bit round our motorways, the "smart" bit on the stretch round us is seriously lacking in signs compared with other places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ihpb Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 I have seen the left lane open during congestion on the M62 and was amazed that the speed limit was 60mph. Someone is going to die soon if they haven't already. Junction 24 and 25 on the M62 are ridiculous with traffic queuing on the motorway for a mile and lorries with a differential speed of 60mph from the left lane to where they thundered past in lane 2. If it is congested then it should be a max speed of 40mph in the left lane. The Tinsley viaduct will remain two lanes because of pollution as far as I know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geared Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 The Tinsley viaduct will remain two lanes because of pollution as far as I know It's a weight restriction isn't it? The viaduct isn't strong enough to carry more traffic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 I have seen the left lane open during congestion on the M62 and was amazed that the speed limit was 60mph. Someone is going to die soon if they haven't already. Junction 24 and 25 on the M62 are ridiculous with traffic queuing on the motorway for a mile and lorries with a differential speed of 60mph from the left lane to where they thundered past in lane 2. If it is congested then it should be a max speed of 40mph in the left lane. The Tinsley viaduct will remain two lanes because of pollution as far as I know How does having the same number of vehicles using 2 lanes reduce the pollution there would be if 3 lanes were in use? Genuine question.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin Smith Posted October 31, 2016 Author Share Posted October 31, 2016 (edited) I don`t know if it`s just co-incidence but we've been seeing a lot more undertaking on the 4 lane (no hard shoulder) M1, some of it is horrendous. I must say I have more sympathy with drivers using the second lane out as their default running lane than I would if there was a hard shoulder on their left. I have considered doing this because I don`t want to run the risk of hitting a stranded car. This could happen if it was dark or it`s hidden by a large vehicle in front etc. At minimum you may have to do an emergency stop (possibly get hit up the rear end) or swerve out into the second lane. On balance I`ve decided to use the inside lane as a default (assuming I can be in it for a reasonable length of time), but, unlike on a conventional motorway with a hard shoulder, I`m not happy about it. Edited October 31, 2016 by Justin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nightrider Posted October 31, 2016 Share Posted October 31, 2016 Dunno..that's why I asked for the stats..how many people killed in live lane breakdown and how many on hard shoulder..? Interesting report here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201617/cmselect/cmtrans/63/63.pdf It mentions a report on the safety implications seen from the scheme on the M25 will not be released until 2017 (when they finish collecting the data). It also mentions (point 31) 28% of RAC members could not make it to one of the emergency refuges when they broke down, and that both the AA and RAC refuse to attend breakdowns in a live lane (even if a red X is present) due to the danger, unless a physical barrier to protect them is put in place. Point 54 mentions a fatality on the M25 thought to be caused by being caught dead in the water in a live lane, because there was no hard shoulder to use. It also mentions DfT officials have justified the increased risk, on the basis that they have reduced risk in other areas so there is no overall increase. The report mentions that it is questionable to increase the risk in one area, just because you reduced it elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now