Dissertation survey

[Horse]

From camera location, to the hatching separating slip road from main carriageway / start of bend is about 60 metres.

... there shouldn't be any reaction time as you're anticipating it. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.

Ok, now put yourself in the position of:
- not knowing where the exit slip is
- finding the direction sign 50m after the 200m sign
- two lanes of 70mph traffic approaching from behind
- getting into the slip and being faced with a tight, blind bend, with a steel barrier as an 'incentive'
- only braking firmly when you're completely off the main carriageway
- and for fun, try it in the dark too

I used it occasionally. As well as trying to get speed off, I'll be selecting a gear, then back on the drive, all before the bend. That takes time and distance too.

But you don't have to take my word that it's awkward.

If there's another driving day at Tot Hill, it would be a 20 minutes or so diversion to try it out

[Horse]

For reference, the centreline markings are on a 9m pitch, so this gives an idea of the exit slip's usable width and length.



View of the bend. Two chevron boards not fully visible until much closer.

[Horse]

Do you treat that junction differently in a car to on a bike?

Thinking about that overhead view, it's interesting that the slip is 'wedge' shaped so that in a car (with following traffic) you can't slow much until you’re fully out of the live lane. But a bike could be out, in, and slowing earlier.

[Strangely Brown]

While I doubt that those already in use will be reverted ...

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/no-new-smart-motorways-planned-concerns-safety-cost-2257652

[jont-]

While I doubt that those already in use will be reverted ...

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/no-new-smart-motorways-planned-concerns-safety-cost-2257652

Some aggresssive enforcement against MLMs would do a significant amount to obviate the need for more lanes.
Although in the most recent case (https://news.sky.com/story/m1-smart-mot ... s-12850805) it seems the problem was not the smart motorway but DWDCA from the driver causing the accident. But we're not allowed to blame shit drivers, are we (unless they're speeding)

[Horse]

While I doubt that those already in use will be reverted ...

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/no-new-smart-motorways-planned-concerns-safety-cost-2257652

Is this a big 'driver' behind it?

“We’re no longer expecting any new smart motorways. Financial pressure on the Government, alongside the unpopularity of the scheme, makes it seem untenable going forward”.


This ...

Mr Sunak pledged during the Conservative Party leadership election last year to ban smart motorways, labelling them unsafe. He said: “Smart motorways are unpopular because they are unsafe. We need to listen to drivers, be on their side and stop with the pursuit of policies that go against common sense.”

... is interesting. Think widely about the potential implications of introducing changes based on 'common sense'.

I've had an @work encounter with someone else named in that article, who berated me for half an hour over something they believed would be an 'obvious' safety improvement.

[jont-]

Mr Sunak pledged during the Conservative Party leadership election last year to ban smart motorways, labelling them unsafe. He said: “Smart motorways are unpopular because they are unsafe. We need to listen to drivers, be on their side and stop with the pursuit of policies that go against common sense.”

... is interesting. Think widely about the potential implications of introducing changes based on 'common sense'.

Scrapping all the 50 limits would be a good move for common sense, but I don't see it happening. Taking roads (both maintenance and speed limit setting) away from local councils would be another sensible move, but again I don't see it happening either.

On the other hand if "common" sense means, "what a majority think", we're stuffed

[Horse]

Mr Sunak pledged to stop ... policies that go against common sense.”

... is interesting. Think widely about the potential implications of introducing changes based on 'common sense'.

Scrapping all the 50 limits would be a good move for common sense,

But faster is more dangerous and more polluting, so - obviously - lower speed limits are A Good Thing (TM).

On the other hand if "common" sense means, "what a majority think", we're stuffed

Yup ..

[Strangely Brown]

The problem with common sense is that it isn't.

[Another Bill]

While I doubt that those already in use will be reverted ...

Dwelling upon that, if political will existed, would reverting actually be so hard, at least in so far as reinstating the hard shoulder?

If my understanding is right, upgrading to ‘smart’ is expensive and disruptive as it requires widening of bridges, new gantries and cable installations, etc. But would restoring the shoulder require anything more than paint and signage?

There would of course be the increased congestion caused by loss of a running lane, but other traffic management aspects such as variable speed limit gantries would probably remain, so a ‘reverted’ SM may still flow better than before it became smart.