Not So Smart Motorways

[Phil th Barrow]

Originally Posted by MSS

So how do we explain the fact that lorries are constantly causing obstructions on multi-lane roads by attempting to overtake each other whilst travelling at materially the same speed as the other?

I don't think we can get away from the fact that, whilst most lorry drivers have exceptional skills, the majority tend to be reckless in relation to driving safely and with due respect for other road traffic.

Rather than automation, the best we can do with lorries is to link them up and have a single driver. Then put them on their own road away from other traffic. One could even give the ensemble of engine and trailers it's own name - a train perhaps!

So back to old rule... Lane one is for driving in . Th other lanes are for overtaking. So if you are undertaken you must be in th wrong lane.

Lorries like other vehicles can over take.

Th last thing a lorry driver wants is a accident. A old saying with drivers is You are only a proffesional when in court.

Car speedo's arent as accurate as lorries. This can cause tailgating if th car doesnt move back into a none overtaking lane. But remember lorries look bigger and closer than a car behind at th same distance.

As for trains.... Totally unreliable delivery. Been tried many times and failed.

Lastly.... Sit in your house and think... All of this including th house was delivered in trucks. So they must av a value. Reason there is a shortage of them is they are under valued in time and money.

So... as i saw once written on th back of a truck... "if you dont like trucks stop buying stuff"

[MSS]

No - that doesn't work. I did not say I was overtaken. The post was about one lorry overtaking (although materially that is not what they achieve!) another whilst traveling at almost the same speed. On many A-roads this causes congestion spot after congestion spot. So they reduce the average speed on a 2-lane carriageway to the speed of the slower lorry in the inside lane.

I actually buy very little in order to do my bit for the planet, but this is not relevant when considering driving skills.

[SD1too]

Originally Posted by MSS

The post was about one lorry overtaking (although materially that is not what they achieve!) another whilst traveling at almost the same speed.

I have never driven an HGV but I imagine that when laden their acceleration is slow. Therefore the driver will try to maintain momentum at all costs. This, I believe, is the reasoning behind one lorry overtaking another at a differential speed of almost zero since they probably have speed limiters.

But isn't it unfair to single out HGV drivers? As Phil has said, car drivers don't want to use lane 1 even when it is free of traffic. It takes far less concentration and skill to sit in lane 2 or 3 maintaining a distance from the car in front by either accelerating or braking. It is this practice which results in congestion, not the HGVs who are limited to lanes 1 and 2 anyway. If lane 3 was used properly traffic would flow much more freely.

Simon

[MSS]

Originally Posted by SD1too

I have never driven an HGV but I imagine that when laden their acceleration is slow. Therefore the driver will try to maintain momentum at all costs. This, I believe, is the reasoning behind one lorry overtaking another at a differential speed of almost zero since they probably have speed limiters.

But isn't it unfair to single out HGV drivers? As Phil has said, car drivers don't want to use lane 1 even when it is free of traffic. It takes far less concentration and skill to sit in lane 2 or 3 maintaining a distance from the car in front by either accelerating or braking. It is this practice which results in congestion, not the HGVs who are limited to lanes 1 and 2 anyway. If lane 3 was used properly traffic would flow much more freely.

Simon

Simon - the issue is that their efforts are usually futile because the speed differential isn't sufficient to get one lorry quicker to its destination than the other. Most of the time it would be far better to dial the cruise back a couple of notches and match the speed of the lorry in front than to overtake.

My issue is primarily with the practice on 2-lane carriageways e.g. much of the A14.

I am only singling out lorry drivers because on roads like the A14 it is lorries that cause most of the issues of the type we are discussing. Fortunately, we do not get the same volume of Honda Jazz drivers on their way to Felixstowe.

[HarryM1BYT]

Originally Posted by coolguy

Should never have been started! We wouldn't need an extra lane if folk would use the inside lane - capacity increased at an instant! Also, modern cars have a tendency to die instantly without warning due to electrics - I almost feel safer in my classics.

Yep, happened to me in L3 in my two month old company car, in the middle of the day on a busy M62. I was lucky to be doing a little over the limit, on a downhill and quick thinking. The engine ECU failed completely without any warning, engine stopped producing any power. I put the hazards on all lights, fogs and managed to roll it across through three lanes then to the hard shoulder between an on and off ramp. AA had to tow it to a main stealer for a new ECU to be installed.

[SD1too]

Originally Posted by MSS

Most of the time it would be far better to dial the cruise back a couple of notches and match the speed of the lorry in front than to overtake.

I take your point Maninder but why can't car drivers do that as well when following a lorry in lane 2 of the A14?

Simon

[torque2me]

Originally Posted by planenut

So it is announced today that the roll out of "smart motorways" is paused while another major investigation takes place.

The pause is only to let your anger to disperse. The policy will continue and work will be done as soon as control centers are able to see, via photo transmission, issues relating to the inside lane. Safety will not come into it, only traffic volume.

Kev

[torque2me]

Originally Posted by wraymond

Grant seems to be suggesting when a car 'breaks down' it does so always on the hard shoulder. He obviously has never broken down and never seen one. They have of course been pushed into the 'hard shoulder' by the unfortunate driver or worse - other cars crashing into it in the lane in which it had been travelling when it broke down. Useless article.

Grant, as an MP, has First Class rail travel at taxpayers expense. As a minister he will have a pool car with driver. It would be interesting for the views of the "pool" drivers.

Kev

[Avulon]

Originally Posted by SD1too

I have never driven an HGV but I imagine that when laden their acceleration is slow. Therefore the driver will try to maintain momentum at all costs. This, I believe, is the reasoning behind one lorry overtaking another at a differential speed of almost zero since they probably have speed limiters.

But isn't it unfair to single out HGV drivers? As Phil has said, car drivers don't want to use lane 1 even when it is free of traffic. It takes far less concentration and skill to sit in lane 2 or 3 maintaining a distance from the car in front by either accelerating or braking. It is this practice which results in congestion, not the HGVs who are limited to lanes 1 and 2 anyway. If lane 3 was used properly traffic would flow much more freely.

Simon

True many car drivers still have an aversion to lane 1 on motorways, sometimes lane 2 as well. It's ridiculous when driving in lane 1 to find yourself passing vehicles in lane 3 (of a 4 lane m'way) when there's no congestion.
HGVs aren't limited to lanes 1 and 2 - they are prohibited from the outside lane. Plenty of the M1 has 4 lanes and yes, the lorries use lane 3!

Originally Posted by SD1too

I take your point Maninder but why can't car drivers do that as well when following a lorry in lane 2 of the A14?

Simon

Maybe because a car would be doing er... 70mph and the lorry is doing 57.5mph (at best). And the car is stuck behind it for sometimes what seems an eternity. I can quite easily count a difference of half an hour or more on some journeys depending on the lorry lottery when using the A1 long distance. The 1mph difference between 2 lorries at most is going to make no more than a 10 minute difference over 8 hours. For the car that would otherwise be doing 70mph that's an hour and half difference. Sure following a lorry for 5 minutes while it tries and eventually fails to overtake only costs a minute or 2 in reality, but on a 100 mile trip that can happen every other mile.

[torque2me]

Originally Posted by HarryM1BYT

Lorries do have to be able to overtake, despite the time it might take them. The fully laden ones will slow up on the long hills, the less heavily loaded then must overtake.

The UK's population is very densely packed, there is not much room to expand roads, so the ones we do have are tightly packed. Public transport is nowhere as good as it needs to be, so people use their cars. Rail is a slow and expensive means to get items from one point to another, so bulk transport goes on the road. Road took goods away from rail, for these very reasons in the middle of the last century - hence the enforced closure of so many lines and Beeching.

Rail, in actual fact, is fast and the best mode of transport for 200-400 miles.
The railways used to do the bulk (minerals to finished goods) which when left at their destination were distributed by the Trojans of BRS (and their ilk). Thus 600 tons could be left at various way points for electric vehicles to sub-load to the nearby destinations. You would need 14 x 44-tonne lories for the same effort (14 drivers against 3 driver/guard combo).

We used to have a 'Red Star' rail parcels system, dropped and collected from rail - but even that stopped decades ago as unviable.

We also used to have a railcar system which could have been expanded and improved ala channel tunnel rolling stock!

All to save a few pence in the short term!

Kev