Quote:
Originally Posted by DJ123
...How many vehicles pass by on a Motorway in 17 minutes?!
|
A lot, obviously. I know you didn't ask it for this reason, but I think that's is part of the problem facing the statisticians when 'justifying' the principles of the design. The numbers of vehicles needing the hard shoulder (i.e. 'in trouble') are very, very low compared to the total number of journeys being made on 'live lanes'. So the case becomes pretty clear cut in relative terms, especially when the problem that needs to be solved is one of easing congestion and getting traffic flowing.
For example, how many times have you broken down over the years? I must have made hundreds of motorway journeys over the years, covering 10s of thousands of miles, yet I can only recall breaking down and needing a hard shoulder twice in over 15-20 years. If that's a typical rate then multiply it up for all road users and needing to provide space for the many that want to move becomes masively dominant over giving space to those few that can't?
Sadly, though, even a very, very low %age of serious accidents is still a significant number more than zero. And that really, really matters if you're one of those involved in those incidents. That's where the ethical perspectives get difficult - where to set the threshold of acceptability for the unpleasant outcomes: How many serious accidents or deaths are acceptable for the sake of free(ish)-flowing roads?