Motorway screens bid to stop rubbernecking by motorists

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

The sets of screens will hide the scenes of accidents on motorways

More than 3,000 screens have been bought by the Highways Agency to stop drivers in England rubbernecking when passing motorway accidents.

The partitions will be put up to deter drivers who slow down to look at crashes on the opposite carriageway and therefore slow down the traffic behind. They form part of a Department for Transport initiative to improve accident clear-up times. The government said the screens would "keep the motorways flowing".

The DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)'s CLEAR - collision, lead, evaluate, act and reopen - initiative was launched last year to help ensure motorways and roads reopen quickly following major accidents. As part of this scheme, 105 sets of incident screens will be made available for use by the Highways Agency next year.

Each set has 30 screens which are loaded onto purpose-built trailers and can screen up to 75m if used end-to-end. The individual screens are approximately 2.1m by 2m high. The total cost of the purchase was ^2.3m, with each set costing ^22,000.

Roads minister Stephen Hammond said: "This will be another great advantage to hopefully clearing up collisions but also getting the roads moving rather more quickly afterwards. People will recognise these screens, recognise that something's happening behind it, but actually realise it won't impact on their motorway - there's nothing to see, and we want to keep the motorways flowing."

RAC Foundation director, Stephen Glaister, said the use of the screens should be welcomed. "Incident screens reduce disruption to traffic following an incident [and] assist the emergency services," he said. "Ensuring that motorists not involved in an incident complete their journeys safely and on time is important. The economy relies on an efficient road network. Traffic jams following incidents increase frustration and the risk of low speed collisions."

[stationstop]

But will it stop people shooting past you in the slow lane because everyone else has taken notice of the lane closure signs and moved over?

That's also what slows it all down.

[Electric train]

I have often thought screens would be a goo idea to prevent rubber necking the practicality of achieving it always escaped me, someone has obviously given it some thought and developed a deployment method

[Chris from Nailsea]

Dammit: I wish I'd come up with that idea, at their rate:

The total cost of the purchase was ^2.3m, with each set costing ^22,000.

 

[JayMac]

Of course, this will only prevent rubber-necking once the emergency services have attended an accident scene.

[Ollie]

Based on the picture provided I suspect people will still look when they see all the emergency vehicles.

[JayMac]

A collection of emergency vehicles will always draw onlookers. Human nature and I'm guilty of doing so. 

On Christmas Day there was a house fire in the street where my sister lives. Our Christmas dinner was interrupted by sirens as four fire appliances attended. A quite serious electrical fire that, according to the Devon & Somerset Fire Service, destroyed much of the kitchen and smoke damaged most of the property. Also sad to have learned that, whilst there were no people in the house at the time, a dog succumbed to the smoke. 

[LiskeardRich]

I absolutely wish I could afford an Audi like the white one on the right in your picture BNM

[trainer]

Travelling south on the M5 around Bristol on my way home today I noted the traffic slowed considerably as we passed an accident on the opposite carriageway and the only reason I could see for my side of the motorway slowing was drivers rubber necking.  Can't tell you details of the accident as I was being very virtuous and protective of my no claims bonus and looking at the road in front of me. 

[swrural]

I absolutely wish I could afford an Audi like the white one on the right in your picture BNM

It's only a car RW!  .  Our two cost me ^100 and ^500 (respectively a Peugeot 106D and a Mercedes 260E).  They are both 20 years old or more, and because I have them maintained them properly (cost about ^250 per year each on average) they (touch wood) run me all over the place faultlessly (touch wood).

Motoring is ridiculously cheap unless you insist on buying new cars every two years.  If you do this, by the way, you will effectively secure a release of more carbon than you spend on petrol in a lifetime - every time you do so.

I still try to use public transport.  The trips we made on the M5 over Christmas, due to PT's inadequacies, were horrendous, with an observed chance of being caught up in a major collision every 30 miles or so, let alone dodging the street cowboys of Bristol.   

[LiskeardRich]

I absolutely wish I could afford an Audi like the white one on the right in your picture BNM

It's only a car RW!  .  Our two cost me ^100 and ^500 (respectively a Peugeot 106D and a Mercedes 260E).  They are both 20 years old or more, and because I have them maintained them properly (cost about ^250 per year each on average) they (touch wood) run me all over the place faultlessly (touch wood).

For some of us who do astronimical mileage, a car is more than "only a car". Audi's are excellent for high mileage and very comfortable to drive. I do around 3000 miles a month, and an Audi would be a dream to do these miles in. I have new car and will probably keep it until 250000 miles at least. Wife has a ^250 L reg Clio diesel, to accompany your cheap cars, and I would be happy with such cars, however doing 3000 miles a month a cheap old car is not suitable for me to rely on.

[Oxman]

One of my favourite film sequences features Steve Martin in a spoof movie where he is a cop at the scene of an explosion in a fireworks factory. As fireworks explode everywhere, he urges the crowd to "move along, there is nothing to see here!".

Whenever I see a mass of blue flashing lights, I slow down. Its a natural reaction to a potentially hazardous situation. Then I react to the situation as needed.

I don't slow down to rubberneck. I slow down because there is a mass of dazzling, flashing blue lights.

I don't like being branded a rubbernecker because I slow down.

It strikes me that it would be equally effective and a lot cheaper if the emergency services were to reduce the number of flashing blue lights - they can't all be needed!

[LiskeardRich]

One of my favourite film sequences features Steve Martin in a spoof movie where he is a cop at the scene of an explosion in a fireworks factory. As fireworks explode everywhere, he urges the crowd to "move along, there is nothing to see here!".

Whenever I see a mass of blue flashing lights, I slow down. Its a natural reaction to a potentially hazardous situation. Then I react to the situation as needed.

I don't slow down to rubberneck. I slow down because there is a mass of dazzling, flashing blue lights.

I don't like being branded a rubbernecker because I slow down.

It strikes me that it would be equally effective and a lot cheaper if the emergency services were to reduce the number of flashing blue lights - they can't all be needed!

I am inclined to agree with your points. Blue flashing lights are likely to signal a hazard, and when I took my driving test (2005) it was highly emphasised you slow down for a hazard.

[Fourbee]

One of my favourite film sequences features Steve Martin in a spoof movie where he is a cop at the scene of an explosion in a fireworks factory. As fireworks explode everywhere, he urges the crowd to "move along, there is nothing to see here!".

Could be this one?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rSjK2Oqrgic

[swrural]

Good job you gave the link.  I think it was Leslie Nielsen.