Highways England fires back at SVD accusations

An individual from the organisation has given exclusive info about the controversy regarding SVD tech.

Around a week ago, Highways Magazine published a scrutinising report in which they claimed that Highways England was developing a flawed system of stationary vehicle detection cameras, stating that in a 2016 trial the system passed the evaluation because 'some of the events for which alarms were not sent' were classified as detected. Had the system classified those events as missed detections, the system would have failed the evaluation.

A few days ago, an individual - whom I shall call 'Daniel' in order to protect his privacy - reached out to me and gave me information which put Highways Magazine accusations into question.

Here is what 'Daniel' stated:

"Unfortunately Highways Magazine has distorted the true picture on this one. 85% of stopped vehicles were detected by the system - well above the required detection rate in the trial. SVD did not only pass the evaluation "because a large number of 'events' were incorrectly classified as detected". Highways Magazine has inaccurately described the findings of the report."

Join In

Comments (2)

  • Smart motorways are an idiotic idea. The idea that you can simply toddle along to a refuge area or the next junction displays a complete lack of understanding about the fact that cars can (and often do) stop immediately when a problem occurs. The simple reason for a hard shoulder was to facilitate breakdowns where the car simply stopped running.

    It’s simply another way to avoid using the massive amount of revenue extorted from drivers to upgrade the UKs underfunded and under maintained roads.

      4 months ago
  • Just remember if you break down on a smart motorway you now must follow the government advice and Go left. Who ever created that advert deserves a medal for idiot of the year

      4 months ago