Safe Speed Forums

Barriers on Berkshire's A329(M) 'may have saved life'

An inquest has heard how crash barriers on one of Berkshire's busiest roads could have saved the life of an RAF serviceman.

Paul Payne, 23, was driving along the A329(M) towards Reading when his Fiat Punto crossed the central reservation and collided with a Ford Transit van.

Mr Payne, of Chippenham, Wiltshire, died instantly in the head-on crash on 5 February.

Since the accident, crash barriers have been installed.

Safety campaign

The coroner recorded a verdict of accidental death and noted: "Now the road has barriers the possibility of such a tragic death is much reduced."

A senior traffic officer giving evidence at the inquest said had barriers been installed on the section of the road where the crash happened, Mr Payne's car would not have crossed the central reservation and the accident could have been avoided.

There had previously been a long-running campaign to install barriers and improve safety along the whole stretch of the A329(M).

The road is a major route between Bracknell, Wokingham and Reading and takes thousands of drivers to the M4.

Wokingham Borough Council allocated £650,000 to install the barriers but said the project had been planned to start in February and was not in response to Mr Payne's death.

Mr Payne had served in Afghanistan and in Kuwait with the RAF, and was based in North Yorkshire.

I don't want to trivialise the tragedy, but something is conspicuous by its absence...

Not answering your question directly, but I'd say it's fairly certain that central reservation barriers on motorways and similar dual carriageways are one engineering intervention on the roads that undoubtedly has saved many lives over the years.

But wouldn't it be better to educate drivers not to go onto the central reservation in the first place?

Obviously! The answer to your facetious question (which I would have hoped was obvious) is that a barrier takes immediate steps to remedy an action which, if unchecked, definitely will increase the odds of a collision to unacceptable levels, whereas a camera merely documents a behaviour which has uncertain links to collision likelihood.

...if a driver makes a mistake...

In the same way that taking measures to reduce the speed of traffic will reduce the odds of some one-one being killed if a driver makes a mistake? I am puzzled as to why some measures to reduce the severity of an accident are approved of whereas it is suggested that others should be replaced by driver education.

Crash barriers don't have a negative impact on anyone (apart from the cost), whereas reduced speed limits do.