Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 132 total)
  • max 50mph on roads coming next year
  • miketually
    Free Member

    What are the biggest killers in the UK? Bet vehicle accidents isnt even in the top ten.

    Depends upon the age group, and whether you group all cancers together as a single cause. “Land Transport Accidents” are the third biggest killer of the under-14s (~7%) and second biggest killer of those in the 15 to 34 group (~20%).

    http://www.statistics.gov.uk/articles/hsq/HSQ28_death.pdf

    TheGingerOne
    Full Member

    How exactly will a driver know what their average speed has been over a given distance on a non-motorway route? On a motorway you do not slow down for corners, junctions (where other cars are turning), horses, cyclists, deer, village fetes, etc etc. On other roads you do, so how will you know what your average speed has been taking all these factors into consideration?
    Given most people (it would seem) can’t currently drive along a road at a constant speed, giving them this extra calculation to consider while driving is going to be beyond the majority of this countries population!!

    fatblokeattheback
    Free Member

    4 of those killed in RTA’s were in a stolen Subaru in Bradford which crashed into a chip shop whilst being chased by the police. No law will stop that because they were already breaking the law.

    But guess what, they are putting speed camera’s up on that stetch of road ?

    TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    What is your objections to speed cameras – it ain’t racket science – don’t speed and you wont get done for speeding.

    thisisnotaspoon
    Free Member

    TGO, i nearly wet myself reading that, made my day 🙂

    its a speed LIMIT, your not supposed to drive at 140mph down the road then park up just before the cameras, look at your watch and get out your calculator.

    I never quite understood the mentality of motorists who complain about being caught for breaking the law. No ones forceing you to drive at 35mph past that school, or 90mph down the motorway, you break the law, you should expect to be caught, and on most coutry lanes 50 is more than enough to get into trouble, the hedgerows back home are littered with corsa’s, fiestas, white vans etc etc.

    Sillyoldhector
    Free Member

    Druidh, Sorry I didnt explain clearly, I meant to imply it likened selling a tablet of a strength for example 100mg whereas the safe dosage would be 50mg, but it was only an example and not to be taken as a literal slur on the pharmacutical industry.

    druidh
    Free Member

    On most of the A roads round here, you’d be struggling to break a 60mph average over any distance. I can’t see that dropping it to 50 will make much difference. The danger doesn’t arise from high average speeds anyway. How many folk will get stuck behind a tractor doing 10mph for a long stretch and then try to make up the time, taking corners too fast, overtaking when not suitable, coming over blind rises too fast to stop?

    Then there’s the whole logistics of this. On a motorway it’s fairly simple. The dearth of junctions means it’s easy to install cameras in pairs. How would this be achieved on a typical A road? A camera at every junction paired to that from the previous junction? Or a spread of cameras each logging passing traffic and able to work out average speed over a choice of routes between them? This is gonna require significant investment in both cameras AND IT systems (and we know how good the Govt is at those).

    And how are you gonna power all these cameras? Last time I looked, there wasn’t a useful grid of 13 Amp supplies running along every A road. Anyone care to work out how much additional electricity all of this will use?

    It’s all a stoopid pipedream.

    Christowkid
    Free Member

    I agree with jam bo’s earlier post – no one maintains the current speed limit!
    Having changed jobs about 3 years ago, I now travel along a road that has ( I think I’m right in saying ) the worst accident record in the South west. It is annoying but the speed limits do vary and simply reflect the road going through several villages, twisty and narrow ( 2 way not dualled at all ) despite being the main A road link from Exter to North Devon. At one point the road narrows so that 2 lorries cannot even pass each other. It is a horrible road, so far I’ve experienced road closures due to at least 1 fatality per year and several awful accidents. I tend to obey the limits cos it really is a bad road and appreciate why they’re there.

    But….we seem to have different rules that apply:-
    1. If it’s before 8am the speed limits do not apply.
    2. If it’s a builders’ van or you’ve got a beat up wreck with flouro jackets across the back parcel shelf the limits do not apply
    3. If 1 and 2 above are in place, you have the right to pass all users by overtaking the offending car ( often me! ) *and* the pedestrian crossing bollard in the villages AT THE SAME TIME, therefore saving at least 15 nano seconds on your journey
    4. If it’s foggy and nil visibilty you are still allowed to overtake on the only straight for ~ 6 miles even if there IS a car coming in the opposite direction.

    …. I frequently wonder how on earth I have achieved the simple taks of driving to work safely – I kid you not. Several times I’ve had cars pull in front of me narrowly scraping in whilst cars are coming in the opposite direction, narrowly averting a head -on collision that would have taken me out, despite the fact I’m simply driving along minding my own buisness. The standards of driving at times beggars belief. I’ve never realised just how bad it can be until recently.
    If they do change speed limits – for whatever reason, valid or not – there will be a significant amount of people who just won’t listen and blast on regardless.
    hey ho…..
    Q

    zaskar
    Free Member

    More mpg, leave home another 3 hrs earlier…

    Think I’ll get cruise control fitted for my monthly home visit from Bristol to Peterborough.

    Might ride the 188 miles in summer…leave at 5am in the morning, 12hrs of riding…beat the jams…

    I wish they would ban rain and cold weather instead.

    cp
    Full Member

    What is your objections to speed cameras – it ain’t racket science – don’t speed and you wont get done for speeding

    people spend more time looking at their speedo to make sure they’re not speeding so they dont get a fine, rather than looking at the road conditions ahead.

    On a slightly different slant, cameras make roads MORE dangerous…

    There’s a section of M60 round Manchester at Bredbury, between junctions 25 and 26. It has a 50 limit as it goes round a bend, with average speed cameras. I drove round it yesterday, and people react so unpredictably to the speed cameras! A car in front of my gradually slowed to about 50, and then hit the brakes quite hard to just below 40 as they were approaching the first camera. Scary as ****.

    jam-bo
    Full Member

    for the record there is a blanket 40mph speed limit on dartmoor.

    it is totally ignored by everyone but the tourists.

    I see police up there about once every three months and they are usually breaking the speed limit as well.

    Christowkid
    Free Member

    jam bo:
    Yep – people blasting past at silly speeds, despite ponies or sheep munching on the verge inches away…..!
    I know just what you mean. Locals especially should know the reasons for the limits.
    Q

    jam-bo
    Full Member

    if they are heads down and munching its fine….they generally stay put.

    head up and its anyones guess as to where they are going.

    cp
    Full Member

    On the same journey I describe above, I definitely think more money should be spent on driver training and retesting (say every 10 years) than chuffin speed cameras. I was appalled at the state of driving yesterday. Oh, increased driver training wont give the government a steady income stream from fines.

    I drove to Belgium last year, and the road standards in Belgium are so much better than over here. It was actually a pleasure to drive…

    speed in itself doesn’t kill. Not paying attention and inapproriate driving kills.

    we need a government with balls to implement stuff that will actually have a lasting and real effect, rather than something that ‘sees’ them to be doing something.

    IanMunro
    Free Member

    Ministers plan to use average speed cameras, which monitor speeds over distances of up to six miles

    Phew!
    Luckily the bit of rural road that I can get to over 50mph on is less than 6 miles long 🙂
    Anyway sounds like a good thing to me.

    Good points-

    Less energy in crashes
    Less fuel will used
    People won’t get so pissed off by drivers doing 45mph on open roads.
    It will be nicer for cycling.
    Road noise will be reduced.

    Bad points –
    It will take a few minutes longer to get places.

    grumm
    Free Member

    I find driving in this country mostly less scary than in others – I think one of the main problems here is too many cars on the road. Loads of congestion, roadworks everywhere etc means everyone gets pissed off and does silly things.

    IanMunro
    Free Member

    people spend more time looking at their speedo to make sure they’re not speeding so they dont get a fine, rather than looking at the road conditions ahead.

    LOL!
    Presumbably rear view mirrors are also dangerous.

    Christowkid
    Free Member

    ” Bad points – it will take a few minutes longer….”
    Why are people in such a great hurry?
    On the journey I described in my earlier post, by frantically crawling over my back end in an effort to overtake me, all people do is then come up against another car, or often lorry or huge tractor and trailer. The road itself is incredibly buisy at all times and no matter how fast you drive, it’s impossible to ‘go fast’ on it.
    Yes I want to get to my place of work a.s.a.p., but the people overtaking me and taking substantial risks only ever end up a car or two ahead of me as I pull off into my work. They never gain anything, just drive badly and are narrowly avoiding accidents that will affect others….
    and it’s worse in the early mornings too!
    grrr!!!!
    Q

    TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    It takes a huge amount of effort in fast driving to decrease your journey time by much. Driving down from the highlands back to Edinburgh I was in a reasonably fast hire car and thrashed the spuds of it all the way home – serious speeding stuff. My friend drove normally. We stopped for a pee stop and he got home quicker. so my efforts at thrashing the car made maybe 10 mins difference in a 3 hr drive.

    I have never seen a logical argument against speed cameras – non of the ones above hold water.

    zaskar
    Free Member

    Hey it’s for dodgy country lanes with dips in the road and sports cars on flung on their roofs in the fields you point out while driving at 50mph.

    They are not going to do that to dual A roads or M roads-they will not be affected.

    I have a country lane with National speed limit signs-it is about 1/2 mile long with 30 mph before and after and really bendy like a fairground-nobody reads the bloody signs or know what it means so if it’s reduced to 50 it won’t make a difference to Micra driver.

    Probably safer for us roadies! 😈

    druidh
    Free Member

    TandemJeremy – Member

    I have never seen a logical argument against speed cameras – non of the ones above hold water.

    TJ, I don’t agree with this “you have to watch your speedo at all times” nonsense – a 60 mph limit doesn’t mean you have to drive at exactly 60 all the time”. However, I can’t see how the cost of this latest proposal could be justified. Just how many cameras would that involve? What power source?

    Hairychested
    Free Member

    Following that line of thought we should have 10mph limit in towns so morons on pushbikes who don’t care about the Highway Code can live safe in the knowledge even if they get whacked they’ll be fine. And how about petting NSL at 40 for motorways? More people will survive the crashes there. On top of the above, maybe we should have only 1st gear fitted in a regular car and in order to have more, ie. 2, you’d need to be under the age of 25 with the minimum of 35 years of driving experience, no points ever and health of an astronaut?

    IanMunro
    Free Member

    An excelent idea, plus a blanket ban on all drivers without a sense of proportion 🙂

    druidh
    Free Member

    I take it this is mainly aimed at the elderly? I never have a blanket in the car, so I should be fine.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    What we really need rather than a lowering of the NSL is a complete sea change in how people percieve driving so that speeding becomes socially unacceptable and that careless driving and driving at great speed arent seen as manly things to do. So that stupid morons dont think that over taking someone just so that they can be ahead of them in the next jam is worthwhile and they’ll cut you up to do it. The whole concept of what the car/motorbike/van is socially needs to change so that morons like the ****t I work with dont think its OK to boast to me about how fast he went on his bike at the weekend. It’s all I can do not to explode at him and being the person I am I’m not able to try to explain calmly why I think its wrong and he wouldnt understand anyway or would just think I’m some kind of odd gayer or lentil muncher anyway and ignore me.

    But seeing as how none of this is going to happen a lower speed limit and camara’s **** everywhere would be a start I’d welcome.

    crazy-legs
    Full Member

    you have to watch your speedo at all times

    If you can’t drive along a road without knowing what speed you’re doing (to within a few %) from factors such as engine noise, speed of passing scenery, how hard you’re pressing on the gas, what gear you’re in etc etc, you shouldn’t be on the roads in the first place.
    I was always taught that you maintain a constant ‘scan’ – mirrors, dashboard, road ahead, peripheral vision and repeat. Maybe it’s cos I used to fly planes where such a scan takes in a lot more information, doing it in a car is much easier.
    Other posts on here have mentioned far more useful measures to tackle road deaths but they’re electoral suicide so it’ll never be done. 🙁

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    crazy legs what you dont understand is that people who moan about this think speed limits are targets so they sit right on the limit and then a small % change can make all the difference.

    RudeBoy
    Free Member

    Right. Usual load of bollocks on this subject. So….

    RudeBoy’s proposals for the overhaul of the way people drive motors about in Britain.

    1. A person can, in theory, pass their driving test, then get into a Ferrari. With very little driving experience, and certainly not enough to be skilled in driving a powerful car on public roads. Even an ‘average’ family car with a 1.8/2litre engine is probbly more power than most new drivers could handle safely.

    So, for new drivers, what about limiting them to smaller engined cars, say under 1.3litre engines/below a certain horsepower level?

    Couple this, with a multi-stage driving test.

    Stage one; small engined car, possibly limited to 80mph. The person would need to take further tests, to prove their ability to handle larger engined, more powerful motors. Make the tests for being able to handle big engined, powerful motors, very hard indeed. So, you want a Ferrari? You best be a bloody good driver. We have tests for big trucks and that; why not for cars? The power difference between even a 16v Golf GTi and a 1.1 Micra is massive. And you have to wait at least a year or so, before being able to take the next stage test.

    So, people would need experience and the natural ability, to be able to drive faster cars. Better drivers, in such fast cars, would undoubtedly be safer. Look at all these footballers that crash their luxury motors; they’re probbly crap drivers, who can’t handle their cars sufficiently.

    And it would mean that crap drivers woon’t be able to drive big 3-litre tanks around, in a manner that endangers everyone else on the road.

    2. Penalties for driving offences are pitiful. People literally get away with Manslaughter, if not actually murder. The Law is too often slanted towards the driver, without enough consideration for potential victims.

    So, get caught speeding? Fine, plus 3 points. Get caught a second time? 9 points. A third? One year ban + re-sit test, but AT STAGE ONE. So, you got to stage 4, you start all over again. I suspect that might frighten people into managing their speed a little more carefully… ‘Oh no; now, I’ve got to give up my Merc, and drive a Micra!! The Horror!’

    Caught using mobile ‘phone? Banned from having a mobile for a year, plus big fine. Get caught with another mobile in the meantime? Prison. And 5 year ban. Includes PAYG. And if yer under contract, you’d also have to pay off the remainder of it! Can you imagine? The thought of being without a mobile would make most people baulk at using one whilst driving.

    Parking offences could be similar to speeding. What is the point, of imposing a fixed penalty? Some people just keep on parking illegally, speshly those that can afford it. Repeat offenders should have harsher and harsher penalties imposed.

    Basically, if peopletake the piss, then take their car away from them. Can’t be responsible? Then you can’t have a car.

    3. Speed limits. Even I, as a non-driver, think 70, on motorways, is too bloody slow. What about categorising roads, according to their death tolls? Ones with more deaths pon; lower speed limit. Very busy times- lower speed limit. ‘Safer’ roads? Raise the limit, what, 100mph + 5%?

    In town/built up areas; reduce to 20, where there are lots of people about, maybe even 10 near schools. Frustrating? Yes. Safer? Unquestionably.

    4. Revenue; Speed cams= good; don’t want to pay, then don’t speed. Toll roads? Good idea, but often, people just clog up local roads, so some way of giving them no option is needed. That’s toocomplex for me to want to bother getting into here.

    See, my proposals would lead to safer, happier, more responsible drivers. And the Treasury would still gets monies.

    ‘So RudeBoy’, I hear you ask, ‘why aren’t such stunningly obvious, simple and effective measures not already in place?? Surely, it’s madness not to have such policies?’

    I’ll tell you why; more drivers going fast and breaking rules = more petrol used = more revenue for oil companies = more money in pockets of Governments’ friends = more money for guns and bombs to protect the interests of oil companies = consolidate the power of those in charge…..

    Keep people driving in cars as much as poss = maintain power for the Ruling Elites.

    And you all knows it, too.

    It’s not about safety, or reducing pollution, or congestion- it’s all about MONEY….

    TandemJeremy
    Free Member

    Rudeboy – and votes. some sensible suggestion there but any party proposing them would get voted out at the next election never toreturn again.

    anagallis_arvensis
    Full Member

    If I ruled the world, I’d ban motorsport and ban any car that did more than 90 mph or thereabouts. Dont think I will ever rule the world though!!!

    martinxyz
    Free Member

    know someone up here thats just been caught in a 70mph stretch at around 104mph.if we had average speed camera`s in place then he could say in court that it was a very brief burst of speed and maybe prove he was averaging something like 60mph before the incident.. like i was averaging 38-43mph between carrbridge and slochd the other day then went up to 71mph once i got to the dual cw :O)

    molgrips
    Free Member

    Well, speed is a factor in any collision by definition. The faster you are going the worse any impact is.

    Driving sensibly is a safety net so that if someone DOES make a mistake (you or someone else) the consequences are not as bad.

    PS I agree with rudeboy up until the conspiracy theory bit. The reason draconian measures haven’t been implemented is because people wouldn’t vote for the government that implemented it.

    RudeBoy
    Free Member

    Molgrips; policies and Laws are definitely slanted in favour of keeping as many people in cars, as possible, as it’s more revenue (petrol duty, road tax, insurance, car fixing, spare bits, etc).

    Not ‘Conspiracy Theory’, but Truth. Or have you missed what’s going on in the Middle East, and anywhere that has loads of oil?

    Can’t see how my proposals are ‘draconian’. They woon’t affect most people, really. And would lead to safer, happier and more responsible drivers, and a far more pleasant driving experience for everyone.

    But I agree; most people are too **** selfish to change their habits.

    Car drivers have been panderd to for far too long. and with very serious consequences. Time for change.

    Next week, I’ll be putting forward my policies for Immigration, Education and the Economy…

    aracer
    Free Member

    I have never seen a logical argument against speed cameras – non of the ones above hold water.

    How about an argument against inappropriate speed limits instead? Like the 50 limits I come across all the time on motorways at weekends to protect the line of cones sitting at the side of the road. Limits which are enforced by cameras. I have nothing at all against speed cameras in 30 limits in towns, but if they are simply used to enforce inappropriate limits (as will doubtless be the case with this) then they’re stupid.

    cp
    Full Member

    crazy-legs,

    I agree. trouble is, there are a lot of people out there who can’t deduce from those factors how quickly they’re going… nor how much of an effect the brake pedal has, or how much they have to use it to match speeds of traffic in front… anyway, that’s going off a tangent again!

    Christowkid
    Free Member

    In some ways the whole speed thing is starting to change, like the drinking and driving thing was before the breathalyser. Now, it is socially unacceptable to drink drive, most people realise it and instead of a macho ” I’ve had x pints and driven home fine….” instead of impressing it makes people shudder.
    In many ways the speed thing needs to go the same way, then people might obey the limits – whatever they are.
    Last week we had a chap down here took his son for a burn up on his motor bike along the North Devon link road and was clocked doing 122mph, 12 yr old son pillion, clinging on for dear life, no protective gloves/jacket etc on a wet road that’s notorious for accidents. The judge sent him down for 6months, making the point that if anything had gone wrong it would have made the bike a missile and almost certainly ended in a fatality. I heard it and felt the judge was right! His actions seemd totally inappropriate.

    Maybe the speed limit on motorways might be increased a little, as they are relatively safe – something like 80% of fatalities are on normal non dual carriageway roads. But when speed limits are introduced to reduce speed because it’s an awful road ( like the road I drive ) then we need to find a way of enforcing them – because they are there for a reason. Simpling telling them a road is dangerous and expecting them to *think* about the consequences of speed/bad driving doesn’t work!!!
    Q

    Christowkid
    Free Member

    aracer:
    Abut a year ago there was a huge strech of dual carriageway from Exeter to plymouth resurfaced. It took months. Part of that was an introduction on local tv about it and mentioned speed limits. The official stated they were having a 40mph limit, not the normal 50mph because of the number of fatalites of their road maintenance team was spiraling out of control. He described an incident where a wing mirror of a lorry removed an employees’ head…. Reducing it to 40mph significantly reduces injuries.
    Q

    aracer
    Free Member

    What’s that got to do with anything I’ve written? Oh, and whilst I’m at it, would the bloke have been OK getting hit by a wing mirror if the lorry was only doing 40?

    Christowkid
    Free Member

    sorry – was trying to make the point that what you deem ‘inappropriate’ might actually be not!
    The motorway 50mph’s are there to protect their workers on the job as well as slowing us drivers down to cope with the lane change/unusual cercumstances. Even 50mph is proving too fast so in some cases they are reducing it to 40 because of sheer number of accidents caused to their workers. Perhaps at 40mph the guy’s head might not have left his body, just delicately pureed!!! ( yuk sorry….)
    I drove back along some French motorways/dual carriageways last summer where they tend not to have speed restictions for roadworks on duals/motorways. Suddenly faced with a lane change at ‘normal’ carriageway speed was a bit of a gulper!!!! It really caught me out. I now appreciate the slow speeds for road works a bit more.
    cheers
    Q

    Christowkid
    Free Member

    aracer: ….suppose weekends is different if the road works are not being ‘worked’…..fair comment
    Q

Viewing 40 posts - 41 through 80 (of 132 total)

The topic ‘max 50mph on roads coming next year’ is closed to new replies.