Sorry, going back a bit,
If you think speeding's as safe as not speeding, then you are either stupid or lying to yourself.
Just as an aside, I watched a TV programme a couple of years back about motorists who habitually broke the speed limits. One thing they found was that when the speeders were forced to drive to the posted limits (for purposes of the documentary), one of two things happened. Either they got frustrated far more quickly and were more prone to making erratic decisions or succumbing to road rage; or, they were bored and their attention wandered away from driving, instead they were fiddling with the stereo or otherwise occupying their mind with other things, and started making mistakes.
Now, I'm not saying the solution there is to allow them to speed - rather, it highlights a training issue - and it was a short-term test with a small pool of volunteers rather than a properly conducted scientific study. Point is, it's not as black and white as you're asserting, it's more complicated than that.
WHATEVER THE ACCIDENT... the CONSEQUENCES ARE WORSE IF YOU ARE SPEEDING
Shouty man is shouty.
You're right of course, but that do you suggest? Should we drop the NSL to 20mph? Then when there's a pile-up on the M6, it'll be a nice gentle one. That sort of thing might've been viable once, but these days it's a balance between limiting everyone's speed for safety reasons whilst enabling them to make progress.
The problem is that fixed limits aren't a particularly ideal method of regulating speed. On some 50mph roads it's perfectly safe to do 70mph at times, on others it's dangerous to do 30. Driving past a school at 4pm and at 4am carries very different risks.
Inappropriate speed is far more dangerous than breaking some arbitrary figure assigned to a road several decades ago. We either need variable speed limits or better driver training, or ideally both. If people were properly equipped to judge road conditions and drive accordingly, the roads would be a lot safer and we wouldn't need these poxy little signs everywhere.
You could be a driving god, you can't however see what's coming around the next corner or predict what idiot drivers will do next.
Of course you can. You know what a blind bend looks like and adjust your speed and road position accordingly. You assume everyone else is an idiot and constantly roll through what they might do next. The roads aren't 'black box' systems, there's plenty of clues to be picked up on.
it's the lane change manoeuvre that carries most of the risk. And you have to slow down to wait for a gap, speed up again, then someone piles up behind you and has to brake, etc etc.
That's simply not how you change lanes efficiently. That's the behaviour of someone who only ever sees the tail-lights in front of them, it's a symptom of bad driving, not lane changing.
Touching 3 figures every now and again <ahem> can't really be justified, so I won't try, but 150 to 180's a bit savage mate.
I don't disagree and it's been a while since i maxed out a bike...
However i do struggle not to see 150mph each and every time on a Japnese 1000 sportsbike. It's just so sodding effortless to do and so quick and easy.... along with the fun factor of seeing your mates disappear in your mirrors.
Happily for you lot i no longer own a Japanese 1000, the wife does though so i use that a bit... I own a bike that struggle at more than 130 now due to being a sit-up type.
The most spectacular of which was from 160mph braking too late and going over the bars in a rolling stoppie, the bike flipped, shattering my femur, hand and wrist, a couple of ribs later, a collar bone and plenty of bruising... it was The most spectacular of which was from 160mph braking too late and going over the bars in a rolling stoppie, the bike flipped, shattering my femur, hand and wrist, a couple of ribs later, a collar bone and plenty of bruising... it was an interesting day
Im a story teller & the story must be true!
Looking forward to you in our Donor Unit soon!
Im a story teller & the story must be true!
Looking forward to you in our Donor Unit soon!Complete Kn&b
It was a race, it was on a circuit with ambulances and medical staff etc. WTF else was i supposed to do in a race. I came down the back straight, missed my braking marker.. Well techincally i hit my braking marker right.. but 30 bikes in front of me braking meant i should have moved my braking marker LOL. The lessons you learn in your first race 🙂
That's simply not how you change lanes efficiently. That's the behaviour of someone who only ever sees the tail-lights in front of them, it's a symptom of bad driving, not lane changing.
mol was describing why not changing lanes on exceptionally busy periods/stretches on Variable Speed Limit motorways (when VSLs are in place) is better than people constantly diving in and out of lanes.
Until folk drive perfectly, and it seems no matter how the driving test changes or what aids are added to cars, they're going to do stupid things, we're just going to have to put up with doing them more slowly. All this "inappropriate speed" stuff seems to be spoken by those who believe they have higher skillz levels than the rest of the populace. I'm as happy for the driving gods to be restricted as those with average skills.
I'm not Barry Sheene, i'm just an average bloke who loved doing trackdays and then went racing.
why not keep it to the track then instead of using the public highway?
if you have an outlet for your speed thrills that's done in a place where you are less likely to injure yourself and others why ride like a tit on the public road?
i couldn't give a toss if irresponsible motorcyclists wrap themselves round trees at 100mph (something they do quite frequently on the roads near my folks on the edge of the Romney marsh) as long as they don't injure anyone else but surely it makes sense to do that with a gravel run off area and paramedics 30 seconds away?
why not keep it to the track then instead of using the public highway?
if you have an outlet for your speed thrills that's done in a place where you are less likely to injure yourself and others why ride like a tit on the public road?i couldn't give a toss if irresponsible motorcyclists wrap themselves round trees at 100mph (something they do quite frequently on the roads near my folks on the edge of the Romney marsh) as long as they don't injure anyone else but surely it makes sense to do that with a gravel run off area and paramedics 30 seconds away?
Agree, despite not racing i still do plenty of trackdays now. They do give you the time and place to unleash your inner child of course.
However, if i were to only do 70mph on a motorbike on the roads, i may as well throw in the towel.... and i really don't wish to do that.
All this "inappropriate speed" stuff seems to be spoken by those who believe they have higher skillz levels than the rest of the populace.
Thing is, they probably do. That doesn't mean they have (or believe they have) l33t skillz necessarily though, rather that the rest of the populace contains a very large number of clueless drivers. If you're in any way a reasonably competent motorist, you're almost certainly "above average".
What irks me a little, with the temporary average speed camera zones on the motorways is that they are just so very very long when you compare them to the amount of active roadwork crews you see within that section. I'm no roadworks expert but I'm sure you could fit all active stages of preparation and construction into a couple of miles of road rather than slowing us down for an entire 15-20mile stretch.
"inappropriate speed" stuff
Remember - statisitics can prove anything. I once saw an HSE piechart where 16% of the accidents were attributed to being "struck by a stationary object" "Speed" is a factor in nearly all motoring accidents, but in terms of vehicle/vehicle collisions (not including motorbikes, obviouslly) everyday speeding isn't that big a factor in terms of how serious an outcome will result.
Anybody in support of constant re-examination, once someone passes their test?
Say, every 10 years, you need to clock up at least 4hrs 'instructor time' , and re-take both the practical and theory tests?
Anybody in support of constant re-examination
Yeah, in theory.
In practice it's a non-starter, we just don't have anything like the resource to do it, and putting the infrastructure in place to cope with demand would be a big (expensive) undertaking.
I quite like the idea of making an advanced test mandatory within a couple of years of passing a regular test.
xiphon - Member
Anybody in support of constant re-examination, once someone passes their test?Say, every 10 years, you need to clock up at least 4hrs 'instructor time' , and re-take both the practical and theory tests?
VERY much so... if it were govenment funded, i'd like it less than that... maybe every 2 years.
Although the downside of increasing the number of uninsured drivers sky rocketing would be a concern.
Anybody in support of constant re-examination
I'd rather pay for something proactive like this than something reactive like insurance...
Anybody in support of constant re-examination, once someone passes their test?
Totally. Wouldn't need to be a a complete test, eye exam, reaction test and hazard perception would probably cover it
I still think if you go into a garage to buy certain cars it should result in the instantaneous revocation of your license on the grounds that you must actually not like driving.
statisitics can prove anything... "Speed" is a factor in nearly all motoring accidents
Quite. We've discussed this before but, you need to look at statistics like that critically. When they say "speed is a factor", do they mean it was a [i]causal [/i]factor or just that one of the parties happened to be breaking the limit?
If a party was breaking the limit in (for example) 70% of collisions, but 70% of drivers are speeding anyway, then isn't speed statistically irrelevant here?
As Molgrips was explaining in capitals earlier, for a given collision speed can easily influence the severity of an incident. But if we're actually trying to reduce the number of accidents, perhaps it'd be more effective to focus on things like people tailgating or trying to negotiate a roundabout with a phone pressed to their ear.
As an aside, I'm amazed that it's still legal to smoke in cars. On what planet is holding something in your hand which is [b]on fire[/b] whilst driving a great idea?
If that 70% of drivers weren't speeding, there'd be less accidents.
... in your opinion.
<mod>
I've deleted a couple of the more aggressive comments from earlier in the thread. Please play nicely and refrain from hurling insults about.
</mod>
If that 70% of drivers weren't speeding, there'd be less accidents.... in your opinion.
Is the reverse true then?
M60 average cams catch 460 offenders a month.
*goes back thru thread to check for modding.*
All this "inappropriate speed" stuff seems to be spoken by those who believe they have higher skillz levels than the rest of the populace. I'm as happy for the driving gods to be restricted as those with average skills.
But why, all restricting people does is create frustration and increased stress and tension on the roads. The likely outcome if this is more accidents not less. I must admit myself that I've had more close calls when pottering along within the limit than when driving intentionally fast. The brain switches off when you're stuck to an artificially reduced limit. Not ideal but true.
I've done lots of extra training since passing my test. AIM, police type fast road training, observational training and a couple of track based handling sessions. So I think my standard of driving is way above average. Sure I still make the odd mistake but who doesn't. The extra training, awareness of hazards combined with a high performance car with good handling and good brakes means that often I can drive above the posted limits completely safely whilst at the same time taking accounts if any harass that might be present. For someone who's not had this training then these hazards might seem like unexpected events, but in reality 99% are totally predictable.
I fail to see why if conditions allow then a speed limit can't be safely exceeded. We shouldn't all have to drive to the lowest common denominator. Often I will get flashed when passing a slower driver even though an overtake is safe an legal. I think that slower drivers with less skill seem to think that everyone else should be brought down to their level. I don't mind people driving slow. It's a good chance for an overtake, but just because you want to drive slow, don't assume that everyone else does too.
I'd recommend the extra training to anyone. Similarly I'd recommend to anyone to get a fast car, then you will appreciate the extra level of road holding and safety that can be achieved.
Forgot to add, that I'd never dream if exceeding limits in a built up or residential area, too risky. I'm talking about clear roads, good weather and visibility, low traffic volume etc. I also have plenty if consideration for other road users, particularly cyclists (being one myself), horses etc. Many others I've seen just barge right past - well within the speed limit I might add.
[edited.]
I'd love to see the mess we'd be in if everybody that could, drove a "fast car".
We shouldn't all have to drive to the lowest common denominator.
The answer to this is blatantly obvious:
Everyone thinks they are a great driver, even if they're not. So you can't trust people to make the right call.
There's also a strong argument for everyone driving at similar speeds. That includes people going too slow as well as too fast.
i know someone who was killed by a toaster
This comment intrigued me.
TOASTERS
Several hundred people a year worldwide are killed by their toasters, compared to eight or nine by sharks.
Toasters are potentially deadly because they contain exposed live electric elements and the way they work invites one of the commonest causes of serious home accidents - electric shocks caused when using a metal knife to prize out a slice of stuck toast.
Read more: http://www.****/femail/food/article-1245151/Killers-kitchen-Gender-bending-packaging-exploding-floor-cleaners-toasters-deadly-sharks-.html#ixzz2OYxcvEdd
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
[quote=Rebel12]So I think my standard of driving is way above average
And here lies the problem - everyone [b]thinks[/b] they have 1337 skillz behind the wheel.
It may *look* like safe overtaking opportunity for you in a 40mph limit, but what about the 'speeder' who's doing 60mph+ in the other direction (towards you) ?
Everyone thinks they are a great driver, even if they're not. So you can't trust people to make the right call.
So the solution is to educate people, not to treat them all like imbeciles just because some of them are.
"i know someone who was killed by a toaster"This comment intrigued me.
Now he's brown bread.
It may *look* like safe overtaking opportunity for you in a 40mph limit, but what about the 'speeder' who's doing 60mph+ in the other direction (towards you) ?
Funnily on some of our rides we have commented on that...
"what happens when we meet a group like ours coming the opposite way"
I had a close one with a BMW and wiped out it's mirror with my shoulder.... it was a close on that i can tell you.
I've done lots of extra training since passing my test. AIM, police type fast road training, observational training and a couple of track based handling sessions. So I think my standard of driving is way above average. Sure I still make the odd mistake but who doesn't. The extra training, awareness of hazards combined with a high performance car with good handling and good brakes means that often I can drive above the posted limits completely safely whilst at the same time taking accounts if any harass that might be present.
So you're an amazingly good driver in a super duper car in your opinion.
Often I will get flashed when passing a slower driver even though an overtake is safe an legal.
But then in the opinion of loads of people who have actually seen you driving, you are clearly a bad enough driver that they feel the need to warn you by flashing their lights. Clearly their warnings have just reinforced your belief that you are a super driver, but seriously, if you're scaring people all the time, then you're being at best discourteous, and quite likely dangerous, even if only by the trail of surprised and shocked people hitting their brakes behind you as you zoom past them into a narrow gap.
And here lies the problem - everyone thinks they have 1337 skillz behind the wheel.
Yep. According to the instructors on the Speed Awareness course I did a while back, the vast majority of people think they're "above average" drivers.
However, that being the case doesn't mean you can conclude that all of them aren't. Ie, most people overestimate their ability, that doesn't necessarily make them bad drivers.
The police are after me. They pulled me over as Im so gorgeous they want to put me under arrest.
Bugger. I've always been convinced they were a load of sh*te and never actually working but I just read the first 5 replies from the front page of this thread and I now know I'm wrong! I always obey those zones but could never fathom why some people belted through them but I'd never heard of anyone being caught.
Every day is a school day!
Cougar - I wonder what percentage of those on "speed awareness courses" have been in accidents (as a result of their driving) where they have been speeding?
Perhaps it's the *statistically safer* drivers who get caught speeding?
Poop! Poop!
Whether a Ford or a Ferrari,
Whatever I can get to carry me near or far,
Just give me any car,
I love to ride the Tar,
An old Excalibar,
Yes, any motor car.
And I'll be happy - ho-ho! Messing around in cars!
But then in the opinion of loads of people who have actually seen you driving, you are clearly a bad enough driver that they feel the need to warn you by flashing their lights
Sorry, but that's not necessarily true either. The poster is a bad driver [i]in their opinion.[/i] A lot of people just don't like being overtaken.
You can overtake someone who's doing half the speed limit, on a straight road with perfect visibility for miles, giving them plenty of space before during and after the manoeuvre, and still get flashed at. I've had it happen.
But why, all restricting people does is create frustration and increased stress and tension on the roads.
A speed limit doesn't cause me any stress or tension whatsoever. Driving slower also reduces traffic congestion, paradoxically making journeys quicker.
It's funny how some drivers [i]assume[/i] you're going to overtake them, just because of the car you drive.
Equally, I find it amusing when drivers sit on your tail, knowing they have to wait for *you* to overtake the car ahead before they can. And you know they are eager to hurry up...
If I'm not in a rush, I'll happily it behind a lorry doing 40mph....
Cougar - I wonder what percentage of those on "speed awareness courses" have been in accidents (as a result of their driving) where they have been speeding?Perhaps it's the *statistically safer* drivers who get caught speeding?
Interesting question.
I used to drive everywhere like my head was on fire when I was younger, with a string of SP30s to show for it. These days I'm a lot more respectful of the limits, and have a clean licence. (The incident resulting in the course I took was a road that drops from 50 to 40 to 30, downhill; they clocked me doing 30-something (about 36 IIRC) right after the sign where it drops to 30).
I've had a handful of accidents over the years, some my fault and some not, but never at speed; almost certainly all under 20mph. Most recently, I was taken roughly from behind by a large Polish gentleman who failed to stop in time when traffic lights changed. I was stationary at the time so, speed might have been a contributory factor for him, but it wasn't for me.
I was taken roughly from behind by a large Polish gentleman
*s*****
You put that in purposely you naughty mod.
I find it amusing when drivers sit on your tail, knowing they have to wait for *you* to overtake the car ahead before they can. And you know they are eager to hurry up...If I'm not in a rush, I'll happily it behind a lorry doing 40mph...
In that situation, I'd increase my braking distance so that if someone wants to overtake and I don't, they've got space to hop between.
but it wasn't for me.
If he'd been driving waaaaayyyyy too fast, it may well have been a very big factor for you.
You put that in purposely
I originally typed "I've had a handful of bumps" but went back and corrected it.
