Forum menu
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10454356.stm
I know there has been talk of putting average speed camera's along its full length for a while now which is a shame because its an absolutely fantastic road to drive / ride.
Surely the road itself is not dangerous, its the people using it who are incompetent and driving beyong their abiltity??
Is their a correlation between the UK's best drivers roads and the number of deaths? Whats the answer? To be honest I don't really know, maybe instead of road signs saying sharp bend etc, just have a board saying saying 'X deaths' at next bend and a piece of mangled car/bike, surely that would get people thinking more, or signs saying 'Are you as really as good as you think you are?'
I hope their is an aswer as its one of the most fun roads anywhere in the UK to drive, and having it sanitised would be a shame.
The average speed cameras are already up and active.
It has the cameras already.
I live in Sheffield and have to drive out on most of those roads. That is entirely not a good thing.
It's not that dangerous just near a population concentration and mid-life crisis bikers and boy racers don't know the limits of their skills.
Yet............
Speed Kills.
As above, full of motorbikers who think they are invincible. 🙁
Speed Kills.
Yup, the majority of RTC's I have attended speed is the main cause.
Yep, rear facing cameras already there 🙁
And not just that road.
The road has some great sections, and I don't think it's dangerous itself either, but there have been a lot of bad crashes over the years on it.
Not read your link, but to my knowledge, a huge chunk of these have been bikers loosing it on bends. Mainly through running wide and hitting something coming the other way, or running off the road (not too forgiving either).
ie. riding too fast without enough skill or judgement.
I have seen lots of near misses on it. Had bikes totally fly past me on the straights only to make a complete hash of the next bend. Locked rear tyres, turning in too early, running very wide, etc.
Then completely getting in my way through the bends 😉 (big and daft BMW GS here, so not so quick on the straights !)
To be fair to the police and others, they did try a lot of alternative things first: Police all over the place at weekends, advice given on riding at the Cat and Fiddle pub carpark, posters (including my favourite "ride like a ****t and die"), etc.
The cameras were a last resort. Ruined that particular road for all now. At least there are other roads around, although we will now see more accidents on those.
That's handy actually as it gives me a list of places and areas never to visit for cycling. Do the locals realise that not cracking down on speeding apart from costing them in taxes and council tax for the attendance of emergency services, medical care and clean up caused by speeding motoristas they're also losing out from the loss of income from people deciding not to visit those areas because of the attitude of those said motoristas?
[i]The report also names the highest-risk roads when crashes involving motorcyclists are excluded, with a stretch of the A18 in North East Lincolnshire topping the list.[/i]
Says it all really. Hordes of overweight, middle-aged wannabes in gut-tight leathers riding 170mph bikes they can barely control and launching themselves into the scenery. Not like STWers, erm, hang on...
BWD only about 140 mph difference.
Ian
It is only a dangerous road for those who have limited skill & ability or who have made a mistake; all of us sometimes fall into the latter category, those in the former category should just slow down a bit and take time to learn their craft.
aP...... If you are talking road cycling, then the A537 isn't much fun anyway. But it is surrounded by great cycling roads... narrow, winding, hilly, reasonable surface 🙂
And if you are talking mountainbiking then loads of great stuff around there...... don't worry.. I've never known the power rangers to lose it on a bend and go 'that' far into the scenery.
Don't see how it is for locals to slow the traffic down. Seen farmers try occasionally though !
rapid deceleration into immovable objects tends to kill.[s]Speed Kills.[/s]
It is only a dangerous road for those who have limited skill & ability
In my book that makes it a dangerous road for ALL users as the careful people are wiped out by idiots like that.
I built the telecoms installations up next to the pub so spent quite a lot of days up there, the sheer number of vehicles of all manner canning it was ridiculous. I was nearly hit by a full on rally car as I approached a bend and he was coming round it sideways with his back end in my lane.
So how many people are going to look down at their speedo instead of these
?evere bends, steep falls from the carriageway and was edged by dry-stone walls or rock face
Alot of the accidents happen because it requires competence/changing weather conditions and plain old driver error. Its not just someone ragging it as fast as they can 🙄
Most dangerous road *for motorcyclists* IIRC.
Figures are massively skewed though cos it's also one of the most popular motorcycling roads in the UK.
I've cycled it loads of times without incident although I did come round a bend once and see the ambulance driving off and the police sweeping the remains of a motorbike onto the back of a recovery truck. There was almost nothing left of the bike, it had just disintegrated on impact. The rider had been killed instantly. 🙁
Speed Kills
Why is it that I feel that after 9am there may be a lot of argument about this?
Deja Vu?
I used to ride my motorbike over it back in the 80s. It wasn't too bad up there then. The A 537 then was publicised in one of the magazines as " the best biking road" and attracted all the "born again" crashtastic idiots who kept killing themselves.
There are more dangerous roads but because of the "born agains" killing themselves the A 537 has far too many folk killed.
As above its people riding to fast for their skill levels and they pay the ultimate price.
I don't know what the answer is. Teh demographic is middle class middle aged men. They usually they had bikes in their youth and now they have some time and money they buy themselves sportsbikes that are far beyond their capabilities to ride.
Easily spotted but really hard to know what to do with them to stop them killing themselves
rapid deceleration into immovable objects tends to kill.
Only a matter of time before someone said this... 🙄
[i]Is their a correlation between the UK's [b]best drivers roads[/b]and the number of deaths? Whats the answer?[/i]
Stop treating the public roads as a personal race track, perhaps? If you're that keen on driving then get a suitable vehicle and race it, hillclimb it, or track day it.
*Windy and desolate undulating road in killing people shocker*
nickc - absolutely - but how do you stop folk doing this - driving cars / riding motorcycles for pleasure rather than for utility
Couple that with the tendency for some folk to drive / ride faster than their skill levels.
Ride beyond your skill levels on an MTB you get gravel rash and occasional broken bits of you and bike
Drive a car beyond your skill levels you make car shaped holes in the scenery and occasionally wipe out innocent passers-by
Do it on a motorcycle and you get killed when you hit something solid in the scenery. You don't even have to be going ridiculously fast - indeed often the crashers are not going that fast. 50 - 60 mph is common ( as it tends to be sharp corners where they crash)
I can't believe no one has mentioned Dunning-Kruger effect yet
rapid deceleration into immovable objects tends to kill.Only a matter of time before someone said this...
Because it's the truth.
It's god's way of culling idiots.
It amazes me how many otherwise intelligent people seem to think that the ability to twist a throttle or press an accelerator in some way enhances their manly image. Sorry lads, even girls can do that - and often better 🙂
Place enormous tax burdens on any car that's capable of acceleration over a set limit,
Tax burdens on vehicles capable of exceeding the speed limit,
Tachos in every vehicle,
Satellite tracking,
Make the roads dull.
Invest in technology that makes vehicles drive to destinations atomatically.
Actually properly invest in public transport
Bit of blue sky thinking....
Make the roads dull.
Probably responsible for just as many accidents. M6 Junction 14-16 par example!
It's just thinking of the top of my head, but yeah dull roads probably have an impact on driving. Bet it's not as much as speeding though...
How about a system that automatically restricts you to the speed of the road, as you enter a speed restricted area, of say 30 a system makes it impossible for the vehicle to go faster than that, regardless of how much you press the accelerator
gwaelod - MemberI can't believe no one has mentioned Dunning-Kruger effect yet
I just googled that and indeed IMO it has a significant relevance to the issue.
Advanced training is now reasonably common in motorcycling and to do advanced training is not uncool.
When you are out riding a motorcycle on these roads the crashers are easy to spot. Fast down the straights and slow on the corners and taking the same cornering lines as cars.
usually big sports bikes and " power ranger" suits
Because it's the truth.
🙄
It's merely a result of the speed in the first place. One could constantly drill down until we get to the cellular damage to various organs resulting from the [i]rapid deceleration[/i]. I've heard that really fast objects hitting practically stationary humans can kill too. I think that might be some kind of rapid acceleration. But feel free to correct me.
I've cycled up, down, across the Cat many times (including Sunday). It's far better now with the speed cameras - fewer idiots tear-arsing about.
Sadly, I have on more than one occasion, had to cycle past the remains of a crash. Seeing a large pile of sand on the road mopping up the blood of a dead biker isn't very nice.
Oh, and I regularly cycle on several of those top 10 most dangerous roads. I think I ought to change my routes....
OK, so why is people killing themselves through their own stupidity such a bad thing?
Serious injury, yes, because that costs taxpayers money to sort out, but frankly I could think of much worse ways to go than wrapping myself round a tree at 100+mph and dieing instantly, and I'd be quite happy to just be swept off the road and left there for the crows. I'm not gonna care am I?
I enjoy driving. Give me a nice *empty* country road and I'll drive it as hard as I dare (currently skill and car capability outweighs nerve by some margin - too much at stake). Why? It's fun. Exactly the same reason as I ride bikes. If I **** it up, it's my problem, and I'll have to live (or not) with the results. I'm hopless at overtaking, and I'm cautious on blind bends, simply because I don't want to involve others in my mistakes.
The roads mentioned in Derbyshire aren't inherently dangerous the dangerous bit is the drivers belief that:
- they know whats coming round the corner/out of the dip
- because the road on this side of the bend isn't icy it
will be fine on the exit too
[i]I enjoy driving. [s]Give[/s] let me a pay for a nice *empty* [s]country road[/s] race track, where I'll be less of a danger to every other user and I'll drive it as hard as I dare [/i]
Fixed it etc etc
I went to the cat and fiddle pub a while back and there is a sign outside that details the number of accidents by type, so there were
x motorbike and another motorbike
x motorbike and car
x motorbike and no other vehicle
and my favourite
1 motorbike and sheep
I know its not funny but I still laughed when i saw it
The roads mentioned in Derbyshire aren't inherently dangerous the dangerous bit is the drivers belief that:
- they know whats coming round the corner/out of the dip
- because the road on this side of the bend isn't icy it
will be fine on the exit too
+1
The belief that just because you are a better driver or motorcyclist than the "weekend warriors" you can be safer at speed is just idiotic.
...just have a board saying saying 'X deaths' at next bend and a piece of mangled car/bike
I drive that way from Sheffield to Cheshire as a student and was enjoying it one winter when I saw a car on it's back in a field quite far from the road. I did slow down.
Richie
Its not that. its that they are riding their bikes beyond their skill level - so the unexpected happens and they don't have the skill to deal with it.
Tends to go along with poor observation but its the actual physical skills.
For example the bend that tightens. You need to countersteer and apply a little throttle to tighten the line. The crasher panics and backs off the throttle - this makes the bike run wide so they crash - at a speed far below that which it is possible to ride around that corner.
This is the classic motorcycle accident that causes all the deaths on roads like the A 537
its that they are riding their bikes [s]beyond their skill level[/s] too fast - so when the unexpected happens and they don't have the [s]skill[/s] time to deal with it
fixed it.
LHS - MemberThe belief that just because you are a better driver or motorcyclist than the "weekend warriors" you can be safer at speed is just idiotic.
Do you not see the absurdity in that statement?
If you are more skilled ( actually more skilled not just think you are) you will be safer.
LHS - you are simply wrong on this. when two riders can ride round the same corner and one can get round it easily with plenty to spare and the other crashes due to lack of skill then you cannot say the first was going too fast.
Most of these crashes occur due to a lack of skill. Most occur at speeds which a competent rider could easily ride. We are talking at 50 mph bends
JonEdwards - MemberOK, so why is people killing themselves through their own stupidity such a bad thing?
Serious injury, yes, because that costs taxpayers money to sort out, but frankly I could think of much worse ways to go than wrapping myself round a tree at 100+mph and dieing instantly, and I'd be quite happy to just be swept off the road and left there for the crows. I'm not gonna care am I?
I enjoy driving. Give me a nice *empty* country road and I'll drive it as hard as I dare (currently skill and car capability outweighs nerve by some margin - too much at stake). Why? It's fun. Exactly the same reason as I ride bikes. If I **** it up, it's my problem, and I'll have to live (or not) with the results. I'm hopless at overtaking, and I'm cautious on blind bends, simply because I don't want to involve others in my mistakes.
The fact is many accidents many accidents do involve lots of Innocent people, by their very nature the accidents are when something unexpected happens, whether it's a car pulling out of a junction or corner being sharper than you expect or some fuel on the road. If you want to race goto a race track, it's hardly an unfair think to ask.
TJ, we disagree on this one as shown on other threads.
I think the "skilled drivers/riders can go faster more safely" argument is a bit of a red herring TBH. They can go fast off the public roads and pay for the privilege if that's what they want to do. If the overall speed of roads is reduced (good drivers/ riders included) than the accident rate will come down.
In overall road safety terms is pointless trying to discriminate, a good driver will be just as good at 50 as at 70 or 80
[s]Motor[/s][i]Donor[/i]bikes
LHS - however you are simply wrong.
Try this comparison that yo might be able to understand
Steve Peat having a gentle practise run down a DH track he knows well. He will be both faster and less likely to crash than I would be attempting the same run at the same speed. Why? he has better skills.
I'd probably not even make it to the bottom
In the example I gave of the tightening bend ( which is a common cause) the rider has plenty of time to take the correct action. What they don't have is the skill.
of course your skill levels make a huge difference to the amount of crashes you have
John McGuinesss can do 130mph laps of the TT course. I'd be lucky to get round safely at a 70 mph lap
[i]LHS - however yo are simply wrong. [/i]
TJ, as an aside, this kind of thing doesn't help. Try to find a different way of saying this, or better still stop saying it. It just winds folk up needlessly. OK?
Sorry, gets on my goat, on you go...
TJ, the second the discussion gets round to donorbikes, you appear to lose all sense of perspective...because, guess what, you once rode one, or maybe still do. If it's cars, you're all about everybody slow the **** down.
If all the power rangers rode more slowly and stopped treating bendy roads roads like they're a challenge rather than a route, then there'd be less deaths. Do you agree or disagree with this? Never mind all your skillz-pay-de-billz bollocks for once.
I'm with TJ really as whenever I scare myself on tight corners when descending on a road bike I know a pro would be going around it so much faster than me.
TJ a little lesson for you which I understand in advance you won't take on board.
You have a [u]different opinion[/u] than me.
Neither of us are right or wrong, its a different opinion. 🙄
Don't kid yourself tiger_roach, part of the reason they hammer down those bends is that know nothing's coming the other way, and they've got the whole road to play with...Hang on that almost like a race track...Hmmmmm if we could get cars and motorbikes to do that....
LHS what is your argument? Genuinely interested.
A road that tempts people to drive too fast and then has severe consequences for any mistakes is indeed dangerous. You might as well claim that solo rock climbing isn't dangerous, as long as you don't let go of the rock. Something with a high degree of risk is dangerous.
On the subject of why we should care if incompetent drivers/riders kill themselves - imagine if it was your son or daughter. It's NOT just the driver's problem.
Oh and re the speed issue - any rider is less safe at higher speeds because margins for error are slashed, and the consequences are worse if you do have an accident. I'd have thought this was glaringly obvious. Another glaringly obvious thing is that not everything on the road is under your control.
For example the bend that tightens. You need to countersteer and apply a little throttle to tighten the line. The crasher panics and backs off the throttle - this makes the bike run wide so they crash - at a speed far below that which it is possible to ride around that corner.
totally agree - it's just overcoming your natural instinct to back off that's bloody tricky!
It doesn't matter whether you are a learner or John McGuiness, go round a corner and find an unexpected road condition/obstruction and you will have a far better chance of stopping / avoiding if you are going slower.
DD Of course thats right. Limit all vehicles to 20 mph and there would be few crashes. However it does not get to the root of the problem which is overshooting corners at moderate speeds due to a lack of skills.
NickC - I just get so frustrated. There is a proven reason why these crashes occur - its people riding too fast for their skill levels - not at speeds that are too fast for the road. its often under the speed limit.
I just get frustrated that all motorcyclist get tarred with the crasher tag and that people don't grasp the basic reasons why the crashes occur. its not the same as cars.
While there are many reasons for crashing the majority of crashes on roads such as the A537 are not due to fast riding - they are due to people riding beyond their skill levels. This is not the same thing.
There is a huge amount of research that backs this up.
AS I said above the classic crash ( and the research backs this up) is a rider who does not make it round the corner at a speed that is not excessive.
John McGuinnes could get round that corner at 100 mph. A decent road rider easily at 50 mph with plenty of safety margin. The crasher crashes at a lower speed because they don't know how to corner. They panic and shut the throttle / brake which cause them to run wide and crash.
LHS - it is not a matter of opinion. It is proven fact There is significant research that supports my position.
LHS - MemberIt doesn't matter whether you are a learner or John McGuiness, go round a corner and find an unexpected road condition/obstruction and you will have a far better chance of stopping / avoiding if you are going slower.
You miss the point. at 50 mph McGuiness would not crash and at 50 mph the unskilled would.
its not the speed that is the issue - its the skill levels. Teh skill levels are a far greater influence on crashing rates than the speed is.
McGuineess would be safe at a higher speed than the unskilled.
TJ, no YOU miss the point, or doing a good job of just avoiding it.
No one is saying that weekend warrior lack of skill contributes to accidents. The issue i have is your view that because you are more skilled than the rest you can go round corners quicker and safer.
That is when that "experienced" motorcyclist becomes another statistic because they hadn't known there was oil / water / mud /stopped traffic / turning tractor / badger / sheep / car wrong side of road / I could keep going.... around the next corner.
That is where a vast proportion of deaths occur.
John McGuinnes could get round that corner at 100 mph
And when a car comes the other way on the wrong side of the road, does John McGuinnes phase to a different dimension temporarily and just pass through it?
LHS - good luck. Just remember, if you don't get your point across to TJ you haven't lost.. it's just not possible.
You can't teach someone who will not listen.
LHS - MemberThat is where a vast proportion of deaths occur.
Hmmm. Got any evidence for that?
I don't know how explain it any better LHS. Of course the skilled rider is quicker [i]and[/i] safer.
The situation you describe is not where the deaths occur. its as I describe - it single vehicle accidents at relatively low speeds on bends.
LHS
No one is saying that weekend warrior lack of skill contributes to accidents. The issue i have is your view that because you are more skilled than the rest you can go round corners quicker and safer.
Do you not see the lack of logic in that statement? You accept the lack of skill on behalf of some riders means they crash - the corollory is that the more skilled are less likely to crash - therefore thay can be both quicker and safer.
On fort William DH run Steve Peat does it in 5 mins without crashing. I' be lucky to do in 10 and it would be likely I would crash. So Peaty would be both quicker and safe than me because the gulf in skill is so large
Al - its out there - recent ROSPA research IIRC - might be TRL..
Its pointless trying to convince people with closed minds tho so i shall drop it.
Its pointless trying to convince people with closed minds tho so i shall drop it.
Lol, that is rich mate. You're just about THE most closed minded person on STW!
What I think LHS is trying to say is that no matter how good you are, more speed = more risk.
Molgrips
The point I am making is the skilled rider is less likely to crash at a high speed than the unskilled on is at low speed.
The gulf in skill is so large here.
The skilled rider riding to 70% of their ability is still faster than the uskilled one at 100% of their ability.
so the skilled rider is both faster and safer down the same stretch of road.
TJ, up to you. Genuinely please slow down. No one on here wants anyone else to become another statistic but over-confidence in ones ability and blind faith in other road users and conditions will spell disaster for you as it has done for thousands others including good friends.
Stay safe.
you might as well claim that solo rock climbing isn't dangerous, as long as you don't let go of the rock. Something with a high degree of risk is dangerous.
Hazard= something that can cause an adverse effect
Risk = likelihood that a hazard will actually cause it's effects and the severity of those effects.
so if we look at soloing a rock climb, a hazard will be the rocks/ground at the bottom of the climb. This will not change. The risk is variable dependent upon the skill and experience of the climber, the grade of the climb the height of the potential fall etc..
it can easily be argued that solo climbing is a low risk activity because although the severity is high should a fall happen the likelihood and hence the risk is low due to the fact that folks that solo know the routes well, choose climbs well within their capability and can assess the conditions of the friction and rock etc..
something with a high degree of risk is not inherently dangerous, it can be managed to reduce the likelihood and severity to an acceptable level.
That's why the "speed kills" sound bite annoys me.
The speed a driver/rider may increase the severity and possible likelihood of hazard fulfilling it's inherent ability to cause an effect but this is also dependent upon other factors such as road conditions, driver experience, skill etc..
Steve Peat does it in 5 mins without crashing. I' be lucky to do in 10 and it would be likely I would crash. So Peaty would be both quicker and safe than me because the gulf in skill is so large
a) thats probably because you're a bit sh*t 😉
b) Peaty also probably doesn't have to worry about tractors turning across the track, or a sheep standing in his way....
That's obvious, TJ, and to assume that we don't understand this is a gross underestimation of our intelligence.
LHS's point still stands tho - more speed = more risk. That is also obvious, is it not?
People crash when they're not as good as they think they are OR the road catches them out. That can still happen if you are a noob or a pro, can it not? If you push your own envelope then you are taking a risk, regardless of the actual skill level. But ultimately, if you are a brilliant rider then the edge of your envelope and the point where you crash could be 100mph instead of 50mph, and you're more likley to DIE.
@tazzy - thankyou for the intelligent reasoned response. However, there are always factors outside your control when rock climbing and when driving/riding motorbikes. One very famous climber, the chap who wrote the classic North Wales guidebook, Paul somebody, died soloing on a VS (vastly below his skill level) I think because a piece of rock came off in his hands.
TJ - could Peaty's injuries 'if' he crashed be expected to be greater than yours due to his greater speed?
LHS - don't be so patronising.
I am sorry that you cannot understand the basic point about the risks involved. I am not overconfident in my own abilities. I do not ride beyond my skills.
of course the unexpected can happen anytime.
Having not ridden for a couple of years I know it would take me a good few thousand miles to get back up to speed. This understanding of the limits of my skills is why I am safer than some. I would even attempt to get on a modern sports bike and ride it hard without tens of thousands of miles of acclimatisation. I know where my limits are and I know how to ride within them.
molgrips- yep I've injured myself soloing as well, but that was down to my poor risk assessment 😀
Accidents will still occur even when something has been fully risk managed. You can never fully make any thing or activity safe you can just reduce the risk to as low a level as is reasonably practicable. Sometimes S**t just happens
*bangs head on wall*
LHS's point still stands tho - more speed = more risk. That is also obvious, is it not?
You may think so but the skill levels are far more significant.
That can still happen if you are a noob or a pro, can it not? If you push your own envelope then you are taking a risk, regardless of the actual skill level. But ultimately, if you are a brilliant rider then the edge of your envelope and the point where you crash could be 100mph instead of 50mph, and you're more likley to DIE.
But this is not what I am argueing. The newb might be pushing the envelope at 50 mph, the skilled well within their envelope at 70mph
so the newb is still far more likely to crash despite the slower speeds. Even if a tractor turns across you the skilled has seen tha hazard earlier and can take avoiding action more quickly.
Apologies if someone has pointed this out already. Forget the safety angle, those cameras on the Cat and Fiddle and Congleton road and just damn ugly and ruin a beautiful area of countryside. I can't believe they were approved.
Your points are valid, no need to bang your head anywhere. Apart from this one:
Even if a tractor turns across you the skilled has seen tha hazard earlier
Skilled riders see round bends?
Do me a favour.
Listen, the bottom line is this: If you kid yourself into thinking you're a great driver because you can handle a car/bike/whatever, then the unexpected will probably catch you out at some point. The speed at which this happens will determine how likely you are to die.
Ayrton Senna was a fine driver, he was killed by a mechanical.
Skilled riders see round bends?Do me a favour.
😆
molgrips - Member
Even if a tractor turns across you the skilled has seen tha hazard earlierSkilled riders see round bends?
yes - they see further round the bend because of a different road positioning. The correct line on a motorcycle places you in a different place in the road so you can see further. One of the common newb mistakes is to use the same lines as a car.
Its not just seeing further anyway - its seeing better. Looking for the field entry, looking for the mud on the road, all these little clues.
the chap who wrote the classic North Wales guidebook, Paul somebody, died soloing on a VS
Paul Williams, at Froggatt.
I find these "speed kills. Discuss" threads fascinating (even tho' I can't be bothered to read all of this one). I don't think anyone could disagree with observations on skill level v likelihood of crashing, but how anyone can argue that reducing speed limits [i]won't [/i]reduce {EDIT} the severity of {EDIT} accidents is beyond me.
Either way, if they raise a bit of revenue for whoever then fine with me also. My objection to them - as pointed out above - is the impact they have on the landscape.
I drive fairly fast on the open road BTW