Safe Speed Forums

Thanks.

But that pretty much is settling with power, isn't it?

What's the standard response? Forward cyclic?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Yes, SWP is the US terminology for Vortex Ring. Lowering collective and increasing airspeed with cyclic are the only recovery actions, and do, of course, require some height to succeed! It is no longer part of the training syllabus, but when it was it was practiced from 5000' I believe, so its not something you want to be encountering in the final stages of the approach!

Now you almost had it there. You''re right its not a switch, but it does not increase as you go faster and decrease as you go slower. It increases significantly as you go above the 85th and it increases as you go below the 85th too. Inappropriate speed can be going too slow as well as too fast.

20mph on road with a 60mph 85th is as dangerous as 100mph.

It shouldn't be, and only goes to show that some drivers are incapable of judging situations and reacting appropriately.

If a vehicle, horse, or cyclist(s) going at a slow speed gets rear ended by a vehicle driver, or the driver swerves out and hits an oncoming car, or comes off the road trying to avoid the lower speed vehicle, then its the faster vehicle driver at fault, I imagine in 100% of cases.

Yes, I'm bending it here.

I'm classing intentionally breaking a law as an aggressive act here.

A person can chose to break or not break a law. I was asking about the mindset of somebody who chooses to.

I'm sorry but that is a question with multiple answers. It could be that someone is a psychopath, it could be because someone is trying to do something more important (eg breaking a law to save a life), it could be because the law is unjust (I'm sure Hitler passed a few of those) and so and so on...

I'm concerned by the fact that you seem to think that a) breaking a law is automatically morally wrong and b) that it is an aggressive act - it could be a humanitarian act?

_________________
I won't slave for beggar's pay,
likewise gold and jewels,
but I would slave to learn the way
to sink your ship of fools

I suspect you're going further than just 'bending it'.

I did ask for an explanation as to why you believe such a technical infringement is automatically an 'aggressive step'. Simply repeating it doesn't make it anymore valid.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Hmmm, if you're breaking the speed limit because you've got somebody in your vehicle who is dying and needs to get to a hospital then fair enough. You've still broken the law, but the law might choose not to prosecute due to circumstance.

You telling me everybody who is speeding has a humanitarian reason to do so?

That's like saying all murder is OK because some people murder other people in self defence as a last resort (which is OK if there was no other choice).

Two fingers up to the law, "I'm not taking notioce of you!"; absolutely an agressive act. I explained that already.

I've posted earlier how people exceeding the speed limit do not do so as a deliberate conscious step. Nobody drives at 30 mph amd then suddenly decides "oh, I'll break the speed limit, I'll go up to 31".

I have also seen research demonstrating that, on a typical driving cycle, 99% of men and 97% of women exceeded the speed limit. During the course of a week, I would say that was a likely outcome for drivers.

Yet weepej still claims that exceeding the speed limit is a deliberate, aggressive act

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Choosing to travel at 90 in a 60, absolutely!

What if, instead of sticking two fingers up at the law, you instead decline politely to adhere to it? When I exceed the limit, I'm fully aware of what I'm doing, so it's not correct to say I'm not taking notice of the law, I'm simply choosing not to abide by it. And, quite frankly, with the way the law is used to introduce artificial restraints on the behaviour of the average driver (e.g. speed limits being reduced on political/environmental/nimbyesque grounds but still being enforced on safety grounds), it's probably fair to say that the government has been sticking two fingers up at motorists for quite some time now - should we accept such aggressive behaviour aimed in our direction simply because it comes from our appointed lords and masters (not that my vote helped to appoint any of them, but such is life in a pseudo-democracy) rather than another ordinary citizen?

_________________
Chris

Obviously someone doing 90 in a 60 knows what he is doing, but is the typical driver doing an indicated 35 (probably an actual 32-33) in a 30 really committing a deliberate, aggressive act?

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Not at all, it was you making sweeping generalisations, not me I made no comment about any particular law, as it was you musing about the mindset of people who break laws and you didn't specify either.


But as you bring it up, peoples reasons for exceeding the speed limit will be various, and suggesting they must all be aggressive is bizarre.

_________________
I won't slave for beggar's pay,
likewise gold and jewels,
but I would slave to learn the way
to sink your ship of fools

No and our RPU do not waste precious resources on safe driving which is marginally above the limit.

Oh sure// we would have pulled Med had he committed this here. He would have had the same "discretion" we normally apply.. but then 30 mph above the lolly? We'd have few options open really in all honesty here.

As for "news worthiness sellin papers" - this would have been "explosive" as renegade anti- speed cam Durham with a decent (but by no means perfect) record - but still decent and quite reputable as an achievement when compared to those areas which did not have a very astute guv in Paul G or Jon S as its very capable bosses in charge - whose bosses gave up and handed to the partnerships who placed revenue and self importance perhaps above the real issues of delivering an equitable, standard and nationwide comprehensive road safety which actually delivered instead of remaining static for years at 3.5K - at statistic which would perhaps be higher had not N Yorks, Co Durham and a couple of other forces - including Lancs which pioneered a decent educational programme and did at least listen to the concerns raised - when it later modified the course invites in the right direction at least The Mad Cats have concerns over the manner of the invites - but at least concede there is a more positive equity these days. as far as Lancs/Staffs and Manchester are concerned.

(I am aware from a phone call from Wildy that Steve wishes Durham to post up its stats. We have. They are available for all to see on the official returns and our own info-web site. Common knowledge - but each incident on our patch? It gets a full investigation and we try to ensure all parties - including ourselves learn the lessons. I post this comment becuase he lurks... and will take this opportunity to point out that "road safety stats per region" should not and never should be a "competition" between RPU or a combination of RPU and Partners (or "pratners" Steve - if you ARE lurking - the Mad Cats are not being nasty. when they type "pratnership" - they are just being "normal disgruntled letting off some steam" )

But Durham is not in a competion with anyone. We only want safety for the folk who live here and our very visible presence and actions would seem to deliver a very reasonable result.

But yes.. Med would have been prosecuted over 90 in a 60 here and we would have copped him at it too.


I know we have some embarrassments over an Inspector pinged in Cleveland and our own trainer Inspector pinged when he went off the agreed course north of the border.. but they were on legitimate police business at the time and each case supported safe driving and justification for the act.

They were not on private jollies and each had a genuine reason.. and this was more genuine in my opinion than the infamous Milton affair too

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

I doubt it, more like, "its a 30 limit, I'll drive at 37, so I can get back to 33 if I see a copper".

!!!

No you didn't and you still haven't; you've simply stated that it is so. There is no connecting login in your explanation.

Who exactly is "you"? An aggressive/outdated/irrelevant/unreaasonable law?

I always take notice of the law but when the usage of it is itself abused/neglected then I might choose to infringe - but I always keep within the spirit of the law, that's what's important.
No aggression, just infringement.

Conversely, people can abide by (and enforce) a law in an aggressive manner. Have you never heard of the phrase 'work to rule'?.

So as you can clearly see, there is no inherent correlation between lawful (or otherwise) conduct and aggression.

Ah, OK, I'll start cycling on the pavement then and shout at people that get in my way.

Did that post contain a hint of aggression

Actually that’s a blatant strawman fallacy; it's not nearly the same as doing a safe, calm and comfortable 80 on a clear motorway is it?