Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Dec 12, 2018 00:24

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 15:03 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
As I said, I am ambivalent about the rise but not its consequence and certainly not its justification.

Let's say you are on a motorway 260 miles from the centre of London.

The 80mph journey takes 3 hours to the M25 at 240 miles distant.
The 70mph journey takes 3 hours and 25 minutes to the M25 at 240 miles distant.

The 70mph vehicle is 30 miles behind the 80mph vehicle or at 70mph 25 minutes behind when the 80mph vehicle gets to the M25.

Not a massive saving there then.

Now let's consider the 80mph vehicle on the M6 and M1 from the north to London; it isn't going to be doing 80mph for the whole journey varying between 80 and 60 mph for example. The 70mph vehicle is varying between 70 and 60mph. By my reasoning the time difference at the end of the journey is less than 25 minutes; still less benefit to the economy.

Better still the train is faster and you can use that time to work in, even more benefit to the economy.

If your journey is shorter that 100 miles on the motorway then you are not creating enough time to add sufficient benefit to make a brew.

Benefit to the economy? Taking the pi55 me thinks.

Of course it will take a number of drivers out of the penalty system so is this a reason to move to the new limit. FoI to the speaker to see how many MP's have declared speeding tickets....what do you mean they don't have to declare it?....where's that green paper I asked for Mavis?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 16:01 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3428
Quote:
The 70mph vehicle is 30 miles behind the 80mph vehicle or at 70mph 25 minutes behind when the 80mph vehicle gets to the M25.

Not a massive saving there then.

Now let's consider the 80mph vehicle on the M6 and M1 from the north to London; it isn't going to be doing 80mph for the whole journey varying between 80 and 60 mph for example. The 70mph vehicle is varying between 70 and 60mph. By my reasoning the time difference at the end of the journey is less than 25 minutes; still less benefit to the economy.


Firstly, congratulations on persevering with the CSE maths lessons, you seem to be grasping it at last.

Secondly, I think that, if after a three hour drive, I am 30 miles further on, or arrive 25 mins earlier, than I would have been travelling at 70MPH, I would consider that a benefit.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 16:15 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
I had a brain fart reading it and thought it sounded like he was trying to prove that t=d/s is a myth or give a variation on the hare and tortoise fable.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 16:37 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
The journey time saved by one person is as calculated. However, the economic benefit comes from the huge number of journeys that would be shortened. The M1/M6 London to Manchester carries a vast number of people and amount of goods each day compared to the "fast" railway line between the same points.

The rail based parallel to some parts of the journey being at less than optimum speed is "we apologise for the delay due to a points failure at Wakefield" and you can't get off and use an alternative.

This is why HS2 is a waste of money whereas building another motorway for 90mph traffic would be a huge boon for everyone. You could also "get off" part way, unlike the train.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 17:01 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
GreenShed wrote:
Better still the train is faster and you can use that time to work in, even more benefit to the economy.

Only when considered in isolation.
There are considerable restrictions when using public transport (can’t take many tools or consumables), and plenty of time overhead too (waiting for trains, waiting for connects, getting to the station, getting to the destination afterwards). There is also no chance for mission creep (can't really pick up dinner/kids on the way back).
I wouldn’t want to get my laptop out on a train for fear of it getting nicked (and I suffer from motion sickness). It is difficult to get a good wi-fi signal too.

All considered, forcing everyone to go by (already overloaded) trains would be phenomenally bad for the economy.

I speak from personal experience, I went without a car for 8 months (now that I hardly drive). I soon realised that it is cheaper and faster (and easier and more flexible) to own a car than to take trains. I know my experience won't be representative for everyone, but I reckon your point is applicable only to a small minority.

GreenShed wrote:
If your journey is shorter that 100 miles on the motorway then you are not creating enough time to add sufficient benefit to make a brew.

Benefit to the economy? Taking the pi55 me thinks.

It all adds up, especially to those whose costs are dependent on time on the road – twice or more a day. I agree this isn't particularly significant, but ...

GreenShed wrote:
Of course it will take a number of drivers out of the penalty system so is this a reason to move to the new limit.

Not in itself.
However, it is always good to remove a needless restriction, thus reducing disrespect for law.

Also, as I said earlier: there is also a system-wide casualty benefit – now this IS a benefit to the economy!

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 18:27 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
A take on stopping distances:

Using the HC as a basis: a typical cars from the 1960s, with all-round drum brakes, travelling at 70mph, had about the same or shorter total stopping distance (including the thinking distance) as a typical modern car at 80mph. Don't forget about 'brake assist', as well as ABS/ESP!

HC: 0.67G, 0.67s, at 70mph = 95.5m
Modern say 0.95G, 0.67s, at 80mph = 92.6m

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 19:34 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Unfortunately, all this is lost because of that fraction of a second's distraction; which is why it's on my personal number one list of most heinous driving activities. :whome:

One tyre manufacturer recently boasted their latest like-for-like tyre will stop you a metre or more sooner thereby making the difference between contact or no contact.

Nice boast and good publicity no doubt, but there is no substitute for 100% concentration on the road ahead.

If road safety is ever to be properly addressed I think we should deal with the biggest culprits first.

I would be more concerned with my hepatitis than my in-growing toenail... :) :wink:

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Oct 05, 2011 23:21 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
Strangely, I find myself (sort of) with Greenshed on this one! I don't believe it will make that much difference to journey times in the "real world". However, if the governent has to make up some creative smokescreen of bo11ox in order to convince, or at least mollify those that are going to oppose it, that seems fine by me! For years we've had a variety of specious arguments the other way (come on, we can't have forgotten the "1/3 lie" can we?!), so it seems only fair!

For me, the real reason is the one cited in the article (restoring the moral legitimacy of the system). I also see bringing us into line with most of the rest of Europe as a legitimate reason too. Who knows? It might even bring other benefits, like lower stress levels and more concentration where it counts (on the bleedin' road rather than the bridges!), which can only be good things. Besides, don't know about economic benefits, but before a long run, another 25 minutes sleep is, to me, an undeniable safety benefit! Almost everyone I see on the motorway (49% my backside!), exceeds the 70 limit, pretty much all the time. I have the luxury of driving on motorways with pretty light traffic, and I absolutely know what I see with my own eyes.

So let's stop playing games. We know it's not (in itself) dangerous. They know it too. Everyone does it. let's just get on with it. There will be a die-hard minority who will doggedly cling to the belief that the human body will spontaneously combust (or whatever :roll: ) at velocities in excess of 70 (and doubtless wave all sorts of dubious research to "prove" it), but for the rest of us...

...it's time to move on!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 09:04 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
I agree with you Mole but I think it depends on the congestion as much as anything. Greenshed’s analogy may hold some water, in that you can only go as fast as the slowest vehicle/s in front and the difference isn’t that great etc., but not on open roads.

As an example, when I’m off to Paignton to see my friend I always leave at 5:00 a.m. to miss any traffic. It’s a trip I hate of 186 miles for me, door to door. But at 80 mph I would get there 20 minutes sooner than I would at 70 mph by my calculations. I think that’s a significant difference and it means I would probably not stop for a comfort break either. (2hours 19mins instead of 2hours 40mins).

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 09:58 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 13:55
Posts: 2247
Location: middlish
Dr Dionysys Larder (1793-1859), professor of Natural Philosophy and Astronomy, University College London wrote:
Rail travel at high speed is not possible because passengers, unable to breathe, would die of asphyxia.


Martin Van Buren, Governor of New York, 1830 wrote:
Dear Mr. President: The canal system of this country is being threatened by a new form of transportation known as 'railroads' ... As you may well know, Mr. President, 'railroad' carriages are pulled at the enormous speed of 15 miles per hour by 'engines' which, in addition to endangering life and limb of passengers, roar and snort their way through the countryside, setting fire to crops, scaring the livestock and frightening women and children. The Almighty certainly never intended that people should travel at such breakneck speed.»
Martin Van Buren, Governor of New York, 1830


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 06, 2011 22:10 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
"Peer-reviewed", I hope??? :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 07, 2011 11:19 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7354
Location: Highlands
I must say that I hope the proven material will indicate that the 85th %ile - 90th %ile is around 85mph as I suspect that it is ....
The respect for the Law is important of course but the Law makers must insure that they are never criminalising the normal and competent actions of the Law abiding motorist. The 85th%ile works and should remain the guide by which to set speeds until some new better system replaces it, although I cannot see that happening any time soon.
I wish Governments would state why they do things without worrying about how to say it by 'pleasing' or carrying the largest audience ... but perhaps that is the method within the political arena.
I know that if I travel the vast majority of 500 + miles of which most is motorway, then that trip will be shorter and therefor I am less exposed to danger ... etc...
Keeping motorists interested in their manner of travel is an important feature that has been sorely lacking too, this may assist with that too... just a bit. :) Interest in things that you do, can help your desire to learn more about it, and so improve those skills, abilities and knowledge (esp with encouragement).

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.233s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]