Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Oct 20, 2019 05:04

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 01:35 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4813
Location: Essex
Quote:
And if, in doing 80 as you pass the lorry doing 50, what do you do if a real hazard (not a self-inflicted one) materialises that you hadn't realised was developing because you were concentrating on overtaking. This hazard is one commensurate with the 50mph limit, i.e. the reason the limit exixts in teh first place. You are now doing 80mph with a 50 mph level hazard right in front of you and a lorry in the near environs.
And how do you explain your way out of that one in court?

This is going to sound arrogant. I don't think I can make it not do so - apologies in advance.

If there is a real hazard then I wouldn't commit to the overtake. It is some years ago that I got this camera to flash me just after the overtake. My manouevre was perfectly safe, though "point threatening". The junction that the camera was "guarding" was a minor road joining from my left - almost a parallel road - and I had ssen way up it to the end. There was nothing else about. Had there been anything thaty may even remotely possibly have been in either my or the lorry's flight path, I'd have hung back. That limit existed originally for a mobile farm shop that attracted casual and regular visitors. It no longer exists/existed at the time of my manouevre. However, to now answer your question: had there been any incident because there was something I'd overlooked, I would have rightly been in the dock for driving without due care and exceeding the speed limit. But I didn't drive without due care. I didn't overlook anything except the moeny box.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 02:14 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 00:14
Posts: 535
Location: Victoria, Australia
Whenever I am behind something that is blocking my view of the road ahead I will overtake it. It does not matter if it is travelling at, or even slightly above, the speed limit because the point is that I do not feel safe unless I can clearly see the road ahead.

Obviously I would only do so if I could see enough clear road when I looked around the vehicle. When I do pass I accelerate to the highest speed I can as quickly as I can during the passing manoeuvre so that I am on the wrong side of the road for the shortest possible time.

I cannot think of any safer way of overtaking and I certainly consider being able to see the road ahead is less dangerous than the overtaking manoeuvre.

Having a high performance car means that I could be travelling as fast as 100+mph as I pass the front of a long lorry but I then start slowing down to my normal travelling pace as soon as get back on my own side of the road.

This may seem to some as being dangerous but being on the wrong side of the road is the most dangerous thing you can do on the roads so the less time I’m there the safer I am and no-one is ever going to be able to convince me otherwise.

_________________
Ross

Yes I'm a hoon, but only on the track!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 08:56 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 13:50
Posts: 2643
Rigpig wrote:
OK, devils advocate time here.

If you are doing 50 mph in a 50 mph zone behind a lorry doing 50mph, or even 49 or 48....why do you need to overtake it? Apart from satisfying ones impatience that is.
And if, in doing 80 as you pass the lorry doing 50, what do you do if a real hazard (not a self-inflicted one) materialises that you hadn't realised was developing because you were concentrating on overtaking. This hazard is one commensurate with the 50mph limit, i.e. the reason the limit exixts in teh first place. You are now doing 80mph with a 50 mph level hazard right in front of you and a lorry in the near environs.
And how do you explain your way out of that one in court?


You're making the assumption that the limit is a (properly-set) 50mph.
Nowhere did I allude to that, in fact I was talking about a straight, open NSL road.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 09:48 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
Pete317 wrote:
... I was talking about a straight, open NSL road.
Then I wonder how much the lower HGV limit played a part. If the HGV driver could see the camera or knew it was there he's not going to drive at a more car-friendly speed and risk his licence.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 09:59 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 09:59
Posts: 3544
Location: Shropshire
Pete317 wrote:
You're making the assumption that the limit is a (properly-set) 50mph.
Nowhere did I allude to that, in fact I was talking about a straight, open NSL road.


Nor did I allude to the fact that the limit is properly set, you are assuming I did my friend. I was painting a general scenario - a risky strategy I accept, one scenario always has a counter scenario.

M3RBMW wrote:
Having a high performance car means that I could be travelling as fast as 100+mph as I pass the front of a long lorry but I then start slowing down to my normal travelling pace as soon as get back on my own side of the road.


Yes fine, but we're discussing a UK road carrying a 50mph speed limit and, in this instance, a speed camera whose presence would be 'advertised' by warning signs relating to speed enforcement in that area.

The point I was (clumsily) trying to make was that we must take responsibility for our own actions. We can paint an infinite number of scenarios in which it would or would not be safe to pass a 50mph lorry in a 50 limit, and articulate many creditworthy reasons for doing so or not doing so, at the end of the day YOU make the choice. And if you happen across a speed camera whose presence was alluded to through signposts, then YOU have to take responsibility for any subsequent incident that may occur. Claiming the camera should not have been there in the first place is fatuous and evasive.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 11:26 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
It looks like we're getting back to the old 'safe overtaking' thread which appeared on the Cumbria Silly Camera Pratnership forum some time ago.
The Speedfinder General (SG), Callaghan, would not be drawn as to whether, in terms of safety, it is better to overtake as quickly as possible, spending the minimum time possible on the 'wrong' side of the road (as 'Roadcraft' used to teach), or whether you must back off during a safe overtake when you are alongside the other vehicle and reach the posted speed limit.
The SG just said that it is dangerous to exceed the posted limit at any time, the inference being that if, in an NSL, you catch a truck doing 45 on a long straight, you change down, pull out, accelerate strongly to exactly 60 (watch that speedo carefully!), lift off the gas and cruise past at the speed limit, even if that exposes you for much longer than is necessary.
If you don't do this, the Scamvans will get you as it's on nice long straights where they are placed to collect the cash.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 10, 2005 13:31 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 01:48
Posts: 526
Location: Netherlands
Cooperman wrote:
It looks like we're getting back to the old 'safe overtaking' thread which appeared on the Cumbria Silly Camera Pratnership forum some time ago.
The Speedfinder General (SG), Callaghan, would not be drawn as to whether, in terms of safety, it is better to overtake as quickly as possible, spending the minimum time possible on the 'wrong' side of the road (as 'Roadcraft' used to teach), or whether you must back off during a safe overtake when you are alongside the other vehicle and reach the posted speed limit.
The SG just said that it is dangerous to exceed the posted limit at any time, the inference being that if, in an NSL, you catch a truck doing 45 on a long straight, you change down, pull out, accelerate strongly to exactly 60 (watch that speedo carefully!), lift off the gas and cruise past at the speed limit, even if that exposes you for much longer than is necessary.
If you don't do this, the Scamvans will get you as it's on nice long straights where they are placed to collect the cash.

Nicely summarised, Cooperman.

I believe that it is discussions like this that illustrate the folly of religiously being slave to a lowest-common-denominator-numeric-based road behaviour/policing mentality, as opposed to applying an intelligently considered, adequately researched, genuine road-safety based policy.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Mar 14, 2005 23:58 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
I went to Harrogate on Saturday - A65 was shut at the far end, and we got diverted to Gisburn, down a narrow lane. Driver behaviour was great, especially considering it added a good deal of time to the journey.
As we were bumper to bumper, cars trying to exit side roads were at a disadvantage - but were soon allowed out by cars in the diversion. It was the best example of good driving behaviour by so many drivers I have seen in a while!
Sunday however, we drove from Harrogate to Ripon & the A1 along the A61. It is a very twisting road, with blind summits, and bends, and a lot of traffic.
The road has a warning sign, detailing the number of fatalities in the previous years, and the road has been heavily altered with white lines, hatching and phantom islands (and the occasional real ones).
As we drove the road, I was concerned that in several instances, the hatching actually made some bends worse - altering the driving line, without giving cause to slow until it was a bit late.
However, the worst aspect was the behaviour of other drivers - those that drove too close to the back of me, and two drivers, whose lack of progress led me to believe the speedo had been replaced with a calender!
The frustration of drivers behind me could be felt, as the speeds varied from 35 to 50 and back for no apparent reason. Eventually one driver allowed his feelings to get the better of his judgement, and he performed a hair-raising overtake up to a tight left hand bend over the phantom island.
He then turned off right at a roundabout only a mile or two up the road!!!
We seem to be giving out licenses far too easily these days. IMHO The car test needs to follow the lead of motorcycle training (CBT etc.) and even pass it. Hazard awareness seems to be extraordinarily lacking, despite CD-ROM's being in the supermarkets!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 23:25 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
Has anyone else seen the series on UK Gold Documentary channel, entitled "Accident Black Spot"?
It's hosted by ex-rally driver, Penny Mallory, and features the TRL test track and their policies a lot.

It's a few years since it was filmed, but the two last night delt with particular crash sites with extensive KSI histories, and the attempts made to find why the crashes happened, and how to overcome the problem.

At a village in Cambridge called Thorney, the traffic calming measures recommended by consultants reduced speeds, but increased crashes.
The ultimate answer from all the experts after studying the results was a bypass.
The traffic calming cost half a million pounds!!
Further along the same road at another village, they already had a bypass - why they did not realsie the same arguments for one suited the other, before they wasted £1/2 million is beyond me!
Experts! Ex as in has been, and Spurt - as in a drip under pressure! :lol:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2005 23:33 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 00:24
Posts: 2400
Location: Kendal, Cumbria
I saw a similar programme, where they spent a load of time and money trying to understand why everyone kept crashing on a particular bend.

After much debate about advance signage, chevrons, altered road layout (and even a bloody speed camera) the eventual conclusion was that the road surface was slippery. Once re-surfaced to the standard of the rest of the road the accidents stopped.

It did make me wonder just what was so difficult about coming to that conclusion in the first place. :roll:

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2005 00:02 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
That was the previous one in the series!
The first victim interviewed was a police advanced driving instructor, with two drivers under instruction!!

His comment was "It doesnt LOOK like a bad bend" ....which meant no amount of signage and stripes etc. was going to convince people to slow down.

Ultimately 6 out of 11 KSI's happened at night in the wet, and 3 of the remainder were skid incidents! Suddenly they realised it was the road surface!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.600s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]