Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Fri Dec 15, 2017 14:53

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 13:19 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
I'm not talking about whole cities, I'm talking about residential areas. Like this one, for example:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 13:37 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 14:00
Posts: 1270
Location: Near Telford, UK / Barcelona, Spain
mpaton2004 wrote:
I'm not talking about whole cities, I'm talking about residential areas. Like this one, for example:...

OK, point taken... But... How many thousands, or tens of thousands, of streets are there like this in the UK which would have to be fitted with some form of beacon system at both ends? 20(?) million vehicles would have to be modified... How many people are killed or seriously injured on these types of roads? There has to be some limit on cost-justification, and I'd reckon that this would place an insanely high price on each life "saved" - and there's no guarantee that, in fact, there would be any. I feel sure that the money could be spent elsewhere and get far better returns.

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 13:45 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
I'm not saying it would be cheap, but something to roll out over a period of decades (maybe ISA would be an easier way of taking care of the problem)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:00 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Blimey

Or we could just bring back initiatives the Green Cross Code!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:09 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
Yeah, think of the kiddie who dashes to get his football (because you know all kids have a rational mind when they're excited and playing football). It'll be alright that a driver knocks him over at 30mph because "He should have known the Green Cross Code!" and roads are for cars and drivers to do whatever they want on as they know best, regardless of the environment it creates for the residents.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:19 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
And if the driver was paying proper attention to the road and the surroundings (which would NOT happen if his speed was set so rediculously low) then he would have seen the child well in advance and slowed accordingly.

Yet again, the money would be better spent on education.

I live on a street very similar to the one in your photo, that also happens to be a rat-run from the town centre to the motorway. People (not all) drive too fast along it and in particular too fast round the corner half way along. I HATE people driving like that along my street, to the point that we're currently trying to get it made 1 way.

Point is, if all drivers were properly educated then it wouldn't be a problem. You wouldn't need gadgets and gizmos to limit peoples speed as they would be doing it them selves, ALL the time.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:21 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
Yeah, and it's not going to happen. We need to be realistic.

Instead of going slow after the hazard, why not go slow in the first place, so if someone does run out, you can stop even quicker, and if you DO hit them, the injuries are going to be far less severe.

In any case, why would your concentration be limited on a road like this at 10-15mph? If that's the case, get off the bloody road.


Last edited by mpaton2004 on Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:23, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:22 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
mpaton2004 wrote:
Yeah, think of the kiddie who dashes to get his football (because you know all kids have a rational mind when they're excited and playing football). It'll be alright that a driver knocks him over at 30mph because "He should have known the Green Cross Code!" and roads are for cars and drivers to do whatever they want on as they know best, regardless of the environment it creates for the residents.

Would that also not apply at 15mph? Kids under car wheels don't fair very well at any speed!

This is of course a two way process, but some responsibility must reside with the pedestrian or their guardian.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:24 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Sixy_the_red wrote:
Yet again, the money would be better spent on education.

Exactly! Compared to an government run ISA speed system, anything would be more most effective


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:24 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
mpaton2004 wrote:
Yeah, and it's not going to happen. We need to be realistic.

Instead of going slow after the hazard, why not go slow in the first place, so if someone does run out, you can stop even quicker, and if you DO hit them, the injuries are going to be far less severe.

In any case, why would your concentration be limited on a road like this at 10-15mph? If that's the case, get off the bloody road.


My concentration wouldn't be limited on a road LIKE THAT. I'd be doing that kind of speed anyway! As would any competent and properly trained driver.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:25 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
Of course, but ultimately it's the drivers responsiblilty to be sensible enough to know that kids are likely to be playing here, and slow right down. So why don't they?

If we completely remove the ability to drive at grossly inappropriate speed through areas like this in the first place, then that's surely a positive thing, no?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:30 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 22:02
Posts: 3266
I would love you to have your car limited to 15mph on those streets and 5mph as the signs say in tescos car park.

You would soon be screaming for it to be un-limited

15mph is as slow as an old lady on a bycycle. I bet you drive faster.
(unless you are as blind as a bat and shouldnt be on the road)

:idea: Maybe safe speed need to hack a cars cpu and limit a car and ask councilers to try out the new limits.

PS: I agree with mapton... this is a brainstorming area! I dont agree with much else though.... :wink:

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:31 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
Sixy_the_red wrote:
My concentration wouldn't be limited on a road LIKE THAT. I'd be doing that kind of speed anyway! As would any competent and properly trained driver.


Thanks! Exactly the point! If COMPETENT drivers will be maintaining that sort of speed ANYWAY, we therefore can eliminate the WORST drivers' choice of speeds with the system as under no circumstances is it neccessary to travel above 10-15 mph in the first place under even the best conditions.

They would not need to stare at the speedo
They would be able to focus 100% of the time outside the vehicle
There would be no speed cameras
The environment would be consistent
We are at the lower extremes of the Joksch curve for fatality probability.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:37 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 08:22
Posts: 2618
But surely we'd just be better off removing those bad drivers from the road COMPLETELY.

Remove the ability to think for oneself in one circumstance and you reduce the capability to think for oneself in ALL circumstances.

If a driver is not capable of slowing down to an appropriate level then they either need to be re-educated or removed from the road.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 14:59 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
mpaton2004 wrote:
Of course, but ultimately it's the drivers responsiblilty to be sensible enough to know that kids are likely to be playing here, and slow right down. So why don't they?

If we completely remove the ability to drive at grossly inappropriate speed through areas like this in the first place, then that's surely a positive thing, no?

Who says they don’t?

At what speed would you draw the hard-limit? Would it account for poor conditions or time of day, either needlessly or never? Of course not! This would be another blanket ‘one size fits all’ solution which erodes a precious skill from the driver and that’s a bad thing!

If the real problem – joyriders – has already broken into and started the car, it wouldn’t take them much longer to bypass such ISA systems.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 15:00 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
mpaton2004 wrote:
Thanks! Exactly the point! If COMPETENT drivers will be maintaining that sort of speed ANYWAY, we therefore can eliminate the WORST drivers' choice of speeds with the system as under no circumstances is it neccessary to travel above 10-15 mph in the first place under even the best conditions.

They would not need to stare at the speedo
They would be able to focus 100% of the time outside the vehicle
There would be no speed cameras
The environment would be consistent
We are at the lower extremes of the Joksch curve for fatality probability.

And at the same time remove all incentive for the "worst" drivers to improve; after all if you are driving at 15mph it has to be safe doesn't it?

The other little problem with the idea is that those with responsibility for setting the areas will immediately start with "scope creep", and extend the areas, after all why bother with equipment to set the limit at each end of each road like this (hundreds and possibly thousands of them) when you could for a much lower cost just put them onto all the access roads into the town (20 or 30) and apply a blanket limit across the entire town? Red Ken is already shifting CG out of central London so it will happen - there is no chance in hell that such an idea will be limited to residential streets.

And another little problem is how is it supposed to work for all vehicles? Modern ones with ABS sensors that can give actual road speed and an EMU that can limit engine revs - then technically possible, but what about all the older mechanical ones? What about cyclists - how do we restrict the lycra-clad maniacs ( :wink: ) to a pedestrian 15mph? And won't they be more vulnerable given that they and the vehicles around them are going exactly the same speed? Is anybody allowed to overtake say a milk float going at 12 mph?

Which leads onto the next little problem - speed differentials - even the idealised ABS sensor based mechanism is dependent on the size of the wheels - new tyres are larger than worn tyres, so two identical cars with different tyre wear will give different limited speeds - the new tyred one will be going that little bit faster, and then it's driver can no longer sit on the limiter, but has to take manual control.

What about those areas that are not blessed with flat as a pancake geography? The only way to ensure a speed as low as 15mph in a hilly area (e.g. Leek in Staffs which has many such roads) is to have machine controlled braking as well. So we are not just talking about a simple black box, but are instead proposing full vehicle control - why not just throw in optical and radar sensors too - at least they will be able to give accurate speed based on doppler readings, and maintain the safe distance to the vehicle in front. Bargain price of £5000 per vehicle and compulsory scrapping of all vehicles to which it cannot be applied. Still there would be a healthy black market in bypass mechanisms!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 22:21 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9230
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
smeggy wrote:
Blimey

Or we could just bring back initiatives the Green Cross Code!



OR - Just perhaps realise that play parks are for playing - LA's are getting grants for MUGAs ----(Multi Uses Games Area) --designed to get teens off the streets.


AND ROADS ARE FOR CARS -BEFORE the green lot decide that they aint. :roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 23:12 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
botach wrote:
OR - Just perhaps realise that play parks are for playing - LA's are getting grants for MUGAs ----(Multi Uses Games Area) --designed to get teens off the streets.


AND ROADS ARE FOR CARS -BEFORE the green lot decide that they aint. :roll:

I disagree with this (to an extent).

Pedestrians need to be able to cross roads if they are able to do anything without resorting to motorised transport, such as walking to the aforementioned parks, unless we accept having pedestrian crossings on every street corner!!!

All roads users really can get along, all it takes is a little skill, co-operation and social responsibility.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 23:28 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9230
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
Quote:
Smeggy
Pedestrians need to be able to cross roads if they are able to do anything without resorting to motorised transport, such as walking to the aforementioned parks, unless we accept having pedestrian crossings on every street corner!!!


YES - I agree - before the PC lot got involved - Peds and drivers interacted ,but now the PC lot are saying that kids have the right to play on streets ,and vehicles must look out for them - total reversal of the idea of what you are saying.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 23:55 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
I think a cheaper way of doing it would be with GPS. Just programme the restricted area into each car's GPS receiver and as soon as it is inside that area, it could be made to slow down. Whether or not anyone would BUY a car like that is another matter entirely.

So far, every attempt to force people to drive slower (i.e. speed limiters on trucks) hasn't worked. Soon, minibuses and light goods vehicles will be speed limited. I predict an initial drop in accidents followed by a rise back up to (and beyond) original levels. That's what happened with HGVs and I've no reason to suppose this will be any different. However, we just don't seem to learn the lesson that if we treat people like idiots, that's how they will behave. :roll:

After a while, a few frail old dears will get hurt / killed at 15MPH. There will be a massive outcry. "These people's rights are being infringed". Someone will suggest a 10MPH limit - and cite how wonderful life will be for pedestrians / cyclists etc. But then one day, it will be icy and the councils will have stopped gritting roads to save money because nobody could ever have a serious accident at 10MPH! So someone will propose having a man with a red flag walking in front of every motor car...

and history will, once again, repeat itself....


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 94 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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 : 0.606s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]