Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Dec 18, 2017 23:27

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 15:39 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 17:37
Posts: 702
Location: Whitby, North Yorkshire
prof beard wrote:
A thought:

How about making all speed limits "advisory but contributory"?

By this I mean that you have posted speed limits which are set at (as far as can be done with a fixed figure) a "reasonable" speed of the road under normal prevailing conditions, but which can be exceeded without penalty...

BUT if a driver commits another driving offence or causes an accident whilst exceeding the advisory limit, the penalty is appropriately increased. My thought is this would emphasise "appropriate speed for the conditions" whilst giving some level of guidance for the incompetent or irresponsible.


I very much agree with that, and it is something I've advocated previously.

The principle should be that exceeding a speed limit is not, in itself, a punishable offence, but in the event of an accident a court may take it into account and judge you more harshly.

This would bring it into line with the effect of disregarding the SHOULD and SHOULD NOT items mentioned in the Highway Code.

Best wishes all,
Dave.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 16:01 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4362
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
Dixie wrote:
In the event of an accident, it seams nowadays the first thing anyone says is that people were driving to fast.

I could feel my knee jerking as I read your post. :)

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 16:32 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Off the cuff ideas, I will not be offended if you savage them.

Should there be guidelines that apply to doing >NSL?

e.g.

max speed when passing a SC junction.
max speed when passing a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction, SC again.


If exceeding the speed limit is not an offence would having in car black boxes be of benefit to prove you were not driving too fast if an accident occurs?

Should a black box be a requirement for exceeding the limit?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 00:12 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
I really like those ideas!

The "advisory" thing gives the motorist choice to exercise judgement. I think that treating the motorist like someone with a modicum of intelligence will lead t omore of them BEHAVING like someone with a modicum of intelligence! I wonder whether this is part of the reason why German road KSIs aren't as bad as ours desipte large sections of derestricted motorways?

I can't think of other examples of this kind of policy but there must be some. The closest that springs to mind at present is from the boating world where, in the event of an accident and subsequent apportioning of insurance payouts, it tends to go in the favour of the most highly qualified skipper involved - even though there is no compulsory training / testing requirement for skippers. This seems to provide a good incentive for people to pursue the voluntary qualifications available.

I'd very seriously consider even allowing a "black box" in my car if the "carrot" was an "advisory" speed limit. I, (and despite what some of the trolls seem to think!) a great many other drivers would be happy to take responsibility for my own actions behind the wheel!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Apr 10, 2008 21:01 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 16:51
Posts: 1323
Location: Stafford - a short distance past hope
Dixie wrote:
How would anyone know you were breaking the advisory limit?

In the event of an accident, it seams nowadays the first thing anyone says is that people were driving to fast.


The same way they currently know if you were breaking the compulsory one?
(Police and crash analysis in most cases)


As you know speed related crashes are actually normally "too fast for the conditions" - with MOST below the limit - anyway. I thought that perhaps using breaking an advisory limit as an "aggravating factor" rather than an offence in its own right would focus enforcement more effectively, but penalise the truly reckless.

It would also render cameras redundant?

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Apr 12, 2008 18:53 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 11:11
Posts: 194
Location: Kent
I have been going over and over the idea of a motorway without a speed limit for a good few weeks now. The emphasis should be moved to a "speed appropiate for the conditions" approach whereby if for a very exagerated example a guy is going 60 in snow and heavy traffic then they would be hit with a dangerous driving conviction, but if the motorway was nearly empty and they were going 120 then that would be legal. It just seems such a shame, even my dad's 1993 Corolla can cruise at 100 comfortably, to think that when conditions permit you are only legally allowed to go 70 and have to constantly check all around for cops even if the conditions permit going faster than the limit.

I don't know if any of you guys saw it but on B.B.C. Four a few months ago there was an interesting mini series about the early years of the motorway. Back then there was no speed limit, just as I am pushing for now. It's really ironic that we went backwards. They had interviews when the motorways were new with people saying all about how fast they went. One lady said she had been upto 115! Fast for those days. Anyway, after a series of what were presumably not properly investigated horrific accidents, in a knee jerk reaction they imposed the stupid 70 M.P.H. limit that we face now. Instead of educating the people about choosing an appropiate speed for the conditions. Typical, ay?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 09:03 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
IIRC the nasty accidents the media picked up on that saddled us with :70: were all fog-related too.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 20:19 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2008 01:35
Posts: 4
All very good points.

I think if we did decide to delimit suitable roads, it would be best done in stages.

So first of all a quiet motorway, let's say the M45 would be derestricted first, then busier motorways, then a road like the A14 or A55, then finally more mainstream roads.

Many roads that are currently NSL would of course remain restricted at 60 or 70. Others could be increased a bit - plenty of rural S2s are good for 70 or 80 in good conditions.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 22:24 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 20:28
Posts: 1267
Location: not too far in front, not too far behind.
Lenzar wrote:
All very good points.

I think if we did decide to delimit suitable roads, it would be best done in stages.


I vote for the M58 (I think I may have already suggested this one before today).

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Removing NSL
PostPosted: Mon Apr 14, 2008 00:21 
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
Hi Lenzar :welcome:

I don't know if I missed something, but I'm interested to know more about this..

Lenzar wrote:
They are after all designed for 120mph


Is this true? Where did you get that from? :?

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 16:58 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 21:19
Posts: 1059
Flynn wrote:
It just seems such a shame, even my dad's 1993 Corolla can cruise at 100 comfortably


I bet it can, I bet most cars will.

I'll also bet that most drivers can't.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sun Apr 20, 2008 23:10 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
mpaton2004 wrote:
Flynn wrote:
It just seems such a shame, even my dad's 1993 Corolla can cruise at 100 comfortably


I bet it can, I bet most cars will.

I'll also bet that most drivers can't.


Really? That's quite a generalisation there! I would have thought there would be times and conditions where "most" drivers in most cars WOULD be able to cruise safely at "the ton".


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 06:18 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2004 18:17
Posts: 794
Location: Reading
Mole wrote:
mpaton2004 wrote:
Flynn wrote:
It just seems such a shame, even my dad's 1993 Corolla can cruise at 100 comfortably


I bet it can, I bet most cars will.

I'll also bet that most drivers can't.


Really? That's quite a generalisation there! I would have thought there would be times and conditions where "most" drivers in most cars WOULD be able to cruise safely at "the ton".

There's a difference between cruising safely and cruising comfortably IMHO. mpaton2004, just to confirm, are you saying that you believe that most drivers could never cruise comfortably at 100mph, even when conditions were perfect and nothing was otherwise going wrong, and leaving aside potential safety issues if something was to go wrong (e.g. stopping distances, blowouts etc)? Do you believe that they simply don't have the skill to handle a vehicle properly at 100mph on a good, empty motorway?

_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.

"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (Conservative Way Forward: Stop The War Against Drivers)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Removing NSL
PostPosted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 08:00 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Presumably when one's machine control only involves bushing buttons to engage various autopilot holds, one starts to lose faith in human handling abilities :P

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Removing NSL
PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 10:44 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 17:46
Posts: 823
Location: Saltburn, N. Yorks
As with pilots? :shock: :lol:

That's why I won't fly............


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Removing NSL
PostPosted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 21:15 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
As with some pilots... :wink:

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 07:58 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
bombus wrote:
There's a difference between cruising safely and cruising comfortably IMHO. mpaton2004, just to confirm, are you saying that you believe that most drivers could never cruise comfortably at 100mph, even when conditions were perfect and nothing was otherwise going wrong, and leaving aside potential safety issues if something was to go wrong (e.g. stopping distances, blowouts etc)? Do you believe that they simply don't have the skill to handle a vehicle properly at 100mph on a good, empty motorway?

Since he never bothered to answer ... I'll volunteer!
The average American driver lacks the skill to cruise at 100MpH in any manner. I find this disgraceful.
There are a number of causes - ever encroaching nanny culture, the fact that the term 'driver education' is probably the best example of an American oxymoron, road design that is increasingly infected by traffic calming ... if I spend more time thinking about the causes, I'll get very upset.

Some other things unnerve me about the average American driver (when it comes to driving well, we're a bunch of American'ts):
1) does not wish to possess this level of skill, even it it were for free, yet is willing to spend several thousand dollars on safety features and technologies in an attempt to make up for his lack of skill
2) does not wish others to possess this skill either - whatever the real motive for this urge, it is hidden by a) saying things like 'imagine the carnage if such an accident happened at such a speed', 'who wants / needs to drive that fast', 'teaching people to drive that well is, in itself, dangerous', and other such tripe ... and b) designing traffic enforcement with a tendency to punish those who excercise their abilities over those who behave as the rest of the herd
3) an increasing number prefer being able to multitask while driving (feel free to lay much of the blame on the torque converter / automatic transmission)

To provide a piece of counterpoint, the ability to drive well at speeds above 65MpH becomes easier to find the further one gets from a major city, which highlights corollaries regarding driving speeds, population densities, and traffic densities.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Removing NSL
PostPosted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 08:53 
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
If anyone wanted proof that people can drive quickly and safely you have surely only to look at Germany.

Although I have no personal experience over there, I am told, for instance, that if it starts to rain they automatically slow down. They seem able to drive according to the conditions so why can't others follow there good example?

Is it better training or just something in the German culture or psyche?

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Removing NSL
PostPosted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 09:36 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Big Tone wrote:
If anyone wanted proof that people can drive quickly and safely you have surely only to look at Germany.

Although I have no personal experience over there, I am told, for instance, that if it starts to rain they automatically slow down. They seem able to drive according to the conditions so why can't others follow there good example?

Is it better training or just something in the German culture or psyche?


Do they simply have more practice at judging a safe speed?

On our motorways the speed limit, which most drivers are probably using as a guide to set their speed from, is often so much lower than the maximum safe speed that when conditions deteriorate drivers may not be aware that they are now travelling too fast.

Do German drivers spend significant time on unrestricted autobahns or could many of them never use one?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Removing NSL
PostPosted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 16:00 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 09:59
Posts: 3544
Location: Shropshire
Big Tone wrote:
If anyone wanted proof that people can drive quickly and safely you have surely only to look at Germany.

Although I have no personal experience over there, I am told, for instance, that if it starts to rain they automatically slow down. They seem able to drive according to the conditions so why can't others follow there good example?

Is it better training or just something in the German culture or psyche?


Training in Germany is, IMHO, of a higher standard and there are regular road safety infomercials on the telly. Culture? Perhaps; the Germans seem to be better mannered on the roads than we do, but in other aspects of their society they have never heard of the concept of arriving first gets you served first, i.e. the queue :lol:

British drivers do also slow down in the rain but, IME, a significant number seem quite happy to bowl along, potentially into oblivion, when driving rain and spray reduce the visibilty significantly.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 51 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  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 : 0.291s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]