Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sun Dec 17, 2017 08:50

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 08:44 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
GreenShed wrote:
Frequently!
So I can allow those other drivers who are sharing the road with me some form of idea of how to predict the fastest rate at which I will approach or recede from them.

Self choice with a self imposed choice of a "safe speed" :roll: removes the predictability, in speed, of the behaviour of others. That method of speed management is, I firmly believe, not safe at all.


Naturally, you're as entitled to your "beliefs" as the next man - although it would, of course, be very wrong to portray them as anything other than just that - "beliefs"!

If, however, you hold this view, then presumably, you would agree that artificially low speed limts and rapidly changing speed limits would both be bad for road safety? Certainly I see roads that were once NSL now reduced to (widely ignored) 40 limits resulting in a bigger spread of speeds than before the reduction. These range from the "blindly-compliant", through the "common sense", then on to the "I didn't know it had changed", and right on up to the "well I don't care anyway, I'm a joyrider".

Similarly, you see long stretches (dual carriageways in cities being a prime example) where the limit can change several times in a couple of miles!

I guess you would also then agree that an improvement in road safety could be brought about by removing the (patently ridiculous) 50 limit on NSL single carriageway roads for light goods vehicles and bringing it up to the 60 limit that their (mechanically identical) passenger versions enjoy?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 11:50 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Mole wrote:
GreenShed wrote:
Frequently!
So I can allow those other drivers who are sharing the road with me some form of idea of how to predict the fastest rate at which I will approach or recede from them.

Self choice with a self imposed choice of a "safe speed" :roll: removes the predictability, in speed, of the behaviour of others. That method of speed management is, I firmly believe, not safe at all.


Naturally, you're as entitled to your "beliefs" as the next man - although it would, of course, be very wrong to portray them as anything other than just that - "beliefs"!

If, however, you hold this view, then presumably, you would agree that artificially low speed limts and rapidly changing speed limits would both be bad for road safety? Certainly I see roads that were once NSL now reduced to (widely ignored) 40 limits resulting in a bigger spread of speeds than before the reduction. These range from the "blindly-compliant", through the "common sense", then on to the "I didn't know it had changed", and right on up to the "well I don't care anyway, I'm a joyrider".

Similarly, you see long stretches (dual carriageways in cities being a prime example) where the limit can change several times in a couple of miles!

I guess you would also then agree that an improvement in road safety could be brought about by removing the (patently ridiculous) 50 limit on NSL single carriageway roads for light goods vehicles and bringing it up to the 60 limit that their (mechanically identical) passenger versions enjoy?

Beliefs - I thought that was what you were asking for

Rapidly changing speed limits - What are they? I haven't seen any speed limit changes that changed so swiftly that they couldn't be complied with or were distracting in any way. No I do not agree that speed limit changes are bad for road safety. What is bad for road safety is the "belief" that safe driving can be achieved by drivers who are " "blindly-compliant", through the "common sense", then on to the "I didn't know it had changed", and right on up to the "well I don't care anyway, I'm a joyrider" " or indeed by the driver who drives in a way that they believe they can use speed in excess of the limit as they assess both the appropriateness of the limit and the appropriateness of the speed they use that is in excess of those limits.

Light goods vehicles - Vans are not "identical" in all respects; their body shell is weaker in the event of a collision and they are allowed to carry heavier loads than passenger vehicles so the speed limit set lower makes sense. Some may suggest setting a variable limit depending on the instant load they are carrying but I don't think that is practical.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 12:39 
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:
I haven't seen any speed limit changes that changed so swiftly that they couldn't be complied with or were distracting in any way.

Technically speaking, there is no speed limit (change or not) that cannot be complied with. The issue is whether the limits are reasonable (for which there is no reasonable excuse to significantly exceed them), or are taking the p*55 such that drivers can be forgiven and reasonably expected to disregard them.

They can also be distracting in some circumstances. I ask you again: Would you say it is impossible/unreasonable that drivers will look at speedos more when driving on camera enforced roads where the speed limit is set needlessly low, in order for them to regulate their speed needlessly and significantly slower than they would have otherwise driven? You have no right to claim otherwise unless you can demonstrate that to be illogical or unreasonable.

I've always maintained there is nothing wrong with the concept of speed limits; the issue is how they are set, and we've already discussed how conflicts of interests, especially from SCP staff or ex SCP staff or those who support them in some way, can skew perceptions.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 15:03 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Steve wrote:
GreenShed wrote:
I haven't seen any speed limit changes that changed so swiftly that they couldn't be complied with or were distracting in any way.

Technically speaking, there is no speed limit (change or not) that cannot be complied with. The issue is whether the limits are reasonable (for which there is no reasonable excuse to significantly exceed them), or are taking the p*55 such that drivers can be forgiven and reasonably expected to disregard them.

The issue of reasonableness doesn't arise; if they are there then that should be sufficient at the time a driver is driving through them.
The driver who is assessing whether a speed limit is "reasonable" is surely being distracted by something that is irrelevant at that time.
Why assess "reasonable" when there is no need to and there are no options for exceding the limit if you think the speed limit is unreasonable?
Assessing "reasonableness" makes no sense.
Steve wrote:
They can also be distracting in some circumstances. I ask you again: Would you say it is impossible/unreasonable that drivers will look at speedos more when driving on camera enforced roads where the speed limit is set needlessly low, in order for them to regulate their speed needlessly and significantly slower than they would have otherwise driven? You have no right to claim otherwise unless you can demonstrate that to be illogical or unreasonable.

It is illogical; if the limit is there it is no business of the driver at the time whether it be reasonable or not; to make that assessment is unreasonable, illogical and quite frankly stupid.
Steve wrote:
I've always maintained there is nothing wrong with the concept of speed limits; the issue is how they are set, and we've already discussed how conflicts of interests, especially from SCP staff or ex SCP staff or those who support them in some way, can skew perceptions.

No! The issue is whether the attitude of the driver is to be guided by them or defy them when they believe it to be unreasonable. When was anyone ever taught to do this? To do so is quite daft.

Further, if you believe a speed limit is unreasonable then complain about it to the Highway Authority responsible for it; in that way you are exercising your right to complaint to that authority. I am sure the Authority will be only too delighted to either explain why the limit is there or indeed question and correct something that has been brought to their attention that needs alteration.
Making an assessment and defying the speed limit isn't a reasonable option and I would suggest it is unreliable and far more distracting than using in-car driving aids of any sort.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 15:58 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3427
Quote:
Further, if you believe a speed limit is unreasonable then complain about it to the Highway Authority responsible for it; in that way you are exercising your right to complaint to that authority. I am sure the Authority will be only too delighted to either explain why the limit is there or indeed question and correct something that has been brought to their attention that needs alteration.



Once again, you speak with the naivity of someone just out of school and not someone with any experience.

If the Local Authorities are going to ignore Road Safety Experts like the police BEFORE the limit is set, how on earth are they going to treat Joe Bloggs who complains about a stupididly set limit after it is done. Often the Councils spend many thousands making the road less safe in order to justify these ridiculously low limits. They are hardly likely to change them after wards just because of a few complaints.

You scenario is like complaining to the School bully just after he has pinched your sweets for the third time in a week and expecting him to say...."ok, I'll buy you some back and stop doing it".....DREAM ON!

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 16:13 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4362
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
GreenShed wrote:
Steve wrote:
GreenShed wrote:
I haven't seen any speed limit changes that changed so swiftly that they couldn't be complied with or were distracting in any way.

Technically speaking, there is no speed limit (change or not) that cannot be complied with. The issue is whether the limits are reasonable (for which there is no reasonable excuse to significantly exceed them), or are taking the p*55 such that drivers can be forgiven and reasonably expected to disregard them.

The issue of reasonableness doesn't arise; if they are there then that should be sufficient at the time a driver is driving through them.
The driver who is assessing whether a speed limit is "reasonable" is surely being distracted by something that is irrelevant at that time.
Why assess "reasonable" when there is no need to and there are no options for exceding the limit if you think the speed limit is unreasonable?
Assessing "reasonableness" makes no sense.
Steve wrote:
They can also be distracting in some circumstances. I ask you again: Would you say it is impossible/unreasonable that drivers will look at speedos more when driving on camera enforced roads where the speed limit is set needlessly low, in order for them to regulate their speed needlessly and significantly slower than they would have otherwise driven? You have no right to claim otherwise unless you can demonstrate that to be illogical or unreasonable.

It is illogical; if the limit is there it is no business of the driver at the time whether it be reasonable or not; to make that assessment is unreasonable, illogical and quite frankly stupid.
Steve wrote:
I've always maintained there is nothing wrong with the concept of speed limits; the issue is how they are set, and we've already discussed how conflicts of interests, especially from SCP staff or ex SCP staff or those who support them in some way, can skew perceptions.

No! The issue is whether the attitude of the driver is to be guided by them or defy them when they believe it to be unreasonable. When was anyone ever taught to do this? To do so is quite daft.

Further, if you believe a speed limit is unreasonable then complain about it to the Highway Authority responsible for it; in that way you are exercising your right to complaint to that authority. I am sure the Authority will be only too delighted to either explain why the limit is there or indeed question and correct something that has been brought to their attention that needs alteration.
Making an assessment and defying the speed limit isn't a reasonable option and I would suggest it is unreliable and far more distracting than using in-car driving aids of any sort.

There were other people who defended their position by saying they unthinkingly obeyed orders instead of making their own decisions about what was reasonable but I forget who they were now...

IMO, the sheer arrogance of the comments in this post need no further comment.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 16:38 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
Breathtaking arrogance aside: Did you think I wouldn't spot your attempt of distraction. I'll address each of your other points before reminding you of the underlying issue.

GreenShed wrote:
The issue of reasonableness doesn't arise;

Absolute tosh. 'Reasonableness' is first and foremost. If (whatever) is not reasonable then people won't abide by it - yes they should, but they won't thus making an ass of the law. This is basic psychology; do you really not understand this?

GreenShed wrote:
The driver who is assessing whether a speed limit is "reasonable" is surely being distracted by something that is irrelevant at that time.

Like what ... needless fatigue because the needlessly reduced level of driver arousal coupled with the needlessly longer journey? No that's completely unreasonable isn't it, just ask the 24% of motorway drivers who were killed as a result from that fatigue! :roll:
[table 1.1, dft_rdsafety_032139]

GreenShed wrote:
Why assess "reasonable" when there is no need to

'Just take your medicine and don't ask questions' :roll:

GreenShed wrote:
Assessing "reasonableness" makes no sense.

:o That's one to remember!
Can you see the irony there? :lol:

GreenShed wrote:
Steve wrote:
I've always maintained there is nothing wrong with the concept of speed limits; the issue is how they are set, and we've already discussed how conflicts of interests, especially from SCP staff or ex SCP staff or those who support them in some way, can skew perceptions.

No! The issue is whether the attitude of the driver is to be guided by them or defy them when they believe it to be unreasonable.

Can you see the irony of that response too? :lol:

GreenShed wrote:
Further, if you believe a speed limit is unreasonable then complain about it to the Highway Authority responsible for it; in that way you are exercising your right to complaint to that authority. I am sure the Authority will be only too delighted to either explain why the limit is there or indeed question and correct something that has been brought to their attention that needs alteration.

That is the ideal way forward. However, the authorities will do as they always have done: toe the line to save face or risk being sacked, relying upon misleading data from the SCPs et al about the effects of speed and dismiss everything else.
So what can the majority really do about it without having to throw away their electoral vote on this single issue? We all already know the online petition system doesn’t work.

GreenShed wrote:
Steve wrote:
They can also be distracting in some circumstances. I ask you again: Would you say it is impossible/unreasonable that drivers will look at speedos more when driving on camera enforced roads where the speed limit is set needlessly low, in order for them to regulate their speed needlessly and significantly slower than they would have otherwise driven? You have no right to claim otherwise unless you can demonstrate that to be illogical or unreasonable.

It is illogical; if the limit is there it is no business of the driver at the time whether it be reasonable or not; to make that assessment is unreasonable, illogical and quite frankly stupid.

Did you think it reasonable to completely defy (evade) my relevant question?
That question has nothing to do with defying or assessing the limit, so you cannot respond in those terms.

For all your responses about distraction, you've utterly missed the only question (also about distraction) I asked of you - which to remind you was:
Would you say it is impossible/unreasonable that drivers will look at speedos more when driving on camera enforced roads where the speed limit is set needlessly low (below what is considered to be reasonable by the sensible majority), in order for them to regulate their speed needlessly and significantly slower than they would have otherwise driven?

Just answer that question; no more diversions please!

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 16:48 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3427
Quote:
The driver who is assessing whether a speed limit is "reasonable" is surely being distracted by something that is irrelevant at that time.


Blimey, SURELY this is something that ANY experienced driver does as a matter of course without thinking about it.

When I drive along on any road I am subconsciously assessing what speed to drive for the conditions , usually within the limit if it is reasonable. Any driver who stares at a speed limit sign and then drives accordingly while believing that that speed is a safe speed or safe limit, really does need to do more driving.

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 17:36 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
graball wrote:
When I drive along on any road I am subconsciously assessing what speed to drive for the conditions , usually within the limit if it is reasonable. Any driver who stares at a speed limit sign and then drives accordingly while believing that that speed is a safe speed or safe limit, really does need to do more driving.

:bighand:
According to Gs's logic, it follows that drivers must remain at the speed limit at all times; for him it cannot be reasonable for drivers to assess if it is ever too high, let alone reasonable.


Something else Greenshed,

You essentially state it is wholly up to the authorities to decide the limits and that drivers should not question them. Have you ever given any advice or data to these authorities in any representative capacity, like as SCP staff or as some sort of support for them? At the very least, are/were you affiliated with these authorities in any official/funded way?

Just trying to eliminate potential conflicts of interests...

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 19:25 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2005 18:54
Posts: 4036
Location: Cumbria
GreenShed wrote:
Rapidly changing speed limits - What are they? I haven't seen any speed limit changes that changed so swiftly that they couldn't be complied with or were distracting in any way.

A good attempt at sidestepping the question! I never said they "couldn't" be complied with. I CAN drive with a rose between my teeth. Therer are lots of things I CAN do whilst driving. The question is whether or not they make things safer?!
GreenShed wrote:
No I do not agree that speed limit changes are bad for road safety. What is bad for road safety is the "belief" that safe driving can be achieved by drivers who are " "blindly-compliant", through the "common sense", then on to the "I didn't know it had changed", and right on up to the "well I don't care anyway, I'm a joyrider" " or indeed by the driver who drives in a way that they believe they can use speed in excess of the limit as they assess both the appropriateness of the limit and the appropriateness of the speed they use that is in excess of those limits.

So when they upped the speed limit in Utah and found that the majority of drivers didn't increase their speed to suit, what do you suppose was happening - if not a good demonstration of precisely the opposite that you're suggesting?
GreenShed wrote:
Light goods vehicles - Vans are not "identical" in all respects; their body shell is weaker in the event of a collision and they are allowed to carry heavier loads than passenger vehicles so the speed limit set lower makes sense. Some may suggest setting a variable limit depending on the instant load they are carrying but I don't think that is practical.

Oh really? Well I must say that's news to me - but hey, I only design these things for a living! I'd be interested to see some examples of what you claim!
Just in case you don't come up with anything, let me explain something:
Most sub 3.5 tonne GVW vans these days are also homologated as passenger vehicles. It makes little sense for a major manufacturer to build two shells that are any more different than the need to be. Ahead of the B pillars they are, for all practical purposes, identical - in fact many of the crash tests that I've seen cover both "M1" and "N1" variants (M1 being industry-speak for passenger vehicles up to 8 seats plus driver and N1 being goods vehicles up to 3.5 tonnes GVW).

Furthermore, they don't carry more weight - 3.5 tonnes of people weigh just the same as 3.5 tonnes of flat pack furniture!

You can, of course, "re-plate" most 3.5 tonne vans to something higher - say 3.8 or 4.2 tonnes - assuming their brakes can handle it. In fact, many camper van manufacturers struggle to get all the stuff in and put a big "garden shed" on the back whilst remaining within the original GVW - so they tend to take advantage of this system to increase the GVW - despite being allowed to keep to the same speed limits as a car! You can actually end up with the (in my view) utterly ludicrous situation where a 3.5 tonne tipper van with a nice, low centre of gravity, based on a Transit chassis cab is limited to 50 on an NSL SC, but if you took the tipper body off, stuck a garden shed on the back and loaded it up to the same weight (higher up for added instability!) of cookers, fridges sinks beds etc AND THEN throw in a couple of highly flamable gas cylinders, it's "safe" to do 60!! ("experts" eh? :roll: )

Anyway, apart from being an amusing diversion, it doesn't actually answer my question - which was whether or not you think it's safe (given your assertion that uniformity of speed is a good thing for road safety) to have different limits for different vehicle types?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 20:28 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3427
Well done , Mole.

Once again it appears that Greenshed is talking out of his @@se. How does he expect us to take any of his drivel seriously when he makes so many gaffs.

He is obviously well qualified and very experienced as a B@@@@@@er but not a lot else.

_________________
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  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 13:11 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 10:39
Posts: 384
Location: Strathclyde / West Highlands / Lanzarote
GreenShed wrote:
Rapidly changing speed limits - What are they? I haven't seen any speed limit changes that changed so swiftly that they couldn't be complied with or were distracting in any way.


On the M8 motorway at St James interchange .... there is a 40mph limit which can appear quite suddenly with no pre warning. Hadn't been along there for quite some time till the other week .... I'm in outside lane flowing with the traffic at around indicated 70 ish, there is traffic on inside and middle lane bocking the view to the 40 sign on the nearside, and traffic in front blocking the view ahead .... I'm about 3 secs behind the vehicle in front .... I didn't see the 40 sign until vehicle in front had passed it, giving a 3 second window to slow from perfectly legal 70 to 40 with 70 mph traffic behind and IMO the vehicle behind me was a bit close .... is that enough warning to be able to reasonably comply? (I do admit there is a possibility of lack of observation on my part as I haven't been back that way to check for advanced warning, but if there is I didn't see it)

Some years back before the place was strewn with speed cams I used a motorcyle as my daily transport without a working speedometer or revcounter (the price of these things is astounding :o ) for over 2 years on all types of roads.I was a tad apprehensive about doing so initially, but to be honest I don't recall it ever causing a problem, may actually have improved observation as there was never any temptation or point in looking at the speedo therefore reducing distraction.

_________________
You only need two tools - WD40 and duct tape. If it doesn't move and it should, use WD40. If it moves and it shouldn't, use duct tape. :0)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speedos
PostPosted: Tue Nov 10, 2009 00:18 
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
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
GreenShed wrote:
Safe Speed campaign pages wrote:
Contrary to some ill informed opinions Safe Speed welcome properly set speed limits, and welcome speed limit enforcement when speed limits are exceeded in a way that causes danger.

There is no evidence of this but nobody will stop you guessing and claiming so.

Problem is that speed limits are not set in any rational way - the speed limit set should be the onus on the driver on any set occasion- and penalties set to reflect breach of that failure to observe a limit equal or lower than that due to the prevailing conditions .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.344s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]