Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Sep 16, 2019 23:59

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 23, 2004 18:00 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 19:26
Posts: 39
So what you are saying is on any given road at any given time there is a speed x, which is the maximum safe speed to travel at. In general, this maximum safe speed can be determined by observing drivers habits. The speed that the 85th percentile do not exceed is this maximum safe speed.

Any driver who would normally be driving in the range of x is forced, by legislation, to drive at or below some speed, y, which is below x is now hampered psychologically to such a degree as to cancel out any benefits associated with the forced reduction of speed.

Having a speed, y has its uses, however careful examination should be made before punishing someone who is travelling above y, but at or below x.


That the gist of it?

I agree with most of what is said, or at least can accept it for the moment. However, I am yet to be convinced that just because most people drive a certain way most days, that we can describe that activity as the safest way to be driving.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: dangerous driving
PostPosted: Sun Jan 02, 2005 19:57 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Sat Jan 01, 2005 22:45
Posts: 1
people drive through busy rush hours in dangerous conditions, with care and without accident. what changes these situations is their own attitude, either towards other drivers or (more rarely) with respect to their own ability. neither of these aspects are controllable by safety campaigns or increased regulations. attitude towards other drivers generally deteriorates as a reaction to the bad driving of others; sometimes their appraisal of their ability becomes impaired due to lack of awareness or concentration. i believe the attitudes displayed by drivers are a reflection of their true personality, where else can one push in front, make aggressive gestures and generally intimidate other members of the public whilst remaining anonymous and without fear of reproach? it is an outlet for tension which sometimes initiates a chain reaction resulting in an accident far removed from the first offender.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 22:01 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 21:48
Posts: 169
Location: Nottingham
Mod wrote:
I appreciate that a driver that spends a large percentage of the time looking at his speedo is not spending enough time assesing risks on the road. But a decent driver should be able to drive at 25mph and keep within 5 mph of that speed most of the time without spending any more time looking at their speedo than someone travelling along with less interest in keeping within the speed limits.

But you're then saying that you'll often be travelling at 20mph for no other reason than you're trying to drive at 25mph (presumably to keep under 30mph).

At 20mph you're taking 50% longer to complete your journey, and you're taking twice as long if 40 is an appropriate speed for that road. And if it should be (or even was) a 50, or a 60, or is even a dual carriageway good for 70?.

As someone has already mentioned, you need speed to travel, and people travel for a purpose.

Could you tell us why you think that the arteries of the nation, through which the life blood of the economy is trying to flow, should be blocked by people wandering about the roads meandering between 20 and 30?

By the way, have you ever tried travelling keeping at 25, +/-5mph?

Go for a long drive on a variety of fast 30 roads trying to do that, with someone monitoring that you never exceed those limits except when you have to slow down.

Then tell us:

a) If you succeeded.

b) How it felt by the end of the drive.

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 22:13 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 21:48
Posts: 169
Location: Nottingham
Mod wrote:
And that's where we have differed then. I am not saying here that speeding leads directly to accidents. What I am saying is that when an accident happens, the speed that you were going plays a huge role in deciding the outcome.

But putting a burning cigarrette into a waste bin of paper leads directly to fire.

Blocking a fire exit, in a fire, leads directly to harm.

Putting a high speed onto a car does not lead directly to accidents, neither does it lead to collisions.

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 22:23 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 21:48
Posts: 169
Location: Nottingham
Mod wrote:
So what you are saying is on any given road at any given time there is a speed x, which is the maximum safe speed to travel at.

No, on any given road at any given time there there is an optimum speed which is the safest speed to travel at (around 80 to 85th percentile for most drivers, around 85 to 90th percentile for the best drivers)


Mod wrote:
In general, this maximum safe speed can be determined by observing drivers habits. The speed that the 85th percentile do not exceed is this maximum safe speed.

See above (and following post).


Mod wrote:
Any driver who would normally be driving in the range of x is forced, by legislation, to drive at or below some speed, y, which is below x is now hampered psychologically to such a degree as to cancel out any benefits associated with the forced reduction of speed.

Hence optimum speed. (also causes greater spread of speeds which increases danger).


Mod wrote:
Having a speed, y has its uses, however careful examination should be made before punishing someone who is travelling above y, but at or below x.

That the gist of it?

See following post.


Mod wrote:
I agree with most of what is said, or at least can accept it for the moment. However, I am yet to be convinced that just because most people drive a certain way most days, that we can describe that activity as the safest way to be driving.

But is there not much empirical evidence that:

a) Without draconian enforcement of arbitrary limits the 85th percentile speed does not change for set or roads and conditions.

b) That forcing limits below the 85th percentile speed increases accidents, whilst increasing limits that were below the 85th percentile speed decreases accidents.

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jan 12, 2005 22:35 
Offline
Suspended
Suspended

Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 21:48
Posts: 169
Location: Nottingham
Mod wrote:
Currently, the law stands that 30mph is the fastest you should go in a built up area...that 30mph assumes that the road conditions are the best possible. It sounds like you simply want to have that speed limit increased. Perhaps to 40mph. Obviously 40mph is clearly inappropriate in many situations, but a driver should be relied to set a safe speed within 40mph and there are probably very few areas where 50mph would be appropriate.

The law expects drivers to safely select appropriate speeds up to 70mph on motorways and dual carriageways, both of which can have "pedestrians" on them, and even pedestrians, cyclists, animals, and cars "parked, not only on the side of the road, but in the middle of it.

It also expects drivers to safely select the correct speed up to 60mph on all kinds of roads, in all kinds of conditions, with other cars on the same carriageway going in the opposite direction, possibly far in excess of 60, with pedestrians, parked cars, animals (more, and more variety, than in towns), children, and even residences!

So how come they suddenly lose that ability if you stick up a 50, 40 or 30 sign?


Mod wrote:
That's a fine campaign and I wish you luck with it.

At the end of the day, there is a maximum safe speed to drive at down a road in the best circumstances. I believe the speed limit should be lower than this speed. If you breach that speed by any degree, you are breaking the laws of the road. I do think that cameras picking people for doing 32mph is a bit harsh, purely on the basis that they might have mistakenly accelerated over the limit and be now decelerating.

But the speed limits are supposed to be an aid to prosecuting people driving markedly in excess of the safe speed for the road and conditions.

Not for automatically prosecuting anyone exceeding them by any amount.


Mod wrote:
The faster you go the harder you hit, in stark contrast to the information in the published article.

I'd always rather be missed at 40 than hit at 30.

_________________
http://www.itsyourduty.org.uk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 01, 2005 05:11 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 17, 2004 19:26
Posts: 39
Quote:
Could you tell us why you think that the arteries of the nation, through which the life blood of the economy is trying to flow, should be blocked by people wandering about the roads meandering between 20 and 30?


The arteries of the nation are not 30mph speed limits. They are 60 and 70mph speed limits.

Quote:
But putting a burning cigarrette into a waste bin of paper leads directly to fire.

Blocking a fire exit, in a fire, leads directly to harm.

Putting a high speed onto a car does not lead directly to accidents, neither does it lead to collisions.


You missed the point I'm afraid. Putting a burning cigarrette into a paper bin does not directly lead to a fire. I've done it before with no raging inferno spreading. Driving at speed does not lead directly to accidents. I never said it did. What I said was that when an accident happens, the speed at which it happens, decides the outcome.

When a fire happens (however it started), having the fire exits blocked is a bad thing. It could lead to lives being lost. When a car accident happens travelling at high speeds is a bad thing, it could lead to lives being lost.

Quote:
The law expects drivers to safely select appropriate speeds up to 70mph on motorways and dual carriageways, both of which can have "pedestrians" on them, and even pedestrians, cyclists, animals, and cars "parked, not only on the side of the road, but in the middle of it.

It also expects drivers to safely select the correct speed up to 60mph on all kinds of roads, in all kinds of conditions, with other cars on the same carriageway going in the opposite direction, possibly far in excess of 60, with pedestrians, parked cars, animals (more, and more variety, than in towns), children, and even residences!

So how come they suddenly lose that ability if you stick up a 50, 40 or 30 sign?


So effectively, you are saying that there shouldn't be speed limits because the law expects us to safely select an appropriate speed? Or at least the maximum speed on all roads should be 70 and drivers should be expected to safely select an appropriate speed within that? I don't see how I've stated that drivers have the ability to select a safe speed in a 70 zone but not in a 30 zone.

Quote:
But the speed limits are supposed to be an aid to prosecuting people driving markedly in excess of the safe speed for the road and conditions.

Not for automatically prosecuting anyone exceeding them by any amount.


The speed limit is a limit on the speed you are allowed to travel at. What is the point of having a limit, if you allow people to exceed it by certain amounts? It is no longer a limit. If you allow someone to drive at 35 on a straigh 30mph road, with low traffic, good weather, low resedential, at day time, bla bla bla...why not just make the limit on the road 35 and have done with it?

Quote:
I'd always rather be missed at 40 than hit at 30.


And I'd rather hit something at 30 than at 40.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 47 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

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 : 0.430s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]