Safe Speed Forums

If you read the above statement made by Greenshed......."the FASTER the AVERAGE SPEED of all the traffic, the MORE FREQUENT the accident collisions are"...then explain how this is true using the same type of roads, i.e. single carriage ways.

_________________
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.

There are at lots of types of driving. One is when you are (say) manoeuvring around a multi-story car park at 3am. All the obstacles are still. Another is town driving, when things are random. They can come from any direction at any time. And there's the motorway, where everything is aligned - moving along in a "cloud" around you - you are part of it, moving along in the same general direction. You can't just compare the average speed. You have to know about the type of road. But, in any given type of driving, it's wrong to try to go as fast as you can, however late you may be.

I wondered how many posts it was going to take before your behaviour was going to give you away (thus confirming what the admin team already knew)......

Moderator notice:

Pip is a previously banned user and was also in breach of the forum rules. The user's account has been deactivated.

No it isn't (well it might be by your own perception). I already clearly stated that you wouldn't let yourself be drawn when prompted.

To support the view that your perception is somewhat askew:

That's another strawman. I have already made my position clear on this issue.

One of the things I was suggesting is that allowing higher motorway speeds will 'pull' displace traffic from less safe roads, as well as reduce the effect of fatigue, and lead to a greater respect of speed limits in general.
However, I will say we shouldn't be introducing hazards into carriageways and limiting visibility.

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

Yes Steve, that is one of the points that I was going to use in reply to one of weepej's tired old trot out phrases, when he goes along with.....



I think what you are trying to say, Weepej, (but not making any headway) is that urban roads are more dangerous than rural (higher speed) roads, not because of their (lower)speed limits but because they have MORE HAZARDS, so what you cannot grasp is it is NOT the speed that traffic travels at but the number of hazards over a given stretch that makes a road less safe. Increasing speed limits on a road with few hazards doesn't make the road MORE dangerous, but increasing hazards on a road with a fixed speed limit does make the road MORE dangerous. So the danger level of any road isn't proportional to speed but more so to the number of hazards/mile.

This is something that you speed kills/scp people cannot grasp. This is also born out in the fact that the more "road furniture" that councils litter our roads with , the more chance that someone will hit it.

_________________
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.

You're not kidding!



In a hazardous environment you should travel more slowly, come on graball, we all do it.



Assertion.



No, it means more people drive along it in a dangerous manner.



Wrong, both account for incidents, the higher the speed, the bigger the chance of happening across a hazard and the less time you have to react to it.



You spend post after post asking if speed kills why are motorways "safer" than 30mph roads and you blame others for not grasping something?

So why are motorways safer than urban roads????....slower speeds or LESS hazards....errrm let me work that one out with a calculator for you....

_________________
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.

Total crap...give me an example.... in a given 20 miles of road you will see the same amount of hazards....faster just means that you see the same amount of hazards in the less time OR LESS hazards...think about it...use your brain on this one....

_________________
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.

A rural NSL means that you have a .00000045% chance of an accident, an urban road means that you have a 0.00000101% chance of an accident, both over a given kilometre travelled,....which would you prefer?

_________________
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.

If people like Roadpeace, Brake , SCPs or the speed kills lobby had a grasp of BASIC maths, the country would be a far safer place.

_________________
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.

Failing that, some actual driving experience, more than just tootling to the office every day would help!

_________________
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.

With respect, Graball, you are overlooking or discounting the fact that the nature of a hazard varies with speed; almost invariably becoming more hazardous with increasing speed. Consider. for example, driving down a country road which has a series of bridges which reduce the width of the road to one foot wider than your vehicle. At 10 mph those bridges would present no hazard; at 30mph the would be a hazard that would remove your mirrors; at 100mph they would be an extreme hazard.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

And in the REAL world????

_________________
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.

graball, would you drive down a busy shopping high street at 3pm at 70mph if the road was clear? There's people on the pavements and junctions, and there's a bus stopped just down the road.

NO, but what has that got to do with the fairytale statement of greensleeves that.....

"The higher the average speed of the road, the more accidents", this was my original query and you seem to be drifting totally off the track to try and justify something that you can't!

_________________
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.

For the same type of road.

Once again, you can't compare motorways with urban streets.

Greenshed probably should've quailified that he wasn't saying there are more incidents on motorways compared to urban roads, but you've not got to be too clever to realise that's not what he was saying.

Ok the balls in your court, give me an example....I've tried single carriageways....what next?

_________________
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.

No you are quite wrong in your recollection.
I said that as the avereage speed of TRAFFIC increased so the incidence of collisions and injury increased.

The road type matters not, the rule still applies.

There is plenty of academic and learned opinion and testing available, some of which I have alreadrly pointed to. If you are willing to dismiss it all that's up to you but you level of comprehension on road traffic collision and injury causation and prevention shown on even your last few posts means you are not really worth arguing with to be quite blunt. Your propensity to misquote and misunderstand supports this view in my opinion. Either get some road traffic education or get off the bus.

Oh by the way:
increase hazards on a road and keep speed constant - more collisions
increase speed on a road a d keep the hazards the same - more collisions
increase both - even more collisions

you seem to have conveniently said that increasing speed made no difference. I figure because you think your statement is supported by motorway ksi collision and ksi casualty figures showing motorways(high speed roads) are safer. Wrong again, there are more collisions but the "safer" claim comes from diluting the number of collisions by the increased, huge, traffic volume, whereas other roads don't generally receive this convenient treatment.

There you go, stop misquoting, read a little then come back for another go and perhaps you won't look so stupid next time.

Nice to see you back for another attempt to make sense, Greenshed.

I know that maths isn't your strong point but how do you attempt to explain......




A rural NSL means that you have a .00000045% chance of an accident, an urban road means that you have a 0.00000101% chance of an accident, both over a given kilometre travelled,.

_________________
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.

Your actual words, I believe, please explain for us lesser mortals what exactly you mean, if you don't mean that the A/100mvkms actually go up.

You do understand A/100mvkms don't you? they are, after all, what PROPER road traffic engineers use to evaluate the safety factor of any road, which is obviously a position that you couldn't attain ,not having the maths skills or technical know how to hold the job down.

_________________
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.