Safe Speed Forums

Ah ha! I see a quick Google shows I am not alone on this. These guys have the same feeling and suspicions as me

Interesting site actually; haven’t seen it before. Maybe I should join and put a link back to somewhere I know

_________________
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.

A mod on here had a link to it for some time -he was/is the treasurer - but I'll leave it to him if he wishes to say any more .
The repeaters dodge - not just Midlands SCP that use it - seen it a fair bit -prize example was in Binley Woods -where the limit changed suddenly from to with no warning . Co-incidence or not - a van stand appeared at the same time .TBH I missed the limit signs -been for as long as I lived in this neck of the woods ,only hint was the marks on the lamps posts where the repeaters were .And funnily enough ( to add confusion to the idea of uniform limits) just past the speedway ,with no change in proximity of housing /etc ,the old remained unscathed .The lighting was the same from end to end - does someone smell rewards ?

_________________
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

Yes, I'm a prolific poster and former administrator on that site: http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/forum/

It's an interesting forum but not a campaigning site as such and thus only worth joining if you have a genuine interest in roads and related subjects. Big Tone has joined, btw

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

That was going to be our secret Peter

I’ll try not to rattle them.

Dya get it? (Groan )

_________________
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.

Back on topic...

If I had got done for speeding yesterday along that stretch all it would have taught me is what an ass the law is that I should have been fine last week but fined this week.

Absolutely nothing has changed regarding the safety of that road weepej, (if you're still watching), just the legality of my actions which were perfectly okay last week but which criminalises me this week.

How can safety suddenly have changed in a week when absolutely nothing has changed in the environment?

_________________
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.

How do you know nothing has changed regarding the safety of the road?

You need to look at a road as a system, not from the isolation of your own driver's seat.

Any road will have a number of incidents on it (some resulting in a crash, some not but some would have had the potential to do so had the circumstances been "right").

If the number of incidents goes down because the limit drops from 40 to 30, then surely those previously driving along at at 40 along it were participating in the higher incident rate of the system by way of their speed, so if they ignore the treatment they should expect comeback.

Say people firing guns into the air in celebration kills 50 a year, but most people who fire a gun in the air never kill anybody, in fact thousands do it with no problems at all.


However, if you look at the whole system you can see 50 people a year are being killed through something that is completely avoidable.

You can't say, "don't fire your gun in the air if it's going to end up killing somebody" as nobody can see into the future, so you introduce a law to say it's illegal to fire a gun in the air. A lot of people might feel aggrieved ("I've never killed anybody doing it, why should my right to fire a gun in the air be taken away"), but overall you may reduce the incidents of people being killed by a random bullet.

Not read through as I do not have the time to watch paint dry...

But on page one someone asked how to behave if broken down like that in L3. Well - each situation will have its own unique set of circumstances but a good rule of thumb would be switch on the hazards immediately, use cell phone to contact police and to leave the vehicle ONLY when you consider it safe to do so.

http://www.highways.gov.uk/news/pressre ... eid=156046


http://www.injuriesdirect.com/news/brav ... ident-2378

I gather from a perusal of all the related stories that this chap came across a woman who had crashed her car into the central reserve and pulled over to assist. He helped her to thehard shoulder and then went to retrieve the car and move that to the hard shoulder - which then resulted in this horrific injury to himself.

The insurers then tried to reduce the compo claimed because they considered that his action made him partially liable for these injuries and a court has now ruled that he is now entitled to full compo for these injuries - some of which will go towards re-paying the NHS (or a part of their treatment) from our own first hand and personally felt experience in Wildy's case all those years ago.

Tragically we come to the eternal triangle of the "what if/if only" and it does not really help Mr T to be discussed negatively in a forum but I am sure that if he were to hit on this thread by pure chance - then I would like to make it plain that his action was fully unerstandable and it may be that at the time he tried to move the car - the carriageway seemed quiet and safe. Perhaps he under-estimated the speeds of approach of these other cars as he crossed over to the stricken vehicle. However, I am sure he would like to help prevent other similar tragedies and accept my comment that perhaps there is a good case for the EU law of hi-viz to be in saloon of car at all times as a "just in case" and that perhaps in that rerospective triangle of the "what if/if only" - he may have been wiser to stay and tend to the woman on the hard shooulder and called to alert the emergency services who have the power to shut down the lane to and remove the danger.

I do not think it serves much purpose to blame the other drivers for "speeding" as there is no blame nor proesecution mentioned in any article relating. The real blame lies with the woman who crashed and who did not have the common sense to switch on the hazards in the first place and he was seeking the compo probably from HER insurers!

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

Back to the original.
It was dark. It was wet. It was cold. Judging the speed of approaching vehicles in the dark is hard work.
I am sure the guy had good intentions, but seemingly ignored considerations of personal safety....

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

I am sure his intentions were genuine and sincere and his only thought was of that to help, without thoroughly thinking things through first.

I can easily understand that someone who has had an accident and is in shock, is not thinking clearly at all and getting on the hazards is not necessarily going to be considered.
People can and do cross motorway traffic, we know they do, when they clear debris and so on, I have seen Police do it too, rushing out to collect items that are on the carriageway. It is clearly not advisable nor to ever be encouraged however.

I think if you have your wits about you to get out of the car, and go further down the motorway (within the central reservation if possible). Your stranded car now acts as a buffer, but also as a hazard. Your distance from your car will help motorists see you more clearly as you will stand out more. Staying as safe as possible, in this highly dangerous location has to be your priority, obviously calling the Police asap is top priority.

Cars can be 'driven' on the starter Motor but it will be slow and very dangerous to have the car cross the Motorway like this, better to let it help you pull into the right as much as you dare. If it still works of course !

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Surely, if all motorway drivers are driving well (i.e. leaving a gap, looking ahead, being prepared to slow down or stop in the distance you know to be clear) then it should be perfectly safe to do this?

Well, better that she had been more aware earlier and not had the crash in the first place, but people are not perfect.
We must try not to assume that all places are as they seem when we travel, and unexpected events do occur and why leaving big gaps especially on the motorway is so important.
Why also that we need proper research to help identify the true root causes of accident so that the right education and engineer applications reduce their occurrence.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Bit late but I couldn't let you get away with it

If we go down that route I may as well give up now. Not being funny with you weepej but trust me, other than a resurfacing with what I assume is better Tarmac there’s nothing in the way of extra road furniture, junctions – nothing! If you don’t believe me on that then I’m stuffed.


Again, driver’s seat or bird’s eye view – nothing has changed. I know that area like you know the inside of your home. If someone moved your sofa or changed a lampshade you’d know. That’s how well I know this area of the A38(M). So unless they have used a slippier Tarmac to 'up' the KSI figures, nothing's changed.

But I disagree with the premise of that argument about “if” the number of incidents goes down because the limit drops. It may equally go up because the slower traffic is bunching together so maybe you’re just substituting a rare big accident for a hundred smaller ones?

This goes back to the old fallacious argument about if it saves just one life...

In which case where do you draw the line? If it saves just one life we should all do 10 mph. If it saves just one life we should ban all metal knives. If it saves just one life we should all just stay in our homes and turn the electricity off. It’s a balance between getting the job done and sacrificing, (yes I’m being careful with my words here), sacrificing idealism over realism.

Ideally, I wouldn’t want another KSI anywhere in the world. Realistically, we have to be mobile in order to function and live, and if your answer is to approach immobile that simply is not going to work in any society – ever!

_________________
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.

I didn't quite mean it like that, I was really asking, despite you making it safely down that road the X number of times you've driven down it, you just might be lucky. How do you know how many others are not?

Also, things can change about a road to make it more of a crash zone than just physical layout; increased likelihood of a queue for a start (having seen the results of three read end shunts along a short stretch of the M4 today it's clear to me that queues can catch people unaware), maybe more pedestrians using a crossing, or simply more cars.




Tone, remember, reducing the speed limit by 10mph does little or nothing to your journey time.

1) You don't always travel at the limit (or for you, just above it)

2) Congestion slows you down more that a speed limit ever could

3) The reduced section is probably so short if there were no other cars and you travelled at the limit, it would probably take you 20 more seconds or so to get down it.

In short, no effect.

And the slower limit may reduce the number of crashes, non serious and serious (lots of evidence to show that they do). Massive money saving for all concerned.

So, remind me who's not getting the balancing act right?

You too don’t forget, Mr sanctimonious 'butter wouldn’t melt in your mouth'



So tell me again why we need so many speed cameras.



Good for you to say. You’re obviously not a long distance driver or have a logistics background in the modern world. You know what those thousand 20 seconds adds up to and the crap you get from not delivering on time mean to people living in the real world?

_________________
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.

This is redundant. By your previous logic, traffic speed will change in sympathy with the limit - therefore, journey time is affected.


Only during times of congestion. Outside of this, there are significant benefits to be had by increasing many limits (displacement from less safe roads, displacement from congested times, reduced fatigue [slower = longer; slower = less stimulus]; indeed on the faster roads, there are more casualties due to fatigue than 'exceeding the limit' in general

A high limit outside of peak times on many roads may actually result with greater safety, as well as greater respect for the law.


Nice to see someone considering factors in real-world conditions.


Someone somewhere certainly isn't getting the balance right!

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

So When I travel to France in July, and do 55 instead of 65 to the Ferry port, it won't make any difference to my time?

It is 310 miles, and on my return journey the ferry lands at 9.30pm - it takes 30 - 45 minutes to disembark and clear the port. If I travel at 65, with no stops or hold ups, I will be home by 3.00am.
If I travel at 55 with no stops or hold ups, I will not be home until very nearly 4.00pm - by which time I shall be a good deal more tired than I should be to drive.

I don't know about you, but driving below the speed of vehicles around you requires much more concentration - especially when a ferry has just unloaded 250 cars and lorries who are all keen to make a quick getaway from the port - the M27 M3 and A34 are hectic! It is safest to make as much speed as possible and stay ahead of the traffic!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

This is the problem with office bound beaurocrats making speed limit ( and other road changes). They have little or no "real life" driving experience. If they were to be made to have done a 12 months long distance driving job, previous to gaining the post they have now, they would have a far better understanding of road safety.

_________________
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.

But the 'office bound bureaucrats' aren't setting up an infrastructure entirely inhabited by people who have done 12 months long distance driving job. Their task would be very easy if they were. But they are trying to ensure safety in an environment full of people with much less experience and confidence. Fallible and nervous people who make mistakes and lack confidence and need rules to reassure them. If every road user was as competent as you appear to be then we could safely do away with speed limits and traffic lights and other picane rules. But we are intent on creating a society in which no one can enjoy life to the full unless they drive and that means that there are bound to be a lot of incompetent drivers on the roads.

_________________
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

That's all very well. I think that the majority of us have had quite a bit of experience by the time we leave college, or whatever, of walking, cycling and are pretty well qualified in the knowledge of being a pedestrian or cyclist but to give a job to someone who is only experienced in half of the jobs entailments, is like giving the job of captaining a cruise ship, to someone who has only sailed barges on a canal.

_________________
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.

And I think that it is an unreasonable assumption on your part that they are only experienced in half the job entailments. Because someone with a different, possibly wider, perspective than yours reaches different conclusions to you does not mean that they are unqualified for the job. I think that you are less qualified in that you see road safety only from the perspective of a very competent high mileage driver rather than from the perspective of an averagely incompetent driver

_________________
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