Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Dec 07, 2019 12:05

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 02:54 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
GreenShed wrote:
Alternatively they could just drive within the limits as they are required to do. Wouldn't that be the most likely scenario?
There is as I have explained above the need to have safe and appropriate speeds applied to roads appropriately first. Once road speeds are altered with bad and inappropriate application road users have a harder time to judge and manage risk as well.
When inattention and frustration are the main accident causation factors why are speeds therefore being altered un-necessarily and adding to the problems?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:34 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
GreenShed wrote:
Alternatively they could just drive within the limits as they are required to do. Wouldn't that be the most likely scenario?
There is as I have explained above the need to have safe and appropriate speeds applied to roads appropriately first. Once road speeds are altered with bad and inappropriate application road users have a harder time to judge and manage risk as well.
When inattention and frustration are the main accident causation factors why are speeds therefore being altered un-necessarily and adding to the problems?

It isn't the business of a driver to be assessing the suitability of speed limits on a road; the limits are clearly indicated to drivers if they care to learn how this is done. If they do not then they have their driving priviledges removed or come nearer to that.

SPECS are used on road works, increasingly so it would seem. There are appropriate speed limits set on these, say 50 mph on a 70 mph road, yet we see much discussion about not observing these limits because they are inappropriate because no road workers can be seen from time-to-time. It is my contention that looking for road works activity on a motorway while being seperated from oncoming traffic at 50 mph by a few cones and then choosing to ignore the 50 mph speed limit to drive at 70 mph or more is totally inappropriate. It is easier and safer to simply accept what has been adjudged for all drivers to be the maximum by the Highways Authority, that being the maximum suitable speed at the posted limit, whatever that is adjudged to be.

Time for assessment of safety can thus be used by the driver to achieve safe progress without the need to see if work is being done. I believe it is absured to suggest that drivers can assess the suitability of a speed limit and the speeds at which they drive whether above or below the speed limits in a safer way than driving safely and within the limits that are set and indicated to them. If this is a source of frustration than the sooner a driver, so frustrated, is removed from the road the better it will be for maintaining and improving safety.

While you contend that speed limits are changed unecesarrily I don't believe that any are so altered; it too is an absured suggestion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:41 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
Quote:
While you contend that speed limits are changed unecesarrily I don't believe that any are so altered; it too is an absured suggestion.


if you were to ask 100/1000/10,000 motorists if they think that some speed limits were being changed un neccessarily, you would realise, just how much out of touch you are, with the majority of motorists.

_________________
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: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:47 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
graball wrote:
Quote:
While you contend that speed limits are changed unecesarrily I don't believe that any are so altered; it too is an absured suggestion.


if you were to ask 100/1000/10,000 motorists if they think that some speed limits were being changed un neccessarily, you would realise, just how much out of touch you are, with the majority of motorists.

Very good, and what justification would they have that any of the changes were unnecessary?

As I explained above, they would have none.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:55 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
So the thoughts of the common motorist are insignificant,even though they may be in the majority, have far more driving experience (asis certain in the case of the police) than local authorities?

Typical of the people we have running the country then.....YOU WILL OBEY AND NOT QUESTION WHY!

_________________
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: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 12:57 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
or it could be a case of..... "I (greenshed) am always right and if you argue and ask me to prove the implausable, I will storm off in a huff"

_________________
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: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 13:04 
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:
It isn't the business of a driver to be assessing the suitability of speed limits on a road

It is the business of a driver to assess a suitably safe speed, unless you disagree. If the majority of drivers agree that speed it significantly higher than the posted limit then one of two things must happen, that limit must be reviewed or there must be a clear (and local) explanations why the road is deceptive. Failure to do that will result with respect for those limits being eroded (in turn leading to disrespect of other limit/laws etc).

This is really obvious. The only people who disagree with that simple argument are probably those with vested interests, such that gaining their income from enforcing needlessly low limits.

GreenShed wrote:
SPECS are used on road works, increasingly so it would seem. There are appropriate speed limits set on these, say 50 mph on a 70 mph road, yet we see much discussion about not observing these limits because they are inappropriate because no road workers can be seen from time-to-time. It is my contention that looking for road works activity on a motorway while being seperated from oncoming traffic at 50 mph by a few cones

Yet we have so many 60 limits (SCs and DCs), with only a strip of paint separating oncoming traffic; the motorway workers are protected by concrete barriers which is more than most other road users get.

GreenShed wrote:
I believe it is absured to suggest that drivers can assess the suitability of a speed limit

That's right, motorists must remain at the speed limit at all times, never to go slower than it, even around corners or rain/snow/fog, disregarding hazard density....
:loco:


GreenShed wrote:
While you contend that speed limits are changed unecesarrily I don't believe that any are so altered; it too is an absured suggestion.

That is your opinion, others will share in that opinion. I believe your opinion isn't shared by the majority of motorists.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 13:39 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
Amusing.
Arguing pedantics.
As for speed limits on/near roadworks: Currently the A421/Bedford/M1J13 dualing roadworks are being done. There is a 40mph limit practically all the way from Bedford to the M1.
When enforcement was by the occasional van (hard to see because they parked on the blind side of a bridge) all (or nearly all) of the drivers (including trucks) ignored the restriction.
Now they are enforced by specs.
Funny, the speeds have gone down to around 40.
And they didn't ignore the limit because they could not see the roadworkers, the traffic used to go past guys cleaning the cones at night at well over 40....and mainly over 70 !
EVEN with a big van with flashing amber lights as a warning they ignored the limit.
Now they don't.
Everything has a bright side.....
Some cameras and speed limits may be over the top....but ones for roadworks are not. Nobody has the right to ignore a threat to anothers life.

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 14:30 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
jomukuk wrote:
As for speed limits on/near roadworks: ...
And they didn't ignore the limit because they could not see the roadworkers, the traffic used to go past guys cleaning the cones at night at well over 40....and mainly over 70 !

Well that is bad - but hold on!

I've never, in recent memory, ever seen a motorway where workers are separated by mere cones; I've only ever seen use of concrete blocks. So while your example may well be valid for the specific case you describe, it certainly does not apply to all such motorway road works.

There's more. While I agree it isn't right that people be nipping past cone cleaners at 70, why are the folks cleaning the cones in the first place? How long must have the works been there for cones to need such maintenance? If for any significant period of time, why aren't concrete blocks used instead?
Many would agree to having a temporary restrictions during the times when the cones are fussed around with (with signs explaining why the limit has to be so low), but that’s no justification to apply it 24/7.

More significantly: why do they opt to clean the cones during darkness? :loco: I mean, that’s just f :censored: g stupid, for several reasons!!!
(heck I never see real road works being done out of office hours anyway :roll: )


There are questions more reaching than that. From your description, there are many people disregarding the reduced motorway limits. This of course isn't good, but how did we reach such a level of disrespect for them? Is it because of limits within other such areas really are taking the pi55?

I have to wonder when people call for stringent measures, each one in itself reasonable but where the combination of them are obviously overkill, when there are much higher limits on roads where there are usually people (cyclists) within the same lanes as 70mph traffic (DCs with reservations), not separated by anything, without road lighting, perfectly legally. How much more inconsistent can this possibly be?

Sorry but I don’t buy it!

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 15:13 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Steve wrote:
...
GreenShed wrote:
I believe it is absured to suggest that drivers can assess the suitability of a speed limit

That's right, motorists must remain at the speed limit at all times, never to go slower than it, even around corners or rain/snow/fog, disregarding hazard density....
:loco:

The only time this gets mentioned is by those who disagree with speed enforcement measures; I don't know of any road safety organisation or authority who have or would promote such a suggestion.
The recommendation is to use a speed that is safe AND that is below the maximum speed for the road.
Can you show any policies that are other than I suggest?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 15:40 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 18:50
Posts: 673
Quote:
The only time this gets mentioned is by those who disagree with speed enforcement measures; I don't know of any road safety organisation or authority who have or would promote such a suggestion.

You have promoted it in your prior posts, where you state that a motorist must not choose a speed that is safe (or form an opinion as to what is safe) but that they MUST follow the speed limit.

Are you now backing down on that completely stupid statement?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 15:41 
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:
Steve wrote:
...
GreenShed wrote:
I believe it is absured to suggest that drivers can assess the suitability of a speed limit

That's right, motorists must remain at the speed limit at all times, never to go slower than it, even around corners or rain/snow/fog, disregarding hazard density....
:loco:

The only time this gets mentioned is by those who disagree with speed enforcement measures; I don't know of any road safety organisation or authority who have or would promote such a suggestion.

Don’t you see: that’s effectively what you said: "I believe it is absured to suggest that drivers can assess the suitability of a speed limit".
Your question of policy is irrelevant (and a distraction from the point we are discussing).

It seems that, like weepej, you are conflicted with your own opinions. This only gets demonstrated from those who strongly agree with speed limits and enforcement measures as they are applied today.




I say again:
It is the business of a driver to assess a suitably safe speed, do you agree or disagree?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 16:06 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Odin wrote:
Quote:
The only time this gets mentioned is by those who disagree with speed enforcement measures; I don't know of any road safety organisation or authority who have or would promote such a suggestion.

You have promoted it in your prior posts, where you state that a motorist must not choose a speed that is safe (or form an opinion as to what is safe) but that they MUST follow the speed limit.

Are you now backing down on that completely stupid statement?

The interpretation you have put on that is complete bollix and you know it. It isn't even worthy of being described as stupid.

All of my advice has been and will continue to be that "a safe speed that is also a speed that is at or below the speed limit should be chosen by drivers".

Only the obnoxious idiot would interpret that as "drive at the speed limit no matter what!"

Where's that knob smiley when you need it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 16:10 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685
Steve wrote:
I say again:
It is the business of a driver to assess a suitably safe speed, do you agree or disagree?

I only agree with it when it is qualified thus: "It is the business of a driver to assess a suitably safe speed and that speed is within the speed limit"

You appear to be getting mixed up with where I said "it is not the business of a driver to assess the suitability of the speed limit; still its not like you to require accuracy in your interpretation.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 16:23 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 18:50
Posts: 673
Quote:
The interpretation you have put on that is complete bollix and you know it. It isn't even worthy of being described as stupid.

Don't shoot the messenger, you said it, I can't help it if you now want to backtrack!

Quote:
Only the obnoxious idiot would interpret that as "drive at the speed limit no matter what!"

I had already worked out that only an obnoxious idiot would drive like that, this is what we are trying to point out to you. Clearly our message has got home to you.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 16:55 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
Quote:
"it is not the business of a driver to assess the suitability of the speed limit; still


So are you saying that using mean speeds and 85 percentile speeds to set speed limits is wrong then? Because if not wrong and it is right, (in your opinion), surely that is the point of these two tools, to use "the driving public" to help assess a SUITABLE speed limit for ANY given road. (Dept for Transport Guidelines 2006)

Quite often, speed limits are dropped and local authorities will then reassess the mean speeds, after the limit drop, to see if the limit is being adhered to and to decide what further (ridiculous) measures they have to spend large sums of money on, to try and enforce a ridiculous and unsuitable (by the opinion of the average/mean driver) limit.

_________________
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: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 18:59 
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 only agree with it when it is qualified thus: "It is the business of a driver to assess a suitably safe speed and that speed is within the speed limit"

You appear to be getting mixed up with where I said "it is not the business of a driver to assess the suitability of the speed limit;

No, you’re trying to divert the issue by introducing a factor that is irrelevant.
It is as you say, "the business of a driver to assess a suitably safe speed" (the rest of that sentence is an independent clause separated by an AND operator, hence not relevant). Therefore it is clearly not absurd to suggest that drivers can assess the suitability of a speed limit; yes it is also their responsibility to remain within the limit, but we’re not discussing the latter part (as much as you might want to divert).

An example: what if tomorrow some motorway limits dropped to 50mph; would drivers suddenly not be in a position to assess a safe speed above 50mph? Now that’s absurd!

Face it, when the majority are saying the setting of the law is wrong, and the majority are not abiding by it, whilst remaining safe and within the spirit of the law, then the use of that law must be reviewed.

GreenShed wrote:
still its not like you to require accuracy in your interpretation.

What, like the manner the SCPs do when they give their claims of 'KSI reductions at camera sites', even though most (possibly none) of that reduction is nothing to do with the cameras?
Now you wouldn’t have been part of that brigade would you? :lol:

To say that a group should not have a say on the restrictions placed upon them is the height of arrogance, and in my experience perpetrated only by those who stand to gain by abusing their position in the matter.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 19:07 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
Steve wrote:

I've never, in recent memory, ever seen a motorway where workers are separated by mere cones; I've only ever seen use of concrete blocks. So while your example may well be valid for the specific case you describe, it certainly does not apply to all such motorway road works.

There's more. While I agree it isn't right that people be nipping past cone cleaners at 70, why are the folks cleaning the cones in the first place? How long must have the works been there for cones to need such maintenance? If for any significant period of time, why aren't concrete blocks used instead?
Many would agree to having a temporary restrictions during the times when the cones are fussed around with (with signs explaining why the limit has to be so low), but that’s no justification to apply it 24/7.

More significantly: why do they opt to clean the cones during darkness? :loco: I mean, that’s just f :censored: g stupid, for several reasons!!!
(heck I never see real road works being done out of office hours anyway :roll: )


There are questions more reaching than that. From your description, there are many people disregarding the reduced motorway limits. This of course isn't good, but how did we reach such a level of disrespect for them? Is it because of limits within other such areas really are taking the pi55?

I have to wonder when people call for stringent measures, each one in itself reasonable but where the combination of them are obviously overkill, when there are much higher limits on roads where there are usually people (cyclists) within the same lanes as 70mph traffic (DCs with reservations), not separated by anything, without road lighting, perfectly legally. How much more inconsistent can this possibly be?

Sorry but I don’t buy it!



Really. So where did I say a motorway ?
I said the A421/Bedford to M1J13.
The entire stretch is being dualled. From Bedford to the M1
HERE, THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE A421 SHOWN IS BEING DUALLED The cones are cleaned at night because the sheer volume of traffic is enormous. The A421 feeds the M1 from the A1.
Other work is done at night, but that involves the closure of the entire length...bridge building etc.
In some places the existing A421 is going to be part of the new dual carriageway, in others a new dual carriageway is being constructed. Since that road also feed traffic to/from Milton Keynes (the other side of the A421 is also going to be dualled, eventually.) you can imagine the amount of traffic.
A new M1 junction is also being built (J13A). Alongside all that, the new Bedford bypass has just been opened....which also feeds the M1 and A1....via the A421.
It is a 40mph limit along the entire stretch. From where it says A421 in the top right, to the M1J13. The section of dual carriageway that the A421 sign is on (top right) is coned to single carriageway because they are building the new carriageway and bridge alongside the road. Which has metal barriers on that part (big drop).
That part is where the specs start...and they are alongside the entire stretch from Bedford to the M1.

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 19:41 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2004 14:47
Posts: 1659
Location: A Dark Desert Highway
GreenShed wrote:
It isn't the business of a driver to be assessing the suitability of speed limits on a road; the limits are clearly indicated to drivers if they care to learn how this is done. If they do not then they have their driving priviledges removed or come nearer to that.

SPECS are used on road works, increasingly so it would seem. There are appropriate speed limits set on these, say 50 mph on a 70 mph road, yet we see much discussion about not observing these limits because they are inappropriate because no road workers can be seen from time-to-time. It is my contention that looking for road works activity on a motorway while being seperated from oncoming traffic at 50 mph by a few cones and then choosing to ignore the 50 mph speed limit to drive at 70 mph or more is totally inappropriate. It is easier and safer to simply accept what has been adjudged for all drivers to be the maximum by the Highways Authority, that being the maximum suitable speed at the posted limit, whatever that is adjudged to be.


I went up home 2 weeks ago, a 40 limit that has been in place since circa 1982 is suddenly no a 30. Why has this road suddenly changed? As far as I can see the only thing different about this stretch of road is the new speed limit. Every thing about it is the same as it has been for the last 30 years, except now there is less heavy traffic thanks to the M54 that was built 27 years ago and there's less farm traffic now, largely because they have all gone out of business.

As for SPECS. Get yer self down to Essex. The A127 is "policed" by average speed cameras to enforce the crazy 50 limit that is now inforce. This time last year it was NSL. There has been at least 2 fatalities this year on the 50 section and it was closed recently when someone got knocked off his motorcycle.

Numerous reasons for the poxy cameras and lower speed limit have been banded around. Sometimes it emmisions, one day it might be safety, the next it is to cram more traffic down the same under capacity road. It just depends on who is asking the question really. I use this road off peak normally and would be interested to know why I need to go so slow at 11pm of a Sunday evening when I'm the only car on the road.

Next week I'll be travelling along that road absolutely flat out, but because I'll be on a tractor I won't set the poxy cameras off, even though I'm much safer going 3 times as fast or more in a car.

Thaks for treating me like an idiot, Essex Police, I appreciate it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SPECS3
PostPosted: Tue Dec 15, 2009 19:44 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
jomukuk wrote:
Really. So where did I say a motorway ?

My apologies, I misread your post, as being about the works being on a motorway. Of course this now further distances your arguments from motorways works (which is the part I don't buy). The 40 limit you describe may well be a valid setting for that works section.
However, some of my earlier issues remain.

jomukuk wrote:
The cones are cleaned at night because the sheer volume of traffic is enormous.

So clean then when you can't see them, when other can't see you; that's better than being visible and being able to check cleanliness, huh?
Anyway, even if that is the case, it in itself cannot justify continuation of that limit during daytime, unless the cones are during the day too?

That doesn't begin to address my remarks about how often they need to be cleaned. Are these cones cleaned every night?
Why aren't low maintenance separating blocks used instead? (the works must have been there for a while judging by your description). That's what's used on the A3 Hindhead single carriageway works (and oddly enough the limit is higher).

All being said, there's nothing to prevent an idiot doing 70+ (traffic allowing), especially one determined enough to disregard the law in other ways; just what you want during the small hours when cleaning cones.
The smarter folk know they can do +50 if held up when entering the enforced section.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 99 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


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 : 0.402s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]