Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Sat Dec 07, 2019 19:38

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 21:07 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
weepej wrote:
Big Tone wrote:
The trouble is it brings vehicles passing in opposite directions dangerously close to each other


You should slow right down and let your wheels go over the apex of the bump giving more room between opposing traffic.
I know that weepej but if they put the island bumps nearer the curb, which currently stand about 3' from the curb, down to say 2' from the curb the traffic would still be doing whatever it does but not so dangerously close to each other.

:idea: Alternatively, they could have left the bumps as far from the curb as they are but stagger them so the traffic isn't forced closely together at the same point along the road like that! Same result but less dangerous - correct?

I'm still all about safety my friend; I haven't changed :)

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 00:36 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
Well? I'm waiting.................................................? Maybe others too......................................................................... :roll:

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 00:54 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
Safety and logic don't go together in the council highways dept eyes... ;-)

_________________
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  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 11:02 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
dcbwhaley wrote:
malcolmw wrote:
The short answer is that instead of road safety being the sole criterion for setting speed limits, this process has been corrupted


What is wrong for considering broader issues than road safety when setting speed limits?

Will you be first one to say "Well, we assessed the most appropriate and safest speed limit for the road but then we changed it to one more hazardous because of political pressure?"

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 21:31 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 22:28
Posts: 42
Location: Nr. Inverness
20 mph has recently been painted on roads near me. This is NOT for safety but mearly a revenue collection device. I expect all built up areas will be 20 mph soon.

_________________
Dave ~ Freeman on the Land
http://www.freemanhighland.co.uk/
A paradigm shift in law and politics


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Dec 19, 2009 22:20 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
taxtaxtax wrote:
20 mph has recently been painted on roads near me. This is NOT for safety but mearly a revenue collection device. I expect all built up areas will be 20 mph soon.


Well, if you get done it's just a taxtaxtax on the stupidstupidstupid.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 09:38 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
malcolmw wrote:
dcbwhaley wrote:
What is wrong for considering broader issues than road safety when setting speed limits?

Will you be first one to say "Well, we assessed the most appropriate and safest speed limit for the road but then we changed it to one more hazardous because of political pressure?"


You sound like a politician - answering a question with another, irrelevant, question. :)
I have yet to be convinced that lowering a speed limit will make the road more hazardous for pedestrians. But it will often improve their " quality of life"

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 11:59 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
The implication of your view is that speed limits can only ever be reduced and never increased to the most appropriate and safest.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 15:54 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
malcolmw wrote:
The implication of your view is that speed limits can only ever be reduced and never increased to the most appropriate and safest.


Again I have yet to be convinced that raising speed limits can ever increase safety

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 16:17 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
dcbwhaley wrote:
Again I have yet to be convinced that raising speed limits can ever increase safety

Montana (even if only by displacement).

Raising motorway limits would displace drivers from more hazardous roads (hazardous meaning the likelihood of a collision, for a journey, is increased). Even doing so outside of peak times would displace some traffic from the congested periods thus lowering overall hazard density.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 17:22 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Steve wrote:
dcbwhaley wrote:
Again I have yet to be convinced that raising speed limits can ever increase safety

Montana (even if only by displacement).

Raising motorway limits would displace drivers from more hazardous roads (hazardous meaning the likelihood of a collision, for a journey, is increased). Even doing so outside of peak times would displace some traffic from the congested periods thus lowering overall hazard density.


The post with which I took issue was about the role of Local Authorities in setting speed limits and my concern is about the effect of speed limits on pedestrians. Neither of those considerations apply to Motorways and I agree that in that context the quoted remark is appropriate. I have no problem with raising or even abolishing Motorway speed limits.

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Dec 20, 2009 18:05 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
dcbwhaley wrote:
The post with which I took issue was about the role of Local Authorities in setting speed limits and my concern is about the effect of speed limits on pedestrians. Neither of those considerations apply to Motorways and I agree that in that context the quoted remark is appropriate. I have no problem with raising or even abolishing Motorway speed limits.

OK. I think we can agree your statement I took issue isn't universally applicable.
I would also extend my argument beyond motorways to cover many rural areas too, such as bypasses, or simply where one wouldn't expect pedestrians to be crossing (or crossing with pedestrian lights).

Of course, many wouldn't like to see an increase of many residential 30 limits.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 18:27 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
Big Tone wrote:
:idea: Alternatively, they could have left the bumps as far from the curb as they are but stagger them so the traffic isn't forced closely together at the same point along the road like that! Same result but less dangerous - correct?


I'm not sure providing a slalom course is a good idea.

As for putting the humps closer to the kerb? Bad idea IMO.

Look, I'm no fan of speed humps, replace them all with average speed cameras I say, but there clearly needs to be something to slow certain idiots down.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Dec 24, 2009 19:58 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
I'm not sure providing a slalom course is a good idea.

I didn't expect you see you say that. I thought you liked the idea of putting in needless blind corners, as well as laying blocks within blind corners?

weepej wrote:
Look, I'm no fan of speed humps, replace them all with average speed cameras I say, but there clearly needs to be something to slow certain idiots down.

You mean, something this campaign (and the forum regulars) have always been calling for? Have you been following these debates at all weepej?

Will those average speed cameras really slow down "the idiots"? (the real idiots being those who actually want to drive above the limit and terrorise neighbourhoods; it doesn’t take a criminal genius to figure out how to circumvent those cameras)

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 09:07 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
Steve wrote:
it doesn’t take a criminal genius to figure out how to circumvent those cameras)


Of course it does.
First you have to buy false number plates.
Unfortunately, having incorrect registration number plates on your vehicle would be illegal.
Then you would have to figure out how to buy the plates. Most criminal genii probably do not have passports, and you do not have to be a genius to consider that handing your photo licence to a purveyor of number plates is not a smart move.
And of course, you cannot have "display" plates on your vehicle because it would be illegal (and an mot failure).
So it all falls down.
Oh wait........................s**t........................I forgot...................................crooks don't bother with laws. Crap.
Oh...and you can now buy "false" plates with "false" makers id embossed on them....the march of progress. Or maybe people are fed-up with paying over 20 quid for plates, along with the needing more id than an entry into China.

_________________
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  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 10:18 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
weepej wrote:
Big Tone wrote:
:idea: Alternatively, they could have left the bumps as far from the curb as they are but stagger them so the traffic isn't forced closely together at the same point along the road like that! Same result but less dangerous - correct?


I'm not sure providing a slalom course is a good idea.
As someone who enjoys the odd bit of OTT exaggeration that was a good one. :thumbsup: Trouble is I think you're serious. Image

weepej wrote:
As for putting the humps closer to the kerb? Bad idea IMO.
Why not? You believe it's speed which kills after all. Does the proximity or circumstances also matter now? Careful, you're getting dangerously close to agreeing with me at last. Image

weepej wrote:
Look, I'm no fan of speed humps, replace them all with average speed cameras I say, but there clearly needs to be something to slow certain idiots down.
As Steve pointed out above, completely flawed. I'll wheelie through a busy short stretch of :30: at 40 mph and stop for a few seconds shall I? Image

I agree that something needs to be done to slow idiots down; we would all agree to that I think and hope. But slowing idiots down isn't everything or indeed anything if they do something stupid at 20 mph and kill someone.

Well thanks for replying weepej and Happy Christmas everyone :) I've got a 3.5 Kilogram bird to cook and veg to peel etc. Hope I get it right; I cook like a gatso saves lives Image

Tony Image

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:38 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Big Tone wrote:
In another district I pass through they have placed speed bumps, the island type, which makes drivers travel with their wheels either side to minimise the bump and save their suspension. The trouble is it brings vehicles passing in opposite directions dangerously close to each other. Now I know what someone is going to say so I’ll beat ‘whoever’ to it.


I think that those speed humps are positioned so that you can minimise the bump whilst overtaking a cyclist without endangering her.

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 12:47 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 16:34
Posts: 4923
Location: Somewhere between a rock and a hard place
dcbwhaley wrote:
Big Tone wrote:
In another district I pass through they have placed speed bumps, the island type, which makes drivers travel with their wheels either side to minimise the bump and save their suspension. The trouble is it brings vehicles passing in opposite directions dangerously close to each other. Now I know what someone is going to say so I’ll beat ‘whoever’ to it.


I think that those speed humps are positioned so that you can minimise the bump whilst overtaking a cyclist without endangering her.
I like that dcb and thank you! Seriously! What you say makes perfect sense so count me in :thumbsup: When I hear a good point, well put, I always like to give recognition regardless of who said it.

Staggering the bumps still makes sense to me though, or as weepej puts it, turning the road into a slalom :roll: which does not make sense.

Chicken's looking good :) Now for the stuffing...

_________________
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.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 16:12 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
Big Tone wrote:
dcbwhaley wrote:
When I hear a good point, well put, I always like to give recognition regardless of who said it.


That is a double edged compliment if I ever heard one :D :D

[quute]Staggering the bumps still makes sense to me though, or as weepej puts it, turning the road into a slalom :roll: which does not make sense.


If you stagger the humps you will get some eejit driving on the wrong side of the road to avoid them. Or, to put it another way, slaloming round them :D :D

Quote:
Chicken's looking good :) Now for the stuffing...


Merry Winterfest one and all

_________________
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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Dec 25, 2009 16:30 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
dcbwhaley wrote:
If you stagger the humps you will get some eejit driving on the wrong side of the road to avoid them.


Not that there is anything wrong with using either side of the road if the other side is clear and a safe return to the left can be made before it ceases to be so. One might point out that this is certainly safer than forcing traffic into a reduced lateral separation situation, which is what this type of hump does.

I think I have bemoaned these devices here before as being wholly unfit for purpose, and causing more harm than good. The only vehicles they compel to slow are those that are too narrow (my mother's Smart car) or too low (my classic Triumph Spitfire) to straddle them. The forced reduced lateral separation is even more of a problem for motorcycles, who get pushed out of the optimal road position and into the middle of the road. Even if I were to go straight over the top I am fairly certain that my belly pan (on my unmodified bike) would ground out on many of the behemoths I have seen, not to mention the impact it would have on stability and comfort. Furthermore, the funnelling effect on a continual procession of tyres seems to cause the road surface at the periphery of these humps to degrade far quicker than normal, meaning the edges are often holed and/or broken, a further hazard for two-wheeled road users.

Finally, what is the point in having a device placed in the road that cannot be safely and comfortably negotiated, by the majority of 'normal' vehicles, at the speed limit?

Merry Christmas all!

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 76 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 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:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.443s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]