Safe Speed Forums

How about COASTER? COAST + experience + responsibility?

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

I thought that Risk Management and Responsibility were the foundations on which COAST was based.

Concentrate + Observe + Anticipate + Space + Time = Risk Management

Risk Management is an ongoing (iterative) process typically consisting of the following steps:

Indentify Risks - what might go wrong
Assess Impact - what is the consequence if it does
Mitigate Risk - what to do to minimise the chances of it going wrong, and should it go wrong, then minimise the impact

COA are about Identifying Risks and Assessing the potential Impact while ST are about Mitigating the Risk.

Rather than ignoring Risk Management, COAST is a practical drivers implementation of the Risk Management process - without all the forms to fill in of course.

Responsibility is implicit or rather assumed by COAST; at the time it was created, the idea that people wouldn't take responsibility for their own actions was an alien concept, in fact it is only in the last 10 years or so that the absence of responsibility has become common - and very noticably so. Lead by example from the top (and H&S), blame is always shifted to others, and the fear of having blame shifted onto them causes the nanny state. It is not just in driving that responsibility needs to be resurected - it is everywhere.

I use it much more. How fast I'm going is almost entirely iterative. It is for that reason I likely use much more fuel than other "press on" drivers. Not proud of that aspect, but when I get a hybrid with regenerative power under deceleration or light braking I will be as economical as my colleagues who presently decouple a lot of my varying speed in similar situations. Byh way of example, I find several of my colleagues "max out" at perhaps 50 on country lanes even when straight as far as the eye can see with good left/right visibility and in light traffic, yet are doing almost the same speed on bends with such poor visibility and limited prior chance of assessment that I'd be unlikely to take at over 30.

As for 10 seconds.. that's a fair open road time, but in the town centre with lots of people about a scan may be repeated 3-5 times in that window of time, with barely time to assess things more than 1-2 seconds ahead. That's second gear speed feathiering the brake for me.

OK. You're saying risk management and responsibility are implicit in COAST. I'm saying that's not good enough - they need to be explicit.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I like it!

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

If you're not looking at least twice the minimum safe separation ahead, IMO you're going too fast and need to slow down to give yourself enough time to stay safe.

JMHO

_________________
Will

I think what I'm saying - or trying to say - is that with high hazard density, things within the observation zone can change within 2-3 seconds and thus have to be rescanned in that time, limiting the amount of distance one dare try to scan - and therefore meaning speed has to be down low. I don't think we're disparate, just my inept way of expressing something. Put another way, if activity in close proximity to the car is high, even at zero speed things might collide with you within 10 seconds!

My view is that speeding is driving like a nutter in a built up area. Doing a few miles over the limit ISN'T speeding in my book. I think the police need to understand the difference and apply it.

For the same speeds:
Sensible speed
Appropriate speed
Safe speed (doh!)

For the numerical speeds:
Lemming speed
Sheep speed


Just a few that spring to mind off the top of my head.

OK, I've joined this thread late and haven't looked too closely at all the replies, so this is a 'gut-reaction' posting...

My appreciation of my rate of progress with respect to the encumbent road conditions is proportional to the amount of perceived information that my brain has to process for me to maintain my rate of progress.

Thus:-

My perceived rate of progress will change with the changes in road condition/complexity and my skill-level will adjust my speed to ensure my safety and the safety of those around me.

Upon entering a speed-camera zone, I will abandon my trust in my skills and revert to the use of analogue instrument readings that will keep me moving at a rate below the limit set for prosecution in the area, but use of my acquired skills will be similaraly inhibited, as they are closely linked to the concentration needed for that which I would consider to be an appropriate rate of progress in the absence of the artificially low limit set by the responsible authority...

In short - If my speed is set by others and penalties are involved, I will drive at a reduced level of skill and, more importantly, responsibility.

_________________
Aquila



Licat volare si super tergum aquila volat...

An absolutely typical scenario..........

However, picture the scene last night at about 17:30. I was riding home through the New Forest. It was bloody cold. It was dark with no street lighting . It was foggy and the traffic was fairly heavy. So there was I, approaching a junction on the left. Cars were waiting to come out and another was waiting to turn across me into the junction. just after the junction is a garage on the right and a Speed Camera on the left.

(Even if I say so myself) my hazard awareness was on full alert. My anticipation and priorities were logged. My plan was in place and my position and speed were totally appropriate for the situation.

So what do I feel compelled to do just when my eyes are most needed on the road ahead? Yes! I looked at my speedo in anticipation of the Camera.

A completely stupid thing to do - as far as road safety is concerned.

So my definitions have modified slightly:-

Actual Speed = Safe and appropriate speed
Numerical Speed = Totally irrelevent, a nonsense. And for the Government to force me to look at it in that situation just shows how stupid and ill conceived their whole policy is.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished