Safe Speed Forums

The one we monitored was a very mild gradient. We have a reasonable tolerance in this area anyway - but we were shocked to find the rate of increase as a gradual. We re-enacted ourselves to try to establish just how come. We found it did depend on the car to some extent as well - but we found a speed pick-up with a lift off pedal to add as much as 5 mph in some instance by the time the car reached the bottom of this long but very mild downward. Since we placed some signs and made it plain we were watching on this residential with a couple of schools down a couple of side streets, we found a greater awareness of speed limit It's a







by the way


,There's nowt wrong with IAM advice to use 3rd gear in Surburbia or even Urbania. We tell our DIS customers to use this gear It does help stop a "runaway" situation and tends to keep folk to safe speed "compliance" which on any normal drive will fluctuate from 27 to 33 mph as a norm as none of us are robots

As said - a glance down at the dash or the useful gadget as cursory as the mirror check and I think most capable of this. However, I do find I do check more when in cam zone and I've been a passenger in a car with all of the Swiss mobsters and find they do likewise with a check being unconsciously more frequent when they see a camera. But then - they come from a country which has a 3 mph tolerance margin across each speed limit range and a fine based on earnings. They do tend to glance down when they see wheely bins too as it seems Swiss police have a "sense of humour!"

_________________
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.

That wasn't a very good example Paul...to my mind...


WHAT?
Did the driver fell asleep looking at his speedo?

It would have taken the poor guy several seconds to get in front of the oncoming vehicle and to appear to be "stood there" ..unless he was a 76 yr old sprinter who dashed from cover and stopped right in front of the car...I don't think so..(Perhaps a 'funny handshake' absolved the poor Doctor of any wrongdoing...who knows?:twisted:)

At the very least I believe he should have been written up for a DC&A charge, perhaps even a Causing Death by...one...depending on the evidence at hand..but it appears the driver wasn't charged with anything so do we automatically assume the speed camera is at fault for distracting the drivers' attention and making him look at his speedo?

I don't think the example as shown adds any credence whatsoever to the "popular" (dare I say"misguided"?(IMPO)) belief that speed cameras divert attention from the road...

Please note the emboldened word.
I believe that is could well be how such an unfortunate victim would appear to a driver who has just looked up, perhaps amplified by the state of sudden panic; this phenomenon is called the 'stopped clock illusion'.

We obviously don't do the check in the same way, my way appears to be more intuitive, I do not have to 'read' the number on the dial in the way I understand the term 'read'. I know where 30 is (assuming its 30) on the dial and can ascertain where the needle is in relation to it by a simple scan. I don't have to hunt for the figures and the needle because I know I'm doing 30 give or take a smidge.
Thats the way it is, and I'm pretty sure I'm not exceptional in this sense. If you are sure it takes me longer than I believe it does then we'll just have to wait until it causes me a problem before I re-evaluate my position.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Fair enough. My perspective may be skewed by the fact I often have to drive different cars, I can't rely on learning about the vehicle I'm driving at that time. I own a Japanese car, I won't embarrass myself by telling you how often I activate the wipers when I want to indicate

Well that I can relate to, because I owned Japanese cars in Cyprus and did exactly the same thing. The intuitive flick of the left lever took some time to switch to one of the right; I lost track of the amount of times I washed my windscreen at someone to acknowldge them

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

Good idea. I'll write a quick one in VB if I get time and upload it for perusal. I can think of a handfull of different speedos, but can easily add others.

The PC's monitor will need to be set up with its back to a decent window (or outside) and at dashboard distance.

I'm thinking of a "pick speedo" panel - then size it using the window - then, look to the road.. and listen for the beep. Each time you hear a beep, look down, press the spacebar when you're hapy you've got the reading, the speedo will disappear, write down the number, press the spacebar again and the speedo appears - look to the "road" - press the spacebar again when you've got road focus. At some stage later (between 2 and 15 secs), get a beep, look down, get the readin... Do it 10 times the PC will average the time to get the reading (not to write it down) - and also give you an accuracy figure.

Good idea? any refinements to suggest before I do this tonight?

Roger I admire your enthusiasm, but what would such an exercise serve to prove? (Apart from your prowess in VB of course)

That a person looking at a picture of a speedo on a computer monitor does so x amount of times and can accurately read something x amount of times at the same time?
Hardly anything like the 'real deal' of being sat behind the wheel of your car is it?
Just like 'Gran Tourismo' or the 'Need for speed' series of computer games is anything like driving a real car...its fun but has no bearing on reality (although some would argue the opposite as they pulled another doughnut or HBT in Tesco's car park).

I think the test on the speedo page covers ALL the bases already. See the section: "Experiment: How long does it take to read the speedo?"

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

In this case you are up against simply physiological limitations that you don't perceive. It's perfectly normal. Nevertheless you are subject to the same limitations as everyone else.

You cannot perceive your reaction time either. That doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

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

Exactly so..your point being what? (see my bold)

"It would have taken the poor guy several seconds to get in front of the oncoming vehicle and to appear to be "stood there"
Just how long does it take to check the speedo?
Paul's own table and the results he bases them upon suggest 1.1seconds being the "typical" time to read yer speedo...My contention is that this 'driver' took rather longer than 1.1 secs and was negligent as to actually seeing what was going on around him prior to him 'nodding off' reading the speedo.

My point is that there a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why the pedestrian appeared to the driver to be ‘stood there’ even if the driver's attention was elsewhere for say only 1.1 seconds. Also, you don't know the time between driver recognition to impact, this could have been very short.

Your assertion of 'several seconds' need not be the case. A brisk walking speed is 4mph, so it is perfectly reasonable that the pedestrian could have ventured 1.5m into the road during that critical 1.1 seconds.

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

I agree that the experiemt on the "speedo" page is adequate to ascertain the refocussing time. However, it would appear that some people are sure they can do it without refocussing.

I have no need to prove capability in VB. I'm probably well-rusty in it compared to most! My proposal above is not a difficult one though - I could knock something useable up in two or three hours I think, possibly sooner.

I'm actually thinking that a better exercise is worthwhile. It would involve a light pro projecting a series of random scenes on the screen and a speedo on the PC display itself (in the foreground). The two shift keys would represent input stimuae. Look down when you get a buzz, decide if you are over or under the intended speed, press the right or left shift key respectively to give an impetus to change the speed down or up respectively, then look up to meet a new picture, press left shift key if there's a hazard and right shift key if you think there isn't. Pictures will differ only subtlely - and hazards will be obvious (that's only fair) - but the reaction time to presence or absence of a hazard confirms focussing as well as scanning time. This repeats for the remainder of the pictures - cued by the buzzer.

Then do the same test - same series of photos (possibly in a different order) without the punctuating speedo interjections - or, even better, with speedo interjections on the lightpro screen instead of the laptop/main PC display. This would tell you the refocussing time more accurately.

I'm not going to do it tonight - this is more complicated than my earlier concept - but the more I think of it, the more I think it is more scientific and probably morte telling than the crude (but very effective) test with the clock at arms' length.

I actually took proper note of my journey to a local establishment this evening.

I drove my wifes car, something i am basically unfamiliar to, and saw how easy it was (a split second glance) to read the speed i was doing.??

Never really gave it much attention before, but now i know.

Peace to you all.

_________________
Any man can be a father, it takes someone special to be a daddy.

But because the whole process is nothing at all like driving you will get very false data Roger.



I reckon you are selling yourself and other drivers short. You don't actually switch off your view of the road ahead for 1.1 seconds do you? You are still aware of whats there, what was there before. I reckon the time that the important stuff ahead is out of your vision and cognition is much less than you think.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

In the highlighted case, if pedestrian was so close by then I would say 1.1 seconds may be too long one should easily notice the big object, but I stand by my figure when focussing on subjects in the distance (or in darkness?)

Going back to the example, even 500ms @ 1.5m/s (3.4mph) is 75cm, still enough for a fatal hit.

Another thing: the driver was slowing down, this could easily mean that the driver was looking at the speedo for longer waiting for the needle to drop a litle more for some headroom (I’ve caught myself doing this, I know it’s wrong but I feel compelled to do so).

Sometimes 'the important stuff' is a glint through a hedgerow or a shadow visble under a car starting to move...

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

And you might miss it if you happen to be scanning left instead of right. Or in your mirror, or focussing on the child in the middle distance, or the car thats just pulled up to the junction ahaead looking like it might pull out. Or looking at your sat nav screen to confirm which of the two junctions ahead you should take.
If something is going to happen that fast that the only cue you are going to get is going to occur in the part-second your eyes are sweeping your speedo AND it happens at exactly that time then you are damned unlucky.
Has it ever happened in such a way that any incident would have been avoided had the driver not scanned the instruments at the moment he did? One in a bazillion perhaps.

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.

But the system has perhaps 3 million crashes and perhaps 30 million near misses each year. That's the problem. Even amazingly bad luck is played out daily in a system that big. Take away a second's attention in the run up to what was going to be a near miss and you have a crash.

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

I seriously doubt speedo scanning is any more or less of a problem than any of the other things we do as part of the normal driving routine. And much less of a problem than the things we do that aren't part of a the normal routine and yet which people will argue 'till they are blue in the face aren't really a problem. Mobile phone use, drinking from a bottle etc etc etc

_________________
Political Correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical, liberal minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.