Safe Speed Forums

Really?...My logic is thus...If you are in control of your vehicle you know what speed it is doing...either above of below that 'arbitrary speed limit'.
If you are a COAST driver you should also be aware of the speed limit for the road you are on...ergo NOT KNOWING either/both of those two points would (to my mind) indicate you were NOT in control.

In that case there is a fundamental flaw in your logic!

If "being in control" requires knowing what speed you are doing then in order to be in control at all times you would have to devote a substantial proportion of your time to continually checking the speedo.

In order to be "in control" the only thing you need to know about your speed is whether it is low enough for you to be able to stop before any actual or potential hazard ahead.

For which purpose a speedo is damn near useless.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

I don't see any flaw..
sotonsteve's declaration of "Ever then realised that you are breaking the speed limit without knowing it?" led to this exchange of whether or not a person was "in control" if you were breaking the speed limit without being AWARE you were doing it...
To my mind that doesn't tell me the person who was 'not aware' was in fact concentrating fully on what his vehicle was doing. Rather it lends to the assumption that the driver was in fact daydreaming and suddenly becoming aware that he was over the maximum limit set for the road he was travelling.

My point is that there isn't a direct correlation between "being in control" and "knowing your (numerical) speed".

To illustrate this, imagine driving without a speedometer. You would have no real idea of your speed, yet would you then not be in control of your vehicle? Of course not.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

If my vehicle never had a speedo or the world was devoid of such devices...I would agree...but the world is not devoid of speedos and my car has one fitted...
Like all in-car instrumentation...they are present to give information to the driver to enable him to act upon what they are indicating to him and remain in control. The driver drives the car...ignoring instrumentation is like having the car drive the driver!

I check them whilst driving...and as many of the more important ones like fuel, temperature and ECU warnings are shown around the speedo area...I tend to scan the speedo when I scan my mirrors and other indicating devices. I believe therefore I am in control.

If you intend to keep your vehicle's speed below a certain number and fail to do so then you could be said to not be in control.

But if you don't intend to keep it below said number, and go faster, then you probably are in control.

_________________
Andrew.

I'm sure there are plenty of racing and rally drivers who will be alarmed and disappointed to learn that they are "not in control of their vehicles"!

Similarly there are probably plenty of police drivers out there who might not be in control of their vehicles at all times.

Something struck me the other day. There are a couple of blind bends not far from our house and I was talking to my wife about them. Neither of us knew what speed we typically took them at. Next time I went round them I made a note of it. It was about 20MPH. (The limit is 60 there). The mental process by which we determined a safe speed at which to negotiate those bends had absolutely nothing to do with the car's speedo. In fact, one must regard the person who uses the speedo as their sole means of gauging what is and is not "safe" as
(a) more than likely NOT being in control of their car they day they encounter some different road conditions and
(b) worryingly unaware of the more important messages they OUGHT to be getting from their car and its surroundings.

Robin XE summed it all up pretty nicely I thought with the helicopter thing. Numerical speed is pretty low down on the list when it comes to being in control of a car. (as most sucessful racing drivers will, I'm sure, agree)!

Nope, ignoring instrumentation is known as a selective scan, and it does not in any way mean you are not in full control of the vehicle. You only scan those instruments that are important to the mode of opertaion your machine is currently in, and if you are driving to the conditions (road, weather, traffic, hazard density etc.) then the speedo can well be ignored. In such circumstances the only task requiring the inclusion of the speedo in the scan is the avoidance of speed enforcement, which is a largely non-productive additional load on the driver that we can ill-afford, given the current state of our road safety!

Aw come on...."a largely non-productive additional load on the driver that we can ill-afford"...non productive? Hows that? How can something that gives out information to help you avoid a speeding ticket be non-productive p...lease! :D

"additional load" give me a break" ... a millisecond of your time (and don't lets get bogged down in taking Pauls test to see how long it takes us all to scan our speedo again) to check the indicated speed is hardly "additional load" in my eyes...it is a necessity if you are to avoid £60 and 3 points in today's driving climate. AND IMPO required if you are to remain in control of your vehicle.

That's all well and good but it doesn't address the question of whether or not one can "be in proper control" of their vehicle without knowing their speed. I think pretty much everyone on here would agree that the speedo IS useful for avoiding points and fines!

We're not talking rally drivers or BiB though we're talking 'ordinary Joe' out for a leisurely drive without a care in the world suddenly realising he was doing a speed in excess of the posted one.....

It is useful indeed and using it ensures you are in control and don't get that speeding ticket rather than not using it and hoping your judgement is sound when approaching a speed camera. Or passing a speed camera and suddenly realising your are over the limit!

I think that the point is that most of 'us' don't chose to speed but i do on occasion choose to drive within the numerical limit.

I'm writing this late at night as mrs CE is currently in the maternity ward awaiting the arrival of baby CE.

yesterday after i recieved the call that waters had broken i travelled from near coventry to near cardiff very rapidly indeed. I drove as fast I I could safely do so, the only numerical limit that I chose to adhere to was the m42 VSL (and those limits are supposedly for traffic flow not safety per se)

the rest of the time i drove to the 'limit' bounded by my ability, the traffic conditions, the road condition, the technical limits of my vehicle and the weather conditions. I won't go into how fast i was going but it was very, however I was at all times within every conceivable limit ...bar one.

At all times i believe i was safe and posed no hazard to any other road user.

The only times i looked at my speedo was to comply with the m42vsl and when i looked down at one point on the m50.

At all times i was in full control of my vehicle. this is not the exception that proves the rule, it is a very clear example of why a speedo is not a particularly seful device for ensuring the safe passage of a motor vehicle.

For my part, Sixy has summed up things nicely here:


The excellent use of the double negative here sums up the correct place in the heirarchy of this aspect of driving. It perhaps should be higher during basic driver training, but becomes a secondary feature of driving as the years go by. That is until the yellow boxes brought its importance way up the scae, to the detriment of road safety as a whole.

It can be non-productive because the primary aim of driving is not to observe arbitrary speed limits and avoid tickets, its to get from A to B without inflicting death or damage on yourself or others. It is not necessarily the 'millisecond' (hyperbole) of your time that is take looking at your speedo on one occasion that is significant (though on occasions it may well be!) but the constant additional load taken up with looking out for speed cameras, when they are never going to step/pull out into the road, or brake suddenly ahead, or be the primary cause of lost traction with the road surface. What of the driver in a talivan infested area, scanning from speedo to roadside in an attempt to comply and avoid enforcement, who subsequently missed the ball bouncing into his path from the right, closely followed by infant ball-owner?

On a slight digression, and whilst I do not oppose speed limits, in principle, as a tool for curbing excesses, nor do I think drivers should necessarily be given carte blanche to drive around in whatever manner they see fit, there is a further psychological justification for reducing the level of prescription in both driving law and it's enforcement: If you micro-manage people to the nth degree, then you will only get from them exactly what you have specified, and nothing further. You also set up an authoritarian image of them and us. If, however, you borrow from the concept of 'mission command', you empower your 'subordinates' largely to achieve the results, without meddling. You give them your intent, and allow them to join in ownership of the goals, in order that the 'team' is united towards a common end, pulling together for a result known and desired by all, not a few of the elite who chuck down prescriptive orders willy-nilly. I'm sure I don't need to spell out the parallels there with road safety.

You've got me wrong there. I'm trying to say that I drive at all times at a safe and appropriate speed. When I'm passing a camera a safe and appropriate speed is one at or below the limit, but the rest of the time its governed by the road conditions and potential hazard density.

A couple of years ago the speedo cable on my motorbike broke on my way to work. I managed to ride 10 miles there and make the return journey of 25 miles quite safely without it (thankfully there are no fixed cameras on my route and the vans were all elsewhere)



Oh yeah, well spotted

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

I'm sure this isn't a bomb shell but we do know that speed kills - when it is inappropriately used. But I'd like to mention some points where I think we may differ from your stance ElandGone. (Well, I'll speak for myself as someone who has some undertanding of what SS is about I hope)...

I don't think many here are actually opposed to speed cameras per se, but moreover: the sheer number of them, places they are being installed, cameras set limit, posted speed limit for some roads, inflexibility of the law if you are done (20mph outside schools when there are no children etc.), the fact that they don't catch the uninsured/drunk etc., the fact that it doesn't take into account the road conditions/car/driver - there are more I've missed I know, but I hope you see my point?

In my first day of posting at SS, I mentioned a doctor at my work who was done for doing 33mph in a 30 while he was in an unfamiliar area looking for a patient's address. In his late 50s, and with an impeccable lifelong driving record and deep understanding of the preservation of human life, it was the first time he had been done - to his dismay.

Sadly, since then, I know of many others who have had a similar experience which is what kick-started me into action here at SS.

Now if someone thinks this is fair or good for road safety, or good for relations between the public and police, I simply despond at the logic!

It seems to me that those who are in favour of ever more speed cameras as the answer, who may well have the best of intentions, are happy to catch very good drivers in the name of catching the minority of rogues - and that ElandGone is what bothers me most.

Oh and by the way, a sincere

_________________
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 it, or rather part of it. The cameras LIE about the importance of the number on the speedo; drivers are responding to the lie and altering their priorities for the worse.

And CONGRATULATIONS btw.

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

so all I have to do to be in control of my car is look at the speedo? Wow! I'll remember that next time I'm on a single track road, approaching a blind bend. As long as the magic dial is pointing to 60mph then I'll be in control with nothing to worry about.

Good luck mate!

I remember making just such a trip myself nearly 2 years ago! It was a bit of an emergency because when the waters did break there were signs of other (pretty urgent) foetal distress but I'm lucky in that it's pretty much all deserted (at that time in the morning!) NSL roads round here. As you can imagine, adherence to numerical limits was the last thing on my mind. The safety of the entire family with me in the car (and family-to-be) WAS, however, very much on my mind! Strangely, I couldn't tell you what speed I was doing at any particular point along the way that night and, despite not being a rally driver or a BIB, it certainly reinforced to this particular "ordinary Joe" just how fatuous the notion that you need a speedo to be in control of your vehicle really is!

Let us know the news when it happens!

ElandGone, try an experiment. Book yourself on a track day or into a racing school, - somewhere you can start to explore your car's limits. Start finding out a bit more about what you and your car can do and where it's limits are. I'm prety certain you'll find that as you get closer to its (and your) limits, the speedo will be one of the FIRST things to get crossed off your attention list.