Safe Speed Forums

I'm very flattered to receive this award!

_________________
I stole this .sig

:) Thanks for the history lesson. Learn something new every day (or at least I will when I look at the link in a bit). <Off topic > Wonder if he'd have been pleased with Wales on Saturday or disappointed with England.

Sorry. No offense was meant by that. Allow me to rephrase that to be fairer to your idea and to remove the rantlet:
Even though it would guarantee an accurate indication of speed it would be of absolutely no use in finding out whether that speed is safe for the circumstances or finding out if the limit is unecessarily low.
Okay?

Current speedos under-read already, so how would an absolutely accurate instrument help? If I was to drive strictly by the speedo and prevailing limit a more accurate device ought to increase my free travelling speed, not reduce it. On the other hand, the limit becomes of secondary importance (or less) if I drive at a sensible speed, which makes an accurate speedo unnecessary. I would be as likely to choose the same speed in the same circumstances with an accurate speedo as with a very inaccurate one, or even where a working speedo is absent altogether. That said, we're still only talking about possible effects on free travelling speed, not impact speed. But even if we assume a strong relationship between the two an accurate speedo is still unlikely to bring about a reduction compared to our current under-reading speedos. I can see how an absolutely accurate speedo would help a driver stay legal, but that's it. I can't see an actual safety benefit in terms of either helping to avoid a crash or reducing the severity of one.

Not too fussed really. If staying legal meant being certain of being safe then I'd want to know. We both know that ain't the reality of it - staying legal means no more than not getting speeding fines.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Knowing little about Highway Patrols in the States I'm not entirely with you on the first bit. Are you saying they're funded out of whatever passes for VED over there? The second bit does seem like a plus, but it's not the only means of achieving this. I believe the majority of motorists would feel a lot more kindly to plod in general and trafplod in particular if they felt they were on the same side. More InGears/IanHs, and fewer Brunstroms would probably do it.

Safe roads benefit everyone, even those who think they are only occasional road users or are not road users at all. For one thing I believe almost nobody can claim not to be a road user, so all would benefit from better road safety. For another, even if someone was housebound the goods and services they rely on will arrive by road, so they have an interest in them not being delayed due to some cack-handed twerp causing a crash. Put simply, I can think of no example of someone who wouldn't benefit on some level if we had safer roads.

Now if all benefit, why shouldn't all contribute? Are you and your neighbours entirely responsible for street lighting in your road and maintain it out of your pockets? No, everyone contributes towards it via council tax because potentially it's a benefit to all, not just to those who use it most. What about schooling? People who don't have kids still contribute to the cost of educating the offspring of others in state schools. I know some people without kids get a bit annoyed by this, but long term we all benefit by it. Of course, some would argue that there's a problem in getting everyone to pay for education if the quality delivered is crap. Personally, I'd say it's wrong to ask anyone to pay for it if it's crap.

Same thing with road safety. If we do something that works then potentially everyone will benefit, so it's not unreasonable to ask everyone to contribute. If we do something that's a waste of time, effort and money, then basically everyone gets screwed regardless of who ended up with the tab. I'm not particularly against motorists contributing more, but let's face it - we do anyway through VED and fuel duty. But for others who would benefit to get it basically as a freebie? No. That's no different than people without children refusing to contribute towards education costs.

We all have a vested interest in road safety, and so we all ought to contribute to a greater or lesser extent. And we all ought to be far more concerned with how the money is spent. In principle, do we want cheap stopgap measures that have little or no effect, or do we want something that delivers? Once we've decided that we should then consider which category current policies fall into.


Edited for typos and a splat infinitive.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

The chopping block in the Tower of London would have been busy for a couple of days, while he "reorganised" the team.



My device would have a tiny emitter under the car to send a beam at an acute angle onto the rough road surface. The Doppler effect of the return signal would tell the speed. Some geometrical corrections would be involved, so another emitter might be needed to gauge the height of the main emitter from the road, but a system like this could be quite good. I have absolutely no idea if it would work or not, but it seems feasible and if anyone with money would like to collaborate with me on this system, let me know and we'll grow rich together! Of course, it is only a technical device. But it would allow people to drive in the knowledge at they are in no danger of a ticket. Assuming some means of advertising the current limits to cars is found (discussion on drive by RF anyone?).



There is a tendency for people to interpret the speed limit as a suggested limit, not the absolute top speed that is allowed. It is actually quite OK (even recommended) to drive significantly under it. It is not recommended to drive over it.

_________________
I stole this .sig

This was once the case, but many speed limits are set these days for political reasons. You and many other people have been (intentionally or accidentally) misled to believe that lowering speed limits will result in a lowering of accidents and injury on the road, but all it serves to do is remove the guidance that a speed limit is.

This fictional article explains it very well - Height Kills.

What is interesting is that that little story was written over 5 years ago, and the news today that 55% of drivers admit to ignoring the speed limit is almost prophetic. They are ignoring the limits because the limits no longer make sense, and therefor the enforcement by camera of these 'unhelpful' limits makes even less sense.

Moreover, without the guidance of sensibly set limits PLUS the advocation of better driving skills and roadside education that have been swept away on a wave of automated speed limit enforcement, some drivers are indeed killing themselves and others, whereas they otherwise wouldn't have!

You imagine that speed limits are guidance when they are really absolute top limits.

_________________
I stole this .sig

Otherwise known, I believe as a VVTT (very, very, technical thingy). Actually I think I'm more or less with you on the principle. It sounds similar to the way plod's handheld radar and lidar work, right? Still, if you don't mind me asking questions, how would it cope with grossly incorrect tyre pressures? Or chavmobiles with lowered suspension? That would change the return distance, so wouldn't it need recalibrating or would it be able to do this itself every time the ignition is turned on?

Just being curious. I still don't think it would do anything to lower speeds or improve safety, but it's a gadget so I'm interested.

Dragons' Den, BBC2, if they get a second series, good luck.

Yes, I know. That's the problem. At the moment we might have Mr Numpty who's misinterpreted the message to mean "drive at the limit in order to be safe" (you and I both agree that this is not the case, but Mr Numpty lives up to his name). So if his speedo says 30 he might actually be doing up to 3mph less. If we fit one of your absolutely accurate speedos to his car we can expect his real speed to increase. Sure, he shouldn't be such a numpty, but there you go. What his speedo says won't change that. Better education and road safety messages might, and failing that a tougher test that would have kept the muppet off the road in the first place.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Well, I don't have all the answers because I only conceived the final design on Saturday evening after I heard the rugger score and had a few pints too much in celebration over our victory over the Great Satan, sorry I'm getting carried away. The second emitter (which is perpedicular to the road surface) tells the system how near the first emitter (which is at an acute angle) was to the ground a few millseconds before, as the car moves along, if you are with me. That means it can be used in real time to determine the angle that the beam must have struck the ground, and it accounts for any height variations. And we can surely work out the exact travel distance of the beam. I think, although this is all off the top of my head and maybe the Doppler difference is so tiny that no instrument could differentiate.



Great idea. Now let me see if Maplin's have anything precise enough to make a doppler effect radar type gadget thingy! This is bit more advanced than last week's project - an alarm that let's me know when I leave the freezer door open after I get the ice cream out. Let me know if you need one of those, BTW, and I'll make one for you. It's amazing how many marriages break down because of that.



Just because it is capable of being accurate doesn't mean it must be. I could add Numpty Margin, if that is wise. In fact, I should make it read 15 mph too high in all cases, to give people the impression they are zooming along when they are not! It could save lives.

_________________
I stole this .sig

:lol: I'm starting to go off you again. Oh well, hopefully I can rely on Ireland to kick the @*#% out of you soon ... (at least, I hope ).

Still, you're gadget seems pretty bright. If it can cope with variations in height it could even tell me when I'm breaking the limit over speed bumps . As I said, I'm only familiar with principle of Doppler speed measuring so I don't know much about how hard it would be to measure the difference. Wouldn't playing with wavelengths fix that? Presumably accuracy would be limited to the difference between wavelengths so a shorter wavelength would be the answer, or is my understanding (from scholl physics class 20 odd years ago) a bit ?

Now you've really confused me. If we deliberately make it inaccurate we're back to where we started aren't we? Think the freezer alarm is better, but sadly I'm no longer thin enough to need it. If I leave the door open I can't get out of the kitchen. Perhaps an alarm to let the missus know when I've gone into the freezer to get ice cream.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Only if we add Random Numpty Margin, or noise. If we add Known Numpty Margin, then we are better off because we know know that the speedo will always show high by a known amount. This is a self deception that riders of 50cc FS1Es will know about. When the speedo says 50, you are really doing about 35, flat on the tank.



My alarm offers exactly that feature, available from £9.99!

_________________
I stole this .sig

Read Height Kills again BW and attempt to understand its message. The limit has to appear to relate to some need (level of danger) in order for it to be complied with by the thinking person. Oh, I keep forgetting how you presume that most people have their minds in neutral. This seems to underpin every argument you make and it is contemptuous and patronising in the extreme! It also seems to be the bar to you understanding the need for positive messages about safety.

I work in education and I know through experience that fear, threats and arbitrary rules achieve little. Explanation, persuasion and understanding makes compliance more likely!

OI , i used to ride a a fsie, superb little 50cc for the limited 16 yr old, which at the time found a loop hole in the law, thanks to its pedals, which we duly removed.

The fsie was without doubt the fastest 50cc at the time, and 50mph was very achievable. You just did not mess with a fsie with the pepsi can air filter.

_________________
Steve

Lizzey - bad driving causes accidents. People do not observe and anticipate anywhere near as well as they should do. On another thread here - "Sharing the Road with Cyclists" which contains excellent advice from the IAM newsletter - I posted some sample questions from the Theory Test bank of questions. To say they really test the intelligence ,... Most are like the "GMTV/Wish You Were Here - type " You would have to seriously thick to choose the wrong answer!

It needs tightening up to a German standard. Their questions are a bit more demanding - I could post them , translate and feel confident that both MM and basigwerk would confirm accuracy of translation. Might dig them out to show the difference some time - as cannot remember the link and need to ask someone in the family about it.


It also depends where you live as well. Some areas are a little "tiighter" than others. 34 mph may not be prosecuted in S Yorks who claim to be 10%+2 on all scams - yet other areas have prosecuted at this margin per various posts on PH and elseewhere.

My patch - we allow 10% + 4 as rule of thumb and we do not have any scams as such. All BiB, mobiles and one camera van! RTCs occur here - as accidents will occur for a variety of reasons - but sensible policing, education and some enforcement seems to be working for us around here.



There's a big difference between a person who speeds and a person who steals other people's belongings to fund his habit. In the speeding driver's case - the victim is a "what if" and is intangible unless the person actually collides and the other is a tangible damage to another's property and depriving them of their enjoyment of hard-earned goods.

In a speeding case would depend on how you were caught and at what margin of error.

My job is to enforce and try to ensure people keep to the rules - but am prepared to help folks improve. Sometimes a strong ticking off and some advice works far more than simply issuing a fixed penalty. Apart from that - if you get a fixed penalty in my patch - people know and understand why they are being punished. The fact that I have an obligation to enforce a law and protect society does not mean that I close my eyes and ears and behave like a robot. I can use some discretion and professional judgement - and more often than not - we nail really bad drivers. A fixed camera cannot do this. It can only prosecute a person driving over a set tolerance. They could be driving as the chaps on your roundabout - without adequate mirror work or too fast past a line of parked vehicles or squeeze a cyclist off the road at a pinch point. But if the person is driving at the right speed - it is not going to do anything. On the other hand - a BiB on patrol can issue a warning - and because we could be anywhere - it can deter.

I am not convinced that those pinged by Gatso are learning or understanding why their action was "dangerous" - especially when the speed was 4 mph above the speed limit or the motorway was completely empty.

Some of our customers object ot our mobile traps... yet have not problem if the lads pulled them and used some discretion - along with an acid lecture.



36/37 mph on a deserted 30 mph road - even at night /early morning... I would tend to let it go - so long as the person did not take the proverbials on me.



Oh - might have had go at that one a bit back... The 70 mph limit on the m/way ... most can cope with 80 mph in safety. See no reason why the EU norm should not be adopted here.

Late at night on m/way ... which is straight - unless foggy or wet - they'd be just as safe as on an A/bahn at 81.25 mph - I'd allow the 84 mph margin of error as well. If we increased the speed limit of course. But again - whether or not I issued a penalty notice under current UK law would be based on professional judgement at the time. It does depend on what is seen and on attitude


NSL rural road - I'd question as it may not be the safe speed for the conditions. This is where the training and constant education come in Lizzy . If you drive with a COAST attitude all the time - chances are you would never drive at an unsafe speed in any case.

_________________
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.

Fuzzy's were wonderful for a 16yr old in 1976 but too dangerous in hindsight for that age. One of my mates lost half his stomach on one.

Lizzey - NSL single - 60 mph and DC = 70 mph.

Have - er - travelled on a 60 mph single once at 86 mph - but I was rushing my wife to hospital at the time and was under a green light. Had notified the police to catch and escort me - but I got there before they arrived!

Green light does not mean I can speed - by the way. But in this case - choice was not mine.

As it was after talivan hours anyway .. did not have a problem - but might have been different earlier on! Would have had to have hoped that complicated child birth which was dangerous to my family was a good enough excuse - but we are also talking of a "toppest scientist" in Wildy's case!




Basingmate - we've sorted this out with you before! Very easy to pick up that little extra on a downhill and tyres. road surfaces and so on all play a major part. Only accurate Speedo is my GPS hazard and scam detector.



If you had said "Good Queen Bess" (mind of a man inside the body of a feeble woman" - bit like my wife really!)

Well.... I might have known Cromwell was one of your "heroes." Witchfinder Generals under his "reign"

Yeah - if I remember me "'istry" reet ...he banned all pleausres like football, Christmas, drinking and swearing... He wanted a "pure and Godly State!"

Successive governments under him failed and the average Brit at the time wwas sick of his harsh and joyless moral laws.

I like this line in my own son's history book> "Cromwell's work crumbled away and collapsed like a badly-built house!"

Henry VIII ? His "Six Articles"? (and don't mean his wives either... despite his excommunication he did stay in line with Catholic doctrine. To keep the true Protestants in check - he forced through the "Six Articles" which imposed the death penalty on anyone who denied the truth of Catjolioc doctrines. What he beleived - his people had to believe as well.

Basically - his reign was one of "self styling" - desire for a son - and if he had girlies .... "ORF with Er 'Ed" and and also like this line in my second son's "'istry book":

"Henry died in 1547 - bloated and diseased. He left England halfway between Catholicism and Protestantism (leading to futrure turmoil). He left it, as as an autocrat who had reduced parliament completely to his will. Truly, he may be styled "Henry the Self-Willed".

And Churchill? Probably the only "great" in your list And the only one who would have done something positive about a daft law.





Have one already - my b2

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

I-G and pals apart - but have not noted many patrols out there copping really dangerous drivers. In fact, one traffic cop on PH has just experienced to joys of reporting a burglary....He now knows what we are on about. And had the decency to say so!

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

Took my colleague 6 months to sort out a 34 mph ping (just before they allegedly "revised the policy" in Lancs.) He had been recalled when his patient developed life-threatening complications.

Not good enough if people are copped for minor blips - and any who says they never break a speed limit is telling plain fibbles( to use my youngest son's word.)



And what about those civil servants in the prat offices?




If I paid I-G solely to keep me toeing the line - I'd expect discretion from him.

It's collective for the benefit of society as a whole. I deal in lurgies as you know and deal with emerging pathogens - would you suggest we have a specific tax on anyone who catches a lurgy? Or is gentically predisposed to something or other?

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !
But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.

I trust this wasn't you getting 'carried away'. I would be desolate if the 'basingwerk' genes could not be passed on to future generations.

I just do not know hat else to say

_________________
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.

WHAT?? Not quite Darwin Award territory, but still .

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein