Safe Speed Forums

Traffic Cops on iplayer (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00d1qd6/)

Following an accident where a car driven by an elderly gent hit a boy on a bike, the driver admits to panic and hitting the accelerator rather than the brake when taking evasive action. Now, this is where the revelation comes in. At 16.20, the police officer admits that by speeding up, the driver may well have actually avoided the accident. Use of speed / acceleration to avoid a collision is something that can be just as effective as sudden braking (especially in cases where there is a vehicle close behind). BUT...what about if there was a speed camera? Accident avoided (possibly), driver gets snapped, fined, loses license by going over points limit?

This is where the injustice of speed cameras and cameras of any kind come in. Only recently I was travelling through an unfamiliar town and looking at the traffic / junctions / signs and the lights changed from green to amber to red. Knowing there was a car behind and it was wet (although only traveling c.25mph) and being in an unfamiliar town I was slower to react than usual and went through on amber when in my own town I could have anticipated better and had a more considered approach. This led to an immediate worry over being snapped as I was concerned that the lights had changed to red a fraction after I went through and there was a large box junction to cross. Luckily, it doesn't seem like there were any cameras, but I could have faced a relatively heft punishment for a second of driving.

Whilst I don't condone excessive speed, there are times and places it is effective for safe driving. The point is, whilst there are statistics (lies) about speeding and accidents there are never any counter-arguments based on how many incidents are PREVENTED by short bursts of speed that, out of context, would not be safe.

Some years before I joined this forum, someone here posted an insightful treatise on how, at times, speeding up can turn a potential threat into a non-threat. (I can't find it; it's on my home PC, and I'm dispatching taxis at work now.)

Imagine if, instead of speedometers, we had spaceometers.

Your space, relative to anything that could come to harm at your hand, or harm you, would have its relative rate of closure to you measured in time (because that is how our brain primarily measures distances of potential threats in motion).

Obviously, it would be too difficult to imagine such a display, or how to make it work with turn-of-the-20th-Century tech, or what kind of sheeple would've given me a hard time in my youth for surprising boorishly brazen pedestrians with my sideview mirrors swatting their rumps / haunches at 1 or 2MpH.

My point: just because road speed is most easily measured (in the alternative, could you imagine if your speedometer displayed your speed relative to the closest thing in front of your car, instead of the road?), doesn't make it a be-all-end-all measurement, even if some man-made 'law' wishes to pretend otherwise.

It is the balance between speed & space which must be preserved. One may be more easily measured and controlled, but both are under the influence of ALL road users.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

20th century technology is part way there with Honda's ADAS, including ACC, CMBS. The former is commonplace on executive cars as an option these days I think (and I'm not sure I like the idea of it). Audi has a similar thing now I think to CMBS.

I am actually getting one of the Accords with this on in a few weeks (but not for these features primarily!). I'll let you all know how it fares.

If I've said this before, I'll say it again ...

I already come standard with:

Anti-Lock Braking
Traction Control
Stability Control
Anti-RollOver Control
(I do wish there was a way for me to control calipers individually, though ...)

Blind Spot Info System
Lane Departure Warning and Prevention
I parallel park a 5.537 Metre long vehicle several times daily, without a scratch or nudge

To top it all off, I have Traffic Sign Recognition AND Hazard Recognition.

I do not look forward to a world with a transit system reminiscent of Minority Report.

The car should not do things FOR me. The car should help me to do what I tell it do, BETTER.

Technologies that improve my control, and my abilities to use the brakes, steering, and throttle - and while we're at it, the transmission and the engine - are far more welcome than those that second guess me as the driver (which is why I approve of individual brake caliper management technologies).

"Second Guess" technologies may save lives, but they won't make better drivers. Drivers whose existence and safety rely on such technologies, IMO, might not belong on the roads in the 1st place.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation

Which is why, I think, you do not necessarily need a speedometer to drive safely. Even at higher speeds where it is much harder to judge closing speed to distant objects you can get sufficient information from the engine note and knowledge of what gear you are in.

A speedo would be useful for calibrating your perceptions in a new car so having one is still handy but you should not need to look at it unless you need to know your speed to some precision, as when passing a camera for instance.

A problem with a spaceometer would be; how would you know what it was 'looking' at?

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May

Near as I can tell, speedometers are most useful when significant changes in speed occur very quickly - on / off ramps, mostly.

For those of you that saw that episode of Top Gear ...

After having achieved 253 MpH in the Bugatti Veyron 16.4, Jeremy Clarkson slowed down to about 70 MpH, and then proceeded to open the door. His vestibular sense of motion thought he was standing still, and his visual sense of motion was momentarily stunned out of focus by having recently done 253 MpH. (I'm sure when he got out, he thought he was moving backwards.)

Had he looked at the speedometer, his perceptions would have been checked, and he would not have opened the door prematurely.

When we drive, we regularly exceed our biologically intended velocity. Speedometers acknowledge that novice perceptions need be calibrated (and not just to the next car).

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation