Safe Speed Forums

I'd say both do.

More speed effectively increases the density of hazards as it's more likely a hazard will come into play.

Take a track, and fire some ball bearings down it. The ball bearings have a detector and can slow down and stop if they detect something being fired randomly across the track (the detector dosn't work properly on some ball bearings).

The faster the ball bearings are fired the more chance they have of striking the things going across the track, it's simply physics surely?

Greenshed, we have to balance the probability of what might happen with what is going to happen. I don't drink much or smoke, but do eat properly and am fairly fit. So at a stroke I have removed much of the probability of an early expiry date.

As for driving, my car is meticulously maintained, so the wheels aren't going to fall off, if some thing leaps out in front of me, she should stop ok and the windows are clean, so I should be able to see.

When we drive through deer country a deer might leap out of the hedge in front of us. But how slow should we drive so we don't hit it? We could crawl along at walking pace and still have it land on our bonnet. They are brown and camouflaged so we can't seem 'em even if we are looking for them.

Drive with some COAST action going on and much of the risk is managed.

A digger ist still traffic und if there are a lot of bicycles .. especially two abreast at 20 mph - then they would be a car width to pass und thus would have to be included in the average speed flow on that road.. because their impact make the average speed of your journey - oder?

You cannot disclude disinclude.. uninclude (:censored: what's the damn word!) a bicycle from the traffic when bicycles are part of the traffic

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Except that in the case of most cars - believe it or not - some COAST at various levels of competence does go on. We are trying to help folk to harness, develop und improve upon these skills as constant.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Well, if you drove at 5mph you should be OK, 15, sorted, 30 a bit more risky, 50 more risky still.

If you drive at 100 though the footprint of your future self reaching out in front of you means any deer popping out is more likely to be in this area (it gets bigger the faster you drive), and you are more likely to be involved in a collision.

While your simple explanation does make sense, I have to say that simple isolated effects of physics is trumped by real-world psychology and physiology. You can add some real-world risk homeostasis to that too(which was directed at you weepej, yet I didn't get an acknowledgement)

I can't help but notice how we're now going in circles.

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

Unless you happen to be institutionally complacent or a BiB of a certain ilk ... you know the type.. "goranaexempsham.. been twained..thinks this "twaining" gives super powers etc .. .":roll: - you would see no problem in driving at double the speed limit to get your doughnuts or drive at over the ton on a twisty rural like Over Kellett.


BUT like the NORMAL folk like on this message board .. you would not be at 100 mph in deer country. You would be aware.. looking ahead....to likely habitat... which can be

1. forests
2. former forest areas cleared for farm crops which do not have high enough fencing around.



It's a case of planning and being COAST aware at all times

Driving ist complex und subject to human decsion making /repsonsibility und skill

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Weepej said,

....


correct and now you can tell me why a road with an average speed of 50MPH is less safe than a road with an average speed of say 26MPH?

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

The "same" road presumably?

See above where I outline a thought experiment that demonstrates that the faster you go the more chance you have of not avoiding something that pops out in front of you.

It's why people slow down.

Ball bearing aren't cars driven by people, so show me using stats, some figures that prove roads with a higher average speed have more A/100mkvs

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Explain how the same road can have different "average" speeds while you are at it.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

By reducing the limit.

Graball, I've explained before, you can't go comparing motorways or country roads with urban roads in densly populated environments, it makes no sense.

Therefore, you can't compare 'speeding' on motorways with 'speeding' in densely populated environments, it also makes no sense.

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

Did I ever do that?

I'd be happy for motoways to be left out of the discussion altogether frankly, but you and graball keep pulling them back in , graball is particulary keen on trying to assert that because motorways have low incident rates compared to urban roads it must be OK to travel at 70mph through a pedestrianised town centre.

Did I say you did?

In fact, despite my repeated questions on the issue, you wouldn’t let yourself be drawn on it.

At least we now know that we understand a fundamental reason for the actual answer, even if one isn’t wiling to admit it.



With good reason! One of the original topics of this thread was the (generally accepted) needless limitation of motorway travelling speeds.


I don't think he said that at all; I suspect you are wilfully misrepresenting what he said to enable you to make his argument seem absurd.

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

Weepej, forget motorways now let's talk about single carriage way roads.

30MPH equals 101 A/100mvkms, NSL equals 45 accidents/100mvkms... can even you not spot the more dangerous roads?

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

I don't know about Weepje but I can spot that the 30mph limited roads are more dangerous. But to conclude that the increased danger is a consequence of the speed limit is ludicrous. It would be a valid response to your statistic - but not one that I would advocate - to reduce the limit from 30mph to 20mph

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

Are you suggesting that ALL roads should be like motorways (no t junctions, no pedestrians, armco down the middle)?

That's practical, (not!).

The insinuation that I did is clear.