Safe Speed Forums

Or possibly ,some way of making drivers( of all ages) aware of how( and the need) to self assess -then give them the opertunity to self educate ,or a sourceof advice ( again we used to have the assess thing ,andthe educate /advise ting -all rolled into a mobile enforcement and safety unit -the bloke with a white cap )

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

The ones that realise they need to self assess aren't the problem. There are known bad drivers that aren't being banned. Some old bat pinned someone to a wall and broke their pelvis because they couldn't control their car properly. Same old bat has demolished walls and is well known in the town. Why hasn't she had her licence revoked and been told point blank she must not drive under pain of a broken leg to stop her driving if she won't stop? Just as bad was some young idiot that drove into a work colleague of mine, nearly had an accident in a car park and then promptly killed himself while racing a friend. Unfortunately the car he hit put the other driver in hospital for months and ruined her life. She died a few years later. It all boils down to a few selfish people that are not capable of driving to a reasonable standard. They need forcing off the roads. If truly bad drivers were targetted properly then the majority (probably 80%) could be left alone and treated like responsible adults not stupid children that need to be nannied all the time.

ANPR & specs could be put to good use and spot cars that join the motorway too slowly. Pull them and give them a stiff talking to. If they keep on doing it then give them points.

We've got ANPR/SPECS and CCTV on motorways ,all proving that remote control of drivers ain't working .Along with the join too slowly lot ,we've now got the drive too slowly lot as well -some as low as 50 -creating congestion due to elephant queues along with the associated safety problems .
So what's missing -as i suggested ,for those not capable of self assessment - "( again we used to have the assess thing ,andthe educate /advise ting -all rolled into a mobile enforcement and safety unit -the bloke with a white cap ) "

Seems to work in one or two places in the UK (THOSE PLACES WHERE TH cc ARE ALOWED TO THINK and nowhave the best road safety record in the UK) - BUT that policy doesen't help HMG fill the holes in the economy

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

As low as 50 !
That would faster than trucks on a s/c.
The same speed as trucks on a d/c.
And too slow on the one-remaining-lane on the m/way that isn't used by trucks (max speed (driver-un-ignoreable) 56mph) (and when they finally get the gps digital tacho installed...40 and 50 will be un-ignoreable as well)
I get-on quite well at 55/60 on m/ways....no problem...and in many cases I catch-up with people going past on the outside lane/s....in fact...faster frequently doesn't get you where you're going quicker !

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

yes, but you do occasionally see people doing 50MPH, in cars, and in the middle lane (often when the first lane is clear too).
These are the people who need targeting.

_________________
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.

Maybe: But they're the ones who will never admit being wrong. They're probably civil servants (maybe even scp staff)
The ones doing 150 in the outside lane are police testing cars !

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing

Removing the worst drivers from the road? Sounds like a good idea to me.



I'm personally not convinced by the need for specific motorway training. How different (in non-Sabre terms please ) is a motorway from a good quality DC? Roughly what proportion of the UK population are more than an hour's drive from a good DC?

And slow enough to force HGV into the middle lane of a motorway ,to form one long queueof HGV .I can think of a lot of places in the midlands where this sort of thing causes havoc -where the act of getting off has to be planned a few miles in advance -not because of HGV ,BUT MR 50 IS FAST ENOUGH .Then a three lane motorway becomes a one lane one ,just as surely as if there's a mixed batch of cars on an almost empty motorway travelling in the middle lane at 55-60, with a few in the inside ,and once again the HGV start queueing up behinf the MLM .

JTB -north of Glasgow ,DC ends about Balloch(A82/A811) ,and AFAIK ( certainly as far north as Inverness from the A82 side ) that's the end of DC .Branching west to Sky -none that i know of .Any other DC /MW is over East Coast -Inverness way -how far north it goes -can't say,nor how far south .seem to remember that Kessock bridge is DC -but again,never been over it .So that's a lot of miles south/east to DC from some of the larger Highland towns.SS2 can probably fill in more on the east coast - unless Peter E can find any on Sabre maps.
Will leave those in Penzance to fill in the southern data .

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

But it would place an unnecessary burden on the vast majority of competent drivers which arguably would be disproportionate to the benefits. How many would really feel confident to go into a retest/assessment or whatever without paying for a few refresher lessons? Also it would only remove the numpties from the road, not the competent but reckless.


In terms of the requirements of the driving task, no real difference - indeed the DCs are often actually more challenging as they have tighter slips and curves. To my mind, the vast bulk of the benefit would be gained simply by requiring everyone to do the training on the best quality roads available in their locality.

But some people do make the argument very specific to motorways.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I agree, but the problem here is that many DCs (the ones near me anyway) are only 40 or 50; these won't root out the '50 everywhere driver'. Oddly, my nearest motorway is only 2 mins away (many times closer than the nearest NSL DC).


Sorry, but I feel that is simply not good enough, especially with today's tuition policy.
I can see "some people" really aren't warming to my view. Perhaps a compromise is to pull any (repeatedly, continuously, or stubbornly) errant motorway driver and mandate that they must attend/pass a motorway lesson/test within a certain date?

Surely one must at least agree that the current policy of banning learners from motorway tuition is generally detrimental? If this is overcome then we can properly mandate the quality of roads which must be assessed for a given location - which could then reasonably include motorways!

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

But the significant centres of population that are remote from the motorway network, such as Cornwall, Norwich, North-West Wales and Aberdeen, do tend to have NSL DCs.


I am concerned that we do not put unreasonable barriers in the way of people learning to drive, and IMV insisting that everyone must have motorway tuition falls into that category, when for many people from remote areas it could well require costly and time-consuming overnight stays.

Incompetent motorway driving isn't normally the fault of people from Truro or Wick who aren't used to motorways – it's generally down to locals who have plenty of opportunity to practice.


No problem with that provided a reasonableness test is applied, which might be roads within one hour's drive of the test centre.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

In which case the motorway would be fine. I'm not saying drivers should be trained on a good DC rather than a motorway, rather that a good DC would be a perfectly reasonable alternative to a motorway.

I wonder if this is a planning trend? Most of the Duals that I know that are 50MPH or less are within a couple of miles of a motorway. It's almost as if the planners are saying..."look you've got a perfectly good motorway to blast about on at 70MPH but we're damned if you can have a dual carriageway to play on at that speed too"...makes you wonder?

_________________
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 did mention tiered licences as a solution.


Perhaps, when factoring in exposure. Regardless, both those groups can benefit.

What of the idea of pulling any (repeatedly, continuously, or stubbornly) errant motorway driver and mandate that they must attend/pass a motorway lesson/test within a certain date? Non-attendance/failure of that course could result with legal exclusion from motorways (which could be fairer than points, fine or revocation of licence). This assumes use of trafpol, as opposed to cameras, of course.

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

I was a professional driver for over 50 years and no longer commute, but I 'joyride' far further than my daily trip to work as I'm sure many others do.

Assuming they were effectively excluded from the motorways, they might wind up worse off on rural and local roads. Or, they might not.

The ones that would pose no additional risk to themselves or others on rural and local roads would likely prove such after comprehensive and thorough testing. If the only place that they ought not drive truly turns out to be motorways and dual carriageways, the only thing left to determine is how suitable those rural and local roads in fact are to handling those who now legally must avoid M-ways and DC-ways.

Even if the M-way/DC-way test transfers precisely the correct number of people to rural and local roads, could those roads handle even that many more drivers? At best, they might not add any additional danger to these roads, but that's unlikely; they'd probably add some, even if just by being there (unless they were truly awesome drivers otherwise).

The ones that would probably wind up worse off on rural and local roads are the ones that have a greater need to either be remedially retrained, or banned outright. (Keep in mind that they've already disqualified themselves from M-ways/DC-ways.) Transferring such 'drivers' to rural and local roads would absolutely add more danger than was removed from the M-ways/DC-ways; the only question would be, "Was the danger increased by an integer, a factor, or an exponent?"

Thus, the test should not merely be to see if they are qualified to use the M-ways/DC-ways. They should be retested thoroughly and comprehensively. To be logical and fair to everyone else, everyone else who has to take a road test, should have to take the same road test when they'd normally be required to do so.

_________________
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

We had the best road in the World and that training driver/rider interest made the majority of road users sensible responsible and understood their need to be careful, considerate, keep your eyes on the road ahead and be aware of all those about you. That enable good risk management and judgment. Backed up by good public info films to remind and educate it worked very well. We had a culture of road use and road safety that was the envy of the World.
Now we have a great mess, a muddle thinking sticking plaster policies that fail to help or educate, so road users have been left to their own devices, especially with less cops on the road.

Regarding d/c as a substitute motorway for training I think in principal it can work, but the problem for a for 1000 people is much bigger, One chap I know have NEVER been around a single roundabout and had once been through a set of traffic lights - we are ONLY talking about 10 yrs ago ! I doubt this has changed much. My nearest motorway is about approx 150 miles away.
We were horrified and took the chap on a drive to go through the processes and he asked many sensible and intelligent questions. We were amazed at the instructor not taking him to a roundabout that was a mere 13 miles from his home pickup point !
The test area where he took his test is no longer in operation and is now moved to Inverness (& Dingwall - not 100% still sure).
Education and proper and proportional enforcement have to be the way forward without the interpretations they are placing on these phrases. Customer interactions provide education and guidance, and deals with problems immediately nipping them in the bud.
Implying that a certain age makes one necessary to even take a further test is wrong. Driver education has to be available to enable all to improve and if faults arise they are worked on to raise standards. Now if they continue to have many problems then people are not stupid when someone independent can point out that they are failing to be safe and failing to make the necessary improvements.
Perhaps this is where a friendly policeman visits and helps advise and telling someone they no longer meet the standard is more gentle.
My question then is are they competent to even ride a disabled electric 'carriage'? So perhaps additional advice of their ongoing needs have to be discussed with family, friends and social services. It must be such a sad and scary reality to loose that freedom.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

I am amazed that the IAM made these statements as they must be alianiating 60+% of its own members. I know many drivers 70+ who drive well. or have self regulated due to health.

I think a lot of measure is put on the number of accidents rather than severity of accidents.
The severe accidents involving older drivers surley focus around a cluster of illnesses which could be picked up and in many cases treated with better healthcare and screening. This should not be at the drivers expense as it should be done for every persaon over 40 as part of standard NHS provision.

I am thinking abot heart and circulation. diabeties, eyesight etc.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

Nearly every certificate of competency expires. Regardless of a licensed driver's age, maybe licenses last too long before expiring, and maybe not enough people are being retested.

One way or another, someone's feelings are going to get hurt. I'd rather my feelings be hurt because I'm being tested too often, rather than wind up afraid to do something because my aging caught up with me unawares.

Perhaps the problem is that it's coming from the wrong angle. Maybe healthcare should have much more of a say in this. The idea of retesting seems so much more punitive than it has to be because the government has nothing to say on the topic of driving except, "none of you idiots can be trusted. Everybody slow down, stop at every single red light, and give us more money".

If my doctor advised - or even compelled - me to retake a road test after a medical visit, that might mean something very different to me, than if [my] Dept of Motor Vehicles or Dept of Transportation ordered me to retake a road test because I've joined another statistical demographic that hasn't been generally accepted yet. (In your context, the Dept for Transport, yes?)

I have much more respect for my doctor's expert opinion on my fitness to drive, than for the opinion of someone who may never meet me and will probably never regularly drive to and from work.

_________________
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