Safe Speed Forums

In another thread, itschampionman wrote:


This set me off thinking about what would happen to road safety if we had a national "work to rule" based on the Highway Code. I have this suspicion that we routinely use subtle skills way beyond the content of the Highway Code to avoid accidents. As a consequence, I also suspect that crashes would rise very markedly if we all attempted to driver strictly within the Highway Code.

Obviously we have thousands of accidents that are actually caused by Highway Code violations, so there would have to be some sizeable effects to overcome those obvious benefits. On the other hand the average driver goes about ten years between crashes which is pretty amazing considering the number of crash opportunities available on every single drive.

So what routine crash avoidance techniques do we all use that are "beyond" anything set out in the Highway Code? I'd like to develop a list.

* General principles of defensive driving
* Equalising danger, left and right
* Observation links
* Advanced anticipation

Taking a different sort of view of the same thing, the sort of hazard perception that experienced drivers use automatically is about a million miles beyond anything I've ever seen written down. We use a sort of grasshopper attention scene scan that's subtly and accurately directed around the possible and probable sources of danger. We take many thousands of miles of experience to get good at it and largely we learn individually from personal experience. If we were running a Highway Code "work to rule" I guess we'd be denied the right to use this sort of risk based priority scheme, our attention would frequently be less effectively directed and we'd see important risks later.

What do others think the effects of a Highway Code "work to rule" would be?

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

Along similar lines, I have noticed that when drivers' own choices of speed are artificially restricted eg by a speed camera on an inappropriately low limit, or by a police car on a motorway, the result is lots of bunching and the kind of incompetent speed up - slow down driving evidenced by lots of brake lights.

My hypothesis is that this occurs because everyone's speeds are very similar, but different enough to cause the above problems.

Motorway driving in particular is very stressful when drivers react in this way to absolute speed limits.

On multi-lane roads I suggest that relatively large speed differentials are actually essential to maintain a flow of traffic. This is likely to involve a significant proportion of drivers breaking the speed limit.

In the same vein, I would like to ask other posters on this site to consider what the state of motoring in this country might be without a published set of guidelines that described in plain English the expectation of each driver on the roads. After all, not all countries have a ‘highway code’, but then again, such countries have higher accident rates.

For example, what might happen if there was no published rules on lane discipline, behaviour at roundabouts, traffic junctions, and the meaning of signage. How could fault be accurately attributed in insurance claims, if no guidelines were published on what side of the road to use, or the meaning of parking and warning signs etc.

How could motorists agree on the correct course of action when they meet on a hill, or how to behave on a narrow country road. In general, I would like opinions on whether drivers benefit from a mutually agreeable set of minimal and understandable guidelines on how to interact with other road users, or whether a more free and easy approach would be appropriate?

_________________
I stole this .sig

I sometime wonder if there are any

I certainly regard the Highway Code as worthy and important. But there's an "unwritten" Highway Code that's important too. There are all sorts of rules that we conform to that are not written down, and some of them are in direct conflict with the Highway Code itself. Headlight flashing is a good example. In the Highway Code it's just a simple warning of presence. In the real world it's:

* Several completely different courtesy signals (you can go, thanks, you can pull in now).

* The standard warning (I am here).

* Get out of my way.

* Speed trap ahead

* Turn your lights on!

* Hello!

* Please dip!

The funny thing is we manage to sort these out very well indeed with few problems. They are one small part of a huge underlying culture on which we all depend.

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

Oh - I agree!

The headlight flash means so many things to different people now. And a lot of accidents have occurred because of misinterpretation of meaning of the quick light flash. Especially on a right hand turn.... is the person flashing letting you go? Or letting you know he is there?

I would also prefer it if they said "MUST NOT" all the time as "SHOULD NOT" and "MAY NOT" are also confusing to some readers.

It sounds like you feel the guidelines should be beefed up and made comprehensive. After all, the whole point is to get ALL drivers on the same page, and ambiguous SHOULD NOTs, MAY NOTs and MUST NOTs seem confusing. On the other hand, some granularity with respect to the interpretation might be right. The absolute maximum speed limit is a MUST NOT, so no ambiguity on that one.

_________________
I stole this .sig

It would perhaps be useful if a book was published that was merely a summary of road traffic law and did not include any subjective interpretations going beyond the law.

_________________
"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've asked you this many times, but you've never given a satisfactory answer: precisely what is it about speed limits that qualify them for their sacred status?

As far as you're concerned, laws and rules are open to interpretation, but not speed limits - break these and you're in for eternal damnation.

Who even mentioned speed limits?

Because it gives him am ivory tower to stand on and preach to us from (or should that be a glass house?).

Speed is quantifiable whilst not much else is, and I think that is why there is so much obsession with it. It can be done by machine and requires no subjectivity whatsoever. Oh and it raises cash by the bucketload.

_________________
Tailgaters - Please Pass
You have an Accident to go to!