Speed

[durhamplumber]

There is good evidence to suggest people are more likely to slow down for hazard alerts than temporary speed limits, particularly when they don't understand why there is a temporary limit in place?

Another 1 who lives in toytown with Noddy.

 

[durhamplumber]

speed that does not enable you to stop safely in the distance you can see to be clear).

Rofl. ..take notice,,,next timeyou are on a motorway,,,how many drivers are way too close to the vehicle in front..OR,,,,stick to the speed limit especially non m/way and see how many people drive way too close...Then come back and tell me your percentages

 

[motorbiking]

Another 1 who lives in toytown with Noddy.

What qualifies you as a driving expert? IAM? RoSPA?

Genuinely you might find this book worth a read. https://www.amazon.co.uk/s?k=roadcraft

Interestingly I was called as a witness in a fatal prosecution for a driver convicted of Causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving. Was he speeding - NO was he driving too close to the poor sod on the motorbike who he ran over - YES.

Scenario - rider in middle lane, driver on the outside, approaching exit ramp, driver in the outside doesn't check before diving late for the exit, causes the motorcyclist to lose control, bouncing off the car in the inside lane and goes down. Driver in the middle runs him over, breaking his legs and crushing his skull. Me.. I'm a former advanced riding instructor with first on scene training, so I stop and attempt scene management and first aid.

Nobody was speeding.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

People who drive faster, perhaps those who represent the fastest 15% or 20% of drivers? Working on the basis that 80-85% choose a safe speed? There is good evidence that the risks of accident increase for the top 10-15% of speed on a given road.

So what sound and effective, workable legal regime would you have which would tell all drivers what the 80-85% consensus on speed is on any given stretch of road?

Mr Loophole would be able to buy not just a Caribbean villa, but a whole bl**dy island.

There is good evidence to suggest people are more likely to slow down for hazard alerts than temporary speed limits, particularly when they don't understand why there is a temporary limit in place?

Is there?

Have you never seen significant numbers of drivers ignoring temporary speed limits when they are actually in the roadworks?

Have you ever tried sticking to a mandatory temporary speed limit imposed for flow management and following the advice not to change lanes? If you happened to have been in the RH lane of a motorway when that condition arises, see how popular the idea of you staying there and driving at 50mph is with other drivers.

And surely even the most cursory amount of thinking would reveal that if you pass an advisory speed limit sign on a motorway that even if you don't understand why it's there, it must be for a reason?

EDIT - added this link: https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/temporary-road-signs.512492/page-3#post-4285417

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Rofl. ..take notice,,,next timeyou are on a motorway,,,how many drivers are way too close to the vehicle in front..OR,,,,stick to the speed limit especially non m/way and see how many people drive way too close...Then come back and tell me your percentages

I'd say, rounded to 1 decimal place, 100%.

In the scenario of driving in a lane where there is another to your left, I wonder how many people know how large a gap there needs to be on their left for them to safely move into it, and if the traffic in it is going slower, how big it has to be to move into it to allow another driver to overtake them without them being forced to slow down?

 

[motorbiking]

The process is exactly the same. You monitor speed on the road. You set the limit at the 85th (pre 2001 model) percentile of your data, not the 50th (current model).

You find other ways to address the social and environmental needs.

You can then robustly defend the speed limit as the max safe speed. Not the max speed that meets our other goals.

people tend to comply with laws that make sense.

 

[motorbiking]

I'd say, rounded to 1 decimal place, 100%.

In the scenario of driving in a lane where there is another to your left, I wonder how many people know how large a gap there needs to be on their left for them to safely move into it, and if the traffic in it is going slower, how big it has to be to move into it to allow another driver to overtake them without them being forced to slow down?

feel free to post your formula.

 

[mattylad]

I can do that for him.... just a sec....

Here you go:

 

[durhamplumber]

Have you never seen significant numbers of drivers ignoring temporary speed limits when they are actually in the roadworks?

Yes..loads,,,everyday.So many stupid drivers.

 

[durhamplumber]

people tend to comply with laws that make sense.

What utter garbage.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

feel free to post your formula.

I probably could write it as a formula, but it wouldn't be easy to grasp, and would still benefit greatly from an explanation of it, so why not just have the explanation?

If a driver is to safely move into a gap in slower traffic on his left, and to remain there for a period of time without having to slow down, the gap needs to be long enough so that at no time is he less than 2 seconds from the car behind or in front.

I used to apply a 10 second rule (of thumb), when training people preparing for their advanced test, if they pulled in on a motorway or dual carriage way from overtaking and then pulled out again within 10 seconds. You'd pick up a minor for poor planning.

Clearly relative speeds are significant.

If we use your ROT and assume the slower traffic is moving at 60mph and you are doing 70, then the gap on your left needs to be 528', or 161m.

If you're moving over to accommodate someone who wants to overtake you, then the gap required could be even longer, if they are going to take more than 10s to pass you and then build up a 2s gap in front of you.

In the other thread the example speeds were 60mph to your left, 65 for you, and 70 for the driver behind you, and there the gap would need to be 228m. Plus, technically, the length of your car.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

All academic. If there were proper punishments to be had there would be no lawless people on the roads.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

proper punishments

Amputations?

Executions?

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Amputations?

Executions?

Jail; and if that doesn't work, more and longer jail.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Jail; and if that doesn't work, more and longer jail.

Criminal punishments should be inter-connected. It you are the type that drops litter or spits in the street, or sprays graffiti, or shoplifts, or stabs, or takes drugs; you're more than likely to be the type that, when behind the wheel, speeds and commits other such driving offences, especially as, if and when you have "got off with" lesser offences previously. Motor vehicles are potential murder weapons, and therefore, driving licences should not be issued to anybody convicted of any criminal offence.