Seat Leon 154mph A11
Discussion
CAPP0 said:
How might he avoid jail for that? I'm sure there have been cases of lower speed where custody has been the outcome?
In the absence of another Offence they've (Police report for for and CPS go with) got to stick on for ( and prove to the criminal standard of proof ) Dangerous driving for custody to even be considered ...
agtlaw said:
You're assuming the CPS was involved.
exactly ... but CPS or not - if they want to jail the driver they need to charge with , prove to the criminal standard of proof, Dangerous driving or some other offence that attracts jail as an option ... rather than the ' non-recordable' criminal offence of Speeding...Assuming venue is the crown court then they would have to convince at least 10 jurors that X is dangerous driving. The judge decides the sentence. The most recent stats show that about one-third of convicted dangerous drivers get immediate custody, about one-third suspended sentence and another type of sentence for the remainder.
heebeegeetee said:
I'll pass him at whatever speed I like. And keep your braking to yourself, at higher speeds cars slow appreciably by just lifting off.
Lets hope none of your love ones are ever killed by some nutter way too fast!If your prepared to sit behind someone who don't know going 80 miles an hour above the speed limit on a dual track.
I can only assume its a self preservation thingas you drive in a similar manor and would hope not to go to prison.
In terms of 2.3 secs thats the average, reaction and we are basing it on him 21 and average. He may at that speed been peeing about with his phone or stereo. I have been passed by people going 100 plus who are looking at phones/sat nav etc. Modern cars have plenty of distractions.
Lets not assume he is above average and has 0.5 fighter pilot reactions.In my experience the vision scans of drivers with no additional advanced training don't tend to be far enough for those types of speed.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 8th August 10:25
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 8th August 10:26
surveyor_101 said:
Lets hope none of your love ones are ever killed by some nutter way too fast!
If your prepared to sit behind someone who don't know going 80 miles an hour above the speed limit on a dual track.
I can only assume its a self preservation thingas you drive in a similar manor and would hope not to go to prison.
In terms of 2.3 secs thats the average, reaction and we are basing it on him 21 and average. He may at that speed been peeing about with his phone or stereo. I have been passed by people going 100 plus who are looking at phones/sat nav etc. Modern cars have plenty of distractions.
Lets not assume he is above average and has 0.5 fighter pilot reactions.In my experience the vision scans of drivers with no additional advanced training don't tend to be far enough for those types of speed.
I've only address the comments made by people who seem to think that the speed alone will make people die; it doesn't. All your other comments are another matter and you need to address them to someone else.If your prepared to sit behind someone who don't know going 80 miles an hour above the speed limit on a dual track.
I can only assume its a self preservation thingas you drive in a similar manor and would hope not to go to prison.
In terms of 2.3 secs thats the average, reaction and we are basing it on him 21 and average. He may at that speed been peeing about with his phone or stereo. I have been passed by people going 100 plus who are looking at phones/sat nav etc. Modern cars have plenty of distractions.
Lets not assume he is above average and has 0.5 fighter pilot reactions.In my experience the vision scans of drivers with no additional advanced training don't tend to be far enough for those types of speed.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 8th August 10:25
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 8th August 10:26
agtlaw said:
From one of my expert reports:
The Highway Code refers to this period as ‘Thinking Distance’ and calculates this distance using a reaction time of 0.67 seconds. It is generally accepted that such a time is too fast for normal traffic situations being more in keeping to anticipation. It's a reaction period which might be considered as being more appropriate when a driver is approaching a green traffic signal and anticipates it changing to red against them.
The Highway Code figure was 0.68 seconds until metric units were used. It is generally believed that the figure was determined not by test or research but more of a convenience as it related to a movement of one foot per mph and therefore easy to remember. [reference]
In normal road traffic situations where events occur unexpectedly in good daylight and in direct view of the driver a period of 0.75 to 2.0 seconds is considered to be more reasonable. Data typically shows that 90 – 95% of subjects responded within 1.5 seconds or less, although consideration must be given to the situation and other prevailing circumstances. [reference]
Cut and paste from UK design standards;The Highway Code refers to this period as ‘Thinking Distance’ and calculates this distance using a reaction time of 0.67 seconds. It is generally accepted that such a time is too fast for normal traffic situations being more in keeping to anticipation. It's a reaction period which might be considered as being more appropriate when a driver is approaching a green traffic signal and anticipates it changing to red against them.
The Highway Code figure was 0.68 seconds until metric units were used. It is generally believed that the figure was determined not by test or research but more of a convenience as it related to a movement of one foot per mph and therefore easy to remember. [reference]
In normal road traffic situations where events occur unexpectedly in good daylight and in direct view of the driver a period of 0.75 to 2.0 seconds is considered to be more reasonable. Data typically shows that 90 – 95% of subjects responded within 1.5 seconds or less, although consideration must be given to the situation and other prevailing circumstances. [reference]
MfS Evidence and Research Section 6:
The average perception-reaction time of a driver is 1.4 seconds when stopping in response to a hazard. This is a conservative estimate for the average driver, for example Olson (1997) reviewed 27 driver perception-reaction time studies and concludes ‘a great deal of data suggest that most drivers (i.e. about 85%) should begin to respond by about 1.5 seconds after first possible visibility of the object or condition of concern’. Guidance in DB32 is based on an assumed time of 2 seconds. The average deceleration rate of drivers stopping is 4.5 ms-2. This is approximately half the maximum deceleration that can be achieved by cars under favorable conditions, and is consistent with firm braking (see, for example, Auto Express, 2005). Guidance in DB32 is based on an assumed rate of 2.5 ms-2, approximately equivalent to stopping on snow without skidding.
Which backs up your point...
Edited by Zombie on Monday 8th August 13:12
heebeegeetee said:
janesmith1950 said:
If reaction time is 0.5 seconds at 154mph, you'll have travelled about 35m before you do anything at all.
Which is fine given that you can see clearly ahead for 300m.hora said:
154mph can't be safe. How can it? Public roads have debris, potholes even on motorways, diesel spill even if minor, etc.
Yet it is done, safely, in a place not far from here.surveyor_101 said:
so at 2.3 secs mr leon has traveled 158 metres before he has had time to react to anything! But yeh most folk can do it safely at 3am if the a11 traffic is light.
You can create a study to prove whatever you like. You know full well that people who are paying attention do not take 2.3 secs to react. Pete317 said:
Leaving aside the legality or wisdom of doing 154 mph on a public road, here's a little quiz for anyone who's interested:
You're doing 154 mph on an empty motorway when you see a car ahead in the distance doing half your speed, and you decide to slow down in case he does something silly.
So, when you're 150 metres from him, you apply moderate braking and decelerate at 4m/s^2
How fast are you going when you pass him?
I'll pass him at whatever speed I like. And keep your braking to yourself, at higher speeds cars slow appreciably by just lifting off.You're doing 154 mph on an empty motorway when you see a car ahead in the distance doing half your speed, and you decide to slow down in case he does something silly.
So, when you're 150 metres from him, you apply moderate braking and decelerate at 4m/s^2
How fast are you going when you pass him?
heebeegeetee said:
I've only address the comments made by people who seem to think that the speed alone will make people die; it doesn't. All your other comments are another matter and you need to address them to someone else.
More aggravating is I would only attempt that sort of speed on a motorway not the A11.The speed doesn't kill is all about cash only works on folk who are a relatively small margin over the limit.
If this conversation was about 98mph for arguments sake I might well agree with you. Once you start doing double the posted limit anywhere and your not properly (Police advanced) trained advanced driver, there is a much more increased level of danger to you and the public. Even paramedics and standard response drivers won't get to go that fast.
If there is no emergency and your just speed testing your car, your essentially using the PUBLIC highway as a race/test track and thats dangerous and selfish.
Having worked in highways and design (HE)), highways england do not design our roads for more than double the posted limit. Most barriers and highways furniture is testing to DMRB standards, which is you have guessed it tested to 30-70 max in most cases. If this chap had lost control at 154, he might well of ended up on the opposing carriageway, which could of been messy. Which is why only a handful of elite police drivers will ever been allowed legally to drive at that sort of speed and that won't very often.
The sheep finally acknowledging that SEAT cars are a worthy, cheap mans alternative to a VW.
I've owned Two SEAT's (Ibiza and Leon) however about 5 years ago before they really caught on in this country. Now 1 in 5 cars on the road seems to be a SEAT, driven by everyone, from teenagers up to OAPs.
Must admit, mine were solid, never had any problems with them. Plus I do find SEAT cars to be more stylish than their VW counterparts.
I've owned Two SEAT's (Ibiza and Leon) however about 5 years ago before they really caught on in this country. Now 1 in 5 cars on the road seems to be a SEAT, driven by everyone, from teenagers up to OAPs.
Must admit, mine were solid, never had any problems with them. Plus I do find SEAT cars to be more stylish than their VW counterparts.
surveyor_101 said:
heebeegeetee said:
I've only address the comments made by people who seem to think that the speed alone will make people die; it doesn't. All your other comments are another matter and you need to address them to someone else.
More aggravating is I would only attempt that sort of speed on a motorway not the A11.With a background in highways and design you will know that the dualling of the A11 between the Five Ways roundabout at Barton Mills and Thetford is quite recent (December 2014). AFAICS the only thing it lacks compared with the M11 is a hard shoulder.
To me the absence of other traffic is a much more relevant factor if you're intent on going that fast. Furthermore I certainly wouldn't contemplate it in March on a unlit road at night. You can only see as far ahead as your headlights will illuminate
Red Devil said:
Why?
With a background in highways and design you will know that the dualling of the A11 between the Five Ways roundabout at Barton Mills and Thetford is quite recent (December 2014). AFAICS the only thing it lacks compared with the M11 is a hard shoulder.
To me the absence of other traffic is a much more relevant factor if you're intent on going that fast. Furthermore I certainly wouldn't contemplate it in March on a unlit road at night. You can only see as far ahead as your headlights will illuminate
I worked areas 1/2 nothing do with that neck of the woods.With a background in highways and design you will know that the dualling of the A11 between the Five Ways roundabout at Barton Mills and Thetford is quite recent (December 2014). AFAICS the only thing it lacks compared with the M11 is a hard shoulder.
To me the absence of other traffic is a much more relevant factor if you're intent on going that fast. Furthermore I certainly wouldn't contemplate it in March on a unlit road at night. You can only see as far ahead as your headlights will illuminate
As said 2004/2014/2016 doesn't matter it was not designed for 140mph let alone 154
Pete317 said:
Is that tested to 70mph using a car, or a HGV?
Hgv's are limited to 56mph....The kinetic energy they both have is interesting though;
Where Energy (J) = ½ x Mass (kg) x Velocity^2 (m/s)
Seat Leon
1,400kg @154mph or 68.8ms
0.5 x 1400 x 4733.44 = 3,313,408J
44T Articulated Wagon
44,000 kg @56mph or 25.034m/s
0.5 x 44,000 x 626.701 = 13,787,425J
Edited by Zombie on Monday 8th August 17:46
Zombie said:
You're not really helping yourself.
I couldn't care less. I see plenty of people who drive up to the car in front and then brake; I don't, and I would hope many on here don't either. All you have to do is look beyond the end of the bonnet. I really do think that people are making too much of this on here. The death toll on autobahns must be huge if a fraction of what is said is true (and most/ a great many of them are only 2 lanes).
heebeegeetee said:
I couldn't care less. I see plenty of people who drive up to the car in front and then brake; I don't, and I would hope many on here don't either. All you have to do is look beyond the end of the bonnet.
I really do think that people are making too much of this on here. The death toll on autobahns must be huge if a fraction of what is said is true (and most/ a great many of them are only 2 lanes).
You can't say the autobahn and the a11 are the same as they aren't. So you ant say if 154 safe on on one it's fine for the other. Autobahns are 4 lane in my experience for a start. Your not one/two lanes apart form heavys going 50. Ernst in the main don't run their tyres to 1.6mm or until inspection comes round like most twunts in this country. Want to drive like arton Senna and run bald ditch finders on their pimped out seat 300bhp. Lost count of the amount of people who claim to be mechanics or petrol heads and there cars are shockingly maintained, I really do think that people are making too much of this on here. The death toll on autobahns must be huge if a fraction of what is said is true (and most/ a great many of them are only 2 lanes).
What he was doing was racing testing on the public highway, no reason to go that fas other than your selfish.
He was driving like a twunt and we are lucky he didn't come unstuck, 56 day ban is not long enough but it's done now, clearly jps aren't equipped to deal with 110 plus and forces wil now write people up wi the cps blessing for dangerous driving.
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 8th August 21:23
Edited by surveyor_101 on Monday 8th August 21:24
La Liga said:
I always wonder if those who make comparisons with Germany realise there's more (proportional) death on Germany's roads, restricted or not.
Well deaths per billion miles driven on the autobahns are half that of the fat wide USA...Also the autobahns I just drove weren't much different to UK motorways - never even saw a four laner. And they also don't have the Christmas tree lights + video walls on a gantry every mile either (but probably sell this amazing tech to the rest of the world)!
Just back from there and cruising at a speed that would cause you immeasurable legal grief here was very comfortable for me there at around 110mph (dependent on traffic density - sometimes more - sometimes less) - but then of course that's all totally different isn't it... Its just doesnt compute!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff