Breaking the National Speed Limit
Discussion
What is the general opinion in Advanced driving circles about breaking the national speed limit.
An observer has explained to me that they would exceed the limits, and seemed to frown upon my decision to stick to the limits as slow driving.
As for posted limits 20 30 40 50 mph etc they said this shouldn't be broken
An observer has explained to me that they would exceed the limits, and seemed to frown upon my decision to stick to the limits as slow driving.
As for posted limits 20 30 40 50 mph etc they said this shouldn't be broken
Safety comes first. For example, if I need to accelerate out of trouble, then I won't worry about the speed limit. Advanced driving is a very practical skill and a bit of common sense should apply. For example, should you be carefully studying your speedo in the middle of an overtake? Would it be safer to complete the overtake and then ensure you're within the speed limit once the overtake is complete?
The IAM and RoSPA are road safety charities and therefore can't condone breaking the law. Consequently, on test you should aim to drive legally (unless safety takes priority, as suggested).
The IAM and RoSPA are road safety charities and therefore can't condone breaking the law. Consequently, on test you should aim to drive legally (unless safety takes priority, as suggested).
My views on speed and NSLs in this old post here...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
foxtrotmike said:
What is the general opinion in Advanced driving circles about breaking the national speed limit.
An observer has explained to me that they would exceed the limits, and seemed to frown upon my decision to stick to the limits as slow driving.
As for posted limits 20 30 40 50 mph etc they said this shouldn't be broken
It's up to you, but I am familiar with the advanced driving mindset towards NSLs - generally that if it can be exceeded safely, with little risk of being caught then they treat it as an advisory limit and drive / ride to the conditions. You'll hear that a lot if you ask PH'ers their attitude to the NSL, they'll just say they "drive the conditions". An observer has explained to me that they would exceed the limits, and seemed to frown upon my decision to stick to the limits as slow driving.
As for posted limits 20 30 40 50 mph etc they said this shouldn't be broken
Of course, it all comes down to your own personal risk assessment and how you'd deal with the punishment for being caught. But if you're on a dry, straight-ish road with good visiblity, hazards you've accounted and planned for and you don't see any suspicious vans or cars parked at the edge of the road, and nothing that looks like an unmarked car around you, then why aren't you exceeding the NSL and making progress, rather than obeying an arbitrary law that you're unlikely to be caught breaking?
The above is not necessarily my view, but this is what your instructor is going to be asking.
foxtrotmike said:
An observer has explained to me that they would exceed the limits,
That's up to them I suppose.foxtrotmike said:
and seemed to frown upon my decision to stick to the limits as slow driving.
That's bizarre. Even more so if this person was wearing their IAM hat at the time (you said 'observer' so I presume IAM).foxtrotmike said:
As for posted limits 20 30 40 50 mph etc they said this shouldn't be broken
That's also bizarre. It's not more illegal to break those limits than NSL.foxtrotmike said:
An observer has explained to me that they would exceed the limits, and seemed to frown upon my decision to stick to the limits as slow driving.
If that was really a concern and if they were worth their salt, they'd have taken you down roads where sticking to the limits would have been very fast driving.Interestingly, over the years I have paid for tuition from x3 different providers.
x2 times the instructor was a current serving Police officer (one an actual Police instructor), the other retired.
In all cases they suggested I 'made good progress' in NSLs.
Within RoSPA / IAM groups, the observers should, with no exceptions recommend sticking to the limits, all of them. Quite simply, you won't pass the test if you don't, and as an ambassador for RoSPA/ IAM the organisations would not take a positive view.
My view would be to drive to the conditions, what I actually do is stick to the limits as I wish to maintain a clean license.
x2 times the instructor was a current serving Police officer (one an actual Police instructor), the other retired.
In all cases they suggested I 'made good progress' in NSLs.
Within RoSPA / IAM groups, the observers should, with no exceptions recommend sticking to the limits, all of them. Quite simply, you won't pass the test if you don't, and as an ambassador for RoSPA/ IAM the organisations would not take a positive view.
My view would be to drive to the conditions, what I actually do is stick to the limits as I wish to maintain a clean license.
The fact is we're in a point in time where the speed issue has been turned into a political one and speed limits are enforced accordingly IE inflexibly rigidly and with numerous methods and points of detection.
The fact that under that regime even overtaking slower traffic is now impossible in most cases,because it's not possible to create a safe speed differential while subject to rigid enforcement of the limit,says everything.
As for me I just wished that I'd been born at least 10 years earlier thereby putting more of my driving years during earlier better days.
The fact that under that regime even overtaking slower traffic is now impossible in most cases,because it's not possible to create a safe speed differential while subject to rigid enforcement of the limit,says everything.
As for me I just wished that I'd been born at least 10 years earlier thereby putting more of my driving years during earlier better days.
As others have said, I am very surprised if an Observer wearing an IAM hat encouraged you to exceed the NSL. For an IAM test you must keep within the speed limit, and for people who habitually exceed the speed limit that requires practice (as does getting up to the speed limit briskly where consistent with safety and smoothness).
Having said that, I know that many 'Advanced Drivers' do have the attitude described by the OP - that red ring limits are sacrosanct but the NSL is not. This attitude comes from training in the police driving schools where that is the practice for much of the courses. Most civilian advanced driver training in the UK is either directly from police trained drivers or on a trickle down basis from those influenced by police trained drivers. There is also a pragmatic element to it for those unconcerned with legality for its own sake - that such folk are more inclined to exceed limits on the sort of road where the limits are less likely to be enforced.
Many who have this attitude fail to recognise how illogical it is. Some do realise that, but still stick with their deeply ingrained habits.
Having said that, I know that many 'Advanced Drivers' do have the attitude described by the OP - that red ring limits are sacrosanct but the NSL is not. This attitude comes from training in the police driving schools where that is the practice for much of the courses. Most civilian advanced driver training in the UK is either directly from police trained drivers or on a trickle down basis from those influenced by police trained drivers. There is also a pragmatic element to it for those unconcerned with legality for its own sake - that such folk are more inclined to exceed limits on the sort of road where the limits are less likely to be enforced.
Many who have this attitude fail to recognise how illogical it is. Some do realise that, but still stick with their deeply ingrained habits.
waremark said:
Many who have this attitude fail to recognise how illogical it is. Some do realise that, but still stick with their deeply ingrained habits.
It's not completely illogical - back in the days when speed limits were a more useful indicator of hazard density, a 30 or 40 limit gave you reliable information to base a speed choice on.The link between limits and hazards is massively degraded these days, but for drivers who want to avoid points, the 'respect the red ring' maxim still holds good. Looking at the camera partnership sites in my area, I'd say around 95% are in red-ring limits.
I find it hard to believe that an IAM Observer would state that failing to exceed a limit would be marked down. I shall plead the fifth about my own opinions.
In my experiences of IAM and Rospa, speeding was a no-no, whatever the personal views of the observer/examiner when not wearing the club blazer and tie. Understandable really, if a little slow in some places.
There was no nudge-nudge, wink-wink involved, but the bike examiner did comment that most people do exceed limits at one time or other/all of the time, but that they should not do so for the test.
There was no nudge-nudge, wink-wink involved, but the bike examiner did comment that most people do exceed limits at one time or other/all of the time, but that they should not do so for the test.
S. Gonzales Esq. said:
waremark said:
Many who have this attitude fail to recognise how illogical it is. Some do realise that, but still stick with their deeply ingrained habits.
It's not completely illogical - back in the days when speed limits were a more useful indicator of hazard density, a 30 or 40 limit gave you reliable information to base a speed choice on.The link between limits and hazards is massively degraded these days, but for drivers who want to avoid points, the 'respect the red ring' maxim still holds good. Looking at the camera partnership sites in my area, I'd say around 95% are in red-ring limits.
As i passed my AD test a couple of years ago I went back recently to have a refresher session with the local IAM group but my aims were just that and not to take anything like First or Masters (thats for another time)
So although it wasn't Observed runs for an AD test as such but was still done under the IAM umbrella so I was a bit shocked that i was being encouraged to break the NSL, more so I was even more shocked when i was, on occasion been put under pressure to speed when my choice was not to, this is found very puzzling, and in a way affected my trust in the remainder of the drive elements.
On balance though, i can understand why he may have wanted to have done it as it would of assisted with my confidence issues but in my opinion this was primarily when performing overtakes and turning right onto busy fast A roads, i have to say the latter is much improved.
But anyway i got what I want out of it, im much more confident, much smoother and gear changes now feel like im driving an auto which is bang on what I wanted to get out of it, the rest which i still need to address, such as 1st gear at junctions i haven't quite mastered but i think that will happen over time.
But i doubt i'll be attempting to break the NSL madly just yet, although i sometime will do +5mph
but thats always been the case.
So although it wasn't Observed runs for an AD test as such but was still done under the IAM umbrella so I was a bit shocked that i was being encouraged to break the NSL, more so I was even more shocked when i was, on occasion been put under pressure to speed when my choice was not to, this is found very puzzling, and in a way affected my trust in the remainder of the drive elements.
On balance though, i can understand why he may have wanted to have done it as it would of assisted with my confidence issues but in my opinion this was primarily when performing overtakes and turning right onto busy fast A roads, i have to say the latter is much improved.
But anyway i got what I want out of it, im much more confident, much smoother and gear changes now feel like im driving an auto which is bang on what I wanted to get out of it, the rest which i still need to address, such as 1st gear at junctions i haven't quite mastered but i think that will happen over time.
But i doubt i'll be attempting to break the NSL madly just yet, although i sometime will do +5mph
but thats always been the case.In perspective speeding in a built up area with pedestrians around is very dangerous.
Driving on a deserted 3 lane motorway at 80mph in a car designed to do 155mph ( brakes, tyres, handling etc) can hardly be called unsafe? (although illegal)
When the speed limit was introduced back in 1968 the average car's top speed was 70mph.
Driving on a deserted 3 lane motorway at 80mph in a car designed to do 155mph ( brakes, tyres, handling etc) can hardly be called unsafe? (although illegal)
When the speed limit was introduced back in 1968 the average car's top speed was 70mph.
Quite simple for any non-police advanced driving test - you stick to all limits, or you will fail. I am quite surprised that an observer made this comment.
What you decide to do at any other time is up to you. It may well be safe to exceed the NSL; but it will always be illegal, whatever anyone's view expressed here, even if you did it for safety reasons. But the police do exercise discretion, unless behind a camera van.
On my IAM test it was wet, but I was encouraged to drive up the limit where safe, which I did and passed. It seems obvious that it must have been considered safe to go faster if it was dry, but I would not have done of course. Not to mention that the speed limit then was 70 on one section and is now 50 with no changes to the road. So 70 in the wet was an IAM pass, but 51 now in the dry is illegal. And then I had no ABS, no TCS, in fact no electronic aids at all.
ACPO guidelines of course suggest that you are unlikely to get a ticket until you are going 10% +2 mph over the limit. (67 no action, 68 ticket, in theory). On my old car this equated to an indicated speed of 73. Now it's 69 on my current car. It's really important to know your speedo; it's accuracy and repeatability - the true figure is the one that matters in law, not what it says. (Although the opposite is true on your test - drive to your speedo on the test, not what you know to be the real speed).
Speed limits as we all know are set for many reason - average driving skill, average cars, political reasons, noise reduction.
Final thought - if you want to get more thrill out of the roads, buy a car designed when the NSL and motorway limit were originally set. You'll be far less troubled by the limits!! (I am not suggesting people break the NSL for a thrill per se)
What you decide to do at any other time is up to you. It may well be safe to exceed the NSL; but it will always be illegal, whatever anyone's view expressed here, even if you did it for safety reasons. But the police do exercise discretion, unless behind a camera van.
On my IAM test it was wet, but I was encouraged to drive up the limit where safe, which I did and passed. It seems obvious that it must have been considered safe to go faster if it was dry, but I would not have done of course. Not to mention that the speed limit then was 70 on one section and is now 50 with no changes to the road. So 70 in the wet was an IAM pass, but 51 now in the dry is illegal. And then I had no ABS, no TCS, in fact no electronic aids at all.
ACPO guidelines of course suggest that you are unlikely to get a ticket until you are going 10% +2 mph over the limit. (67 no action, 68 ticket, in theory). On my old car this equated to an indicated speed of 73. Now it's 69 on my current car. It's really important to know your speedo; it's accuracy and repeatability - the true figure is the one that matters in law, not what it says. (Although the opposite is true on your test - drive to your speedo on the test, not what you know to be the real speed).
Speed limits as we all know are set for many reason - average driving skill, average cars, political reasons, noise reduction.
Final thought - if you want to get more thrill out of the roads, buy a car designed when the NSL and motorway limit were originally set. You'll be far less troubled by the limits!! (I am not suggesting people break the NSL for a thrill per se)
You shouldn't feel forced to break speed limits. When you're in the driving seat, you're in charge and any decision to break the speed limit should be yours alone based on your calculations of the risks.
However, there's nothing wrong with questioning speed limits rather than just sticking to them because rules are rules. It's not really true nowadays to say that red ringed speed limits are always right. Local authorities have the power to set limits and their enthusiasm for reducing them varies. Why, for example, should I disregard an NSL on the Bolton or Yorkshire side of the Lancashire border but stick rigidly to one of Lancashire's 50mph limits when nothing about the road itself has changed from one side of the county border to the other where the speed limit changes?
If you know why the speed limit has been set (if it's a long standing one that's there because of the genuine hazard levels on the road, an attempt at a quick fix because of a few accidents, the result of some desk based research based on a dubious understanding of the physics behind impact forces or to pacify some old folk on the parish council who probably speed themselves but want to control everybody else) you can make an informed decision regarding whether or not you want to stick with it and you know what sort of hazards you're likely to encounter. Of course, whatever the reason for the limit, you're always risking getting caught if you exceed it.
However, there's nothing wrong with questioning speed limits rather than just sticking to them because rules are rules. It's not really true nowadays to say that red ringed speed limits are always right. Local authorities have the power to set limits and their enthusiasm for reducing them varies. Why, for example, should I disregard an NSL on the Bolton or Yorkshire side of the Lancashire border but stick rigidly to one of Lancashire's 50mph limits when nothing about the road itself has changed from one side of the county border to the other where the speed limit changes?
If you know why the speed limit has been set (if it's a long standing one that's there because of the genuine hazard levels on the road, an attempt at a quick fix because of a few accidents, the result of some desk based research based on a dubious understanding of the physics behind impact forces or to pacify some old folk on the parish council who probably speed themselves but want to control everybody else) you can make an informed decision regarding whether or not you want to stick with it and you know what sort of hazards you're likely to encounter. Of course, whatever the reason for the limit, you're always risking getting caught if you exceed it.
if you find the need to break the NSL during an overtake or such then your 'plan' was poor?
Speed limit, whether we agree with it or not, is the limit, not the 'drive at' or 'a bit more if the road is good, clear and is safe to do so' speed.
I think you would fail ROSPA advanced test for exceeding any speed limit, both for actually breaking the law and for demonstrating poor planning that necessitated the over-speed reaction
Speed limit, whether we agree with it or not, is the limit, not the 'drive at' or 'a bit more if the road is good, clear and is safe to do so' speed.
I think you would fail ROSPA advanced test for exceeding any speed limit, both for actually breaking the law and for demonstrating poor planning that necessitated the over-speed reaction
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff