Breaking the National Speed Limit

[SVS]

Bluetoo said:

if you find the need to break the NSL during an overtake or such then your 'plan' was poor?

Why would you be looking at your speedometer mid-overtake ? Personally, I'd have my eyes on the road at that point!

I wouldn't be staring at my speedo during an overtake and, in my experience of numerous IAM and RoSPA tests, neither would the examiner. What's more, during the examiner's briefing pre-test, more than one examiner has categorically told me not to worry about my speed mid-overtake, because safety is the most important consideration.

On an IAM or RoSPA test, I make sure I stick to the speed limit before and after an overtake. Mid-overtake, I'm focused on more important things than the speedometer. Your mileage may vary, of course, but I've four RoSPA Golds to date.

[7db]

SVS said:

Why would you be looking at your speedometer mid-overtake ? Personally, I'd have my eyes on the road at that point!

Probably best not to fixate on any particular thing -- and the lump of tarmac is least likely to do the moving around...

Continue your regular scans and checks. Speed measurement is part of that -- not hard to pick-up in peripheral vision and general sense. No point going balls-out pedalt-to-the metal gnashing of teeth, thrashing of all the revs on earth blind to sins of man to make the pass. Also lateral incursions, movement in the target etc.

[SVS]

Sorry, I hadn't sought to start a debate about where to look whilst overtaking. That would warrant another thread, and in my case, I feel I've done enough days with John Lyon and equivalent bike coaches to have a sound grasp of things.

I did, however, want to suggest that worrying about your exact speed shouldn't be a high priority mid-overtake, even during an IAM or RoSPA test. During four RoSPA tests, under three different examiners, I've never concerned myself with speed mid-overtake and neither has any examiner. YMMV. That doesn't mean I ever took the Mickey and I've always been disciplined about speed limits before and after overtaking during test conditions. I believe that's a good approach. (Although YMMV according to the examiner.)

7db said:

Speed measurement is part of that -- not hard to pick-up in peripheral vision and general sense.

In my car, I can't see the speedo without consciously moving my head, because the steering wheel blocks my view. Likewise on my bike, I need to glance down at the clocks to check the speed. In both cases, I've a good feel for speed without looking, but it requires an active look down to gain a truly accurate measure of my speed.

Edited by SVS on Thursday 26th June 13:48

[theshrew]

Ive never done any advanced training car or bike. If i was to i wouldnt be happy being marked down for not going over the nsl.

In my opinion you see more poor drivers break the speed limit in 30 and 40 zones then drive at 45 / 50 in nsl - These are the people who crash and cause issues on the road.

20,30 and 40 limits are genrally in place for a good reason so stick to them.
50 have come about due to silly crashes in that area genrally no need for them at all if people could drive in the first place.
NSL A lot of the time its very safe to be driving / riding above that drive to the road and conditions

[Johnnytheboy]

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

I don't understand the concrete distinction that some people make between different levels of limit.

Either you believe in adherence in speed limits for their own sake (for whatever reason) or you don't.

[7db]

SVS said:

I did, however, want to suggest that worrying about your exact speed shouldn't be a high priority mid-overtake, even during an IAM or RoSPA test.

Well quite. I don't really think that's a priority except in very limited circumstances. That said, my point is that during an overtake one's focus should remain in roughly all the places where it is not during an overtake. In particular most of the hard work is already done at that point, and fixation on the single manoeuvre isn't really healthy to the overall drive. A nice low work rate should be able to encompass it all.

If knowing your speed by glacing or by spidey sense is part of your drive then it should be part of your drive during an overtake too.

[omegac]

Johnnytheboy said:

I don't understand the concrete distinction that some people make between different levels of limit.

Either you believe in adherence in speed limits for their own sake (for whatever reason) or you don't.

That's what is done during Police driver training when not using blue lights. Probably a hang over from that, i.e. usually where it is nationals will be the safest place to go quicker.

Edited by omegac on Thursday 26th June 20:09

[otolith]

There is an assumption that an explicit red ringed limit has been put there for a reason. Not so reliable these days. There is also the idea that a posted limit gives other road users an expectation of the speeds of other vehicles. Maybe you could say that about an implicit 60 limit too, but I think the lower the limit the stronger the effect.

[Blakewater]

There's some stuff here about not going full pelt when overtaking. If you look at the bit about creative overtaking opportunities it gives alternatives to breaking the speed limit to get past someone. In practice though, I think I would prefer to sneak over the limit than try any of them.

http://www.ridedrive.co.uk/driving-tips-07c.htm

[SVS]

Blakewater said:

http://www.ridedrive.co.uk/driving-tips-07c.htm

That's one of the best articles I've read on overtaking. Thanks for posting the link

[Hooli]

Johnnytheboy said:

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

I don't understand the concrete distinction that some people make between different levels of limit.

Either you believe in adherence in speed limits for their own sake (for whatever reason) or you don't.

Red rings mean there is probably a hazard or reason to be slower than the NSL (unless it's recent when it's almost always bks). NSL should still mean No Speed Limit & gets treated as such.

Why is that illogical?

[SK425]

Hooli said:

Red rings mean there is probably a hazard or reason to be slower than the NSL (unless it's recent when it's almost always bks). NSL should still mean No Speed Limit & gets treated as such.

Why is that illogical?

Partly because of the "unless it's recent when it's almost always bks" point, but mainly because opportunities to safely exceed speed limits do not only exist on NSL roads, hazards that require driving below the speed limit do not only exist on red ring limit roads, and exceeding NSL is no less illegal than exceeding any other speed limit.

NSL has not meant No Speed Limit for quite some time now. I'd have thought a policy of sticking to red rings but being willing to exceed NSL on the basis that it once meant No Speed Limit would, at best, be highly anachronistic.

[Zod]

Bluetoo said:

if you find the need to break the NSL during an overtake or such then your 'plan' was poor?

Not if you planned to do so. I often plan to do so or rather assess the overtake, reckon I will break the NSL in making a safe overtake and do so anyway..

[otolith]

Is there a difference in the credibility of "It is not safe to exceed X on this particular road" and "It is never safe to exceed Y on any road"?

[Zod]

omegac said:

Johnnytheboy said:

I don't understand the concrete distinction that some people make between different levels of limit.

Either you believe in adherence in speed limits for their own sake (for whatever reason) or you don't.

That's what is done during Police driver training when not using blue lights. Probably a hang over from that, i.e. usually where it is nationals will be the safest place to go quicker.

Edited by omegac on Thursday 26th June 20:09

Also the fact that before imposition of the NSL, the sign meant, as it does in Germany still today, "no limit".

[Hooli]

SK425 said:

I'd have thought a policy of sticking to red rings but being willing to exceed NSL on the basis that it once meant No Speed Limit would, at best, be highly anachronistic.

Well I also refuse to use metric as I'm English

[blueg33]

Benbay001 said:

If i expect to see pedestrians then i will not exceed the limit.

Its the pedestrians you don't expect to see that are most at risk

[Zod]

blueg33 said:

Benbay001 said:

If i expect to see pedestrians then i will not exceed the limit.

Its the pedestrians you don't expect to see that are most at risk

If you drive to the limit point, you'll be able to stop for a pedestrian even if you are breakign the limit (unless one jumps out of a hedgerow at you).

[blueg33]

Zod said:

blueg33 said:

Benbay001 said:

If i expect to see pedestrians then i will not exceed the limit.

Its the pedestrians you don't expect to see that are most at risk

If you drive to the limit point, you'll be able to stop for a pedestrian even if you are breakign the limit (unless one jumps out of a hedgerow at you).

Indeed

[SK425]

Hooli said:

SK425 said:

I'd have thought a policy of sticking to red rings but being willing to exceed NSL on the basis that it once meant No Speed Limit would, at best, be highly anachronistic.

Well I also refuse to use metric as I'm English

More anachronistic than that