Exceed the speed limit? Ever?
Discussion
brman said:
SpudLink said:
I think this is a well described scenario of where exceeding the speed limit is the safer option.
(And for the sake of argument, let's assum it's a <7.5 ton removal van travelling at 56mph.)
surely the safe option is to stay back and not overtake?(And for the sake of argument, let's assum it's a <7.5 ton removal van travelling at 56mph.)
it is a limit, not a target. What reason have you for saying you need to increase your speed from the 50/56 of the lorry?
if the reasons is that "you just want to faster" or "you just want to reduce your journey time" then fair enough, you assess the risk vs benefit, but I think you on a hiding to nothing trying to get someone to officially say that is ok
no-one is going to tell you that someone's else's offending excuses you offending
brman said:
SpudLink said:
I think this is a well described scenario of where exceeding the speed limit is the safer option.
(And for the sake of argument, let's assum it's a <7.5 ton removal van travelling at 56mph.)
surely the safe option is to stay back and not overtake?(And for the sake of argument, let's assum it's a <7.5 ton removal van travelling at 56mph.)
it is a limit, not a target. What reason have you for saying you need to increase your speed from the 50/56 of the lorry?
if the reasons is that "you just want to faster" or "you just want to reduce your journey time" then fair enough, you assess the risk vs benefit, but I think you on a hiding to nothing trying to get someone to officially say that is ok
Unless I'm driving on a DC or MW I haven't overtaken, unless for VERY slow movers, for ages now.
If I come up behind slow moving traffic, I just ease off, pull back and be patient. There is always a large gap between me and the car in front so if a serial speeder wants to OT there is plenty of room.
Much more relaxing.
WD39 said:
I agree, what's the hurry?
Unless I'm driving on a DC or MW I haven't overtaken, unless for VERY slow movers, for ages now.
If I come up behind slow moving traffic, I just ease off, pull back and be patient. There is always a large gap between me and the car in front so if a serial speeder wants to OT there is plenty of room.
Much more relaxing.
and I disagree Unless I'm driving on a DC or MW I haven't overtaken, unless for VERY slow movers, for ages now.
If I come up behind slow moving traffic, I just ease off, pull back and be patient. There is always a large gap between me and the car in front so if a serial speeder wants to OT there is plenty of room.
Much more relaxing.
I wasn't saying don't overtake. Just don't try to justify it as a safety thing if you break the speed limit doing so
WD39 said:
I agree, what's the hurry?
Unless I'm driving on a DC or MW I haven't overtaken, unless for VERY slow movers, for ages now.
If I come up behind slow moving traffic, I just ease off, pull back and be patient. There is always a large gap between me and the car in front so if a serial speeder wants to OT there is plenty of room.
Much more relaxing.
It's not just serial speeders who wish to overtake. I thought the whole point of advanced driving was to make good progress without compromising safety.Unless I'm driving on a DC or MW I haven't overtaken, unless for VERY slow movers, for ages now.
If I come up behind slow moving traffic, I just ease off, pull back and be patient. There is always a large gap between me and the car in front so if a serial speeder wants to OT there is plenty of room.
Much more relaxing.
A point in case was my overtake of 12-15 cars yesterday morning, on the way to work, as everyone else was happy staying at 35-40 behind an HGV on a well sited part of a single carriageway NSL road. I never exceeded 60 mph during the manoeuvre. Part of the problem are others inability to keep a sensible following distance so that they may take advantage of the occasional overtaking opportunity when one arrives.
I think the OP wants to know whether an IAM course is likely to be useful to him and whether a Rospa course would suit him better. Neither organisation can condone breaking the speed limit and there will be no difference in their attitudes to this. However, a course with either one is likely to be both useful and enjoyable and will help him make his own judgements of what is a safe speed. Few if any representatives of either would believe that breaking the speed limit necessarily involves any danger other than being caught and punished - but to pass one of their tests you have to demonstrate respect for limits as well as make good progress with what the law allows. If following a vehicle doing within 10 mph of the limit on an advanced test I would drop back and make space for anyone behind to make space if they want.
There are professional coaches around who would adopt a more flexible approach to limits. Some of them would recommend you to do an IAM course before going to them.
There are professional coaches around who would adopt a more flexible approach to limits. Some of them would recommend you to do an IAM course before going to them.
The whole point of using any motorized vehicle is to move from one point on the Earths surface to another, faster than is possible by other means. Set against this reason for using motorized vehicles, are limits imposed by vehicle type, road / weather conditions, and of course speed limits, required to bring an element of safety for the majority into the activity.
The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
Pan Pan Pan said:
The whole point of using any motorized vehicle is to move from one point on the Earths surface to another, faster than is possible by other means. Set against this reason for using motorized vehicles, are limits imposed by vehicle type, road / weather conditions, and of course speed limits, required to bring an element of safety for the majority into the activity.
The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
thankyou messers Dunning and Kreuger ...The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
if you are an advanced driver or ES driver i;'d revisit thefirst few chapters of Roadcraft
mph1977 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
The whole point of using any motorized vehicle is to move from one point on the Earths surface to another, faster than is possible by other means. Set against this reason for using motorized vehicles, are limits imposed by vehicle type, road / weather conditions, and of course speed limits, required to bring an element of safety for the majority into the activity.
The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
thankyou messers Dunning and Kreuger ...The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
if you are an advanced driver or ES driver i;'d revisit thefirst few chapters of Roadcraft
Pan Pan Pan said:
I am neither, I just try to drive to the best speed that road conditions, and or the posted limits allow as much as possible. To do any less is just perverse and anti social.
rubbish. The only thing anti-social here is you trying to foist your own need to go as fast as possible on every other road user Drivers not giving enough space for overtakers to slot into or driving in the middle or outside lane when not necessary are anti social. Someone driving 10 mph below the limit just because he wants to take it easy isn't. You need to get a sense of perspective about what "society" is all about
brman said:
rubbish. The only thing anti-social here is you trying to foist your own need to go as fast as possible on every other road user
Drivers not giving enough space for overtakers to slot into or driving in the middle or outside lane when not necessary are anti social. Someone driving 10 mph below the limit just because he wants to take it easy isn't. You need to get a sense of perspective about what "society" is all about
hence my previous comment , re messers Dunning and Kreuger Drivers not giving enough space for overtakers to slot into or driving in the middle or outside lane when not necessary are anti social. Someone driving 10 mph below the limit just because he wants to take it easy isn't. You need to get a sense of perspective about what "society" is all about
Mad Chemist said:
WD39 said:
I agree, what's the hurry?
Unless I'm driving on a DC or MW I haven't overtaken, unless for VERY slow movers, for ages now.
If I come up behind slow moving traffic, I just ease off, pull back and be patient. There is always a large gap between me and the car in front so if a serial speeder wants to OT there is plenty of room.
Much more relaxing.
It's not just serial speeders who wish to overtake. I thought the whole point of advanced driving was to make good progress without compromising safety.Unless I'm driving on a DC or MW I haven't overtaken, unless for VERY slow movers, for ages now.
If I come up behind slow moving traffic, I just ease off, pull back and be patient. There is always a large gap between me and the car in front so if a serial speeder wants to OT there is plenty of room.
Much more relaxing.
A point in case was my overtake of 12-15 cars yesterday morning, on the way to work, as everyone else was happy staying at 35-40 behind an HGV on a well sited part of a single carriageway NSL road. I never exceeded 60 mph during the manoeuvre. Part of the problem are others inability to keep a sensible following distance so that they may take advantage of the occasional overtaking opportunity when one arrives.
I accept that it could have been for another misdemeanour, but on this occasion witnessing the atrocious driving, I don't think so.
I would guess that the cars in your queue were quite happy to be patient and arrive a few minutes late rather than charging through.
Edited by WD39 on Thursday 7th April 20:07
Pan Pan Pan said:
The whole point of using any motorized vehicle is to move from one point on the Earths surface to another, faster than is possible by other means. Set against this reason for using motorized vehicles, are limits imposed by vehicle type, road / weather conditions, and of course speed limits, required to bring an element of safety for the majority into the activity.
The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
Oh dear, I am perverse. Is that good?The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
BrumBrumDuffy said:
On thing that concerns me particularly is overtaking on a NSL road.
Say that one is behind a truck travelling at its limited speed of 56mph on the straights, and much slower around corners.
I think this is a really interesting point. I like to make progress when driving and I like to do so safely. Say that one is behind a truck travelling at its limited speed of 56mph on the straights, and much slower around corners.
Regardless of speed limiting, vehicle restrictions or anything, personally if a lorry, van or car was doing 50 in a 60 I would want to overtake when safe to do so. I'd want to complete my overtake in the shortest possible time and if conditions were dry and good and visibility was clear I would have no problem in breaking the 60 limit to overtake the car. If I didn't break that limit then I'd be no better than the trucks that are elephant racing along roads, only this time you're on the other side of the road in danger of meeting oncoming traffic.
I know that that view is wrong, I totally do but I can't see any other way to view it.
ashleyman said:
I think this is a really interesting point. I like to make progress when driving and I like to do so safely.
Regardless of speed limiting, vehicle restrictions or anything, personally if a lorry, van or car was doing 50 in a 60 I would want to overtake when safe to do so. I'd want to complete my overtake in the shortest possible time and if conditions were dry and good and visibility was clear I would have no problem in breaking the 60 limit to overtake the car. If I didn't break that limit then I'd be no better than the trucks that are elephant racing along roads, only this time you're on the other side of the road in danger of meeting oncoming traffic.
I know that that view is wrong, I totally do but I can't see any other way to view it.
it's called a theory-practice gap and in this case it is because of the 'outrage' of the antis should law breaking be 'encouraged'...Regardless of speed limiting, vehicle restrictions or anything, personally if a lorry, van or car was doing 50 in a 60 I would want to overtake when safe to do so. I'd want to complete my overtake in the shortest possible time and if conditions were dry and good and visibility was clear I would have no problem in breaking the 60 limit to overtake the car. If I didn't break that limit then I'd be no better than the trucks that are elephant racing along roads, only this time you're on the other side of the road in danger of meeting oncoming traffic.
I know that that view is wrong, I totally do but I can't see any other way to view it.
Is there any argument for automatically observing the NSL on any grounds other than because it happens to be the law? (That is of course a valid reason but it has nothing to do with whether that speed is safe or not.)
The NSL is of course completely arbitrary, there is nothing special about a speed of 60mph below which one is safe and above it becomes dangerous.
I find is very disappointing that IAM and RoSPA do not take a more nuanced view. Of course the law should be respected but an individual can choose to disregard it and take punishment if caught, but surely organisation that want to improve driving standards should be equipping people with the skills, knowledge and attitude to make sound decisions about what speed is safe to travel at regardless of arbitrary limits.
Otherwise they are just contributing to the culture which says "as long as I'm driving below the speed limit I'm driving safely", regardless of how there are driving and how much attention they are paying. It's my view that inattentive driving is mare more of a risk to others than an engaged and concentrating driver who may be travelling at higher speed than a arbitrary limit.
The NSL is of course completely arbitrary, there is nothing special about a speed of 60mph below which one is safe and above it becomes dangerous.
I find is very disappointing that IAM and RoSPA do not take a more nuanced view. Of course the law should be respected but an individual can choose to disregard it and take punishment if caught, but surely organisation that want to improve driving standards should be equipping people with the skills, knowledge and attitude to make sound decisions about what speed is safe to travel at regardless of arbitrary limits.
Otherwise they are just contributing to the culture which says "as long as I'm driving below the speed limit I'm driving safely", regardless of how there are driving and how much attention they are paying. It's my view that inattentive driving is mare more of a risk to others than an engaged and concentrating driver who may be travelling at higher speed than a arbitrary limit.
BrumBrumDuffy said:
Is there any argument for automatically observing the NSL on any grounds other than because it happens to be the law? (That is of course a valid reason but it has nothing to do with whether that speed is safe or not.)
The NSL is of course completely arbitrary, there is nothing special about a speed of 60mph below which one is safe and above it becomes dangerous.
I find is very disappointing that IAM and RoSPA do not take a more nuanced view. Of course the law should be respected but an individual can choose to disregard it and take punishment if caught, but surely organisation that want to improve driving standards should be equipping people with the skills, knowledge and attitude to make sound decisions about what speed is safe to travel at regardless of arbitrary limits.
Otherwise they are just contributing to the culture which says "as long as I'm driving below the speed limit I'm driving safely", regardless of how there are driving and how much attention they are paying. It's my view that inattentive driving is mare more of a risk to others than an engaged and concentrating driver who may be travelling at higher speed than a arbitrary limit.
They aren't suggesting that driving below the speed limit will mean you are driving safely, they are offering a system they believe will assist you in being a safer driver within the legal framework.The NSL is of course completely arbitrary, there is nothing special about a speed of 60mph below which one is safe and above it becomes dangerous.
I find is very disappointing that IAM and RoSPA do not take a more nuanced view. Of course the law should be respected but an individual can choose to disregard it and take punishment if caught, but surely organisation that want to improve driving standards should be equipping people with the skills, knowledge and attitude to make sound decisions about what speed is safe to travel at regardless of arbitrary limits.
Otherwise they are just contributing to the culture which says "as long as I'm driving below the speed limit I'm driving safely", regardless of how there are driving and how much attention they are paying. It's my view that inattentive driving is mare more of a risk to others than an engaged and concentrating driver who may be travelling at higher speed than a arbitrary limit.
You do have a choice over exceeding the speed limits personally but the standard they are examining to can't countenance it without exposing themselves to huge problems.
That standard of examination won't be supporting inattentive driving.though.
WD39 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
The whole point of using any motorized vehicle is to move from one point on the Earths surface to another, faster than is possible by other means. Set against this reason for using motorized vehicles, are limits imposed by vehicle type, road / weather conditions, and of course speed limits, required to bring an element of safety for the majority into the activity.
The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
Oh dear, I am perverse. Is that good?The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
Pan Pan Pan said:
WD39 said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
The whole point of using any motorized vehicle is to move from one point on the Earths surface to another, faster than is possible by other means. Set against this reason for using motorized vehicles, are limits imposed by vehicle type, road / weather conditions, and of course speed limits, required to bring an element of safety for the majority into the activity.
The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
Oh dear, I am perverse. Is that good?The speed limits are low set to give the widest spectrum of vehicle (and vehicle operator) types a reasonable expectation of safety when moving from one place to another.
To travel at speeds below the already low set posted limits, when driver ability, vehicle type and weather conditions allow the posted limit to be safely maintained is perverse, and is in opposition to the whole point of using a motorized vehicle.
If another driver is leaving you opportunities to pass on a reasonably regular basis that isn't perverse, anti social or bloody minded, even if they have decided to travel at a speed below the posted limited where you consider it safe to legally go faster.
WD39 has explained he/she leaves a large enough gap in front for others to pass if they wish so is show consideration for others who wish to travel faster.
In the overtaking situation - my examiners general advice was that during the overtake they would be concentrating on the hazards around us. Basically I was fine to break the speed limit to complete an overtake in a safe manner however I was obviously expected to drop back down soon after completion. I think it depends on the examiner to be honest - this was ROSPA a number of years back
brman said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
I am neither, I just try to drive to the best speed that road conditions, and or the posted limits allow as much as possible. To do any less is just perverse and anti social.
rubbish. The only thing anti-social here is you trying to foist your own need to go as fast as possible on every other road user Drivers not giving enough space for overtakers to slot into or driving in the middle or outside lane when not necessary are anti social. Someone driving 10 mph below the limit just because he wants to take it easy isn't. You need to get a sense of perspective about what "society" is all about
Society is not based on the selfish arrogance of a fortunately small minority who see no problem in baulking the progress of those around them, just because `they' don't feel like travelling at the already low set but legal posted limits, but rather on the needs of the majority who do have somewhere they need to be at a specific time.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff