142 MPH in Scotland... anyone here?
Discussion
caley64 said:
Snow and Rocks said:
Are those highlighting the fact that it's an A road actually familiar with the particular stretch of road in question?
It's wide open, perfectly sighted with open moorland on each side - I'd argue that it's probably safer to speed there in certain conditions than on most dual carriageways.
As an aside, I got pulled by an unmarked Volvo on this very stretch about 10 years ago. He'd clocked me during an overtake (at long range) doing 92 which resulted in a trip to court in Dingwall and 4 points and a £200 fine.
Probably lucky I was driving an ancient diesel Land Cruiser or my full bore overtake would probably have resulted in a much higher number!
I was told this morning he was originally clocked at 112mph, then got nobbled for the higher speed when they set off after him.It's wide open, perfectly sighted with open moorland on each side - I'd argue that it's probably safer to speed there in certain conditions than on most dual carriageways.
As an aside, I got pulled by an unmarked Volvo on this very stretch about 10 years ago. He'd clocked me during an overtake (at long range) doing 92 which resulted in a trip to court in Dingwall and 4 points and a £200 fine.
Probably lucky I was driving an ancient diesel Land Cruiser or my full bore overtake would probably have resulted in a much higher number!
There are indeed massive wide open stretches on this road.
It's like shooting fish in a barrel. The police often sit in the layby this time of year.
CharlesdeGaulle said:
It was a stupid thing to do and I have no sympathy, but I can't help thinking that jail isn't the best way to deal with speeders. It would probably be an appropriate outcome if he'd hit somebody, but prison isn't really an effective way to deal with speeding per se.
Some time between me getting a proper Superbike in the late 90s, and 2000, jail for speeding started to in the news.Guardian:
The fastest convicted speeder in Britain was Daniel Nicks, a motorcyclist who filmed himself travelling at 175mph on a Honda Fireblade in 2000. He was jailed for six weeks and banned for two years.
There were a lot of properly fast bikes around from the early 90s.
The people riding them were in their 20s and 30s.
Now, the average motorcyclist is about 60.
vonhosen said:
It's jail for dangerous driving, not for exceeding the limit.
I take it if in this case the driver is jailed the Police officers that left the layby and caught him by exceeding the limit by an even higher speed in a less suitable vehicle for high speed than the car in question will be getting jailed as well then ?Question is rhetorical as i know they won't but if the driver is jailed it's a joke. I have no problem with bans, high fines etc but jail is a step way, way too far for an offence that caused no harm to anyone else.
AndyAudi said:
There is always some that surprise you though, this lad I expected to be made an example of, young lad in a focus RS at 153mph on the Aberdeen Bypass & he didn’t get jailed…. (It is a lovely road - not a Motorway but pretty much motorway spec if you ignore the roundabout on it)
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen...
That was a mate of a mate, lucky boy but a fair punishment. It is an amazing piece of road. I was visiting the aforementioned mates dad for a fishing trip the day after it opened, on the return leg two evenings later it was quite apparent a fair few local motoring enthusiasts were enjoying it to the full. Top marks to whoever designed it, i would suggest they ensured good lines of sight for camera spotting.https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen...
wc98 said:
vonhosen said:
It's jail for dangerous driving, not for exceeding the limit.
I take it if in this case the driver is jailed the Police officers that left the layby and caught him by exceeding the limit by an even higher speed in a less suitable vehicle for high speed than the car in question will be getting jailed as well then ?Question is rhetorical as i know they won't but if the driver is jailed it's a joke. I have no problem with bans, high fines etc but jail is a step way, way too far for an offence that caused no harm to anyone else.
Tony1963 said:
Why can’t people just do track days and be happy?
I know it’s not the same, just as circuit racing isn’t the same as road racing, but surely staying out of prison and alive is more important?
People always say that in these cases and it seems like such a ridiculous comment to me. If you do the comparison:I know it’s not the same, just as circuit racing isn’t the same as road racing, but surely staying out of prison and alive is more important?
Requirements to drive at high speed on the road:
Find an empty, straight road.
Put your foot down for a few seconds
Requirements to go on a track day:
Clear a day in your agenda
Pay several hundred pounds for entry
Pay for track insurance
Drive to the track
Arrive early
Sit through a briefing
Rent a helmet
Wait your turn in the pit lane
Hope the circuit is quiet enough so you can get a good run down the straight, watching in your rear view mirror to make sure you're not holding up faster cars
I've driven at high speeds on the road and enjoyed it, I've also done track days and enjoyed them. They are two completely different things though, and doing one does not mean you won't want to do the other.
wc98 said:
I take it if in this case the driver is jailed the Police officers that left the layby and caught him by exceeding the limit by an even higher speed in a less suitable vehicle for high speed than the car in question will be getting jailed as well then ?
Question is rhetorical as i know they won't but if the driver is jailed it's a joke. I have no problem with bans, high fines etc but jail is a step way, way too far for an offence that caused no harm to anyone else.
It is something I often wonder, I see them on Police interceptors frothing at how stupid the speeders are to be driving like that, they may be advanced trained but they are still humans and they followed at higher speeds.Question is rhetorical as i know they won't but if the driver is jailed it's a joke. I have no problem with bans, high fines etc but jail is a step way, way too far for an offence that caused no harm to anyone else.
Master Bean said:
A jail term is to stop people copying it. A deterrent. Maybe you and I will think 100mph is fast enough. Take the points and fine.
Would be great if they tried that for carrying knives etc. Jailing someone for speeding on NSL roads outside ofm built up areas (even if speed is high enough to be judged DD) will never, ever sit right with me. There are far too many scumbags out there that will never contribute anything meaningful to anyone or anything ,you know the basics like paying tax, insurance etc doing things that have horrific impacts on the daily lives of many people that don't get jailed (i thought all the jails were full anyway ?) for this ever to warrant loss of liberty.Jail time never used to be a thing for driving/riding quickly, then a judge took a dislike to an Edinburgh hairdresser on a bike. A bloke that ran a successful business, employed people and generally lived a decent life. Since then people similar to that hairdresser started taking measures to avoid ending up in jail while enjoying their hobby.
I would love to know the stats pre that jailing and post for people not stopping and the number plate not corresponding to a real number or a number from the other end of the country. I know of one story of a failed road block on the A9 a good few years back when a bike supposedly went between two Police cars at a higher speed than mentioned here, that's the kind of thing people that don't want to go to jail will do. Might have been an imaginary tale but people are going to take more risks if they think they are going to jail than for a ban and fine.
To be fair 100mph is about my limit these days, due to the vehicles i have. No bikes anymore and slow cars. I can think off hand of at least 15 people i know that will have seen north of 160mph on that road on bikes and in cars before all the bawbags blasted it all over social media (the internet has a lot of negatives to answer for) and none of them died or had any negative impact on anything except flies. Maybe gave folk like martinbiz a fright when they went rattling past but you can't guess who is a timorous beastie or will be laughing their head off on every high speed pass.
Heaveho said:
Snow and Rocks said:
Are those highlighting the fact that it's an A road actually familiar with the particular stretch of road in question?
It's wide open, perfectly sighted with open moorland on each side - I'd argue that it's probably safer to speed there in certain conditions than on most dual carriageways.
As an aside, I got pulled by an unmarked Volvo on this very stretch about 10 years ago. He'd clocked me during an overtake (at long range) doing 92 which resulted in a trip to court in Dingwall and 4 points and a £200 fine.
Probably lucky I was driving an ancient diesel Land Cruiser or my full bore overtake would probably have resulted in a much higher number!
I know the road, and on the times it's been empty may have hit higher speeds on it than the unfortunate Porsche owner. A well developed sense of self preservation would have prevented me from doing so if it had felt inherently unsafe in that location. Too many stories of long range speed enforcement mean those days are over now.It's wide open, perfectly sighted with open moorland on each side - I'd argue that it's probably safer to speed there in certain conditions than on most dual carriageways.
As an aside, I got pulled by an unmarked Volvo on this very stretch about 10 years ago. He'd clocked me during an overtake (at long range) doing 92 which resulted in a trip to court in Dingwall and 4 points and a £200 fine.
Probably lucky I was driving an ancient diesel Land Cruiser or my full bore overtake would probably have resulted in a much higher number!
I find the issue on many of Scotland's best driving roads these days is the condition of the surface. Absent actual holes in the tarmac you still have to contend with significant surface depressions and bumps that could launch you in unexpected directions at three figures speeds.
Many years (decades) ago we were overtaken by a Ferrari on one of the longer straight stretches in Glencoe. He was doing well north of 100 and the pressure wave of him passing our Panda at first pushed us over to the nearside and then briefly pulled us out into the oncoming lane.
Back then the surface was flat and smooth, try that now and you'll be going off-roading, Dukes of Hazzard style.
CharlesdeGaulle said:
It was a stupid thing to do and I have no sympathy, but I can't help thinking that jail isn't the best way to deal with speeders. It would probably be an appropriate outcome if he'd hit somebody, but prison isn't really an effective way to deal with speeding per se.
Agree with that I mean it did not deter him did it! Best thing to do is just a hefty fine say £1000 per miles over the limit that alone will deter way more people than points or other punishment that way they get the income stream we all know they rely on us for!Caddyshack said:
wc98 said:
I take it if in this case the driver is jailed the Police officers that left the layby and caught him by exceeding the limit by an even higher speed in a less suitable vehicle for high speed than the car in question will be getting jailed as well then ?
Question is rhetorical as i know they won't but if the driver is jailed it's a joke. I have no problem with bans, high fines etc but jail is a step way, way too far for an offence that caused no harm to anyone else.
It is something I often wonder, I see them on Police interceptors frothing at how stupid the speeders are to be driving like that, they may be advanced trained but they are still humans and they followed at higher speeds.Question is rhetorical as i know they won't but if the driver is jailed it's a joke. I have no problem with bans, high fines etc but jail is a step way, way too far for an offence that caused no harm to anyone else.
(Police Interceptors! Really?)
wc98 said:
vonhosen said:
It's jail for dangerous driving, not for exceeding the limit.
I take it if in this case the driver is jailed the Police officers that left the layby and caught him by exceeding the limit by an even higher speed in a less suitable vehicle for high speed than the car in question will be getting jailed as well then ?Question is rhetorical as i know they won't but if the driver is jailed it's a joke. I have no problem with bans, high fines etc but jail is a step way, way too far for an offence that caused no harm to anyone else.
If they did it in their own car off duty then yes they'd be getting the same, or worse probably.
Forester1965 said:
vonhosen said:
Different test of dangerous driving in law for them.
If they did it in their own car off duty then yes they'd be getting the same, or worse probably.
Has Bannister been superceded? Does Bannister apply on Scotland or is there another authority?If they did it in their own car off duty then yes they'd be getting the same, or worse probably.
Edited by vonhosen on Saturday 11th May 19:56
Forester1965 said:
vonhosen said:
How so?
For me it's asking too much of the jury. Others may have different views. What was untenable was to apply the same standard to Police when we expect & they are taught to do something different.
The change in the law was way overdue (IMHO).
I don't see that it's too much for a properly instructed jury to apply either standard to a set of circumstances.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff