RE: Speed limit review rules out 80mph
Discussion
griffter said:
As limits will inevitably be revised downwards in practice, journeys will be become more tedious.
Think you've hit the nail on the head. We all know current policy has very little to do with safety.
I'm beginning to believe the real purpose of rigid enforcement of very low speed limits is simply to reduce the attraction of travel or liesure that involves motoring.
Like the spin
we were sold about the new road safety bill. We're supposed to be happy that we get less points for the pleasure of being shafted for being slightly over the limit. At the same time, when you get done for travelling at just over 60 on the road that is now down to 40 from NSL, we'd all better be prepared to bend over big time.
Things can only get better?
Fk me. 
Oh damn - they are doing
I very much agree with what has already been posted about unreasonably low speed limits reducing respect for the 30 mph limits that really matter. I currently live in Germany and I find that the limits are far more sensible - if they say unrestricted they mean, but if they tell you to go slower it usually for a very, very good reason.
This also seems to extend to most road markings - if I see red and white chevrons on the side of a road at a bend I know to slow down for a bad bend. Several times in the UK I have come across slight bends with warning chevrons and very tight bends with nothing.
Sensible limits and consitentcy please!
This also seems to extend to most road markings - if I see red and white chevrons on the side of a road at a bend I know to slow down for a bad bend. Several times in the UK I have come across slight bends with warning chevrons and very tight bends with nothing.
Sensible limits and consitentcy please!
A simple question someone should ask the transport secretary in a very public interview:
"Is it possible to drive a car safely without a speedometer?"
Obviously the only possible answer he can give is yes (a car doesn't even need a speedo to pass an MOT), and that proves that numerical speed has absolutely nothing to do with driving safely.
Ithankyou.
"Is it possible to drive a car safely without a speedometer?"
Obviously the only possible answer he can give is yes (a car doesn't even need a speedo to pass an MOT), and that proves that numerical speed has absolutely nothing to do with driving safely.
Ithankyou.
dcb said:
Acoridng to the Department of Transport's *own* figures, some
57% of all cars and 59% of all motorcycles on the motorway exceed
the 70 mph limit.
I've spend hours and hours bumbling up and down my local stretch of the M1 at or about the speed limit, and it seems to me that very few cars (i.e. not lorries, vans, coaches etc) travel at less than the speed limit, I would put it at less than 5%. The ones that do usually speed up again when their call finishes.
Just come up the M1. Even when quite busy the traffic is flowing at over 80mph indicated, sometimes above 90. No accidents, no near misses, no panics, no heart-attacks, just reasonable driving in good conditions.
90 would be a good start for raising the limit. It wouldn't affect the actual speeds driven but would remove the law-breaking element from it. Perhaps it might even restore some faith in the lower limits.
Why not try an experiment somewhere? Put the limit on, say, the M40 up to 90 between High Wycombe and Oxford for a trial period and see what happens. You could even do it between 9am and 3pm -- it might reduce rush-hour traffic volumes as people hold off travel to catch the higher speed limit. Now how about that? A carrot for travelling outside peak times rather than a stick? No chance -- not the mentality of this "government".
90 would be a good start for raising the limit. It wouldn't affect the actual speeds driven but would remove the law-breaking element from it. Perhaps it might even restore some faith in the lower limits.
Why not try an experiment somewhere? Put the limit on, say, the M40 up to 90 between High Wycombe and Oxford for a trial period and see what happens. You could even do it between 9am and 3pm -- it might reduce rush-hour traffic volumes as people hold off travel to catch the higher speed limit. Now how about that? A carrot for travelling outside peak times rather than a stick? No chance -- not the mentality of this "government".
timbob said:
A simple question someone should ask the transport secretary in a very public interview:
"Is it possible to drive a car safely without a speedometer?"
Obviously the only possible answer he can give is yes (a car doesn't even need a speedo to pass an MOT), and that proves that numerical speed has absolutely nothing to do with driving safely.
Ithankyou.
change 'safely' for 'legally' and you have the root of the problem
Peter Ward said:
90 would be a good start for raising the limit. It wouldn't affect the actual speeds driven but would remove the law-breaking element from it. Perhaps it might even restore some faith in the lower limits.
".
There lies the "problem"
The apologists use the current "tolerance" of 80 mph in a 70 limit as the mean.ie if we raise the limit to 90,their logic assumes we'll all do 100+
The only way to get an increase of the motorway limits will include a "zero-tolerance" policy against anyone breaking it......do we want that ?
countryboy said:
Did I not read somewhere, a few years ago, that the Police admitted to rarely stopping anyone on the M25 doing less than 85mph.Their reasons being that (a)everyone was doing that speed and (b)traffic was flowing fine.....
Im just curious to find what number of PHers have been stopped/fined for 80mph on a motorway ?
I think most ACTUAL police officers won't prosecute for less than 85 in clear conditions.
But then of course you've still got the scammers pinging people for 79 in Wilts and Cumbria
My fiancee's boss got 3 points off a van over the M6 in Cumbria...for 77!!! How ridiculous?!?
I think this will be more bad news - they're trying to return the roads to the Victorian era - far easier to control the population if their mobility is reduced!!!
77!So they've now changed the threshold in Cumbria to just 10% over? Thats like North Wales. I'm so lucky I only often have to drive on the M5 - no nasty cameras apart from a couple of talivans in Somerset, who I don't think prosecute for as low as 79 (or 77).
I could never see this government raising the motorway limit. Can you imagine the loss in motorway speeding fines. And then of course there's the enviromentalists who would go mental cos they think that everyone would do at least 90, when as far as I know, most motorists probably won't actually go any faster than they currently do.
apache said:
A simple question someone should ask the transport secretary in a very public interview:
"Is it possible to drive a car safely without a speedometer?"
Obviously the only possible answer he can give is yes (a car doesn't even need a speedo to pass an MOT), and that proves that numerical speed has absolutely nothing to do with driving safely.
Ithankyou.
change 'safely' for 'legally' and you have the root of the problem
Yep, safety and legality seem to have diverged somewhere along the way on our roads...and i didn't even see the 'Keep Left' sign!!!
dcb said:
Also, as another poster points out, scientifically, the safest
speed limit to post would be the 85th percentile.
The previous post you referred to, and your post, state/imply that the 85th percentile speed is the 'safest speed at which to drive'. That is emphatically not the case. The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85% of drivers choose to drive in free flowing conditions. The 'safest' (least accident involved) drivers tend to drive at or around the 85th percentile speed.
It does not follow - in fact it is positively untrue - that the 85th percentile speed is 'safer' than any other speed; it is simply (and no more than) the speed selected by the safest drivers. Therefore, it would be wrong and potentially dangerous to encourage drivers whose level of competence and confidence, or personal preference, leads them to drive at (say) the 50th percentile speed to increase speed on the grounds that the 85th percentile speed is 'safer'.
Gazboy said:
Just to show how crap the motorway limits are, the a40 in Denham is a 70 zone, despite 2 sets of traffic lights, houses, 6 garages (2 of which are petrol stations), a residential road joining, a d/c merge and a roundabout at the end of the strip.
Just to show how crap your observation is, the A40 at Denham (Denham roundabout up to Tatling End) is a 60mph limit.
Observer2 said:
Therefore, it would be wrong and potentially dangerous to encourage drivers whose level of competence and confidence, or personal preference, leads them to drive at (say) the 50th percentile speed to increase speed on the grounds that the 85th percentile speed is 'safer'.
I would agree that encouraging drivers to progress at a speed greater than their ability would be dangerous.
You must make a disctinction between the speed limit and the safe speed however.
My experience of driving on national speed limit roads is that people will drive at their ability and to the conditions. Many folks (quite correctly)
will drive at say 47mph depending on their car, vision, road conditions, experience, weather conditions, etc, etc. Just because the limit is 60mph does not mean that they drive at 60mph.
Are you saying that if the motorway limit was set at a number higher than 70 that these people would drive faster than the safe speed? If so, why?
Are you saying that if a higher limit was applied to the motorway that it would be an encouragement to drive faster? Given the point that NSL roads seem to show otherwise, what is your evidence for such a claim?
Observer2 said:
Just to show how crap your observation is, the A40 at Denham (Denham roundabout up to Tatling End) is a 60mph limit.
I take it from the context of your post that one person's observation is being used as evidence that motorway speed limits are already too high?
As there must be at least one person in the UK who drives around staring at nothing other than the car in front or their speedo, perhaps that should lead us to conclude that the only safe progress to be made on a 2 mile long straight with 4 lanes is 23.27mph regardless of everyone elses capability and the conditions?
NOTE: I am not making any comment on other particpants' observation, I am making comment on the basis of Obserber2's theory.
711 said:
Just to show how crap your observation is, the A40 at Denham (Denham roundabout up to Tatling End) is a 60mph limit.
I take it from the context of your post that one person's observation is being used as evidence that motorway speed limits are already too high?
As there must be at least one person in the UK who drives around staring at nothing other than the car in front or their speedo, perhaps that should lead us to conclude that the only safe progress to be made on a 2 mile long straight with 4 lanes is 23.27mph regardless of everyone elses capability and the conditions?
NOTE: I am not making any comment on other particpants' observation, I am making comment on the basis of Obserber2's theory.
Eh? I just read it as he's corrected you on what the signs read - not what the "correct" speed should be?
JJ
jazzyjeff said:
Eh? I just read it as he's corrected you on what the signs read - not what the "correct" speed should be?
JJ
Hell J good to see you again
I've not been corrected on anything as yet 
, go back and have a look at the thread again 
I'm just interested in what agenda might have been behind the comment on "crap" observation, especially from a fellow poster with the user name Observer2 I would agree that on the face of it the correction is factual
but why? 
I've never driven on your side of the pond but thankfully in the majority of the US speed limits more reflect reality now than ever before .
13 of the US states have adopted a posted 75 mph limit and enforce 80 to 85 mph in most of those states . Texas has just passed a 80 mph limit but hasn't posted it yet , but will in the new year . 18 states have a posted 70 mph limit 2 new one this summer with a 75 to 80 mph average on these roads . Even in the 19 states that still have a 65 mph limit 70 to 75 is the norm .
Americans are driving the fastest ever and our roads are the safest in history .
All this being said the death rate has dropped to the lowest level ever in recorded history .
This info could help your government to be pushed into raising the limit to what is safe & prudent .
Cheers,
David
13 of the US states have adopted a posted 75 mph limit and enforce 80 to 85 mph in most of those states . Texas has just passed a 80 mph limit but hasn't posted it yet , but will in the new year . 18 states have a posted 70 mph limit 2 new one this summer with a 75 to 80 mph average on these roads . Even in the 19 states that still have a 65 mph limit 70 to 75 is the norm .
Americans are driving the fastest ever and our roads are the safest in history .
All this being said the death rate has dropped to the lowest level ever in recorded history .
This info could help your government to be pushed into raising the limit to what is safe & prudent .
Cheers,
David
rotarykid said:
This info could help your government to be pushed into raising the limit to what is safe & prudent .
Cheers,
David
That assuming we have a government that gives a flying fig as to what the electorate want and a government that has spun so many lies and alienated many 'normal' people that they are now viewed as untrusworthy and the enemy within.
Push the government? The new anti terror laws will have us hung drawn and quartered before you could say 'freedom to protest'.
You cant even heckle a labour politician without being arrested.
- >> Edited by superlightr on Tuesday 20th December 19:39
20mph limits rigidly enforced with cameras in narrow village streets and outside schools. Such limits well signposted. Anyone who speeds in these areas can be banned for life or shot, which would have the added value of reducing congestion (less drivers left on the road). All speed bumps could then be removed helping to reduce polution and letting me in and out of my home without scraping the gearbox.
Having rightly increased safety with these measures, all scameras could be removed from ordinary roads and the motorway limit increased. Even the French have higher speed limits for their agricultural machinery (Renault/Citroen that is).
Problem solved.
Having rightly increased safety with these measures, all scameras could be removed from ordinary roads and the motorway limit increased. Even the French have higher speed limits for their agricultural machinery (Renault/Citroen that is).
Problem solved.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff