Driving quicker could be safer
Discussion
No1
Driving according to the conditions means that corner X can only be taken at say 50mph regardless of what car you drive due to potential cyclists, horses,cows, badgers, numpties etc.
By being that bit faster on the corner approach I'm naturally covering the brake pedal, so this will obviously be safer than......
If I cruise into that corner at 50mph I'll keep my foot on the throttle as I don't need to slow down. My reaction time has obviously to be greater using this method.
Which would be considered the safest?
No 2
Passing cyclists, tractors, slow moving vehicles etc.
The number of people who will not put there foot down to pass these safely is quite frankly astonishing. Has no-one got any idea about time exposed to danger or don't they teach that in driving tests these days?
>>> Edited by cptsideways on Monday 7th June 09:26
Driving according to the conditions means that corner X can only be taken at say 50mph regardless of what car you drive due to potential cyclists, horses,cows, badgers, numpties etc.
By being that bit faster on the corner approach I'm naturally covering the brake pedal, so this will obviously be safer than......
If I cruise into that corner at 50mph I'll keep my foot on the throttle as I don't need to slow down. My reaction time has obviously to be greater using this method.
Which would be considered the safest?
No 2
Passing cyclists, tractors, slow moving vehicles etc.
The number of people who will not put there foot down to pass these safely is quite frankly astonishing. Has no-one got any idea about time exposed to danger or don't they teach that in driving tests these days?
>>> Edited by cptsideways on Monday 7th June 09:26
I was discussing the faster is safer arguement with Ninja Eli and Rich1231 at the weekend. General concensus was when driving on a motorway, if you are 10/15 mph faster than everything else you are more alert anticipating traffic flow etc. Personally just flowing with traffic I am less alert and over a long distance (say 100 miles+) am more liable to experience brain fade with my mind wandering due to not having enough to do.
Remember you heard it here first.
"Think! don't drive tired, Speed up!"
DAZ
(prepares flameproof jacket for a load of crap accusing me of driving whilst tired).
Remember you heard it here first.
"Think! don't drive tired, Speed up!"
DAZ
(prepares flameproof jacket for a load of crap accusing me of driving whilst tired).
dazren said:
I was discussing the faster is safer arguement with Ninja Eli and Rich1231 at the weekend. General concensus was when driving on a motorway, if you are 10/15 mph faster than everything else you are more alert anticipating traffic flow etc. Personally just flowing with traffic I am less alert and over a long distance (say 100 miles+) am more liable to experience brain fade with my mind wandering due to not having enough to do.
The link between speed and alertness is at best very tentative I would say. I would also say that the benefits from any minor increases in alertness would be far outweighed by the shortened reaction times and the incresed threat you pose to other motorists by your increased velocity. By this I mean that motorists who are not skilled above the average driving skill level are not able to assess approaching vehicles speed very well.
dazren said:
Remember you heard it here first.
I'm afraid this isn't a new idea Daz. This has been discussed for some time on our forum at www.cumbriasafetycameras.org/forum/
dazren said:
"Think! don't drive tired, Speed up!"
The idea that a drivers ring twitching because of speed increases awareness and subsequently safety is not going to be a major contribution to road safety. Keep on with the safety thinking though it is a good start.
dazren said:
I was discussing the faster is safer arguement with Ninja Eli and Rich1231 at the weekend. General concensus was when driving on a motorway, if you are 10/15 mph faster than everything else you are more alert anticipating traffic flow etc. Personally just flowing with traffic I am less alert and over a long distance (say 100 miles+) am more liable to experience brain fade with my mind wandering due to not having enough to do.
Remember you heard it here first.
"Think! don't drive tired, Speed up!"
DAZ
(prepares flameproof jacket for a load of crap accusing me of driving whilst tired).
Totally agree. Nothing worse than driving whilest bored (eg. Same speed over a long period of time)
I'd agree to a certain extent about being more alert, but you still have to take into account the actions of the numpties. If I am making progress I'll still slow when in the vicinity of other cars simply because I'm scared of them not seeing me and an speed differential on impact would have graver consequences.
Swings and roundabouts I'd say.
Boredom certainly is a danger when cruising with the flow though.
Swings and roundabouts I'd say.
Boredom certainly is a danger when cruising with the flow though.
Hello Steve,
Nice to see you "out and about".
You would be quite wrong. It's of critical importance to road safety. Try asking experienced drivers. I have. See:
www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=117
95% of (41) respondents report that excessively low speed would adversely affect their concentration.
There's clearly a continuous scale from:
too slow - bored to death
to
right speed - engaged in task
to
too fast - frightened to death
We need to get our drivers into the middle of the range - something that they do naturally, thankfully. Best leave them to it eh?
Perhaps you would like to explain the real world data on which you base that assertion. Oh, damn. There isn't any. You're guessing and guessing wrong.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
Nice to see you "out and about".
stevecallaghan said:
The link between speed and alertness is at best very tentative I would say.
You would be quite wrong. It's of critical importance to road safety. Try asking experienced drivers. I have. See:
www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=117
95% of (41) respondents report that excessively low speed would adversely affect their concentration.
There's clearly a continuous scale from:
too slow - bored to death
to
right speed - engaged in task
to
too fast - frightened to death
We need to get our drivers into the middle of the range - something that they do naturally, thankfully. Best leave them to it eh?
stevecallaghan said:
I would also say that the benefits from any minor increases in alertness would be far outweighed by the shortened reaction times and the incresed threat you pose to other motorists by your increased velocity. By this I mean that motorists who are not skilled above the average driving skill level are not able to assess approaching vehicles speed very well.
Perhaps you would like to explain the real world data on which you base that assertion. Oh, damn. There isn't any. You're guessing and guessing wrong.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
cptsideways said:
No 2
Passing cyclists, tractors, slow moving vehicles etc.
Two issues here.
I don't think it is fair to lump cyclists in with tractors. In the case of conflict the cyclist is a vulnerable road user and in my opinion not only should they be given a wide margin but also its polite to keep differential speed to a level proportional to the amount of room you are able to give them.
Tractors its the other way round and you in your relatively light car / bike is the vulnerable party. Then its a case of equalising the hazards, e.g. amongst others space vs differntial speed.
cptsideways said:
The number of people who will not put there foot down to pass these safely is quite frankly astonishing. Has no-one got any idea about time exposed to danger or don't they teach that in driving tests these days?
Know exactly what you mean, due to go out for latest RoSPA guidance session today, and one of the factors I find difficult is the issue of maximising progress without any speeding, at all!
There are many cases where the time on the wrong side is extended or an overtake prevented because not even 1mph above 60 is allowed.
That apart I think the activities of the camera pratnerships in NSL's has resulted in many people being scared to give it some in an overtake.
FiF
All depends on the driver.
If Im driving quicker I pay even more attention than usual to side junctions, driveways, the vanishing point, road surface etc but Im sure there are some numpties that drive fast whilst still on the same attention level they have whilst sat in a traffic jam.
Im probably wrong but do see some awful driving out there. Especially on the busier roads.
If Im driving quicker I pay even more attention than usual to side junctions, driveways, the vanishing point, road surface etc but Im sure there are some numpties that drive fast whilst still on the same attention level they have whilst sat in a traffic jam.
Im probably wrong but do see some awful driving out there. Especially on the busier roads.
Flat in Fifth said:
In the case of conflict the cyclist is a vulnerable road user and in my opinion not only should they be given a wide margin but also its polite to keep differential speed to a level proportional to the amount of room you are able to give them.
Hmm. When I'm on my pushbike, one of the things that really pisses me off is a car driver sat on my rear quarter waiting until they can pull right over to the other side of the road to pass. I regard my rear quarter as a "threat zone"; if I fall off, they'll be straight over me; if I need to avoid a pothole, broken glass etc. and they happen to decide to overtake at that moment, the same thing happens. (Also, my right eye doesn't work, which makes it hard for me to assess what they're doing.) I'd much prefer they passed straight away without fannying about. A foot of clearance is plenty, and there are not many city streets which are too narrow for this even when cars are coming the other way. A passing car is less dangerous than a tailgating car as if I fall off I'll bounce off the side rather than fall underneath it.
Flat in Fifth said:
In the case of conflict the cyclist is a vulnerable road user and in my opinion not only should they be given a wide margin but also its polite to keep differential speed to a level proportional to the amount of room you are able to give them.
But what do you do when, having finally crept alongside, you find that there is now an oncoming vehicle to avoid?
stevecallaghan said:
The link between speed and alertness is at best very tentative I would say.
Good job there's no link between slow, constant monotonous speed and monotony then.
Otherwise there would be a link between slow, constant monotonous speed and monotony.
And you would have proved that they wasted £billions on bends in motorways to stop people losing alertness.
stevecallaghan said:
I would also say that the benefits from any minor increases in alertness would be far outweighed by the shortened reaction times and the incresed threat you pose to other motorists by your increased velocity. By this I mean that motorists who are not skilled above the average driving skill level are not able to assess approaching vehicles speed very well.
Didn't I read somewhere that it takes a novice driver up to 10 (yes, that's TEN) seconds to spot a hazard.
Good job monotony doesn't put you in the same bracket as a bored, switched off, novice driver then.
bogush said:
The link between speed and alertness is at best very tentative I would say.
Good job there's no link between slow, constant monotonous speed and monotony then.
Otherwise there would be a link between slow, constant monotonous speed and monotony.
And you would have proved that they wasted £billions on bends in motorways to stop people losing alertness.
Strange, they keep driving off the carriageway on the M6 in Cumbria at these safety features, or was it bends!
Perhaps I should raise a bit of cash to have them straightened out.
safespeed said:
95% of (41) respondents report that excessively low speed would adversely affect their concentration.
There's clearly a continuous scale from:
too slow - bored to death
to
right speed - engaged in task
to
too fast - frightened to death
I wonder why they said that. Now we have a whole new scientific theory based on the opinions of 41 motorists who were probably on your site looking for ways to avoid a speeding fine. Real world indeed Paul.
SteveCallaghan said:
Strange, they keep driving off the carriageway on the M6 in Cumbria at these safety features, or was it bends!
Perhaps I should raise a bit of cash to have them straightened out.
Better still, raise the limit.
They probably came off at the bends because they were driving straight ahead asleep at the wheel.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff