Speed 'not main road killer'
Discussion
kevinday said:
TripleS said:
2. Many people make very sudden reductions in speed when they see a camera. In many cases they may have no need to brake, but in doing so they present a risk to following traffic that would not otherwise occur.
Why? If traffic followed at a safe an reasonable distance, it would make not the slightest bit of difference if someone braked to go through a site. In fact if it affected the person following it would give rise to the fact that that person was failing to observe the camera and was travelling too fast towards it as well!
You are of course correct Gone, however, many, many people do brake, even when well below the speed limit, thus they are indeed creating a hazard.
Yes, they are in the present circumstances, even if ideally people should not behave like that.
Of course in an ideal world our driving would always be appropriate in terms of speed and all other aspects, and then we could be freed from all this nonsense. I guess we are still some way off achieving that happy state.
Best wishes all,
Dave - part time optimist.
No he is not! mybrainhurts said:
safespeed said:
Choosing a safe and appropriate speed for the conditions applies to the entire road network.
Which is where we differ.
I'd prefer the powers that be to decide what those speeds are
....What?....as in......councillors..?
You are a one, spn......
OOOO, "authority figure" - must be right!
mybrainhurts said:
safespeed said:
Choosing a safe and appropriate speed for the conditions applies to the entire road network.
Which is where we differ.
I'd prefer the powers that be to decide what those speeds are
You are a one, spn......
Not to mention the "Magnificent Seven Farties" over pie and pint in the pub
Who -
do not even drive - but like to pedal furiously in their lycra .....und think that buses are clean und cheap 
and that trains actually run on time ..... 
You are right - spn is a rum one .....
spnracing said:
You are a one, spn......
Well I do try my best.
Anyway - its normally Road Safety Officers in co-operation with the police isn't it?
Err, no...
The last one I objected to was set by greenfreak councillors, objected to by police, but over-ruled by said council incompetents.
Police considered 40 unnecessary and unenforceable.
History......
Originally deristricted
NSL 60 imposed
Now reduced to 40
Official reason.........
To save the lives of sheep from high speed impacts.
Real reason..........
We hate cars in our countryside.
Post 40 effect..........
More sheep killed.
Area.........
open moorland, blanket limit, several roads.
Road Safety Officers........
Where were they, then.......?
Powers that Be?
More like Pillocks that Be......
And you expect me to respect such limits.....?
mybrainhurts said:
Me
Many a true word... The implication that drivers should set speed limits is very well founded.
The common mechanism for this around the world has been to set the speed limit at around the 85th percentile of traffic speed. Speed limits based on the 85th percentile of traffic speed have a good safety record.
But we must also have consistent national standards. Applying a 30mph limit to a mile of straight and clear road between villages tends to devalue the whole speed limit concept.
So the DfT should publish national guidelines, and traffic engineers should set limits locally consistent with the national guidelines and the 85th percentils speed and in consultation with the police.
But the DfT have devolved speed limit setting responsibilities to local authorities where unskilled (so called) road safety officers and unskilled councillors set limits according to ill-founded whims.
btw, There's about a million miles between a traffic engineer and a road safety officer.
spnracing said:mybrainhurts is spot on, the police usually object to the mass of speed limit reductions taking place, but like the rest of us they're ignored.
Anyway - its normally Road Safety Officers in co-operation with the police isn't it?
>> Edited by turbobloke on Tuesday 12th October 18:53
safespeed said:
But we must also have consistent national standards. Applying a 30mph limit to a mile of straight and clear road between villages tends to devalue the whole speed limit concept.
So the DfT should publish national guidelines, and traffic engineers should set limits locally consistent with the national guidelines and the 85th percentils speed and in consultation with the police.
But the DfT have devolved speed limit setting responsibilities to local authorities where unskilled (so called) road safety officers and unskilled councillors set limits according to ill-founded whims.
btw, There's about a million miles between a traffic engineer and a road safety officer.
There should be rules, not guidelines, thus removing any element of local bias.
spnracing said:
You are a one, spn......
Well I do try my best.
Anyway - its normally Road Safety Officers in co-operation with the police isn't it?
So who would YOU have set the limits?
Obviously the driver Spn. Why? Cos he's already expected to do just that when conditions deteriorate on roads like motorways, he's expected to make a judgment *downwards* and set a safe speed in such circumstances!
True, some get it wrong, but thats just the way it is.
Btw, whats wrong with Wayne and his lowered Corsa?
gone said:
Who really knows?
Like I said before, it is wholly more honest to just say "I don't like speed cameras because they are not fair" without resorting to spurious pie in the sky stuff which no one can prove or disprove in any way!
Speed cameras arent fair, but just whining to that effect is not gonna achieve anything but the predictable, 'life aint fair, deal with it' To this end many people do the reasearch to back up the 'not fair' with 'not right and not safe'. Whats really become ridiculous is the data is completely ignored, so what chance does bleating about fairness stand?
spnracing said:
You are a one, spn......
Well I do try my best.
Anyway - its normally Road Safety Officers in co-operation with the police isn't it?
So who would YOU have set the limits?
Well
certainly not seven men in the local pub - especially if they are councillors - based on my own assessment of these people...... not exactly the most employable are they? As driver and bloke with intimate knowledge of driving along my local roads - certainly I have more idea of hazards and local issues than these self-important posers who do this seeking attention and pats on the back .... and a nomination to stand as MP
and thus further their own selfish ends ..... Road Safety Officer .... like our Paulie says - big difference between one of these and a Road/Traffic Engineer...
Another hot topic in my locality are the cycle lanes in Ambleside. Reduced speed limit and narrowed carriageway to make way for cycle lanes which only a suicidal cyclist would use.... Not even the most hardened muesli muncher would want to use them....The workmen who were contracted to paint them thought it a joke and refused to do it until some bod from council told them im person and in triplicate written form wsigned and witenessed by foreman onthe site ....
so whilst I do not doubt your ability to handle a car at speed around Oulton park - I seriously doubt your ability to hack it around Cumbria and Lancashire mate - and suggest you drive around actually looking at the hazards these scams actually create.... They actually encourage numpty behaviour as well .... panic braking on sight ... even when legal
Then take stock of what they are actually enforcing - compliance with speed limit because of apparent danger - or entrapment because they know they will catch people out as they decelerate to comply.... and the ones on the m/way bridges - note where they really are and weight this against which bridge they should be on... and then decide which does better job anyway - the traffic officer or the talivan.... No "Road Safety Officer", "Policeman" (indeed local plod want them removing!) nor "Engineer" planned this stupidity - was brain dead councillors again ....
kevinday said:
[...]
So the DfT should publish national guidelines, and traffic engineers should set limits locally consistent with the national guidelines and the 85th percentils speed and in consultation with the police.
[...]
There should be rules, not guidelines, thus removing any element of local bias.
That's an interesting point. I quite like guidelines because there is sometimes a genuine need for local variation. If we tried to write (let's say) strict rules to allow for local exceptions, then the rules would become much more complex. And I don't like complex rules.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff