Mandatory Speed Limiters from 6th July 2022
Discussion
poo at Paul's said:
The answer is simply to continue driving the cars and bikes you enjoyed driving back in the old days.
A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
The problem with this idea is that, once speed-limited cars are on the roads in sufficient numbers, they will force down the speed of everyone else. A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
dxg said:
poo at Paul's said:
The answer is simply to continue driving the cars and bikes you enjoyed driving back in the old days.
A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
The problem with this idea is that, once speed-limited cars are on the roads in sufficient numbers, they will force down the speed of everyone else. A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
poo at Paul's said:
dxg said:
poo at Paul's said:
The answer is simply to continue driving the cars and bikes you enjoyed driving back in the old days.
A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
The problem with this idea is that, once speed-limited cars are on the roads in sufficient numbers, they will force down the speed of everyone else. A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
Speed limiters you set yourself and can easily "knock off" are already here. My 2012 Mondeo has one. I like it. It's a button on the steering wheel near the cruise control button. On the other side of the wheel are two buttons that knock the set limit up and down in 5 mph increments, and one that makes 1 mph adjustments but that's increases only.
There's a "Cancel" button too. Although you can suspend it by pushing the pedal down hard. And then, when your desire for a higher speed has passed, just allow the car to decelerate by lifting off until the speed reaches the set limit, and the limiter kicks back in. The system on my car isn't "intelligent" though. So you still have to read the road, and road signs, and select the set limit for yourself. The good thing about that is that you can set a higher limit in the car than the legal limit for the stretch of road. Either to bring up your speed to a more accurate reading (eg: I set for 56 mph in a 50 mph average speed section and find I'm barely scraping 51 mph on a GPS device, and I'm a little faster than most traffic through that section) or because you've risk-assessed your likelihood of falling foul of speed cameras/rozzers and simply like to go faster.
It's a MUCH better system than cruise control, in my opinion. Because it means you retain throttle control, and if you don't actively "drive" the car and your attention drifts, your speed falls. I can't abide cruise control because it detracts from the driving experience. Whereas with the limiter I still have fun with an active driving experience, with a simple reminder, when the limiter is reached, that I'm having a little more fun than I restricted myself to. And if I wanted to, I could simply turn off the limiter and attempt to reach whatever top speed a Mondeo might realistically achieve...
There's a "Cancel" button too. Although you can suspend it by pushing the pedal down hard. And then, when your desire for a higher speed has passed, just allow the car to decelerate by lifting off until the speed reaches the set limit, and the limiter kicks back in. The system on my car isn't "intelligent" though. So you still have to read the road, and road signs, and select the set limit for yourself. The good thing about that is that you can set a higher limit in the car than the legal limit for the stretch of road. Either to bring up your speed to a more accurate reading (eg: I set for 56 mph in a 50 mph average speed section and find I'm barely scraping 51 mph on a GPS device, and I'm a little faster than most traffic through that section) or because you've risk-assessed your likelihood of falling foul of speed cameras/rozzers and simply like to go faster.
It's a MUCH better system than cruise control, in my opinion. Because it means you retain throttle control, and if you don't actively "drive" the car and your attention drifts, your speed falls. I can't abide cruise control because it detracts from the driving experience. Whereas with the limiter I still have fun with an active driving experience, with a simple reminder, when the limiter is reached, that I'm having a little more fun than I restricted myself to. And if I wanted to, I could simply turn off the limiter and attempt to reach whatever top speed a Mondeo might realistically achieve...
Harry H said:
poo at Paul's said:
dxg said:
poo at Paul's said:
The answer is simply to continue driving the cars and bikes you enjoyed driving back in the old days.
A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
The problem with this idea is that, once speed-limited cars are on the roads in sufficient numbers, they will force down the speed of everyone else. A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
it may surprise you know that different vehicles on the road have different speed limits, so even limited vehicles will be legitimately allowed to overtake slower moving vehicles, so the white line will not just double up across the land because of speed limiting tech and it is nonsense to suggest otherwise.
poo at Paul's said:
Harry H said:
poo at Paul's said:
dxg said:
poo at Paul's said:
The answer is simply to continue driving the cars and bikes you enjoyed driving back in the old days.
A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
The problem with this idea is that, once speed-limited cars are on the roads in sufficient numbers, they will force down the speed of everyone else. A decent nick car without this nonsense tech will last 10 to 20 years. Bikes the same.
it may surprise you know that different vehicles on the road have different speed limits, so even limited vehicles will be legitimately allowed to overtake slower moving vehicles, so the white line will not just double up across the land because of speed limiting tech and it is nonsense to suggest otherwise.
In my brief post I never suggested the increase of double white lines is due to to speed limiting tech but it is happening all the same. The A and B roads of Sussex and Surrey are getting more and more of them as time passes. I've personally had the pleasure of a fine from an unmarked police car for having the cheek of popping around a dawdler whilst riding my motorbike on a virtually empty straight piece of road.
Carry on sticking your head in the sand by all means.
Harry H said:
Until every road has double white lines. Not far off that now in some areas.
2+1 divided carriageways with wire cable median eliminate risk of head-on collisions. Introduced in Sweden on previously single-carriageway roads, they have shown remarkable accident reduction. They are under trial in many other countries.Absolute safety pressures are likely to force UK down a similar path. Add double white lines elsewhere, and overtaking in the face of oncoming traffic will be outlawed.
https://eurorap.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/iRA...
|https://thumbsnap.com/ZKwEpcNn[/url]I wonder if a Tesla can actually "see" those wire barriers when on autopilot?! They seem to need white lines.
And I've asked this question on EV/autonomous-driving forums but not had a definitive answer: Do you think auto-driving cars will ever be programmed to overtake on a standard "A" road, i.e. using the wrong side of the road? It's an extraordinarily difficult manoeuvre in programming terms, to do it safely.
And I've asked this question on EV/autonomous-driving forums but not had a definitive answer: Do you think auto-driving cars will ever be programmed to overtake on a standard "A" road, i.e. using the wrong side of the road? It's an extraordinarily difficult manoeuvre in programming terms, to do it safely.
M4cruiser said:
I wonder if a Tesla can actually "see" those wire barriers when on autopilot?! They seem to need white lines.
And I've asked this question on EV/autonomous-driving forums but not had a definitive answer: Do you think auto-driving cars will ever be programmed to overtake on a standard "A" road, i.e. using the wrong side of the road? It's an extraordinarily difficult manoeuvre in programming terms, to do it safely.
Autonomous cars will need to cope with cyclists and pedestrians but probably little else. Of course, cars and other motorised vehicles could be segregated from cyclists and pedestrians. All in the cause of absolute safety.And I've asked this question on EV/autonomous-driving forums but not had a definitive answer: Do you think auto-driving cars will ever be programmed to overtake on a standard "A" road, i.e. using the wrong side of the road? It's an extraordinarily difficult manoeuvre in programming terms, to do it safely.
I used to wonder why the motoring public tolerated increasing authoritarian crap, with hardly a whimper.
Then I came to terms with actually, who gives a f
k?
Now I realise that an overwhelming majority actually support these new restrictions. My viewpoint has been out of kilter since 1965
Then I came to terms with actually, who gives a f
k? Now I realise that an overwhelming majority actually support these new restrictions. My viewpoint has been out of kilter since 1965
bigothunter said:
2+1 divided carriageways with wire cable median eliminate risk of head-on collisions. Introduced in Sweden on previously single-carriageway roads, they have shown remarkable accident reduction. They are under trial in many other countries.
Absolute safety pressures are likely to force UK down a similar path. Add double white lines elsewhere, and overtaking in the face of oncoming traffic will be outlawed.
https://eurorap.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/iRA...
|https://thumbsnap.com/ZKwEpcNn[/url]
Those wire dividers should be illegal! Horrifically damaging to anyone hitting them, motorcyclists don't stand a chance if they're unfortunate enough to hit one!Absolute safety pressures are likely to force UK down a similar path. Add double white lines elsewhere, and overtaking in the face of oncoming traffic will be outlawed.
https://eurorap.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/iRA...
|https://thumbsnap.com/ZKwEpcNn[/url]Jim1556 said:
Those wire dividers should be illegal! Horrifically damaging to anyone hitting them, motorcyclists don't stand a chance if they're unfortunate enough to hit one!
Much less damaging for motorists than hitting a car or truck coming in the opposite direction.But I entirely agree about horrific motorcyclist risk - probably take your leg off. However saving grace is motorcycles conflict with absolute safety (Vision Zero), so perhaps they will be prohibited from roads with wire dividers or eventually banned altogether?
bigothunter said:
M4cruiser said:
I wonder if a Tesla can actually "see" those wire barriers when on autopilot?! They seem to need white lines.
And I've asked this question on EV/autonomous-driving forums but not had a definitive answer: Do you think auto-driving cars will ever be programmed to overtake on a standard "A" road, i.e. using the wrong side of the road? It's an extraordinarily difficult manoeuvre in programming terms, to do it safely.
Autonomous cars will need to cope with cyclists and pedestrians but probably little else. Of course, cars and other motorised vehicles could be segregated from cyclists and pedestrians. All in the cause of absolute safety.And I've asked this question on EV/autonomous-driving forums but not had a definitive answer: Do you think auto-driving cars will ever be programmed to overtake on a standard "A" road, i.e. using the wrong side of the road? It's an extraordinarily difficult manoeuvre in programming terms, to do it safely.
bigothunter said:
I used to wonder why the motoring public tolerated increasing authoritarian crap, with hardly a whimper.
Then I came to terms with actually, who gives a fk?
Now I realise that an overwhelming majority actually support these new restrictions. My viewpoint has been out of kilter since 1965
You and me both. Raging against the dying of the light, to misquote the poetThen I came to terms with actually, who gives a f
k? Now I realise that an overwhelming majority actually support these new restrictions. My viewpoint has been out of kilter since 1965
yellowjack said:
No, I don't think it's possible that they could be. Just consider the road network in the UK. The vast majority of which is rural miles without even a footway. How the blazes do you suggest that such roads achieve segregation between cyclists/pedestrians and motor vehicles without a prohibitively expensive widening program? Sure, you could ban peds and cyclists from such roads, but that will NEVER happen because some folk would effectively become trapped in their homes. And you can't really restrict motor vehicle use there either because few rural villages even have a basic shop these days. o residents need to get to other villages or towns. Either by walking, or cycling, or driving. Which pretty much means that the status quo will be maintained. Autonomous cars will struggle on rural roads though, especially the narrowest of them. AI is what needs banning from such roads if anything...
How about limiting minor road vehicle access to all but residents and essential services? Limit their speed to 10mph using ISA. All other cars, trucks, etc permitted on major roads only. Continue developing footpaths and cycleways. That would go a long way towards segregation.Vision Zero (no road deaths or casualties) is gaining momentum. Without radical action to improve road safety, how else can we get close to that target?
The Royal Society for The Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) reported that in the UK (2018), 186 people were killed in crashes involving someone exceeding the speed limit.
An average of 666 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year
Yet we plough how much money, time and resource into 'speeding' to help reduce road deaths?
How many more old fashioned patrols could we afford to catch the dangerous / drunk / drug drivers that we've spent developing, installing and maintaining the thousands of speed cameras and limiter/limiter infrastructure ?
oh and lastly, just for 'fun' - 5691 suicides in 2019 - how about tackling some of that and making a real difference.
An average of 666 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year
Yet we plough how much money, time and resource into 'speeding' to help reduce road deaths?
How many more old fashioned patrols could we afford to catch the dangerous / drunk / drug drivers that we've spent developing, installing and maintaining the thousands of speed cameras and limiter/limiter infrastructure ?
oh and lastly, just for 'fun' - 5691 suicides in 2019 - how about tackling some of that and making a real difference.
Edited by Pixelpeep 135 on Wednesday 18th August 10:46
Pixelpeep 135 said:
The Royal Society for The Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) reported that in the UK (2018), 186 people were killed in crashes involving someone exceeding the speed limit.
An average of 666 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year
Yet we plough how much money, time and resource into 'speeding' to help reduce road deaths?
How many more old fashioned patrols could we afford to catch the dangerous / drunk / drug drivers that we've spent developing, installing and maintaining the thousands of speed cameras and limiter/limiter infrastructure ?
oh and lastly, just for 'fun' - 5691 suicides in 2019 - how about tackling some of that and making a real difference.
I agree An average of 666 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year
Yet we plough how much money, time and resource into 'speeding' to help reduce road deaths?
How many more old fashioned patrols could we afford to catch the dangerous / drunk / drug drivers that we've spent developing, installing and maintaining the thousands of speed cameras and limiter/limiter infrastructure ?
oh and lastly, just for 'fun' - 5691 suicides in 2019 - how about tackling some of that and making a real difference.
A logical point which I could have made before enlightenment.The demon is speed. It kills. Propaganda makes this 'fact' unquestionable. Buck that doctrine at your peril.
bigothunter said:
Pixelpeep 135 said:
The Royal Society for The Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) reported that in the UK (2018), 186 people were killed in crashes involving someone exceeding the speed limit.
An average of 666 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year
Yet we plough how much money, time and resource into 'speeding' to help reduce road deaths?
How many more old fashioned patrols could we afford to catch the dangerous / drunk / drug drivers that we've spent developing, installing and maintaining the thousands of speed cameras and limiter/limiter infrastructure ?
oh and lastly, just for 'fun' - 5691 suicides in 2019 - how about tackling some of that and making a real difference.
I agree An average of 666 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year
Yet we plough how much money, time and resource into 'speeding' to help reduce road deaths?
How many more old fashioned patrols could we afford to catch the dangerous / drunk / drug drivers that we've spent developing, installing and maintaining the thousands of speed cameras and limiter/limiter infrastructure ?
oh and lastly, just for 'fun' - 5691 suicides in 2019 - how about tackling some of that and making a real difference.
A logical point which I could have made before enlightenment.The demon is speed. It kills. Propaganda makes this 'fact' unquestionable. Buck that doctrine at your peril.
Harry H said:
bigothunter said:
Pixelpeep 135 said:
The Royal Society for The Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) reported that in the UK (2018), 186 people were killed in crashes involving someone exceeding the speed limit.
An average of 666 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year
Yet we plough how much money, time and resource into 'speeding' to help reduce road deaths?
How many more old fashioned patrols could we afford to catch the dangerous / drunk / drug drivers that we've spent developing, installing and maintaining the thousands of speed cameras and limiter/limiter infrastructure ?
oh and lastly, just for 'fun' - 5691 suicides in 2019 - how about tackling some of that and making a real difference.
I agree An average of 666 people were killed in drink driving related accidents in Great Britain each year
Yet we plough how much money, time and resource into 'speeding' to help reduce road deaths?
How many more old fashioned patrols could we afford to catch the dangerous / drunk / drug drivers that we've spent developing, installing and maintaining the thousands of speed cameras and limiter/limiter infrastructure ?
oh and lastly, just for 'fun' - 5691 suicides in 2019 - how about tackling some of that and making a real difference.
A logical point which I could have made before enlightenment.The demon is speed. It kills. Propaganda makes this 'fact' unquestionable. Buck that doctrine at your peril.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff