Speed Congress 2012
Discussion
The title suggests it looks like the perfect opportunity for a PH'rs gathering.
If we can't make it in person, we should email them and thank them for focusing on this issue that is so important to all of us.
It is so important to focus on just speed. I mean, if we all drive at 70mph and only worry about our speed, rather than trivial issues such as car maintenance, skid control, tyre choice and pressures or enhancing our snow driving skills and capability, then the world would be much safer. I mean, we'd never see the shocking headlines we woke up to this morning.
http://speedcongress.wordpress.com/
Let's all go and celebrate our supersafe future world of driving where our only concern is speed.
If we can't make it in person, we should email them and thank them for focusing on this issue that is so important to all of us.
It is so important to focus on just speed. I mean, if we all drive at 70mph and only worry about our speed, rather than trivial issues such as car maintenance, skid control, tyre choice and pressures or enhancing our snow driving skills and capability, then the world would be much safer. I mean, we'd never see the shocking headlines we woke up to this morning.
http://speedcongress.wordpress.com/
Let's all go and celebrate our supersafe future world of driving where our only concern is speed.
It's the Brake speed congress 
It reads like one of those tv adverts where 1% reduction in heating can solve up to n% of the UK's problems
(wasnt the linked report was about various methods of speed reduction, there are other methods of casualty reduction)
Look at two sentences in the linked link to New South Wales
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeed...
'In NSW speeding is a factor in about 40 per cent of road deaths.'
Ok but as a factor it could have been a minor factor, secondary factor, causal factor, unrelated factor.
Look how that develops into
'This means around 200 people die each year from speeding in NSW'
Why dont they go for a factor they can more usefully do something about?
Statistics
It reads like one of those tv adverts where 1% reduction in heating can solve up to n% of the UK's problems
article said:
Research shows that a 1mph speed reduction can reduce collision frequency at the following rate:
about 6% for urban roads with low average speeds
about 4% for medium speed urban roads and lower speed rural main roads
about 3% for higher speed urban roads and rural main roads [2].
about = less than or not at all?about 6% for urban roads with low average speeds
about 4% for medium speed urban roads and lower speed rural main roads
about 3% for higher speed urban roads and rural main roads [2].
(wasnt the linked report was about various methods of speed reduction, there are other methods of casualty reduction)
article said:
Reducing traffic speed is a subject that often causes controversy in the media,
Why would that be - or is that the purpose of the conference?Look at two sentences in the linked link to New South Wales
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeed...
'In NSW speeding is a factor in about 40 per cent of road deaths.'
Ok but as a factor it could have been a minor factor, secondary factor, causal factor, unrelated factor.
Look how that develops into
'This means around 200 people die each year from speeding in NSW'
Why dont they go for a factor they can more usefully do something about?
Statistics
IN response to this
“…speed is the number one cause of road traffic deaths ”
I just posted this ...
"...speed is the number one cause of road traffic deaths " - Who is making this rubbish up ?
From Surrey Police Road Statistics from a couple of years back, the contribution of speed to accidents (and note, that is contribution, not cause) was around 4%.
New DFT stats released, show that common blame of speed could't couldnt be further from the truth. Exceeding the speed limit accounts for 5% of accidents, with over the legal alcohol limit, being also the reason in 5% of accidents.
According to a recent Auto Express article, 50% of further accidents are due to lack of Looking properly by the Driver-Rider-Pedestrian says DFT.Next biggest cause is failure to judge speed or path direction.Careless-Reckless-Hurried behaviour comes next, and not paying attention to conditions is also included.
Interestingly, the speed limit was dropped on a main A-road near me a few years ago, due to a knee-jerk reaction to a number of serious, some fatal, accidents. At this time, I wrote to the council pointing out this wouldn't make any difference, sadly, they didn't even reply.
It therefore didn't particularly surprise me to learn that there has been no decrease in the accident rate on the road. Fatal accidents are still happening, serious accidents are still happening.
Speed can rarely cause an accident alone, it will affect the consequences, but is seldom the lone cause - if you work on the main causes, speed becomes less of an issue. The main causes of accidents account for 95% - so it would be more worthwhile to concentrate of the majorty of issue that will make a difference, as opposed to the minoroty, that it has been shown, do not make a difference.
There should be driver and passenger education - the simple golden rule of driving ' Always stop in the distance you can see to be clear" would have prevents the terrible accident that happened recently on the M5, or at least, would have vastly reduced the number of cars that ran into the 'primary accident'. Simply, many drivers look no further than the end of their bonnet, or on a good day, the car in front, as opposed to actually reading the road ahead, and reacting to changing conditions.
Pedestrians (children) should be properly educated - and parents should take responsibility for their children. Sad as it may be, if you play on the roads, you may be hurt of suffer life-changing injuries, that is the parents responsibly, not anybody else's. - I wasn't run over as a child, as I was properly educated about the risks, and supervised until I was old enough and responsible enough to look after myself.
“…speed is the number one cause of road traffic deaths ”
I just posted this ...
"...speed is the number one cause of road traffic deaths " - Who is making this rubbish up ?
From Surrey Police Road Statistics from a couple of years back, the contribution of speed to accidents (and note, that is contribution, not cause) was around 4%.
New DFT stats released, show that common blame of speed could't couldnt be further from the truth. Exceeding the speed limit accounts for 5% of accidents, with over the legal alcohol limit, being also the reason in 5% of accidents.
According to a recent Auto Express article, 50% of further accidents are due to lack of Looking properly by the Driver-Rider-Pedestrian says DFT.Next biggest cause is failure to judge speed or path direction.Careless-Reckless-Hurried behaviour comes next, and not paying attention to conditions is also included.
Interestingly, the speed limit was dropped on a main A-road near me a few years ago, due to a knee-jerk reaction to a number of serious, some fatal, accidents. At this time, I wrote to the council pointing out this wouldn't make any difference, sadly, they didn't even reply.
It therefore didn't particularly surprise me to learn that there has been no decrease in the accident rate on the road. Fatal accidents are still happening, serious accidents are still happening.
Speed can rarely cause an accident alone, it will affect the consequences, but is seldom the lone cause - if you work on the main causes, speed becomes less of an issue. The main causes of accidents account for 95% - so it would be more worthwhile to concentrate of the majorty of issue that will make a difference, as opposed to the minoroty, that it has been shown, do not make a difference.
There should be driver and passenger education - the simple golden rule of driving ' Always stop in the distance you can see to be clear" would have prevents the terrible accident that happened recently on the M5, or at least, would have vastly reduced the number of cars that ran into the 'primary accident'. Simply, many drivers look no further than the end of their bonnet, or on a good day, the car in front, as opposed to actually reading the road ahead, and reacting to changing conditions.
Pedestrians (children) should be properly educated - and parents should take responsibility for their children. Sad as it may be, if you play on the roads, you may be hurt of suffer life-changing injuries, that is the parents responsibly, not anybody else's. - I wasn't run over as a child, as I was properly educated about the risks, and supervised until I was old enough and responsible enough to look after myself.
DFT road accidents report 2010
Contributory factors in reported accidents by vehicle type - for cars:
Exceeding speed limit: 3%
Failed to look properly: 23%
Following too close: 4%
Travelling too fast for the conditions: 5%
When you look at the details, speed is a very minor cause of accidents. That the focus for so long has been on speed at the expense of all else is imho verging on the criminal. There's now so many drivers out there convinced that so long as they don't drive fast, they'll be safe. That they'll quite happily drive at 40mph everywhere no matter the conditions is inconceivable to them that it might be dangerous, since 40 isn't seen as fast.
Despite this, Brake still cling on to the speed issue, self righteously pushing their agenda forward to anyone who'll listen, and sadly there are plenty who do.
In light of the events on the M5 last night, when it appears that old fashioned bad driving (not looking, following too close) was the cause and not "speed", I'd argue that they need to take a long hard look at the effects their misguided approach is having to accident rates and the consequences in the UK.
Contributory factors in reported accidents by vehicle type - for cars:
Exceeding speed limit: 3%
Failed to look properly: 23%
Following too close: 4%
Travelling too fast for the conditions: 5%
When you look at the details, speed is a very minor cause of accidents. That the focus for so long has been on speed at the expense of all else is imho verging on the criminal. There's now so many drivers out there convinced that so long as they don't drive fast, they'll be safe. That they'll quite happily drive at 40mph everywhere no matter the conditions is inconceivable to them that it might be dangerous, since 40 isn't seen as fast.
Despite this, Brake still cling on to the speed issue, self righteously pushing their agenda forward to anyone who'll listen, and sadly there are plenty who do.
In light of the events on the M5 last night, when it appears that old fashioned bad driving (not looking, following too close) was the cause and not "speed", I'd argue that they need to take a long hard look at the effects their misguided approach is having to accident rates and the consequences in the UK.
Marquis Rex said:
Another reason to hate the IMechE. Not only do they not do enough to push the salaries of British engineers salaries up, they don't protect the title (as outlined in various threads already) now they endorse s
te like this!
And they keep sending me bunff to renew my (previously free) membership...te like this!I think not.
I will probably have to join again at some point when I retrospectively apply for CEng. I'm not sure for mech eng if the CEng is actually worth anything for most jobs, but it can't harm to have it. CEng in civil engineering is at least a recognised requirement if you want to be in a position to sign works off.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff