Commercial vehicles and KSIs
Discussion
Now we have speed limiters on LGVs is it time to look at the death toll and what percentage of the KSIs involve commercial vehicles. I am sure is very high on the Motorway but what about on the rest of the highways? Interested to know because obviously the driver training for LGVs is extra.
nonegreen, the rout to your data is here
The best way is to access the excel files and make up your own mind but fwiw
Whenever someone makes a comment like "heavies are responsible for 30% of deaths / serious injuries / collisions" I conclude that such an allegatio is false. It is true that the consequences of a collision are usually worse simply due to vehicle weight, especially if the collision involves much lighter vehicles.
Secondly in my personal opinion I can see that there has been no actual benefit from speed limiters. As discussed before, e.g. elephant racing, there are a lot of downsides.
The best way is to access the excel files and make up your own mind but fwiw
Whenever someone makes a comment like "heavies are responsible for 30% of deaths / serious injuries / collisions" I conclude that such an allegatio is false. It is true that the consequences of a collision are usually worse simply due to vehicle weight, especially if the collision involves much lighter vehicles.
Secondly in my personal opinion I can see that there has been no actual benefit from speed limiters. As discussed before, e.g. elephant racing, there are a lot of downsides.
More likely because HGVs are about 10% of total traffic (usually) so 2% of accidents is a lower proportion than for cars.
BUT any accident involving an HGV is more likely to result in serious or fatal injury (usually to the driver and passengers in whatever hits them) so the proportion of injuries is higher.
Simple really.
As you say, the fault might be the car driver's, but may not necessarily be speed (or speed-camera) related!
BUT any accident involving an HGV is more likely to result in serious or fatal injury (usually to the driver and passengers in whatever hits them) so the proportion of injuries is higher.
Simple really.
As you say, the fault might be the car driver's, but may not necessarily be speed (or speed-camera) related!
WildCat said:
My county figures are:
HGV 2% of traffic and 2% of collisions
but 40% of Fatalities involve HGV's.
>> Edited by destroyer on Sunday 27th February 18:10
Und why ist that Liebchen? Impatience? Or talivan sited at safest place to overtake forcing fatal abort of overtake?
Come on Wildy put that wooden spoon away, you had the answer from me above.
We could but it would be slightly less practiable.We could just stop HGV's from driving at 6-9am and 6-9pm. But as gordon and his friends wont make any money nothing will happen.
Surely if this saves lives (which it obviously would) we should at least try it
Replying to tvrgit
>> Edited by Pies on Sunday 27th February 19:42
Surely if this saves lives (which it obviously would) we should at least try it
Replying to tvrgit
>> Edited by Pies on Sunday 27th February 19:42
Why is it simple to change delivery times? Does that not mean that somebody has to be in earlier (or later) than now, at each destination? Does that not mean that they in turn have to drive at other times and make the peak last longer?
What about longer-distance loads that take longer than 9 hours? (ie leave at 9 but not there by 6?) - do they have to stop somewhere and do sod all for 3 hours till the nice car drivers are out of the way?
Do you want your daily post delivery at 3pm for example?
Or be buying yesterday's bread or milk unless you buy it after mid-day (unless you are lucky and your shop happens to be the first after the wagon leaves the depot at 9am)?
Is it not easier to make all the office workers start at 6am and finish at 3? or start at 10 and finish at 7?
Just asking!
What about longer-distance loads that take longer than 9 hours? (ie leave at 9 but not there by 6?) - do they have to stop somewhere and do sod all for 3 hours till the nice car drivers are out of the way?
Do you want your daily post delivery at 3pm for example?
Or be buying yesterday's bread or milk unless you buy it after mid-day (unless you are lucky and your shop happens to be the first after the wagon leaves the depot at 9am)?
Is it not easier to make all the office workers start at 6am and finish at 3? or start at 10 and finish at 7?
Just asking!
Dont forget little Johnny has to get to school.I admit i'm over simplifying the system.It could be just not drive in certain areas or only on certain roads.But this government keep saying the want road deaths and serious injuries down,and IMHO they are right to try to achieve that,yet one of the most dangerous situations is when HGV etc and cars/bikes mix.The stats show this but nobody tries to split one from the other.Ok its never going to be a perfect answer but to not try seems daft to me
P.S id love to get my post by 3pm
P.S id love to get my post by 3pm
Little Johnny doesn't have to get to school by car.
If HGVs are 10% (ish) of traffic but 2% of KSIs, then that suggests that it's not the HGVs that are the road safety problem - so why should HGV operators have to suffer higher operating costs to solve somebody else's problem?
If one of the most dangerous situations is when HGV etc and cars/bikes mix, and one has to be split from the other, why not remove the problem, ie the cars? People can then travel at other times or by another means - it's an easier choice than most goods deliveries!
(Sorry, I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate here - the truth is probably that the Government can't afford to lose (a) the support of the haulage industry or (b) the votes of the rest of us!)
If HGVs are 10% (ish) of traffic but 2% of KSIs, then that suggests that it's not the HGVs that are the road safety problem - so why should HGV operators have to suffer higher operating costs to solve somebody else's problem?
If one of the most dangerous situations is when HGV etc and cars/bikes mix, and one has to be split from the other, why not remove the problem, ie the cars? People can then travel at other times or by another means - it's an easier choice than most goods deliveries!
(Sorry, I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate here - the truth is probably that the Government can't afford to lose (a) the support of the haulage industry or (b) the votes of the rest of us!)
tvrgit said:
Little Johnny doesn't have to get to school by car.
Public transport says otherwise,unless government reintroduce free school buses
tvrgit said:
If HGVs are 10% (ish) of traffic but 2% of KSIs, then that suggests that it's not the HGVs that are the road safety problem - so why should HGV operators have to suffer higher operating costs to solve somebody else's problem?
If they travelled outside peak hours they wouldnt spend so much time stuck in traffic.Example the latest ferry closure at Dover cost the hauliers £5bn
tvrgit said:
If one of the most dangerous situations is when HGV etc and cars/bikes mix, and one has to be split from the other, why not remove the problem, ie the cars? People can then travel at other times or by another means - it's an easier choice than most goods deliveries!
The public transport system in this country has been desimated such that we now depend on the car.If the government invested a serious amount of money in ALL forms of public transport then maybe will can use the car less.Even the con charge in London has not reduced car use because the public transport is already over burdened
tvrgit said:
(Sorry, I'm being a bit of a devil's advocate here - the truth is probably that the Government can't afford to lose (a) the support of the haulage industry or (b) the votes of the rest of us!)
Nothing will ever happen because we have nobody in politics brave enough to try
Pies said:
If they travelled outside peak hours they wouldnt spend so much time stuck in traffic.Example the latest ferry closure at Dover cost the hauliers £5bn
Therefore if they didn't have to travel at peak times, do you think they would?
pies said:
The public transport system in this country has been desimated such that we now depend on the car.If the government invested a serious amount of money in ALL forms of public transport then maybe will can use the car less.Even the con charge in London has not reduced car use because the public transport is already over burdened
Can't disgree with you there. Doesn't mean that HGV operators should pay for it though.
pies said:
Nothing will ever happen because we have nobody in politics brave enough to try
or politically suicidal enough?
>> Edited by tvrgit on Sunday 27th February 21:06
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff