80 limit dead in the water?
Discussion
Mr Happy said:
The thing is, there's no 'substantiated' data on the ABDs site. It states "On parts of the German autobahn network, where there is a long tradition of having no mandatory maximum speed limit, 85th percentile speeds in 1996 were around 95 mph" then references its source as: "11. Data from the Bundesminister Fur Verkehr, Germany.". That could be anything, there's no way to back it up.
It also states that the "current 85th percentile speed on the Autobahn is 95mph" but then also states that the 85th percentile speed in 1996 is also 95mph. So in 17 years, the 85th percentile speed on the Autobahns remains unchanged, despite the advances in tyre, brake, engine and suspension technologies since then?
It also states (by way of a chart, with unsubstantiated data) that the mean speed in 1997 is 80mph, 16 years ago.
This is basic, basic stuff - I'm hardly doing deep analysis of their data in the way that the anti-lobbyist lot such as Brake would do.
Also, I don't doubt your personal experience of driving loads in Germany, that's not what I'm being picky about - it may be that *your* personal comfortable speed is around 200kph on unrestricted autobahn, I've never disputed that. It's the insinuation of *the* average, not *your* average speed and that 200kph is a very ordinary speed for people (which even the ABD disputes, being that they say 95mph which is 152kph). If the 85th percentile speed (that is, the speed at which 85% of people tend to drive) is 152kph, then I'd say a speed of 200kph would not be 'ordinary' for most.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see a limit that brings us in line with Europe, even just taking it up to 80, but getting it past the lobbyists is going to take more than just ranting "Germany Germany Germany" at them...
As an aside, would people be ready to accept the laws of Germany regarding the Autobahn if we had Autobahn-alike speed limits in the UK? Stuff like it being mandatory to stop at an accident? Risking up to 5 years clink for flashing your headlights repeatedly, a potential 3 month ban for driving closer than 30 metres to the car in front...
These are all things that we take for granted in the UK. Yes we have one of the lowest prescribed limits but it's hardly rigorously policed, and it could be said that for most people a speed of about 130-140kph is already the norm. A mandatory maximum of 80mph, with a 10%+2 leeway (if allowed, the cynic in me says that they'd probably give a 5mph tolerance, and anything over that would be big points/fines) would only make a realistic increase of about 2.5mph at the top end over what we already have.
I know what I'd prefer - I'd prefer to sit at the 80-85 most people do already, and one at which most trafpol wouldn't bat an eyelid at, rather than having the roads policed by robocop, just because the government have capitulated to the will of the people to give them a 'huge' 80mph limit.
Good post.It also states that the "current 85th percentile speed on the Autobahn is 95mph" but then also states that the 85th percentile speed in 1996 is also 95mph. So in 17 years, the 85th percentile speed on the Autobahns remains unchanged, despite the advances in tyre, brake, engine and suspension technologies since then?
It also states (by way of a chart, with unsubstantiated data) that the mean speed in 1997 is 80mph, 16 years ago.
This is basic, basic stuff - I'm hardly doing deep analysis of their data in the way that the anti-lobbyist lot such as Brake would do.
Also, I don't doubt your personal experience of driving loads in Germany, that's not what I'm being picky about - it may be that *your* personal comfortable speed is around 200kph on unrestricted autobahn, I've never disputed that. It's the insinuation of *the* average, not *your* average speed and that 200kph is a very ordinary speed for people (which even the ABD disputes, being that they say 95mph which is 152kph). If the 85th percentile speed (that is, the speed at which 85% of people tend to drive) is 152kph, then I'd say a speed of 200kph would not be 'ordinary' for most.
Don't get me wrong, I'd like to see a limit that brings us in line with Europe, even just taking it up to 80, but getting it past the lobbyists is going to take more than just ranting "Germany Germany Germany" at them...
As an aside, would people be ready to accept the laws of Germany regarding the Autobahn if we had Autobahn-alike speed limits in the UK? Stuff like it being mandatory to stop at an accident? Risking up to 5 years clink for flashing your headlights repeatedly, a potential 3 month ban for driving closer than 30 metres to the car in front...
These are all things that we take for granted in the UK. Yes we have one of the lowest prescribed limits but it's hardly rigorously policed, and it could be said that for most people a speed of about 130-140kph is already the norm. A mandatory maximum of 80mph, with a 10%+2 leeway (if allowed, the cynic in me says that they'd probably give a 5mph tolerance, and anything over that would be big points/fines) would only make a realistic increase of about 2.5mph at the top end over what we already have.
I know what I'd prefer - I'd prefer to sit at the 80-85 most people do already, and one at which most trafpol wouldn't bat an eyelid at, rather than having the roads policed by robocop, just because the government have capitulated to the will of the people to give them a 'huge' 80mph limit.
Edited by Mr Happy on Thursday 14th February 23:36
These limits would only have applied to managed motorways - you know, the ones with variable speed limits and lots and lots of speed cameras. Increasingly, those will be average speed cameras. The plan was that as well as being able to cut the speed limit when necessary, they would have been able to raise it when possible.
Managed motorways are going to be gradually rolled out over the network - automated speed enforcement will become pervasive. For those who think this is a victory for continuing to speed on motorways, the status quo is not going to last - the 80 limit was the carrot, and it has been taken away. The stick is still coming.
Managed motorways are going to be gradually rolled out over the network - automated speed enforcement will become pervasive. For those who think this is a victory for continuing to speed on motorways, the status quo is not going to last - the 80 limit was the carrot, and it has been taken away. The stick is still coming.
otolith said:
These limits would only have applied to managed motorways - you know, the ones with variable speed limits and lots and lots of speed cameras. Increasingly, those will be average speed cameras. The plan was that as well as being able to cut the speed limit when necessary, they would have been able to raise it when possible.
Managed motorways are going to be gradually rolled out over the network - automated speed enforcement will become pervasive. For those who think this is a victory for continuing to speed on motorways, the status quo is not going to last - the 80 limit was the carrot, and it has been taken away. The stick is still coming.
People will just take their plates off if they do that, not like their is anyone to stop you. What exactly are they going to do when half the motorway traffic has no plates.Managed motorways are going to be gradually rolled out over the network - automated speed enforcement will become pervasive. For those who think this is a victory for continuing to speed on motorways, the status quo is not going to last - the 80 limit was the carrot, and it has been taken away. The stick is still coming.
otolith said:
For those who think this is a victory for continuing to speed on motorways, the status quo is not going to last - the 80 limit was the carrot, and it has been taken away. The stick is still coming.
I've no doubt that you are correct in the longer term, although in a car without good cruise control, driving 100s of miles under SPECS-style cameras (as through some roadworks, with lots of bunching) could be mentally quite tiring.The British public seem to have no problem with living in a society with ever-increasing surveillance.
If the government can categorise private vehicles for emissions and taxation then surely they could categorise a vehicle for its motorway speed capability. Ie the company Prius (with roof mounted light bar) meanders and doesn't feel very planted at anything above 70 (dash which is 63mph GPS), in my BMW Z4M it's planted and has lots of reserve power, grip and braking... much more capable of operating at higher speed without fatiguing the driver.
At least if I was permitted to go faster my £460 yearly donation for covering <6k miles would have a benefit to me.
At least if I was permitted to go faster my £460 yearly donation for covering <6k miles would have a benefit to me.
Mr Happy said:
The thing is, there's no 'substantiated' data on the ABDs site. It states "On parts of the German autobahn network, where there is a long tradition of having no mandatory maximum speed limit, 85th percentile speeds in 1996 were around 95 mph" then references its source as: "11. Data from the Bundesminister Fur Verkehr, Germany.". That could be anything, there's no way to back it up.
You could go and visit the websites mentioned in the ABD report.Google search and translate can help here too.
Mr Happy said:
It also states that the "current 85th percentile speed on the Autobahn is 95mph" but then also states that the 85th percentile speed in 1996 is also 95mph. So in 17 years, the 85th percentile speed on the Autobahns remains unchanged, despite the advances in tyre, brake, engine and suspension technologies since then?
The ABD report was first published 2005. Some of the sums mentionedin it are dated 1999. Some of the data stops in 1997.
The report could do with an update. Some information can
be extrapolated to 2013.
Mr Happy said:
Also, I don't doubt your personal experience of driving loads in Germany, that's not what I'm being picky about - it may be that *your* personal comfortable speed is around 200kph on unrestricted autobahn, I've never disputed that.
Oh good.Mr Happy said:
It's the insinuation of *the* average, not *your* average speed and that 200kph is a very ordinary speed for people (which even the ABD disputes, being that they say 95mph which is 152kph).
You are getting the limited and unlimited bits mixed up. If some of my journey is limited to 120 kmh, and so your average there can only be about 100 - 110 kmh, and the all autobahn average is about 150 kmh, how much of my journey do I have to do at 200 kmh in the unlimited bits to reach an average of 150 kmh ?My comment was also based on personal observation. Folks tend to drive whatever they have flat out. That means little Corsas at 180 kph, Diesel Passats at 200 kph, V6 people carriers at 220 kph, M-B / Audi / BMW at 250 kph and Porsche and the rest faster.
Mr Happy said:
If the 85th percentile speed (that is, the speed at which 85% of people tend to drive) is 152kph, then I'd say a speed of 200kph would not be 'ordinary' for most.
Depends on the shape of the curve. There is a long tail. You could alsogo there and find out for yourself.
Mr Happy said:
These are all things that we take for granted in the UK. Yes we have one of the lowest prescribed limits but it's hardly rigorously policed, and it could be said that for most people a speed of about 130-140kph is already the norm. A mandatory maximum of 80mph, with a 10%+2 leeway (if allowed, the cynic in me says that they'd probably give a 5mph tolerance, and anything over that would be big points/fines) would only make a realistic increase of about 2.5mph at the top end over what we already have.
The UK limit of 70 mph doesn't seem to get enforced much in my experience until 90 mph.Upping the limit to 80 mph tends to indicate that enforcement might start at 100 mph.
A 5 mph tolerance doesn't look very realistic to me. Oh sure they might say new new limit
is strictly enforced, but they have limited resources and they can't ticket everyone.
Witness the M40 burbling along at 90 mph most days.
Mr Happy said:
I know what I'd prefer - I'd prefer to sit at the 80-85 most people do already, and one at which most trafpol wouldn't bat an eyelid at, rather than having the roads policed by robocop, just because the government have capitulated to the will of the people to give them a 'huge' 80mph limit.
If the 80 limit encourages folks to wake up and pay attention while theyare driving, possibly having some better lane discipline too, then that's a good thing.
Which websites would they be, then? The only referenced information in the ABD report is listed below:
As for the dates of the report, even you yourself admit 'it could do with an update' - why has it not been done? Could it be that the speeds on the Autobahn have reduced since the report was made? It wouldn't be too far out of the question to assume that, what with the rise of fuel prices and the economical woes we have at the minute. I'm not saying that as a fact - merely as a possibility.
Other posters have backed up my assertion that 200kph is not a common Autobahn speed, and have gone on to say that sitting at 200kph means you're very rarely overtaken. I'm not going to drill down to the n'th degree to support your argument, as again - it appears that you are referring to *your* average vs *the* average. Unless you can come up with substantiated data to say that across the entire Autobahn network, *the* average speed is 152kph, or even 200kph - then unfortunately I can do nothing but disbelieve this for the reasons stated above.
I also think it is rather fanciful (at best) to assume that no matter what the car, as soon as it hits the Autobahn it's driven flat out, by every single driver, at 10/10ths.
The suggestion of the UK limit not being enforced much is in agreement with my assertion that people are probably already driving at about 130-140kph (so 81-87.5mph), so why does this need to be increased if it's already not being enforced as stringently as it could be? There is no reason to assume that the threshold for police enforcement would rise to 100mph due to this. The government have said in their proposal that "Some stretches of motorway would be likely to retain a 70 mph limit because of their engineering and environment.". You could bet your last penny that this will mean that Managed Motorways will support an 80mph limit, everything else will remain at 70. It's also entirely coincidental that Managed Motorways have been installed with HADECS cameras.
If this is the case, and the HADECS are set at 10%+2mph as per ACPO guidelines, it is fair to assume that it would only lead to a increase in 'real' speed by about 2.5mph over that which most folk drive at now. As some motorways have a L3 and L4 that will run well into the 90mph area, it would end up slowing them down.
I know that currently Managed Motorways only use the VSL/HADECS for enforcing a reduced speed from the NSL, however there's nothing to stop the VSL being set to 80mph, the signs being switched on and the cameras being live for the entire 80mph stretch. This would require zero police involvement with zero chance of leniency if caught (therefore the insinuation of the roads being policed by robocop is correct). It would simply churn out ticket, after ticket, after ticket for those who think "oh, well I used to do 85, so now I'll do 95-100".
Why would an 80 limit encourage better lane discipline and make people more aware of their driving? I don't think the threat of automated (camera) prosecution for exceeding the speed limit will do anything of the sort, personally. It would just mean that people will be sitting at 80 in the outside lane instead of 70.
The only thing that would encourage better lane discipline would be to have real, living, breathing BiB prosecute those who show an inability to follow the rules of the road. Educating them wouldn't work, as poor lane discipline has become too endemic now. However, this would lead to more police on the roads, with the side effect of a greater chance of prosecution for exceeding the speed limit (at whatever it is set at).
ABD Report said:
REFERENCES
1. Data from the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
2. Transport Statistics Great Britain.
3. RRL Special Report No.6, HMSO, 1967.
4. Autocar, 13th July 1967.
5. Autocar, 12th June 1965.
6. Autocar, 10th January 2001.
7. Circular Roads 1/80 (The setting of local speed limits), Department of Transport, 1980, Annex E.
8. Project Report PR58: Speeds, speed limits and accidents. Transport Research Laboratory, 1994.
9. Circular Roads 1/93 (The setting of local speed limits), Department of Transport, 1993.
10. Effect of speed limits on speed and safety: a review. Chester G Wilmot & Mandar Khanal, Transport Review, October 1999.
11. Data from the Bundesminister Fur Verkehr, Germany.
12. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1998.
13. "Speed Doesn't Kill: The Repeal of the 55 mph Speed Limit." Stephen Moore, Director of Fiscal Policy Studies, Cato Institute. 1999.
14. Air quality and traffic management. DETR, December 1997.
15. DETR Transport Air Quality Seminar, 24th February 1999.
16. Understanding the Impacts of Speed. Richard E Allsop. PACTS Conference — Speed: Whose Business Is It? February 1999.
17. Factbook "Ground-Level Ozone". BMW AG, 1998.
18. National Environmental Technology Centre. Data provided by DETR.
19. The Distribution of CO2 between Atmosphere, Hydrosphere, and Lithosphere; Minimal Influence from Anthropogenic CO2 on the Global Greenhouse Effect. Tom V. Segalstad. University of Oslo. The Global Warming Debate: European Science and Environment Forum. 1996.
20. Transport 2010 — The 10 Year Plan. DETR. July 2000.
21. Transport Economics Note. Values of time and vehicle operating costs. DETR. March 2001.
That is their entire reference list for the whole report. Not one is referenced as a hyperlink, and some of it (such as the only part that is mentioned in reference to 85th percentile Autobahn speeds) isn't even dated. That cannot be taken as a substantiated set of data, no matter what anybody says.1. Data from the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
2. Transport Statistics Great Britain.
3. RRL Special Report No.6, HMSO, 1967.
4. Autocar, 13th July 1967.
5. Autocar, 12th June 1965.
6. Autocar, 10th January 2001.
7. Circular Roads 1/80 (The setting of local speed limits), Department of Transport, 1980, Annex E.
8. Project Report PR58: Speeds, speed limits and accidents. Transport Research Laboratory, 1994.
9. Circular Roads 1/93 (The setting of local speed limits), Department of Transport, 1993.
10. Effect of speed limits on speed and safety: a review. Chester G Wilmot & Mandar Khanal, Transport Review, October 1999.
11. Data from the Bundesminister Fur Verkehr, Germany.
12. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1998.
13. "Speed Doesn't Kill: The Repeal of the 55 mph Speed Limit." Stephen Moore, Director of Fiscal Policy Studies, Cato Institute. 1999.
14. Air quality and traffic management. DETR, December 1997.
15. DETR Transport Air Quality Seminar, 24th February 1999.
16. Understanding the Impacts of Speed. Richard E Allsop. PACTS Conference — Speed: Whose Business Is It? February 1999.
17. Factbook "Ground-Level Ozone". BMW AG, 1998.
18. National Environmental Technology Centre. Data provided by DETR.
19. The Distribution of CO2 between Atmosphere, Hydrosphere, and Lithosphere; Minimal Influence from Anthropogenic CO2 on the Global Greenhouse Effect. Tom V. Segalstad. University of Oslo. The Global Warming Debate: European Science and Environment Forum. 1996.
20. Transport 2010 — The 10 Year Plan. DETR. July 2000.
21. Transport Economics Note. Values of time and vehicle operating costs. DETR. March 2001.
As for the dates of the report, even you yourself admit 'it could do with an update' - why has it not been done? Could it be that the speeds on the Autobahn have reduced since the report was made? It wouldn't be too far out of the question to assume that, what with the rise of fuel prices and the economical woes we have at the minute. I'm not saying that as a fact - merely as a possibility.
Other posters have backed up my assertion that 200kph is not a common Autobahn speed, and have gone on to say that sitting at 200kph means you're very rarely overtaken. I'm not going to drill down to the n'th degree to support your argument, as again - it appears that you are referring to *your* average vs *the* average. Unless you can come up with substantiated data to say that across the entire Autobahn network, *the* average speed is 152kph, or even 200kph - then unfortunately I can do nothing but disbelieve this for the reasons stated above.
I also think it is rather fanciful (at best) to assume that no matter what the car, as soon as it hits the Autobahn it's driven flat out, by every single driver, at 10/10ths.
The suggestion of the UK limit not being enforced much is in agreement with my assertion that people are probably already driving at about 130-140kph (so 81-87.5mph), so why does this need to be increased if it's already not being enforced as stringently as it could be? There is no reason to assume that the threshold for police enforcement would rise to 100mph due to this. The government have said in their proposal that "Some stretches of motorway would be likely to retain a 70 mph limit because of their engineering and environment.". You could bet your last penny that this will mean that Managed Motorways will support an 80mph limit, everything else will remain at 70. It's also entirely coincidental that Managed Motorways have been installed with HADECS cameras.
If this is the case, and the HADECS are set at 10%+2mph as per ACPO guidelines, it is fair to assume that it would only lead to a increase in 'real' speed by about 2.5mph over that which most folk drive at now. As some motorways have a L3 and L4 that will run well into the 90mph area, it would end up slowing them down.
I know that currently Managed Motorways only use the VSL/HADECS for enforcing a reduced speed from the NSL, however there's nothing to stop the VSL being set to 80mph, the signs being switched on and the cameras being live for the entire 80mph stretch. This would require zero police involvement with zero chance of leniency if caught (therefore the insinuation of the roads being policed by robocop is correct). It would simply churn out ticket, after ticket, after ticket for those who think "oh, well I used to do 85, so now I'll do 95-100".
Why would an 80 limit encourage better lane discipline and make people more aware of their driving? I don't think the threat of automated (camera) prosecution for exceeding the speed limit will do anything of the sort, personally. It would just mean that people will be sitting at 80 in the outside lane instead of 70.
The only thing that would encourage better lane discipline would be to have real, living, breathing BiB prosecute those who show an inability to follow the rules of the road. Educating them wouldn't work, as poor lane discipline has become too endemic now. However, this would lead to more police on the roads, with the side effect of a greater chance of prosecution for exceeding the speed limit (at whatever it is set at).
Edited by Mr Happy on Saturday 16th February 15:22
Mr Happy said:
The suggestion of the UK limit not being enforced much is in agreement with my assertion that people are probably already driving at about 130-140kph (so 81-87.5mph), so why does this need to be increased if it's already not being enforced as stringently as it could be?
So that the rest of us can travel at up to 80 without fear of prosecution.If many people are already driving at 80 odd without problems it's a bit difficult to argue that if we hit 75 carnage will necessarily ensue.
Dr Jekyll said:
Mr Happy said:
The suggestion of the UK limit not being enforced much is in agreement with my assertion that people are probably already driving at about 130-140kph (so 81-87.5mph), so why does this need to be increased if it's already not being enforced as stringently as it could be?
So that the rest of us can travel at up to 80 without fear of prosecution.If many people are already driving at 80 odd without problems it's a bit difficult to argue that if we hit 75 carnage will necessarily ensue.
(It's also worth mentioning that you can guarantee the stats take into account stuff like HGVs and other, limited motorway traffic - as there are always lies, damn lies and statistics)
It's fair to say that you already can drive at up to 79mph without fear of prosecution (that being ACPO's 10%+2 guideline threshold).
Edited by Mr Happy on Saturday 16th February 15:31
Mr Happy said:
It's fair to say that you already can drive at up to 79mph without fear of prosecution (that being ACPO's 10%+2 guideline threshold).
No it isn't. The guideline is the highest speed they aren't necessarily supposed to prosecute for, not the lowest they can prosecute for. Dr Jekyll said:
Mr Happy said:
It's fair to say that you already can drive at up to 79mph without fear of prosecution (that being ACPO's 10%+2 guideline threshold).
No it isn't. The guideline is the highest speed they aren't necessarily supposed to prosecute for, not the lowest they can prosecute for. If you want to drive at 70 as a hard limit, then feel free to do so. If you also think that the hard limit being increased to 80 would benefit you, then feel free to campaign for it.
That's not the issue I'm talking about though. I'm saying that for those of us who already exceed the 70 limit with no ill effects, an 80 limit could bring more negatives than positives. In your personal situation, it would probably be the reverse.
Mr Happy said:
That's not the issue I'm talking about though. I'm saying that for those of us who already exceed the 70 limit with no ill effects, an 80 limit could bring more negatives than positives. In your personal situation, it would probably be the reverse.
This is something I cannot understand. If you exceed 70 without ill effects, why shouldn't I be allowed to do the same?If you exceed 70 you obviously believe that in certain circumstances >70 is an appropriate speed, so how can 70 simultaneously be the maximum appropriate speed in all circumstances?
Dr Jekyll said:
Mr Happy said:
That's not the issue I'm talking about though. I'm saying that for those of us who already exceed the 70 limit with no ill effects, an 80 limit could bring more negatives than positives. In your personal situation, it would probably be the reverse.
This is something I cannot understand. If you exceed 70 without ill effects, why shouldn't I be allowed to do the same?If you exceed 70 you obviously believe that in certain circumstances >70 is an appropriate speed, so how can 70 simultaneously be the maximum appropriate speed in all circumstances?
The point is, I'm *not* allowed to exceed 70, I may however *choose* to do so.
You *choose* to drive by the rules of the road, which is perfectly fine and not a negative in any way, shape or form.
It just so happens that in my experience of possibly breaking those rules, I may have experienced no ill effects in doing so. That's not to say there aren't any, just that I may not have happened upon any of them.
I really don't understand your line of argument on this one. On the one hand you're saying "other people drive at over 70, but it's illegal so I won't", then you say "but I really really want to because they're not experiencing any problems doing so". You could turn that into "other people do smack, but it's illegal so I won't, however they're not experiencing any ill effects of it so I think I'll campaign for smack to be legalised, so I can have a go too".
Edited by Mr Happy on Saturday 16th February 15:51
Mr Happy said:
I really don't understand your line of argument on this one. On the one hand you're saying "other people drive at over 70, but it's illegal so I won't", then you say "but I really really want to because they're not experiencing any problems doing so". You could turn that into "other people do smack, but it's illegal so I won't, however they're not experiencing any ill effects of it so I think I'll campaign for smack to be legalised, so I can have a go too".
The onus of proof should be on those who want a restriction, not those who don't.The reason I don't do 80 is not because it's illegal, but because I don't want to be prosecuted. If other people are doing 80 without safety issues it's difficult to see the justification in making anything > 70 illegal.
Nigel Worc's said:
I don't know what motorways people on here use, but I frequently use the M's 5,42,6,1,54,50,4,56,62 ......... at 80 mph, you won't be keeping up with the traffic in lane 3 !
Except in areas people think they are being watched, variable limits, roadworks etc.
I tend to do an indicated 100ish when conditions allow (most of the time), mostly M4,1,25,42,18,62, dropping to 85 for any marked cars. Plenty of people doing a similar speed, not many straying much beyond but a few. Yet to receive any attention for it.Except in areas people think they are being watched, variable limits, roadworks etc.
Dr Jekyll said:
If other people are doing 80 without safety issues it's difficult to see the justification in making anything > 70 illegal.
Why ?The speed limit doesn't define where safe becomes unsafe. By it's very nature it would need to be conservatively set & that will mean that there are lots of times where it will possible to go faster than 70 without safety issues.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff