I was going to mention dashcams. Anyone got one? I've lost count of the number of near misses I've had recently, including twice nearly being sideswiped on the M25 in the space of 2 days last weekend. I know if I do end up having an accident, it certainly wont be down to me.
Brought one about a month ago, went for a Nextbase 212 for under £60. Well worth it, if you ever have a crash and it's not your fault.
I think the speed limit on motorways is too low. I would change the system so that where there are three lanes, the inner lane limit is 65mph and lorries are not allowed outside of this lane, the middle lane is 75 mph and the outer 95 mph. There would have to be zero tolerance of drivers tailgating and going faster in these lanes. I would also on four lanes, have a lower lane limit of 55mph, and this give lorries the opportunity to overtake slower ones. Limited stretches of four lanes could be introduced for this purpose on three lane motorways.
I would also introduce the chevron distance system the manage the distance between cars. One of the things you need to do on motorways with high volumes of traffic is undertsand the maths of jams. The solution is to avoid situations were cars have to brake needlessy, beacuse of the driving style of the driver. I think the changes above would change the culture and allow more cars to get to they want to go more quickly.
There is no risk to pedestarians on motorways and with the improvements in modern cars, there is no reason to have a speed limit of 70mph which everybody ignores! But speeds in areas where there are people and children who may have limited road sense need to be kept low. Whether it is annoying for us drivers or not!
I think the speed limit on motorways is too low. I would change the system so that where there are three lanes, the inner lane limit is 65mph and lorries are not allowed outside of this lane, the middle lane is 75 mph and the outer 95 mph. There would have to be zero tolerance of drivers tailgating and going faster in these lanes. I would also on four lanes, have a lower lane limit of 55mph, and this give lorries the opportunity to overtake slower ones. Limited stretches of four lanes could be introduced for this purpose on three lane motorways.
I would also introduce the chevron distance system the manage the distance between cars. One of the things you need to do on motorways with high volumes of traffic is undertsand the maths of jams. The solution is to avoid situations were cars have to brake needlessy, beacuse of the driving style of the driver. I think the changes above would change the culture and allow more cars to get to they want to go more quickly.
There is no risk to pedestarians on motorways and with the improvements in modern cars, there is no reason to have a speed limit of 70mph which everybody ignores! But speeds in areas where there are people and children who may have limited road sense need to be kept low. Whether it is annoying for us drivers or not!
I'm not sure I like the idea of different speeds for different lanes but in any event it would take potential career ending courage to advocate a faster speed because it is only a matter of time before an incident occurs that someone will claim would have been different if the sped limit was still at 70mph.
Speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does.... speed cameras are just a stealth tax, nothing more nothing less. What are/will contribute to better driving is the increased use of dash cams. In a lot of RTA's evidence is gathered from the dash cam and drivers are being prosecuted for careless and even reckless driving. I believe it is mandatory in Russia to have a dash cam, it should be the same in the UK.
One way to avoid speeding fines and points is to get a number plate that has a typo in it, I've got one on my Honda Fireblade and haven't been nicked for years.... ;o)
If we ignore, for a second, that speeding is bad driving, sometimes an accident can be caused with no fault of the driver. However, if a small child breaks free from it's mum's hand and runs into the road and a driver (at no fault at all) hits that child the child's fate is then determined by the speed of the car, which determines the force of the impact. Camera or no camera the speed limits are set, in the majority of instances, for safety reasons. Anyone caught on a camera is, maybe, lucky that it was a camera that stopped them not the sickening sound of a child's bones breaking.
Also as the speeding fines end up in the same place as increased taxation, and everyone on here seems to think that we need to be spending more money as a country, isn't this a great idea? Encourage people to not break the law, make the roads safer, and raise more money for those public services and public sector workers. It's a win, win, win!
Inappropriate speeding is bad driving. Speed limits outside schools should be 20MPH max, and anyone who breaks them should get a months ban,.
As I said speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does. Cameras are just a tax, IMHO Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. Slowing people down does not make the roads safer, myopic bloody drivers who dont have a clue cause accidents, but THEY dont get fined for causing near miss after near miss, the working mum who has just dropped her kids at school, got back on a duel carriageway and needs to get to work on time, so she doesn't lose her job and goes a few mph over the limit are the ones who get fined. RE bad driving I bet most drivers dont even know if their cars are front or rear wheel drive, I see so many drivers braking mid corner in the wet and then they wonder why they understeer, its actually worrying the amount of idiots driving a ton of metal on the road who just have no idea. Speeding drivers are the least of our worries, but the authorities run campaigns that target speeding drivers and so justify the use of cameras to the uneducated.
They ran a trial in Texas a couple of years ago, they increased the limit for 70 to 80 on a highway and monitored the results.
The average max speed increase by 1mph from 84mph to 85mpg. The average low speed didn't change, meaning therefore the average maximum speed differential increased by 1mph. It's speed differential that is the biggest problem on motorways. There's a reason the highway code says to try and match the flow of traffic and to accelerate up that speed on the slip road as much as possible.
What it did show is that, apart from the odd idiot, most people who want to go fast are comfortable at mid to low 80s, and will drive at that speed regardless of actual limit.
Put railings up along any stretch of road where the limit is more than 30.
Make it more difficult for break-away children to run in the road, rather than put total responsibility and liability on the driver.
If someone is hit by a car at 40 mph they are 90% likely to be killed. If someone is hit by a car at 30 mph they are 50% likely to be killed. If someone is hit by a car at 20 mph they are 10% likely to be killed.
Railings where it is more than 20mph might be more appropriate.
Whatever the speed where railings are fitted, your plan will however be a tad expensive to achieve!
Transport in the United Kingdom is facilitated with road, air, rail, and water networks. A radial road network totals 29,145 miles (46,904 km) of main roads, 2,173 miles (3,497 km) of motorways and 213,750 miles (344,000 km) of paved roads.
They ran a trial in Texas a couple of years ago, they increased the limit for 70 to 80 on a highway and monitored the results.
The average max speed increase by 1mph from 84mph to 85mpg. The average low speed didn't change, meaning therefore the average maximum speed differential increased by 1mph. It's speed differential that is the biggest problem on motorways. There's a reason the highway code says to try and match the flow of traffic and to accelerate up that speed on the slip road as much as possible.
What it did show is that, apart from the odd idiot, most people who want to go fast are comfortable at mid to low 80s, and will drive at that speed regardless of actual limit.
It also means that the majority of vehicles driving on those roads are suddenly obeying rather than breaking the law, so why criminalise them in the first place if it makes no actual difference?
Put railings up along any stretch of road where the limit is more than 30.
Make it more difficult for break-away children to run in the road, rather than put total responsibility and liability on the driver.
If someone is hit by a car at 40 mph they are 90% likely to be killed. If someone is hit by a car at 30 mph they are 50% likely to be killed. If someone is hit by a car at 20 mph they are 10% likely to be killed.
Railings where it is more than 20mph might be more appropriate.
Whatever the speed where railings are fitted, your plan will however be a tad expensive to achieve!
Transport in the United Kingdom is facilitated with road, air, rail, and water networks. A radial road network totals 29,145 miles (46,904 km) of main roads, 2,173 miles (3,497 km) of motorways and 213,750 miles (344,000 km) of paved roads.
Easier to build the USA/Mexican wall.
Corporation tax can pay for everything. Just hike it to daft levels and we'll have those railings fully costed in no time
Speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does.... speed cameras are just a stealth tax, nothing more nothing less. What are/will contribute to better driving is the increased use of dash cams. In a lot of RTA's evidence is gathered from the dash cam and drivers are being prosecuted for careless and even reckless driving. I believe it is mandatory in Russia to have a dash cam, it should be the same in the UK.
One way to avoid speeding fines and points is to get a number plate that has a typo in it, I've got one on my Honda Fireblade and haven't been nicked for years.... ;o)
If we ignore, for a second, that speeding is bad driving, sometimes an accident can be caused with no fault of the driver. However, if a small child breaks free from it's mum's hand and runs into the road and a driver (at no fault at all) hits that child the child's fate is then determined by the speed of the car, which determines the force of the impact. Camera or no camera the speed limits are set, in the majority of instances, for safety reasons. Anyone caught on a camera is, maybe, lucky that it was a camera that stopped them not the sickening sound of a child's bones breaking.
Also as the speeding fines end up in the same place as increased taxation, and everyone on here seems to think that we need to be spending more money as a country, isn't this a great idea? Encourage people to not break the law, make the roads safer, and raise more money for those public services and public sector workers. It's a win, win, win!
Inappropriate speeding is bad driving. Speed limits outside schools should be 20MPH max, and anyone who breaks them should get a months ban,. As I said speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does. Cameras are just a tax, IMHO Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. Slowing people down does not make the roads safer, myopic bloody drivers who dont have a clue cause accidents, but THEY dont get fined for causing near miss after near miss, the working mum who has just dropped her kids at school, got back on a duel carriageway and needs to get to work on time, so she doesn't lose her job and goes a few mph over the limit are the ones who get fined. RE bad driving I bet most drivers dont even know if their cars are front or rear wheel drive, I see so many drivers braking mid corner in the wet and then they wonder why they understeer, its actually worrying the amount of idiots driving a ton of metal on the road who just have no idea. Speeding drivers are the least of our worries, but the authorities run campaigns that target speeding drivers and so justify the use of cameras to the uneducated.
Did you actually read my post?
Accidents can happen without the fault of anyone. That's why they are called accidents. It is the speed that determines the outcome. However, the speed can also determine if a collision is avoided or not. If one is driving at a higher speed then it increases the stopping distances. There are lots of places where it is safer to drive more slowly. Anyone that believes that speed limits are only put in place to catch people speeding has failed to understand or appreciate that someone else has gone to the trouble to of assessing the road and decided on a safe, reasonable speed limit.
It is ironic that you ridicule other drivers that don't understand the mechanics that you obviously do, yet suggest that those that set speed limits know less about them than you do.
Come back to me and tell me that speeding doesn't cause accidents when you've taken a call at 4am and had to tell your wife that her teenage brother has been killed in a collision that wouldn't have been fatal had the car being driving slower!
Speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does.... speed cameras are just a stealth tax, nothing more nothing less. What are/will contribute to better driving is the increased use of dash cams. In a lot of RTA's evidence is gathered from the dash cam and drivers are being prosecuted for careless and even reckless driving. I believe it is mandatory in Russia to have a dash cam, it should be the same in the UK.
One way to avoid speeding fines and points is to get a number plate that has a typo in it, I've got one on my Honda Fireblade and haven't been nicked for years.... ;o)
If we ignore, for a second, that speeding is bad driving, sometimes an accident can be caused with no fault of the driver. However, if a small child breaks free from it's mum's hand and runs into the road and a driver (at no fault at all) hits that child the child's fate is then determined by the speed of the car, which determines the force of the impact. Camera or no camera the speed limits are set, in the majority of instances, for safety reasons. Anyone caught on a camera is, maybe, lucky that it was a camera that stopped them not the sickening sound of a child's bones breaking.
Also as the speeding fines end up in the same place as increased taxation, and everyone on here seems to think that we need to be spending more money as a country, isn't this a great idea? Encourage people to not break the law, make the roads safer, and raise more money for those public services and public sector workers. It's a win, win, win!
Inappropriate speeding is bad driving. Speed limits outside schools should be 20MPH max, and anyone who breaks them should get a months ban,.
As I said speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does. Cameras are just a tax, IMHO Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. Slowing people down does not make the roads safer, myopic bloody drivers who dont have a clue cause accidents, but THEY dont get fined for causing near miss after near miss, the working mum who has just dropped her kids at school, got back on a duel carriageway and needs to get to work on time, so she doesn't lose her job and goes a few mph over the limit are the ones who get fined. RE bad driving I bet most drivers dont even know if their cars are front or rear wheel drive, I see so many drivers braking mid corner in the wet and then they wonder why they understeer, its actually worrying the amount of idiots driving a ton of metal on the road who just have no idea. Speeding drivers are the least of our worries, but the authorities run campaigns that target speeding drivers and so justify the use of cameras to the uneducated.
Speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does.... speed cameras are just a stealth tax, nothing more nothing less. What are/will contribute to better driving is the increased use of dash cams. In a lot of RTA's evidence is gathered from the dash cam and drivers are being prosecuted for careless and even reckless driving. I believe it is mandatory in Russia to have a dash cam, it should be the same in the UK.
One way to avoid speeding fines and points is to get a number plate that has a typo in it, I've got one on my Honda Fireblade and haven't been nicked for years.... ;o)
I Speed limits outside schools should be 20MPH max, and anyone who breaks them should get a months ban,.
I think this is a good idea. BUT it should only be done when children are in the vicinity. They do this well in (some) States in the US. With variable speed signs and warning lighting when kids are entering and existing schools. But the speed limit reverts to its normal level at night time or when kids are in class on on school holidays.
You just know it would be introduced over here in a badly thought out, cheap, half-cock version that would be brought into disrepute.
One of the problems about kids being wrapped in cotton wool, of course, is they never develop good spacial awareness and will grow up to be the truly appalling drivers of the future. Self-driving cars will be the only thing saving us from carnage.
Speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does.... speed cameras are just a stealth tax, nothing more nothing less. What are/will contribute to better driving is the increased use of dash cams. In a lot of RTA's evidence is gathered from the dash cam and drivers are being prosecuted for careless and even reckless driving. I believe it is mandatory in Russia to have a dash cam, it should be the same in the UK.
One way to avoid speeding fines and points is to get a number plate that has a typo in it, I've got one on my Honda Fireblade and haven't been nicked for years.... ;o)
If we ignore, for a second, that speeding is bad driving, sometimes an accident can be caused with no fault of the driver. However, if a small child breaks free from it's mum's hand and runs into the road and a driver (at no fault at all) hits that child the child's fate is then determined by the speed of the car, which determines the force of the impact. Camera or no camera the speed limits are set, in the majority of instances, for safety reasons. Anyone caught on a camera is, maybe, lucky that it was a camera that stopped them not the sickening sound of a child's bones breaking.
Also as the speeding fines end up in the same place as increased taxation, and everyone on here seems to think that we need to be spending more money as a country, isn't this a great idea? Encourage people to not break the law, make the roads safer, and raise more money for those public services and public sector workers. It's a win, win, win!
Inappropriate speeding is bad driving. Speed limits outside schools should be 20MPH max, and anyone who breaks them should get a months ban,. As I said speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does. Cameras are just a tax, IMHO Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive. Slowing people down does not make the roads safer, myopic bloody drivers who dont have a clue cause accidents, but THEY dont get fined for causing near miss after near miss, the working mum who has just dropped her kids at school, got back on a duel carriageway and needs to get to work on time, so she doesn't lose her job and goes a few mph over the limit are the ones who get fined. RE bad driving I bet most drivers dont even know if their cars are front or rear wheel drive, I see so many drivers braking mid corner in the wet and then they wonder why they understeer, its actually worrying the amount of idiots driving a ton of metal on the road who just have no idea. Speeding drivers are the least of our worries, but the authorities run campaigns that target speeding drivers and so justify the use of cameras to the uneducated.
Did you actually read my post?
Accidents can happen without the fault of anyone. That's why they are called accidents. It is the speed that determines the outcome. However, the speed can also determine if a collision is avoided or not. If one is driving at a higher speed then it increases the stopping distances. There are lots of places where it is safer to drive more slowly. Anyone that believes that speed limits are only put in place to catch people speeding has failed to understand or appreciate that someone else has gone to the trouble to of assessing the road and decided on a safe, reasonable speed limit.
It is ironic that you ridicule other drivers that don't understand the mechanics that you obviously do, yet suggest that those that set speed limits know less about them than you do.
Come back to me and tell me that speeding doesn't cause accidents when you've taken a call at 4am and had to tell your wife that her teenage brother has been killed in a collision that wouldn't have been fatal had the car being driving slower!
Wind it in mate and dont make the debate about personal accounts, as sad as they are, it clouds judgement, however I will argue that speed didn't kill you wifes brother inappropriate speed did, and ultimately that is bad driving. I used to be a firefighter and have attended many RTA's, some fatal, I held the back of a fellas head together while he died after he was thrown out his car after he rolled it, he was not wearing a seat belt, we was not speeding, he clipped a curb while changing a CD, we can all give accounts, so lets keep it objective. A road accident involving two or more vehicles and a vehicle and person is always someones fault it has to be, even if a tyre blew it is someones fault (the driver for not checking the tyres or the person who fitted the tyre) 99.9 percent of accidents are avoidable. It is not ironic at all, but most people who drive cars dont have a bloody clue, you may not like that, but they dont. When you passed your test you were taught to pass a test, not how to drive a bloody car, then I bet you did what most new drivers did back then, went on a motorway for the first time and like many new drivers, crapped yer pants, because you had no training on these types of roads. Ive been ridding bikes and driving cars for over 35 years and am an advanced motorist in both vehicles, I also learned how to drive a fire truck, with 400 gallons of water in it, I also do plenty of track days on my bike, have attended the Superbike school. so I understand machine control, so yer I know a bit. Its kept me alive all these years. And again, the authorities dont give a shit if you or me die in a accident, why would they? But they do care about the stealth tax. The technology exists whereby they could insist that all vehicles are fitted with a limiter for any given stretch of road, it works on GPS, so IF they really wanted us to slow down they could insist that these limiters were fitted, BUT then they would get no fines in the coffers. Finally and somewhat tongue in cheek, the greatest safety device that could be fitted to a car is a ten inch steel spike fitted to the centre of every car steering wheel....think about it!
I drive for a living, 700-1000 miles per week, statistically, most of the bell ends on the road I see daily are BMW drivers, closely followed by youngsters in souped up VW's, Saxos and Corsas
No regard for other road users, speed limits, indicators apparently are optional in most BMW's. I have to keep my cool as it's my job, but as I drive a large long wheel based van, they can't bully me. My favourite hobby is keeping as close as possible to the car in front of me as I join a slip road exit (specifically J9 M25) as the ignorant entitled twats try to cut in at the last second rather than queue like the rest of us, stare straight ahead laughing as they go ballistic tooting their horns that such peasants won't let them in.
I drive for a living, 700-1000 miles per week, statistically, most of the bell ends on the road I see daily are BMW drivers, closely followed by youngsters in souped up VW's, Saxos and Corsas
No regard for other road users, speed limits, indicators apparently are optional in most BMW's. I have to keep my cool as it's my job, but as I drive a large long wheel based van, they can't bully me. My favourite hobby is keeping as close as possible to the car in front of me as I join a slip road exit (specifically J9 M25) as the ignorant entitled twats try to cut in at the last second rather than queue like the rest of us, stare straight ahead laughing as they go ballistic tooting their horns that such peasants won't let them in.
I drive for a living, 700-1000 miles per week, statistically, most of the bell ends on the road I see daily are BMW drivers, closely followed by youngsters in souped up VW's, Saxos and Corsas
No regard for other road users, speed limits, indicators apparently are optional in most BMW's. I have to keep my cool as it's my job, but as I drive a large long wheel based van, they can't bully me. My favourite hobby is keeping as close as possible to the car in front of me as I join a slip road exit (specifically J9 M25) as the ignorant entitled twats try to cut in at the last second rather than queue like the rest of us, stare straight ahead laughing as they go ballistic tooting their horns that such peasants won't let them in.
I drive for a living, 700-1000 miles per week, statistically, most of the bell ends on the road I see daily are BMW drivers, closely followed by youngsters in souped up VW's, Saxos and Corsas
No regard for other road users, speed limits, indicators apparently are optional in most BMW's. I have to keep my cool as it's my job, but as I drive a large long wheel based van, they can't bully me. My favourite hobby is keeping as close as possible to the car in front of me as I join a slip road exit (specifically J9 M25) as the ignorant entitled twats try to cut in at the last second rather than queue like the rest of us, stare straight ahead laughing as they go ballistic tooting their horns that such peasants won't let them in.
I drive for a living, 700-1000 miles per week, statistically, most of the bell ends on the road I see daily are BMW drivers, closely followed by youngsters in souped up VW's, Saxos and Corsas
No regard for other road users, speed limits, indicators apparently are optional in most BMW's. I have to keep my cool as it's my job, but as I drive a large long wheel based van, they can't bully me. My favourite hobby is keeping as close as possible to the car in front of me as I join a slip road exit (specifically J9 M25) as the ignorant entitled twats try to cut in at the last second rather than queue like the rest of us, stare straight ahead laughing as they go ballistic tooting their horns that such peasants won't let them in.
I drive for a living, 700-1000 miles per week, statistically, most of the bell ends on the road I see daily are BMW drivers, closely followed by youngsters in souped up VW's, Saxos and Corsas
No regard for other road users, speed limits, indicators apparently are optional in most BMW's. I have to keep my cool as it's my job, but as I drive a large long wheel based van, they can't bully me. My favourite hobby is keeping as close as possible to the car in front of me as I join a slip road exit (specifically J9 M25) as the ignorant entitled twats try to cut in at the last second rather than queue like the rest of us, stare straight ahead laughing as they go ballistic tooting their horns that such peasants won't let them in.
Is it a white van you drive?
My BMW is black and the indicators work fine
According to your chauffeur
He assures me he uses them and I have no reason to disbelieve him.
Sort of on a similar subject, I got done around a month ago by Neighbourhood watch/police officers. I say got done loosely, basically i got a letter advising of 2 times i have driven past them and gone over the 30mph (changes from 50mph). Letter one, has two offences and says this would normally warrant a penalty/fine or a speed awareness, although this was just a caution/advisory. for the record i went 41 & 35. Letter two, i received the weekend (2nd one within the month) , this time with 3 incidents they have got me over the limit. 41/34/40 approx. This then goes on to say they will be passing details to the police and will stay on their records for 12 months and the police may choose to suprise me sometime by catching me, effectively.
Ok i get i am repeating the offence alot here, but my question is more to how much notice i should really take? These people have no authority and no photos its just a speedometer which they will do the same road about 6 months of the year but never in the past have i had a letter. I have been using this road on the way to and back from work for 5 years +
I know it will be easy enough to slow down in future and stick to the limits, but just generally intrigued whats behind this? maybe just getting people to slow down in future is all they need?
Sort of on a similar subject, I got done around a month ago by Neighbourhood watch/police officers. I say got done loosely, basically i got a letter advising of 2 times i have driven past them and gone over the 30mph (changes from 50mph). Letter one, has two offences and says this would normally warrant a penalty/fine or a speed awareness, although this was just a caution/advisory. for the record i went 41 & 35. Letter two, i received the weekend (2nd one within the month) , this time with 3 incidents they have got me over the limit. 41/34/40 approx. This then goes on to say they will be passing details to the police and will stay on their records for 12 months and the police may choose to suprise me sometime by catching me, effectively.
Ok i get i am repeating the offence alot here, but my question is more to how much notice i should really take? These people have no authority and no photos its just a speedometer which they will do the same road about 6 months of the year but never in the past have i had a letter. I have been using this road on the way to and back from work for 5 years +
I know it will be easy enough to slow down in future and stick to the limits, but just generally intrigued whats behind this? maybe just getting people to slow down in future is all they need?
Not me, but a friend of mine was stopped by a normal police car after he shot past them.
They told him he was speeding to which he replied that he wasnt.
they had no recording or any "proof" that he was so they couldnt do anything.
I'm sure it is technically possible to disable a smart phone when in a car that is not automatically connected to a hands-free system. That would solve a lot of Problems, or disabling the text function, etc.
I work for Mercedes and everyone of our models has a bluetooth hands-free kit as standard. It takes about 30 seconds to connect the phone intially and after that it connects automatically every time you get in the car. The number of people I see with a phone glued to their ear is shockingly high.
I'm sure it is technically possible to disable a smart phone when in a car that is not automatically connected to a hands-free system. That would solve a lot of Problems, or disabling the text function, etc.
I work for Mercedes and everyone of our models has a bluetooth hands-free kit as standard. It takes about 30 seconds to connect the phone intially and after that it connects automatically every time you get in the car. The number of people I see with a phone glued to their ear is shockingly high.
So what do you do about the passengers phones? How do you determine whether a phone in a car belongs to the driver and should be deactivated or to a passenger and not. Plus, my phone is always connected to the bluetooth in my car, that doesn't prevent me from picking it up and using it as normal if I so choose.
I seem to recall that various studies have shown that using a phone hands free is no better than using it with your hands in terms of your ability to control the vehicle. It's the act of conversing itself that causes issues with concentration and reaction times.
Comments
I would also introduce the chevron distance system the manage the distance between cars. One of the things you need to do on motorways with high volumes of traffic is undertsand the maths of jams. The solution is to avoid situations were cars have to brake needlessy, beacuse of the driving style of the driver. I think the changes above would change the culture and allow more cars to get to they want to go more quickly.
There is no risk to pedestarians on motorways and with the improvements in modern cars, there is no reason to have a speed limit of 70mph which everybody ignores! But speeds in areas where there are people and children who may have limited road sense need to be kept low. Whether it is annoying for us drivers or not!
As I said speeding does not cause accidents, bad driving does. Cameras are just a tax, IMHO Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive.
Slowing people down does not make the roads safer, myopic bloody drivers who dont have a clue cause accidents, but THEY dont get fined for causing near miss after near miss, the working mum who has just dropped her kids at school, got back on a duel carriageway and needs to get to work on time, so she doesn't lose her job and goes a few mph over the limit are the ones who get fined.
RE bad driving I bet most drivers dont even know if their cars are front or rear wheel drive, I see so many drivers braking mid corner in the wet and then they wonder why they understeer, its actually worrying the amount of idiots driving a ton of metal on the road who just have no idea. Speeding drivers are the least of our worries, but the authorities run campaigns that target speeding drivers and so justify the use of cameras to the uneducated.
The average max speed increase by 1mph from 84mph to 85mpg.
The average low speed didn't change, meaning therefore the average maximum speed differential increased by 1mph. It's speed differential that is the biggest problem on motorways. There's a reason the highway code says to try and match the flow of traffic and to accelerate up that speed on the slip road as much as possible.
What it did show is that, apart from the odd idiot, most people who want to go fast are comfortable at mid to low 80s, and will drive at that speed regardless of actual limit.
Make it more difficult for break-away children to run in the road, rather than put total responsibility and liability on the driver.
Got some great footage of me racing a 911 at 145 mph...
If someone is hit by a car at 30 mph they are 50% likely to be killed.
If someone is hit by a car at 20 mph they are 10% likely to be killed.
Railings where it is more than 20mph might be more appropriate.
Whatever the speed where railings are fitted, your plan will however be a tad expensive to achieve!
Transport in the United Kingdom is facilitated with road, air, rail, and water networks. A radial road network totals 29,145 miles (46,904 km) of main roads, 2,173 miles (3,497 km) of motorways and 213,750 miles (344,000 km) of paved roads.
Easier to build the USA/Mexican wall.
Accidents can happen without the fault of anyone. That's why they are called accidents. It is the speed that determines the outcome. However, the speed can also determine if a collision is avoided or not. If one is driving at a higher speed then it increases the stopping distances. There are lots of places where it is safer to drive more slowly. Anyone that believes that speed limits are only put in place to catch people speeding has failed to understand or appreciate that someone else has gone to the trouble to of assessing the road and decided on a safe, reasonable speed limit.
It is ironic that you ridicule other drivers that don't understand the mechanics that you obviously do, yet suggest that those that set speed limits know less about them than you do.
Come back to me and tell me that speeding doesn't cause accidents when you've taken a call at 4am and had to tell your wife that her teenage brother has been killed in a collision that wouldn't have been fatal had the car being driving slower!
I used to be a firefighter and have attended many RTA's, some fatal, I held the back of a fellas head together while he died after he was thrown out his car after he rolled it, he was not wearing a seat belt, we was not speeding, he clipped a curb while changing a CD, we can all give accounts, so lets keep it objective.
A road accident involving two or more vehicles and a vehicle and person is always someones fault it has to be, even if a tyre blew it is someones fault (the driver for not checking the tyres or the person who fitted the tyre) 99.9 percent of accidents are avoidable.
It is not ironic at all, but most people who drive cars dont have a bloody clue, you may not like that, but they dont. When you passed your test you were taught to pass a test, not how to drive a bloody car, then I bet you did what most new drivers did back then, went on a motorway for the first time and like many new drivers, crapped yer pants, because you had no training on these types of roads.
Ive been ridding bikes and driving cars for over 35 years and am an advanced motorist in both vehicles, I also learned how to drive a fire truck, with 400 gallons of water in it, I also do plenty of track days on my bike, have attended the Superbike school. so I understand machine control, so yer I know a bit. Its kept me alive all these years.
And again, the authorities dont give a shit if you or me die in a accident, why would they? But they do care about the stealth tax. The technology exists whereby they could insist that all vehicles are fitted with a limiter for any given stretch of road, it works on GPS, so IF they really wanted us to slow down they could insist that these limiters were fitted, BUT then they would get no fines in the coffers.
Finally and somewhat tongue in cheek, the greatest safety device that could be fitted to a car is a ten inch steel spike fitted to the centre of every car steering wheel....think about it!
No regard for other road users, speed limits, indicators apparently are optional in most BMW's.
I have to keep my cool as it's my job, but as I drive a large long wheel based van, they can't bully me.
My favourite hobby is keeping as close as possible to the car in front of me as I join a slip road exit (specifically J9 M25) as the ignorant entitled twats try to cut in at the last second rather than queue like the rest of us, stare straight ahead laughing as they go ballistic tooting their horns that such peasants won't let them in.
My BMW is black and the indicators work fine
Letter one, has two offences and says this would normally warrant a penalty/fine or a speed awareness, although this was just a caution/advisory. for the record i went 41 & 35.
Letter two, i received the weekend (2nd one within the month) , this time with 3 incidents they have got me over the limit. 41/34/40 approx. This then goes on to say they will be passing details to the police and will stay on their records for 12 months and the police may choose to suprise me sometime by catching me, effectively.
Ok i get i am repeating the offence alot here, but my question is more to how much notice i should really take? These people have no authority and no photos its just a speedometer which they will do the same road about 6 months of the year but never in the past have i had a letter. I have been using this road on the way to and back from work for 5 years +
I know it will be easy enough to slow down in future and stick to the limits, but just generally intrigued whats behind this? maybe just getting people to slow down in future is all they need?
It was the most expensive charity event I've been to.
They told him he was speeding to which he replied that he wasnt.
they had no recording or any "proof" that he was so they couldnt do anything.
I work for Mercedes and everyone of our models has a bluetooth hands-free kit as standard. It takes about 30 seconds to connect the phone intially and after that it connects automatically every time you get in the car. The number of people I see with a phone glued to their ear is shockingly high.