Speeding

[996jimbo]

I'm assuming by speeding we mean breaking the speed limit in which case I would say that the question "is speeding dangerous" is not necessarily the right question.

The posted speed limit is an arbitary limit for a given area. Any given area has varying traffic conditions ergo (been dying to use that) what may be considered a safe speed will vary within an area. And it will also vary because people have different perceptions of what is safe.

Driving at 70mph in a 60mph limit may be less dangerous than driving at 25mph in a 30mph limit. Imagine if you will driving through one of your Northern moors on a sunny day with nothing in sight for 2 miles in any direction, and then driving past a school at drop off time.

Clearly speed can make things worse (witness Tom's rather gruelling description of clearing up after a smash). A moving vehicle is going to hurt at any speed so (as a society) what we are trying to balance is the desire to travel along against the risk of colliding with something and the consequent damage / injury. But ultimately the limits are arbitary - there is no fundemental law of nature that says "30mph in town is the right and safest speed limit to have".

Having effectively agreed to speed limits as a society the question about whether or not we should break them is a simple question of whether or not it is right to break the law. We do not have to speed.

The speed limit may itself be a dangerous speed in a particular circumstance or location. A speed limit is a matter of law, not simply a matter of safety. Whether we think a limit is too low is, in a sense, irrelevant.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

My view is this. speeding is a breaking a law that was set up for a reason by people better than me. the issue i have with speeding as a crime per-se is that speeders are looked upon as the scum of the earth. This isnt a reasonable response to people who have transgressed a law. And much as I undertand what Tom says about scraping people up, this isnt the preserve of accidents that are just caused by excessive speed. as he well knows, some accidents with these results happen on roads with 40mph restrictions and the vehicles involved often traveling at less. however, if a drunk driver has lost control of his car at 38mph and hits another car doing 40, it has the same impact as driving into a wall at 78. and hitting a tractor that didnt see you coming and pulls out in front of you, well you can hit that at 40 and die. they dont have soft crumple zones. and none of the above accidents are caused by speed and all happen. In fact just going thru the traffic lights at 28 can be daunting as you only need someone doing 28 to hit you from the right and your ultra stiff side impact bars and airbags aint gonna help much. not if they didnt notice the red light, which, in fairness, was there for a reason!

I also think that with todays technology, we can improve the traffic flow and, certainly on motorways where there are 3 lanes or more, that we can raise the maximum speed allowed to 100mph on certain stretches. I also think that some variable speed limits in towns and cities will do more for speed control than blanket speed limits and daft cameras. Cameras are okay for traffic lights in my view. but at 3 am near a school you could reasonably do 30, the same in a city centre at that time. however when lots of people are milling around schools and city centres the speed can be lowered to 20 for safety reasons. I think the public will accept this. you have to remember that speed limits are maximums and on a motorway you will see plenty driving moderatly beneath them too.

The road death statistics in this country where a train hits something going thru a crossing, are counted as road accidents if a road vehicle is involved. This doesnt influence it much as there arent many in a year, but is is unfair.

But, and this is fact. the majority of deaths on the roads for the last 5 years has been "walk outs". this is when people walk out into the flow of traffic. and the incidents of serious injurys has increased 100% in areas where ther limit has been reduced from 30 - 20mph. in contect however, deaths in the same area have been reduced to almost nil. the problem is the education of pedestrains who are now taking more risks. and stopping cars from speeding in these areas doesnt adjust the foot path users. this is happening all over Europe and thats why EuroNCAP have been making car makers do the pedestrain safety issues. until we stop people walking out in front of cars we will not reduce deaths on the roads any further. Pavement fences anyone?

Motorways have been our fastest roads and safest roads since they were first built. The AA have a map of the most dangerous roads and not one is a motorway. In Germany the autobahns have de-restricted areas and these are the safets roads in the whole of Europe! Why, it seems that when people drive on them they concentrate more due to the speed. this results in less accidents. in fact, the germans are currenlty cracking down on those UK drivers who go there to drag race their performance cars and the reason they are doing that is to keep these roads safe and de-restricted. Racing on public roads is dangerous anywhere at any speed.

People want freedom. But the law makers need to justify freedom and safety. at the moment the doo-gooders and the health and safety people have too much ear of the governemnt and it is no longer representative of the majority of people. this is not such a bad thing as the oposition havent any ideas themselves but sometimes law makers need to remember exactly why the laws were made in the first place and not just pander to those who think they have everyones safety in mind. we have lost the common sense of our fore fathers who came up with the good ideas, for the cotton wool generation.

Our cars will not become much safer and to persue a slower speed limit will not help. it is about time the whole system was looked into and sorted out. It has been neglected for 40years and, as far as i can see, there is very little anyone will do about it.

no points now, and never have been.

 

[davidsl500]

I always abide by the 40 and 30 speed limits in towns and built up areas - and it really irritates me to find someone driving 2 feet behind me with no chance of stopping if i brake suddenly - invariably they are women in people carriers doing the school run.......

I am all in favour of increasing motorway speed limits and possibly de-restricting on certain stretches. The big problem to that is relative speeds of vehicles - trucks playing overtaking each other for mile after mile forces slower vehicles into the overtaking lane (not the fast lane as some people call it..) so it is quite easy to be humming along and suddenly come across someone doing 55mph in the overtaking lane...

Personally I like to have a good "blat" now and then and apart from track days there is nowhere in the UK that you can really do it. I have a feeling that if there were facilities available to let off some steam in relative safety then drivers wouldnt mind living with the outdated speed limits so much...

On the subject of points, my score is 3 points (1992) in 29 years of driving - and i still think that they were unfair. 59mph in the contraflow on the M1 heading towards Leeds at 7.00am on a saturday morning, dry road in the summertime with only 3 cars in sight - me, the patrol car 500 yards behind and a Belgian plated Scorpio 2.9i 4x4 which they clocked at 100mph through the contraflow - having slowed from 125mph as they passed the police car !! The patrol officers excuse for NOT stopping the Scorpio was that it had foreign plates and as the offence would have been dangerous driving they would have to have jailed him untill Monday morning when the courts were open - this may have caused a "foreign incident", they explained to me.....so they took the easy target..

 

[SLinKyjoe]

I always abide by the 40 and 30 speed limits in towns and built up areas - and it really irritates me to find someone driving 2 feet behind me with no chance of stopping if i brake suddenly - invariably they are women in people carriers doing the school run.......

Agreed

I am all in favour of increasing motorway speed limits and possibly de-restricting on certain stretches. The big problem to that is relative speeds of vehicles - trucks playing overtaking each other for mile after mile forces slower vehicles into the overtaking lane (not the fast lane as some people call it..) so it is quite easy to be humming along and suddenly come across someone doing 55mph in the overtaking lane...

This is what keeps the autobhns safe. aniticpation and the fact that the other drivers are aware that this happens so everyone is concentrating. Plus most coporate manufactures self limit their cars to 155mph. smaller volume manufactures don't.

On the subject of points, my score is 3 points (1992) in 29 years of driving - and i still think that they were unfair. 59mph in the contraflow on the M1 heading towards Leeds at 7.00am on a saturday morning, dry road in the summertime with only 3 cars in sight - me, the patrol car 500 yards behind and a Belgian plated Scorpio 2.9i 4x4 which they clocked at 100mph through the contraflow - having slowed from 125mph as they passed the police car !! The patrol officers excuse for NOT stopping the Scorpio was that it had foreign plates and as the offence would have been dangerous driving they would have to have jailed him untill Monday morning when the courts were open - this may have caused a "foreign incident", they explained to me.....so they took the easy target..

thats just damned ridiculous isn't it. no wonder the police, who do a good job in the main (if you can do better why dont you join them etc etc) have a bad name with this type of problem. altho you were breaking a law at the time. still, as a reasonable person i would have thought a warning and "mind how you go, sir" would have been more effective dont you think?

 

[SLinKyjoe]

Nicky and Andy K.

I removed your posts, not because they were off topic but just to save some space. dont be offended. it isnt personal. i can always put them back.

sorry if my long winded post gets up peoples noses but it seems today we are being informed that 1000's of motorists have been wrongly accused of speeding! another issues that needs looking into.

for the sake of safer policing, proper justice and freedom, the law needs an enema.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

some may well find this site useful

www.eurorap.org

 

[blassberg]

some may well find this site useful

www.eurorap.org

country map - with fair not good resulution
http://www.eurorap.org/pdf/road_ratings/roadrating_gb.pdf

 

[Silver Arrow]

I agree with Slinky on his dissertation. It is time we had a serious and commonsense analysis of the issue. Unfortunately politicians have many agendas to pursue so we don?t get a proper job done.
Many mathematical analyses use old highway code figures for safe distance vehicle separation distances and pressure groups such as Transport 2000 bandy figures such as maximum efficiency for vehicle numbers have about 20 mph as the most efficient speed for motorway capacity.
Many of these naive analyses are based on faulty concepts. Eg the stopping distances used assume that the preceding vehicle is at rest. (This is a squared relationship) Actually it is most likely to be travelling at the same speed so the separation should be based more on reaction times. (a linear function)
The calculations also tend to ignore the economic values of longer journey times due to lower limits on a cost value basis. The values of fatalities are well established in the cost benefit calculations used by the administration in other, similar, project evaluations.
More intelligent traffic management systems need not incur high costs. Traffic lights have a very low bandwidth, as do the little variable signs used on motorways. These are normally controlled by remote computers and, as we all know, even the public have access to 2 Mb or more bandwidth via twisted pair copper wires to home, and 50Mb or more wireless networks around the house and garden.
The problem with fast driving is not speed itself, but awareness of speed differentials. It is rarer in Germany to find a grockle doing 70 mph pulling out into your path as you close at 130 mph because they are more aware of the implications. Hitting a stationary car at 70 absorbs less energy than hitting a 70 mph car at 130 mph due to the squared energy relationship.
Unfortunately most of our leaders and pressure groups work on emotional bases, rather than mathematical logic.

 

[mlc]

I think an important part of this agrument has been missed so far - and that is driver training and skill.

Its 30 years since I passed my test and regardless of the changes to the test and the addition of the theory test the truth is that the level of skill required to be allowed to drive has not really increased. However the cars we drive in terms of acceleration and top speed are completley different. My first car was a Morris 1100 with 0 - 60 around 25 seconds and top speed of 80mph. I didnt not speed out of choice, it was that the car wasnt up to it! And this was considered a family car. Whilst I agree that brakes / steering / handling have of course improved as well none of this is relevant if the driver doesnt realise that he has a problem.

Having had the good fortune to drive in Germany on many occasions I really think we need to follow their example. They drive very fast on thier Autobahns, but they always travel in lane one unless overtaking. They happily give way to faster traffic and I am yet to see tailgateing, perhaps because it is not required. Has anyone ever seen a German use the phone whilst driving? of course not because they see driving as a very serious job that needs full concentration. Finally road works dont have miles of cones, because German drivers realise that they need to drive carefully through road works so they slow down and ensure that every one is safe.

In summary, we need driver training to be to a much higher standard then we could travel faster whilst remaining safe.

Mark.

 

[blassberg]

IHas anyone ever seen a German use the phone whilst driving?

That's an unfair question as most of them would arrive there before the person answered it

 

[SLinKyjoe]

I think an important part of this agrument has been missed so far - and that is driver training and skill.

In summary, we need driver training to be to a much higher standard then we could travel faster whilst remaining safe.

Totally agree. last time i mentioned this tho, it didnt go down well, because to keep people at the required standard you need to re-test them or standards slip. I advocate a re-test every 5 years and then every year passed whatever age it is that you need to go to the doc's to be medically certified to drive. sorry if that upsets people but the world has moved on and we need to move on with it. it will keep confidence levels up to.

am suprised no politician has got a grip of this issue yet. too busy worrying about Iraq or maybes which other leader candidate has been taking drugs (topical) to worry about the state of our roads.

 

[Silver Arrow]

I?m not so sure that would suffice. Re tests tend to test technical skill, they are not hot on attitudes and psychology.
Different attitudes exist in the States. Having held Californian and Washington DC drivers licences I saw the effects of very different systems. The Southern Californian freeways used strict lane discipline, trundling nose to tail, so the drivers tended to behave as if in their living room at home. That is, drinking coffee, eating breakfast, chatting on the phone and even reading! All due to a low attention span requirement of their personal environment. Non of this figures in the Californian testing system.
In the desert areas between the coasts, vast straight roads little outside stimulus is needed other than keeping awake!
In Maine, however, drivers stop when pedestrians approach the kerb in towns!

 

[flagstaff]

totally agree with the 'psychology of driving' angle: something so important, and yet not addressed in driver training. of course, some folk get the hang of this as they go out into the real driving world ... but others never really get the hang of it; we all know people who simply 'don't like' driving - and imho i think these people make up far too large a slice of the driving population. on the other hand there are those whose belief in their ability to drive (quickly or not) is badly misplaced.

i think that not enough folk understand the physics of what's involved. not in an academic way, just in a deep-down-feel-it-in-the-bones kind of way.

i've made a point of teaching all three of my children to drive in 100cc 2-stroke karts. anyone who's driven these little firecrackers will understand exactly what i mean.

 

[turnipsock]

i've made a point of teaching all three of my children to drive in 100cc 2-stroke karts. anyone who's driven these little firecrackers will understand exactly what i mean.

It's a good idea. Maybe new drivers should be given a power restriction for a year or so.

How many times have you been traveling down the outside lane, and you see car gaining on a lorry. It catches the lorry and adjusts it's speed to that of the lorry, then it checks the mirrors, sees a gap and moves out. The fact that it's only doing 40mph and the rest of the outside lane is doing 80mph is not a problem to this driver...they just don't understand what all the light flashing is about.

If you have limited power, you learn to drive properly, that is adjust your speed before you switch lanes, or move out in pleantly of time.

Limited power also improves overtaking technique, that is you don't sit so close that you can hardly see past the car in front, but sit back and start accelerating to anticipate the gap. A lot of people sit really close, move out and then accelerate.

 

[paulcallender]

Speeding is Safe

Case closed!

 

[blassberg]

we get Defensive Driving training very 4 years at work.

Observations, skills and soft stuff. Works well I think.

 

[SNAP ON]

there is plenty of track days for all the boy racers that want to speed..but its still nice to have a car that can get you out of trouble if need be,...

 

[andy_k]

there is plenty of track days for all the boy racers that want to speed..but its still nice to have a car that can get you out of trouble if need be,...

there are very, very few (if any) road cars that will actually accelerate quick enough to get you out of trouble.

Far better is not putting yourself in that position in the first place or having good enough brakes/tyres/concentration to slow down rapidly.

andy

 

[3146bj]

we get Defensive Driving training very 4 years at work.

Observations, skills and soft stuff. Works well I think.

The company I used to work for introduced Defensive Driver training in the late '80's with a 2 day full on course for every staff member expected to drive a company car. Initially, the minor accident rate went up and the major accident rate dropped dramatically. Over a couple of years the total accident rate dropped & the cost savings were significant. More importantly, refresher training for a full day every 3 years ensured the skills learned were maintained. Acceptance by the staff was very good and when a sponsored scheme for family members likely to drive a company car was introduced, the take up rate was nearly 100%.

On the speeding thing, the only way to completely avoid the risk of a car colliding with something is to never move it. Any movement of a car involves a risk, even pushing it out of the garage! Setting speed limits is an expression of the level of perceived risk that is acceptable to society. Nothing at all to do with actual risk. And don't forget that risk is rarely properly understood to combine the consequences of failure AND the level of exposure! I cannot comment on the UK, but here in Australia, there is a very much justified perception that speed limits are set to enhance revenue collection in the form of fines. Nothing like a downward speed limit change at the bottom of a steep hill combined with a speed camera (Gatso to you, I think) to generate significant income for the Government. So speed limits are regarded very cynically.

Another interesting point on speed. I recently visited the Northern Territory, which, outside towns has no speed limits for cars on the open roads. Trucks (up to 4 trailer road trains) are limited to 100km/hr. Most cars were travelling at around 100-120km/hr even thought the roads were suitable for much higher speeds. On a 500km run, only one or two cars would overtake at higher speeds. At dusk or early morning, the usual speeds were nearer 70-80km/hr as people slowed to allow for avoiding wandering livestock (the roads are not fenced) such as cattle and kangaroos. This seems to bear out the contention that people drive at speeds suitable for the conditions and at which they are comfortable.

 

[Mounis]

Motorway Speed Limits Suck....

I'm sorry but I have to say it our whole attitude towards driving fast sucks. There is continual harrassment towards fast driving, this mentality of being perceived as a 'Boy Racer' just because you want to get somewhere quick or you don't want to piddle about behind a granny at 65mph on the motorway.

I feel that as a professional driver (I do about 1500 miles a week in and around London) we should adhere to the following:

City/Town - Stick strictly to the speed limit. 30 means 30 esp around schools, towns parks etc. No one wants to run over little Tommy as he's crossing to get an ice-cream from the van.

Country - Improved signs for danger spots should highlight what to be expected but I feel the generally the limits should be stuck to as the terrain is unpredicatable and you never know when Daisy the cow might decide to appear around a corner.

Motorway - Lets stop and pull our fingers out of our a$$es and accept two things:
1) The speed limit at the moment sucks and should be derestricted and a LOWER LIMIT of 90mph should be set. If you cant hack the speed then don't drive on the motorway or get driver training to gain confidence.
2) Better policing of the narrow 3 lanes that we have available. All too often, an aged uncle-type will drive at 75mph in the overtaking lane and if you come on too fast from behind he will dab his brakes as to say "Son, I'm breaking the limit already at 75 so I will keep my ass infront of you. Now sod off...." even though he is daoing about the same as the cars in the middle and first lane. He will sit there for as long as he feels necessary and then when he decides he will move out of the way, slowly...

I say lets insist on all drivers doing a minimum of 90mph (lets face it, most of us do this all the time anyway). That will encompass most 'habitual' speeders and ensure faster flow of traffic. If everyone was happy to float around 90mph more people would drive in the 'slow' lane, thus freeing up the middle and outer overtaking lanes for the faster drivers.

If I'm honest with you I drive daily at well over the speed limit. Normally its at the end of the day, motorway is clear and I just want to get the last 60 miles of my journey over as soon as possible... 130mph? why not? theres no one else on the road at 2am. Why should I live in fear of losing my licence when I'm not harming anyone? You may argue that if I lost control then what? Well firstly I feel I am competent enough. Secondly when you do 130mph all the time, it doesnt actually feel any faster than 100, which I'm sure to most doesnt feel much faster the 80mhp. All you need to ensure is that you concentrate and have a vehicle that is maintained to a high standard. You should have no problems then....