DfT recommendations for M-way capacity management include toll lane for higher speeds

[Oswaldtwistle]

How would such a device work?

.

Same way as Sat-Nav- GPS reciver connected to a database of speed limits. We have the techology already, and arguably it is less 'big brother' than endless cameras.

My own preference would be an audible warning device rather than a physical limiter.

 

[Cobbles]

Most people can tell their speed from the engine noise.

I can't - my car's very quiet inside - that's one of the reasons why I bought it.

even if you're totally deaf you should be able to judge speed from how fast things are moving outside the car .

That's a totally asinine assertion - How long have you been driving and how many different vehicles have you driven? There's a totally different sense of speed as between, say, an old 850 mini where the aural and sensory experience means that 30 MPH may seem fast whereas the same speed in an S class Merc seems like standing still, similarly, wafting down the Mall at 30 seems like being stationary whereas the same speed down narrow twisty cobbled lane seems suicidally fast. What do you use as cues - counting the time between telegraph poles along a railway line?

I'd love to see how you could maintain a specified speed (say 27.3 MPH)
in any vehicle driven along any road without constantly checking the speedometer.

Anyone claiming it's impossible to stay below 20 without looking at the road needs a slap.

There's obviously something linguistic missing here - do you mean that anyone ought to be able to maintain 20 MPH without looking at their speedometer?

Again, if I put you in an unfamiliar vehicle (let's say a heavy automatic SUV with a high performance engine) do you really think that you'd be able to set a given speed and maintain it without using the speedometer, to which your attention will be drawn unreasonably frequently if all you're focusing on is speed rather than the road itself.

 

[Cobbles]

Same way as Sat-Nav- GPS reciver connected to a database of speed limits. We have the techology already, and arguably it is less 'big brother' than endless cameras..

Which are constantly changing so how do you ensure that every local authority will maintain the database?

Also, how do you guarantee that within the accuracy range of civilian GPS, no vehicle will ever be going too fast in the wrong place (e.g. legislation to ensure no camera can be positioned or a scamera van parked within 30M of a speed limit sign.

My own preference would be an audible warning device rather than a physical limiter.

Pointless - that'd be an audible warning device, as opposed to a speed limiter.

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

Which are constantly changing so how do you ensure that every local authority will maintain the database?

Also, how do you guarantee that within the accuracy range of civilian GPS, no vehicle will ever be going too fast in the wrong place (e.g. legislation to ensure no camera can be positioned or a scamera van parked within 30M of a speed limit sign.
.

Neither problem is insoluble. 30m limit would be quite reasonable. In any case it is about helping motorists stick to the speed limit, not just avoid tickets. We already have devices to do that.

 

[rover07]

How would such a device work?

I was thinking of a manual device, changeable by the driver.

 

[cybertect]

I was thinking of a manual device, changeable by the driver.

Hmm. Cruise control?

 

[Ravel]

They're maximum speeds not the speed everyone's supposed to maintain.

If more people understood this, the roads would be much safer.


Improve journey times and cut down on delays on motorways tomorrow: Hide the speed cameras. They'd do their job better (people would drive at a more steady speed, not knowing where they were to slow down and speed up all the time) and it would eliminate the panic braking associated with drivers seeing one.

scamera

 

[editor]

It'd soooooooo much better to be able to concentrate on looking at the road ahead to scan for potentially dangerous situations, rather than staring fixedly at the speedo to prevent the possibility of funding more staff in a scamera revenue production centre.

Actually, you'll find it demonstrably safer to just drive slower rather than employing technology to let you hurtle through built up areas at the maximum speed.

And if you weren't driving dangerously and needing to scan for speed cameras, you wouldn't have to be constantly looking out for them.

 

[Sunray]

Speed cameras were hidden for ages till so many people complained that they were there to make money and not slow people down. So they painted them yellow. So people slow down for the 300m that they cover. All the sat nav's beep when your approaching one. I'm not sure of there over all relevance.

All those proposals are just that, proposals which will get considered and then costed. When the treasury see the multi-billion price tag the carpet suddenly becomes a useful filing cabinet.

What needs to be done really is to try to successfully deter people making those journeys. The horse bolted on this a few years ago. Now there are so many car drivers that pissing them off is political suicide. Any solution to mass car use is generally just tinkering with some minor issues to see if that has any effect and doesn't get you 2 million people on a petition.

 

[Oswaldtwistle]

What needs to be done really is to try to successfully deter people making those journeys. The horse bolted on this a few years ago. Now there are so many car drivers that pissing them off is political suicide.

And I think this is a fact we need to accept. People like having personal mobility. In London that means an Oyster card. In many other places it means a car.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the fact 'pissing off drivers is political suicide'- this is a democracy so why shouldn't the majority be able to enjoy things only the rich had a few years ago? It's funny these things only become a problem when everyone else starts doing them.

 

[rover07]

Hmm. Cruise control?

Cruise control is fine for motorway driving but not really practical for urban driving.

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

This is an ill-thought-out mish-mash of proposals. Basically, it's the government panicking after road pricing was rejected, and clutching at any straws they can. Tbh a lot of it probably won't happen.

certianly not after the M1 fiasco of closeing it down to two lanes and 50 limited for two years to build a priority lane which has now been shown to be unsafe and unworkable.

I thnk that any toll lanes will go down the same plug hole...

 

[Cobbles]

Hmm. Cruise control?

Obviously not.........

Cruise control allows a vehicle to drive along at a fixed set speed (with minor adjustments up and down / resume depending on its functionality).

I can't visualise any scenario where I'd want to be swept along at an unvarying 25 or 28 or whatever MPH (apart from an absolutely empty motorway heading straight to the horizon).

Something that allows me to mash the accellerator into the lamswool but curbs my enthusiasm at a selected speed by cutting off the joy-juice is a different kettle of piscatorial nosh.

 

[Cobbles]

Actually, you'll find it demonstrably safer to just drive slower rather than employing technology to let you hurtle through built up areas at the maximum speed.

And if you weren't driving dangerously and needing to scan for speed cameras, you wouldn't have to be constantly looking out for them.

Where's the correlation between accidents and speed (apart from the fact that an unmeasurably low number of collisions take place between stationary vehices)?

Clearly you've never read the police advanced driving manual or attempted an IAM test (or much of this post - where's the desire to "hurtle through built up areas at the maximum speed"- apart from in your fevered imagination........

The goal for a civilian is to make as much progress as possible within the law - something that's only possible through developing skills of anticipation (mmmmn a sink housing estate ahead - all pedestrians are liable to be unpredictable/pissed/drugged up). More time spent looking at the speedo (admittedly not a major consideration for pursuit class police motorists) means less time to take in the environment and assess and pre-handle potential risks.

BTW If you'd like to send me your name and address, I'll happily pass it on to my Solicitors so that they can send you a nice writ for defamation- how can you possibly alssert that I have a desire to drive dangerously???

 

[cybertect]

Obviously not.........

No, I was just thinking that it's not a million miles from the same idea. Cruise control just sets a fixed speed, all you'd need would be an optional mode for a maximum.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Speed limits - how it should be IMHO

20mph limit near schools.
30mph in urban areas.

The above to be enforced strongly. Up the penalty from 3 points to 6.

60mph on single lane major roads
80mph on dual carrigeways.
Variable, depending on time of day on conditions, up to unlimited mph on motorways.

 

[Ravel]

Speed cameras were hidden for ages till so many people complained that they were there to make money and not slow people down. So they painted them yellow.

A pretty "knee jerk" reaction really, to the minority of law breakers who had a problem with them.

I'd be all for removing them, on the condition that each one was replaced by a mobile unit, in a different, unpublished place every day. As if by magic, people might learn to stay within the speed limit (well, most drivers would. The ones who use excessive speed at the moment would drive at half the limit, just in case )


Ultimately, if drivers like Cobbles can't control their speed without staring at their speedo 100% of the time, they shouldn't be on the road.

 

[Cobbles]

Ultimately, if drivers like Cobbles can't control their speed without staring at their speedo 100% of the time, they shouldn't be on the road.

Similarly, if fuckwits like yyy can't behave themselves when on the pavements then let's let evolution take its course....

 

[Ravel]

Where's the correlation between accidents and speed

Irrelevant. If you have an accident (although I'm sure it'll never happen to you ), which will be safer:

- Travelling at 30mph
- Travelling at 50mph

 

[Cobbles]

No, I was just thinking that it's not a million miles from the same idea. Cruise control just sets a fixed speed, all you'd need would be an optional mode for a maximum.

So long as your speedo is 100.00000000000% accurate - which it's not....

 

[Cobbles]

Irrelevant. If you have an accident (although I'm sure it'll never happen to you ), which will be safer:

- Travelling at 30mph
- Travelling at 50mph

pointless discussion -

If a person were to wander into the road in a 30 zone and I'm driving at 30, oo-er.....

If a person were to wander into the road in a 60 zone and I'm driving at 30, (or 53) so fucking what???????

Where's your point?????????????????

 

[Isambard]

Where's the correlation between accidents and speed

The rate of fatality or serious injury for pedestrians involved in RTAs increases horrificly as vehicle speed increases. That is why speed limits in areas with a high level of pedestrians need to be keep down. 20 MPH sounds about OK.

The idea of making pedestrians "behave themselves on the pavement" is farcical.
Yes, some adults walk into the road without looking.

But on my street, there's a lot of children who play on the street. There are pubs and shops that people wander in and out of and a number of little side roads that it is easy to kind of half forget are there. I think there needs to be a notion that an area is a space to be shared comunally and not that selfish car drivers, who are a minority in many urban settings, have the "right" to use more space than is their fair share, in a manner as only they see fit

 

[Cobbles]

But on my street, there's a lot of children who play on the street. There are pubs and shops that people wander in and out of and a number of little side roads that it is easy to kind of half forget are there. I think there needs to be a notion that an area is a space to be shared comunally and not that selfish car drivers, who are a minority in many urban settings, have the "right" to use more space than is their fair share, in a manner as only they see fit

That's why it's better to be able to concentrate on what's happening around your vehicle as well as road conditions, rather than having to be paranoid about watching the speedo.

 

[Cobbles]

Actually, you'll find it demonstrably safer to just drive slower rather than employing technology to let you hurtle through built up areas at the maximum speed.

And if you weren't driving dangerously and needing to scan for speed cameras, you wouldn't have to be constantly looking out for them.

Any chance of applying your no doubt huge and extensive experience of roadcraft to answering my response to this ludicrous post (#44).

NB Google and wankapedia won't have the answer.

 

[Isambard]

That's why it's better to be able to concentrate on what's happening around your vehicle as well as road conditions, rather than having to be paranoid about watching the speedo.

You need to concentrate on what is happening around you AND your speed.
You do know about the expotential increase in braking distance and level of injuries sustained in an RTA compared to vehicle speed?

 

[Ravel]

pointless discussion -

Pretty much the response I expected. People with your opinions on speed can rarely answer such a simple queston directly.

What causes an accident doesn't matter. Driving at excessive speed (yes, speed limits are there for a reason, nothing to do with making money - there's a very simple way for the government to do that, it's called tax).

If you have an accident, which will be safer:

- Travelling at 30mph
- Travelling at 50mph

All other conditions are the same in both accidents.

 

[Cobbles]

If you have an accident, which will be safer:

- Travelling at 30mph
- Travelling at 50mph

Clearly if you get hit by an articulated lorry doing 55, then you'll be more hurt than if it was doing 5 MPH......

However the only way it'd hit you at 55 is if you were dumb enough to walk across a motorway, in which case it'd probably be a blessing that your genes were removed from the pool.

Speed is not per se, a cause of accidents, otherwise motorways would theoretically be constant streams of carnage - they're not.

 

[Ravel]

Still not going to answer the question then?

 

[Cobbles]

Still not going to answer the question then?

Clearly if you get hit by an articulated lorry doing 55, then you'll be more hurt than if it was doing 5 MPH......

However the only way it'd hit you at 55 is if you were dumb enough to walk across a motorway, in which case it'd probably be a blessing that your genes were removed from the pool.

Speed is not per se, a cause of accidents, otherwise motorways would theoretically be constant streams of carnage - they're not.

RTFP

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Clearly if you get hit by an articulated lorry doing 55, then you'll be more hurt than if it was doing 5 MPH......

However the only way it'd hit you at 55 is if you were dumb enough to walk across a motorway, in which case it'd probably be a blessing that your genes were removed from the pool.

Speed is not per se, a cause of accidents, otherwise motorways would theoretically be constant streams of carnage - they're not.

Much as it pains me to say this, this post is spot on.

The "speed kills" argument is simplistic bullshit.