The Chief Constable of South Wales is opposed to the proposed raising of speed limits on the UK motorway system. His reasoning is that the impact will be greater at higher speeds.
The science of speed is the faster you go, the more impact it has when you hit an object that is not moving.
Well, yes, basic O level physics and all that. However, what if, as happens with the vast majority of journeys, we don’t actually hit anything? What then? There’s no “when” about it. A careful driver will regulate speed to match the conditions – and if they are right, 80mph is perfectly safe and there will be little risk of collision with stationary objects – because, you know, the driver has read the road ahead and is driving accordingly. And, oddly enough, I manage to navigate our roads without hitting stationary objects. Funny, that.
The plea that I would give is all too often I’m driving on the road and I see the matrix signs in the middle of the road indicating an advisory speed of 40mph and people pass my car at 70mph, sometimes even more.
The signs on the motorway are put there for a reason – to give people advance notice of what’s going on in front of them.
And how many times have you passed these matrix signs only to see nothing that justifies the advisory speed and eventually seen an “end” sign, wondering what all that was about. That these signs are not utilised properly and switched off promptly when the hazard is past brings them into disrepute. I suggest Mr Vaughan takes the matter up with the folk operating the signs, not the rest of us.
The Department for Transport said as many as 49% of drivers flout the current 70mph limit.
I suspect that may well be a significant underestimate, myself…
The key factor influencing collision outcomes is not pre-impact free travelling speed, but driver response. If this were not the case, then there would be no fatal accidents in 20 mph zones, but 40 mph zones would be scenes of carnage. Which they’re not.
And totally agreed that, at least 9 times out of 10, the messages given on the matrix displays are crying wolf.
XX A careful driver will regulate speed to match the conditions XX
And as a biker, you know damn well that most of the cage driving arseholes are no such thing.
How many times have you been overtaken by some wanker doing 90-100 in 20 meter vision fog?
Indeed, but the speed limits are neither here nor there as regards that one.
I have to say that I’m personally opposed to speed limits being raised on motorways. My reasoning for this is simply the sheer number of wankers who travel at over 100mph and would do even more if they thought they had the extra headroom. I remember a story told by a traffic cop. One very foggy morning the control room took a call from an angry motorist who said “How the hell do you expect me to do 70mph in this?” For me, examples like that and my own experiences just go to show the level of idiocy on motorways.
“A careful driver will regulate speed to match the conditions”
Agreed, but my point is, how many ‘careful’ drivers as opposed to brain dead tossers do we have on the motorways? I suspect, from experience, not a lot.
During my many years as a biker, I’ve seen bangers doing over 90mph with the canvas and wire hanging out of tyres, body panels flying off in the wind, on one occaision someone’s rear tyre from his Audi came bouncing at me down the motorway. Add to this reps on mobile phones and eating with no hands on the wheel, map readers and people changing their clothes and using the rear view mirror for applying make up. And tailgating as well.
The answer to which is more effective policing using real cops not cameras.
“The answer to which is more effective policing using real cops not cameras.”
Agreed, but the stark fact is, we don’t have effective policing, so to raise the speed limit can only make things even worse.
“cage driving arseholes”
Ah yes, the authentic voice of the bigot.
As soon as anyone uses the word “cager”, I immediately know their views are worthless.
This is not unachievable and bear in mind that the raising of the limit comes hand in hand with an end to the blind eye currently in force.
Limits? I always think of them more as guidelines myself. Especially when there’s no-one else around.
😈
So he has a problem people are doing the legal speed when presented with a lower “advisory” limit? What sort of policeman is he? If it’s advisory then people can still drive at 70.
Most advisory limits are about traffic. You get them around places like Newport on the M4 which can get quite sticky in the morning. But late in the evening it’s empty.
He seems to be speaking from the same position as a judge who, a couple of years ago, jailed a guy for riding his motorbike at 100mph for just a mile on a straight empty road in perfect conditions.
Reason for the jail term was that it “could” have caused an accident if he hadn’t slowed down when he came to an intersection. Which he did.
Likewise the My Family actor who was banned for 6 months for NOT driving while drunk. We’re deep into territory where laws and sentences are being handed down on what is often not just unlikely, but merely in the mind.
You mean like the EDL who might have caused a breach of the peace? 👿
“This is not unachievable and bear in mind that the raising of the limit comes hand in hand with an end to the blind eye currently in force”
Again, I agree that it’s not unachievable, but how can you be so sure that it will be achieved?
In an earlier comment, Curmudgen said “The key factor influencing collision outcomes is not pre-impact free travelling speed, but driver response.”
Well yes, driver response does influence collision outcomes, except that for any given driver the response time would be fixed. In an accident involving that same driver at 80mph, the impact would still happen at 10mph more than at 70mph, which is a 20mph impact if hitting a stationary object or 40mph impact if hitting another vehicle travelling in the opposite direction. And that’s with the proviso that had the accident happened at 70mph, the driver would have been able to bring the vehicle to a stop at the point of impact.
With the same degree of certainty that you have in anticipating an increase in casualties 😉
I don’t anticipate an increase in casualties, just the same casualties but a bit worse 🙂
Given that the current limit is already being treated with disdain by the majority, I anticipate no change or a continued downward trend.
Is there a case for an advanced driving test before being allowed to drive on motorways? At the moment a 17 year old can go straight from the test centre having never driven above 30 mph to a motorway where they can drive at 70 mph. As part of the training and/or test, applicants should be made to watch videos of bad motorway driving practices and their resultant accidents.
It would bring a boost to the economy as well.
Let’s say everyone who wishes to drive on a motorway (and motorway standard dual carriageways) after October 1st 2014 must pass a motorway driving test. That gives everyone 3 years.
I would take a slightly different tack. While I actively encouraged my learners to take post test motorway lessons – and saw an immediate benefit from those who took it up – a simple lesson and test is not really an answer although an improvement on what we have. I’d like to see some form of ongoing assessment regime as occurs in any safety critical occupation. And, no, I don’t see the role of assessment being conducted by the DSA. Their role would be standards setting and monitoring.
Assessment is not the same thing as a test. It is more dynamic and involves a two-way approach between the candidate and the assessor. Used properly it is an opportunity to upgrade one’s skills as well as getting valuable feedback about areas for improvement.
It’ll never happen, though. Our society simply isn’t that mature.
Doesn’t the Pass Plus go some way towards this? A new driver who completes the Pass Plus can halve their first year’s insurance premium which is a good incentive, though its a bit expensive and not compulsory.
Plainly our motorways are too small and overcrowded to make 80mph a sensible idea. So why propose the idea? Perhaps the idea is presentational – to give the illusion of a modern infrastructure as we whisk Indian and Chinese investors around the country. After all, Spain, Greece, France and Germany all have super motorways and might look a better place to locate a new factory. Wake up Treasury or we will miss out – again.
Pass plus is a good idea, but the advertised reduction in insurance premiums are somewhat on the optimistic side.
Roger, given that traffic is already travelling in excess of the proposed 90mph limit, clearly the system can cope with it.
“which is a 20mph impact if hitting a stationary object or 40mph impact if hitting another vehicle travelling in the opposite direction”
No, no, no. Totally wrong. A head on collision at 20mph with a car coming the other way at 20mph is still a 20mph collision. Look up the Mythbusters programme on it.