Wales becomes Trumpton

[carmanmemoranda]

If something doesn't work because it isn't enforced then enforcement is the issue, not the speed limit.

Lower speeds are safer, it's basic science.

Absolutely impossible to argue against, but he will.

It's like driving on ice and hitting another car at 5mph. Its still too fast for the conditions and therefore speed is a factor.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

basic nonsense.

Driving at speed that allows you to stop in the distance you can see is clear is enough to avoid an accident.

Why would you drive at 20mph if you can see 500m of clear road and pavement ahead?

When, in a built up area can you clearly see 500m of clear road and pavement ?

It doesn't happen. Parked cars, traffic, pedestrians, buses, delivery vans etc

 

[noseall]

Speeding is hardly ever a main factor in an accident

Untitled

• noseall
• 17 Jan 2015
• 3

 

[Brigadier]

My view is that it is safer for all concerned if we drive at 20 rather than 30,

All other things being equal, I would agree.

One issue though is that, if the speed limit is clearly too low for the conditions, fewer and fewer drivers will abide by it.
Which, if and when other road users (inc. pedestrians) start to pay less attention to the road in the mistaken belief that "it's safer coz' it's a 20", is clearly not safer.


Something that I'm really missing though at the moment - coz' it's packed up - is my cruise control. Especially in 30 zones
I use it all the time, so that I can put my full concentrate on the road, rather than any on my speedo.

 

[motorbiking]

Exactly.

Which is why speed limits that are set too low rarely work and blanked reductions of speed limits tend to fail. Its also why the strategy of setting the limit according to the 85th percentile was highly effective.

When, in a built up area can you clearly see 500m of clear road and pavement ?

It doesn't happen. Parked cars, traffic, pedestrians, buses, delivery vans etc

I'm fairly certain right now (5AM UK time) that this would be the case on the vast majority of A roads with 20mph limits that have been changed in the last 2-3 years. Many A roads now have 20 mph limits in the suburbs of cities.

 

[motorbiking]

Absolutely impossible to argue against, but he will.

It's like driving on ice and hitting another car at 5mph. Its still too fast for the conditions and therefore speed is a factor.

So now you are starting to understand the difference between driving too fast for the conditions and exceeding a posted speed limit.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

So now you are starting to understand the difference between driving too fast for the conditions and exceeding a posted speed limit.

I understood that on page 1.

20mph can be too fast at tines too.

But can you now understand 20 is safer than 30?

 

[carmanmemoranda]

So you want a different speed limit at 5 am to 5 pm.

I'm fairly certain right now (5AM UK time) that this would be the case on the vast majority of A roads with 20mph limits that have been changed in the last 2-3 years. Many A roads now have 20 mph limits in the suburbs of cities.

How much would that cost?

You do twist and turn.

 

[motorbiking]

I understood that on page 1.

20mph can be too fast at tines too.

But can you now understand 20 is safer than 30?

I understand you think this.
Its also fairly obvious you think its only about the physics of object A hitting object B.

 

[motorbiking]

So you want a different speed limit at 5 am to 5 pm.

How much would that cost?

You do twist and turn.

Nothing if you set the speed limit at the 85th percentile and have a system in place where road users are trained to observe and act accordingly.

Do you want the speed limit to be set to the lowest speed based on the worse case scenario?

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I understand you think this.
Its also fairly obvious you think its only about the physics of object A hitting object B.

No I think its about you arguing figures prove different to what they do .

You keep using incomplete figures because you've made your mind up. Without all the info. As you always do

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Nothing if you set the speed limit at the 85th percentile and have a system in place where road users are trained to observe and act accordingly.

Do you want the speed limit to be set to the lowest speed based on the worse case scenario?

Do you think drivers would drive at the same speed then?

you are in cuckoo land if you think you can get all drivers trained to the same standards

I've seen drivers parking cars at walking speed who are dangerous

 

[noseall]

Its also fairly obvious you think its only about the physics of object A hitting object B.

It's fairly obvious you have not read any of the RSPA's report into 20mph speed zones and their obvious improvements in road safety.

Obviously not our fault you fail to understand basic English. Obviously.

 

[IT Minion]

@IT Minion I'm familiar with Stat19 reporting..

Remind me, what obligations exist for non-mechanically propelled vehicle operators to stop and report an accident involving an injury. Is it:

A - the same as for a car/lorry/motorbike - sec 170 Road Traffic Act?
B - none whatsoever?

Even if you take out the handful of injuries causes by horses, cyclists etc ~500 a year or less you will still see the answer is around 2%. If you then remove those that occurred on the pavement its very low.

Perhaps, but you're making up numbers now. It's fine to say you're making an educated guess but that's it.

 

[motorbiking]

I think you are distracted by small changes which make no difference to the overall calculation.

What I have proven is there is no obvious correlation between impact speed and free travelling speed.

Otherwise 90% of people hit in 40mph roads would die. Fortunately it's around 2% or less.