That is nonsense.
You can be driving at excessive speed while below the speed limit, and you can be driving at an entirely reasonable and prudent speed while above it.
29mph in a 30 zone down a narrow road as school kids pike out of school in the rain is excessive speed. 79 on a deserted motorway at 4am is not.You will be telling us ID cards are a good idea next ;-)
The message from "dennis@home" contains these words:
Non sequitur.
The message from John Rumm contains these words:
That expresses my thoughts somewhat better than I could have put it myself.
No it is fact. Its even recorded as excess speed on your license.
I didn't exclude a slower speed.
Only if you put RFID tags on them and automated cameras to detect people who don't have them. It could be coupled with face recognision too so that people can't use stolen cards. ID cards are useless unless you can find people who don't have one.
How would you know?
Once again though, you are incorrect. The DVLA defines the offence codes as
SP10 Exceeding goods vehicle speed limits. SP20 Exceeding speed limit for type of vehicle (excluding goods or passenger vehicles). SP30 Exceeding statutory speed limit on a public road. SP40 Exceeding passenger vehicle speed limit. SP50 Exceeding speed limit on a motorway. SP60 Undefined speed limit offence.
There is no mention of "excess speed". Licenses are endorsed with the offence code, the date and the fine.
But how would this detect slow drivers in trilbies and other criminals.?
No it doesn't. Cars per hour is similar, but since they are all going faster, they all take less time to get there. Overall you get more journey miles per hour at higher speeds.
A simple *reductio ad absurdum* shows this to be the case. Consider: A suite of cars dong 1 mph over a stretch of single carriageway road that is say 100 miles long.
Well put them bumper to bumper - say 12 feet apart. So at any given time we have 100 miles x 5280/12 cars on the road. Thats 44,000 cars all doing 1mph, so the total car miles per day is
44,000 * 24. That is a shade over a million car miles a day on that road.Now put them on at 100 miles and hour, and space them ten car lengths - so its 4,400 cars on the road, and they are doing 4,400*100*24 car miles per day. A shade over 10 million car miles per day.
10 times the snails pace where they are squeezed as tight as they can go.Or let's stop them all..thats as slow a speed as you can get. That's zero car miles a day. Great.
Never mind the beneficial aspects of low journey times on drivers stress levels and alertness..
The reality of this is why you get compression waves in car congestion. The flow, once interrupted, slows to a halt because once below cruising sped, the road cannot handle the car numbers. One slow car pulling out of a junction onto the M25 causes an accident 20 minutes later and 20 miles further back on the motorway.
The message from "dennis@home" contains these words:
On your licence perhaps but you will have been booked for exceeding the speed limit in a commercial van in the days that they were limited to 40 mph on grounds entirely unconnected with road safety.
These days the police analysis of contributory causes distinguishes between speeding and excessive speed.
I often wonder why people _have_ to rush around so much these days. We all have so much more leisure time than in days of yore. Little wonder that so many people suffer from stress/heart attacks...
Just take it easy - relax and enjoy life!
That is total rubbish,.
Most of the bad drivers are so paranoid about being stopped by the police that they drive well under the limits all the time.
Im talking not about the drivers that irritate YOU, but the ones who actually cause accidents.
Like my dear old mum, who unbeknonsst to us was in the early stages of dementia, and completely forgot where she was an what she was doing and drove slap into the back of a stationary truck in broad daylight on a completely clear road.
Like the lovely old boy, now deceased thank god, who used to drive across the main road to the village shop without stopping. Or looking. At 2mph. I never saw him in second gear. How he never got hit is a tribute to other peoples reactions.
Like the middle aged mum who for reasons still not clear to me pulled out directly in front of a car on a fast roundabout at less than 20mph, and sent it hurtling into the crash barrier after rolling three times.
Like my first fatal accident I witnessed, where a man doing a respectable 25mph hit and killed an old lady who stepped straight out in front of him with absolutely no reason that the court could ascertain nowhere near a pedestrian crossing..
Like the van driver who got himself in a terribly difficult position, with the main toad in his blind spot, and, unable to see me coming at a totally legal 60mph, pulled straight across the road in front of me. That one was NOT an accident. If you had been there you would have been able to judge whether I am a good driver or not.
Of course in the tabloids these things are not news. Only boy racer in nicked cars writing themselves off at 90mph on a country road are 'news'
Thats the difference between you and me. YOU have opinions, based on very little fact. I have experience of YEARS of driving.
No..thats the point. You DEFINE bad drivers as ones who 'break the rules' I define bad drivers as ones who have accidents. If speeding drivers had more accidents the insurance companies would penalise people who have speeding offences. They do not.
There is no discernible correlation between people who get caught speeding and their likelihood of having an accident. The isnurance companies know this.
If there is any delusion going on here sweety pie, its you.
If you think that strict adherence to a set of rules will save your bacon, think again.
I am trying to tell you how to survive, not how to stay legal.
Not that much. a car length for every 10mph is the required space. Its not far off what I would say is correct in dry conditions. I leave a shade more. Most drivers a lot less.
It wouldn't, but then you obviously do not drive much, if at all.
The police know this, and don't like it. Its the same reason why motorways are built with curves in them. To keep some input required from the driver. Theye tried them straight and people fell asleep..
Well it removes all the bad drivers at a stroke doesn't it..since by your definition a bad driver is one who breaks the law.
With no laws to break, there are no longer any bad drivers
QED.
I seriously doubt it, because the wear on your tyres and the temperature of them will make more difference than that.
Not to mention substituting a different make. Rims are exact. Tyre outside diameters are not.
Because they are like you. Dickheads by and large with quotas to make up, and axes to grind.
And as bad a set of drivers as anyone else by and large.
Look at how many peoole have been killed by speeding cops, versus the general public..its rather shocking.
>
I don;t really understand. If I can't see anything in front, and the road is lit as far as the eye can see, how can there be anything in front?
On unlit roads the limit is about 100mph with decent halogens.
Although you can spot other cars (strangely they also have lights on that are visible up to 5 miles) you cant see the bends coming up.
You are joking surely? I got a ride once somewhere near Aston, at 2 a.m. in a souped up rover 3.5, and the driver was doing 140mph all down the M1, slowing for other cars and the bends occasionally. It was lit the WHOLE way.
But anyway, i've done 130 on unlit roads..its fine if the headlights are up to it, and you know the road. And on that car they were. And I did. I don't make a habit of it, but if the road is empty and there are no entrances on to it for that stretch.. why not? No skin of anyones nose.
Older cars don't cut the mustard on the lighting though.
so which ones does it NOT apply to then?
No but for the vast majority of caravans 60mph is the safe speed and thats it. setting the limit at 50 gives a bit of margin for error.
>
Lets try that with some real figures shall we.
Say 70 mph with a spacing of 70m (much less than the 315 ft in the highway code but it will do.
So as the energy is V x V we need to extend that distance by 2 times as the energy between 70 and 100 is doubled. So now you have half the number of cars per mile but only 1.4 times the speed.. a net reduction in the capacity of the road. Unless you are some idiot that wants to drive too close to the car infront.
If you paid attention you would also know that that is the reason for the variable speed limits on the M25. Its an attempt to maximise the throughput by allowing the maxiumum amount of traffic along the road which is *not* at high speed.
You will find that the standing waves are caused by drivers going too fast and then having to jump on the brakes when the traffic slows. They invariably over do it and that causes a chain reaction as the next one does the same. You may also notice that these waves usually start in the offside lane. But don't let the truth interfere with your delusions that you know how to drive.
No, it take nothing more than a heavy right foot to drive TOO fast. It takes a huge amount of skill to drive fast..and stay alive.
If it were that easy, why aren't YOU the next Hamilton? Gotta be an easy way to earn a million..
If you say so. I still have my original; clean license. I suppose I will have to get a photocard one sometime.
Excessive for what?
Every post you make betrays more and more opinion and less and less actual experience. Have you ever driven anything?
Are you Dr Drivel?
>
Not in a decent car.
exactly. That's why I switched off the cruise control
Maintaining the spacing is the only thing that can make you safer on the M25..that means speeding up to make sure some clot doesn't cut in in front of you and then usually slam the brakes on when he realises there WAS another car in front of you after all.. and backing off to open it up again when no one is likely to do it..and accelerating past the slower cars, and then finding a clear bit and dropping back the speed again.
Constant speed adjustment, as dictated by the traffic and forget the bloody limits, because they are simply getting in the way of safe driving.
One immediate case springs to mind.
You are in the center lane of the motorway doing a legal 70mph.
the traffic in the slow lane, which you have been steadily overtaking at a legal 70mph, stretches back unbroken for the previous 5 miles.
There is a gap 3/4 mile ahead.
You want to turn left off the motorway in 2 miles time.
Do you
(a) start slowing down and try to force your way into a gap in the slow lane that isn't there?
(b) wait till you get to the junction and then stop in the middle lane with your indicator going waiting for teh 5 miles of traffic to go past and a decent gap in the slow lane? (this is actually the LEGAL course of action)
(c) boot the car up to 100mph and make the gap well before the junction, pull smoothly across upsetting no one (except Dennis, who is in the slow lane in the middle of the queue, who moves out in front of you to stop you, but you undertake him out of sheer evilness) indicate, slow and get off the road disturbing no one?
Had they introduced driving tests when you got it?
This is an issue that many folk do not seem to be able to appreciate!
It worries me greatly that we have this dangerous Nanny State attitude at large. "I was doing less than 30 mph when the accident happened" - on a morning when there was black ice on the road in front of the school - when more than 5 - 10 mph would be irresponsible.
This lunatic attitude to speed rather than irresponsible speed bugs me. We desparately need to educate people to consider context and to forget the application of legislation.
"Laws are there for the guidance of wise men and the obiedence of fools!" Hmm - who was it?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.