Re: Totally OT - Highway Question - Is 100 Metres Enough

[The Natural Philosopher]

Agreed. IF the road is clear, its absolute luxury.

Exactly.

[dennis]

The capacity of a road goes down as traffic gets faster. Unless its full of idiots that don't keep a safe distance.

[The Reid]

driving fast is for quiet roads, driving faster makes them even quieter

[The Reid]

I've seen caravans turn over several times, you see them swaying in the slightest breeze. On one occasion it left the car propped up at 45 degrees on the wrong side of the road.

[dennis]

You really should not keep making judgements like that. All you do is provide evidence that your judgement is impaired.

Most of the bad drivers also speed. Catching them speeding is easier than catching them doing other things and would be just as effective at getting rid of them if it were done correctly. Just accept that habitual speeders are bad drivers just like other drivers that break the rules. They just like to delude themselves into believing they are OK.

Rubbish. Cars driving at 100 mph need to leave much more road infront of them than cars doing 70 mph. Therefore you get less cars on the road and you get more congestion.

Also it would be far safer with all the cars doing 70 mph rather than a random spread of speeds.

How does that help?

[dennis]

I think you will find my speedo is calibrated to be correct within 1 mph.

8-) I don't slow down when there is a speed camera like you do. I bet you do 35 past the 40 mph cameras. Do you modify your driving if you notice the police car following behind? Why?

[dennis]

Do you wear night vison googles or do you just accept that if there is anything infront of you you are going to hit it?

[John Rumm]

Studies have already proved that link. When they saturate an area with speed cameras the general crime rate goes up. People feel persecuted and become less cooperative with the police in all walks of life, not just motoring related.

With technology that we now have it would be possible to achieve 100% enforcement of all sorts of legislation that is currently observed mainly in the breach. While this would be a control freaks wet dream, it would probably result in the destruction of society as we know it!

[dennis]

That doesn't apply to all caravans. Are you suggesting the speed limits should be set for the lowest common denominator?

[John Rumm]

You could solve that with a simple rule like they have in France, a lower limit applies when its raining.

(it is also important to remember that the fastest roads in this country are also by far the safest)

For many people stuck with long commutes it could (in theory) lop a couple of hours a day off the time they spend in the car. I say "in theory" since they are probably already either doing that speed anyway, or are constrained by the volume of traffic.

[John Rumm]

as do most of the good ones.

Indeed it is, which is why so much effort is focused on a "crime" that can be detected, solved, and "cleared up" so easily.

I don't accept that habitual speeders are bad drivers. Many of them show far more common sense and curtsey then the ones who claim to be "slow and careful".

For example: In semi rural areas around here there are lots of 60mph country roads, and lots of drops to 40 or 30 in villages etc. The faster drivers will tend to do 60 or more on the open roads with clear visibility, but then slow down in the villages, and take account of their surroundings (e.g. slowing to 20 or less when passing a school at kicking out time). The slow and careful brigade seem to fall into two camps. One lot does 40 everywhere regardless of the road or the conditions or the circumstance. The others do 23mph round town, and creep up to 35 in the 60 limits causing lots of frustration and risk as people have to try to get past them.

The sad thing is, was say one solved the terrible crime that is exceeding the speed limit totally, then what?

You would suddenly realise you have made no difference at all to road safety in general, and you need to go and get a new bee in your bonnet so you can carry on feeling morally superior to those around you and give purpose to your life.

Ah, wet dream time again.

Eliminates a whole criminal class at a stroke.

[John Rumm]

Not heard of street lights?

[Andy Hall]

Do it in Luxembourg and they will take your car away. I know of somebody that that happened to, although there was a loss of interest when it was found out that it was a rental car. Mind you, one can drive through the entire country in under an hour anyway :-)

[Roger]

The message from "dennis@home" contains these words:

Oh yes? I have lost count of the number of times I have sat patiently in a queue at a junction as the numpty at the front, having missed several safe gaps waits until the next one is almost past before pulling out almost under the wheels of the on-coming car. While none of these have so far resulted in serious accidents there have been some very close calls.

There you go making up a strawman just so you can knock it down again and confusing speeding with excessive speed as well.

I don't think anyone here has claimed to be a perfect driver apart from yourself. As to the lack of driving skill you have to be almost completely unobservant not to notice the low standard exhibited by almost all drivers around but particularly by the slower drivers to most of whom positioning and anticipation are a foreign country and overtaking anything faster than a farm tractor a definite no-no. As a slow driver you get to see all the boy racers as they thrash past. As a faster driver I get to see all the incompetent clots who pootle along the highway unaware of who or what is behind them and unconcerned about what is coming next as all they need to do is follow the vehicle in front. The more extreme examples don't just wear a hat, they also have their tongue between their teeth as they grip the steering wheel tightly and hunch forward all the better to see the back of the vehicle in front.

It is not impossible but just inherently unlikely. However if the likelihood of having is an accident is say once every 10 years then there must be plenty of drivers around who have been lucky enough to experience none in 30 years who are in no way better drivers than those who have been unlucky enough to experience 3. It doesn't work quite that way of course. Accidents are much more likely at the start and end of a drivers life but it is still often being in the right place at the wrong time that puts one driver in an accident rather than another.

I would bet on the skills of the faster driver any day of the week. Leaving aside the thorny issue of whether or not the slow driver is slow mainly because he has slow reflexes the slow driver doesn't need the skill that the faster driver has to acquire just to continue to stay alive and just doesn't get the experience that would improve his roadcraft. Practice in this case might not make perfect but it certainly improves the situation.

[dennis]

As I said fewer deaths/injuries.

You are making the same error as all the other fast drivers. You assume it takes skill to drive too fast.

[Dave Liquorice]

You choose to live in the crowded south and presumably travel at the same time as everyone else... B-) I'm off to Middlesbrough on Sunday morning about a 90 min drive. I wonder when and where I'll see the my first moving vehicle? Might be Middleton-in-Teesdale thats only 20 miles away or more likley Barnard Castle (30 miles) which is more or less half way through the journey.

Up here a traffic jam is 3 cars waiting for the Co-op delivery truck to reverse into the loading bay.

[Dave Liquorice]

Urbanites again. Street lights or lit motorways are an urban/built up area thing and on a majority of those roads 120 would not be an acceptable speed.

[John Rumm]

It takes more skill to drive fast and safely.

It takes a lack of skill or attention to drive too fast.

You seem to be equating excessive speed with speeding again, they are unrelated.

[dennis]

Any speeding is excessive speed. Not quite unrelated.

[Tim Lamb]

No. My maths is suspect but you will only save anything on the bits where 85 is unimpeded. I drove round you on Tuesday evening, not rush hour, not pub turn out. 117 miles takes 2.5 hours. Roughly half that distance is motorway/dual carriageway with the rest indifferent A roads. I don't believe a potential 85 would have reduced the time taken by more than a few minutes. Congestion and traffic mix simply do not permit higher speeds.

Maybe. You also have to look for employment security. Few NHS employees are going to vote for a reduced head count.

No. Engine noise perhaps. Most concentration is needed for maintaining road spacing.

regards