Safe Speed Forums

That is a totally specious argument:

The "remove all signs / markings" approach is put forward for an urban environment where various road users including pedestrians interact with each other - in that specific situation the 20mph maximum design speed principle is relevant as the negotiation / communication taking place is arguably analagous with our prototypical hunter / gatherer group.

The situation at speeds in excess of 100mph is rather different - I think it's safe to assume that the communication will be taking place with people travelling in the same direction at similar speeds - the differential speed is in fact likely to be rather less than the said 20mph, so in fact the same principle can still apply perfectly validly.

Incidentally, the Red Flag Act had nothing to do with machine / human interaction and everything to do with machine / horse interaction - the idea being to warn riders or drivers of horses which might be "spooked" by the unexpected apparition. Those writers (including the venerable L J K Setwright) who have argued a more sinister motive have not tended to evidence their assertions.

I refer the honourable forum member to the comment I made some time ago:
so I certainly won't be running anywhere at 20mph!

Seriously, the group in question might be doing various things whilst out hunting, so it's the differential speed mostly - and nobody has ever suggested a precise "possible / impossible" speed for this sort of communication, so maybe we'd better standardise on an assumption of "ish"!

Why box yourself in? The 'self explaining roads' concept is very much in its infancy. It works because it gives responsibility and encourages interaction and negotiation. These principles are extensible way outside of the 'home zone' type environment.

It's absolute nonsense to suggest that any "neuropsychological principle" (your words) prevents "giving responsibility" or "encouraging interaction" or "negotiation for space" at speeds above 20mph (differential or otherwise).



It's not true is it? People move to L3 giving space for L1 drivers to move to L2 all day long all over our motorways. Sometimes the speed differentials are over 60mph.



Really? Nothing to do with a fear of speed then? And you're not aware that one of the arguments advanced in support of fear of speed was that the human frame / human brain wasn't designed for speeds in excess of (pick your random number)?

This page may help you to understand why the number tells you little about the situation.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Yeah, nor me. I’m afraid I have a tendency to use hypothetical word-pictures.

I think you are limiting our ability to ‘communicate’ with fellow road users if you consider eye contact only. It’s massively important in some situations but we have the ability to ‘learn’ so much more about someone’s likely actions by studying a much bigger picture.
Body language, vehicle position and movement and that all-important ‘Seventh Sense’, will enable us to make accurate predictions.

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

Seventh? I'm still trying to get a proper grip on my own sixth sense.

Was that a slip or have you got an interesting definition for us?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Ah ha! so you’ve only got six senses, have you?

If it is a slip, it’s not mine. Basically it’s all about learning to over-ride your brain to prevent it making assumptions. It goes a bit like this:

The brain always tries to work at optimum speed and will fill in the ‘blanks’ within our vision. If it can make an assumption, it will, and then it skips the rest of the processing and delivers the result as a fact. It’s always trying to ‘fill in the missing gaps’.

In simple terms, if we can’t see something, the brain is likely to tell us there’s nothing there.

The ‘Seventh Sense’ is where we develop the ability to ignore the result the brain delivers and fill in our own possible options on what is missing or what might happen.

(I could have called it ‘Road Sense’, but that doesn’t sound so intriguing)

_________________
It's tricky doing nothing - you never know when you're finished

Mmmm, is the Danish and Dutch psche the same as the British?
Do they have the same attitude towards driving in general?
Do they have the same chav elements that the UK have?
Would we need a bit more social engineering before we are ready for unsigned junctions?

Whilst they might work in some areas they might not work in all areas and I think that's the same in Holland and Denmark.

With respect, I think you're confusing two different ideas there. The "shared space" which is the basis of this thread is rather different from the "self explaining roads" whereby it is apparent to the driver what sort of road they're on from the markings etc.



Would you mind awfully highlighting where I allegedly made that suggestion? I simply pointed out one of the bases of the shared space concept. Perhaps you'd like to provide references for the "absolute nonsense" suggestion?



The suggestion I put forward is perfectly true - the situation you describe is not one of communication between drivers in the way we were considering, but reaction by the driver giving way either to an indicator seen on the car in L1 or to an observed situation which leads that driver to conclude that the driver in L1 will wish to change lanes. In either case the driver in L1 will, one hopes, be observing whether or not there is a gap being created to move into and be reacting accordingly...



The Locomotive Act 1865 was brought in to address the problems perceived to be caused to horses by the (rather noisy and visually frightening with lots of exposed machinery) primarily steam powered vehicles of the day - the "humans can't travel at such speeds" fear was actually to do with the passenger railways IIRC.

Incidentally, the equation put forward in the article you cite could actually be used to support the "reduce speed and all will be well" approach and rather contradicts the conclusion drawn later in the piece that dealing with one factor cannot succeed - but then we do all agree that real life is never that simple. It certainly doesn't work along any lines other than those governed by the behaviour, conscious or unconscious, of its participants.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

From todays 'Independent':

Sharing the road: a sign of the times?
It sounds like a crazy idea, but the German town of Bohmte is getting rid of its road signs
By Tony Paterson
Published: 17 September 2007

There is only one sign that warns you that all other traffic signs are being abolished in the small west German town of Bohmte: it is a huge black exclamation mark on a red and white background with the somewhat baffling "Priority Changed" written in bold letters underneath.

Otherwise the street is a broad vista of smooth pink cobblestones edged with strips of nobbly white rubber to accommodate the blind. There are no traffic lights, no stop signs, no waiting restrictions and no proper kerbstones. Soon the road user is confronted with an alarming reality – nobody has priority.

A town without traffic signals initially conjures up images of central Cairo or Naples in the middle of the rush hour with snarling, clench-fisted drivers revving their engines and fighting for each inch of space, leaving pedestrians diving for cover.

But in Bohmte, cars that pass along this stretch of sign-free road seem to be driven by swivel-headed paranoiacs with rubber vertebrae. They crawl along at little more than 15mph, their occupants constantly craning their necks to make doubly sure that they are not going to hit anything, be it a pedestrian, cyclist or even another car.

Yesterday was day three of the start of Bohmte's bold experiment. The town of 7,500 inhabitants north-east of Osnabrück has decided to abolish all traffic signs and signals in an attempt to cut traffic congestion and accidents. In rule-obsessed Germany, where there are 1,800 combinations for the country's total of 650 traffic signs – the project is an attempt to wean drivers off the idea of permanent external control and put responsibility for road safety firmly back in the hands of the road user.

Klaus Goedejohann, Bohmte's mayor, and one of the chief initiators of the project, told The Independent yesterday that the idea was designed principally to cut the flow of lorry traffic through his town. "Every day, an average of 13,500 vehicles pass through Bohmte and most of them are lorries, but from now on drivers and pedestrians will enjoy equal rights," he insisted.

The ¿2.3m (£1.6m) scheme is being funded by the European Union and is based on the so-called "shared space" traffic management concept dreamt up by the Dutch expert Hans Monderman. His system is designed to ensure that road users "negotiate" with each other through eye contact or hand signals rather than having it enforced by traffic signals and signs.

Mr Monderman's scheme is already used in the Dutch town of Drachten where accidents and traffic congestion have dropped dramatically since it was introduced. Studies show that the scheme keeps traffic movement fluid. Cars pass through the town twice as fast as before and use less fuel while doing so.

Bohmte launched the first stage of "shared space" this week by removing all traffic signs from one of the town's major roads, re-paving it and flanking it with oak tree saplings. The centre of the town is being ripped up for further modification which will turn its entire main thoroughfare into an area interspersed by large roundabouts, on which nobody had priority on the streets.

Mr Goedejohann said the scheme was a true expression of "people power". More than three years ago Bohmte's residents were asked to come up with suggestions aimed at cutting congestion on the town's main thoroughfare that served as an east-west lorry route.

"The residents were against the obvious suggestion which would have been a bypass, because experience showed that they take away customers from the shops," the mayor said. "They wanted to keep traffic passing through the town centre but slower and at a reduced volume," he said.

As Hans Monderman's concept seemed worth investigating, the town made contact with his office in Holland. Within weeks Mr Monderman was himself in Bohmte, explaining the advantages of his scheme to a crowded town hall. A busload of initially-sceptical Bohmte townsfolk travelled to Drachten to see the concept in action. "They were pooh-poohing the idea on the way there, on the way back they were converted," the mayor said yesterday.

Yet not all the experts were convinced. Siegfried Brockmann, a traffic accident specialist for Germany's Association of Insurers said that the project only worked when there is a consensus of opinion among those involved. "More than 13,000 vehicles pass through Bohmte daily, most of them are from outside. There can hardly be any consensus in this case," he said.

However, Mr Goedejohann maintained that up to 20,000 were passing through Drachten each day before "shared space" was introduced into the Dutch town. "With our version of shared space, we hope that Bohmte will gain a reputation among lorry drivers as a town to be avoided."

Most experts agreed that more traffic signals was the wrong answer. "They simply encourage drivers to speed up in order to get past them," said Professor Klaus Becker, a specialist at Dresden's Technical University.

Others such as Professor Bernhard Schlag, one of Germany's handful of traffic psychologists, argued that "shared space" creates the ideal conditions for a greatly-improved environment for inner city residents. "If the goal is an inner city which is pleasant to live in, we have to make streets narrower, install roundabouts and even build bends in the road," he said.

Professor Schlag bases his argument on his experiences in town centres with narrow streets that were built in the Middle Ages. "You can pass through these city centres by car but it's not easy," he said.

Rainer Kling, Bohmte's police spokesman, said the scheme already appeared to have cut congestion in the town and encouraged a more courteous attitude among road users.

Two farmers who stood admiring the new "shared space" highway were nevertheless sceptical about the scheme's wider use. "I don't think it would work in a really big city though," insisted one. "Can you imagine this working in the middle of Paris?" he asked.

Doesn't Paris operate something similar already? Leave the road signs in place but just ignore them.