This follows - but is askew - from the intelligent brakelight discussion.
It is another paradox of control-by-speed limit. There is a stretch of road I use regularly. It is a 30-limited road that has a sweeping downhill stretch in the middle which has a couple of poor visivility drives on it about 2/3 down and a well-set-back ribbon development of houses both sides. The 30 didn't use to start where it does, but perhaps 100 yards further on. It was extended to get a field entrance inside it - but one where visibility during progress is punctuated by various hedging and other street furniture, but very reasonable once you get about 4 - 5 cvar lengths from it.
My natural ptogression down there (in the dry and with nothing obvious about) is to hit the 30 limit (from NSL) at about 50, but braking gently to be around 30 within 50 yards, ie, just before the aforesaid field entrance (but covering the brake). This to me minimises risk (which is why I do it). If I've overlooked a hazard (or not been able to see it for whatever reason), if something comes out of the field entrance just before it gets a chance to see me eg, I am not only doing within the speed limit (just), but - crucially - already slowing down.
It is, dare I say it, a place where a lot of drivers exceed the speed limit routinely, and there have been a few dings (though nothing more than bent meyal I think) over the years. Ocasionally we get plod at the bottom of this descent pointing his hairdryer back up at the traffic. In these conditions of course I have to be doing 30 or less by the time I hit the speed limit sign for license preservation. This renders the earlier snapshots of the field less useful (out of date on arrival), but, crucially, means I'm less likely to be covering the brake at thie "pinch point" (as to do so would mean I would be reducing to an unreasonably slow speed in the event of no hazard deveoloping). I am less comfortable in this situation as it is unnatural and, I believe, marginally less safe.
What I cant explain is, if the traffic is more dense and I am forced through real hazard (rather than hairdryer) to be doing 30 or less along that approach, I do not feel the marginal increase in danger.
Several questions, to which I do not know the answers:
1) In the hairdryer-controlled speed scenario, is the danger increase I feel real or imaginary, perhaps a misread of license-threatenong butterflies in case I misjudged the speed trap?
2) Is there a similar danger increase when my speed is reduced to the same profile it would be were it hairdryer controlled, but is actually the natural speed profile due to other (real) hazards?
3) If "yes" to 2), why do I not feel the discomfort I feel in 1)?
|