Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Oct 27, 2025 09:01

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 22:28 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Seen on another forum:

Quote:
I sent the tories an e-mail asking if they had any plans to raise the motorway speed limit if they get into power.

Just in case anyone's interested, here's the response.

Quote:
We do not intend to raise the speed limit from the current 70 mph to 80 mph. This was our policy at the last election but on reflection we have decided that this could have some disadvantages. The first one is environmental as the faster cars go above a certain speed the more CO2 they produce per kilometre and the second point is that if we increase the speed limit to 80 mph there would have to be some draconian measures, possibly involving speed cameras or time over distance cameras, to ensure that people did not use that as an excuse to travel at 90 mph. I am sure you are aware that current ACPO (Association of Chief Police Officers) guidance is not to prosecute until the person is doing over 10% plus 1. This would mean if the speed limit was 80 mph people would be travelling at almost 90 mph before they were liable to be prosecuted. This could have effects on road safety and also it has been shown by research that if cars travel faster on very busy roads the journey times do tend to increase because of the bunching of traffic and the way the congestion builds up. We have seen on road works for example that where a 50 mph speed limit is enforced by time over distance cameras then the number of vehicles getting through the road works is greater than if no speed limit were enforced.
I have pasted a copy of Theresa Villiers speech at the Party Conference which makes some announcements on both safety cameras and clamping of parked cars which I hope you will find interesting.
Thank you again for your interest. We will be outlining some more of our policies as time goes on as we get nearer to the election which I hope you will take an interest in.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 22:33 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
Quote:
. We have seen on road works for example that where a 50 mph speed limit is enforced by time over distance cameras then the number of vehicles getting through the road works is greater than if no speed limit were enforced.


What comparison can you make between driving through road works and driving on an open motorway.....madness!!!

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:54 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 17:37
Posts: 702
Location: Whitby, North Yorkshire
Unless ACPO guidance has changed recently, I believe the Conservative version of it is wrong.

Anyhow don't worry about that too much, or the NSL on motorways. Just get rid of the NSL elsewhere. That'll do for me. :)

Best wishes all,
Dave.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 18:12 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 11:11
Posts: 194
Location: Kent
The leeway is 10% plus 2 not 1 :)

_________________
Currently undergoing training with the I.A.M.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 19:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 17:37
Posts: 702
Location: Whitby, North Yorkshire
Flynn wrote:
The leeway is 10% plus 2 not 1 :)


No, the Conservatives' error is more than simply a matter of 1 mph. They seem to be saying that you are unlikely to get nicked until you reach speed limit plus 10% plus 1 (or 2) mph, but that amount of leeway does not exist.

As I understand it the guidance is that if action has not already been taken at a lower level of speeding, it should be by the time the excess reaches 10% plus 2 mph. The ACPO guidance therefore makes provision for you to get nicked long before you reach speed limit plus 10% plus whatever, etc.

Where's IG when we need an authoritative explanation?

Best wishes all,
Dave.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 22:05 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2007 09:08
Posts: 48
Location: Cambridge
Well it would be so 'reasonable' it will never happen, gosh fancy letting us go at a nearly sensible speed.

IF the issue is the CO2 emission, (plantfood) then we should be OK for 120mph + once we all drive fuel cell, H2 or electric cars eh?

_________________
Enjoying the twilight years of personal freedom in the UK (and my M3) :)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 22:53 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
I thought the ACPO guidance has been changed to limit + 4mph?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 00:41 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands
The rule is a clear 10% plus 2mph. So at 80mph that is (plus 8mph for 10%) +2mph = 90mph ....

People should not be prosecuted at or below this figure, and when this happens they have tried to deny it.
People must have clear guidelines, and know where they stand ... well there's an idea ....

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 07:25 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
SafeSpeedv2 wrote:
The rule is a clear 10% plus 2mph. So at 80mph that is (plus 8mph for 10%) +2mph = 90mph ....

People should not be prosecuted at or below this figure, and when this happens they have tried to deny it.
People must have clear guidelines, and know where they stand ... well there's an idea ....


That large sign with a black number on a white ground within a red circle should be a clear enough guideline for anybody. I don't understand the idea of a 10% leeway on speeding. Such a tolerance is nether asked for nor granted in other motoring law. The alcohol limit is set at 35 and you would expect to be prosecuted at 35.1 not 40.5.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 09:35 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 19:08
Posts: 3434
I think it originally stems from the fact that earlier speedos were as much as 10% out and in some cases 10% underreading giving the motorist who thought he was driving on the limit the chance of being 10% over. Fuel pumps used to be able to be 10% out too but I think they have clamped down now it's so bl@@@y expensive.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 09:39 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
The leeway is to ensure certainty of a guilty verdict leaving no room for the inaccuracy of equipment defence to be used.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:20 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
dcbwhaley wrote:
That large sign with a black number on a white ground within a red circle should be a clear enough guideline for anybody. I don't understand the idea of a 10% leeway on speeding. Such a tolerance is nether asked for nor granted in other motoring law. The alcohol limit is set at 35 and you would expect to be prosecuted at 35.1 not 40.5.

I believe practical drink drive limits kick in at above 39; less than that is sometimes let go.

Isn't the 2 second delay before RLC activation exactly the same kind of tolerance?

Most other motoring requirement aren't continuously variable (numerical) in nature, but there are grace periods for things like tax and MOT.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 07:51 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2007 22:50
Posts: 3267
graball wrote:
I think it originally stems from the fact that earlier speedos were as much as 10% out and in some cases 10% underreading giving the motorist who thought he was driving on the limit the chance of being 10% over. Fuel pumps used to be able to be 10% out too but I think they have clamped down now it's so bl@@@y expensive.


I thought it was the other way round.

I.e. driver driving at an indicated 34 say, thinking their speedo must be over reading and that they were travelling at a real speed of 30, but there speedo wasn't overreading and they actually were travelling at 34.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 08:24 
Offline
Supporter
Supporter
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2008 13:45
Posts: 4042
Location: Near Buxton, Derbyshire
I thought it was the other way round.

I.e. driver driving at an indicated 34 say, thinking their speedo must be over reading and that they were travelling at a real speed of 30, but there speedo wasn't overreading and they actually were travelling at 34.[/quote]

If speed really is such an issue cars should be required to have accurate speedometers which are recalibrated periodically.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:29 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London
weepej wrote:
I thought it was the other way round.

It is meant to be today, but graball did say "earlier speedos". I don't know what the situation was yesteryear.

dcbwhaley wrote:
If speed really is such an issue cars should be required to have accurate speedometers which are recalibrated periodically.

Indeed. I've driven a car with a significantly underreading speedo (would be travelling at a true 10%+2 for an indicated legal speed).

As it is, most people know speedos have a tolerance (but fewer know exactly how), so some will be tempted into 'compensating', even though there is a chance their speedo could actually be spot-on.

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 15 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 233 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.025s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]