Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Oct 27, 2025 13:20

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: PR128 - observations.
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 17:29 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4813
Location: Essex
Paul et al - a few thoughts here and a couple of questions.

You say
Quote:
but we also have ongoing improvements in vehicle safety, road engineering safety and post accident medical care thought to be worth about a 7% reduction per annum when taken together

Where do you get 7% from, or is it just a gut feel?

One or two of my friends are suggesting you have been very selective with your extracts from the DTI report, latching on to "deaths are up" but failing to recognise, for example, the accident rate per 100 milion vehicle kilometres is down by 5%. (tying in pretty well with the 7% {your figure} that should have come about as a result of road/vehicle improvements). Accidents overall are down by 3% and the number of injured down 4%. Child casualties are down 8%, pedstrains 6% and pedal cyclists killed down 12%.

I personally believe all this ties in with speed cameras on open roads forcing a speed below the otherwise uninhibited 90%ile speed for the road. People feel safer thanks to travelling at a lower speed, get complacent, multiplexing their attention prgressively more to immaterial aspects, and simply do not slow down when it matters, making the speed of impact the speed of travel immediately prior to the accident instead of the substantially reduced speed of travel were the party/ies concentrating to a greater extent.

I think, whilst speed cameras in black spots and in built up areas may also have a detrimental effect, people are less selfish and still do not speedo-watch in such situations - they are likely well below the limit anyway if pedestrians and cyclists are potentially en pris.

Is it worth a supplementary release identifying something along these lines to preempt accusations of selectivity?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 18:33 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
The "7%" figure is around the average reduction over the period 1978 to 1993. See page:

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/fatality.html

I can't trust the serious injury stats at all at the moment, and they have gone even further out of whack with the new figures.

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/serious.html

The minor injury accidents may or may not be a reliable series, but by any standard, especially given the definition of a serious injury, they are far less important. I've been concentrating on fatality figures for a long time because they are likely to be both reliable and important.

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


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 26, 2004 18:36 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4813
Location: Essex
Thanks, Paul.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 425 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 : 0.074s | 15 Queries | GZIP : Off ]