Safe Speed Forums

I think also that if speed limits are to be inviolate they would need to be set so high as to have no value on influencing those drivers who most need the guidance of speed limits. The sort of people who contribute here would recognise that the fast stretch of a certain road is good for 80 in ideal conditions, but probably no more than that. But would you want recently qualified drivers who have still to develop the hazard spotting and anticipation skills that more experienced drivers use daily to take 80mph as their guidance? Probably not, so the current NSL might be more appropriate combined with built in overtaking opportunities and enforcement that won't wallop an experienced driver for exceeding the limit there if they've done so safely.


I agree, that's what you would think would happen. But in reality it doesn't happen. We can easily see since we already have limiters fitted to artics and HGVs, and it's far from unusual to see them sitting on each other's tails on motorways and dual carriageways. I concede the sharp truckers don't do this and will still leave adequate gaps, but plenty do tailgate each other daily. I feel, as others have already said, that this comes from an unwillingness to lose speed unless they really, really have to since the ability to make it up later on has gone. I can't see any reason not to expect car drivers to behave in a similar way to truck drivers - if anything we might expect them to be worse overall since truckers have more stringent training and tests to go through.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

so you've not been on a motorway recently then? It's not just the trucks either, you often see groups of cars each about a car length apart travelling in convoy. and before anyone asks, I'm talking about light traffic conditions where the followers could easily pass if they wanted to.

I think it's beyond question that limiters would lead to more tailgating - both of the "ignorant close following" variety and the deliberately aggressive kind. At present, drivers adopt a variety of speeds both above and below the limit, which spreads them out along the road. If they could never exceed the limit, then any slight drop below it would result in the vehicles behind catching up, so we would end up with convoys of vehicles trundling along precisely on the limit.

On most roads where steadily cruising is possible, the maximum speed would effectively become the minimum too. And the more aggressive type of driver would inevitably take exception to any drop below the limited maximum from vehicles ahead, which could lead not only to tailgating but hooting and even bumping the car in front.

I also fear it would lead to a catastrophic decline in driving standards as people took the view that the responsibility for safe driving had largely been taken out of their hands.

_________________
"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

They tailgate now, without limiters, and they do it it calmly - but they still drive too close to the car in front even if they have no intention of overtaking.

I don't understand the mentality of such drivers either, but i do believe strongly that limiters will only not make a bit of difference to this sort of driver as they already do not want to overtake.

The aggressive tailgater who in the past would have overtaken will now be stuck behind you for even longer as the limiter prevents them from overtaking.

Agree 100%.

The less you ask people to think for themselves, the less they think.

Foot down, up to the limiter, they must be driving safely, so they think about whats on tv tonight instead of looking at the road ahead.

Education is needed, not rigid enforcement of a notional limit which itself may only be the maximum safe speed on a road for a few minutes a day.

On the roads I'm thinking of, they basically can't overtake anyway, limiters would do nothing to take away their ability to overtake, but they might reduce the desire to overtake as the benefit they would gain from being ahead of the car in front would be close to zero, unlike now.


Crikey, you must drive on roads with speed limits set rather differently to the roads around here. Round here, it's more likely that it would only be unsafe to drive at the speed limit for a few minutes every month.

I actually think there is an argument, which I haven't made before, for speed limiters causing an improvement in the appropriateness of driver selected speeds, even below the speed limit. My logic here is based on people's desire to equalise risk. Suppose people were forced to drive along a road at 10mph when it could safely be driven along at 30mph. The risk level at 10mph will be very low, but over time they will become accustomed to driving along at that risk level. If they then drive onto a motorway, 70mph will probably feel faster after a lengthy spell at 10mph than it would have done if the driver had been doing 30mph. Or if conditions change, such as bad weather, then the risk will seem much greater compared to what they are accustomed to. This is of course all conjecture, but then so are people's arguments against limiters, the question comes down to whether or not you can condition people to choose a lower risk level when they are free to choose by forcing them to spend most of their time driving at a lower risk level when they are not free to choose.

So if they do this without speed limiters, how can it be the case that speed limiters would cause this to happen? I guess you're saying it would be made worse, but I don't see clumps of lorries like this on motorways, I see random distributions, which will naturally produce some adjacent lorries, like the lottery is expected to often produce adjacent numbers. The way some people talk about it, you'd think there was mile after mile of lorry-less road, then hundreds of lorries all bunched up together. If anything, cars without limiters bunch more than lorries with limiters, perhaps people have a natural tendency to drive faster until they catch up to a bunch, but not go past them? Seems to me that limiters would help solve this problem by preventing them from catching up and preserving more of a random distribution.

yes I believe it will just make the current situation worse as those who are currently able to get past won't be able to. Motorways are the least of your worries though - as I've already said, it's the a-roads and getting stuck behind Mr 40mph, or worse Mr 55mph or catastrophic Mr 60mph on the straight bits and 20mph through the corners, and therefore having absolutely no realistic chance whatsover of getting past. Impatience will eventually win and no doubt crazy overtaking moves will ensue.

As for trucks, try the M1 or M20. Plenty of nose-to-tail convoys on those roads.

Also seen it on the M25. And the M4. And the M3. And the M40 (at its worst crossing the Chilterns). Actually I've seen it on just about every motorway I've been on I think.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

I think you misunderstood what i was saying.

The number on the sign may be the maximum safe speed ( e.g. 40mph ) for a few minutes a day. The rest of the day the maximum safe speed will be constantly changing from say 20 to 50 to 45 to 5 etc so all a limiter will do is enforce a legal limit, not a safe speed. Also the safe speed will vary from driver to driver, vehicle to vehicle - different reaction times, attitudes and stopping distances.

We need drivers to adjust speed to conditions, if limiters are introduced then drivers lose part of that decision making process and, i believe, will result in more driving at unsafe speeds for the hazards.

I am curious what roads you drive on if you feel only unsafe to drive at limits for a few minutes a month, round here we have pedestrians, parked cars, junctions, bends, crests, horses, tractors, schools, other traffic, fog, snow, ice, rain, etc, etc - all of which may involve an adjustment to speed, sometimes slight, other times may mean coming to a stop.

As you say, the roads you drive on affects your views a lot. I have driven extensively all over the country, and, in my experience, the kind of road you mention is the exception rather than the rule - probably to be found more in the SE than anywhere else.



So the nett effect would be to make people more likely to stick to the 70mph motorway speed limit - when you have said yourself that the motorway speed limit is too slow.
What is needed is for people to be more able to judge an appropriate speed for themselves - not make them less so.



It's because of tiny speed differentials between lanes that traffic can't pass efficiently and make more efficient use of the available roadspace.
People probably slow down when they catch up with a bunch because they perceive an increased danger - but they then, ironically, perpetuate the danger by staying with the bunch and not getting clear of it. Slower isn't always safer.

Cheers
Peter

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

pedestrians : yes, you do get the occasional pedestrian, but they don't generally represent a significant hazard in that you can see from a distance that they are aware of their surroundings, walking along the pavement in a predictable manner, not likely to suddenly jump into the road. There are typically proper crossing points that they will use if they wish to cross the road. One of the roads has a large green next to it where you get people playing on the grass, but it is large enough that the people are many tens of metres from the road, and drivers have a completely unobstructed view of them, so they can guarantee that a hazard will not suddenly arise from that direction.

parked cars : yes, some, but the main reason these represent a hazard is because pedestrians might emerge from between them, but people don't do that on these roads, they cross at the proper crossing points. But I would say most people do slow down when they pass parked cars, perhaps going past them at 10-20% over the speed limit rather than 30-50% over the limit.

junctions / other traffic : yes, and clearly you will slow down to below the limit if another vehicle is obstructing the road. I don't personally include this in my definition of "conditions", that would be like saying that whenever you're not the first car at traffic lights, conditions make it unsafe to drive at the speed limit, when the conditions are in fact fine it's just that the flow of the traffic hasn't got up to speed yet.

bends / crests: typically, the speed limit will be set such that you can stop in the distance you can see to be clear on all bends / crests on the road, and there is generally significant safety margin built in such that you can almost certainly exceed the speed limit by 50% and still always stop in the distance you can see to be clear.

horses : very rare indeed, I think I saw one a few months ago.

tractors : never.

schools : I leave for work after everyone has arrived at school and drive home after everyone has left school, so these are a non-issue on my drive to and from work. It's extremely rare that I would drive past a school at a time when its presence represents a hazard.

fog / snow / ice : Exceptionally rare, and the roads are well enough gritted and driven on that you don't get snow on the roads as such.

rain : Yes, if the rain is very heavy, people might slow down enough to get close to the speed limit. If it is really heavy and there is localised flooding, people will go much more slowly through the flooded patches. You do get some flooded patches perhaps a couple of times a year.

Note that in the above I'm not talking about my own driving, more my observations of general driver behaviour along these roads.

I also do understand that there are other 30mph limit roads where the limit is completely appropriate. An example that springs to mind is Briercliffe Road in Burnley as you get closer to where it meets up with Colne Road. Very hazardous indeed, I frequently drop below the 30mph speed limit on that stretch when I'm up there. But contrast that with Eastern Avenue in the same town - same speed limit, vastly lower risk level.

Perhaps being forced to drive at 70mph would cause sufficient pressure from motorists for something to be done about the motorway speed limit?

Try the other end of Briercliffe Road, through Harle Syke - 10, 15mph max maybe? So many parked cars, and people trying to pull out, very dangerous. But what would limiters bring to the party there? Well a whole host of trouble in my opinion. Drivers are going to be less likely to want to slow down and lose time when there is a high level of hazard density (say through Harle Syke) because they know they can't increase their speed when there is a vastly reduce hazard level such as Eastern Avenue, which was once a 40mph road, and still should be since there has been no development to alter it's hazard level and no history of collisions.

Fat chance of that.
Petrol £1 per litre and barely a peep from motorists.
Besides, they're far more likely to raise a stink over being forced to drive at 10mph everywhere else.

Cheers
Peter

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Perhaps, perhaps not. If a side effect is, as some of us fear, lower levels of concentration among a significant number of drivers I think motorways casualties may not improve at all and may even rise. In that event I would expect the infamously vocal anti-car brigade to put pressure on the government to lower the limit, and wouldn't be surprised if the government was to consider it anyway. IMO a lot of the current thinking behind policy is to mitigate the effcts of collisions with nowhere remotely near enough consideration given to how best to avoid them in the first place. That sort of thinking will always seek to lower limits as the assumption is that crashes will occur anyway, so lowering speeds will make more of them survivable.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein