I Speed - Therefore I'm a Bad Driver (?)

Discussion on Advanced and Defensive Driving.

Postby Ralge » Mon Oct 12, 2015 6:50 am


paul adams wrote:When I drive, i concentrate, I am acutely aware of other drivers, I have a good level of car control, my eyes are always on main beam, I always observe effectively, I'm considerate to other road users including vulnerable road users, I drop well below the speed limit when required...such as outside a busy school, road works etc.

Then, whilst on a relatively quiet 30 limit road, no pedestrians, I look down to glimpse my speed, which is sitting around 37mph..

I'm a a bad driver? Because I "speed" do all the other elements in paragraph one become void? People can "see" I am speeding, but have no real tangible evidence of all the other good stuff I do...

Does anyone else feel this frustration..?


I have no idea whether 37 would ALWAYS be safe (in outcomes),if not legal, for you or any other driver, pedestrian, cyclist emerging, turning ... on this "relatively quiet 30 limit road with no (visible) pedestrians" - your performance and accuracy of hazard perception and the likelihood of another road user having a SMIDSY moment on this road will wax and wane from day to day, minute to minute.
What we can be clear about is that the outcomes of any incident that starts with braking from 30mph and 37mph will be massively different and your other excellent driving attributes may count for nothing.
Fleet ADI, RoSPA Dip, RoADTest examiner.
Ralge
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:01 pm

Postby paul adams » Mon Oct 12, 2015 9:47 am


I agree the outcome braking at 30 vs 37 is a massive difference - possible the difference between life and death...

However, thats only if I hit someone. I know that sounds flippant - but I would struggle to see how getting the road safety message across would work, when a driver could turn around and say "yes officer, but there was no one around"......

It's horses for courses I guess, and I can't expect someone enforcing the law to say any different. However, as a previous post said - limits are for the masses not individuals or something like that... It makes sense, but advanced drivers are in the very slight minority.

I am rambling on.....makes sense in my mind anyway
paul adams
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 12:30 pm

Postby superplum » Mon Oct 12, 2015 8:23 pm


paul adams wrote:I agree the outcome braking at 30 vs 37 is a massive difference - possible the difference between life and death...

However, thats only if I hit someone. I know that sounds flippant - but I would struggle to see how getting the road safety message across would work, when a driver could turn around and say "yes officer, but there was no one around"......

It's horses for courses I guess, and I can't expect someone enforcing the law to say any different. However, as a previous post said - limits are for the masses not individuals or something like that... It makes sense, but advanced drivers are in the very slight minority.

I am rambling on.....makes sense in my mind anyway


So, presumably, you would continue to drive using that philosophy during an advanced test?
superplum
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:31 am

Postby paul adams » Tue Oct 13, 2015 1:27 pm


no not at all....However, I would have no issue exceeding the limit slightly to pass a vehicle on a single carriageway in a national speed limit area... say head towards 65mph to safely get past a vehicle before returning to 60..
paul adams
 
Posts: 29
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 12:30 pm

Postby Ralge » Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:21 am


paul adams wrote:I agree the outcome braking at 30 vs 37 is a massive difference - possible the difference between life and death...

However, thats only if I hit someone. I know that sounds flippant - but I would struggle to see how getting the road safety message across would work, when a driver could turn around and say "yes officer, but there was no one around"......

It's horses for courses I guess, and I can't expect someone enforcing the law to say any different. However, as a previous post said - limits are for the masses not individuals or something like that... It makes sense, but advanced drivers are in the very slight minority.

I am rambling on.....makes sense in my mind anyway


What you are saying is (because I'm an Advanced driver) it won't happen to me.
But "it" is no different for you than any other non-Advanced driver who thinks the same.
Only you will know how much actual and potential risk your 37-in-30 contexts puts you and others at risk. All too often the actual risk is only fully and correctly assessed after the event.
Fleet ADI, RoSPA Dip, RoADTest examiner.
Ralge
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:01 pm

Postby Astraist » Wed Oct 14, 2015 8:22 am


Question is, whether "it" happening to you is plausible, the answer to which is to be found mostly within the question:

Can I safely stop well within the road section I see to be clear?

If the conditions allows for you to stop within that distance at 37, than those extra seven miles per hours are largely immaterial. You might choose to stick to just 30 out of law-abiding reasons, but you aren't doing much in the way of increasing safety.

Yes, you could argue that reducing speed further will be even safer, making it possible to stop more safely and more "well within" the road section seen to be clear, but there's no end to this arguement unless you stop driving altogether.

Plus, by slowing down to a fault you are effectivelly reducing alertness (and, as it turns out, seperation margins) and potentialy speed differentials between cars.
User avatar
Astraist
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:39 pm




Postby Gareth » Wed Oct 14, 2015 10:30 am


Astraist wrote:Can I safely stop well within the road section I see to be clear?

If the conditions allows for you to stop within that distance at 37, than those extra seven miles per hours are largely immaterial. You might choose to stick to just 30 out of law-abiding reasons, but you aren't doing much in the way of increasing safety.

I think there may be (at least) two aspects to the issue of safety. The first is as you say, but the second is meeting (or not) the expectation of other road users who may not be as engaged in what they are doing.
there is only the road, nothing but the road ...
Gareth
 
Posts: 3604
Joined: Sat Apr 15, 2006 2:58 pm
Location: Berkshire




Postby Astraist » Wed Oct 14, 2015 10:34 am


Yes, but if the speed limit indeed falls clearly bellow the more natural speed (and this does happen, although it is less common in built-up areas) chances are other road users will also "speed" and indeed have the expectation of others to do so.

Anyhow, it's not blasting wildly over the limit...
User avatar
Astraist
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:39 pm




Postby Ralge » Tue Oct 20, 2015 10:44 am


Astraist wrote:Question is, whether "it" happening to you is plausible, the answer to which is to be found mostly within the question:

Can I safely stop well within the road section I see to be clear?

If the conditions allows for you to stop within that distance at 37, than those extra seven miles per hours are largely immaterial. You might choose to stick to just 30 out of law-abiding reasons, but you aren't doing much in the way of increasing safety.

Yes, you could argue that reducing speed further will be even safer, making it possible to stop more safely and more "well within" the road section seen to be clear, but there's no end to this arguement unless you stop driving altogether.

Plus, by slowing down to a fault you are effectivelly reducing alertness (and, as it turns out, seperation margins) and potentialy speed differentials between cars.


The fuller question is surely:
"Can I stop on my side of the road in the distance I can see to be clear and can I be sure that nothing will change in that distance?"

And the difference between stopping from 30 and not from, say, 37 (and the disproportionate resultant impact speed) must not be understated.
Fleet ADI, RoSPA Dip, RoADTest examiner.
Ralge
 
Posts: 191
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 4:01 pm

Postby javagreen » Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:44 pm


Hello,
I feel that your question is seeking to justify the fact that you sometimes recognise that you are speeding. On taking my Advanced Driving test, a Further Advanced Course and then, a couple of years later, much to my deep embarrassment a Speed Awareness Course, I strongly believe that the speed limit IS the speed limit. End of. I find that it is perfectly possible to have a challenging and pleasurable drive using my car to its full capacity, from time to time doing a commentary in my head, and using optimum limit points etc without needing to exceed the stated speed limit. Would your arguments stand if, heaven forbid, you had to explain your speeding in the case of an accident?
(By the way, I own and drive a modest Hyundai Accent, a 6 litre Jaguar XJS and a 4 litre supercharged Jaguar XKR.)
javagreen
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 2:42 pm

Postby jont » Fri Oct 23, 2015 4:50 pm


javagreen wrote:I strongly believe that the speed limit IS the speed limit. End of.

Do you (these days) always know beyond doubt what the speed limit /is/ for any section of road? Sure you haven't missed any signs buried in hedges?

If speed limits are set sensibly and signed correctly, I would tend to agree that one should instinctively know from the hazard density what a speed limit is likely to be [with the signs used to confirm], but these days that's very far from given.
User avatar
jont
 
Posts: 2990
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Cambridgeshire

Postby Astraist » Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:16 am


Ralge wrote:The fuller question is surely:
"Can I stop on my side of the road in the distance I can see to be clear and can I be sure that nothing will change in that distance?"


Trying to keep it more fluent (and especially in my native tongue) I use a different phrasing.

Using the terminology "road section" means that not only the length of the area seen to be clear is regarded, but also the width.

Being certain that the distance seen to be clear will remain clear, is mostly a question of field of vision lateraly. Once you incorprate this dimension into your decision on speed it becomes much safer.

Think of passing besides a parked car (in a build up area) as going past a corner (whehence a road user could appear) with a limit point and you won't be too wrong.
User avatar
Astraist
 
Posts: 811
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 2:39 pm




Postby jwatkins » Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:39 pm


I wouldn't say it makes you a bad driver overall. However, if you routinely drive in excess of the speed limit, and choose not to remedy this, then it's arguably a weakness.

In my view, one of the problems with speeding is that if you apply a subjective approach to compliance, where do you draw the line?

Most people would agree that driving at 37mph on a quiet built up road at 2am is not too bad. Similarly though, if the road surface is favourable, would it be ok to pass central bollards on the wrong side if there's definitely nobody else around? Is it ok to go through red lights in similar circumstances, or even reverse up a deserted motorway if you miss an exit?

Are there certain rules which we should abide by rigidly and others that we should apply a degree of flexibility to?
jwatkins
 
Posts: 30
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 9:25 am

Postby superplum » Mon Nov 02, 2015 9:21 pm


jwatkins wrote: Are there certain rules which we should abide by rigidly and others that we should apply a degree of flexibility to?


Not if one is really an advanced driver - they should be maintaining/setting standards!
:roll:
superplum
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 12:31 am

Postby MGF » Wed Nov 04, 2015 12:33 am


The problem posed in the OP is a product of a flexible interpretation of the rules. Non-compliance is more of an issue of confusing others or antagonising them rather than being seen not to be compliant, I think.
MGF
 
Posts: 2547
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: Warwickshire

Previous

Return to Advanced Driving Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests