A339 - why 50mph?

[TripleS]

Visited my brother in law on boxing day...went on the A339 from Newbury via Basingstoke and then towards Alton. Why is much of this otherwise excellent road limited to 50mph? In many places it had all the hallmarks of NSL but it's almost solid 50...aaarrrghh.
map here
Anyone know how long ago it was NSL or why it changed?

I live a few yards from the 'top' end of it, and travelled back along from Alton late on Christmas Day.

Just a few miles N of Basingstoke there's a side turning on to a long single track road [towards Hannington] . . . which is NSL

Blanket 50s do get my goat - perhaps something for the 'lobbying IAM' thread?

Yes, well I've gently suggested what I think ought to be done there!

'It seems to have little support though. No matter. The majority are not always right.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[TripleS]

I'd imagine that because a proportion of people are treating NSL as no speed limit, this is the result. They don't believe they'll be so inclined to treat a 50 as no speed limit.

Yes that's quite possible.

Alternatively, newly introduced 50 limits might simply get exceeded by larger margins.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[TripleS]

I'd imagine that because a proportion of people are treating NSL as no speed limit, this is the result. They don't believe they'll be so inclined to treat a 50 as no speed limit.

This is one of the things that went through my mind. However the danger I see with this approach is that 50 will become the new 'NSL' and be ignored (but for different reasons). And as 50 is just another number other limits will receive the same contempt. I do not see this as a way to successfully get drivers to respect speed restrictions. The more you restrict people the more they will resist.

Regards
Brian Haddon

....and rightly so!! It is inevitable.

I do believe governments are interfering far too much in our lives, and their measures are being treated with increasing scepticism by people; not just in our motoring, but generally. This is not good news in terms of encouraging good and stable behaviour.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[TripleS]

I'd imagine that because a proportion of people are treating NSL as no speed limit, this is the result. They don't believe they'll be so inclined to treat a 50 as no speed limit.

This is one of the things that went through my mind. However the danger I see with this approach is that 50 will become the new 'NSL' and be ignored (but for different reasons). And as 50 is just another number other limits will receive the same contempt. I do not see this as a way to successfully get drivers to respect speed restrictions. The more you restrict people the more they will resist.

Regards
Brian Haddon

And when people roundly ignore the 50's & treat them as no speed limit, it will give them the ammunition for ever more draconian measures.

....which might be welcomed in some of the, er, shall we say, more eagerly authoritarian quarters?

You may be right though, but it is likely to lead to a worse situation overall; it may encourage more antagonism between the people and government. I do not welcome the idea of such conflict, but it might happen; in which case the people must win, by whatever means.

We are more important than the government. They are supposed to be serving us, not controlling and restricting our choices in how we behave.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[ExadiNigel]

.....You may be right though, but it is likely to lead to a worse situation overall; it may encourage more antagonism between the people and government.

At this point I totally agree with you!:shock:

There is a point where limits can be reduced too far.

I do not welcome the idea of such conflict, but it might happen; in which case the people must win, by whatever means.

By whatever means? No, surely not!

We are nore important than the government. They are supposed to be serving us, not controlling and restricting our choices in how we behave.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Yep! Back in agreement again.

Nigel

[Big Err]

And when people roundly ignore the 50's & treat them as no speed limit, it will give them the ammunition for ever more draconian measures.

My argument in Professional Life against unrealistically low speed limits is that if implemented the instigator (politician/community/planner) have an equally unrealistic expectation that traffic will immediately conform to it.

This becomes the Professionals rod to beat their own back as pressure is then reapplied by the initial instigators for high levels of enforcement or as von says "more draconian measures".

[ROG]

Just looking at the general overall picture, would ADUK members agree that the more the general traffic increases, the more restrictions on speed is required

I know it should not be this way as drivers should be able to adapt to curent conditions but unfortunately this does not happen.

The only way forward that I can see is an electronic variable limit on every road in the network.

Or

Every driver to become an advanced motorist - where is that flying pig.....

[martine]

That'll be:DfT Circular 1/06

Thanks for this link Andy...I haven't read it yet but noticed it was open for public consultation. This was news to me (and I'm sure many others) and had I known, I would have contributed.

Looking through the associated DfT guidance letters I see they list the organisations that DID contribute: RAC Foundation, BRAKE, ROSPA but not a dicky-bird from the IAM...

[Big Err]

Just looking at the general overall picture, would ADUK members agree that the more the general traffic increases, the more restrictions on speed is required

You'll find on the most congested parts of the motorway and dual carriageway/special roads network, speed limits (usually enforced) are being used to increase lane capacity and reduce tailgating (an unexpected benefit of average speed cameras!!). The latter has the benefit of reducing shunts and therefore reducing delays at peak times.

However, in many places reduced speed limits are being introduced due to local/community/political pressures and maybe with a bit of NIMBYism??? I can't help that think that the person who complains about the speed of traffic through their community are likely to be 'speeding' through yours.

[Big Err]

Looking through the associated DfT guidance letters I see they list the organisations that DID contribute: RAC Foundation, BRAKE, ROSPA but not a dicky-bird from the IAM...

No surpises there though. I'd also suspect that the ROSPA input was not from the Advanced Driving section of ROSPA.

[ExadiNigel]

....I can't help that think that the person who complains about the speed of traffic through their community are likely to be 'speeding' through yours.

Not sure about the accuracy of this statement. Though I seem to remember that where a local community have requested a speed camera to be installed, many of those caught were from that same community!

Nigel

[ScoobyChris]

Not sure about the accuracy of this statement. Though I seem to remember that where a local community have requested a speed camera to be installed, many of those caught were from that same community!

Same happened in the village near where I work. Our site has some 5000 employees and about 2/3 of them come off the motorway and through the village (30mph into NSL after the village). The villagers were complaining that people were "racing" through their village so the local police set up a man with a speed gun. They were correct - a lot of people were racing through their village, but ironically, the majority caught lived in the village.

Chris

[ScoobyChris]

Every driver to become an advanced motorist - where is that flying pig.....

An IAM observer made a comment recently that if every driver was an advanced driver there'd be no need for speed limits. Nice in theory, but my own personal view is that the advanced driving standard would need to be raised somewhat before that was the case!

Chris

[TripleS]

.....You may be right though, but it is likely to lead to a worse situation overall; it may encourage more antagonism between the people and government.

At this point I totally agree with you!:shock:

There is a point where limits can be reduced too far.

I do not welcome the idea of such conflict, but it might happen; in which case the people must win, by whatever means.

By whatever means? No, surely not!

We are nore important than the government. They are supposed to be serving us, not controlling and restricting our choices in how we behave.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Yep! Back in agreement again.

Nigel

Hello, Nigel. Nice to see some measure of agreement.

....but "by whatever means"....?

I would say yes, ultimately. If it really comes to the crunch, the will of the people must prevail over the excessive control freakery and bullying (or however we regard it) of that tiny minority of individuals comprising a government. They should not be regarded as functioning with unfailing wisdom and accepted by us as the supreme authority on all things at all times.

Anyhow, I have things I need to do; I can't be hanging about here all day, bandying words with the likes of you lot. This could get very deep, and I'm not sure I'm equipped to do the subject justice.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[vonhosen]

Every driver to become an advanced motorist - where is that flying pig.....

An IAM observer made a comment recently that if every driver was an advanced driver there'd be no need for speed limits. Nice in theory, but my own personal view is that the advanced driving standard would need to be raised somewhat before that was the case!

Chris

It would have to test the appropriateness of higher speed choice for a start.

As soon as the speed ramps up, most people who are fine with & drive to the system at slower speeds, start to have safety/system issues. Until they develop their system & timing to a sufficient standard for the new parameters.