ADUK Archive

Posted: **Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:24 pm**

Officially announced today the UK's road Killed and Seriously Injured stats are up for the year-ending Sept '14.

http://fleetworld.co.uk/news/2015/Feb/Road-deaths-rise-for-first-time-in-30-years/0434018342

It's not directly explainable by the economy continuing to recover apparently but it could be a statistical blip of course - although the trend has been up for several quarters running.

Predictably BRAKE have called for more, lower speed limits...if the medicine doesn't work then make the medicine stronger I guess:

Brake is calling on all political parties to make three, key general election manifesto commitments to get casualties falling again and enable everyone to get around safely, sustainably and actively:

Change the default urban speed limit to 20mph to protect people on foot and bike, and allow everyone to walk and cycle without fear.
Introduce graduated driver licensing, to allow new drivers to build skills and experience gradually while exposed to less danger.
Introduce a zero-tolerance drink drive limit of 20mg per 100ml of blood, to stamp out the menace of drink driving once and for all.

Personally I would support 2 of their 3 proposals and vehemently challenge the 3rd - I'm sure you can guess which.

Posted: **Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:40 pm**

I'm with you on that Martine.

Posted: **Fri Feb 06, 2015 5:47 pm**

20mph would make no difference - those who cause accidents at 30 would cause them at 20 (i.e. they won't change their speed)

alcohol limits - you have to be cautious not to pick up those who consume alcohol unintentionally (e.g. in a pudding) - possibly not easy to implement

graduated licences - yes sounds a great idea... normal licence as now, then for those with AD skills allow additional privileges (e.g. 80 on the motorway) - electronic car tags could enable that...

Alasdair

Posted: **Fri Feb 06, 2015 6:02 pm**

I'd prefer to see an emphasis being placed on "safe road use" instead of the same old "speed kills" message.

Undoubtably inappropriate use of speed is a cause of accidents, but careless driving, driving too close, inattentive behaviour, distraction and a whole range of other issues are just as likely to cause accidents.

In addition, there has been a huge increase in cyclists over the last few years and I'll bet that a significant proportion of those extra deaths and serious injuries involve cyclists who have received little or no training before going out on our very busy roads. Children seem to receive very little road safety training these days too - certainly nothing like we received in the 1970s.

Putting all the blame (and further restrictions) solely on the motorist is a very myopic approach, and if, as a society, we are really concerned about the number of fatal and serious accidents on the road, then we should take a much more holistic approach to road safety.

If we're being pragmatic about it though, it's actually only a tiny rise when you consider just how many vehicles are on our roads these days and how many miles are covered. Any fatal or serious accident is a genuine tragedy - I should know - but we all accept that risk when we choose to use the roads in any capacity.

Posted: **Fri Feb 06, 2015 10:55 pm**

Driver education is the key here, Just because a road says 30, doesn't mean I drive at that limit, sometimes i'll crawl past a local school in an urban area, because those picking their kids up have parked all over the zigzag lines and in the most silly of places! And the last thing I want to do is hit a kid that runs from between the idiotically parked vehicles!

I have got a lot better at appropriate speed since doing my AD sessions. And I think this needs to be hammered home more than lowering every urban speed limit.

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:04 am**

... and there's something going on across the Channel, too.
http://etsc.eu/france-and-the-uk-see-fi ... ral-years/

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:12 am**

akirk wrote:20mph would make no difference - those who cause accidents at 30 would cause them at 20 (i.e. they won't change their speed)

alcohol limits - you have to be cautious not to pick up those who consume alcohol unintentionally (e.g. in a pudding) - possibly not easy to implement

graduated licences - yes sounds a great idea... normal licence as now, then for those with AD skills allow additional privileges (e.g. 80 on the motorway) - electronic car tags could enable that...

Alasdair

I'm no supporter of Brake's over-simplified view of things but you should check out Newton's Laws - reducing the prevailing speed on a road from 30-ish to 20-ish makes a massive difference.
Brake to a stop from 30, brake to a stop from 20 => massively different outcomes (I.e residual speed and resultant impact speed and force) along the lines of braking/deceleration before stopping.
I believe it is the case that 20 limits worked well in London despite a lot of non-compliance, no doubt, and, as a result, they are bound to proliferate outside of the capital.

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2015 2:08 am**

Ralge wrote:I believe it is the case that 20 limits worked well in London despite a lot of non-compliance, no doubt, and, as a result, they are bound to proliferate outside of the capital.

What information do you have on that? I find 20's on through routes in London random confusing and maddening. This is mainly due to inappropriate implementation. I am entirely happy with 20's in narrow residential streets.

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2015 2:15 am**

Personally I think cyclists should be obliged to participate in training, pass a test before being allowed on the road, the bike to have an ID plate and have insurance.

The list of idiotic actions I've seen cyclists perform is endless. In ratio to car drivers, if drivers acted the same there would be carnage on the roads.

This is definitely a European problem, after spending 9 years in Italy and 4 in Germany I've seen the same stupid and dangerous antics; Berlin was definitely the worst!

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2015 7:13 am**

waremark wrote:
Ralge wrote:I believe it is the case that 20 limits worked well in London despite a lot of non-compliance, no doubt, and, as a result, they are bound to proliferate outside of the capital.

What information do you have on that? I find 20's on through routes in London random confusing and maddening. This is mainly due to inappropriate implementation. I am entirely happy with 20's in narrow residential streets.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/do ... london.pdf

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2015 11:11 am**

Ralge wrote:
waremark wrote:
Ralge wrote:I believe it is the case that 20 limits worked well in London despite a lot of non-compliance, no doubt, and, as a result, they are bound to proliferate outside of the capital.

What information do you have on that? I find 20's on through routes in London random confusing and maddening. This is mainly due to inappropriate implementation. I am entirely happy with 20's in narrow residential streets.

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/do ... london.pdf

Thanks for the link. I have not got time to go through it all. One thing I saw indicated that key data was from 1986 to 2006. If I understood that correctly I think it has little relevance to the sort of roads which have had 20 limits imposed recently.

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:23 pm**

akirk wrote:alcohol limits - you have to be cautious not to pick up those who consume alcohol unintentionally (e.g. in a pudding) - possibly not easy to implement

The other, seasonal concern is around cold and flu remedies and the various side effects of both being ill and the medication.

However I'm not so sure that ignorance of the effects should define the limit.

Posted: **Sat Feb 07, 2015 12:57 pm**

Ralge wrote:
akirk wrote:20mph would make no difference - those who cause accidents at 30 would cause them at 20 (i.e. they won't change their speed)

alcohol limits - you have to be cautious not to pick up those who consume alcohol unintentionally (e.g. in a pudding) - possibly not easy to implement

graduated licences - yes sounds a great idea... normal licence as now, then for those with AD skills allow additional privileges (e.g. 80 on the motorway) - electronic car tags could enable that...

Alasdair

I'm no supporter of Brake's over-simplified view of things but you should check out Newton's Laws - reducing the prevailing speed on a road from 30-ish to 20-ish makes a massive difference.
Brake to a stop from 30, brake to a stop from 20 => massively different outcomes (I.e residual speed and resultant impact speed and force) along the lines of braking/deceleration before stopping.
I believe it is the case that 20 limits worked well in London despite a lot of non-compliance, no doubt, and, as a result, they are bound to proliferate outside of the capital.

My apologies - I am aware of that, but I was meaning something different...
A limit's purpose is to get the driver to drive slower - until we get to a point of electronic limits which talk to the cars (possible already!) the limit is about changing the driver's intent...
On the basis that most drivers choose their speed based on car / urgency / road / etc. more than the limit - I am not sure that reducing it to 20mph will necessary make any difference in terms of drivers who even now ignore the 30mph limits...
I watched two cars the other day in our village driving towards a blind bend ahead of me - one doing c. 40 - 45... the other overtaking the first!

at the moment a 20mph limit has a sense of novelty and is unusual enough to catch attention - so it can be effective - change it across the board and it will lose that effectiveness an we will be back to the same place... except for those who are obedient to the law and who will now be restricted to 20 even in places where it is un-necessary...

sadly it is easy to change a sign - it would make more sense to actually study places in which accidents occur and to change roads / road furniture / etc. to subliminally influence / change the way in which people drive across that section of road...

a good example is having chicanes / restrictions as you enter a village, which they have in a few places around here - they work really well - perception of speed is affected by the speed at which you are travelling which is why it can be difficult bringin your speed down as you enter a village - the physical lay out of the entry as a chicane forces a slower speed and resets that perception - meaning that drivers are more likely to drive slower through the village... can work well

just random thoughts...

Alasdair

Posted: **Mon Feb 09, 2015 12:20 pm**

akirk wrote:sadly it is easy to change a sign - it would make more sense to actually study places in which accidents occur and to change roads / road furniture / etc. to subliminally influence / change the way in which people drive across that section of road...

a good example is having chicanes / restrictions as you enter a village, which they have in a few places around here - they work really well - perception of speed is affected by the speed at which you are travelling which is why it can be difficult bringin your speed down as you enter a village - the physical lay out of the entry as a chicane forces a slower speed and resets that perception - meaning that drivers are more likely to drive slower through the village... can work well

just random thoughts...

Alasdair

The Dutch have this as a principle of their road design, rather than the (motor) traffic flow, which is the guiding principle in the UK:
http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/search/label/sustainable%20safety

Posted: **Mon Feb 09, 2015 12:30 pm**

I would rather we went that way as the authorities seem determined to kill flow anyway!

Alasdair

ADUK Archive

KSI's up

KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up

Re: KSI's up