ADUK Archive

From next year (I think), vans with a gross vehicle of weight of over 3.5 tonnes, will be limited to 56mph, like HGVs. What do people think of this? It will probably cause more congestion on motorways and dual carriageways, as vans and trucks will now be taking forever to overtake each other.

Does anybody know anything else about this law? What about coaches? Will these vans still be allowed in the outside lane. Will it make the roads safer? I've a feeling these van drivers are more likely to speed in 30s and 40s to make up for lost time, and this new law could affect the earnings of many self-employed couriers, who do long distance work.

And will this law eventually filter down to small vans? At the moment vans with a GVW of over 2 tonnes are limited to 60 on DCs and 50 and SCs, which I find quite odd, when lots of larger cars have a GVW of over 2 tonnes. I can't see why a Range Rover can do 60mph on a country lane, while a Transit Connect, is limited to 50mph.

http://www.limitspeed.org.uk/Brochures/EU_Directive.pdf

This is from the EU.

The UK were th only country opposing it.

I could be wrong, but I beleve eddie stobart trucks have been limited to 56mph for ages.

Jay

vonhosen wrote:This is from the EU.

Ah, that'd explain why it's a stupid number, 56mph = 90km/h (plus small change)

Cheers & God bless
Sam "SammyTheSnake" Penny

vonhosen wrote:http://www.limitspeed.org.uk/Brochures/EU_Directive.pdf

This is from the EU.

The UK were th only country opposing it.

I would imagine this opposition is because our roads are among the busiest in Europe. Many 2 lane motorways and busy three lane motorways will be further clogged by this pointless intervention.

It would have made much more sense to introduce a limiter to 70mph (perhaps 120kph) for this group.

It'll be interesting to see how this affects KSI collisions in this group. I'll wager they'll go up significantly because of boredom and tiredness, both of which are much more significant collision causers than speed, especially with this type of road user.

Søren wrote:It'll be interesting to see how this affects KSI collisions in this group. I'll wager they'll go up significantly because of boredom and tiredness, both of which are much more significant collision causers than speed, especially with this type of road user.

Did this happen with HGVs>7.5t when limiters were introduced?

I doubt the effect on KSIs will be noticable as there are so many other factors involved. Access to the insurance companies claims would be a better indicator.

Eric

Big Err wrote:

Søren wrote:It'll be interesting to see how this affects KSI collisions in this group. I'll wager they'll go up significantly because of boredom and tiredness, both of which are much more significant collision causers than speed, especially with this type of road user.

Did this happen with HGVs>7.5t when limiters were introduced?

I doubt the effect on KSIs will be noticable as there are so many other factors involved. Access to the insurance companies claims would be a better indicator.

Eric

As with many of these questions the precise statistics seem to be virtually unsourceable.

You would have thought that the DfT, in order to support the introduction of speed limiters and to appease the haulage industry, would have been only to keen to produce definitive statistics to suggest that limiters reduce KSIs. I have seen no evidence of this.

I would also have expected that, as this was virtually an overnight enforcement of speed reduction, that we would have seen a stepped reduction in KSIs for the subsequent year after introduction.

Perhaps the DfT have decided that no such explanation is necessary, that the desired result would automatically follow, given the infallibilty of the physics.

My own experiences are that virtually all goods vehicle RTCs we deal with on the motorway are cause by inattention, or the driver falling asleep. This applies even to the current unlimited stock, and the smaller panel vans. I'm pretty sure that collisons caused by inattention deriving from boredom at slower speeds and tiredness due to increased journey times will outnumber those caused by exceeding 56mph, after all the momentum of a 7.5 tonner at 56mph is still 187,500kgm/s, plenty to produce a killing impulse.


Some other opinion on the subject.

From Police Review 1996 – an HGV driver’s view.

ABD 1

Mark McArthur Christie wrote:HGV drivers have been afflicted for the past ten years with speed limiters set at 56mph - below the HGV motorway speed limit of 60mph. This means that an HGV driver will inevitably drive on the limiter rather than looking at the road and making decisions. HGV and PSV related fatalities make up 50.4% of all motorway deaths in 2002, and deaths of HGV drivers increased by 24% the year after limiters were made compulsory (1995 vs 1994)

ABD 2

Mark McArthur Christie wrote:"Look at the increases in HGV fatalities since speed limiters became compulsory," argues McArthur-Christie. "HGV drivers are careful, experienced professionals, yet they are now crashing at a greater rate than before limiters came in. We believe many of these crashes are fatigue-related and linked to being forced to drive on the limiter."

I have emailed McArthur Christie to try to obtain the source for his figures.

One of the reasons I think they introduced the limiter also was this it was absurdly cheaper to drive at 56mph than 60mph.

Fell free to shoot me down if wrong.

Jay

Always be careful with source material and statistics, and particularly their presentation.

I had a look at our own reported crash database (Fife) out of curiosity and got these figures for numbers of crashes involving HGVs - so as you can see there was an increase in 1995 over 1994,
Severity Of Crash
1-7 Date Fatal Serious Slight Total
1987- 4- 12- 34- 50
1988- 6- 15- 36- 57
1989- 4- 23- 41- 68
1990- 5- 12- 33- 50
1991- 2- 14- 35- 51
1992- 2- 15- 36- 53
1993- 2- 6- 32- 40
1994- 4- 7- 25- 36
1995- 0- 16- 22- 38
1996- 0- 10- 26- 36
1997- 2- 15- 19- 36
1998- 0- 7- 24- 31
1999- 2- 6- 20- 28
2000- 1- 14- 15- 30
2001- 1- 8- 17- 26
2002- 3- 4- 15- 22
2003- 1- 7- 9- 17
2004- 4- 6- 13- 23
2005- 1- 7- 20- 28
Total- 44- 209- 477- 730

To relate this information to how many HGV drivers were casualties would take a bit of time, of which I am not overly blessed with today. But I think the above results give an idea of trends etc, and as per my previous posting I would suggest there are too many factors involved to allow a direct correlation between crash numbers/trends and any single event.

Eric.

Big Err wrote:I would suggest there are too many factors involved to allow a direct correlation between crash numbers/trends and any single event.

Eric.

Aye, difficult isn't it. One force's figures are never enough to form any realistic trend.

My own experiences suggest to me it isn't a good idea. In the absence of any counter argument or significant statistical analysis, maybe that's all I'm going to get to base my judgements on.

I've formed the opinion that limiters havent made any contribution to safety as by christ we'd have heard about it.

Is this 3.5 ton limit crap europe as well ?

Nigel wrote:I've formed the opinion that limiters havent made any contribution to safety as by christ we'd have heard about it.

I've looked and looked Nigel, I can't find any such proclamation.

Nigel wrote:Is this 3.5 ton limit crap europe as well ?

Von linked to it above, I'm afraid it is.

http://www.limitspeed.org.uk/Brochures/EU_Directive.pdf

christopherwk wrote:It will probably cause more congestion on motorways and dual carriageways, as vans and trucks will now be taking forever to overtake each other.

This is a good point. Even if their is a 1/4 of a mile an hour difference between limiters it is possible for one HGV to gain 100 meters on another in 15 minutes. As drivers inevitably drive on the limiter when it is safe to do so it may well encourage painfully slow over takes.

christopherwk wrote:What about coaches? Will these vans still be allowed in the outside lane.

My understanding is that, as a general rule, any vehicle that is restricted either physically or legally from doing 70 mph is forbidden to use lane 3.

christopherwk wrote:This new law could affect the earnings of many self-employed couriers, who do long distance work.

The purpose of a Europe wide speed limit is the same as a standard for maximum driving hours and various other attempts at 'harmonisation'. For the single internal market to work everyone must work to the same rules so businesses can't get an edge on each other through differences in regulations. Naturally at what point these standards are set is a separate argument.

Mark McArthur Christie wrote:HGV drivers have been afflicted for the past ten years with speed limiters set at 56mph - below the HGV motorway speed limit of 60mph. This means that an HGV driver will inevitably drive on the limiter rather than looking at the road and making decisions.

Why are 'driving on the limiter' and 'looking at the road and making decisions' mutually exclusive activities?

Mark McArthur Christie wrote:"HGV drivers are careful, experienced professionals,..."

I find it difficult to reconcile this claim with the one above.

In my view careful, experienced professionals look at the road ahead when they are driving and the presence of a limiter shouldn't overcome their carefulness, experience or professionalism.

MGF wrote:Why are 'driving on the limiter' and 'looking at the road and making decisions' mutually exclusive activities?

I suspect the answer could be that drivers need a certain level of stimuli to keep them alert.

An easy demonstration that tends to corroborate this is using motorways for a long journey. After a certain amount of time, the boredom becomes so great that it is safer to leave the motorway and continue on more interesting roads.

If the limiter is set below the speed that the driver would naturally choose in the absence of other restriction, then it is likely that the mental work load is below that which staves off boredom.

That being the case, the limiter is probably having a negative effect on road safety for certain drivers.