Red Herring wrote:Do you really think the sort of driver who drives on rural roads at the sorts of speeds that means they cannot stop in the distance they can see to be clear is the least bit interested in what the speed limit is?.
Gareth wrote:Red Herring wrote:Do you really think the sort of driver who drives on rural roads at the sorts of speeds that means they cannot stop in the distance they can see to be clear is the least bit interested in what the speed limit is?.
The same could apply to drivers who can stop in the distance they can see to be clear, (and can reasonably expect to remain so). Speed limits are being reduced far below these levels; witness the speeds that police drivers are willing to use when they are in a hurry to get somewhere, and use that to determine appropriate speed limits.
vonhosen wrote:I don't think you can use the speeds that Police are willing to travel at to establish appropriate speed limits. Their risk management should be different to that of normal driving because what they are attending/doing dictates different levels of risk being acceptable.
Gareth wrote:vonhosen wrote:I don't think you can use the speeds that Police are willing to travel at to establish appropriate speed limits. Their risk management should be different to that of normal driving because what they are attending/doing dictates different levels of risk being acceptable.
Are you saying that police drivers sacrifice safety and travel faster than the speed at which they can stop in the distance they can see to be clear and reasonably expect to remain so?
Well then, how about asking suitably trained police drivers for their expert assessment of that criteria when setting speed limits?
Oh, I forgot, that's what we used to do, and now those responsible for setting the limits seem to listen to anyone spouting a load of tripe instead.
PeteG wrote:jmaccyd wrote:As someone who cycles on rural, National Speed limit roads, I have become conserned about not just the standard of driving, but the exess speed that is generally involved on this type of road. Of course these roads are not just shared by cyclists, but by horse riders, pedestrains and slow moving farm traffic.
I am not in favour of a blanket 'one-size-fits-all' speed limit like that proposed, and I am not familiar with the type of roads mentioned in this article, but am in favour of lower speed limits on rural roads. With the standard of driver ability/education in this country far to often 60MPH is taken as the speed to drive at regardless of the view ahead, or the type of road conditions that are prevailling at the time
So how far do you lower the limit? Wouldn't you rather educate all drivers in the art of stopping in the clear distance, rather than limiting speed, which could still be far too high?
Red Herring wrote:Sorry, I don't quite follow that. Are we saying that if motoring is made more expensive there will be fewer people on the road and that as there is a link between wealth and intelligence (premier footballers excepted...) we will therefore get a more knowledgeable motoring public.....
or are we saying that we should require a higher skill level to get a licence, and therefore reduce the likely number of people able to reach it?
Red Herring wrote:Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you did. I made the link.
I think that if you introduce a requirement for more training and a tougher testing regime you will also increase the number of persons who will be unable to afford the training or reach the required standard. It may be that those persons will then cease to drive, however it is more likely that they will simply drive illegally.
Red Herring wrote:I think it's a little presumptuous to imply that the ten deaths are the direct result of excess, or even inappropriate, speed.
Return to General Car Chat Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 41 guests