Drive the M4?

[Agent]

Speed Limits on normal roads I have no problem with, but motorways could have variable limits determined by factors such as traffic, visibility and weather conditions

.

A system like this is already in place. In normal conditions you can go at 70, when the weather gets worse, slower limits will often be imposed (usually big flashing signs on the motorway )

As for speed cameras making drivers slow down, yes, they do make people slow down for about 300 yards before they accelerate again.

Totally agree mate. I don’t believe that speeding is acceptable, but then again I don’t believe speed cameras do an efficient job in reducing speeding on our roads. Perhaps for black spots, and higher risk areas like schools, but in everyday use, once their location is known they just cause the slowdown – speedup syndrome.

Cars are designed for stability and good handling at high speeds these days, a BMW 5 series will quite happily cruise along at 155mph all night long and as long as traffic is very light and conditions are ok why the hell shouldn't it?

Because a Series 5 in a crash at 155mph is sure as hell going to raise the risks of a fatality occurring. Its only ‘safe’ travelling at 155mph provided its not in an accident.

Some kid gonna kick his football out into the middle of the M4? No accidents will all boil down to driver error something that we'll never eliminate no matter how many black boxes and cameras we use on motorists.

Exactly. Accidents happen, your not going to stop that, irrelevant of the speed limit. But providing a speed limit that is a good compromise between safety and commuting is a must. I don’t know who calculates this to be 70mph, but if this is the set number, it should be adhered to, no matter if we agree with it or not.
Sure, im not denying it would be nice to go down the motorway at 90mph for example, but what if this doubled the average fatality rate? What if it tripled it? Where do you draw the line?

It would be interesting to see how the risk of a fatality increases with speed, providing all other factors remain the same. Im guessing not many unbiased research has been done into this though, as it appears most ‘research’ about on the net has a strong bias towards one side or the other.

Every speed you can think of is safe, until someone has an accident.

Thanks for killing free will.

Your ‘free will’ is limited by the law, like everyone else’s. Sure, you can break it, like everyone else can, but like the crazy French guy out of the Matrix says, ‘cause and effect’. You break the law and get caught, and you’re going to get nailed for it.

[iranu]

For 6 months at the start of 2004 I drove from Reading to Bristol and back along the M4. 7.00 - 8.30am and 4.45 - 6.15pm ( I know), so I can honestly comment.

I would usually drive at @ 90mph, ALL conditions permitting. Awaits the condemnation. There were usually on average 3 accidents a week that I saw on that stretch; lorries and cars. I even came on to J11 once to find a blue 305 pointing the wrong way, stationary in the middle lane .

The majority of car accidents were caused by people travelling too close together for the speed they were travelling at and YES that includes those doing the legal 70mph in the middle lane.

Lorry accidents were caused by tire failure, drivers falling asleep or as I saw in one case a lorry hit the back of a chemical container in the inside lane. Legal limit 60mph. So speed is NOT the overiding factor in accidents.

Currently there is no requirement in the driving test to drive on the motorway. I have seen some of the most insane driving possible on that commute (and I've been to Thailand and Indonesia where they are crazy)

Motorway speed limits have not changed since the introduction of motorways in 1959. Car technology certainly has.

Putting up cameras will have the opposite effect of increasing safety. They are there purely for revenue purposes. I would rather have people warned and then fined (plus points) for persistant "tail gating". Stick to the "2 second rule"

The only way to increase safety is to train drivers better. Yes, TRAIN not teach. That way the individual driver is better suited to assess the conditions and drive appropriately ON ALL ROADS.

Go and do an advanced driving course it will make you more safe, reduce your insurance premium and surprisingly slow you down .

Take care folks.

[DaBeeeenster]

So you've never broken a speed limit? ever?

Yes, I have, when I was younger, but I do not speed now. I only ever drive in London really. It's physically imbossible to speed in London. I do believe that that would have deserved to be prosecuted if caught, and I do believe I was in error.

It's quite simple Skii; if you drive a car you must abide by the law of the road. It is a communal system based on rules; it is not down to the individual to decide what they think is best, as their actions affect all road-users. I do not wish to be involved in an accident with a Beemer M5 going 140 at 3AM on a monday morning because "in their opinion conditions were right for going 140".

A lot of people that drive on the roads in the UK cannot drive properly and are seriously dangerous IMHO. Giving them the license to decide on speeds because "they thought conditions were OK" is insanity.

[DaBeeeenster]

Can I just ask the anti speed camera people what, exactly, they would like the law changed to?

[Spud1]

Heh looks like we do have some sensible ppl on here

One big problem i've gathered from this post is that we dont have any conclusive evidence to say that speeding increases/decreases the risk of accidents.

What we do have is common sense - if you hit somebody at 90mph its going to do more damage than if you hit them at 70mph. (assuming the same conditions for this comparison before anyone goes on about angles etc)

you cannot argue with that, thats just pure physics.

To answer peoples point about '70mph being the limit cos thats what cars used to max out at' thats easy - those cars are still about today. Many old cars are still about that struggle at 70mph, let along higher. Also many NEW cars still have 1 litre engines that struggle to maintain high speeds. So raising the speed limit would increase the dangers immensely - a mixture of speeds on a motorway would be insanely stupid.

Variable speed limits - a good idea aslong as plenty of warning of speed changes are given and its sensible - but the same problem as above is relavent here....

No-one is saying that speed cameras will stop tailgaters etc, so once again i dont think that its relavent to this discussion

Also yes knoxy your right, cameras tend to only help within a few hundred yards, but the ones on the motorway are SPECS cameras that are places miles apart and measure your average speed. They can help reduce speeds over miles as opposed to just a few hundred yards - much more useful yes?

[fondie]

I drove along the M4 on Sunday, travelling on average at about 90mph saved 25% of my travelling time, hurrah!

[headbrace]

I am in the joyous position of having a car which would definately struggle to break the 70 mph limit by any great margin, and frankly it is uncomfortable at anything over about 60.

However, the point of this post is to remind you that the 70mph limit was introduced as a trial for 3 months. Certainly the longest three months I have ever known.

[Flibb]

pass plus is not a legal requirement. People can still pass their driving test, having never driven in motorway conditions, then jump in their parents car and do battle in the 4 lanes on the M25.

[Howard]

You never said anything about it being a legal requirement

You simply said there should be driver training that keeps up with the times, and there is

[Flibb]

previous post edited to keep howard happy. Pass plus has limited appel as the benefits are limited. Many people are insured by their parents for the first year, or theres the inclusion of insurance in the price of small cars this is targeted at new drivers.

[Skii]

Yes, I have, when I was younger, but I do not speed now. I only ever drive in London really. It's physically imbossible to speed in London. I do believe that that would have deserved to be prosecuted if caught, and I do believe I was in error.

It's quite simple Skii; if you drive a car you must abide by the law of the road. It is a communal system based on rules; it is not down to the individual to decide what they think is best, as their actions affect all road-users. I do not wish to be involved in an accident with a Beemer M5 going 140 at 3AM on a monday morning because "in their opinion conditions were right for going 140".

A lot of people that drive on the roads in the UK cannot drive properly and are seriously dangerous IMHO. Giving them the license to decide on speeds because "they thought conditions were OK" is insanity.

I agree with many of your points Beenie, but the premise of my argument is this, even the safest and most sensible drivers find themselves creeping over the speed limit by the smallest margin, it isn't that they are bad divers, or negligent, it is simply because they are human. The argument that all people that speed are law breakers and deserve to be caught is ridiculous for the simple reason that it is impossible for you not to exceed the speed limit even by a slight margin for only a few seconds at some point through your life behind the wheel of a car. There - you are a law breaker and a criminal.

In the time it takes a driver a few seconds to realise that this 40 mph zone is now actually a 30 they could have already been flashed - bad driver ?


You ask what I'd like to see the speeding law changed to ? I don't think the law needs changing, it just needs to be applied differently. More scameras outside shools and and less on dual carrigeways and open roads I'd rather see a few more policemen on patrol for a start, using their common sense and judgement.

I'd like to see a plate to-owner vehicle registration system as used in Canada, where license plates remain with the vehicle owner, not the vehicle. I think the vast majority of people ARE sensible drivers, but that still leaves a large majority of people who just don't care about other drivers, and I think these people are the biggest problem we have. Speed camera are not goint to stop them.

I agree with the use of speed cameras in the right places, but so far I've seen nothing to sway my opinion that they are being used purely for revenue
purposes.

[Spud1]

Skii any decent driver can keep to the speed limits, I'm not saying i've never edged over before, but thats why 99% of the cameras have a tolerance zone so that if you do edge over you wont get snapped.

Plus when taught to drive my instructor told me to aim to keep at 27mph in a 30mph zone, and 27 in a 40 etc etc - this allows for you to 'creep up' without actaully breaking the law.

If you cant do that then you shouldnt be driving...

[KnightWhoSaysNi]

I favour Taleban-style laws . No speed limits but if you cause an accident you pay the same as your victim - whether they lost paint, a limb or their life. Might make people pay attention (and realise control of the vehicle is entirely their responsibility) if the penalty for killing someone was more than £200 and a 6 month ban.

[Proplus]

Thank God, its the M4, and not the M40, nearly gave me a heart attack.

TBH, the whole speeding sentance thing needs to be changed. I've been caught doing way over 100mph on 2 occasions, and between the 2 offense have had only 3 weeks of suspension, no points penalties.

In court, you can EITHER get points (if its just speeding, then its around 6 points) or suspension, both will incur a fine. Prove that your job requires you to drive a lot, and you'll get the suspension (1 to 4 weeks). I mean thats lame. Say I was speeding down the M4 now at 85mph, I'll get caught and an automatically issued ticket will come my way for a fine and 6 points, but say I drive 110mph, I'll get a court hearing which I'll plead for a suspension and a heftier fine.....for I'd prefer to drive much faster.....not much of a deterance is it?

As for the M4 having speed cameras, they've had it for ages around the Bristol junctions, at one time they were even daft enough to paint those white lines on the tarmac and all drivers who stumbled upon them braked hard, invariably nearly causing pile-ups.

I don't mind people breaking the speed limit, or those that choose to abide by them, but what REALLY gets up my nose are people driving 60mph in the fast lane holding up traffic behind them.

[DaBeeeenster]

I agree with many of your points Beenie, but the premise of my argument is this, even the safest and most sensible drivers find themselves creeping over the speed limit by the smallest margin, it isn't that they are bad divers, or negligent, it is simply because they are human. The argument that all people that speed are law breakers and deserve to be caught is ridiculous for the simple reason that it is impossible for you not to exceed the speed limit even by a slight margin for only a few seconds at some point through your life behind the wheel of a car. There - you are a law breaker and a criminal.

2 points:

1. I believe there is a 10% leeway over the actual limit.
2. If you every now and then creep over the limit, you will, naturally, creep under the limit to a similar degree. If I have understood it correctly, these cameras average your speed out over a fairly long distance.

In the time it takes a driver a few seconds to realise that this 40 mph zone is now actually a 30 they could have already been flashed - bad driver ?

As I remember from passing my test many moons ago, you have to watch out for speed limit signs and ensure you dont break them. Are you saying that you find this harder to accomplish with driving experience?

You ask what I'd like to see the speeding law changed to ? I don't think the law needs changing, it just needs to be applied differently. More scameras outside shools and and less on dual carrigeways and open roads I'd rather see a few more policemen on patrol for a start, using their common sense and judgement.

I'd like to see a plate to-owner vehicle registration system as used in Canada, where license plates remain with the vehicle owner, not the vehicle. I think the vast majority of people ARE sensible drivers, but that still leaves a large majority of people who just don't care about other drivers, and I think these people are the biggest problem we have. Speed camera are not goint to stop them.

I agree with the use of speed cameras in the right places, but so far I've seen nothing to sway my opinion that they are being used purely for revenue
purposes.

I agree with pretty much everything else here.

[Skii]

2 points:
As I remember from passing my test many moons ago, you have to watch out for speed limit signs and ensure you dont break them. Are you saying that you find this harder to accomplish with driving experience?

I agree with pretty much everything else here.

Perhaps a bad example, but sometimes those signs aren't so easy to spot, and there is a fine-line in spotting the difference in certain areas.