Gatso mk 2

[badass]

My thoughts exactly.

Why do cars get manufactured to go 150mph when the speed limit is at maximum 70mph?

Speed limits will make no difference to the environment. 40% of the emissions around the UK come from shipping. Most of the rest comes from industry and avaiation.
Dod you know that a single flight to America per person dumps more pollution in the atmosphere than you driving a car for a year!
If yuo want to deal with pollution, deal with the things that create teh most. IIRC cars are responsible for less than 5% of the UK's emissions. Dropping the speed limits on motorways will not affect that by much at all. Why are the people in power so short sighted to not realise that.
For example, Red Ken of London, total idiot that he is has caused Londons air quality to be reduced by his congestion charge.
Why? Because of the death belching sooty diesel busses now driving around more. It was entirely predictable aswell. over 1/2 of the particualte emissions in the UK come from lorries and busses. The type that cause cancer and more immediately asthma.
In Australia they simply run the busses off petrol engines powered by gas. They make even a modern petrol look dirty!
In the UK, we are incapable of that kind of forward thinking though

[RVF500]

The people in power are not short sighted. They have an agenda and rely on most of us being ignorant so that they can massage the figures to get their agenda through. One that is based around promoting themselves and their own goals.

My thoughts exactly.

Why do cars get manufactured to go 150mph when the speed limit is at maximum 70mph?

Because not all countries have the same speed limits as we do, Germany for example has stretches of road that are unlimited. The argument being, get a high performance vehicle and take it where you can use the performance if you want to. You can pay to go to a track day in the UK and take your car around a race track. Of course some owners prefer to show off on the roads so they can expect no leniency when they are caught doing 150 down a slip road. Thing is, people like that will simply find a place where there are no electronic cops and treat the place as a race track. Hence my argument for investing in more police officers. Even a Ferrari can't outrun a helicopter or avoid a road block set up ahead of him/her.

[dkmech]

Helicopters aren't that fast actually
The Lynx is one of the fastest around (maybe even the fastest) and its top speed is 330kph. This is more than most Ferraris and it can travel in a straight line not having to follow the curves of the road, but police helicopters aren't Lynxes as far as i know. There have been cases of them being outrun by cars and bikes. At a guess they can do about 130mph.

This doesn't disprove your point in the slightest, just thought I'd mention it. Carry on.

[RVF500]

i've been in a Puma...ummm, a scout...and a Gazelle and agree, they ain't that quick. But, they don't have to slow down for corners Oh yeah, and a Wessex but we didn't go too far. Just up 800 feet and jumped out.

The thing with the police helicopters is that they can see a long way from up there, have a horribly powerful camera..."evenin' sir is this your bright red ferrari that you won't be drivin' for the next 12 months?" or more topically.... "'scuse me madam but is this you eating an apple at the wheel?".....and can do 100+ constantly. Damn things can even see in the dark. But as you so rightly say, nothing is infallable and the odd miscreant has got away. But I would guess that these were stolen vehicles so taking a happy snap of the number plate wouldn't do much good.

Carrying on....

[schmunk]

According to 'Helis.com':

"The current World helicopter speed record is held since August 6, 1986 by Westland 's Lynx at 217.5 Kts (402 km/h) using specially designed high-speed rotor blades."


Which is roughly 250 mph...

[badass]

My brother's a Policeman and told me the copters they use do around 175MPH tops. He also told me that if you'rem in essex the copter is theoretically never less than about 5 mins away.
This is theoretical however as the copter spends more time being fixed than in the sky

[badass]

According to 'Helis.com':

"The current World helicopter speed record is held since August 6, 1986 by Westland 's Lynx at 217.5 Kts (402 km/h) using specially designed high-speed rotor blades."


Which is roughly 250 mph...

And that proves what exactily?

[schmunk]

And that proves what exactily?

It proves that dkmech was correct in his belief that the Lynx is the fastest helicopter.

It proves that, as dkmech and RVF500 said, helicopters can outrun Ferraris.

It's an interesting fact.


What exactily do you want from me?

[badass]

It proves that dkmech was correct in his belief that the Lynx is the fastest helicopter.

It proves that, as dkmech and RVF500 said, helicopters can outrun Ferraris.

It's an interesting fact.

Sorry the way I read it, it looked like you were suggesting he was wrong.

What exactily do you want from me?

To admit that the govt's obsession with speeding motorists is wrong, and that people are perfectly entitled to complain when they get busted speeding and clearly weren't being dangerous and even fight this stealth tax

[Swafe]

Sorry the way I read it, it looked like you were suggesting he was wrong.

To admit that the govt's obsession with speeding motorists is wrong, and that people are perfectly entitled to complain when they get busted speeding and clearly weren't being dangerous and even fight this stealth tax

And to also stop going off on a tangent, avoiding the original issue in hand by side stepping it, ITS A STEALTH TAX

[schmunk]

And to also stop going off on a tangent, avoiding the original issue in hand by side stepping it, ITS A STEALTH TAX

Well OK, lets pretend that you're right and it is actually a tax.

As I'm a Tax Consultant (no really, I am), I can give you some free gratis tax-avoidance advice...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Don't speed and you won't pay any speeding tax.


Now stop whinging about not being able to break the law and get away without punishment.

Do you think you should be able to escape charges if you're just a little bit over the drink-driving limit? Or if you hadn't noticed you'd strayed above it and it was only an accident? Or if you think the limit's not fair - 'This road's straight and flat, with no turnings. I should be able to drive down it with 200 mg/l of blood alcohol...'

Seriously, how can you, or others, possibly imagine you're morally correct in your argument?

[Swafe]

Don't speed and you won't pay any speeding tax.

How many times have I heard that one in this thread?

Have you even read my last but one post? I've never had a speeding ticket, so its not like I have a problem with paying a fine, as I dont speed, thus, I've never needed to pay. The only 1 time I nearly got caught out, was due to them using dirty tactics to trap normal law abiding motorists - this is what I hate.

And also its not just the changing down speed limits by 50%, with no warning, but the countless speed cameras (Not sure where your from, but my me at least) that by law need to be visable to the motorist, so there aware that are placed behind trees, where theyve strategically been placed so that when the trees overgrow there no longer visable and people wont complain as theyve been there all along.

Also the ones they stick at the bottom, or sometimes, even on, steep hills (I can take you some photos if you dont belive me) On the way to uni its a 40 zone, driving confortably at 30mph if you dont accelerate one bit, by the time you reach the speed camera lines your doing ~42-45mph and WILL get caught unless your break, to take into account for their sneakyness. They might aswell wait till the straight later on, and put in a 30 limit camera. I just see this as ridiculous, there just trying to catch you out so they can get more money out of you.

If cameras were banned where they were on/at the bottom of the hill, hidden behind trees or bushes, they actually gave you warning before changng the speed limit down and removed the ones that cause more accidents than they save, I'd have more tolerance for them - but as it goes, if they removed all them, there would only be about 10 cameras left..

[RVF500]

Prevention being better than cure, I agree with swafe that they should be used as a deterrent. But of course not so much 'tax' is raised that way. This new way is completely covert. Like I said all along, this is about catching the unwary, those who are distracted, even if only for a moment. Now if people think that such events are punishable by fining and possible loss of license then sorry, I think that's just plain wrong. People are not robots, they err. Often not deliberately or maliciously. But people will be punished simply because they are people. Added to the 'big brother' approach which is somewhat insidious.

This will do nothing to make roads safer, reduce greenhouse gasses or any other claptrap that is spouted by the govt as a mask for this project.

As I see it most people aren't moaning about potentially getting speeding fines or being restricted. Most are angry at the underhand way in which this govt approaches things in order to intrude deeper into our lives and direct more of our diposable income into their coffers for their pet projects. The 'don't speed, don't get caught misses' argument the point completely.

Here's some free tax advice. Want to reduce your taxes? Don't make the same mistake next time. Vote these Orwellian clowns out. You may find a bit more value for tax too. i.e. troops not being shipped off left right and centre to other people's wars, police out performing their jobs instead of filling out forms and motorists not getting picked on because each one given a ticket is a crime cleared up and a tick in the box for the months stats.

[badass]

Do you think you should be able to escape charges if you're just a little bit over the drink-driving limit? Or if you hadn't noticed you'd strayed above it and it was only an accident?

Funny you should say that because thats EXACTILY what all police forces do.
Yes they do. They let people off for being "slightly" over the drink drive limit.
It is Essex police policy to let people off if they blow less than 41mg/100ml
The legal limit is 35mg/100ml
On the 200mg/ml point - you can stay in a straight line on a clear motorway and not crash at 100 mph. With 200mg/ml I doubt thats actually possible.

[schmunk]

It's Exactly, not exactily...

So Police forces tend to let people off for being slightly over the limit. OK, that's a concession, but there's no compulsion for them to do this and I wager that if an individual is stopped and acts angrily or suspiciously then 35.1's a fail...

[RVF500]

It's Exactly, not exactily...

So Police forces tend to let people off for being slightly over the limit. OK, that's a concession, but there's no compulsion for them to do this and I wager that if an individual is stopped and acts angrily or suspiciously then 35.1's a fail...

That's called making a judgement on a situation and dealing with it as the situation warrants. Which is what police officers CAN do and electronic devices CAN'T do. Which basically backs up the argument that what we actually need is trained police officers patrolling the roads and not hi-tech gizmos linked straight to the treasury.