It can't be denied, MrX, that there are some roads where the limit needs lowering and junctions made better, but a blanket approach would not be right...
I notice that in the Czech Republic, and certain parts of Germany, they have an automatic speed reduction limit on approach to junctions (usually down to 70kph, sometimes 50kph), to me that seems like a good idea as it leaves the rest of the road at the normal 90kph limit... how would you react to that?
But obviously its only as good as the people that use it, if people ignore it, like many do already on NSR roads, then the more draconian measures may be more appropriate?
|
'Some roads have a persistently bad record, such as the winding A537 from Macclesfield to Buxton which had 27 accidents resulting in deaths or serious injuries over two years, many of them involving motorbikes."
Those of us who live up North know exactly what the problem is with that road. It's where bikers go to pretend they are on the Isle of man TT course. Figures show the majority of accidents on it are biker related. The answer is not to punish car drivers but to keep up the pressure on the bikers. If it were the other way round, I'm sure Bikers would argue the same case.
Overall though, we are still judging roads by number of people killed or injured on them. The obsession to reach a zero rating continues unabated though I hold the opinion that bearing in mind the number of road journey's made every single day in the UK, the figures really are low.
|
The case of the A537 cat and fiddle is apt.
The limit was reduced to 50mph 2 or three years ago - accidents have gone up since then apparently. Its not bad roads that cause accidents, its bad drivers.
The A537 was featured on BBC breakfast this morning. Interviews were carried out in the car park of the Cat and Fiddle pub. Very very few of the passing vehicles had lights on, despite there being very thick fog/low cloud in the area at the time.
|
|
|
|
no doubt this lowering of speed limits is set by idiots that do not drive !
The way that this 'road safety' keeps being drummed into our heads is stupid.
Just take a look at Europe, we actually have a very good safety record.
This government must think we were all born yesterday.
|
|
Don't you realize that MPs,ministers,"celebrities" do not have to comply with any laws(road or otherwise) for "security reasons".
|
"Don't you realize that MPs,ministers,"celebrities" do not have to comply with any laws(road or otherwise) for "security reasons"."
Thats right, they can just claim back their fines through expenses !
|
How do this all tie in with this one? news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8118341.stm
UK road deaths reach record low
The number of road deaths has fallen despite safety concerns about A-roads
The number of people killed on UK roads has reached a record low, according to government statistics.
There were 2,538 people killed on Britain's roads in 2008, which is the lowest annual total since records began in 1926.
That is 14% down on the 2007 figure. The highest recorded post-war annual total was nearly 8,000 in 1966.
The drop came despite half of Britain's A-roads failing to be rated as safe in a European survey.
|
As stated by comrade x, some roads are far more dangerous than others - especially where bikers are concerned.
Being an ex biker, I find it *more than tragic* the amount of young riders that lose their lives per annum.
Clearly, educating the young bloods doesn't work and neither will reducing specific speed limits, so I reckon that the only answer is ... up the legal age requirement.
|
Bikers are their own worst publicists (and I am a 400 miles per week Biker).
Last night two bikes joined a NSL 60mph road in front of me. Initially they slowed down then proceeded to do wheelies for well over 100 yards and disappeared into the distance at 100mph or more.
That sort of thing does not create a good impression !
|
|
|
|
A road near me kills lots of drivers
it like jumps out at them and says your dead
speed limit has been reduced twice but still the road kills people
latest initiative? council have applied for funding for 10 cameras
did i say the road kills?
no it doesnt
speed and recklessness kills
usually by the exact tyope of person whom mummy always tells me is mr perfect angel aged 19 1/4
better driving standards are needed and we should start with the driving instructers as i think their standards of driving really cant get much lower, so how the heck can their pupils be any better
all roads are always safe if you can read react and drive sensibly
|
|
Another excuse for inattentive drivers. It wasnt me it was the road. Blame culture?
|
im not even going to mention texting while driving
or the fact its now the culture for kids to be cool by not wearing seatbelts and slouched down low in their seats so visibility is reduced,its like mr magoo type driving
|
Single-carriageway A roads fall into two categories:-
Those sections that are built to modern standards in terms of width, alignment and visibility - like by-passes, realignments or widened roads.
Sections that fall short of those standards.
Generally the bits of A roads that are built to modern standards - i.e. built or improved since the 1970s, are safe for 60 mph limit. There is a case for introducing a 50 mph limit on more bits of sub-standard A roads and all B roads.
|
|
There's a case for improving those sub standard A road by means other than lowering the speed limits.... but then again, the lower the limit, the better the chance of finding some body exceeding it and the opportunity to collect £60
|
|
Erm, so there's a roughly 10% drop in road deaths shortly after it's announced that 10% fewer people were using the roads last year due to the recession biting...
|
Young riders being killed? The local tragedy stories are featuring 45 plus year olds with families.
They are the riders having fun and being killed on the Cat and Fiddle road.
I like having fun on my bike at 57 but at my own, probably illegal pace.
|
Figures, figures, figures
It's all ways hard to get your head around these ' figures '. I get the impression that they can mean just about anything that some one wants them to do if it strengthens their argument, normally an argument that involves punishing the road user more.
Deaths on the Cat and Fiddle road fell last year, supposedly because the bad summer saw fewer bike riders take to the roads. So how about a ban on nice summers in order to save lives, instead of punishing the car user with an even lower speed limit ?
|
|
How about banning everything - that would save a hell of a lot of precious lives!
|
"So how about a ban on nice summers in order to save lives...?"
There's drivel and there's Mr X's drivel.
|
The way to deal with the problem is to de-restrict A roads.
This is the best way to force people to think for themselves, and decide an appropriate speed - force them to read the road, and think, and make sure that roads of this type are included in test routes.
Yes, there would be some Darwinian attrition in the early stages, and some innocent lives would be lost, but, they're being lost already under the system we have.
Nanny's intervention means that the responsibility is blurred, leading to people being able to try to blame the road - which is plainly ridiculous.
|
|
N_C, would this argument not hold for all roads then?
|
This is the best way to force people to think for themselves<<
But some people *can't* think for themselves N/C, they are numbskulls who are lacking a vital organ that resides between their ears!
|
NC,
the basic principle of what you've said, has long been my thoughts...combined with warning signs only when you really need them....then people might pay attention to them
|
Heh heh... of course NC and Westpig are spot on with their retrograde line. But of course it's a non-starter in these progressive days.
'Comrades! Onward, ever onward to the overfulfilment of the five year plan!'
I quote this slogan not to suggest that our government is in any way socialist or marxising or totalitarian, but to underline the fact that politicians of all parties are now sordid, cynical, unimaginative apparatchiks. They think the voters buy this nursery twaddle.
And by Jupiter the carphounds do. We've had it.
|
I disagree.
The 'experts' are right to warn over road safety.
We - the general public - are now able to buy vehicles with performance *way* in excess of anything considered sensible.
A yamaha R1 motorcyle can be had for a few thousand pounds - and yet has performance similar to a MotoGP bike of just a few years previous.
Valentino Rossi - one of the greatest riders of all time - has said that he would not ride it in the Manx TT - and that on a one-way circuit with marshalls. Yet many people think they have the skill to ride such a bike with two way traffic on worse roads.
There are similar stories in the car world too - it's not just the bikes.
|
So what's new SteVee? Ever since Mr Toad (The Wind in the Willows, 1912) people with more money than sense or skill have been buying fast vehicles and crashing them. It's intrinsic to the logic of the privately owned automobile.
That doesn't mean we have to ask to be managed like a lot of children or sheep. Mr Toad didn't like it and neither do I.
|
So general concensus is to have a free for all...
I'm facinated to know why you feel that allowing everyone to do "their own thing" would be safer option than having speed limits... I agree with less signage, but people can't even seem to judge speed or the road in front of them correctly now, so how would no limits help?
You're certainly right about the accident and injury rate amongst drivers going up if that was to take place, and I'd hate to think what would be the outcome for the more vulnerable users of the roads such as cyclists and pedestrians...
TBH that idea is dafter than the Gov's blanket 50 limit... Let me know in plenty of advance when you intend yo do it so I can emigrate!
Edited by b308 on 25/06/2009 at 18:45
|
It needn't be any more of a free-for-all than it is already. The nutters would still be nutters and everyone else still wouldn't be. But free from looking over their shoulders for speed guns they might have some spare attention to be better drivers, with an improvement in traffic flow.
But don't worry b308, the powers that be are with you.
:o}
|
Unfortunately there have been very few experiments with no speed limits, the only one I'm aware of is in Montana in the mid 90's. Now while I accept Montana is very different to the UK, it is never the less an interesting example.
www.hwysafety.com/hwy_montana_2001.htm
|
So general concensus is to have a free for all...
i'm not after a 'free for all'
I'm facinated to know why you feel that allowing everyone to do "their own thing" would be safer option than having speed limits... but people can't even seem to judge speed or the road in front of them correctly now so how would no limits help?
i don't think everyone should 'do their own thing'...and for example I have no problem with sensible limits in built up areas...but...the reason why people can't judge speed and make a complete hash over overtaking etc...is they have no experience built up, they don't usually drive fast or overtake, so they don't know what they're doing. We're creating a country full of mimsers who don't know how to 'up their game'. You've only got to listen to my wife when she comes home from work moaning about people who can't/won't overtake a bus when it stops..THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO AND HAVEN'T GOT THE CONFIDENCE TO and there's more and more of them.You're certainly right about the accident and injury rate amongst drivers going up if that was to take place and I'd hate to think what would be the outcome for the more vulnerable users of the roads such as cyclists and pedestrians...
instead of 'blanket' rules, there needs to be a healthy injection of officialdom common sense, so that each road can be assessed on its merits. How many 30mph limits have you driven down that you think is absolutely ridiculous. Conversely, how many 30mph roads have you driven down as 25mph and thought 'hmm, that's plenty'. Drivers need to learn to think for themsleves, not just bimble along and comply with some bureaucrats diktat.
We all know 60mph NSL roads, where that speed is plenty, more than enough...then there's some where 80mph+ would be perfectly acceptable on some occasions.
All that happens with making it ever slower limits..is that the non natural driver will never achieve the skills to be a really competent driver; the good law abiding driver, will be inconvenienced..and the total clowns will carry on as they usually do
|
|
Here here... rare moment of Westpig agreement. make a note everybody.
|
" a healthy injection of officialdom common sense"
As likely as a world powered by nuclear fusion.
|
"So how about a ban on nice summers in order to save lives...?" There's drivel and there's Mr X's drivel.
The way I read Mr X's 'drivel', is - no matter how many laws you pass, some things will never change'
ie, ban nice summers, they will still come...
|
|
Maybe we should apply civil aviation criteria:
Accidents are either:
Pilot (driver) error
Mechanical failure
or
External factor (weather etc.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
