Road safety: UK set to adopt vehicle speed limiters

[Chilli.s]

Public transport is so appalling outside London, everyone needs a car sadly.

 

[8ball]

If that were the case, then no, I'd have to have a rethink. But auto 20mph zones, yeah defo.

There was some recent negative research about increasing 20 mph zones - I didn’t look into it in detail but this is the kind of thread where someone may have it to hand../

 

[editor]

So what are you on about with all this "making driving more attractive" then?

Wait. Are you actually suggesting that increasing the speed limit doesn't make driving a more attractive option?

 

[editor]

Public transport is so appalling outside London, everyone needs a car sadly.

No one is arguing against the need for cars (or bikes) in rural areas and most people would support a vastly improved public transport infrastructure. But I'm against raising the speed limit.

 

[Cid]

Wait. Are you actually suggesting that increasing the speed limit doesn't make driving a more attractive option?

To be fair it’s unlikely to make much difference either way.

 

[Chilli.s]

Afaik variable speed limits on motorways prevents congestion and lowers pollution as it basically turns the thing into a constant flow. I see it as a game to try and drive as economically as possible and squeeze out another 0.1mpg. Not everyone agrees.

 

[Chilli.s]

I'm against raising the speed limit anywhere except motorways, I think allowing cars only to go to 80mph may have advantages. Everyware else, I'd prefer the limit to go down.

 

[Calamity1971]

Afaik variable speed limits on motorways prevents congestion and lowers pollution as it basically turns the thing into a constant flow. I see it as a game to try and drive as economically as possible and squeeze out another 0.1mpg. Not everyone agrees.

In between those variable speed limits people speed up anyway, then brake harshly (that's a fuel eater) at the next sign/camera points. Like wacky races going down the M62 to Liverpool.

 

[editor]

And elsewhere:

A new report has recommended that the 60mph speed limit should be lowered on thousands of miles of rural roads.

This is one of the key findings in the Road Safety Management Capacity Review, which was commissioned by the DfT and carried out by the Systra consultancy, which provides research and advice on transport to central, regional and local governments across the globe.

The report recommends reviewing national speed limits, with a particular emphasis on single carriageways in the countryside – suggesting that a 5% decrease in mean speed could produce a 30% reduction in deaths on these roads.

The report also calls for more average speed cameras to be introduced, pointing to figures which suggest average speed cameras reduce fatal and serious collisions by 36%, and a reduction in the threshold for speeding prosecutions.

In terms of vehicle safety, the report encourages the Government to promote technologies including Intelligent Speed Adaptation and Autonomous Emergency Braking, and to introduce improvements in crash tests for front and side passenger protection, and pedestrian protection.

Among the report’s other recommendations are lowering the drink-drive limit, reintroducing casualty reduction targets and ensuring that at least 10% of road infrastructure investment is devoted to road safety intervention.

Government should review national speed limits ‘as soon as possible’

And I'm all for lowering the drink-drive limit too.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

60mph on many rural roads is bonkers anyway. You have a strange situation in Derbyshire where the A road is 50, but the tiny small roads that feed onto it are 60.

 

[UnderOpenSky]

And elsewhere:



And I'm all for lowering the drink-drive limit too.

It's already pretty much you can't drink anyway, a pint will push most people over. Having it as it does gives some leeway the next day.

 

[editor]

And here's another well researched article explaining why raising the speed is not a good idea, and it swiftly demolishes the argument that newer cars will be safer going faster:

Many argue that these design parameters are based on historical designs and that modern vehicles have more effective brakes and handling. If this is true, it would mean existing road design standards are conservative and the risks of driving faster than the design speed have been reduced. A wide-ranging review of the standards, including a look at changes to vehicle design, is to be completed by 2020 and may lead to updates in the way roads are built.

But even if today’s vehicles can safely drive faster than our roads’ design speed, 95% of all road crashes have human error as a factor. Most of us are simply not the good drivers we think we are. The recent launch of a national campaign highlighting the failure of drivers on England’s roads to keep a safe distance illustrates this point only too well. Higher speeds gives us less time to respond and react to a critical situation.

As such, it’s perhaps unsurprising that a recent OECD study across ten countries has found that increasing road speed, including on motorways, consistently leads to a disproportionate increase in the number and severity of crashes. And more crashes leads to more congestion and longer journey times.

Increasing the speed limit won't get traffic moving faster

 

[Chilli.s]

In between those variable speed limits people speed up anyway, then brake harshly (that's a fuel eater) at the next sign/camera points. Like wacky races going down the M62 to Liverpool.

Yeah, once you start the variable flow models the speed has to increase and decrease in a controlled manner. The breaking thing is obviously something that wastes fuel. If you drive carefully and try to keep the mileage and economy up on a motorway then you rarely use the breaks.

 

[Calamity1971]

60mph on many rural roads is bonkers anyway. You have a strange situation in Derbyshire where the A road is 50, but the tiny small roads that feed onto it are 60.

There's loads like that here. It would test even the best of TT riders to make it round the bends at 60mph.

 

[editor]

And another study says forgetit.

The authors caution that ignoring the safety risks is short-sighted, and that the economic claims seem dubious. The problems associated with higher speed limits, they write, are numerous.

Research in several countries including the UK has shown an exponential increase in the number of crashes involving injuries and deaths with higher speed. However, the health consequences extend beyond road safety. They include greater emissions and consequent air pollution, and, potentially, rising levels of obesity as a result of increased car use among those taking advantage of shorter journey times.

The authors point to some evidence. When the maximum highway speed limit was raised from 65 mph to 70 mph and 75 mph in the U.S. in 1995, traffic-related deaths rose a reported 16.6 percent. They argue that a similar increase in traffic deaths could be expected if the U.K.'s speed limit is raised. And with more accidents on the roads, traffic would jam up more often. The lost opportunity cost of sitting in traffic would likely increase, as would the cost of healthcare resulting from the rise in injuries. Overall, they argue, it’s just a bad idea.

"It is difficult to see how any benefits of an 80mph speed limit would outweigh the costs.”

The Safety Risks of Raising Speed Limits - CityLab

 

[Calamity1971]

Yeah, once you start the variable flow models the speed has to increase and decrease in a controlled manner. The breaking thing is obviously something that wastes fuel. If you drive carefully and try to keep the mileage and economy up on a motorway then you rarely use the breaks.

But no one sticks to the same speed in between them. Cue lots of overtaking and then breaking. I'm guilty of it myself .

 

[Chilli.s]

But no one sticks to the same speed in between them. Cue lots of overtaking and then breaking. I'm guilty of it myself .

Well... it's your money! I just like saving.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

In between those variable speed limits people speed up anyway, then brake harshly (that's a fuel eater) at the next sign/camera points. Like wacky races going down the M62 to Liverpool.

Which is why they need to be across the entire motorway network.

 

[Calamity1971]

Well... it's your money! I just like saving.

I make up for it in the miles upon bleeding miles of 50mph speed check areas along my route.

 

[Saul Goodman]

I hope they bring this in very soon. I'll be working on kits to bypass it as soon as it comes out, and they'll be for sale on ebay shortly after.
There's no better feeling than making money from circumventing stupid nanny-state legislations.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

I hope they bring this in very soon. I'll be working on kits to bypass it as soon as it comes out, and they'll be for sale on ebay shortly after.
There's no better feeling than making money from circumventing stupid nanny-state legislations.

 

[Saul Goodman]

You don't have to buy one.

 

[Calamity1971]

Which is why they need to be across the entire motorway network.

Is this sarcasm. I'm not quite sure?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Is this sarcasm. I'm not quite sure?

Not at all, the entire motorway network needs to be made variable speed limit, enforced with average speed cameras.

 

[editor]

I hope they bring this in very soon. I'll be working on kits to bypass it as soon as it comes out, and they'll be for sale on ebay shortly after.
There's no better feeling than making money from circumventing stupid nanny-state legislations.

Ones that stop people being killed? Yeah, nice one, warrior for the people!

A new, large scale, international report confirms what safety experts around the globe have long known: that speed has a direct influence on the occurrence and severity of traffic crashes, and that lower speeds make roads safer and result in fewer deaths.

Inappropriate speed is responsible for 20 to 30 % of all fatal road crashes, according to “Speed and Crash Risk,” which examined how the road safety performance in ten countries improved after they changed speed limits or introduced automatic speed cameras on a large scale.

The report, released on Thursday by the Paris-based International Transport Forum, an intergovernmental organization with 59 member countries within the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), analyzed cases from: Australia, Austria, Denmark, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Norway, Sweden and the United States.


The researchers’ goal was to establish a link between vehicle speed and crash risk by documenting the recent changes in speed limits or the wide-scale implementation of automated speed enforcement and whether those measures delivered the safety impacts that theoretical models suggested.

The results were clear: “All the cases indicated a strong relationship between speed and the number of crashes: An increase in mean speed was accompanied by a higher number of crashes and casualties,” the report said. “A decrease was associated with fewer crashes and casualties. In no case did an increase in mean speed coincide with fewer crashes or casualties.”

Speed Kills: New Global Study Confirms Strong Link Between Crash Risk And Vehicle Speed

 

[editor]

You don't have to buy one.

Good job because you'll never make one.

 

[Calamity1971]

Not at all, the entire motorway network needs to be made variable speed limit, enforced with average speed cameras.

It doesn't work though, as I've said. The A1 Durham to Newcastle is now set at 50mph. People either drive up your arse or overtake aggressively. Especially locals who know where the camera traps are.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Ones that stop people being killed? Yeah, nice one, warrior for the people!

Do you have any proof that these speed limiters will stop people being killed, or ever have prevented a death?

 

[editor]

Do you have any proof that these speed limiters will stop people being killed, or ever have prevented a death?

Don't take my word for it. Listen to the words of a pro-car boss:

AA president Edmund King said there was no doubt that new in-car technology could save lives, adding there was "a good case" for autonomous emergency braking to be fitted in all cars.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Thought not.