What is the point of a 1 week driving ban?

[benb]

The thing is, whilst some drivers can probably safely exceed the posted limit, I don't trust the majority of drivers to be able to make that decision.
Virtually everyone who bangs on about "appropriate speed" is basically saying "F U, I just want to drive at whatever speed I want and damn the law"

So the speed limits aren't there for someone like @Phaeton who is obviously a driving god, the skill of which us mere mortals can only dream of, but for the 90% of drivers who are simply not competent to decide when it is safe to exceed the limit.

In any case, all other things being equal, the slower you drive the safer. Obviously there needs to be a balance between safety and people actually being able to move around.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

I'm not expecting a great deal from a bloke who can't spell ...

Glenn, even if your own spelling was error-free (which it isn't), it's a weak basis on which to judge the merits of the other person's viewpoint.

GC

 

[glenn forger]

Fair enough, spelling aside the fact he rubbished the claim while offering nothing to support his and ignored subsequent questions demonstrate his posts are worth nothing.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

So the speed limits aren't there for someone like @Phaeton who is obviously a driving god, the skill of which us mere mortals can only dream of, but for the 90% of drivers who are simply not competent to decide when it is safe to exceed the limit.

You have no idea what I drive like, but just to put you straight, in nearly 40 years of driving & well over 500,000 miles in many countries, I have never received a speeding ticket, in fact if I did I would not be able to renew my membership to the IAM. One of the biggest reasons is I do not speed on public roads, I save that for the track.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

Fair enough, spelling aside the fact he rubbished the claim while offering nothing to support his and ignored subsequent questions demonstrate his posts are worth nothing.

Because you were arguing a point that I never made.

 

[glenn forger]

^^^^^ This is the most sensible thing said in this debate


^^^^^ This is the most stupid thing said in this debate, apart from "Twenty mph zones reduce collisions and injuries by up to 40%."

Why do you think that?

Fourth time.

 

[Deleted member 26715]

apart from "Twenty mph zones reduce collisions and injuries by up to 40%."

I'm agreeing with you!

Tell you what, forget it, go find another worthless youtube video to post

 

[glenn forger]

What were you calling "stupid" then? Your posts aren't terribly clear.

 

[StuartG]

Stuart, I'm a little, well actually not a little, I'm actually a lot confused at what point you are arguing against, what point do you think I was or clearly very inefficiently was trying to make?

I think there are two main areas of difference.

1) The concept of appropriate speed. Who decides what is appropriate? Humans behind the wheel do get it seriously wrong. Otherwise far fewer cars would leave the road in an unscheduled manoeuvre. The most common excuse when caught speeding is "I didn't realise officer". Mr Fry's friend was apparently confused that 100 in an Aston Martin feels like 70 in other cars. People have a poor idea of the distance they should keep between vehicles because they are poor at connecting thinking/braking distances to speed. The fact that kinetic energy of a vehicle increases with the square of speed and weight - and that this is what causes the damage in a collision. And the severity of damage is also not linear. Like bike helmets cars may have an 'egg' shell which provides protection as long as it is not breached. But when it is it may collapse catastrophically offering no protection at all. I think you agree that posted speed limits are a blanket maximum and of little use when if a carefully calculated appropriate speed drops below that. In an earlier life I worked on simulations to spot roads where the layout sent the wrong signals to the driver's brain so they would miscalculate what was 'safe' - typically when there was a downhill but the driver was cued to see it as an uphill.

2) How limits should be set. There is no safe speed only what rate of KSIs you are prepared to accept. You usually start from the current position. The BMJ paper which appears to be reasonably sound indicates that if we can drop average speeds in residential streets by 10mph (27mph in 30 limit) to (17mph in 20mph) the KSI rate should drop by around 40%. That would be an achievement much greater than any other collision reduction initiative. Its a trade off in lifesaving v timewasting. Many of us think it a reasonable deal. Some may argue for more or less but we should be deciding on the best evidence available. When it comes to Motorways the sweet spot for maximum traffic flow is around 50mph. That's why in peak traffic flows 'managed' motorways lower the limit to 50. This has been known for 50 years but it isn't intuitive to the average motorist that he might get there faster if he goes slower. I am arguing that a combination of modelling and the careful analysis of evidence may be a better guide to manage roads than driver perception.

In another sphere - aircraft accidents are more likely to be caused by the pilot than the plane. Airbus was the first in introducing managed flying. It is hard (but not impossible) to fly the plane outside its designed envelope. Here is a lovely example which may be a guide to what driving a Google Car may feel like. Hope you enjoy it:

 

[Wobblers]

Because you were arguing a point that I never made.

You've repeatedly stated that "inappropriate" speed is the problem. I'd be interested to find out exactly "appropriate" speeding gets round the problem of physics, given that:

1. The time window in which a correction or response to some unexpected event can be made decreases linearly with velocity
2. Cornering forces between tyre and road surface increase with the square of the velocity, so that the available safety margin diminishes very rapidly as speed increases
3. Kinetic energy, and hence damage done to self and innocent bystanders increases with the square of the velocity

 

[green1]

And if you are in another car, do you want to be hit by the lighter version or the heavier?

Depends which one has crumple zones and has been designed to deform during an impact rather than to be a solid as possible.