From the "It looked good on paper" department

Blind_Io

Blind_Io

"Be The Match" Registered
DONOR
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
24,229
Location
Utah
Car(s)
See signature
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/15/1508.asp

UK: More Accidents with Lower Speed Limit
UK figures show 20 MPH speed zones have a higher accident rate than 30 MPH zones.

20 MPH zoneCalls to lower speed limits as a means of improving safety in school zones may actually make things worse, according to an analysis of UK Department for Transport (DfT) statistics. Road safety expert Paul Smith, founder of Safe Speed, points out that accidents are more likely to be fatal or more serious in a 20 MPH zone than in a 30 MPH zone.

"The authorities continue to treat road safety as a problem of vehicle physics when in fact it is a complex problem of human psychology," Smith explained. "There's no indication that any of the 'speed kills' policies have made our roads safer. Speed cameras, traffic calming, speed limit reductions and so on have all been rolled out across the country with no significant reduction in road deaths or road crash hospitalizations."

The DfT report Road Casualties Great Britain: 2005 shows that accidents in 20 MPH zones have an 11.85 percent chance of involving a fatality or serious injury while in 30 MPH zones that chance is 10.26 percent (Table 13). Smith suggests the reasons why 20 MPH zones are more dangerous is complex and that the simplistic solutions offered by the transportation bureaucracy is making things worse by, for example, forcing motorists to watch their speedometer instead of the road ahead.

"Far too often they claim that 'it's obvious' that a given intervention should work." Smith said. "As is common with modern road safety interventions this has not been investigated. They do it because they believe it should work."
Click to expand...

EDIT:
Mods, could someone please fix my typo in the title? If possible, it would be nice to let the user edit that.
 
I dont trust these kinds of studies. They are 20mph zones because many pedestrians are walking around, so of course the fatality rate can be higher. The article doesn't say that there were less deaths when they were restricted to 30mph.
Statistics - so useful and so useless at the same time.
 
...making things worse by, for example, forcing motorists to watch their speedometer instead of the road ahead.
Click to expand...

Oh why, why can't this simple logic occur to our policy makers?? (In Victoria, Australia - doing 3km/h over the limit will trigger a speed camera, yes, even in a 110km/h zone. The rule nicely ignore the +/-10% tolerance for speedometer accuracy in our design laws)
 
Blind_Io said:
Mods, could someone please fix my typo in the title? If possible, it would be nice to let the user edit that.
Click to expand...

I have it set so you can edit the title of your thread for up to 30 minutes after it was posted. Just go to the advanced edit area rather than the inline edit. ;)
 
Cobol74 said:
Zero accidents = zero speed, there you go problem solved - its obvious, ban cars.
Click to expand...
What about people collisions?!

I say we ban moving around period and just stay in our houses. Safest that way.
 
making things worse by, for example, forcing motorists to watch their speedometer instead of the road ahead.
Click to expand...
The only solution is obvious: sweet Corvette-style head-up displays for all cars!:D

Seriously though; if they'd spend just half the time and effort reducing careless and idiotic driving instead of worrying about people driving a few mph too fast, the roads would be a whole lot safer.
 
Viper - we can fix that by having single person streets. Only one person allowed in the street at a time - no inter people collisions, its obvious! Can I have a job in the Ministry of Transport do you think?
 
Cobol74 said:
Viper - we can fix that by having single person streets. Only one person allowed in the street at a time - no inter people collisions, its obvious! Can I have a job in the Ministry of Transport do you think?
Click to expand...
As a concerned citizen, that still sounds dangerous to me. There's a possibility of people colliding with insects, cats, dogs, squirrels, chipmunks, snakes, birds, and reptiles. Not to mention the tripping hazard of rocks, twigs, cracks, untied shoes, and simply tripping over one's own feet.

:lol:
 
Another gem of a thread from the final gear brain trust.... LMAO!!!

I propose that we issue everyone shoes with steel plates in them and then add magnetic chains to all the roads, that will allow you to move and keep a fixed distance... no collisions. 8)
 
Remember kids, speed saves lives.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vfs5-TO5ro[/youtube]
 
I am going to crack this very vital Health and Safety issues if it kills me (sic). Right get in the DDT and Kill all insects, dead! Set the Dogs on the cats, squirrels, chipmunks (What are monks doin in the street?), snakes and reptiles, next kill all the dogs. The birds will die from the long awaited bird flu. Grind all rocks, twigs, etc. into dust with an "automatic stuff disintigrater" and finally have all feet surgically removed from the people wanting to walk in the street. Its obvious really, finally we have a street that is safe for a maimed person to haule themselves up by their arms. A small price to pay for zero casualties - do you think that this H&S job in the DfT is on the cards I am after? I just noticed that they have changed the name to Department for transport formally the Ministry of Transport. I wonder how much that cost?

/Edit - Is the above just too silly? It is I hear you say - then the job is mine, yipee!
 
Last edited:
A bit like the idea I had yesterday for an LS7 with a chair and some wheels.
 
Cobol74 said:
I am going to crack this very vital Health and Safety issues if it kills me (sic). Right get in the DDT and Kill all insects, dead! Set the Dogs on the cats, squirrels, chipmunks (What are monks doin in the street?), snakes and reptiles, next kill all the dogs. The birds will die from the long awaited bird flu. Grind all rocks, twigs, etc. into dust with an "automatic stuff disintigrater" and finally have all feet surgically removed from the people wanting to walk in the street. Its obvious really, finally we have a street that is safe for a maimed person to haule themselves up by their arms. A small price to pay for zero casualties - do you think that this H&S job in the DfT is on the cards I am after? I just noticed that they have changed the name to Department for transport formally the Ministry of Transport. I wonder how much that cost?

/Edit - Is the above just too silly? It is I hear you say - then the job is mine, yipee!
Click to expand...
With a solution thought up so quickly and as brilliant as that, you've got my vote!:lol:
 
I like the idea of getting rid of all possible sources of danger... but then you get the problem that everyone just stays at home, which -according to statistics- is where most people bite the dust... so you?ll need to find some sort of solution for that... :mrgreen:

but seriously:
sensible speed limits make perfect sense depending on the amount of traffic, pedestrians walking around, children playing, etc... but simply making everyone move around at 30 km/h just isn?t the solution... I used to drive in switzerland quite a lot, they have a general speed limit of 120, and really hardcore speeding fines... when you do this at night for a couple of hours, you eventually stop actually concentrating on the road in front of you... you?re sliding around in your seat trying to sit comfortably, playing with the stereo, messing with the sat-nav, whatever...

on the other hand if you?re doing 200+ on a german highway, you?re REALLY concentrating on whats going on ahead of you, and you also get there faster, so the drive is shorter, and you?re not completely tired by the time you?re halfway to your destination... I?d much rather drive fast, and take a break every 2 hours or so, than roll along half asleep at 100 km/h, trying to figure out the best way to eat my giant sandwich while steering with my knees...
 
I agree with ford perfect, problem is when you're going around lowering speed limits people just don't pay as much attention because well most people know a crash at 100km/h is pretty much going to result in your death or the death of your car, where as say look at people driving near shopping centres that have low speed limits people are fiddling with stuff, looking for a new cd etc.

Oh why, why can't this simple logic occur to our policy makers?? (In Victoria, Australia - doing 3km/h over the limit will trigger a speed camera, yes, even in a 110km/h zone. The rule nicely ignore the +/-10% tolerance for speedometer accuracy in our design laws

Yet it still doesn't stop people totally speeding in really dumb spots and endangering others (some speed limits I don't agree with in places but I'm reasonable and can understand why they need to be there) but what really fucks me off is idiots that don't give two shits about who else there endangering when they are excessively speeding (eg not just accidently rolling over the speed limit)
 
Some things to consider:
Most speed limits (in the UK at least) were implemented when car stopping distances (using drum break technology) were way more than now. The speed limits did not, because they could not, take into account road conditions - Heavy Rain, Fog, Heavy Traffic, day or night. Now there is a sensible way to drive and that is within your, your vehicle and weather conditions limits and this can indeed be fast (German Autobahns) or sometime should be slow, in Fog and or black ice this should be very slow. The best way around this in the past for us was that the Police did not worry too much about people at 3 AM gunning down a motorway at 120 MPH in the dry with good visibility and no other traffic on the road. Now that the Police have decided to hand over enforcement of speed limits to robotic technologies this type of driving is no longer possible but there still is no way to implement variable speeed limits easily, sadly.
 
well in the end, a sensible person will always drive taking into account road conditions, the characteristivs of the car, and most importantly their own driving skill... speed limits are required simply because there are just too many idiots out there...

we have variable limits in the form of electronic roadsigns on some highways around here, that have no limit if traffic and weather conditions allow it, but are limited to 120 at rush hour, all the way down to 50 if conditions are really bad... they can also display warnings if there is an accident or roadworks up ahead...

this is probably the best solution for the problem, however, a system like this is obviously only as good as the humans that operate it... and unfortunately they?re simply too expensive to have them everywhere... but if this system was perfected and implemented all over the place, it would be the best solution...
 
We are talking about in-city 20mph zones here, they exist everywhere and they are there for a reason, you shouldn't drive faster when people are walking around. If you do, accept the fine and stop complaining. We have plenty of 30km/h limits here and I don't find any of them annoying. If you wanna drive fast get on the Autobahn or a proper road.
 
Un-dee I take your point. The 20 MPH limit would be fine during the day when there are people (and probably chirldren) about, but in the middle of the night? I would like to see some way of regulating these up to at least 30 at suitable times and when conditions permit personally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top