Is this really road safety?

tomstickland

I've just been along another rural A road and found that it's now littered with 50 limit signs. I've used this road countless times in the last few years and I'd say that the national 60mph limit was a fair one for most of it, though there are a few hazard points where an observant driver would slow down. It seems that the dumbing down approach has now been applied. I wonder how many people really think that his will suddenly make the road really "safe".

I had a good think about it on the way home. Lets say that accidents can be modelled in three sections
1) Probability of occurence
2) Avoidance
3) Severity of impact of not avoided

Now I'd agree that speed has a large effect on 2) and 3). Obviouslly, if a hazard is 1/2 mile away and the driver sees it then 60mph is slow enough to allow them to avoid. When avoidance is limited and impact occurs then speed increases the energy to be dissipated. However, for 2) and 3) to be important then 1) has to be high. In the examples below I'd argue that for straight and open roads with verges and good visibility then the difference in road safety between 50mph and 60mph was neglible.

banger9365

yes your right put for some unknow reason the speed limit is that it is ,we have a road near me and you can say the same (it's 40 now and looks better than your pic),the thing is that the locals now why the speed limit is that ,there mite have been a few deaths on then roads just like the one near me thats what you have to rememder, the speed limit is there for a reason and looking at the road do not show the reason for it

Andy_L

This looks like a nice stretch of bike road, where is it?

tomstickland

A road from Gloucester to Ledbury.

there mite have been a few deaths on then roads just like the one near me thats what you have to rememder

Yes, but why? I think the reason is that there a number of hazards on this road and they're pretty easy to spot. I fail to see why a 50 limit on the parts I've shown will have any beneficial effect.

tru

tomstickland wrote: »

A road from Gloucester to Ledbury.

Aaaah, thought it looked familiar

michaels

All these new limits add to journey times - maybe only a few minutes to each journey but given that most people might vaue their time at say an average of £10 per hour over the huge number of car journeys it will add up to a fortune - is it worth it for an unproven reduction in accidents? Afer all although excess speed is mentioned in a factor in some proportion of accidents it is never mentioned whether this is in excess to the posted limit or just for the conditions.

We have a new road near us that has good visibility and about 2 junctions, but no houses or anyhting else and the limit has been set at 30 - I thought previously there was some sort of assesment based on road width, number of house/other entrances, distance house back from the road etc which would then equate to derstriced, 40, 30 etc - now the councils just seem to do what they want.

amcluesent

>It seems that the dumbing down approach has now been applied<

Looks like the sort of road with nice, safe long straights where drivers will do 60mph but there are plenty of places for scamera-vans to hide. An easy £60 in tax for the thieves!

Safety is the last thing they worry about - these scamera 'partnerships' have to be self-funding so they will inevitably resort to using dirty-tricks to entrap more motorists to keep the cash rolling in.

Throbbe

As the OP says, there are a few hazards obvious to a competent driver (housing/industrial buildings suggesting a junction, dips that might conceal a vehicle, the layby) but nothing I could see that would justify a blanket drop in the speed limit.

I'd guess that the stretch of road has a poor accident record, and therefore the highway authority are under pressure to 'do something', and speed limits are a cheap (and actually often effective) way of doing it. I do agree that it's sad that we* tend to have to design for the minority of poor drivers and that everyone is affected. I'd be tempted to let natural selection take its course. :rolleyes:


* I do this sort of thing for a living.

rdwarr

Interesting to see such differing viewpoints in the two preceding posts. Nice for MSE that one of them was sensible