Speeding offence

AdrianC

And, right on cue, from Facebook...

Richard53

AdrianC wrote: »

And, right on cue, from Facebook...

35.5, simple.

Joe_Horner

Richard53 wrote: »

35.5, simple.

Nope, that'd be an NSL seeing as the conflicting signs will invalidate each other, especially given the lack of street lighting as another cue. From Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual:

To avoid the risk of failed prosecutions, it is of the greatest importance that speed limits be signed lawfully. It is equally important that speed limits be signed clearly and in accordance with this guidance, so that at no time will drivers be in any doubt about the prevailing limit.

Having two different speeds indicated is not only unlawful but obviously at risk of "leaving drivers in doubt" - as proved by you thinking it meant 35.5! :beer:

Personally, as far as a photo can suggest an appropriate speed, I'd probably be doing around 40 at that point but expecting to slow as I approached the bend seeing as I don't know what's round it but do know there's housing, with a possible side road from the buildings' positions, and that road may be obscured because of the trees on the verge. There's also at least one house further ahead and those visible one the left look like fairly fairly new build (as opposed to an old farm) which suggests a development / estate rather than isolated houses so good chance of kids around.

But those who insist that limits must be complied with for safety would presumably be happy with me doing 50 or so seeing as that's well within the posted limit.

Car_54

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Nope, that'd be an NSL seeing as the conflicting signs will invalidate each other, especially given the lack of street lighting as another cue. From Chapter 3 of the Traffic Signs Manual:

Having two different speeds indicated is not only unlawful but obviously at risk of "leaving drivers in doubt" - as proved by you thinking it meant 35.5! :beer:

No, it would be a 30 mph limit.

The Traffic Signs Manual is advisory, not law, and the speed limit painted on the road has no legal force.

In reality, I suspect it's a 40 limit where the vandals have turned the sign around.

Joe_Horner

Car_54 wrote: »

No, it would be a 30 mph limit.

The Traffic Signs Manual is advisory, not law, and the speed limit painted on the road has no legal force.

In reality, I suspect it's a 40 limit where the vandals have turned the sign around.

Given the new 30 repeater and the older painted 40, it's far more likely to be a 30 that's replaced an older 40 thanks to idiots going through at 70.

But it would NOT be enforceable because of the ambiguity (we've already got 2 viable interpretations on here for which of the two is correct!)

Also, the TS manual is advisory, but is based on the TSRGD 2002, which are legally binding and contain the same requirements for unabiguous signage. It's just easier to refer people to the manual because it's written in relatively clear language

brat

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Say I'm happliy driving along at 100 leptons, passing an HGV, in light traffic on a straight motorway when he decides to pull out to pass the lorry ahead.

My speed will be given as "a factor" despite the fact that (a) he should have seen me long before I caughht up and checked he was clear before pulling out, and (b) I should have observed that he was catching the one ahead, anticipated his overtake, and been ready to move (or even already moved in anticipation) into the next lane over.

But that's a failure of obs / anticipation rather than a matter of my speed - if I don't take account of such things at 100 there's no valid reason to assume I would at 70!

I've always considered an overtaking range of between +10 and +25mph to be the most appropriate overtaking range. That higher range can be increased if there is an extra lane.

If you overtake too slowly, you are putting yourself at added risk, through extra time exposed to danger and increased time in blind spots. If you overtake too quickly, you are therefore likely to be approaching too quickly, and that approach speed may not be properly assessed by the vehicle about to be overtaken.

I believe it's important that those who drive at above average speed on the motorways are aware of their added responsibilities, especially in respect of becoming the 'hazard' in other drivers overtaking plan.

Bantex_2

Still nobody had said what the advantage of driving over the limit is.

kwmlondon

Richard53 wrote: »

I often wonder what would happen if we experimentally removed or blanked off every vehicle's speedometer.


Nothing else changes, apart from the absence of a number on a dial. Traffic chaos, murder and mayhem; no change; or a better environment where people were forced to drive to the conditions they find rather than what they have been told is acceptable?


I'm genuinely curious as to how this might work out.

It would be as interesting as going away with seat belts and putting a large spike on every steering wheel. It would change everyone's behaviour enormously, but as we're just postulating ideas I'd suggest that some would drive exactly the same as they do now, some would slow down and some would speed up and we would have no idea what the effect of these would be.

Driving simulators have become so sophisticated now that it would be possible to link a dozen up and see how people would interact, THAT is an experiment I'd like to see, but like anyone sane I'd be very reluctant to make a drastic change to the rules of driving because the outcome would be so unpredictable and the the risks so high that we'd have to try it out in the virtual world really.

matttye

Bantex wrote: »

Still nobody had said what the advantage of driving over the limit is.

Because it's glaringly obvious!

Bantex_2

matttye wrote: »

Because it's glaringly obvious!

No it's not. What is the advantage?