Two fatal Accidents In my area

Mildly_Miffed

ididgetwhereiamtoday said:

I always wondered why lorries try to overtake each other. Surely it can’t make much difference to the eta.

One mile per hour difference is one mile difference for each hour driving on the limiter.
At 56mph, that's just over one minute per hour...

Why do some trucks drive at 56mph and some at 60 mph?

Because while their speed limiters are all calibrated to a legal maximum of 90kph (a gnat's under 56mph), that calibration can change slightly according to tyre wear. 
Or an operator may deliberately set the limiter to be a bit lower for fuel economy, if their schedules don't make driver hours an issue.
Also, a heavily loaded wagon may struggle to hold it on the limiter up a long hill, while one with a lighter load and/or more power will have no issue.

LGV? Long goods vehicle?

Large.

Car_54

born_again said:

Tony5896 said:

I see no issue with driving at 50-55mph on a multi lane road where people are free to overtake as needed .. I do see issues where people drive at 55-60 mph and then don't increase speed while over taking .. I also see an issue where people crawl along single lane roads at 10mph or more less than than the posted limit ..  
  

The limit is advisory & subject to road conditions, not a target. 

That will come as news to the hundreds of thousands of drivers who are (correctly) penalised every year for exceeding speed limits.

Stubod

When I was working I tended to rushed everywhere, (but always careful to stay within speed limits.

Now retired I tend to take it steady and find it a lot more relaxing, and in  general doing similar journeys that used to be around 2 hours are only an extra few minutes longer....makes me wonder why people " rush" so much????

ididgetwhereiamtoday

Stubod said:

When I was working I tended to rushed everywhere, (but always careful to stay within speed limits.

Now retired I tend to take it steady and find it a lot more relaxing, and in  general doing similar journeys that used to be around 2 hours are only an extra few minutes longer....makes me wonder why people " rush" so much????

This is spot on. Driving this style so much less stressful and easier. 

It’s very money saving too. Wear and tear is greatly reduced. 

matt_drummer

ididgetwhereiamtoday said:

matt_drummer said:

Arunmor said:

matt_drummer said:

Arunmor said:

In my view the one thing drivers should do is drive over (the true) 56mph on motorways so as not to become a mobile chicane to the HGVs whose speedos will read a true 56mph.  For most cars that will mean an indicated slightly over 60mph.

HGV's don't exist any more and haven't done for over 30 years

I hope you are taking that with the government they seem to disagree and still use the term eg:-

https://www.gov.uk/training-hgv

So if the government still use it so can I.  That was just an act of pedantry on your part. 

On your other point of course they were not a problem to you, but is a problem to the large queue behind you.

Pendantry or educational as I prefer to think of it, they are LGVs now and the government should know that seeing as they changed it in the 1990s.

I am not sure what the other point is you refer to, I never had queues behind me as I just followed the truck in front on a dual carriageway so as not to spend three miles trying to overtake and blocking the whole road. I also slowed down as other trucks overtook me so it was over sooner.

I saw no material difference whether I was doing 54.5mph or 55mph, it doesn't matter.

I applaud you for your sensibility. I always wondered why lorries try to overtake each other. Surely it can’t make much difference to the eta. 

Why do some trucks drive at 56mph and some at 60 mph?
LGV? Long goods vehicle?

LGV = Large Goods Vehicle

The other one is PCV (Passenger Carrying Vehicle) that changed at the same time from PSV (Public Service Vehicle)

When you drive a vehicle with a speed limiter it requires the least effort just to keep your foot buried on the floor, actually controlling the speed takes some effort and thought.

The speed limiters vary slightly in their calibration, it depends on the diameter of the tyres as the speed limiter is based on axle revolutions and calculated speed rather than an actual speed. New tyres are faster.

Vehicles with speed limiters must be fitted with tyres of the exact dimensions recorded on the speed limiter calibration and the vehicles test certificate, you cannot fit tyres with a larger diameter for obvious reasons.

Tyre inflation levels will also have a small affect on the actual speed travelled.

Some operators of goods vehicles choose a calibrated speed of 90km/h whilst some choose a  lower limit, it's more fuel efficient and doesn't get you a bad name for always sitting in an overtaking lane!

It is difficult to resist just pushing on in a truck, but if you know you are turning off shortly or the road goes from two lanes to three or more, just wait.

Hills can be an issue if the truck is heavy, obvious hills less so, but some long shallow inclines really take the speed out of the truck so you do try to keep as much as possible as you cannot recover the lost speed.

Some slower trucks are easier to overtake if your truck is `fast'

But they do it to cars too, they just cannot resist.

No trucks do 60mph legally, some foreign trucks are faster even though EU speed limiters are the same.

If you are following a truck in your car and the speedometer shows 60mph it is likely to be an error in your car than with the truck.

But it's human nature to get in front.

How many times do you get caught by a vehicle , then they overtake and then pull back in front of you (too close normally) and then slow down!

There were some adverts a few years ago about pulling back to the left once you have overtaken. Good advice but you don't need to pull back in 20 feet in front of the car you have just overtaken if there's nothing behind you.

Some of us prefer not to have our car sandblasted and pebble dashed just so you look like an F1 driver!
 

oldagetraveller1

"How many times do you get caught by a vehicle , then they overtake and then pull back in front of you (too close normally) and then slow down!"

That happened to me this morning. Dual carriageway (70 limit) and travelling at just over 60m.p.h. (fuel economy), with cruise control set. Overtook me then slowed down to less than my 60+.

Same journey, another annoyance (for me), someone caught up and just sat on my tail!

Ditzy_Mitzy

chrisw said:

Emmia said:

matt_drummer said:

SiliconChip said:

You must have a different definition of "expensive" to me, this list of cars that will do 0-60 in under 3 seconds seems to feature cars that I would say are all expensive, although obviously some significantly more so than others. I'm not sure which of them you might consider not expensive but doesn't have a cheaper model with lesser performance (such as some of the BMWs and Teslas).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars_by_acceleration#By_0%E2%80%9360_mph_(97_km/h)_(less_than_3.0_s)

Probably.

But I don't need to apologise for the position I am in. It's all relative. Most new cars are a lot of money but expensive must apply to those that cost the most.

I do realise that the car I drive is out of reach for most people.

I didn't say it was a cheap car, just not particularly expensive compared to the likes of supercars such as Ferrari, Lamborghini or some even more exotic cars.

I didn't say there wasn't a cheaper model, just not a cheaper model with the features I considered important to me.

However, cars in general have got much faster in recent years and I don't see any great leaps in driving standards, except downwards!

God help us when ancient Teslas find their way into the hands of newer drivers.

But even bog standard cars like Skoda's and VW's do 0-60 in less than 6 seconds these days.

It's beyond what many drivers can handle in my opinion.

It's too easy to get into a car now with performance beyond the capabilities of the people that buy them.

Modern cars are very fast, they need some respect and care when using that performance.

Impatience and aggression coupled with high performance is a recipe for disaster.

When I did driving lessons my instructor had the top engine spec in a Citroen saxo... A light vehicle with a decent engine. If you touched the accelerator / or thought about it... it went. 

My instructors perspective was that his pupils would pass and would probably have access to their parents cars, which weren't 1ltr jobbies - part of his tuition was being able to safely handle something with a bit more oomph.

Mine was the other way round. I learnt in my dad's 2l Cortina and took my test in the instructor's Triumph Acclaim. Unfortunately it didn't accelerate like I thought it would when I pulled out of a junction to beat a lorry and I failed the test.

I always used to think the Triumph Acclaim was a sporty car because, firstly, it was a Triumph and, secondly and more importantly, it had louvred air-intakes in the bonnet like an RS Turbo.  The two-litre Cortina was quite a fast car for its time, though, as long as you drove it like you'd stolen it (maybe you did, back in the joyriding days...).  

I do admit to breaking the speed limit, on occasion, to reduce time spent overtaking.  

x44

Stubod said:

When I was working I tended to rushed everywhere, (but always careful to stay within speed limits.

Now retired I tend to take it steady and find it a lot more relaxing, and in  general doing similar journeys that used to be around 2 hours are only an extra few minutes longer....makes me wonder why people " rush" so much????

If i'm doing a 200 mile journey at 40 mph average its going to take me 5 hours, at 50 mph average its going to be 4 hours - hardly a few minutes.

I do such journeys which I do regularly as a similarly retired person to you.

Its mostly single carriagways and if I get stuck behind someone doing 50's I'm not bothered. If it 40's mph I try and get past as if I don't, I know excatly what will happen next. We will get stuck behind a tractor and the car doing the 40's will not be bothered about doing 35 behind the tractor and wont get past but me certianly is bothered and now I have to get past them both.  So we end up with the situation where I will try and get past everyone doing 50 or less wheras I probably would not if I knew they WOULD overtake the wretched tractor when we meet it.

Conversly when I'm stuck behind a lorry and I know most commercial traffic turns left at the next roundabout and I want to turn right I'll just accept the 40mph travel for a few miles to the junction as its just too must hassle/risk etc to overtake - or as the case often is I know there are no suitable straight overtaking sections anyway in the distance left to the junction.

EnPointe

happyhacker said:

Oh why, Oh why, do people overtake! I always catch them up. They always break the speed limit as I go along at 55 - 58. I know it's a non post really and that you have to get to 70 to realise the folly. I think every road should have speed detectors. I don't want someone involving me in their accident! Not trying to be smug but just letting off steam.

you are expected to make reasonable progress and  drive withthe  due care and attention of the orindary reasonable driver , driving at 20 + % below the limit in  reasonable to good conditions is Not  the standard expected of the ordinary driver ... 

 what's the betting the OP has 'never had an accident' ... 

EnPointe

matt_drummer said:

QrizB said:

55mph is 24.6 metres per second.

Assuming a "safe" 2-second gap between vehicles, you'll be starting your overtaking manoeuvre 49.2 metres behind the other vehicle. You then need to pass the vehicle (another 5 metres) and get a safe distance in front (another 49.2 metres) before the manoeuvre is complete. Total distance travelled 103.4 metres.

If you're traveling at 60mph, you're 5mph faster and you'll be passing at 2.24 metres per second. So your manoeuvre will take (103.4 / 2.42) 46 seconds. In that time you'll travel 3/4 of a mile.

However you won't be committed to the manoeuvre for that entire time. For the first dizen seconds or so you'll be able to pull back in safely behind the vehicle you're passing, and similarly you could pull back in sooner after passing if circumstances demanded it. 

matt_drummer said:

Sounds quite risky to me?

With the right road conditions it could be entirely safe. With the wrong ones, it would be foolhardy (or worse).

I cannot think of any single carriageway that I have traveled on where I would be comfortable and consider it safe in a car to sit in the oncoming carriageway at 60mph for 46 seconds travelling 3/4 mile.

It does not sound safe to me and not worth the risk just to go 5mph faster than the car in front.

I am sure I am not alone but I understand that some people may consider this a risk worth taking.

What are the right conditions that would make this manoeuvre entirely safe?

Strawman are highly  flammable ...