As they argue in the article, in the event that you need to overtake quickly and therefore briefly exceed the speed limit to avoid a collision this is not a good idea. I think something like a audible warning to make you aware that you are speeding, similar to the seatbelt warnings most cars are fitted with now that beep when the driver isn't wearing a seatbelt.
You'd be able to put up with a beep whilst overtaking for short periods but driving along continuously would make drivers stick to the speed limit to avoid the audible warning.
Wouldn't work, my radio goes louder than seatbelt warning - job sorted
i dont see why they keep mkaing cars that go over 150mph
i thought bad idea but if there are people who think its ever safe to be doing
50 in a 30
60 in a 40
85 in a 60
then maybe we need it
It sometimes can be safe to do those speeds. How is a 'safe' speed dictated by a number on a stick?
Also, if everyone can only do 70, lets reduce the motorways to single lane, no need for the others really is there? (Except for lorries)
Dom
Originally Posted by dave
i thought bad idea but if there are people who think its ever safe to be doing
50 in a 30
60 in a 40
85 in a 60
then maybe we need it
It can never be safe to do those speeds. They are not simply figures that are plucked out of thin air.
I know of a couple of roads locally where the posted limit has been reduced due to a number of incidents. Even though the limit was 40, some drivers believed they knew best, they 'knew' what they & their car was capable of & so drove those roads at 60 & children lost their lives as a result.
The posted figures, btw, aren't 'must do' speeds, they are maximum numbers.
My neighbour pulled across the A5 & his car was totalled. He had crossed that same piece of road many, many times to visit his daughter. He knew that it was safe to cross if the oncoming traffic hadn't reached a certain fixed point. The other driver told police my neighbour seemed to hesitate as he was pulling across the dual carriageway, police bods said his car was doing "in excess" of 100mph in the minutes before impact.
With great freedom comes great responsibility and, sad to say, more and more drivers are abusing their freedom by acting irresponsibly.
http://goo.gl/maps/Ru4Xm - 95+ wouldn't be safe here if there was nothing on the road? Why?
If it's anything like around here, I bet there are deer, badger, pheasant, hedgehog, pigeon and fox carcasses all over the place.... But are there the warning signs to go with them...?
PS: Can't see Street View on my iPad... -- not from your link, anyhoo.
Nope, none of those as far as I'm aware. Just a straight A road dual carriageway.
there is an orange bloke in the road at 95 you may hit him or crash swerving out of the way.
View attachment 123581
Why can't it? A section of road very local to me used to be NSL (60), now it's 40. I don't remember any accidents on that road so why has it changed?
I don't break the speed limit anyway as I see them as a maximum but I do see that a number on a stick is not a safe speed.
http://goo.gl/maps/Ru4Xm - 95+ wouldn't be safe here if there was nothing on the road? Why?
Dom