149 MPH - 6 month ban

[WG M-B]

For all those who think that speeding doesn't kill.
Wonder how your attitude would change if you spent a month in the life of a traffic officer? Speed limits are set to limit the loss of lives. So many factors are taken into consideration.
If you want to drive fast go to a track.
Unless you have experienced the tragedy and death caused by extreme speed then there is no argument.
The fact that you can drive safely at speed doesn't mean everybody else can.

 

[John Jones Jr]

For all those who think that speeding doesn't kill.

I think you got the wrong end of the stick, maybe. Of course excessive speed kills (i.e. dangerous driving), I can't imagine anybody here saying otherwise, have they?

One of the many points raised here is that the 70mph limit on motorways in good conditions is to a limit that's too low, which I happen to concur with.

 

[WG M-B]

I think you got the wrong end of the stick, maybe. Of course excessive speed kills (i.e. dangerous driving), I can't imagine anybody here saying otherwise, have they?

One of the many points raised here is that the 70mph limit on motorways in good conditions is to a limit that's too low, which I happen to concur with.

No I definitely didn't get the wrong end of any stick. The limit is 70 mph for more than one reason.
Keep it that way!
Drive at 90 like most do anyway

 

[WG M-B]

And more importantly 'be a traffic officer for a month'

 

[Dryce]

More SPECS cameras, then?

Evil things that should only be used at extended roadworks.

 

[John Jones Jr]

Sorry, don't see any point in engaging further after reading your last three posts. I'm out.


P.s. If I've got a problem with either of my Merc's at 71-80mph, I promise not to bother you.

 

[Dieselman]

One of the many points raised here is that the 70mph limit on motorways in good conditions is to a limit that's too low, which I happen to concur with.

So write to your MP then...

 

[John Jones Jr]

So write to your MP then...

I've just paid another installment for the council tax, do you think if I enclose the receipt it would help?

 

[Dieselman]

I've just paid another installment for the council tax, do you think if I enclose the receipt it help?

It will do a fat sight more than whinging like an old Woman on here will.

 

[WG M-B]

Sorry, don't see any point in engaging further after reading your last three posts. I'm out.


P.s. If I've got a problem with either of my Merc's at 71-80mph, I promise not to bother you.

Fair play

 

[John Jones Jr]

So, it now down to name calling...I'll leave you to it.

 

[LTD]

How many of us have had to carry out an emergency stop, for whatever reason, on a motorway at 70mph ?

It's a trouser-changing experience.

Now imagine doing this at 20mph faster.

 

[E55BOF]

Or at 79 mph faster.......

 

[cass]

i agree,speed does not kill,motor sport proves that,the wrong speed for the road conditions & bad driving kills.i have done 128mph on autoban in w210 e class no problem & present e250 avant. sits well at 70+ no problem.

 

[Dryce]

i agree,speed does not kill,motor sport proves that,.

Motorport doesn't prove this.

Note that in the likes of F1 drivers need a super licence and cars that are 7% slower are banned. The traffic density is low. There are run off areas. There are padded barriers. Cars are built to relatively high safety standards. Drivers wear helmets and protective clothing. There are track marshalls both to provide warning of track conditions and attend quickly to accidents.

 

[Dieselman]

Motorport doesn't prove this.

Note that in the likes of F1 drivers need a super licence and cars that are 7% slower are banned. The traffic density is low. There are run off areas. There are padded barriers. Cars are built to relatively high safety standards. Drivers wear helmets and protective clothing. There are track marshalls both to provide warning of track conditions and attend quickly to accidents.

You don't see HATO's...??

 

[cinek]

You don't see HATO's...??

I think you will find the correct term is Motorway Wombles.

 

[Giantvanman]

For all those who think that speeding doesn't kill.
Wonder how your attitude would change if you spent a month in the life of a traffic officer? Speed limits are set to limit the loss of lives. So many factors are taken into consideration.
If you want to drive fast go to a track.
Unless you have experienced the tragedy and death caused by extreme speed then there is no argument.
The fact that you can drive safely at speed doesn't mean everybody else can.

Well said.

Should anyone decide actual research is needed to verify, I would say this:- approach any police officer, whether with three years service or thirty years service, whether 'beat patrol' or traffic officer and ask them a simple question:-

How many drivers have you stopped/spoken to that admit to being not very good drivers?

I have NEVER heard anyone say anything other than they thought they were good, pretty good etc etc. Some of the self proclaimed excellent ones are very scary to be in the car with I have found.

Can everyone be correct? No. And that is the essence to these arguments about speed.

In all the years of development of vehicle safety etc, the one thing that has not changed is the human behind the wheel. To be human is to have flawed perceptions with many being quick to reject the premise that they could be wrong, all because they themselves have not experienced something.

Stop thinking in terms of speed, start thinking in terms of time.

30mph=13.41m/s/s meaning that distance travelled every second. So even with outstanding and perfect reaction time (as per Highway Code) a driver takes AT LEAST that amount of time (one second) to see, assess and react to something. And travelled another 13.41m before braking or steering even begins.

Now multiply that up to the so called perfectly safe speeds advocated by some and do the arithmetic…………..90mph= 40.2m/s (approx). 40m every second. So in the one second you see, assess and react, you have travelled at least another 40m. And then you have to brake, steer etc which TAKES TIME.

Even if the action takes only one second to complete (unlikely), then you will have travelled ANOTHER 40m…………so far, a minimum distance total of 80m so far.

And just because there are no vehicles on the road, are there really NO unexpected, unforeseen events or happenings that could reasonably take place that could result in a collision?

And as a parting shot, anyone who thinks being good on a track means that they are therefor by default good on a road, is just plain daft. If there was even the slightest correlation, then police/ambulance/fire brigade etc etc would all be training on the relative safety of a track rather than on a road.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

How many of us have had to carry out an emergency stop, for whatever reason, on a motorway at 70mph ?

It's a trouser-changing experience.

Now imagine doing this at 20mph faster.

I had to carry out an emergency slow down (as opposed to stop) on a German Autobahn last year. Fortunately driving at nearly 150mph was keeping me alert, so I managed to spot in reasonable time a car (4-letter make, 3 of which are vowels!) pulling out in front of me at a considerably lower speed. I was more than grateful that Mercedes provided brakes commensurate with the performance capabilities of my car, so I was able to rapidly slow to around 70mph without the slightest loss of control. This taught me two things: 1) Don't drive at those speeds when other cars are around, even though we're told how much more aware German drivers are on their high speed roads; 2) My sphincter muscles are strong!

 

[ItalianTuneUp]

Deterrence doesn't seem to have much value when it's successful.

Speed (or rather energy) has a pretty big contribution to the outcome of an accident. We don't see as many really bad high speed accidents as we might simply because people on the whole do observe the law.

True. And the cars are getting better and less drinking and driving is happening.