Will the NSL limit ever be raised?

[Mactech]

With reports like this around, I think not!

Why is speeding not a taboo?

Anyway, it is not speed that kills, it is inappropriate speed that is the problem.
Unfortunately, not all drivers can be trusted to the grasp that concept, so the law will probably remain the way it is....or we will have more reduction in limits.

 

[BTB 500]

As already mentioned our 70 mph speed limit is actually one of the lowest in Europe - in most countries it's 120 or 130 kph (75 or 80 mph) on motorways.

 

[BTB 500]

I do find drivers on mainland Europe generally more disciplined, more willing to give way and far less confrontational.

It varies a lot - I've seen some crazy stuff in Belgium, and aggressive driving is pretty common on the German autobahns.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

You talk about the Highway Code stopping distances being out of date because cars can stop quicker. Yes, modern cars can stop quicker after the brakes have been applied (braking distance). But not all cars are modern and not all modern cars have their brakes in top condition. The braking distance is also dependent on road surface conditions that can increase the distance significantly. So the Highway Code caters for the worst instances.

But what most drivers fail to appreciate or consider is the other element of the stopping distance: thinking distance. With so many distractions in modern cars the thinking distance is inevitably increasing on average. A recent report suggests that the thinking distance now is twice that shown in the Highway Code. They say that at 70mph it’s an extra 25 metres. The Highway Code has a dangerous error in it, campaigners claim

IMO the improvements in braking distance are outweighed by the degradation in thinking distance, so the overall stopping distance remains a reasonable estimate to apply for safety. I’d love to be able to drive everywhere at whatever speed I like, but I’d prefer the best chances of arriving safely.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

It varies a lot - I've seen some crazy stuff in Belgium, and aggressive driving is pretty common on the German autobahns.

That’s been my experience too; not pleasant when driving at 150mph. As for driving in Italy - minefields are safer.

 

[Mactech]

That’s been my experience too; not pleasant when driving at 150mph. As for driving in Italy - minefields are safer.

Yes, there is a single lane road round the Almalfi coast where the overtaking car has the right of way! Only in Italy.
But there is even worse in South America. Buenos Aries is the worst of my experience

 

[Deleted member 65149]

Yes, there is a single lane road round the Almalfi coast where the overtaking car has the right of way! Only in Italy.
But there is even worse in South America. Buenos Aries is the worst of my experience

Buenos Aries is on my list of places yet to visit, so I can’t comment on the driving there. But I’ve just returned from Vietnam and the driving in Hanoi has to be seen to be believed. Actually I still don’t believe it, despite having experienced it. The pavements are no safer than the road, and there are apparent rules on the road. I think it’s only the sheer volume of traffic (mostly of the two-wheeled variety) that prevents many deaths every day.

 

[TheFoX]

I live in the Fens and most of our roads are NSL, meaning we can do 60 mph on roads with junctions left, right and centre. That said, it does make me wonder why a duel carriageway or motorway, which flows in the same direction for all two, three or four lanes, separated from the contraflow by Arco barriers, has a speed premium of just an additional 10 mph?

I've been involved in a serious crash when someone pulled out in front of me while I was doing 50 mph in a 60 mph zone, and I can attest how dangerous a road is when it is joined either side, or even through a crossroads, when travelling at or near the NSL, so I would like to see a lower NSL for A and B roads, probably 50 mph or even lower for accident blackspots. On the flipside, though, a higher NSL for the safest roads in the country (motorways and dualcarriageways) would not be unthinkable, and would make sense.

In addition to raising the speed limit, you could also enforce a minimum speed limit to discourage those who would drive too slowly for the traffic flow. This would force lane hoggers to have to pull in to the near side line or risk being caught by a speed camera recording breeches of the speed limit.

For such a system to work, it would have to be a fluid system that monitors the traffic flow and adjusts the speed higher and lower limit based on traffic conjestion, weather conditions and other factors. Naturally the inside lane won't need a minimum speed restriction, but if someone knows that they are doing 40 mph in the middle lane when it says speed limit set to 50 mph to 70 mph, then they will also know that they could be clocked doing 10 mph below the minimum and face 3 points on their license and a £60 fine.

Having a fluid speed limit system would also allow the government to control traffic flow better by allowing motorists who travel outside of peak times to make their journey in a shorter time. Imagine being able to travel up the M1 or M6 at 90 mph because you are travelling at 3 am in the morning.

Of course, the 'Speed Kills' campaign will try to reduce the limit to 20mph on all roads, but when self driving cars start to become the majority, then the government will be able to argue that human error no longer has an impact on road deaths, and that if someone is stupid enough to walk in to the path of an oncoming vehicle, it is their fault and not the 'driver' of a driverless car. It would be like putting your finger in a live power outlet.

In fact, it is arguable that in twenty or thirty years time, when all vehicles are controlled by computers and a network of traffic monitors, it is quite feasible that your own vehicle will join a long line of other vehicles and cruise down the M6 at speeds in excess of 150 mph, getting you from A to B in no time at all.

 

[Stu22]

Think it's fair to say that whether the car can stop quicker or it has a million safety features are irrelevant, its all about the daft-**** driver and there poor judgment or judgment of others.

Prior to getting my M-B I frequented another car forum and I couldn't believe the attitude of an older driver on there with some disabilities - he felt it was fine to fully rely on the likes of radar cruise control and collision prevention systems to make up for the lack of his mobility and poor reactions! Admittedly a very low mileage drivers but IMHO was an accident waiting to happen.....

 

[clk320x]

On the A34 (N) to Oxford up from the M4, on an uphill section there is a 1 or 2 mile zone where Lorries must stay in the left lane, this works very well as lorries usually try to overtake each-other for 10 minutes on sections like these. (It is a Dual-Carriageway)

Stuff like that actually eases traffic flow and prevents congestion, I am not sure how variable limits help TBH

Speaking from experience, when I am doing my 200 mile run through to Wales, on the M4 I pass 2 variable speed limit zones, the first around 2-3miles, and the other around 12-15miles I would say? Anyway... the variable speed limit zones are always heavily congested, however the minute the sign reads 'Variable Limit Ends' the traffic ALWAYS without fail just seems to disappear.

Also I have NEVER been stuck in traffic in a non-variable limit zone, but ALWAYS in variable speed limit zones...

Interested to hear one of the 'road traffic scientists' response.

 

[Deleted member 65149]

On the A34 (N) to Oxford up from the M4, on an uphill section there is a 1 or 2 mile zone where Lorries must stay in the left lane, this works very well as lorries usually try to overtake each-other for 10 minutes on sections like these. (It is a Dual-Carriageway)

Stuff like that actually eases traffic flow and prevents congestion, I am not sure how variable limits help TBH

Speaking from experience, when I am doing my 200 mile run through to Wales, on the M4 I pass 2 variable speed limit zones, the first around 2-3miles, and the other around 12-15miles I would say? Anyway... the variable speed limit zones are always heavily congested, however the minute the sign reads 'Variable Limit Ends' the traffic ALWAYS without fail just seems to disappear.

Also I have NEVER been stuck in traffic in a non-variable limit zone, but ALWAYS in variable speed limit zones...

Interested to hear one of the 'road traffic scientists' response.

To understand why “Smart Motorways” (with variable speed limits) should work, you first need to read this report on road capacity and flow analysis. http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/business-...orway-design-guide-capacity-flow-analysis.pdf

In simple terms, algorithms are applied to varying traffic situations to reduce congestion caused by the existing capacity being exceeded. In theory this should work well, and indeed it does when everyone follows the instructions. But with so many (dare I say the majority?) drivers sharing the perception that variable speed limits are no good and just there to collect speeding fines, the theory goes out of the window.

The biggest issue is that we only notice and remember things when they’re not working as expected. When the Smart Motorway is doing its thing and traffic flows reasonably well it just becomes part of the journey, and forgettable. When caught in the congestion before it’s been sorted by variable limits, we see them as the cause because we’re not aware of anything else. It’s human nature.

So we mistrust the limits and ignore them, or only eventually take notice for fear of being fined. So the system doesn’t work as it should - the algorithms stutter and can fail. So congestion gets worse and the OP pulls his hair out on the M4.

Perhaps the algorithms developed by mathematicians need input from psychologists? We humans are a strange lot. Or perhaps we just have to accept that increasing volumes of traffic, mainly comprising the cars we all love, will result in congestion and there’s no point getting upset by measures being introduced in attempts to ease that congestion. The more disgruntled we get the worse the congestion - in our heads as well as in reality.

 

[Wolfie1]

On the A34 (N) to Oxford up from the M4, on an uphill section there is a 1 or 2 mile zone where Lorries must stay in the left lane, this works very well as lorries usually try to overtake each-other for 10 minutes on sections like these. (It is a Dual-Carriageway)

Stuff like that actually eases traffic flow and prevents congestion, I am not sure how variable limits help TBH

Speaking from experience, when I am doing my 200 mile run through to Wales, on the M4 I pass 2 variable speed limit zones, the first around 2-3miles, and the other around 12-15miles I would say? Anyway... the variable speed limit zones are always heavily congested, however the minute the sign reads 'Variable Limit Ends' the traffic ALWAYS without fail just seems to disappear.

Also I have NEVER been stuck in traffic in a non-variable limit zone, but ALWAYS in variable speed limit zones...

Interested to hear one of the 'road traffic scientists' response.

That is so true1

 

[Participant]

If they increase it to 80, 90 will be the norm. I'm not sure there's anything particularly wrong with the current limit. Change for the sake of change.

 

[crockers]

With most Speedos reading over driving at 80 mph indicated is usually closer to 70 than most people realise.

 

[rockits]

It seems to make sense to me to have clear variable limits & better realtime information to give better advice to the conditions at that time.

There are too many incorrect variables for me. Lorries/HGV's are limited to 56mph. All other vehicles are 70mph. So a brand new Merc GT drives at 70 mph the same as a 3.5t long wheel base Sprinter/Crafter. Clearly one is far less capable & safe at the same speed so why is the speed limit to same.

Maybe it should be 60mph for HGV's then 70mph for commercial vehicles & 80mph for cars/motorbikes.

Many commercial vehicles or vans are loaded with loads in the back that are not wholly secure. That is clearly more of an issue than a Merc GT doing 70mph.

Also the road conditions we know have a major factor so why aren't limits adjusted according to road conditions?

There are variable limits used with overhead gantry signs but in my experience they are often wrong and/or incorrect or not up-to date.

I agree better drivers would make things safer with better lane discipline and awareness. I don't agree it is always speed that kills especially on motorways. It is often bad driving or driving too fast for the conditions. Or bad awareness or not leaving enough space. It is a domino effect especially in pile ups as distances are too close. If you leave too much space (or the right amount of space) someone fills the gap to make it too small again so you feel forced to leave less space to make it not an opportunity for someone to fill.

There are some very old and badly maintained cars on our roads that are clearly less safe at the same speed as a new car. So why should the rules be the same. With the govt. thinking it is a good idea to scrap MOT's for much older vehicles surely this will be worse.

I don't see any issues with the speed limit being raised for the right vehicles in the right conditions at all. Lane discipline & driving quality is clearly much more of a safety than speed per se.

 

[clk320x]

So a brand new Merc GT drives at 70 mph

Really?