A roads 50mph by default

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by jockass, Apr 21, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/5191001/A-road-speed-limits-to-be-reduced-to-50mph.html

    20mph near schools and in quiet residential zones, fine. But you can bet your bottom dollar that they will try to make all town roads 20mph.
    And making all A roads 50mph unless the councils bother to give good reason not to. WTF? Its the classic H&S trap where no council will have the balls to submit for keeping 60mph in case they open themselves up to get sued if there is then an accident, even though most accidents i'm sure are very little to do with that extra 10mph and everything to do with muppets behind the wheel making mistakes.
    I really hope this doesnt develop too far. When are they going to realise that at some point you have to accept that roads will always be dangerous no matter what the speed limit (within reason obviously) and if millions of people drive all over the UK every day, then every year even with the best will in the world people will get hurt. 50mph on A roads by default is nuts. Whats wrong with councils having to give good reason FOR each section to be reduced to 50mph?
    Is it cynical to think that they need to lower the limit to stand a better chance of raising revenue in the downturn from speed camera's?
  2. I was confused when i heard about this as i thought the most deaths occured on country roads ? maybe if they put them on a 40/50 speed limit instead of national speed limit like the ones in my area which are single lane and have blind corners it would help, agree with 20 near schools though.
  3. Easy-peasy. Slow traffic down, and then apply more congestion charges.
  4. I understand that they also are bringing in a new offence of driving too close to cyclists. In my area there are huge areas of cycle lanes and paths. Does this mean that I can drive on the footpath?

    Bloody 'elf and safety nazis
  5. Don't get me started on cyclists!!! Cnuts! All of them!

    Ignore red lights.......cycle over zebra crossings even when the cars have stopped and I'm trying to cross! W@nkers!!
  6. old_fat_and_hairy

    old_fat_and_hairy LE Book Reviewer Reviews Editor

    Try living here in Cambridge. They are allowed to cycle the wrong way up a number of designated one-way streets, ignore all lights,road signs and common sense.
    A half million pound cycle lane was built for them near my village; ignored. And more bikes than people here too. Bloody lycra wearing fat arsed red faced tw*ts!
  7. Maybe once we have 20mph zones then some cyclists will get charged for racing around at dangerous speeds.

    Why are they allowed to ride around on public roads in packs as a sport? If I started a game of touch rugby on a dual carriageway I would get nicked within minutes.

    Adults on bikes should pay road tax, insurance and be made to wear a cycling proficiency test badge to make their lycra clothing look even more rediculous.

    As to new speed limits - it is a revenue generator. Driving dangerously should be the crime not just speed. Why is driving past a school at 25 mph in the middle of the holidays a crime?
  8. The sole purpose of this is to generate revenue.
    Perhaps there is an element of skulduggery involved as a back door method of forcing even more motorists off the road for "environmental" reasons.
  9. As usual, the devil is in the detail. Hidden away in the small print is the phrase 'increase in fine charges'. My friends, it is little more than another revenue raising exercise, dressed up as a safety measure. Saw the idiot of a Transport Minister on GMTV this morning, trying to defend yet another badly thought out target driven policy. He looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, obviously parroting what he had been told to say.

    Why don't they reduce speed limits to 4 mph and have each motorist pay for someone to walk ahead with a red flag - it would work wonders for unemployment (hang on, hasn't that been tried before?). Anyway, try keeping a modern car down to 20 mph for any length of time.

    I agree with the comments about the lycra bum bandits - here in the Peoples Democratic Republic of South Sussex (Brighton), I have lost count of the number of times at night I have had to swerve out suddenly to avoid a cyclist with no lights, dark clothing and no safety gear. That is on top of the general ignoring of the highway code, i.e. jumping red lights, wrong way up one-way streets, etc.

    Locally, it has been admitted that the most dangerous group are pedestrians listening to ipods stepping out in the road without looking.
  10. The big downside that they will avoid mentioning is the environmental impact
    After designing cars for decades to be at their most economical and cleanest running at 56mph we are now going to make it illegal to travel at that speed on vast sections of the road network.
    Consequently many vehicles, especially diesel 4x4's, will no longer travel efficiently in top gear. Many will have to stay in 4th gear, burning more fuel and throwing out more emissions. Logical eh?
  11. Not the best advertisement for a Labour Government. When they came to power in 1997:

    You could travel from London to New York in 3.5 hours ish

    Trains were forecast (Virgin's Pendolino) to run at speeds of 140MPH. Trains run slower now than they did 90 years ago.
    Heathrow express was Heathrow to London in 15 Minutes.

    You could safely travel on the road network at 70MPH on motorways and 60MPH in unrestricted roads, now most roads where I come from are already limited to 50.

    Cycle lanes have been painted on roads, but they are used to park cars on so cyclists use the pavements.
  12. old_fat_and_hairy

    old_fat_and_hairy LE Book Reviewer Reviews Editor

    What with this new plan, and the recent regulations on travel, informing when one leaves the country etc;does this not start to sound like the old Soviet set up? Restrictions on travel, except for the party faithful. Constant surveillance on everyone. Special perks, including country dachas for ministers. A politicised police force under ministerial control, used to suppress dissent by the proletariat. There are many other things, but if I go on then I will sound paranoid. Or, more so than I already do.
  13. Like I said, Jagman, another badly thought out policy - revenue generation dressed up as safety. I used to drive up the A23 everyday and saw plenty of accidents. Very few were due to speeding, most were due to tailgating, weaving in and out and just plain, inconsiderate, bad driving.
  14. Lincolnshire County Council has an accident blackspot, which accounts for between 8 and 10 people per year each and every year. Plans were drawn up about 20 years ago to remodel the area where the accidents occur, its a staggered junction with poor visibility on both main road approaches down a hill and up the hill (A1500), to landscape the road to improve visibility and place a roundabout at the junction.

    Financial constraints on this project have meant that they have limited the speed at this point to 50MPH, and built an escape lane (less than a car width) into the staggered road junction. Result: Still 8 or 10 people per year killed in accidents on this junction (Last time I did a H&S transport course the cost per death was in the region of £2.5Million). It would make sense to locate a "safety camera" both directions on the main road through the junction to enforce the speed limit - no LCC prefers them on a straight stretch of the A1 which has no accident record where they gain most revenue.

    It concerns me that public money can be wasted in this way, the road is a major one for the area and used by thousands of cars every day. I have lost 3 friends there, and know of a family devastated after losing their 7year old daughter in an accident at that junction, and still nothing has actually been done to improve it.

    Changing the speed limit on A roads to 50MPH will have little to no impact on deaths or injuries as proven in the case above, where there is no choice but to bite the bullet and do some major excavations to improve visibility on a junction on a major country road.