Scottish Elises

So, according to the beeb this morning speed is a contributory factor in 1 in 5 road deaths.

A campaign to catch speeders is in place to assist in hitting the government's target of reducing road deaths by 40%.

No mention of what the other 4 in 5 (that's 80% for the arithmetically challenged) are caused by and what is being done to reduce deaths in those areas.

So even if the campaign is a huge success and eliminates all speeding it will only eliminate one contributory factor from 20% of the road deaths. Unlikely to hit the target I suspect.

Pretty shoddy reporting really.

Cheers,
Robin

[Edit: this was on the regional news section and there is no mention of this campaign on Police Scotland's home page, though they do have a great section on road safety - makes you wonder who really has the speeding agenda - is it the government, the BBC or the police?]

I think you're writing a better article than them. New career?!

There were 2,500 drivers charged last year with exceeding 100mph.

The fastest was a footballer at 156. He received a six month ban the same as I did. Must have spent more for his Solicitor.

tut

tut wrote:There were 2,500 drivers charged last year with exceeding 100mph.

The fastest was a footballer at 156. He received a six month ban the same as I did. Must have spent more for his Solicitor.

tut

Or wore shoes in court.

Speed is an easy target, and a revenue earner.

Would love to know how many drivers have been fined for middle lane hogging since the law was changed on that.

As relative speed approaches zero accidents approach zero. Surely.

Apart from Supermarket wifeys pushing their trolleys into your parked car.

tut

So if my calculations are right, 80% of accidents are caused by people driving under the speed limit.
Therefore if I continuously exceed the limit, there's less chance of being killed on the roads.

So if my calculations are right, 80% of accidents are caused by people driving under the speed limit.
Therefore if I continuously exceed the limit, there's less chance of being killed on the roads

But officer, what you need to understand is...

I reckon I see 3-4 accidents a week in the 50mph average speed section of the M74 roadworks, many more than the same section of motorway when it's unrestricted.Tailgating and hounding cars travelling at 48 mph is a common sight (trucks are often the worst offenders) as is phone use by drivers on cruise control / autopilot. The Police are too busy dealing with the accidents to target the cause.
Once out of the speed limited section people start paying ( a bit more ) attention.

Don't get me wrong - I am not opposed to a campaign that will reduce road deaths, obviously - but I am frustrated that the reporting is so broken that they cannot do even the most trivial analysis and ask somebody to comment on what they hope to achieve.

j2 lot wrote:I reckon I see 3-4 accidents a week in the 50mph average speed section of the M74 roadworks, many more than the same section of motorway when it's unrestricted.Tailgating and hounding cars travelling at 48 mph is a common sight (trucks are often the worst offenders) as is phone use by drivers on cruise control / autopilot. The Police are too busy dealing with the accidents to target the cause.
Once out of the speed limited section people start paying ( a bit more ) attention.

I bet that's classified as speed causing an accident - people spending too much time staring at their dashboard and driving too close.

I hate driving in average speed camera zones. In January, I drove down to London. It wasn't an especially busy time of day, maybe 10.30am, I was on the M1 in an average speed camera zone, so 4 lanes of traffic all clumping together. When the works (on the hard shoulder) finished, there was no national speed limit sign. Half of the traffic decided it was back up to 70 (so 85) and the other half thought it was still 50. I've never felt so apprehensive on the road. Arctic trucks undertaking 50mph cars at 65mph, tailgating, cars weaving in and out, then all the 50mph cars trying to dive into the inside lane and cutting up a speeding, undertaking car or truck and having to dodge back out, and I was stuck in the middle of it all. I still can't believe there wasn't a huge pile up with fatalities due to the bunched traffic from the cameras, and then half of them trying to drive 20mph quicker than the others...

Chris

I think the classification is "excess speed" not just speed ... so whilst I applaud the conspiracy theory I don't think it will turn out to be true.

I do dislike average speed cameras for all of the reasons you state and also because they are guaranteed to make the traffic run slower than it otherwise would - people cannot help hitting the brakes when they see the yellow cameras, even though (a) they are only doing 50 anyway (b) it won't affect their average speed over the previous leg and thus their fate is already sealed. So in an average 50 section you get two streams of traffic - inside lane, 56mph (equals foot to the boards in a lorry with a 90km/h speed limiter) - all other lanes 50-0-50 yoyo caused by the cascade effect of people hitting the brake pedal now and then.

The fact that the lorries always appear to thunder through at 56 makes me think they've worked out that an average 50mph camera section will not trip if you keep speed < 56 at all times.

Cheers,
Robin

I think that they are probably set the same as Scam vans and Gatsos Robin, around 56.

tut

I drive that section of the M1 regularly. The worst time to be on it is when it's dark and raining. The lanes have been narrowed (it was worse at the start of the works) and you have a mixture of very nervous motorway drivers being tailgated by lorries who leave it until the last minute to pull out to overtake. I wonder how many crashes there have been on it.