National Safe Speeds day

I used to press on as much as possible, but since getting shot of the TVR last yearnand some more points the year before, I tend to set the cruise at an indicated 75-80 depending on traffic flow and relax.

Time to destination isn't many minutes more usually and it is pretty stress free.

I never speed in urban areas as 30 or 40 is entirely appropriate.

O Joy - who knew the blasted speed wombles had their very own day. I don't approve. I just don't. They aren't capable of a reasoned approach - it's all far too black and white.

I don't speed in urban areas either, and while I can see the need for 20mph speedzones on little narrow residential streets, I cannot see why the entirety of Westminster and the City needs to be a 20mph speed limit. That's just wilful priggish municipal twattishness. Even unfit me can easily exceed 20mph on a pushbike along Victoria Embankment and there is no penalty for doing so - the real MAMILs are pedalling along at 30mph, yet you cannot travel at that speed in a car on a wide road with little pedestrian footfall.

I don't mind the EDWARD stuff - firstly ending road deaths (by far the biggest cause of workplace deaths in the UK is driving for work) is a good cause, in anyone's book. Secondly the project looks at the whole piece - vehicle deisgn, road layout, transport strategy, aggressive behaviours, medical care - AND speed. This is a week of action for them, today just happens to be the speed day. They are not just mypoically focused on speed like some people are, such as BRAKE, where all the blame goes to the driver (and where I stopped us spending marketing money a few years ago as I dislike them so much!)

Fingers crossed you're right.
I often wonder how many crashes have been caused by poor road condition - I hit a nasty pothole a few years ago while driving the 320 and it was a bad enough impact to damage the sidewalls of both nearside tyres (runflats). I shudder to think what might've happened if the tyres had actually failed as the hole was immediately before a sharpish red hand bend that was a joy to take at 60 (ish).

Road design is another one that I feel gets completely overlooked. I can think of several T-junctions round here that are on nasty corners, one in particular would require a complete guess when pulling out. As its on a very quiet sideroad that is about 2 miles long with no houses at all to my mind it'd be a much safer choice to simply close the road.

A year or two back, the speed limit on a nearby dual carriageway dropped from 70 to 50 over a distance of a couple of miles. There is one junction and I've never seen any accidents there, a bit of research showed that the the drop was to reduce pollution, nothing to do with road safety. Apparently many of the M25 reduced speed sections on the variable limit sections are for similar reasons, explaining why the limit is often 50 or 60 when there is almost no traffic in sight.

We're being conned

The pollution reason is another example of the usual lack of joined up thinking.

When I go to visit my mum, on leaving the local town I'm faced with some traffic calming in the form of an island blocking my way.
Try this at rush hour and you can easily be in a queue for several minutes as cars take a chance to dive past this while there's a tiny gap in oncoming traffic. Added to this it's on a slight uphill.
So, 300 yards before the end of the 30 limit, with houses on 1 side only, instead of driving past on a steady throttle you sit with the engine idling and are then forced to use quite rapid acceleration which is completely the opposite of trying to reduce pollution.

This doesn't even address the issue that the oncoming traffic is heading slightly downhill with no impediment to them doing the usual 40-45 that so many people appear to think is reasonable for the first part of a 30 limit. At the very least the council have the traffic calming on the wrong side of the road but in reality they should remove the obstruction and let the traffic flow.
There have been NO accidents and NO injuries to pedestrians on that stretch of road in the 40 years I've been using it almost daily.

Traffic light phases need reviewing too. At night, in the county where I live, it seems the County Council have lights set to change to red as a single car approaches, dlowing it down until it either rolls very slowly up to the lights or stops, at which point they change to green. This happens when there is nothing waiting at the adjoining road. There are numerous places I know where this happens, both in towns and in suburban areas. Not only is it massively frustrating, to be doing a steady 40mph, to stop for no reason and then set off again at every traffic light, but it's hardly reducing emissions is it?

The NSL reduced to 50 is bollocks, too. Councils were given this power some years ago and loads of roads were dropped to 50 which, any many cases, feels totally inappropriate for what was a faster road. If the limit feels inappropriately low then compliance will be lower. But that's where Road Safety Partnerships can stick a scamera van and, hey ho, self justification ensues. There's local consultation here and more roads to be reduced to 50. As Blarno says, it won't make any difference to accident rates. The idiots won't take notice and neither will drink/drug drivers. But the council says its done something and a camera van can then be plonked there.

We got a very brief email saying to go out and do some local speed enforcement on our beat areas as part of Project Edward. Only there was no explanation of what Project Edward was and this thread is the only thing I have heard about what it actually is!