Message Forums

Quote: Originally posted by mikekillay on 30/6/2007

---

I am with Fiona 66 on this,
The more that speeders are caught and got off the roads the better.
I used to be a speed cop back in the 70's and got really fed up with the whingeing and explanations when I gaught a speeder.
If only I could have taken them to the mortuary to see the mangled bodies, children squashed out of existence, to visit the families with the dreadful news.
Don't tell me that speed doesn't kill

---

Great thread people.

I am particularly interested in the comment on Trucks governed to 56mph overtaking each other, especially on dual carriageways.

I do 40,000 miles a year and see this all the time lorrys side by side for mile after mile with a huge tailback behind and drivers undertaking to the front of the Q.

My question is would it really make a huge difference to the journey time for the lorry being overtaken to just lift of the gas for a second and allow the overtake to happen.

I am sure a lot of the foriegn trucks are not governed or if they are its to 80mph!

Come on truckies you know it makes sense!

I think there are three reasons why the lory driver being overtaken will not "lift his foot off the gas" to allow the other driver back in.

1. If he is climbing a gradient, he may not be able to regain his speed, thus ending up going more slowly until the road levels out.  If he owns the lorry, this could mean an increase in fuel costs.

2. He may feel that, as another driver has decided to overtake him, then it is that driver's responsibility to make sure he has the power to do so.

3. If he is travelling at the maximum permitted speed for his lorry, and the overtaker is in the same position, why should that overtaker be where he is in the first place?

Obviously, the best decision would be to let the overtaker back in, for the sake of road safety.  But when the question of who is right and who is wrong enters the equation, the otherwise most intelligent of people do not always act logically.  That is the price we pay for being human.

Bertie.

 

We all know that speed kills and only morons choose to pretend it doesn't. Our famous Local Leadfoot tested his car on the M54 at over 170mph and on town streets at 80+..He wasn't a speed cop in the 70's HE IS ONE NOW

---

I am not a moron but I use common sense somewthing widely lacking these days.    If just one person can show that speed kills I would be very surprised. Like a gun, speed does not kill, it is the moron behind the trigger or the wheel that kills.  In my opinion, people who kill through careless or reckless driving should be locked up withoput the option of a fine.  

Going back to the original thread, it was about speeding and flashing your lights and if that slows down a driver all the better but I suppose by the sam token if they are driving reckless etc, they deserve to get nicked.

Oops a double bill for the price of one!

Bertie, I meant to mention that i have noticed a number of roads where the authoritys are trialling the banning of HGVs in lane 2 during rush hour. These are usually on gradients and over a distance of a couple of miles, lets hope the trial is a success and it gets widespread implementation.

I understand what you say but on many occaisions I am sure they are just being bloodyminded.

A light feathering of the throttle is all it would take.

Sorry to disagree, Surfer01, but speed does sometimes kill.  We all know that the police drive very fast through traffic, blues and twos shrieking out a warning.  And the police will claim to be fully trained to make this safe.

BUT, suppose the police car developed a sudden steering fault, or suffered something as basic as a tyre blowout.  Do not try to kid me that the driver would then have full control of the vehicle. It may be fitted with Tyron bands to allow it to run flat, but the steering geometry would not respond in the same way as with a correctly inflated tyre.

It's all very well to train on skid pans, but trying to regain control with other vehicles and people in close proximity is quite another matter.  And there is one thing that nobody can train to overcome; the laws of physics.

Bertie.

Quote: Originally posted by The 2 Tops on 06/7/2007

---

Sorry to disagree, Surfer01, but speed does sometimes kill.  We all know that the police drive very fast through traffic, blues and twos shrieking out a warning.  And the police will claim to be fully trained to make this safe.

BUT, suppose the police car developed a sudden steering fault, or suffered something as basic as a tyre blowout.  Do not try to kid me that the driver would then have full control of the vehicle. It may be fitted with Tyron bands to allow it to run flat, but the steering geometry would not respond in the same way as with a correctly inflated tyre.

It's all very well to train on skid pans, but trying to regain control with other vehicles and people in close proximity is quite another matter.  And there is one thing that nobody can train to overcome; the laws of physics.

Bertie.

---

But we do read of occasional incidents where a speeding police car has hit a person or other vehicle, without the police car having a fault, and sometimes with tragic results.  Inability to avoid the accident has been down to the speed of the police car.

At the regulation speed, the police driver could have possibly stopped in time, or the third party have had time to move out of the way.  So no matter how you look at it, the only error in the equation is speed.

I have been personally involved in a near accident, which was down to two police cars racing each  other.  Hearing the sirens, and seeing blue lights in my mirror, I pulled to a stop, and the vehicle in front did the same.  We were on a fork in the road.  One police car went left between me and the vehicle in front, whilst the other went left across the front of that vehicle.  After the manoeuvre the police cars were side by side, and almost touched.

Had an accident resulted, I would have given a statement on oath against those two drivers.  I often wonder what would have happened if the vehicle in front had stopped that little bit quicker, or a bit later.  One police car would have had nowhere to go.

And their speed left no margin for error.  Their escape was down to luck, not skill.

Bertie.

Again speed does not kill ,but then this thread has nothing to do with police cars and their level of expertise when driving, it was started about drivers flashing their lights! 

Quote: Originally posted by Surfer01 on 06/7/2007

---

We all know that speed kills and only morons choose to pretend it doesn't. Our famous Local Leadfoot tested his car on the M54 at over 170mph and on town streets at 80+..He wasn't a speed cop in the 70's HE IS ONE NOW

---

<!--bmi_SafeAddOnload(bmi_load,"bmi_orig_img");//-->I don't see a problem with that as the man was professionally trained and was not a danger to any one. As part of my job in an earlier life, at times I was required to exceed the speed limit and on occasions reached speeds of over t120 mph but then I was trained for that purpose.

I am not a moron but I use common sense somewthing widely

A car being driven at 80mph is travelling at 117fps,and,with minimum reaction time will need AT LEAST 400 feet to stop. AT 170mph (249 feet fps) this increases to 840 feet., .Perhaps Professional Training allows your 'Drivers who are not a danger to anyone' to defy the laws of physics by reducing both reaction and braking time to nanoseconds .
I DON'T THINK SO. Do police cars have dragster style chutes, sensors which can see around corners and retro rockets ? 80+ in a town centre ? suicidally dangerous.170 on motorways ?   That's why our taxes fund police helicopters

-------------
HOOKUP

Quote: Originally posted by Surfer01 on 06/7/2007

---

Again speed does not kill ,but then this thread has nothing to do with police cars and their level of expertise when driving, it was started about drivers flashing their lights! 

---

Why, then, does the Ministry of Transport have roadside signs saying "speed kills, kill your speed"?   And the police are not exempt; their drivers are road users just like any othe motorist.   What about the TV ad?  The reversed footage of the child representing an accident victim and "if you hit me at 40 mph, I die.  If you hit me at 30 mph, I will live"

And if speed does not kill, why are drivers prosecuted for exceeding the speed limit, rather than exceeding their level of expertise?

Yes, the thread started about drivers flashing their lights, which was linked to speed cameras, which was linked to speeding.

Bertie.

Here in France, the signalling by one driver to another as a warning of gendarmes ahead is a courtesy, that's all. It's not the cue for anyone to debate the rights or wrongs of speeding. If you want to slow down, do so. If you don't, then don't. The gendarmes may not have speed cameras, it may be a signal that there's an accident ahead, or perhaps a spot check? Or even the douaniers on the prowl. If I see the gendarmes with a camera hidden behind a tree, I signal the oncoming traffic too. It's their decision whether to slow down or not. They may not realise their speed. Often in France there's nothing on the roads, the roads are often straight and long. It's very easy to just get your foot down, and then 90kph feels very much like 60kph.

I have by my side a map of France detailing all the fixed camera positions. It came with this weeks TV magazine. The maps all have the locations printed therein. The local newspaper tells you where you're likely to find the mobile cameras that week too.

We returned from France yesterday (and the weather was pretty good by the way). On Saturday night we were trying to find our way to a campsite in France and driving along a small country road we were flashed several times. A bit further on there were two motor cycle police with a  speed camera. We weren't speeding by any means but appreciated the courtesy of the other drivers and given the frequency of road rage incidents here it goes some way to restoring your faith in human nature. While I agree speeders deserve to be penalised - in some cases who is to say that advance warinng of a speed trap hasn't actually saved a life anyway. Many of the roads we drove on didn't specify a limit and while we're pretty aware of restrictions on each type of road, I have to say that telling you when a speed restriction ends and not what it has changed to really isn't a lot of help.