Edmund King, President of the AA....

[srw]

Why are you defending this?

I'm not. I think the study being cited as evidence by the people who run the roads isn't robust enough to back the recommendations made. But the "discussion" in the thread is taking a very predictable turn - and completely ignores the facts available.

It's unfashionable to say so on this site, but motorists are not "the enemy". They're simply people trying to get around the country.

 

[Tim Hall]

Can any lorry drivers help with this bit?

Edmund King, president of the AA, said that most trucks have a speed limiter set at 56mph: "And sometimes they're pretty reluctant to slow down so you get a lot of tail-gating of trucks driving very close to cars and then the cars are inclined to speed up."

My car has a speed limiter, which I can adjust. Lorry drivers, do you have adjustable limiters, or are they all glued to (slightly different values of) 56 mph?

 

[srw]

Personally I think the speed limit past coned-off areas on any road should be 30mph and sod the consequences for delays to people's journeys.

Even if that means more accidents? More people killed? More pollution?

[For the record - I don't know if those are actual consequences, but they're plausible.]

 

[Joffey]

Setting out the Traffic Management is a risky operation, so having to do it more often is generally a Bad Thing. Which is why you sometimes see "empty" road works.

(Edited to complete the final sentence)

I appreciate that but maybe just signs at the beginning could be changed before they go home? Or maybe that is too simplistic and I'm missing lots of things!

 

[Katherine]

Can any lorry drivers help with this bit?

My car has a speed limiter, which I can adjust. Lorry drivers, do you have adjustable limiters, or are they all glued to (slightly different values of) 56 mph?

When drivers feel intimidated and bullied by lorries sitting on their tail at 50mph, would that mean that at 60 mph speed limit, lorries wouldn't be able to do this?
I have had a discussion with a lorry driver about about driving through roadworks. He said that lorry drivers don't like having to go below the 50 limit when cars they are following consistently drive under the limit because of unnecessary caution or inaccurate speedometer. Whereas lorries have accurate speedometers regulated by gps.
I said that is no excuse for them to sit on your tail when the whole queue of traffic is going at the same speed. He agreed.

 

[srw]

I appreciate that but maybe just signs at the beginning could be changed before they go home? Or maybe that is too simplistic and I'm missing lots of things!

Roadworks have speed limit reminder signs throughout their length, and they're heavy lumps of metal. You'd need to send someone along the motorway carrying enough signs to change them all, and getting off their van carrying a large lump of metal at regular intervals, each time exposing them and other road users to more risk. For a long stretch of roadworks, changing the speed limit signs before they go home would have to start at lunchtime, and changing them back would start first thing in the morning and finish just in time for lunch.

All of this discussion illustrates neatly that things are often rather more complicated than those of us who are not experts generally realise. As it happens I've just spent some time driving on Italy's motorways, at which point you realise that Britain's approach to road safety is, while not as good as we might like, pretty robust.

 

[presta]

No. The findings, of a very small study, were that drivers had lower heart-rates while driving at higher speeds. The link to dangerous driving is a hypothesis.

You would think that they'd have the sense to measure accident rates rather than heart rates, it reveals that the objective is driver convenience and not safety.

 

[growingvegetables]

Hmm - reading the BBC report and this in The Times suggests King, far from shooting his mouth off, was trying to head off the apparent looniness of Highways England? They are apparently planning 'that the 60mph limit was "something that we want to introduce to as many roadworks as possible"' and it's being misleadingly reported?

I'm reading it that he's saying - "Hold on, guys - there may be circumstances where a higher speed limit may be appropriate, but there's more where the speed limit should be reduced."

 

[srw]

[QUOTE 5007372, member: 45"]It's a very small suggestion that might warrant further investigation[/QUOTE]
Ummm.....

I think the study being cited as evidence by the people who run the roads isn't robust enough to back the recommendations made

As it happens, I suspect that if you ask drivers on a motorway to slow down suddenly from 70mph* to 30mph rather than to 50mph, the results would be chaotic. You would get lots of rear-end shunts.

*I'm being generous

 

[marinyork]

All of this discussion illustrates neatly that things are often rather more complicated than those of us who are not experts generally realise. As it happens I've just spent some time driving on Italy's motorways, at which point you realise that Britain's approach to road safety is, while not as good as we might like, pretty robust.

Safety! Some seriously scary slip roads on both the autostrade and faster statali. And some comically patched up bollards, tape and warning signs after minor inconveniences like earthquakes putting big cracks in roads. Although sometimes substantial country road repairs can be like that. Gaping ravines with no safety barriers or crumbling ones great for views on the bike.

 

[srw]

Hmm - reading the BBC report and this in The Times suggests King, far from shooting his mouth off, was trying to head off the apparent looniness of Highways England? They are apparently planning 'that the 60mph limit was "something that we want to introduce to as many roadworks as possible"' and it's being misleadingly reported?

I'm reading it that he's saying - "Hold on, guys - there may be circumstances where a higher speed limit may be appropriate, but there's more where the speed limit should be reduced."

I don't think there's any Highways England looniness either. As the BBC report says...

"But Mr O'Sullivan said that lower speeds were likely to be maintained in areas with narrow lanes, contraflows or where workers are close to the road, due to safety reasons.

Highways England has been testing different speed limits since September 2016 as part of a wider initiative to assess the benefits associated with increasing speed limits through roadworks.

Those trials on a section of the M1 near Rotherham and on the A1 between Leeming to Barton examined the safety implications of the scheme as well as the journey-time benefits for drivers travelling through roadworks"

[O'Sullivan is the HE CEO]

So far from basing their conclusions on a single, small survey, Highways England have done some long-term research.

 

[Milkfloat]

Not to me they're not.

Stands to reason doesn’t it

 

[growingvegetables]

I don't think there's any Highways England looniness either. ...

OK - looniness a bit strong. Replace with "gung-ho eagerness "to introduce (60mph limit) to as many roadworks as possible"?

 

[srw]

OK - looniness a bit strong. Replace with "gung-ho eagerness "to introduce (60mph limit) to as many roadworks as possible"?

Replace "gung-ho" with "researched and evidenced", and add "to do their job of ensuring that the roads are efficient as well as safe" and I'd agree.

[QUOTE 5007388, member: 45"]Yes, but what we have this morning is the public, who largely think they are good drivers and who don't like being told to slow down, being told by the slant of the reporting that very clever and important motoring people agree with them that they can drive faster.

And Edmund King being a nobber with his public presentation of the issue.[/QUOTE]
Yes, that's one interpretation. I tend to believe that the public are not quite that dumb - and will respond to existing speed limit signs as they have always done, with a mixture of acceptance and impatience.

 

[glasgowcyclist]

Whatever the speed limit, I drive within it and at a speed I asses as appropriate for the circumstances and conditions. That won't change if the speed limit through roadworks is raised, and I won't go faster just because some nobber is up my chuff. Tailgating me results in me reducing speed.

Have the representatives of the roadworkers expressed a view on this call for increased speed?