-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
How fast do you drive on the motorway?
- Thread starter londonmidland
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
- Joined
- 23 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 2,574
I love people who deny that humans may be causing climate change.
It gives me someone to ignore. One of the few groups of people I can really loathe... Along with American ultra-conservatives, and groups along the scale to racists and fascists. Although of course, special levels of loathing reserved for these latter. Often some overlap though...
It gives me someone to ignore. One of the few groups of people I can really loathe... Along with American ultra-conservatives, and groups along the scale to racists and fascists. Although of course, special levels of loathing reserved for these latter. Often some overlap though...
Personally, I don't drive on motorways (or anywhere else for that matter). If I could, I would drive at precisely 70 whenever possible, although I reckon that 100 in a modern car with airbags and side-impact protection would be safe. On an unrestricted Autobahn, my personal speed limit would be 125 (or 200 km/h in a German car) because that's probably as fast as I could handle a car safely when in traffic. On a track day, as fast as possible (Armco and gravel traps help).
Nor is gravity. We don't know how it works or why it is so weak compared with other forces, but it just works.
90019
Established Member
We have enough proof of gravity.
So far, there's not enough evidence either way to prove if climate change is natural or caused by humans.
strange6
Established Member
So you think airbags and side-impact bars would protect you at 100mph +?
Certainly better than the Ford Cortinas and Morris Oxfords that ran on motorways when the speed limits were set.
strange6
Established Member
Climate change has been here ever since the earth was formed. The climate is always changing and always will change. The worrying aspect for me is the depletion of the ozone layer
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Well, let's put it this way. It wouldn't matter which car you were in, you would be dead. Modern cars are safer at lower speeds than cars of 50 years ago, that's for sure. But when you start going above 60mph, even a modern car will not save your life in most crashes at those speeds. You simply cannot 'engineer out' the laws of physics.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Well, let's put it this way. It wouldn't matter which car you were in, you would be dead. Modern cars are safer at lower speeds than cars of 50 years ago, that's for sure. But when you start going above 60mph, even a modern car will not save your life in most crashes at those speeds. You simply cannot 'engineer out' the laws of physics.
Last edited:
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
From the Daily Telegraph motoring section yesterday, in an article about the new Hindhead Tunnel on the A3*, is the news that when the tunnel opens ( which is in July this year ) average speed cameras will be monitoring "the whole of the A3 network".
So it appears it is happening, though I wonder about the definition of "A3 network"; does that mean the A3 itself, full length, or does it also include a mile or so of all the major roads joining / leaving it?
*For much of its length the A3 is a motorway in all but name.
90019
Established Member
A Smart isn't exactly a good example, being designed as a very small city car and not really meant for the motorway with almost no distance between the occupants and the exterior of the car.
In a bigger car that has more space to dissipate the energy and better crumple zones, and you'll have more of a chance of surviving - hence not everyone involved in a motorway collision is killed.
strange6
Established Member
Ideally, you would want the car to break into as many pieces as possible to dissipate the energy of a crash. This is what modern racing cars do in the event of a crash whilst the driver remains protected in his 'survival cell', in which he sits.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VMeFkkEi1g
This was mark Blundells head on into a concrete wall at 180mph crash which illustrates the point
There's enough proof that it's not linked to the Milankovich Cycles, which usually cause climate fluctuations and the glaciation/interglacial oscillation. Current predictions for a pre-industrial world are that it should be getting colder. That isn't happening.
The other big feature is plate tectonics, which can allow warm water access to the poles, and has caused the Earth to be much hotter in the past (the mid Jurassic being a good example). However, continents move veeeeeeeeeery slowly. There cannot possibly have been enough continental movement to allow warm water to start heating up the Arctic. The other natural possibility would be the Sun. Now, I don't know enough about it, but what I do know is that it is a comparatively steady-state star. I don't know of any major fluctuations in solar radiation in the Sun's observed history, and the Earth is still here and still has life after 4,600 million years of orbiting it. So, if it's not the Earth's orbit, not plate tectonics, and not the Sun, what is it?
If you want proof beyond reasonable doubt (meaning in scientific terms a P-value of less than 0.05, or 95% certainty) then I don't have enough data to work with. However, on the balance of probabilities, it's us. We do know that CO2 (which is not the only greenhouse gas, but the commonest one) has increased in quantity ever since we started measuring it. We almost certainly know from air stored within ice core samples that this began to happen just after the Industrial Revolution. We also know that ice coverage in the Arctic, the Antarctic, the Alps and the Himalayas is reducing.
It's a solid theory with a known mechanism (unlike gravity, with no known mechanism). So I think it's about time we stopped arguing about it and did something serious instead.
- Joined
- 23 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 2,574
No matter how much protection you give, occupants' internal organs still experience extreme forces in head-on-collisions, and as the Fifth Gear video states, you probably aren't going to survive slowing from 70 to 0 in 1 second as your organs simply crush against the front of your rib cage. Blundell was incredibly lucky. You can die just from internal organ injuries from much less.
Something not dissimilar to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kYqjTA_VEg
Something not dissimilar to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6kYqjTA_VEg
strange6
Established Member
Indeed. You simply cannot engineer out the laws of physics. I think what saved Blundell is the slight angle he went into that wall at.
Striker
Member
- Joined
- 6 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 503
I am stunned.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Your attitude is just as bad as somebody denying climate change is caused by humans. The truth is, nobody knows for sure what causes climate change (notice how it's callled climate change now and not global warming). Scientists can't even agree. Sadly the majority of people have forgotten this (since when was it proven that humans are causing climate change?) and are being brain washed by governments as it's a good excuse to tax more, whether that be your holiday flight or the car you drive to work. Taxes on petrol. Road tax. Congestion charges in cities. The justification for it all is "climate change".
Exactly.
Exactly.
With regards speeding and the scary news that the A3 will be covered entirely by average speed cameras. It's just removing the onus on the driver to think for themselves, which in turn creates "zombies" behind the wheel. Also, the constant focus on speed makes people think that is the only thing that matters behind the wheel when in reality there are many, many things which drivers should consider when behind the wheel. Hazzard perception. Indicating properly. Lane discipline. Loading your vehicle correctly.
I have lived abroad for ten years now and have a lot of experience of driving on Belgian, Dutch, French, German and of course, British roads. I drive across Europe on a regular basis and do around 50,000 miles per year. Ten years ago I would say the best drivers were between the Germans and the British. Now it is quite clearly the British who are the worst. And I mean "clearly". The contrast is quite stark too. I think the biggest reason for this is the explosion of speed cameras in the UK. People just drive around like zombies, and it's quite depressing trying to drive in the UK nowadays. Middle lane hoggers are just terrible in the UK too. This rarely happens in continental Europe.
I say they're like "zombies" because it's as if people are thinking, "as long as I'm below the speed limit I'm safe".
This is something I feel quite passionate about.
Last edited:
90019
Established Member
You end up with people spending more time looking at the speedo than watching the road because they're scared of getting done.
Of course, you also then get the people who don't seem to understand the concept of an average speed camera, who'll slow down for the cameras and speed the rest of the time. They then wonder why they get a letter informing them they've been caught speeding.
My god, we agree on something!
Well that isn't news, put two scientists in a room together with an orange and they will start a passionate argument about what colour it is. I don't know of any field where there is a complete scientific consensus. There are several different schools of thought on climate change, just as there are on (say) population dynamics of pelagic fish. There's also the question of what constitutes "proof".
Personally, I hate statistics. I'd much rather publish the figures and leave readers to draw their own conclusions. However, there are hundreds of different models to analyse data, chi-squared tests, regression analyses, t-tests (paired and unpaired) and so on. I spent three months studying them and still had to re-sit the module. All of them are intended to produce a P-value as a "measure of uncertainty". It's the inverse of certainty, so if P=0, then 100% certainty (which is impossible) and P=1 then 0% certainty (also impossible). The crucial value is P=0.05 (or 95% certainty). Virtually no paper is accepted without conclusions that are supported by 95% certainty in the data. If it is anything more than 0.05, then the default position is "we don't know", which usually means a modification to the experiment design - go back and do it again.
So, scientists are careful about publishing results unless they've run the tests (they look like idiots in front of their rivals otherwise). They disagree because they are people (with egos) who always believe their own figures. It's perfectly possible for two different models to build up to explain the same phenomenon, but they're always backed up. Out of this, usually one of these models will turn out to be accurate. Climate change/global warming as caused by anthropogenic effects has been the dominant model for getting on for thirty years, and is still going strong. I doubt it will ever be broken now.
The Barlow Boy
Member
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2010
- Messages
- 696
You end up with people spending more time looking at the speedo than watching the road because they're scared of getting done.
Of course, you also then get the people who don't seem to understand the concept of an average speed camera, who'll slow down for the cameras and speed the rest of the time. They then wonder why they get a letter informing them they've been caught speeding.
My god, we agree on something!
That last paragraph set me thinking..............Does anyone know of anyone who's been done by an average speed camera in motorway works?
I don't.
Minilad
Established Member
Yep one of my mates got done on the M6 ones, Average speed of 61.7 in a 50
I'm not sure that the entire A3 is actually going to have average speed cameras. Other than the above article the only information I can find is that the tunnel itself is to have average speed cameras. If it was to be the entire A3 from London to Portsmouth then I am sure it would have been bigger news.
Must've been seriously unlucky!
I was talking to a friend who works for the Highways Agency, apparently these average speed cameras are only turned on for very small period of time (a few hours per week), and even then they only activate when someone is speeding over the normal limit (think he said 85mph on a motorway).
I was talking to a friend who works for the Highways Agency, apparently these average speed cameras are only turned on for very small period of time (a few hours per week), and even then they only activate when someone is speeding over the normal limit (think he said 85mph on a motorway).
I know plenty of people who've been caught out on the M80. There used to be an issue whereby if you changed lanes, the SPECS cameras wouldn't notice! Although I believe that that issue has now been resolved. Not that I would recommend it anyway.
For a while going down the M80/A80/whatever it's called at the moment, there were some numpties who travelled at 70mph+, but slowed down when they got to the average speed cameras... :roll:
It will be just through the tunnel. I am not a speed camera's biggest fan but can see the sense through the tunnel & other high risk/accident rate areas. It's quite curvy through there as seen on the walkthrough the other weekend.
Last edited:
Talking of tunnels, they finished the Hatfield Tunnel refurbishment programme on Sunday, after three years of nothing but two lanes and a tedious limit of 40mph! There were a couple of bikes going through it at at least ninety odd when I headed into work today. Maybe we should have a 60 limit for all tunnels. Just an idea. I've only just finished work so it's probably not that constructive!
I'd say 56 mph, would completely remove the need for anyone to overtake in a tunnel.
starrymarkb
Established Member
I suspect this is down to the belief that you can replace a Traffic Cop with a Camera. Thing is the Cop catches more then just speeders, they also catch bad driving under the limit
- Status