Monbiot on speed cameras and the real war
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Matt B on 31 Jul 2010 08:14 On 31/07/2010 11:52, Chelsea Tractor Man wrote: > On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:02:44 +0100, Matt B wrote: > >>> So why hasn't a single civilised country, anywhere in the world, come up >>> with something better? >> >> But they have. > > expand. The speed limit is a last resort for when the road system has failed to deliver a truly "public road". It is a blunt tool which can do nothing but (and only if rigorously enforced) cap speeds locally. Unless it varies infinitely along a route it cannot deliver user friendly or particularly safe roads. The late Hans Monderman, a Dutch traffic engineer, realised this and developed a radical concept (now generally known as Shared Space) and implemented various variations of it in towns and cites in the Netherlands. The concept has now spread around the world. In the UK there are small versions of it at Seven Dials in Covent Garden and in Brighton, Ashford and a few other places. A quite ambitious scheme is planned for Exhibition Road in London. The concept relies on designing a road system for humans, not for automatons, and that does not rely on 100% human infallibility and observance of arbitrary laws, rules and regulations for it to work safely. It harnesses the natural ability of human beings to "negotiate" their own terms for the interactions with other humans that are required to use the road space. -- Matt B
From: Matt B on 31 Jul 2010 08:18 On 31/07/2010 11:54, Chelsea Tractor Man wrote: > On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 18:53:52 +0100, Brimstone wrote: > >>> Because the only way that a driver could make absolutely certain that he >>> never exceeded a speed limit by even 1 mph would be for that driver to >>> consistently drive at several mph *below* the limit. >>> >> Many cars now have speed limiters fitted so staying below a pre-defined >> figure is easy. > > for varying limits? For any limit. They are set by the driver, a bit like cruise control. Some sound a buzzer at the selected speed and some can actually govern the speed to the set limit. They can generally be overridden by pressing the accelerator through a detent switch - like a kick-down. -- Matt B
From: Brimstone on 31 Jul 2010 08:22 "Chelsea Tractor Man" <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message news:detiovl6t84n$.13120bedcpf0n.dlg(a)40tude.net... > On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 12:21:22 +0100, Brimstone wrote: > >>>> One can alter the figure at which the limiter cuts in. >>> >>> not the same thing >>> >> Why not? > > its obvious > To you, perhaps.
From: Matt B on 31 Jul 2010 08:26 On 31/07/2010 12:17, Tony Raven wrote: > Derek C wrote: >> >> Doesn't sound much like Barbara Castle, who was a non driver! >> > > It wasn't. She extended the period to allow the Road Research Laboratory > more time to collect data on its effects (as you would see if you > revisited the news reports at the time). It was then on the basis of > that data that she made it permanent. The "research" were controversial and challenged even then though, and the government chose an interpretation to suit their agenda (as they still do). As always, there are other studies which show a different results. -- Matt B
From: Matt B on 31 Jul 2010 08:33
On 31/07/2010 13:03, Chelsea Tractor Man wrote: > On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 12:56:18 +0100, Matt B wrote: > >>>> What do you think would happen to traffic speeds and casualty rates if >>>> car drivers didn't assume (and weren't given) right of way over all >>>> traffic emerging from each and every side road and driveway or over all >>>> pedestrians and cyclists who wanted to cross as they drove along a road? >>> >>> I assume you are only talking about city centres? >> >> Villages, towns and other places too where the public road is shared by >> all types of user. >> >> For distributor roads and through routes you need a different approach, yes. > > for the specific point of priority you cannot have different rules in > different places, too confusing for children and foreigners. Confusing for > everybody, it would be carnage. The redesign idea is OK for city centres > but impractical for the large areas of suburbs. It works in NL. Which is probably why they have the safest roads in the world, and probably the largest and most vibrant cycling community. The key is to have a very few, but very distinct road types, which everybody recognises and understands. Each is consistent and recognisable over its entire length. There's none of this chopping and changing speed limits every few hundred yards and a bit of cycle lane here and there and the randomness that seems to dominate here. It's all prim, proper and clear-cut there. -- Matt B |