Is clamping down on speeders really that necessary?

MAYPOP

maoleary wrote:

I have a feeling that this is half due to the extra weight of the yank cars and many states (even counties differ!) do not make seatbelt wearing mandatory, which obviously affects safety. Also the americans are not quite as nutty on safety as we are here with our NCAPs and so on. But I agree that a big US car is damn lot safer than an old micra that young people are forced to drive here.

IMO drink/drunk driving is a lot more prevalent in America that it is in Ireland these days due to enforcement issues.

skyhighflyer wrote:

We live (well, not me anymore thankfully), in a country where cars are massively overtaxed and insurance is insanely expensive. Therefore young drivers have to start off in tin boxes of cars, i.e 1.0l micras, starlets et al with no safety equipment to speak of and which simply fold up in a crash. Compare this with the US where most young people drive jeeps or big sedans handed down from their parents, or, if not, something modern and safe like the new Jetta or a Passat (which is the same price as a Polo there) Couple that with crappy roads and no driver training and it's no surprise so many young people die on the roads here.

I agree with you 100%

Victor

I think there are two factors - the culture of speed and the actual impact speed

Culture of speed - Fast = good. Slow = bad. Fast = grown up. Slow = childlike. I must get there quicker. I must overtake that person. I am invincible. All these combine to create a situation where additional risks are taken - dangerous overtaking, taking bends or narrow roads too fast, jumping red lights and general corner cutting.

Impact speed - the faster the impact speed the move severe the accident. The energy involved increase to the square of the speed. Severity increase somewhere between the speed^3 and speed^4. That is a 100km/h impact is between 8 and 16 time more severe than a 50km/h impact.

---

To those that blame the quality of roads. Adjust your driving to suit the road.

To those that query the effectiveness of penalty points. Look at the effect of the initial introduction in 2003 and the expansion last year (to gether with more Traffic Corp gardai). Graph attached.

maoleary wrote:

I have a feeling that this is half due to the extra weight of the yank cars and many states (even counties differ!) do not make seatbelt wearing mandatory, which obviously affects safety.

Fair points, but I suspect air bags are much more common in the states.

MAYPOP wrote:

IMO drink/drunk driving is a lot more prevalent in America that it is in Ireland these days due to enforcement issues.

I don't thinks its the enforcement as such, more the sentencing. "Moderate" drink driving leads to driving bans of only a few weeks.

Ghupta Yahd

Speed is not the problem, you can drive safely at speed. The problem is driving at inappropriate speed for the circumstances. That boils down to experience and knowing the dangers of the prevailing conditions. The standard of driving on Irish roads is extreamly poor, which is not really surprising considering how easy it is to get behind the wheel here.

Del2005

The few places in the US I've been there was a huge drink driving culture. We used to walk to the pub and get strange looks from everyone, also they didn't have random breath testing. They had to do the sobriety test and a lot of people in the US can pass them when drunk. Also wasn't Montana the last state where you could drive with an open alcohol container and they only removed that law recently

American cars have more and bigger air bags but thats cause they don't typically wear seat belts and need the bigger air bags.

Driving at too high a speed is dangerous and not speeding. But then it doesn't matter speed what you do if some muppet comes around a corner on the wrong side and smacks into you.

rowanh

I would definatley be of the opinion that driving at a fairly high speed does increase the chances of accidents. At the same time i think on a motorway having no speed limit in itself does not increase the levels of accidents significantly, this is from wikipedia

Accident Record

The overall safety record of autobahns is comparable to other European motorways, and motorways are safer than other road types. A 2005 study by the Federal Minister of the Interior indicated that there were an equal number of accidents per kilometer on the autobahn in sections without any speed limits.

If there was no speed limit on the m50 it would not make much difference at most times of day as the bits that are 120 i find a lot of the time both lanes are moving at more like 100. I would happily drive at 180 on the m50 when it is empty enough to do so. I would be fairly confident i could drive at 180 on a daily basis and it would not be a problem outside of exceptional circumstances.

I think a simple solution is have a reccomeded speed limit. If you want to be able to drive over the reccomeded limit then you have to pass an advanced driving test which is actually hard to pass. If you speed without this then you lose your license on a point system like ours. Obviously this would only apply to duel carrigeways and motorways. Also i think if you are on a provisional and you should lose your license very quickly with points.

Type 17

rowanh wrote:

I would definatley be of the opinion that driving at a fairly high speed does increase the chances of accidents. At the same time i think on a motorway having no speed limit in itself does not increase the levels of accidents significantly, this is from wikipedia

Accident Record

The overall safety record of autobahns is comparable to other European motorways, and motorways are safer than other road types. A 2005 study by the Federal Minister of the Interior indicated that there were an equal number of accidents per kilometer on the autobahn in sections without any speed limits.

If there was no speed limit on the m50 it would not make much difference at most times of day as the bits that are 120 i find a lot of the time both lanes are moving at more like 100. I would happily drive at 180 on the m50 when it is empty enough to do so. I would be fairly confident i could drive at 180 on a daily basis and it would not be a problem outside of exceptional circumstances.

I think a simple solution is have a reccomeded speed limit. If you want to be able to drive over the reccomeded limit then you have to pass an advanced driving test which is actually hard to pass. If you speed without this then you lose your license on a point system like ours. Obviously this would only apply to duel carrigeways and motorways. Also i think if you are on a provisional and you should lose your license very quickly with points.

I drove the length of Germany in 2005, and the speed limits on autobahns are great - 130km/h around cities and busy places (like where two major autobahns meet), but only a recommended speed limit of 130km/h between cities - BUT it only works because of the high levels of driver training which exist in Germany - lane discipline is almost perfect and, where it is not, other drivers are ready and aware. All drivers use mirrors and indicate always, and basically work with each other, rather than competing with each other.

Can you imagine no speed limits on the motorways here with today's Irish driving standards? :eek: :eek: :mad:

unkel

Type 17 wrote:

All drivers use mirrors and indicate always, and basically work with each other, rather than competing with each other

Sharp observation and something not often mentioned here. Can I give a simple example of what I think you mean? Say car A is driving at 180km/h in the overtaking lane and about to overtake (in the next 30s or so) car B in the driving lane doing 130km/h. Car B is approaching a HGV C in the driving lane doing 80km/h.

If A keeps going at the same speed, B will have no chance to safely overtake C before obstructing A (a big no no as A has right of way), so B will have to brake.

In practice, you often see selfless solutions like A either speeding up or easing of slightly, so B can overtake C safely without having to brake (either before or after A overtakes . No flashes or other signals are required to communicate, just observation

Of course this all works if A and B are constantly aware of their position and speed compared to each other and compared to other vehicle(s) on the road

Type 17

unkel wrote:

...works if A and B are constantly aware of their position and speed compared to each other and compared to other vehicle(s) on the road

Most (not all) Irish motorway users are unaware of the PRESENCE of other road users, never mind their position and speed

DublinWriter

maoleary wrote:

The amount of cars driving at (or below GRRRR) the speed limit is incredible, yet the road deaths are still as high as when we were all bommin it around the place. What are we missing?

You really have to look at the stats on when fatal accidents occur and the groups to whom they most frequenty occur and where.

Right now, the high-spike in the stats are young male drivers between the hours of 00.00 and 06.00 at the weekends on "R" roads.

Yes, speed is an issue, but I would say the biggest factor is reckless driving.

When I say 'reckless', I really mean some 20-something lad, trying to impress his mates from the pub and generally acting like a numpty on the road.

The guards really need to get out at those hours and stop such reckless behaviour. They need roster more manpower into this particular window and not into having static speed checks on the Naas road and breathalising people at 2pm on a Sunday afternoon.

DublinWriter

maoleary wrote:

The amount of cars driving at (or below GRRRR) the speed limit is incredible, yet the road deaths are still as high as when we were all bommin it around the place. What are we missing?

You really have to look at the stats on when fatal accidents occur and the groups to whom they most frequenty occur and where.

Right now, the high-spike in the stats are young male drivers between the hours of 00.00 and 06.00 at the weekends on "R" roads.

Yes, speed is an issue, but I would say the biggest factor is reckless driving.

When I say 'reckless', I really mean some 20-something lad, trying to impress his mates from the pub and generally acting like a numpty on the road.

The guards really need to get out at those hours and stop such reckless behaviour. They need roster more manpower into this particular window and not into having static speed checks on the Naas road and breathalising people at 2pm on a Sunday afternoon.

Victor

Right now, the high-spike in the stats are young male drivers between the hours of 00.00 and 06.00 at the weekends on "R" roads.

5pm is just as dangerous as 3am - the difference being the number of people on the road.

The guards really need to get out at those hours and stop such reckless behaviour. They need roster more manpower into this particular window and not into having static speed checks on the Naas road and breathalising people at 2pm on a Sunday afternoon.

Actually Sunday is a good day for breahaliser tests because of the cumulative effect of the alcohol over the weekend and people doing unfamiliar journeys.

Revelation Joe

I haven't read all through this thread, so I'm sure that most of these points have already been raised, but:
Part of the problem is inappropriate speed. Going too fast for the conditions, the traffic flow and the layout of the road.

But here's a point that might be controversial.
Modern cars cossett drivers too much.
People take risks because 'Oh I have ABS, EBD, traction control, airbags, side impact beams'.
I've never had a car with any of those, not even an airbag and I am a careful driver. I'm not a slow driver, I adapt my speed to the environment. And I have never had a crash in fifteen years of driving in the UK and Ireland. A couple of near misses when I was younger, because I *did* go too fast for the conditions but I soon learned my lesson.