New 80 mph limit being considered for motorways

[Album56 0]

At last someone with a bit of common sense Transport Secretary Philip Hammond is considering increasing the speed limit on motorways to 80mph, the speed most of us drive at quite safely anyway.

Could this be an outbreak of common sense? long overdue as far as I'm concerned, now we need a revue of all speed limits sopme of which are ridiculous.

[Jim Bowen 1]

i do 90mph anyway because its big and clever, at least with everyone doing 70mph its quicker for me to overtake them in my VR6 Corrado :D

[Wendy 0]

But - most of the A roads are being reduced to 50mph which is not good news.

The only reason I can see for doing this is due to the state of our roads.

 

Instead of spending Tax Payers money putting up more and more signs - of speed limits, number of accidents etc it would be more beneficial to all - to repair the roads and keep uninsured drivers off the roads.

 

Re the 80mph - although this is only good for someone like me - the money that will be spent on the administration is just wasted - better if the camera's did not clock you until over 80mph, or even leave it all at 70mph - this is generally sending out mixed messages to the majority of drivers - one telling them they can drive faster - the other slower.

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Where as Sunday's Express had a "Lower Speed limit" headline (in respect of the 70 limit trunk roads) on the front page, as Wendy says.

 

Something to do with helping people to save fuel. What a load of rot. People are clearly already going onto the internet and discovering 56mph is supposedely the most efficient cruising speed to drive at. I've never seen so many people slip streaming HGVs and overtaking 3 mph faster to save fuel.

 

Well, yes, if you want to save fuel, do it in the slower lanes please and get out of the way of commuters needing to get to work on time. Chunts.

[andy 0]

Don't get me wrong, I rarely stick to the 70 limit and I do like to get places in a reasonable timeframe....ahem

I have often pondered the benefits of making motorways and main routes say 50mph. I reckon there would be less accidents and less of this bunching thing that causes havoc on the motorways. (speed up, slow down, speed up.....etc) You would be able to predict (hopefully through more predictable conditions) how long it would take you to get somewhere with greater accuracy and save fuel.

I think in some cases you might get places quicker. Every morning I join the M27 and do the bunching thing for 5 miles, my average speed is well under 50. Because everyone is trying to do 80, then they spot a brakelight on the horizon, slam on the anchors, speed up, slam on...grrrrr! If everyone was doing 50...ish. Merging would be easier, better stopping distances, less need to slam on etc etc

I think it makes a lot of sense. Lets hope they never bring it in!

[Kevin Bacon 5]

That motorway accordian effect has plagued us for years! Get to a hill or a busy intersection at peak time and the tailbacks can be massive! I'm not sure reducing the speed limit would solve that, but more people would survive accidents as a result of lower impact speeds, in theory.

 

I think the only thing that will solve this country's motoring misery is fewer cars on the roads, which can only be achieved by better and cheaper public transport. But this is Great Britain though. As soon as a new 17 Billion rail link is planned, it's opposed. Make your minds up people. Bitterly complaining about the state of the transport infrastructure on one hand, and complaining about a new rail link cutting through a cattle field on the other...... this country is seemingly never going to sort it's arse from it's elbow out.

[Peebee 0]

Well at least I'll be breaking the speed limit by s smaller margin. lol very imature of me I know!

[corozin 0]

No! No! No! No! No!

 

If the motorway limit is increased to 80mph then the Police will feel the obligation to enforce it afresh (to ensure the message gets over) whereas at the moment lots of people safely do 80-90mph and the Police mostly only intervene if you're tailgating or taking the mickey.

 

I agree with Wendy.This is a classic piece of Government spin doctoring, and the media have fallen for it. The headline is "we're going to be nice and give you higher motorway limits" whereas the real story is that almost every other limit we're going to get screwed once again.

 

I didn't think the Government had any money? Who is going to pay for all the new signage involved?

[tony_ack 0]

Don't get me wrong, I rarely stick to the 70 limit and I do like to get places in a reasonable timeframe....ahem

I have often pondered the benefits of making motorways and main routes say 50mph. I reckon there would be less accidents and less of this bunching thing that causes havoc on the motorways. (speed up, slow down, speed up.....etc) You would be able to predict (hopefully through more predictable conditions) how long it would take you to get somewhere with greater accuracy and save fuel.

I think in some cases you might get places quicker. Every morning I join the M27 and do the bunching thing for 5 miles, my average speed is well under 50. Because everyone is trying to do 80, then they spot a brakelight on the horizon, slam on the anchors, speed up, slam on...grrrrr! If everyone was doing 50...ish. Merging would be easier, better stopping distances, less need to slam on etc etc

I think it makes a lot of sense. Lets hope they never bring it in!

 

 

Not sure if it's right, but my maths instinct tells me that a three lane motorway with a 50mph speed limit would have a lower capacity in terms of maximum no. of cars per hour than a three lane motorway with a 70mph speed limit.

[andy 0]

Not sure if it's right, but my maths instinct tells me that a three lane motorway with a 50mph speed limit would have a lower capacity in terms of maximum no. of cars per hour than a three lane motorway with a 70mph speed limit.

 

Yes it would have a lower maximum flow rate, assuming perfect (minimal) spacing and no one braking etc. Junctions, lanes merging etc prevent this ideal scenario. The point I'm making is that bad driving is getting right in the way of achieving anywhere near the maximum flow rate. As I say in the example above, lots of people trying to go too fast for the conditions means more braking, unecessary deceleration and acceleration, and acheiving a really naff average speed.

On more remote motorways, higher speeds are more easily and safely achievable, but only because the volume of traffic is lower. I'm only (theoretically) suggesting it might help on busy stretches of motorway. Variable limits would probably be the best (theoretical) solution, but then driving in this country simply isn't good enough!

[corozin 0]

I think it's fairly safe to assume that any statement coming out of John Prescott is rubbish. The man is a complete moron.

[dr_mat 0]

Yes it would have a lower maximum flow rate

 

Acshully research shows that lower speed limits increase the throughput of the road, though "maximum flow rate" might be read in various different ways. You, personally, may not get there any quicker, but people drive more closely together, at more even speeds and the overall throughput of the road increases at 50mph compared to 70mph. It gets worse as you go higher. Essentially any technique that puts more cars in the same piece of road improves throughput, no matter how fast those cars are going. The ultimate would be three lanes of cars doing 100 mph inches from each other's bumpers. Never going to happen if you allow humans to drive, we're all too pathetic to cope with that.

 

Why do you think they use variable speed limits on many motorways during busy times? Slow *everyone* down, and the road is less likely to hit standstill and you'll get more cars through. Thimpleth!

Edited March 2, 2011 by dr_mat

[chazrad 0]

No! No! No! No! No!

 

If the motorway limit is increased to 80mph then the Police will feel the obligation to enforce it afresh (to ensure the message gets over) whereas at the moment lots of people safely do 80-90mph and the Police mostly only intervene if you're tailgating or taking the mickey.

 

I agree with Wendy.This is a classic piece of Government spin doctoring, and the media have fallen for it. The headline is "we're going to be nice and give you higher motorway limits" whereas the real story is that almost every other limit we're going to get screwed once again.

 

I didn't think the Government had any money? Who is going to pay for all the new signage involved?

 

I'm not sure I agree with you, John. Firstly what are these police that you speak of that will enforce motorway speed limits? They're simply aren't the coppers on the roads anymore to effectively police the Queen's highways. Cuts several years ago put paid to them: when the police - encouraged by the Home Office - had to prioritise their budgets to neighbourhood policing over enforcing traffic regulation. They were replaced by the more cost effective but essentially powerless highway patrols that you see about. I reckon the raising of the motorway speed limit tacitly suggests to drivers that it is now 'alright' (read unlikely to be pulled over) to do 90mph whereas before we have probably all thought that its 'alright' to do 80.

 

I have to admit to not having seen anything on the lowering of other road speed limits so can't comment on that. On the issue of variable speed limits, I have to say I think they generally work, when enforced by average speed cameras. I hate to admit it but they do seem to ensure that the traffic flows because everyone basically accepts that they can't really go any faster than anyone else over that stretch, so there is less tailgating and idiotic behaviour (unnecessary braking leading to bunching etc.) The other thing is such enforced limits save everyone fuel. Experience on the hateful M25 at morning rush hour - when I am unfortunate enough to need to use it - is what I am basing this on.

 

Hmmm new signs: don't know who'll pay. Possiby a hike in road tax will cover it!!

[andy 0]

Acshully research shows that lower speed limits increase the throughput of the road, though "maximum flow rate" might be read in various different ways. You, personally, may not get there any quicker, but people drive more closely together, at more even speeds and the overall throughput of the road increases at 50mph compared to 70mph. It gets worse as you go higher. Essentially any technique that puts more cars in the same piece of road improves throughput, no matter how fast those cars are going. The ultimate would be three lanes of cars doing 100 mph inches from each other's bumpers. Never going to happen if you allow humans to drive, we're all too pathetic to cope with that.

 

Why do you think they use variable speed limits on many motorways during busy times? Slow *everyone* down, and the road is less likely to hit standstill and you'll get more cars through. Thimpleth!

 

Dr, you have 100 per cent re-iterated the point I had made. Exactly!

[colinstubbs 0]

Hmmm new signs: don't know who'll pay.

 

No need for new signs on motorway - it'll still be national speed limit signs or electrical ones no?

[Kevin Bacon 5]

The ultimate would be three lanes of cars doing 100 mph inches from each other's bumpers. Never going to happen if you allow humans to drive, we're all too pathetic to cope with that.

 

Or do things the American way and build 5 and 6 lane trunk roads into and out of the major cities, but the liklihood of that happening is less than zero.

 

One of our biggest problems is driver attitudes. In America they sit in there row after row at 55 - 75mph (depending on state) patiently and more importantly, at a consistent speed, +/- a few mph of each other. There's no bunching up, slamming on of the brakes or people weaving across 3 lanes. Such obedience would never happen in this country. There are always people who want to drive a lot slower and a lot faster than the posted limits.