They're only reducing limits round schools and residential areas round my way, which isn't something I have a particular problem with. I don't have a problem with the speed limit on good quality dual carriageways/motorways being increased to 80mph either.
Serves him right
- Thread starter stockhausen
- Start date
Fair enough, here I'm faced with the ideas of a previous moronic government where they were reducing the speed limit from 120kph to 100 kph everywhere where the motorway has been widened. Yep that's right more lanes=lower speed limit here, the A2 and the A12 I'm o about, A2 went from 2x3 lanes to 2x 5 lanes and the speed got reduced from 120kph to 100 kph. The A12 from 3+4 lanes to 2x4 lanes and again, reduction of speed limit...
It really grinds my gear especially when coming back from abroad where I'm used to having CC set at 160 kph or so then having to slow down to 120 or 100 kph
.
It really grinds my gear especially when coming back from abroad where I'm used to having CC set at 160 kph or so then having to slow down to 120 or 100 kph
.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
That makes sense. More cars at the same speed increases the chances of a collision.
Don't you mean, same amount of traffic spread over more lanes, traffic doesn't suddenly increase by 40% because they increased capacity, it does over time but not like that.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
So you'd prefer if they reduced the speed limit over time instead? It saves them time and money doing it at the same time that they increase capacity.
Yes.
And the low speed limit should not apply from 1-5 am.
It costs or saves them nothing there are computerized signs on that whole stretch, they can put any speed limit they want on at any time from their lazy chair. It's a ''variable speed limit'' zone where they lower the limit a couple of miles before a traffic jam to try to dissipate it.
Regardless, the lowered limits particularly annoy me for driving at night. You say it's logical to lower the limit for more cars, well, there's 1 other car per 3 miles of road around 3 am...
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
So there's no fixed signs?
I think that increased capacity particularly on a busy stretch of road would lead to a quick influx of cars who would have otherwise avoided it.
I know that when they upgraded one of the roads near me to a dual carriageway, it was just as busy if not busier than before straight away.
I think that increased capacity particularly on a busy stretch of road would lead to a quick influx of cars who would have otherwise avoided it.
I know that when they upgraded one of the roads near me to a dual carriageway, it was just as busy if not busier than before straight away.
Soldato
- Joined
- 9 Oct 2009
- Posts
- 9,287
- Location
- United Kingdom
Poor guy, speeding in Switzerland...bad idea!
If I'm correct there aren't, I can't be sure as I've not been there yet after the work was done, the extra lanes open on Monday.
Before the works, there weren't any but the matrix signs as it was an NSL motorway and only in case of jams, roadworks, accidents the matrix signs either showed a lower limit or warned for jams by flashing and saying 50...
That may be the case but that is pretty much the only road between Rotterdam&The Hague and Utrecht, 3 big cities, I can't imagine people taking a different route as there is no proper other route.
Associate
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 2,211
So if it's the only proper route I'm guessing before the upgrade there was problems with congestion? So as a result of the upgrade in capacity, the same or a slightly larger number of vehicles are travelling at higher speeds than before (on average), yes?
Therefore it makes sense to reduce the limit as the same number of cars (or slightly more) are now able to travel faster (during peak times).
Yes, congestion pretty much every day between 7-9 am and 5-7pm , but what about the non peak times where you could do 120 kph and now have to drive slower.
Anyone driving offpeak or at night is shafted now and loses 5 minutes of time ( if they keep to the limit ofc, which I doubt, off peak about one third of the drivers ignore the limit, in some places it's as bad as 60% of the drivers ignore the limits).
I think this is leading nowhere though, I will never be FOR a lower speed limit, I do a large mileage on the motorway and because of work I also drive around the city a lot in the van and in both situations I feel I can easily go a little faster than you have to in the majority of places. So lets just disagree
...
Last edited:
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 47,227
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
I think that you will find that there are a few more vehicles on the roads than there were 40 years ago as well
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 47,227
I think that you will find that there are a few more vehicles on the roads than there were 40 years ago as well
Exactly why we need to get them on and off the motorway quicker
[TW]Fox;17151325 said:
Would be awesome to be in this position. "Keep the car, I'm off to have a wander around a Ferrari dealership"
Or
"Hålla bilen, jag ut att ha en vandra runt en Ferrari återförsäljare!" if you like
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 3,975
At the end of the day, he won't be speeding at 180mph or whatever he was doing because of the fine. If he got £60 he would certainly be more likely.
I assume that you are against speed limits of all types? Let everyone drive at whatever speed they want and if they crash, punish them then- of course if they crash at 290Kph then it's highly unlikely that they will be around to be punished!