Erm, No.
Bring on brexit!
- Thread starter NVP
- Start date
Erm, No.
Soldato
I think it's a great idea, can't wait to tail-gate and then overtake a nice new BMW doing bang on 70mph on the motorway, in my 25 year old Vauxhall Corsa.
/dons tin hat
/dons tin hat
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Don't forget though that German motorway design isn't as good as ours - there are numerous dodgy junctions where traffic joining and leaving the motorway conflicts, many of them are only 2 lanes, etc.
Not true at all, lots of factors especially time and location.
If I leave before 6 I'll be in work in 50-60mins.
If I leave after 6.15 I'll be in work in 105-120mins+
Last edited:
Associate
Assuming you don't work in statistics, you have to be careful with correlation....
As you can see, in the 2000's suicides by hanging, strangulation and suffocation was "Directly Linked" to the US Spending on science, space and technology
Associate
Spot the anti-car / not into cars poster's 
+ FoxSpot the anti-car / not into cars poster's
Very fair point, there are many contributory factors involved.
Ok so while the correlation between deaths and speed is not definitive, I grant you, however it is fact that on Autobahns, the average speed is considerably higher than on our motorways, and the number of deaths are also considerably higher, so it is not beyond common sense to make a ball park correlation, yes there are other factors, but speed involved will be a major one of them.
To say speed has no contributory factor at all, and use that as a reason to say speeding is ok, is just idiotic in my opinion.
There is a link, it has been proved many times, that if you slow down, you will be less likely to kill your self and or others, that is beyond doubt.
Simple physics tell you, that if you halve your speed you will have one quarter of the kinetic energy, (inverse is, double your speed you have 4 times the energy involved) to dissipate in a collision, less energy involved, less chance of injury or death, very simple facts.
Spot the anti-car / not into cars poster's
Not sure if that was aimed at me at all, but personally it is far from the truth, as my whole working life has been around cars.
First working as a mechanic in a dealership then 15 years in motor racing from club level up to 12 years in F1. Since leaving F1 I have spent the last 9 years working at a major independent international research and development facility in the UK working on everything to do with all manner of vehicles, but mainly over the last 5 years on the development of autonomous and connected vehicles, in conjunction with several major manufacturers, the government, and other authorities.
So having spent best part fo 36 years in various parts of the automotive industry, i believe I have a pretty good basis of knowledge from which to comment from.
Assuming you don't work in statistics, you have to be careful with correlation....
As you can see, in the 2000's suicides by hanging, strangulation and suffocation was "Directly Linked" to the US Spending on science, space and technology
Clearly NASA is strangling people who know to much.
Soldato
I must have missed the part where RHD was a safety feature.
You're "in to" cars yet welcome the limiters happily
Ah, fair enough
I mean it would depend how its implemented. If it's simply mandatory inclusion of the systems available today which are optional then I am all for it - but they are fully switchable.
Gone are the days when a competent driver could just 'know' the speed limit without needing to look at a sign based on the type of road and the surroundings - these days speed limits seem to set far more arbitrarily and therefore its easy to get caught out and tech which helps you avoid this is therefore welcome.
There are so many wide, grade separate dual carriageways around now with speed limits as low as 50 or even 40 which were 70 when they were built - not to mention every A road in Oxfordshire seemingly now being a 50 when the same road types in most other counties are 60.
Can anyone honestly say that every single speed limit in this country has been imposed necessarily and rationally?
A speed limit should be there to control the actions of the few - it should be set at the speed which 85% of competent, careful drivers would naturally travel at anyway unless the road presents hidden hazards that a competent driver may not necessarily foresee when choosing a speed. But this rarely seems to happen anymore.
The 'Zombie effect' of very low speed limits is genuinely concerning too - you only have to see how some people behave in monotonous 50 zones, some peoples thoughts and eyes are on anything but what they are supposed to be - it feels so placid and so 'safe' that it has a detrimental effect on peoples alertness.
I mean it would depend how its implemented. If it's simply mandatory inclusion of the systems available today which are optional then I am all for it - but they are fully switchable.
Gone are the days when a competent driver could just 'know' the speed limit without needing to look at a sign based on the type of road and the surroundings - these days speed limits seem to set far more arbitrarily and therefore its easy to get caught out and tech which helps you avoid this is therefore welcome.
There are so many wide, grade separate dual carriageways around now with speed limits as low as 50 or even 40 which were 70 when they were built - not to mention every A road in Oxfordshire seemingly now being a 50 when the same road types in most other counties are 60.
Can anyone honestly say that every single speed limit in this country has been imposed necessarily and rationally?
A speed limit should be there to control the actions of the few - it should be set at the speed which 85% of competent, careful drivers would naturally travel at anyway unless the road presents hidden hazards that a competent driver may not necessarily foresee when choosing a speed. But this rarely seems to happen anymore.
The 'Zombie effect' of very low speed limits is genuinely concerning too - you only have to see how some people behave in monotonous 50 zones, some peoples thoughts and eyes are on anything but what they are supposed to be - it feels so placid and so 'safe' that it has a detrimental effect on peoples alertness.
So..
Assuming (say) 16,000Km/Year
One might drive for 700,000 years or so on British motorways, but only 600,000 years on German ones before croaking oneself (or being croaked by somebody else)
This is longer than Homo Sapiens has even existed!
Both seem pretty damn safe to me.
I hate it when people get all obsessed over really tiny numbers!
So..
Assuming (say) 16,000Km/Year
One might drive for 700,000 years or so on British motorways, but only 600,000 years on German ones before croaking oneself (or being croaked by somebody else)
This is longer than Homo Sapiens has even existed!
Both seem pretty damn safe to me.
I hate it when people get all obsessed over really tiny numbers!
Really tiny numbers huh ?
The number of deaths on German roads (that's all roads not just Autobahns) last year fell to 3,214, but there were 2.6 million accidents. It was the highest number of traffic accidents since reunification.
3,214 deaths is 3,214 too many, In comparison there were 1,770 road deaths on British Roads in the same year.
Think I will stick with having speed limits as it is demonstrably safer.