Top speed

If you're speeding in Italy, watch out for the Lamborghini Police Car...

On Sunday afternoon at 4.30 8 people died and the A23 both into and out of Brighton was closed for 15 hours causing untold misery and inconvenionce for thousands of people, just because someone thought he could drive faster and better than others. He was going that fast he lost control and cleared the central barrier before hitting on coming traffic leaving Brighton.At least 6 families are now destroyed.
oldie.

And your point is what?

You have evidence that isn't in the public domain about the speed of the BMW? Or the attitude of the driver?

Paul

I agree with Paul, it seems somewhat premature to dismiss the possibility that the driver was either distracted, unfit to drive, unwell, wholly inexperienced at driving on such a busy and fast stretch of road or that his vehicle might have suffered some defect.

If speed does turn out to be the sole cause of this accident, surely the inconvenience, misery or family grief, though massive, is no greater or worse than in the overwhelming majority of accidents which occur at, or well under the applicable speed limit and are due to amongst others, external events, road conditions, driver impairment, poor driving skills, poor judgement, inattention and deliberately reckless behaviour.

Speed is an issue, certainly not the issue.

"If speed does turn out to be the sole cause of this accident"

Even if the accident was due purely to the speed being driven at, it'd be inappropriate speed, rather than purely speeding, which is the problem.

I've seen speed related accidents and inappropriate speed well within the speed limit. I saw a girl knocked down outside my local school a couple of years back and the car driver can't have been doing 20mph (in a 30mph limit) at the time. Given that there were loads of kids crossing the road (there are no pedestrian crossings, no speed cameras and no lollipop lady/man on the road outside the school) and not paying much attention he was still driving way too fast for the conditions.

Less than a mile away he could have been booked doing 70mph in a 60mph limit on a long straight well surfaced section of road (I've done 150mph on it) with no junctions, pedestrians or other traffic. I don't think that's dangerous however, but driving at 20mph when he knocked the girl down was.

With all due respect, according to early reports, the BMW "flew" over the central barrier, implying that it must have been going incredibly fast. It was occupied by five people all between 17 and 20 years old. Although it may be too early to judge, it doesn't take a great leap of imagination to see what happened. We shall wait to see.
What is most important is that a poor two year old and a four year old in the other vehicles are dead because of this, and that is unforgivable in my opinion. If it turns out to mechanical failure or other unforeseen causes, then I will bow to that verdict - but let's wait and see.
It isn't always speed though, because we in Brighton are also hearing of a baby in a pushchair on the pavement crushed by a car driven at 3mph by a 80 year old woman driver who forgot which pedal to press.
The whole system needs a shake up I think, and as far as I'm concerned, anyone putting innocent lives at risk on the roads needs to be stopped and prevented from doing so in the future.
If those little children wern't dead, then I may not feel as stongly as I do, but I am very upset by this.

I agree with Steve. We have a dual carriageway nearby that is through open marshland with no surrounding buildings, no pathway, no trees, and straight. The limit is 40mph.
We should have new properly considered set limits for all roads, say 90mph on motorways with a minimum limit too of say 60, and severe penalties for middle laners & tailgaters.

I too used to argue that speeding "in itself" was not dangerous, but then I woke up to the fact that I was clearly lying to myself and others in a bid to excuse my own pathetic behaviour behind the wheel.
Creeping over the speed limit from time to time is one thing, but some of these speeds quoted on this thread are totally irresponsible. Think about it, do you really want speed limits relaxed so that load of Chavs can bomb about the place at 100mph+ in their Saxos?
Simon

quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon Perry:
do you really want speed limits relaxed so that load of Chavs can bomb about the place at 100mph+ in their Saxos?

---

They're doing it anyway.

Steve,
I disagree. All the speed traps and cameras about the place have got to be a restraining influence on some of the Chavs some of the time. Would you like to see speed limits raised then?
Similarly, they've got to be a restraining influence on some of the excellent F1 drivers on this thread.
Simon

Two things occur to me. Firstly a lot of the countryside 40 mph limits are not to protect people but wildlife.

Secondly, it's all very well going fast on straight roads but most drivers appear to find it nigh on impossible to driveat a consistent speed down country roads, you know the sort, 55mph on the straight, down to twenty for the long sweeping bend, oh no there'ss are car approaching, hit the brakes, oh another straight, accelerate hard so no one can over take and back in the safety of the bends we they can sit at 25mph when they're not braking. Where's the skill base that allows them to keep the momnetum going?

Tom

Actively enjoying it all

Rasher, I agree with pretty much everything you say, but the qualification must be that many people drive safely at high, even incredible speed where they judge it to be safe. I imagine that yes, the car was travelling at a speed which was inappropiate in respect of the road, possibly into the sun, the experience of the driver and the distractions which were quite possibly being posed by his passengers. If the baby cries, my wife nags or if I'm ferrying loud and drunk friends in the car my concentration wavers and I have to slow right down. I could drive on badly and inattentively within the speed limit, not trigger a camera, but I'd be a danger. As a cool teenager, I'm not convinced that I'd have the sense to do that.

It's still a bloody tragedy, but I agree that that a rash of camera and a 40mph limit isn't the answer, I think we need to swell the ranks of traffic police rather than the coffers and as you say, a review of speed limits which balances the need to make steady progress with safety.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Simon Perry:
Steve,
I disagree. All the speed traps and cameras about the place have got to be a restraining influence on some of the Chavs some of the time.

---

Not as much as having police out there targeting bad/dangerous driving and dangerous/unininsured vehicles would. Speed cameras are only active for very short sections of road and, once the locals know where they are, have little impact elsewhere.

quote:

---

Would you like to see speed limits raised then?

---

I'd like to see some raised (e.g 85mph on motorways) and some lowered (20mph limits or lower & "safety" cameras outside all schools during school hours). I past a school a couple of days back which had a 40mph limit outside it and I know of a couple locally that have 60mph limits immediately outside. Madness.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tom Alves:
Firstly a lot of the countryside 40 mph limits are not to protect people but wildlife.

---

Good point - hadn't thought of that (but I'm a city boy where wildlife means something else).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rasher:
Good point - hadn't thought of that (but I'm a city boy where wildlife means something else).

---

I'm not so convinced. I do a lot of driving in the countryside and while you do see the occasional sheep on the road (and even less frequently a cow or deer) it's pretty rare. Driving properly and using sightlines (and driving so you can stop within a distance you can see to be clear) then the speed limit shouldn't be a factor for wildlife, unless it jumps out onto the road right in front of your car.

I'm with Tom and Steve on this. I regularly get burnt off by a gang of 12 year old pikeys in a decrepit Vauxhall Nova or somesuch. I can usually spot a gap where the tax disc should be and thus can assume that the insurance is similarly absent. Do you really these guys give a damn about speed cameras? They're happy as hell that the bean counters are pumping the money into cameras whilst they have their fun.

I also don't think that anyone on this thread is holding their speeds up to be anything but abnormal; that's the whole point of the thread. I also think that people don't want a blanket relaxation of speed limits, they want a sensible, mature review that applies appropriate limits i.e 15-20mph outside schools, shops etc. duing specified hours and higher limits where the road is well-maintained, vision is clear and doesn't pass through or near residential areas. Rasher's example of a 40 mph dual carriageway through open marshland is a case in point.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Steve G:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rasher:
Good point - hadn't thought of that (but I'm a city boy where wildlife means something else).

---

I'm not so convinced. I do a lot of driving in the countryside and while you do see the occasional sheep on the road (and even less frequently a cow or deer) it's pretty rare. Driving properly and using sightlines (and driving so you can stop within a distance you can see to be clear) then the speed limit shouldn't be a factor for wildlife, unless it jumps out onto the road right in front of your car.

---

It may not work and not be well reasoned and indeed be a regional thing but certainly Sussex & Kent had these 40mph zones through the scenic & natural bits e.g. Ashdown Forest. It's not so much the animals but the birds which can't react to vehicles moving at more than 50mph. Last weeks drive (Amulree to Kenmore (1st gear on hills, max speed 40 mph avg 25mph) ) we got to see Red Shank, Black Grouse, Red Legged Partridge, Pee Wit to name but a few, all at the side of the road. And then there's pheasants and more pheasants and supper

Tom

Actively enjoying it all

I believe racing between cameras, accelerate as hard as possible then brake as hard as possible to avoid being photographed, is now becoming quite popular where cameras are close together.

quote:

---

Originally posted by reductionist:
I believe racing between cameras, accelerate as hard as possible then brake as hard as possible to avoid being photographed, is now becoming quite popular where cameras are close together.

---

This was definitely popular on the M25 between the M3 and M4 junctions (when traffic was light enough to allow speeding anyway).

It merely seemed to confirm my theory that the M25 is an experiment in wave motion.

quote:

---

With all due respect, according to early reports, the BMW "flew" over the central barrier, implying that it must have been going incredibly fast.

---

I don't think that implication follows at all.

FWIW the time of day and the area implies to me that the road would have been busy and 'incredibly fast' simply not possible. OTOH 75mph and having someone pull out in front of you could lead to a loss of control. Misfortune with the kerbs and barrier and you're flying. Perhaps this being an A road rather than motorway, and therefore built to a much lower safety standard, was a factor.

A reasonable person would look at the increase in road casualties since cameras became popular, the decrease in prosecutions for careless and dangerous driving, the decrease in observable driving standards, and conclude that perhaps the current policy was failing. The anti-freedom of movement pressure groups and the government however are quite happy with the way things are going and want more of the same. One day the worm will turn.

Paul

The stretch of road coming towards Brighton is generally a fast stretch with a slight left hand bend after a fairly slow section which then widens out to 3 lanes. The slow traffic moves to the inside lanes and the traffic that has been held up for a few miles just opens out and lets rip. Even giving the time of day, it is perfectly possible that they could have been doing in excess of 100mph by that bend as the traffic is generally not congested at that point.

A competent and attentive driver in a perfectly funtioning car, on a clear 3 lane carriageway in perfect conditions doesn't crash through a central reservation into oncoming traffic simply as a function of attaining 80,90 or 100mph. The important thing is that the speed, if it turns out to be a factor, was inappropriate, given one, some or all of the factors mentioned earlier. It was the combination that proved deadly and the focus of resources and attention on speed, which is authoritatively acknowledged to be one of the least likely sole causes of accidents, badly serves the cause of road safety. As already noted, those who consider it to be all about speed appear to ignore reason.

OK, so we had an "inexperienced driver going at an inappropriately fast speed" being distracted momentarily to change the CD say, and he kills 8 people including himself and two children.
If he was doing 60mph they would all probably still be alive.
So what are you going to do? Give all chavs a frontal lobotomy, or make sure they can't go fast enough to threaten the lives of innocent people when they don't give a fuck about anyone or anything? Well,... let's see which option is more feasible

Rasher some of what you say is right this is possibly just another example of "not giving a fuck".
I must have had a least four examples this morning, people blocking access on to road / roundabout etc when it is painfully obvious they can't go anywhere but now neither can you.
As regards the A23 crash the local paper has not said who was driving. My eldest has heard that the BMW was racing another car. Mind you given the time and the weather not sure there would have been enough free space to race.My youngest was at school with the 20 yr old lad BTW.
Are you advocating just chavs /BMWs are restricted to say 40-50 mph? Every body else (this is you and me and the other 20 or 30 sensible people will be unrestricted.)


Howard

Well, you know the answer. Ban private ownership of cars, and boost public transport including extensive use of taxis. If people must drive make it on a need basis but only after they've taken some seriuosly draconian test.

Naturally this won't apply to me

Tom

Actively enjoying it all