Go to Ultimatecarpage.com

Go Back   Ultimatecarpage.com forums > Automotive forums > Technical forums


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 01-30-2008, 04:04 PM
Matra et Alpine's Avatar
Matra et Alpine Matra et Alpine is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 27,781
nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clivey View Post
can you truthfully say you'd support such a system?

I DONT support such a system coz I'm a motorbike rider.
Many times the safest thing to do when some stupid cage doesn't see you is to get the hell OUT of danger as quick as possible !
Quote:
Furthermore, do you really think that the future of personal transport should be "limited"? Surely the future should dictate that we should arrive at our destination quicker? How are we going to do that if we pander to ancient, impractical and unworkable laws?
erm, no point in arriving quicker if you've killed hundreds of people enjoying sitting in their greenhouse whilst you went past and blew the glass onto them with the supersonic shock wave.
THinking like a law STUDENT
THe greater good is always used in determing laws.
Quote:
And yes, that's just as lame as being convicted of speeding for travelling at 80mph on an empty dual carriageway.
It's not. Statue books the world over are full of archaic laws and nobody uses them.
At the point anyoen was charged with that banana one it woudl go to appeal court and be over-ruled and thus removed from the statutes.
Quote:
So to answer your question: "It depends on the law in question."
But that isn't your choice, the courts detemrine that.
Quote:
There are probably plenty of other extremely important reasons, which I haven't so far covered, why restricting vehicles to the speed limit on every single road is a bad idea.
There aren't, ven the bike one is lame as it can be argued it was poor observation on my part in getting into dangerous position with a cager !
We've spent many an afternoon in the IAM motorcycle section discussing this with traffic cops
Quote:
I mean: What would YOU do with your RX-8 or A610? It'd be like having a dick but never being able to use it!
Nope. To carry on your analogy, I chose to use my dick in women. Not play with it on my own in the bedroom. I push the cars on track
WHat you chose to do with your car/dick ... MAY impact others "freedoms" and thus be necessary to be limited.
__________________
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 01-30-2008, 05:04 PM
Coventrysucks's Avatar
Coventrysucks Coventrysucks is offline
'64
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,273
UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
The point is not that this is on the front page, but how many green and environment and weather issues are?
Yes, the "green issue" gets headlines, and that is the point - all of the big and bold green issues are underlined and emphasised - wind turbines, nuclear power stations, congestion charging.

A story about speed humps is not "on message" of either the government's agenda of "speed kills", or the green lobby's agenda of "bringing misery to motorists" - therefore, whilst everyone applauds them for saving the planet by adding another 5p tax on air fares, they can and will ignore it.

It is the same every other time these concerns have been raised; speed bumps cost lives by slowing the emergency services - you'd expect them to be abolished immediately, but no, the main agenda is "speed kills", so the story was ignored, faded away and nothing was done.

It is the same with speed cameras - the evidence to support their use is shaky, and more officers on the roads would be much more effective in improving safety as a whole - but "speed kills", so we need more cameras.

It is the same with wind turbines - they're rubbish, and need an equal amount of conventional power generation to ensure redundancy when the wind drops off, but simply because they are not directly burning "evil" coal and gas they are "green" and we must have thousands of them.

Ad infinitum.

It is embarrassing that so many problems in this country are reduced to black/white fundamentalisms with too little debate, digestion and discussion of the actual facts. And then anyone who does not obligingly swallow the official brand of "truth", however misguided that truth is, is ridiculed and ignored.
__________________
Thanks for all the fish
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 01-30-2008, 05:32 PM
Matra et Alpine's Avatar
Matra et Alpine Matra et Alpine is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 27,781
nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
You've really got the wrong end of the stick on the green issues I reckon
eg speed bumps costing lives - NOT green, spped camera - NOT green !
SPeed bumps increasing fuel consumption and emissions - GREEN

Wind turbines aren't rubbish if you locate them where there is large average wind and then use HYDRO. The perfect storage system, already used for decades in the UK using nuclear to pump water back up the hill and then when peak needed letting it flow down.

True, the nutters see black/white on both sides.
BALANCE is what's important.

Personally I'd have preferred more research on wave power, but no, we buy technology from countries with no waves and plenty of wind. We coudl have been a world power in wave generation except for a string of short-minded governments
__________________
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 01-30-2008, 06:38 PM
crisis's Avatar
crisis crisis is offline
Space Modulator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 6,153
Adelaide
Problem with obsessing over speed limits and speed is that it does not take care of stupid and incompetent drivers who drive at the legal speed.
The one size fits all mentality fails on many fronts.
Firstly the reduction of 10 km here in Adelaide a few years back on certain suburban roads was seen in a study to have reduced the number of fatalities and serious injuries on those roads affected. The study went on to say there was no other factor they could say would have contributed. Wrong. Each year thousands of new cars take to the road and thousands of old ones are retired. The new car will stop in far less space at 60kmh than the old one will at 50kmh. The new one with the airbag will be far safer in a collision at 80kmh than the old one at 50kmh.
A report of road deaths (the road toll) was published in one of our newspapers recently. The road toll went up. The question was asked what we do to remedy this. The cry form police , politicians and the media was for people to slow down
Upon studying the figures I found that it was people in the 40-60 (approx) bracket who were most represented in deaths. Is this the traditional group generally regarded as irresponsible speeders?
It was also clear the larger percentage of deaths was on country roads. While the police love to sit in 100k zones and book you for 115kmh the accidents we see on the news of cars shredded in these accident happen at far greater speeds.
One factor that stood out from this whole thing was that in several accidents there were multiple fatalities. 4 dead in one car 3 in another. So while the road toll was a few people higher than the previous year the actual amount of accidents may have been less.
What does this all mean?
The simplistic ideology that speed kills and if we slow down all will be good is merely an excuse to collect money. The cynicism of it is what really pisses me off. If the authorities really wanted to reduce the amount of deaths they would force drivers to undertake proper defensive driving courses before they were allowed to drive.
Will it eliminate road deaths? Never. You have two objects approaching each other at 120kmh occurring thousands of times a second separated by a painted line on the road and a couple of feet. And people treat this activity as a secondary priority while doing something or thinking about something else. And that was before we had mobile phones.

Speed bumps are a lot les problem in a Landcruiser too.
__________________
"A string is approximately nine long."
Egg Nogg 02-04-2005, 05:07 AM
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 01-30-2008, 07:26 PM
Coventrysucks's Avatar
Coventrysucks Coventrysucks is offline
'64
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,273
UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
Speed bumps increasing fuel consumption and emissions - GREEN
Speed bumps cause climate change = "bad"
However, "speed kills", so speed bumps = "good"

Good + Bad = Inaction

The govt. can do plenty of other things to appease greenies that do not also ruin its road safety policies*, so they will.

And whilst they do those other things, everyone will forget about the "good + bad" speed hump paradox.

* - Government policy on road safety:
Do not do anything which might make roads safer.
__________________
Thanks for all the fish
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 01-31-2008, 04:00 AM
Matra et Alpine's Avatar
Matra et Alpine Matra et Alpine is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 27,781
nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
cs, look at how speed cameras are now treated differently once the income-generation and NOT safety came to the fore.
I agree that it will be an uphill struggle, but for once the "green" will be on the side of the "motorist"

So Greenies + economist + motorist > anti-motorist
__________________
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 01-31-2008, 09:19 PM
werty's Avatar
werty werty is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,939
Earth
speed bumps????

And all this time I thought they were ramps....

guess my mpg is staying up there in the 50's
__________________
UCP's NO. 1 Source for Enzo & 69 Camaro pic's
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-01-2008, 02:31 PM
Coventrysucks's Avatar
Coventrysucks Coventrysucks is offline
'64
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 7,273
UK
Quote:
Originally Posted by werty View Post
And all this time I thought they were ramps...
You can tell because they aren't inclined surfaces connecting two different levels.

They are low mounds or rounded protuberances that project from the surrounding areas.
__________________
Thanks for all the fish
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-01-2008, 06:58 PM
P4g4nite's Avatar
P4g4nite P4g4nite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 913
Ozland
Speed bumps save the environment localised about my face from cars driving through it.
__________________
Horsepower wins races. Torque pulls trailers.

http://www.nuerburgring.de/fileadmin/webcam/webcam.jpg <Live cast from the 'Ring.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-02-2008, 03:45 AM
henk4's Avatar
henk4 henk4 is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 27,310
Rozenburg, Holland
If you want to ignore speed bumps buy a big Citroen

Is it true that an automatic car will use more fuel doing a steady 20 mph than when doing 30?
__________________
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-02-2008, 04:31 PM
Kooper's Avatar
Kooper Kooper is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,350
Interesting. Driving too fast kills and driving too slow harms the environment.

The point of automotive transport is to my mind increase our productivity by cutting down on time spent traveling by foot or by pedal or by hoof.
Yet, even if there were no speed-bumps, there's still other traffic to get around. And of course pedestrians. And of course kittens.

Maybe our solution lies in the automated driving solutions currently being developed. If say we can someday have cars that can drive themselves near perfectly, then surely we can cut out things like stops, traffic lights and unnecessary time wasted sitting in traffic jams. I know I'm not alone when I think that if the car in front of you accelerates, you directly behind it should be able to accelerate at nearly the exact same time, result being a whole lot more cars getting moving again at the same time instead of 1-at-a-time we're currently seeing worldwide...

Anyways, back to the point. If cars could be driven by some AI to tolerances of mere centimeters in traffic situations someday in the future, maybe this will permit us to have no speed-bumps, stop signs, speed-limits and all the rest as there'd be no need for it.

There are still the mindless peds to consider of course, as well as other factors like stray animals and stray kittens, but hey, I'm dreaming here.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-03-2008, 12:14 PM
Clivey's Avatar
Clivey Clivey is offline
Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,193
Derby, England
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
[/B]
I DONT support such a system coz I'm a motorbike rider.
Many times the safest thing to do when some stupid cage doesn't see you is to get the hell OUT of danger as quick as possible !
The same is true with cars, to a lesser extent of course. Especially when you're overtaking a truck when the driver doesn't see you and pulls out into the outside lane.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
erm, no point in arriving quicker if you've killed hundreds of people enjoying sitting in their greenhouse whilst you went past and blew the glass onto them with the supersonic shock wave.
THinking like a law STUDENT
THe greater good is always used in determing laws.
Doing 80/90mph doesn't create the effects you describe. No-one uses Thrust SSC to commute. And I'd argue that if lane discipline was better enforced by the Police, it wouldn't be dangerous at all to do those speeds on motorways - they do on the continent even though in countries like France the driving's terrible.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
It's not. Statue books the world over are full of archaic laws and nobody uses them.
At the point anyoen was charged with that banana one it woudl go to appeal court and be over-ruled and thus removed from the statutes.
Precisely, and I'm arguing that the same should be the case with the "archaic" 70mph motorway speed limit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
There aren't, ven the bike one is lame as it can be argued it was poor observation on my part in getting into dangerous position with a cager !
We've spent many an afternoon in the IAM motorcycle section discussing this with traffic cops
I'm sorry but I've so far seen no argument that takes even a small step towards convincing me that blanket limiting of vehicles is a good idea. It's going TOO far. Fitting switchable limiters like the one on my C4 IS a good idea, so long as they remain switchable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine View Post
Nope. To carry on your analogy, I chose to use my dick in women. Not play with it on my own in the bedroom. I push the cars on track
WHat you chose to do with your car/dick ... MAY impact others "freedoms" and thus be necessary to be limited.
I would argue that only being able to use a performance car on track is the equivalent to only being able to masturbate, rather than having a sexual relationship, and in the sexual context, anyone who causes road users' freedoms to be eradicated is committing what, rape?

Yes, I think the Government should be "limited" further!

- After all, they're not doing their job properly. The job of a government is to spend a countries' money WISELY. I see mostly pitiful waste with "New Labour" in power, although the top three parties are all as bad as each other in reality.
__________________
"This is hardcore." - Evo's John Barker on the TVR Tuscan S
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-03-2008, 05:25 PM
crisis's Avatar
crisis crisis is offline
Space Modulator
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 6,153
Adelaide
I will continue my rant. This weekend there was a two page spread in the paper outlining how we should (again) reduce our speed to reduce the seriousness of injuries. The editorial went on about how reducing speed by a small amount (at the moment there is this “wipe off 5 (km)” thing going on) and you will reduce the seriousness of accidents. It then supported(?!) this by outlining the increase in seriousness of injuries when a car is travelling at 30 -40, 40-50, 50-60 and so on with the fastest 90-100 speed showing serious injuries. Up until around the 60 kph mark the injuries appear to be generally non life threatening.
I have no problem in people driving slower really but the message here is that it is all about speed. They are asking people to reduce their speed by 5kmh when any speed up to 60kmh seems to result in non life threatening injuries. So reducing to 55 or as the new speed limits are 50 has a marginal effect (although admittedly each case will be different). Moreover reducing from 100kmh to 95km also appears to make little different as 90-100 results in largely the same injuries.
What they should also be enforcing is attentiveness and driving at a speed appropriate to the road conditions. What they should be doing is upgrading our major country roads into dual lane carriage ways and finally making defensive driver training compulsory.

That’s me again for a while,
__________________
"A string is approximately nine long."
Egg Nogg 02-04-2005, 05:07 AM
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-04-2008, 01:03 AM
henk4's Avatar
henk4 henk4 is offline
Supporting Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 27,310
Rozenburg, Holland
Quote:
Originally Posted by crisis View Post
and finally making defensive driver training compulsory.
replace "defensive" with "effective" and you will see much more progress....
__________________
"I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting, but it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously." Douglas Adams
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-04-2008, 02:11 AM
Matra et Alpine's Avatar
Matra et Alpine Matra et Alpine is offline
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 27,781
nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
oh dear, Crisis.
Sorry, it sounds like the idiots having f'ed up the UK have emigrated to Australia to wreak their havoc there
Watch out their next phase is to then deploy cameras to monitor these new speeds -- and to fine everyone caught.
THe companies running the cameras make lots and lots of profits and nothing happens to the injury/death rate !
__________________
"A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
police, speed


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:15 PM.

 

1998 - 2019 Ultimatecarpage.com