firstly i'd mention i believe the guys who operate the electronic signals over the motorway lanes do a great job when there's been an accident etc, however i think they also have a sense of humour late at night / early morning (probably when the boss has gone home) like most of us on here to get to meets at clubs etc we find ouselves in the early hours of the morning on a motorway coming home.
this week they've made me slow down to 20 mph for a mile then up to 40 mph then never even told me when i could speed up to the legal limit,hence never saw another person / vehicle during that time, we've had beware pedestrians on the road (its a bloody motorway).lol. guess what no pedestrians and finally this is what prompted me to write this i've had the "close encounters of the third kind" visual light display played to us, has anyone else experienced anything similar?
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
motorway driving
They can be pretty random at the best of times! I've seen the advisory ones turned on down deserted motorway/dual carriageway late at night too.
(The thing to remember is that a speed limit restriction is only legal if it's in a red circle, like normal fixed speed limit signs or like the variable limit signs on the M25, anything else is only advisory and it's down to you to use your own discretion)
(The thing to remember is that a speed limit restriction is only legal if it's in a red circle, like normal fixed speed limit signs or like the variable limit signs on the M25, anything else is only advisory and it's down to you to use your own discretion)
Quote by cockslut
they've made me slow down to 20 mph for a mile then up to 40 mph then never even told me when i could speed up to the legal limit
I'm not 100% sure but I believe that the normal overhead speed limit signs are advisory, and not mandatory. To be mandatory,they need to comply with the Road Traffic Act blah blah and need to have a the red circular border around the number. Otherwise your defence could be that you were reading the highway code whilst driving down the motorway and did not recognise the signs
The "new" speed limit signs, like the ones near Birmingham airport on the M42 do have this red border and so are mandatory speeds.Maybe one of the site's more legalistic members could confirm this.
Ian
Quote by Ian
they've made me slow down to 20 mph for a mile then up to 40 mph then never even told me when i could speed up to the legal limit
I'm not 100% sure but I believe that the normal overhead speed limit signs are advisory, and not mandatory. To be mandatory,they need to comply with the Road Traffic Act blah blah and need to have a the red circular border around the number. Otherwise your defence could be that you were reading the highway code whilst driving down the motorway and did not recognise the signs
The "new" speed limit signs, like the ones near Birmingham airport on the M42 do have this red border and so are mandatory speeds.Maybe one of the site's more legalistic members could confirm this.
Ian
Quite correct, though merely have a red circle isn't necessarily the whole story.
The police/highways/council can't just up a sign with a red circle and it becomes mandatory. There has to be legal process before a speed limit can become compulsory including public consultation. So basically any temporary changes to motorway speed limits are advisory. The exception being when public permission has been granted for examples such as long-term roadworks etc.
One useful technique for wriggling out of speed offences when being done for exceeding 40mph limits in roadworks is to check that the council has indeed gained the necessary permissions for the speed reduction for the area in which you were nicked. It isn't unknown for councils just to bang up the speed signs arbitrarily relying on the public's ignorance of such things.
Casanova
Quote by Peanut
they've made me slow down to 20 mph for a mile then up to 40 mph then never even told me when i could speed up to the legal limit
I'm not 100% sure but I believe that the normal overhead speed limit signs are advisory, and not mandatory. To be mandatory,they need to comply with the Road Traffic Act blah blah and need to have a the red circular border around the number. Otherwise your defence could be that you were reading the highway code whilst driving down the motorway and did not recognise the signs
The "new" speed limit signs, like the ones near Birmingham airport on the M42 do have this red border and so are mandatory speeds.Maybe one of the site's more legalistic members could confirm this.
Ian
Quite correct, though merely have a red circle isn't necessarily the whole story.
The police/highways/council can't just up a sign with a red circle and it becomes mandatory. There has to be legal process before a speed limit can become compulsory including public consultation. So basically any temporary changes to motorway speed limits are advisory. The exception being when public permission has been granted for examples such as long-term roadworks etc.
One useful technique for wriggling out of speed offences when being done for exceeding 40mph limitsin roadworks is to check that the council has indeed gained the necessary permissions for the speed reduction for the area in which you were nicked. It isn't unknown for councils just to bang up the speed signs arbitrarily relying on the public's ignorance of such things.
Is it not better not too commit the offence in the first place, speed limit are there for safety. Better not to speed and have the potential to kill someone. Or having to wriggle out of a speeding offence.
Quote by Zeddies
Is it not better not too commit the offence in the first place, speed limit are there for safety. Better not to speed and have the potential to kill someone. Or having to wriggle out of a speeding offence.
In the last ten years, I've driven somewhere near 50,000 miles per year. Interestingly the three accidents I've been involved in I was stationary all three times. Twice I was hit in the rear (ooo errr missus), and the other time, a drunk driver hit my car everywhere from the front to the back
Needless to say I no longer sit still in a car. If I'm moving, I'm a harder target to hit.
Ian
Are you sure? I thought the ones on the M25 were enforceable?? I'll be more than happy if they are not!!
Quote by Sixfootsix
They can be pretty random at the best of times! I've seen the advisory ones turned on down deserted motorway/dual carriageway late at night too.
(The thing to remember is that a speed limit restriction is only legal if it's in a red circle, like normal fixed speed limit signs or like the variable limit signs on the M25, anything else is only advisory and it's down to you to use your own discretion)
Quote by Bjlips2008
Are you sure? I thought the ones on the M25 were enforceable?? I'll be more than happy if they are not!!
They can be pretty random at the best of times! I've seen the advisory ones turned on down deserted motorway/dual carriageway late at night too.
(The thing to remember is that a speed limit restriction is only legal if it's in a red circle, like normal fixed speed limit signs or like the variable limit signs on the M25, anything else is only advisory and it's down to you to use your own discretion)
The ones in the variable limit are enforcable because they have a "red circle" around them. The "flashing white" signs you see aren't enforcable, they're simply advising you. If it says "20" then it's at your discretion whether you choose to ignore it. (bear in mind crashing while ignoring these signs would probably be frowned on!)
Also bear in mind what peanut said, temporary restrictions (and other restrictions such as one way systems) have to have legal backing to make them legally enforcable.
Quote by Zeddies
Is it not better not too commit the offence in the first place, speed limit are there for safety.
Who told you that?
There are numerous reports done by the AA and the RAC that say that it is just as safe to have the 70 MPH speed limits raised to upto 90mph.
You have to realise that the 70mph limit was brought in at a time when cars were technologically very different than they are now. Braking systems especially. These days there are very few cars on the market that aren't designed to be safe (functionally speaking) up to 100mph.
Better not to speed and have the potential to kill someone. Or having to wriggle out of a speeding offence.
On motorways it's normally slow vehicles that cause the accidents (and I'm talking about every day driving conditions, not hazardous ones). Why is it do you think that the motorways are the only roads to have a minimum speed limit?
Sex God
I remember a statement to the effect that the average speed of accidents in a motor vehicle was 17 mph but that was 20 years ago.
As for motorways i guress i'm lucky in that i drive when i choose to so rarely have problems. I drive between the hours of 8pm and 7 am when journeying. I use the motorways and slap on some sounds or the radio and next thing i know a few enjoyable hours have passed and i'm there.
I would however like to see a lot of the what I think is unnecessary nighttime lighting on M'ways stopped.
As for motorways i guress i'm lucky in that i drive when i choose to so rarely have problems. I drive between the hours of 8pm and 7 am when journeying. I use the motorways and slap on some sounds or the radio and next thing i know a few enjoyable hours have passed and i'm there.
I would however like to see a lot of the what I think is unnecessary nighttime lighting on M'ways stopped.
Sex God
Quote by Hibernian
What was that I said about folk disecting posts and quoting line by line?
Dunno, never pay much attention to your posts. Sorry.
If only irony was so funny
Said the metallurgist to the comedian Blame my parents for getting carried away! :D
Sex God
Quote by Peanut
snip
You have to realise that the 70mph limit was brought in at a time when cars were technologically very different than they are now. Braking systems especially. These days there are very few cars on the market that aren't designed to be safe (functionally speaking) up to 100mph.
snip
I find myself agreeing with this....
The speed limits are somewhat antiquated as they were designed for older cars and road systems....
Take a look at the back of the highway code....
The stopping distances quoted are from back in the stone age (they may have changed since I last saw it so I stand to be corrected)....
I think a review of the speed limits is in order...
Perhaps different limits for different times of the day....
I believe that in places like France the limit is a little lower if weather conditions are adverse (I suspect GnV will correct me if I'm wrong) and that this limit is advertised via matrix signs so there's no excuse for not knowing it..
Yes.....
A review is long overdue.....
Casanova
Quote by Ian
Is it not better not too commit the offence in the first place, speed limit are there for safety. Better not to speed and have the potential to kill someone. Or having to wriggle out of a speeding offence.
In the last ten years, I've driven somewhere near 50,000 miles per year. Interestingly the three accidents I've been involved in I was stationary all three times. Twice I was hit in the rear (ooo errr missus), and the other time, a drunk driver hit my car everywhere from the front to the back
Needless to say I no longer sit still in a car. If I'm moving, I'm a harder target to hit.
Ian
I was hit because a speeding drive who couldn't stop when the motorway came to a stand still, maybe if he was sticking to the slower speed limit he would have been able to stop.
Quote by Zeddies
they've made me slow down to 20 mph for a mile then up to 40 mph then never even told me when i could speed up to the legal limit
I'm not 100% sure but I believe that the normal overhead speed limit signs are advisory, and not mandatory. To be mandatory,they need to comply with the Road Traffic Act blah blah and need to have a the red circular border around the number. Otherwise your defence could be that you were reading the highway code whilst driving down the motorway and did not recognise the signs
The "new" speed limit signs, like the ones near Birmingham airport on the M42 do have this red border and so are mandatory speeds.Maybe one of the site's more legalistic members could confirm this.
Ian
Quite correct, though merely have a red circle isn't necessarily the whole story.
The police/highways/council can't just up a sign with a red circle and it becomes mandatory. There has to be legal process before a speed limit can become compulsory including public consultation. So basically any temporary changes to motorway speed limits are advisory. The exception being when public permission has been granted for examples such as long-term roadworks etc.
One useful technique for wriggling out of speed offences when being done for exceeding 40mph limitsin roadworks is to check that the council has indeed gained the necessary permissions for the speed reduction for the area in which you were nicked. It isn't unknown for councils just to bang up the speed signs arbitrarily relying on the public's ignorance of such things.
Is it not better not too commit the offence in the first place, speed limit are there for safety. Better not to speed and have the potential to kill someone. Or having to wriggle out of a speeding offence.
Of course nothing to do with money then at all? Forever the cynic me.
Quote by Zeddies
I was hit because a speeding drive who couldn't stop when the motorway came to a stand still, maybe if he was sticking to the slower speed limit he would have been able to stop.
If the visibility was good and the road surface dry then there's no reason he couldn't stop in time if you could. That means it was probably driver error rather than speed.
Inappropriate speed is what causes accidents, not specifically excessive speed.
It's looking like we've found the only driver in the country who doesn't break the speed limit.
Casanova
Quote by Peanut
I was hit because a speeding drive who couldn't stop when the motorway came to a stand still, maybe if he was sticking to the slower speed limit he would have been able to stop.
If the visibility was good and the road surface dry then there's no reason he couldn't stop in time if you could. That means it was probably driver error rather than speed.
Inappropriate speed is what causes accidents, not specifically excessive speed.
It's looking like we've found the only driver in the country who doesn't break the speed limit.
Currently I dont drive, I was a professional driver used to do over 70,000 miles a year.... I was hit by someone head on speeding at the same time as he was doing something in his car. I was on the way to work at , his speed was critical in causing the accident, the road was clear, conditions excellent, he crossed over onto the wrong side of a country road that was wide enough for 3 cars.
It took 4 hours for me to be cut out of the car.
I had a broken neck, back in two places, shatter femur, pelvis, broken ribs, a head injury, nerve damage, damage to all my major organs. I was resuscitate 4 times. I was given a 2% chance of living. I was told I would never walk again, but I do. I lost 8 years of my memory, my job I worked hard to get and I lost my home. I cannot put full story here and wouldn't like too.
The people who know and have met me I think they can vouch what I say is true and how it effected me.
Incase anyone thinks or make a comment I got compensated, I didn't because of who the other driver was they look after their own. After nearly 3 years I got an apology and my legal fees paid for. Not because of the accident, but more for the way I was dealt with after the accident.
Quote by Zeddies
I was hit because a speeding drive who couldn't stop when the motorway came to a stand still, maybe if he was sticking to the slower speed limit he would have been able to stop.
If the visibility was good and the road surface dry then there's no reason he couldn't stop in time if you could. That means it was probably driver error rather than speed.
Inappropriate speed is what causes accidents, not specifically excessive speed.
It's looking like we've found the only driver in the country who doesn't break the speed limit.
Currently I dont drive, I was a professional driver used to do over 70,000 miles a year.... I was hit by someone head on speeding at the same time as he was doing something in his car. I was on the way to work at , his speed was critical in causing the accident, the road was clear, conditions excellent, he crossed over onto the wrong side of a country road that was wide enough for 3 cars.
It took 4 hours for me to be cut out of the car.
I had a broken neck, back in two places, shatter femur, pelvis, broken ribs, a head injury, nerve damage, damage to all my major organs. I was resuscitate 4 times. I was given a 2% chance of living. I was told I would never walk again, but I do. I lost 8 years of my memory, my job I worked hard to get and I lost my home. I cannot put full story here and wouldn't like too.
The people who know and have met me I think they can vouch what I say is true and how it effected me.
Incase anyone thinks or make a comment I got compensated, I didn't because of who the other driver was they look after their own. After nearly 3 years I got an apology and my legal fees paid for. Not because of the accident, but more for the way I was dealt with after the accident.
I have no intention of disagreeing with your version of events. I wasn't there and am quite willing to believe what you say.
The thing is, once again the cause of the accident sounds like a combination of driver error (the other driver, not you) and inappropriate speed
It has not however changed my mind about excessive speed or breaking speed limits per se.
I'm an advanced driver courtesy of the 2 week driving course (based on the police Roadcraft system) I received as part of my Ambulance Service training. I consider myself also to have a natural talent for driving. Our training involved quite a bit of high-speed driving which frequently broke the national speed limits. At no time did I feel I was driving unsafely and neither did my instructors.
The point of me stating the above is to demonstrate that excessive speed or breaking speed limits does not necessarily mean that it is automatically unsafe, especially on motorways.
I cannot stress enough that it's inappropriate speed that causes accidents. Please don't confuse the two. And by inappropriate I also mean that speeds well below the speed limit can also cause accidents.
PS the fact that you no longer drive does not detract from my comment. You did drive and I'm willing to bet that breaking the speed limit was not an unknown occurrence for you.
Sex God
Bloody OUCH!! ~ I for one zeds am glad your still about after all that :thumbup: good on you !
Sex God
If its time in peoples minds to increase the speed limits then why the hell don't they do it? I cant see a reason for keeping them low if theres a case to be answered for increase. Personally I'm a bit of a grandad driver so I think a lowering of speed limits is in order maybe down to 50 with limiters placed on vehicles of 80.
Quote by Lost
If its time in peoples minds to increase the speed limits then why the hell don't they do it? I cant see a reason for keeping them low if theres a case to be answered for increase. Personally I'm a bit of a grandad driver so I think a lowering of speed limits is in order maybe down to 50 with limiters on vehicles of 80.
There have been several reports from the AA and RAC requesting the very same thing you ask for. I have no idea why they aren't implemented.
There was even one suggestion that drivers with a proven safety record could be cleared for travelling at up to 90mph on the motorway.
Casanova
Quote by Peanut
inappropriate speeds I agree with
Myself I have did the 2 week driving course aswell as driver defence training, before I have driven over the national speed limits doing a similar job to yours. I am in total agreement I was in full control and was trained to do so. It more that people speed thinking they are in control but they are not really... not everyone has been trained to drive at high speeds. Every year we had to do a refresher course.
Sex God
Quote by Hibernian
Speed can get you out of trouble as well as into it.
I think that if the mandatory was 50 then 80 would be over 50% more than legal then that should be enough speed to get out of trouble.
I also think that cars should increase massively in tax proportionate to engine size. £500 for a 2litre a £1500 for a 3ltr litr car £2000 for 4ltr £3000 for a 5 ltr
Also tax the size height and weight maybe too.
Oh but reduce tax on commercial vehicles. Get rid of company cars (show the company drivers the cash in the wage instead)
An't it lucky I dont rule the world
Casanova
Laughing at your last post
made me chuckle.
