Advanced Driving Hub

There are all sorts of ramifications from switching between two different limits, so it's usually left at the lower.

Variable limits have been trialled.

jont- wrote:...I'm not on about the roadworks, I'm on about the rest of our roads network where limits are falling unnecessarily by the day. If /some/ roadworks can be increased, that suggests to me all the other places 50s have gone in should be reviewed too, particularly as many won't even have followed the DfT guidelines but instead been imposed by clueless council busybodies who wouldn't recognise an NSL sign if they were slapped around the face with it

Absolutely agree Jon - South Gloucestershire Council seem to have policy of reducing NSL's to 50 (or less!) wherever they can. Oxfordshire seem to do even more and it seems madness to have a good quality A & B road set to 50 where all the adjoining narrow, twisty C roads, are NSL. I think it's all to do with stats which highlight the busier roads with more RTCs - some of which are caused by drunk/drugged, illegal drivers in any case.

I am on the South Glos email list for proposed road modifications and wherever I'm notified and I feel a proposed new limit is wrong, I object. I would recommend everyone takes an interest.

GTR1400MAN wrote:On the A14 at Ipswich there is a long stretch of roadworks with a 40 limit. The work is only carried out at night and then the cones moved so both lanes are open during the day. The signs are left in place! Riding my motorcycle at 40 is a terrifying experience and I now avoid the area. No-one is observing the limit and cars/lorries approach you from behind at the NSL with last minute lane changes. It is not policed at all. Madness.

So... if you, as a more vulnerable road user, go onto a road where traffic is flowing at a particular speed and choose to drive/ride at a speed considerably below that then where does the "madness" lie?

That you have chosen not to do it is probably safer for everyone.

Strangely Brown wrote:if you, as a more vulnerable road user, go onto a road where traffic is flowing at a particular speed and choose to drive/ride at a speed considerably below that then where does the "madness" lie?

The madness lies in the law, that penalises with potentially life-changing consequences (loss of job, etc.,) based on the posted limit rather than safety.

Strangely Brown wrote:So... if you, as a more vulnerable road user, go onto a road where traffic is flowing at a particular speed and choose to drive/ride at a speed considerably below that then where does the "madness" lie?

That you have chosen not to do it is probably safer for everyone.

So you expect me to join in, risk my clean licence, etc. etc. ?

I've made the sensible choice and avoid it, but the fact is I shouldn't have to. There should either be enforcement or the signs should be covered. The irony is there are big signs saying the limit is there for safety.

What I would expect anyone to do is to not deliberately cause a problem that could lead to something much worse, especially so of a road user that is more vulnerable to start with.

Yes, as Gareth points out and you echo, the madness is in the stupid inflexibility of the law. You have made the right choice to avoid the situation but for anyone to deliberately drive/ride at a speed significantly below that of the free flowing traffic is just creating danger that need not exist.

I remember a group conversation many years ago with a traffic officer in which this very situation came up. Someone asked about going into the outer lanes of a motorway/dual-carriageway when they were flowing faster than the NSL/posted limit but wanting not to exceed that limit.
The response was that in that situation, if you're not prepared to match the free flowing speed and, if necessary exceed the limit, then you had better stay the hell out. In other words: either piss or get off the pot.

ETA: Rules are for the blind obedience of fools etc.

I've encountered the same issues multiple times on motorways when the matrix signs have displayed lowered speed limits. I remember a 40 on the M1 southbound between Bedford and Luton, and in the nearside lane it was a scary experience until the limit ended, before the next off-slip. No gantry cameras in those days.

More recently, late at night some years ago, there was a 15 limit southbound on the M40; I assumed it was meant to be a 50 and kept to that, and still there were very much faster vehicles catching and passing. Eventually I stopped on the hard shoulder and called the police to report it; they told me there was a car heading north on that carriageway ...

And, unfortunately, the control room operators are damned either way (although they don't directly control either the variable speed signals or queue protection systems).

I doubt we'll see the 60mph limits very often, every set of works requires a site specific risk assessment and as said earlier, the works situation will need to allow for a higher speed limit. Where lanes are narrowed, for example, they may not increase it or where there is any risk to the people working on site.

Also, this will only apply to HE roads and most roads aren't. On the rest of the network speed reduction measures will be put in place to keep the workforce who are often working within 0.5m of the cars, behind a traffic cone and plastic barrier.

The way many people drive today with extremely poor hazard awareness, the speed reductions are necessary. Tailgating is the result of bad driving, not necessarily the speed limit; if driving through a hazard rich area in town at 20mph I will be tailgated by the same driver that disappears in my rear view mirror once out of town and away from the hazards.

Oh yes, and those inappropriate 50mph and 40mph speed restrictions that have popped up everywhere that do not bare any relation to the hazards of the road are not thought up by councils, they are pressured by residents then councillors to put them in place; the council's will often try to prevent them.

MichaelAC wrote:I doubt we'll see the 60mph limits very often, every set of works requires a site specific risk assessment and as said earlier, the works situation will need to allow for a higher speed limit. Where lanes are narrowed, for example, they may not increase it or where there is any risk to the people working on site.

No doubt at all. It will be exactly as you describe.

What this has done is encourage scheme designers to move away from 50 as a default. There are stronger barriers available now, and dynamic speed limit signs, that didn't exist four years ago.