Advanced Driving Hub

Saw this press release recently...

https://www.intelligentinstructor.co.uk/20mph-limits-gain-popularity/

Why are the IAM promoting lower speed limits across the board - as in reducing the 30 to 20 nationally?

I'd much prefer they promote 'Advanced Driving' and gaining the skills necessary...regardless of the limit.

"Interestingly, just over half of respondents (54%) would like the road outside their home to have a 20mph limit."
Yet when enforcement campaigns target areas the biggest offenders are the locals

The rush to the bottom continues. I better invest in red flags, as the market for these is sure to increase.

martine wrote:Saw this press release recently...

https://www.intelligentinstructor.co.uk/20mph-limits-gain-popularity/

Why are the IAM promoting lower speed limits across the board - as in reducing the 30 to 20 nationally?

I'd much prefer they promote 'Advanced Driving' and gaining the skills necessary...regardless of the limit.

Absolutely.

The way things are going they'll have to drop the 'Advanced' from the name...

GTR1400MAN wrote:"Interestingly, just over half of respondents (54%) would like the road outside their home to have a 20mph limit."
Yet when enforcement campaigns target areas the biggest offenders are the locals

The rush to the bottom continues. I better invest in red flags, as the market for these is sure to increase.

Well, yes, obviously /I'm/ a safe driver, it's everyone /else/ who is the problem

It's a shame they don't ask whether you'd like people to be driving in a manner than means the road outside your house doesn't need a speed limit.

From the article

Nearly half (44%) of respondents agreed all current 30mph limits should be replaced with a 20mph limit. This is a 13% increase from the same representative sample surveyed in 2014.

Was it the same 'representative' sample? How do we know this? If it's the same population being surveyed, how do we know it's representative? If it's not the same population, then the claims are immediately suspect.

Gareth wrote:From the article

Nearly half (44%) of respondents agreed all current 30mph limits should be replaced with a 20mph limit. This is a 13% increase from the same representative sample surveyed in 2014.

Was it the same 'representative' sample? How do we know this? If it's the same population being surveyed, how do we know it's representative? If it's not the same population, then the claims are immediately suspect.

https://www.iamroadsmart.com/media-poli ... eed-limits

Includes a link to the full report.

https://iamwebsite.blob.core.windows.ne ... 9b00cd5c_2

I'm not sure I get the significance of pedestrian safety unless there's an issue with cars driving on pavements. Slowing things down only helps if there's an undesired interaction, so wouldn't a better idea be "stop pedestrians and drivers coming into conflict" in the first place?

Are the IAM going to campaign to ban EVs next because they're too quiet and pedestrians can't hear them coming?

As for "do you find it difficult to comply with a 20mph speed limit" I'm going to call most of the respondants who said "no" liars. I'd love to see some data logging from those that say it's not an issue to see how badly they actually comply.

Croydon has had a blanket 20 limit on all non-main roads( introduced overnight with little/no consultation) for over a year now. The majority of the roads were not capable of sustaining 30 for more that a few hundred yards in anycase (if you are looking of course). The bit about not being too worried about people going upto 30 in 20's is really quite dangererous. Pedestrians and drivers/riders are now used to 20 and when someone arrives at a higher speed (30 or even 40) judgement of gaps to duck into and time to cross the road are quite difficult to judge. Another drawback is when one gets to a 30 road (quite rare) a lot of drivers/riders remain frustratingly at 20 for some time.
I have no data on reduction of accidents since the introduction of the 20's but suspect (with Covid) little has changed. All they have done is dumbed down for the sake of it

jont- wrote:I'm not sure I get the significance of pedestrian safety unless there's an issue with cars driving on pavements. Slowing things down only helps if there's an undesired interaction, so wouldn't a better idea be "stop pedestrians and drivers coming into conflict" in the first place?

Judging gaps in traffic for crossing? That's potential conflict.

Horse wrote:

jont- wrote:I'm not sure I get the significance of pedestrian safety unless there's an issue with cars driving on pavements. Slowing things down only helps if there's an undesired interaction, so wouldn't a better idea be "stop pedestrians and drivers coming into conflict" in the first place?

Judging gaps in traffic for crossing? That's potential conflict.

And are those conflicts happening at >30 mph or <30mph. Because if it's more than 30mph, the speed limit isn't the problem