Advanced Driving Hub

jont- wrote:

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

You asked 'why pedestrians?', so I gave a suggestion.

Do you happen to know the median speeds of traffic in 20s and 30s? I don't. If you're only focused on collisions, you're missing out on any close calls.

Horse wrote:Do you happen to know the median speeds of traffic in 20s and 30s?

Don't see how that's relevant. If the problem is vehicles travelling faster than 30 in a 30, then reducing the limit does nothing to improve the situation.

Gareth wrote:

Horse wrote:Do you happen to know the median speeds of traffic in 20s and 30s?

Don't see how that's relevant. If the problem is vehicles travelling faster than 30 in a 30, then reducing the limit does nothing to improve the situation.

Well, it might reduce average speeds. But it might not help say the fastest 5th or 10th percentile, which is really where the problem is.

jont- wrote:

Gareth wrote:

Horse wrote:Do you happen to know the median speeds of traffic in 20s and 30s?

Don't see how that's relevant.

it might not help say the fastest 5th or 10th percentile, which is really where the problem is.

Compliance problem or collision problem?

Horse wrote:

jont- wrote:

Gareth wrote:

Horse wrote:Do you happen to know the median speeds of traffic in 20s and 30s?

Don't see how that's relevant.

it might not help say the fastest 5th or 10th percentile, which is really where the problem is.

Compliance problem or collision problem?

You tell me, you're the one saying lower speeds are needed to reduce collision problems.

jont- wrote:

Horse wrote:

jont- wrote:

Gareth wrote:Don't see how that's relevant.

it might not help say the fastest 5th or 10th percentile, which is really where the problem is.

Compliance problem or collision problem?

You tell me, you're the one saying lower speeds are needed to reduce collision problems.

You quote me saying exactly that and I'll answer. Good luck.

Horse said "judging gaps" which has an obvious but unstated implication, because gaps are harder to judge if they are arriving quicker than expected, such as and especially if vehicles are travelling above the prevailing speed limit.

I think either Horse is saying that there is an issue in judging gaps and because of our common understanding it relates to vehicles above the limit, (which Horse now appears to deny), or Horse is presenting it as a thought experiment without indicating that it has any relation to Horse's opinion.

I also think debates go much better if honest opinions are honestly stated.

I thought this was clear enough:

Horse wrote:

jont- wrote:

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

You asked 'why pedestrians?', so I gave a suggestion.

However, if I did make the supposed statement ...