advertisement


Is it time for all motor vehicles to be fitted with a black box?

Ahem, as the old cliche says, it's a limit, not a target!

I beg to disagree... you get a Prius (sorry Prius owners) driving 5 MPH below the posted speed limit on a road perfectly safe to drive on 10 MPH above that limit and 20 car drivers behind getting frustrated this is far more likely to cause an accident. Most speed limits are based on vehicle technologies from the 1960's with commensurate braking distances and handling. In our area 5 MPH above the posted limit is pretty normal and IMHO safe. When you have a vehicle travelling 10 MPH below the normal traffic speed there is a problem. I would far prefer concentration of enforcement on vehicles running red lights or veering around while texting both of which are far more dangerous than marginally exceeding posted limits.
 
Of course the Gov't make money from car drivers - disproportionately so. Speed is NOT the biggest factor in deaths; the Gov't's own figures show that "excessive speed" & "breaking the speed limit" was a contributory factor in around a third of fatalities (37%) and consider not even the sole cause; someone speeding might also be drunk/tired/distracted etc. Note also that 'excessive speed' ≠ 'speeding'. The largest cause is apparently "failing to look properly".

My point is that if they really cared about 'saving lives' they would focus on the other two thirds of the causes of fatalities; they don't, because doing that involves putting Police on the roads to stop drink-drivers, people texting/livestreaming/Instagraming, poor car control and lane discipline, all of which cost more money to police than it will generate in fines. Those things are hard to solve and difficult to monetise so they don't bother - they just stick speed cameras up to catch you 5mph over an artificially-reduced limit. Or worse, put them up all over the safest roads - motorways. Not hard to see why; it's like shooting fish in a barrel. Easy money.

And if you speak against any of this you're immediately labelled a lunatic speed-mad road-demon. "Why won't you think of the children?!"
37% is a big number! It is a huge contributor, no denying this & speed cameras will have reduced this figure down. It’s really simple don’t speed & look where you are going, the two combined will massively reduce fatalities.
 
37% is a big number! It is a huge contributor, no denying this & speed cameras will have reduced this figure down. It’s really simple don’t speed & look where you are going, the two combined will massively reduce fatalities.
There comes a tipping point though, where obsession with not speeding means you spend a disproportionate amount of your attention on monitoring the speedo, which inevitably means a smaller proportion on looking where you’re going, scanning for hazards, and checking your mirrors. It’s not a simple argument. If you had a black box and knew a ticket would follow if you put a toe over the line, wouldn’t you fixate on that aspect, to the likely detriment of others?
For example, in the 50mph restrictions mentioned upthread, these are usually monitored by average speed cameras. I know I do find myself fixating on the speedo on the longer sections. And to judge from the number of people who drift out of their lane, so do many others.
 
Last edited:
I beg to disagree... you get a Prius (sorry Prius owners) driving 5 MPH below the posted speed limit on a road perfectly safe to drive on 10 MPH above that limit and 20 car drivers behind getting frustrated this is far more likely to cause an accident. Most speed limits are based on vehicle technologies from the 1960's with commensurate braking distances and handling. In our area 5 MPH above the posted limit is pretty normal and IMHO safe. When you have a vehicle travelling 10 MPH below the normal traffic speed there is a problem. I would far prefer concentration of enforcement on vehicles running red lights or veering around while texting both of which are far more dangerous than marginally exceeding posted limits.

Very true, I see that quite often though not a Prius (whatever a Prius is) normally a tractor as this is a very rural area, you'll get someone driving right up there backside and then can't see to safely overtake, then you'll get more idiots driving too close until it forms a queue resulting in cars pulling in and out trying to see to overtake.
The speed limits in general are there for good reason, the difference between the damage done when a collision happens at 20 mph vs 30 mph is staggering, a pedestrian getting hit by a car a 30 mph will most likely result in a fatality.
The use of mobile phones when driving is despicable and shows absolutely no respect or consideration for other road users, right up there with driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs IMHO.
 
I see loads of people on mobiles but speed cameras don't pick these up and there are no police about to stop them, if there was then they wouldn't risk 6 points.

Only recently I had to brake very hard as a car pulled out of a lay-by from where it was parked behind a speed camera van. The police in the van did nothing, obviously.
 
… Most speed limits are based on vehicle technologies from the 1960's with commensurate braking distances and handling...
Interesting point Martin, I usually think differently on this and often think it reflects the reaction time of drivers and consequences of impact on those vulnerable in that area. I often drive country lanes in my area with 40/50/60 mph speed limits and no question many cars can handle it, however driver reaction and damage means sensible speed is more like 20/30 in many cases and I’m only talking one vehicle not the doubling of two vehicles.
 
Interesting point Martin, I usually think differently on this and often think it reflects the reaction time of drivers and consequences of impact on those vulnerable in that area. I often drive country lanes in my area with 40/50/60 mph speed limits and no question many cars can handle it, however driver reaction and damage means sensible speed is more like 20/30 in many cases and I’m only talking one vehicle not the doubling of two vehicles.
There are two elements to the ‘stopping distance’: ‘reaction distance’ (generally distance travelled in 2/3 of a second) and ‘braking distance’. The latter has, roughly, halved since the figures in the Highway Code were set in the 50s or 60s. Thank: servo disc brakes, ABS, and low profile radial tyres.

What this implies is two things: first that collisions may more often be prevented, second that even if they occur, the closing speed will likely be lower than it would have been back then. So that kid who runs out, in the 1960s you’d do emergency braking and maybe lose 5-10mph before you hit them, now that’s likely to be more like 10-20 mph reduction. From 40, that gets you down to where my dad’s old Ford Anglia would have got to from 30, at a rough guess.

FTAOD, I’m not advocating for an increase in urban limits, just making the point that safety has improved without a drop in limits. The casualty figures bear this out, too. So this fixation on speed and speeding is another government distraction/red herring. Because they don’t want to fund proper traffic policing.
 
I see loads of people on mobiles but speed cameras don't pick these up and there are no police about to stop them, if there was then they wouldn't risk 6 points.
Many thousands of people are stopped and fined each year. It’s just an attitude of “I’m safe to do this” that OKs it in people's minds.
 
I think that it's more a matter of whether or not we agree with the notion of PCNs & FPNs and other penalties that are issued without any attending officer. If then, you agree to a black box in your car, then you might be liable to a whole host of penalty notices too. On my last job, I ended up with a £750 fine, because the system hadn't updated my staff parking permit. I had no recourse to challenging this & had to pay it. I f it were just me, then I'd say it was my own fault, but no, I wasn't the only one. With respect to the increase in fines issued from local authorities, I'm convinced it has little to do with road safety & more to do with raising revenue because of lack of funding from central government.
 
37% is a big number! It is a huge contributor, no denying this & speed cameras will have reduced this figure down. It’s really simple don’t speed & look where you are going, the two combined will massively reduce fatalities.
If we reduce speeds everywhere to 5mph we'd solve the problem completely! :p

You're right that as a contributory factor (not the sole cause) - and let's not forget 'excess speed' isn't 'speeding', it can be inappropriate speed for the conditions - it does have a bearing on fatalities. However, per my earlier point there were 'only' <1600 deaths on the road last year compared with nearly 80,000 from smoking. Are the actions and punitive fines against drivers for speeding proportionate with the potential outcome of casualty reduction that could be achieved?

As I say, if all these rules and actions being taken under the pretence of 'saving lives' then surely a smoking ban would achieve 50x the lives saved immediately. Heck, we're seeing around 200 people a week (10-11,000/year) die from Covid at the moment yet we've just removed ALL restrictions on the prevention tools we had in place. Re-imposing those could save more lives than abolishing all car use entirely would - so why isn't that being done?

It's easy to say, "stopping speeding saves lives" but the number of fatalities is already astonishingly low given the number of vehicles on the roads and the number of journeys they make. The punitive punishment is about raising revenue, not saving lives. 2.6m tickets were issued in 2019, raising c.£260,000,000 in revenue. It's all about the (easy, automated) money.
 
Your driving doesn't include speed limits, etc?
The Institute of Advanced Motoring (which used the police’s own ‘Roadcraft’ manual as its basis) advocates ‘driving to the conditions’. This means that when conditions are bad, you may well decide the speed limit is too fast and moderate your speed appropriately; but conversely, if conditions permit, there is nothing inherently wrong with exceeding the speed limit. Part of the training is, AIUI, to help you better make those sort of assessments.

Caveat: I’ve not done the training, this is just what I’ve heard from friends and colleagues who have.
 
If there’s a lot of info to take in, I slow down. If a police car is behind me, I slow down just to be awkward. If I’m at a red light and a fire engine appears behind me, sirens on the go, I wait for the green light. I just have these fail safe settings that keep me out of trouble, and if following traffic doesn’t like it, tough, they won’t be taking my points or paying my fines.
 
Speed doesn't kill -it just drastically ramps-up the collateral damage for otherwise lesser mistakes.

I.e it's shit judgement that is the problem - in the driver, not the car.

(that includes the need to romp around obnoxiously in something like a Ranger 'pickup' /or gigantic german-built suv-cum-urban assault vehicle that boasts 'high performance' yet weighs the same as a small moon/ that you can't park/ that is blatantly obnoxiously loud and deliberately craply driven [ragged to get it to pop and bang - those crappy, obvious, same-every-time snap-crackle-pop maps in many recent cars - including the hilariously-awful, unnecessary, tuned-in DSG 'fart' exhibited esp by the quicker VAG group cars under load] - things mostly observed only around town centres, etc etc... oh - tick the boxes that apply; I've a very long list.)

I confess, many years ago when programming ECUs, to finding a little spike of positive timing as load dropped above 5k5 rpm would lead to nice flames on gear changes for those that ran a full decat :) All the latest German sporty cars have mapped in effects.

I think part of the problem is the power that can now be created from an engine is so far higher than in the 80s and 90s. In general suspension and diff controls have also advanced…but the latter can be switched off…and is there anyone who does not think they are an above average driver…and therefore wants to switch it off? There were always idiot drivers, now they have much faster machinery to display this.

i then think more the powerful vehicles has lead to an overall reduction in speed limits to try and contain things. I’m still dumb enough to drive one of the fastest point to point cars available, but have limited opportunity outside of a track to really exploit it unless being stupid. I’m sure I’d have much more fun in the old MK I Mexico of my youth :)
 
If I’m at a red light and a fire engine appears behind me, sirens on the go, I wait for the green light. I just have these fail safe settings that keep me out of trouble, and if following traffic doesn’t like it, tough, they won’t be taking my points or paying my fines.
Your approach is the right one; breaking the law to allow an emergency vehicle through will see you with the points and fine if caught. Emergency response drivers are trained not to pressure other road users into doing so.

One tip I was taught is to leave a car length space if you're at the front of a queue of traffic at a red light (rather than pulling right up to the line); this will allow you to pull forward and to one side without crossing the red light which may be sufficient to allow an emergency vehicle through.
 


advertisement


Back
Top