Beginning of the end of SUVs?

[kempiejon]

I was busted running a red light a while back, I know how it happened, I was approaching when the light changed to amber but rather than stop abruptly I proceeded expecting I'd get through in time; apparently not. I would have been covering the brake on my tests and exam.

Amber means "Stop" as well

Indeed but if there's no one looking...

[didds]

[quote="Spet0789"]
In my opinion, driving at 50mph when 60mph would be safe and legal is inconsiderate and is bad driving./quote]

Getting quite philosophical now Im intrigued by the differences shown here in this context

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/driving-a-van#speed-limits

It is thus presumably not inconsiderate for a van to have a limit of 50 in a car's 60mph limit zone, or 60mph in a car's 70mph zone?

And what may be the difference between being behind a van doing 50 and a car doing 50??

Its not unusal when driving across Salisbury plain to be behind a column of army vehicles that is doing about 40mph (these are 60 mph roads and are straight enough to do 60 mph on ... i usually do when not behind columns of army vehicles ). Are these vehicles not being inconsiderate ?
And what of tractors and milk floats ?

[didds]

[Personally I would mandate re-tests after 20 years of driving then every 10 years, then every 5 years after 65 years of age. Drivers kill more people than mechanical faults and yet we test cars annually.

I've no issue with that idea at all - but would have to say the current test environment cant handle the demands for tests as it is, let alone adding every current driver into that system on a regular basis too...

Let alone those that have a foreign licence and are visiting/working in the Uk for several months - and if the licence is from the European Economic Area, it can be used until the owner turns 70 - which could be decades away of course. And Id imagine those are actually very few in reeality and comparison to domestic licences being used.

didds

[Pendrainllwyn]

What’s safe for one person is not for another. Why can’t we be considerate and accept that not everyone is a confident driver or as capable as those who feel comfortable going at the speed limit all the time? How would the police assess what is safe for the driver?

For example do we really want to take people off the road as soon as their reaction times decline a little or require people to travel at the speed limit all the time as soon as they have passed the test - maybe driving at night for the first time.

Do we want to require people to travel at the speed limit even when travelling to or from a funeral or taking someone in a fragile condition (perhaps yourself) to or from a hospital perhaps with a new born baby or a heavily pregnant lady.

Some might argue it’s inconsiderate to expect everyone to travel at the speed limit all the time without fearing being stopped by the police and being honked by other road users.

Pendrainllwyn

[servodude]

The amber after the red makes no sense to me. It should just go from red to green.

There isn't an amber after the red, it's a red+amber. I find it useful if you're moving towards the lights when it changes, you can time it so it's green by the time you arrive and you don't have to stop.

Scott.

From what I was taught:
Red/amber is for getting in to gear and finding the bite ready to move off; if you're driving a go kart this is not that helpful but it can help the proper vehicles move more smoothly

Amber means stop "if safe to do so" - because the guy behind you might have his go kart too close to your rear to stop if you slam on the brakes

[XFool]

From what I was taught:
Red/amber is for getting in to gear and finding the bite ready to move off; if you're driving a go kart this is not that helpful but it can help the proper vehicles move more smoothly

When I was still driving (manual gears) in London, RED + AMBER was becoming the signal for the driver in the big black SUV (automatic) behind you to hit the horn.

[swill453]

Amber means stop "if safe to do so" - because the guy behind you might have his go kart too close to your rear to stop if you slam on the brakes

It's worded in the Highway Code slightly differently, but I guess it means pretty much the same.

"You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident"

Scott.

[Spet0789]

What’s safe for one person is not for another. Why can’t we be considerate and accept that not everyone is a confident driver or as capable as those who feel comfortable going at the speed limit all the time? How would the police assess what is safe for the driver?

For example do we really want to take people off the road as soon as their reaction times decline a little or require people to travel at the speed limit all the time as soon as they have passed the test - maybe driving at night for the first time.

Do we want to require people to travel at the speed limit even when travelling to or from a funeral or taking someone in a fragile condition (perhaps yourself) to or from a hospital perhaps with a new born baby or a heavily pregnant lady.

Some might argue it’s inconsiderate to expect everyone to travel at the speed limit all the time without fearing being stopped by the police and being honked by other road users.

Pendrainllwyn

It’s clearly subjective, but in my view if you’re not up to driving at the speed limit on a straight, dry, lightly-trafficked road, you’re not safe to drive at all.

Of course there may be very rare circumstances where driving extra slowly is perfectly sensible, but there the onus should be on the person to demonstrate that. For example, driving a pregnant woman in labour to hospital is a great justification for driving above the speed limit. Similarly driving a person with a suspected broken neck to hospital would be a great justification for driving well below the speed limit. The law contemplates this.

[Spet0789]

In my opinion, driving at 50mph when 60mph would be safe and legal is inconsiderate and is bad driving./quote]

Getting quite philosophical now Im intrigued by the differences shown here in this context

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/driving-a-van#speed-limits

It is thus presumably not inconsiderate for a van to have a limit of 50 in a car's 60mph limit zone, or 60mph in a car's 70mph zone?

And what may be the difference between being behind a van doing 50 and a car doing 50??

Its not unusal when driving across Salisbury plain to be behind a column of army vehicles that is doing about 40mph (these are 60 mph roads and are straight enough to do 60 mph on ... i usually do when not behind columns of army vehicles ). Are these vehicles not being inconsiderate ?
And what of tractors and milk floats ?

Surely just horses for courses. The logic for HGVs and trailers having lower speed limits is that they take longer to stop. To put it another way, every road is a wet, greasy road if you’re towing a trailer.

Considerate driving means driving safely, within the speed limit and not holding up other road users.

[XFool]

What’s safe for one person is not for another. Why can’t we be considerate and accept that not everyone is a confident driver or as capable as those who feel comfortable going at the speed limit all the time? How would the police assess what is safe for the driver?

For example do we really want to take people off the road as soon as their reaction times decline a little or require people to travel at the speed limit all the time as soon as they have passed the test - maybe driving at night for the first time.

Do we want to require people to travel at the speed limit even when travelling to or from a funeral or taking someone in a fragile condition (perhaps yourself) to or from a hospital perhaps with a new born baby or a heavily pregnant lady.

Some might argue it’s inconsiderate to expect everyone to travel at the speed limit all the time without fearing being stopped by the police and being honked by other road users.

It’s clearly subjective, but in my view if you’re not up to driving at the speed limit on a safe, dry, lightly-trafficked road, you’re not safe to drive at all.

Subjective it is!

That bald statement makes little sense to me - what is the context? A "safe, dry, lightly-trafficked road" in a 30mph urban environment? A "safe, dry, lightly-trafficked road" which is a winding country lane? A "safe, dry, lightly-trafficked road" such as a motorway?

In the latter case, if I choose to drive at 50mph in the outside lane there are two clear "safe, dry, lightly-trafficked" for people to easily go past me. What is the issue?

Surely, not driving at the speed limit on a road is not the same thing as being "not up to driving at the speed limit". Rather it is exercising choice and judgement.

And, to summarise Spet0789, whatever happened to tolerance? But then, I don't drive any more.

[didds]

Considerate driving means driving safely, within the speed limit and not holding up other road users.

But that's the point isn't it?

A car doing 50 in on a 60 road is not holding up other road users any more than a van doing 50 on a 60 road.

And way less than a column of military vehicles, or a tractor or a milk float.

[didds]

Meanewhile a panel van is limited to 50 ion a 60 etc - until its re-classified as a motorhome (or whatever the V5 name for it is).

Then it becomes a "car" cand can legal;ly now do 60 on a 60 etc.

With vary a difference in weight



Didds
(former owner of a VW T4 classified as a panel van, and now a VW T5 classified as a motorhome/motor caravan or whatever it is)

[kempiejon]

Considerate driving means driving safely, within the speed limit and not holding up other road users.

But that's the point isn't it?

A car doing 50 in on a 60 road is not holding up other road users any more than a van doing 50 on a 60 road.

And way less than a column of military vehicles, or a tractor or a milk float.

Especially if the other road user being held up is up your bumper flashing and honking to make you speed up. Which would suggest to me I slow down as they have not left sufficient braking distance.