[squeezebm]

No Limits:d:d

[NFS]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

That would be fatal, if you have ever seen what damage a heavy good vehicle can do to a large saloon car let alone a small hatch, you would have NEVER typed that.

That would be SHEER LUNACY to allow a HGV to do 70mph... Many acidents ate caused by HGV on mobiles or not paying attention with fatal consequences, many more people would die on the UK motorway network if something so silly was introduced.

They can already do 60mph legally so another 10mph is hardly sheer lunacy Carlos.

As you say yourself many accidents with regard to HGV's occur because their drivers are not paying attention to the road. This isn't speed related.

Although I am sure that the monotony of driving at a steady limited 56mph on the motorway is a significant factor in terms of this lack of attention.

I'd also ban them from overtaking. At the moment HGV drivers travel ridiculously close together because it takes them so bloody long to overtake. When they do try to pass they slow down all three lanes and hack everyone off.

So if they are stuck in the inner lane, they might as well space themselves out and let the traffic flow.

The only cars in danger would be those in the inside lane, who frankly would be travelling far to slowly for my new 90 motorway anyway.

You have to think holistically mate.

[dxb335d]

NFS, 10mph more in a 20-30 tonne vehicle is ALOT more. The sheer weight kills people even in a low speed accident. Lorry drivers take the piss as it is (as well as being VERY agrressive at times), in all weather conditions, now you imagine geting caught in traffic in a blizzard and the Lorry coming up onthe wet road was doing 70mph, it really doesnt bear thinking about. Im sure one of the reasons there limited to 56mph is due to the their weight and stopping distances!


Carlos

[NFS]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

NFS, 10mph more in a 20-30 tonne vehicle is ALOT more. The sheer weight kills people even in a low speed accident. Lorry drivers take the piss as it is (as well as being VERY agrressive at times), in all weather conditions, now you imagine geting caught in traffic in a blizzard and the Lorry coming up onthe wet road was doing 70mph, it really doesnt bear thinking about. Im sure one of the reasons there limited to 56mph is due to the their weight and stopping distances!


Carlos

Why would they be doing 70mph in a blizzard Carlos? 70 mph would be an absolute limit not a target and like the rest of us they would be required by law to moderate their speed according to the conditions.

If HGV's were restricted to the inner lane there would be zero chance that they would crash into stationary traffic in the outer lanes. That's a considerable reduction on the current situation where people at the back of 2 lanes are at risk.

Again, if they are unable to overtake the slowest vehicle would dictate the speed of all of the others ... and bunching together or acting aggressively would be totally pointless.

There are some interesting comments in this article about drivers bunching together, falling asleep and becoming distracted because of the existing 56 mph limiters.

http://www.cybertrucker.co.uk/content.php?menace.php

I'd never use the inner lane again anyway.

[- Paul -]

I thought it was more to do with saving the earth and all that jazz, ie, they use less fuel at 56 rather than 70 etc

[NFS]

Originally Posted by 1stnewcar

I thought it was more to do with saving the earth and all that jazz, ie, they use less fuel at 56 rather than 70 etc

That is exactly why they are limited .. it's an EU directive aimed at reduction in CO2 emissions.

The by product of this is that they travel on very safe motorways at exactly the same speed that the travel on B roads, where they represent considerably more of a danger to other road users and a significant nuisance to residents.

[dxb335d]

Originally Posted by needforspeed

Why would they be doing 70mph in a blizzard Carlos? 70 mph would be an absolute limit not a target and like the rest of us they would be required by law to moderate their speed according to the conditions.

If HGV's were restricted to the inner lane there would be zero chance that they would crash into stationary traffic in the outer lanes. That's a considerable reduction on the current situation where people at the back of 2 lanes are at risk.

Again, if they are unable to overtake the slowest vehicle would dictate the speed of all of the others ... and bunching together or acting aggressively would be totally pointless.

There are some interesting comments in this article about drivers bunching together, falling asleep and becoming distracted because of the existing 56 mph limiters.

http://www.cybertrucker.co.uk/content.php?menace.php

I'd never use the inner lane again anyway.

Read my post again, i mention piss taking lorry drivers?!!!!!

so a example of a piss taking lorry driver, taking risks in foul weather in his now 70mph hgv, trying to get the delivery in time, comes round the bend, NFS and his family with little one are broken down or caught in a jam...


i say make them stay in left lane permanelty at 40mph

[NFS]

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Read my post again, i mention piss taking lorry drivers?!!!!!

so a example of a piss taking lorry driver, taking risks in foul weather in his now 70mph hgv, trying to get the delivery in time, comes round the bend, NFS and his family with little one are broken down or caught in a jam...


i say make them stay in left lane permanelty at 40mph

1. What bend ????? this is on the motorway

2. There is 0% chance of NFS and his family being in the inside lane because it will be full of lorries doing at best 70mph, wheras the speed limit in the outer lane is 90 mph.

3. If my car broke down the family and I would watch the carnage from the embankment whilst waiting for BMW to collect us.

4. The lorry driver is far less likely to be asleep, on the phone, masturbating, reading a book or scratching his arse at 70mph than at 40mph ... when he would frankly be in a catatonic stupor.

Anyway .. so long as they are not allowed in the outside lanes .. I'll accept your 40mph limit proposals on the basis that I don't care that much.

[Hotcoupe]

beemerbird
If you become Roads Minister, can I apply for the position of PA? Obviously retaining ALL current Civil Service benefits.

JUST all current civil servant benefits Helen,no non contractual benefits or out of office hours perks.
I think you need to think again young lady,and reapply with all the requisite requirements.

Sorry, I'll get my coat,back to topic......................................

[NFS]

Originally Posted by Hotcoupe

JUST all current civil servant benefits Helen,no non contractual benefits or out of office hours perks.
I think you need to think again young lady,and reapply with all the requisite requirements.

Sorry, I'll get my coat,back to topic......................................

I'll vote for you only if you abolish speed limits for black BMW's.

[Hotcoupe]

needforspeed Quote:
I'll vote for you only if you abolish speed limits for black BMW's.

Spooky,that is no 1 on my manifesto.
No 2. Abolition of the need to pay for fuel if you have a black BMW.
No 3. Abolition of the need to pay for servicing if you have a black BMW.

I was considering making all black BMW's completely free,but that would just be plain silly, as it would let the riff raff get them and we can't be having that,can we!

I think I stand a better chance of being Roads minister then I do a moderator thats for sure!

[beemerbird]

Originally Posted by Hotcoupe

JUST all current civil servant benefits Helen,no non contractual benefits or out of office hours perks.
I think you need to think again young lady,and reapply with all the requisite requirements.

Sorry, I'll get my coat,back to topic......................................

You would be a HARD boss wouldn't you OK I wish to re-apply for the post DEMANDING non contractual benefits and insisting on out of office perks, please Sir

[Hotcoupe]

beemerbird Quote:
You would be a HARD boss wouldn't you OK I wish to re-apply for the post DEMANDING non contractual benefits and insisting on out of office perks, please Sir

The jobs your's Helen,we would have to discuss the bowing though,that is way,way too fast!!

[beemerbird]

The bowing is too fast. Yes the smilie definately has the totally incorrect technique and is absolutely no reflection on my bowing technique.

When do I start then?

[NFS]

Originally Posted by Hotcoupe

Spooky,that is no 1 on my manifesto.
No 2. Abolition of the need to pay for fuel if you have a black BMW.
No 3. Abolition of the need to pay for servicing if you have a black BMW.

I was considering making all black BMW's completely free,but that would just be plain silly, as it would let the riff raff get them and we can't be having that,can we!

I think I stand a better chance of being Roads minister then I do a moderator thats for sure!

This man makes a lot of sense .. I'll vote for that

[mjh93sa]

Originally Posted by beemerbird

I think you're trying to take on Matt there Hotcoupe (that takes longer to type than your real name), for length of post, but I agree with all your comments - scary

If you become Roads Minister, can I apply for the position of PA? Obviously retaining ALL current Civil Service benefits.

But what the hell.

It's agreed. I'll be PM and Hotcoupe and Helen can run the transport department. Obviously Steve1965 get's defence, Viv can sort out the home office and Carlos gets the foreign office, if only to see the look on translators faces when he starts talking "Fandango."

Originally Posted by needforspeed

They can already do 60mph legally so another 10mph is hardly sheer lunacy Carlos.

As you say yourself many accidents with regard to HGV's occur because their drivers are not paying attention to the road. This isn't speed related.

Although I am sure that the monotony of driving at a steady limited 56mph on the motorway is a significant factor in terms of this lack of attention.

I'd also ban them from overtaking. At the moment HGV drivers travel ridiculously close together because it takes them so bloody long to overtake. When they do try to pass they slow down all three lanes and hack everyone off.

So if they are stuck in the inner lane, they might as well space themselves out and let the traffic flow.

The only cars in danger would be those in the inside lane, who frankly would be travelling far to slowly for my new 90 motorway anyway.

You have to think holistically mate.

Digging about a bit I think that the minimum requirement for an HGV trailer braking system to to achieve 0.45g. Put into context a car will probably achieve something like 0.9g in good dry conditions.

So if we are generous and run through our A-level maths and sort out what happens at 56mph and 70mph for a car braking at 0.9g and an HGV braking at 0.6g.

Stopping distances are:
Car 56mph 35.49m/116ft 70mph 55.45m/182ft
HGV 56mph 53.24m/175ft 70mph 83.18m/273ft

That's a big increase in the stopping distance of an HGV that might weigh 44 tonnnes. Now for the scary bit.

If the car and HGV are doing 70mph and both stand on the anchors then the 44tonne HGV will push the car through the object it could have stopped before at 40mph! Of course if the HGV is doing a limited 56 it can stop faster than the car doing 70mph can. Maybe they thought this one through.

So you'd better be doing 90. Although it will take you 92m/300ft to stop... so don't get too close to the back of that HGV as you'd still be trying to do 26mph when the HGV stopped.

Of course all that's bollox if only people would drive sensibly.

Originally Posted by dxb335d

Read my post again, i mention piss taking lorry drivers?!!!!!

so a example of a piss taking lorry driver, taking risks in foul weather in his now 70mph hgv, trying to get the delivery in time, comes round the bend, NFS and his family with little one are broken down or caught in a jam...

i say make them stay in left lane permanelty at 40mph

Calm down Carlos.

[- Paul -]

Not much on tonight Matt?

[mjh93sa]

Safespeed spreadsheet calc does the maths automatically. I only ran through one calc to check their figures.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by mjh93sa

Digging about a bit I think that the minimum requirement for an HGV trailer braking system to to achieve 0.45g. Put into context a car will probably achieve something like 0.9g in good dry conditions.

So if we are generous and run through our A-level maths and sort out what happens at 56mph and 70mph for a car braking at 0.9g and an HGV braking at 0.6g.

Stopping distances are:
Car 56mph 35.49m/116ft 70mph 55.45m/182ft
HGV 56mph 53.24m/175ft 70mph 83.18m/273ft

That's a big increase in the stopping distance of an HGV that might weigh 44 tonnnes. Now for the scary bit.

If the car and HGV are doing 70mph and both stand on the anchors then the 44tonne HGV will push the car through the object it could have stopped before at 40mph! Of course if the HGV is doing a limited 56 it can stop faster than the car doing 70mph can. Maybe they thought this one through.

So you'd better be doing 90. Although it will take you 92m/300ft to stop... so don't get too close to the back of that HGV as you'd still be trying to do 26mph when the HGV stopped.

My entire strategy was based on the fact that I would queue in the outside lane and never use the inside one again, because if was full of surly and unpleasant lorry drivers with no grasp of physics.

Based on your excellent calculations I now propose that we stick with the banning of overtaking, but retain the 56 mph limiters.

[mjh93sa]

Originally Posted by needforspeed

My entire strategy was based on the fact that I would queue in the outside lane and never use the inside one again, because if was full of surly and unpleasant lorry drivers with no grasp of physics.

Based on your excellent calculations I now propose that we stick with the banning of overtaking, but retain the 56 mph limiters.

How do you get on and off the Motorway then

Junction 12 on the M5 is a classic cock-up by the Highways agency. Tonight was pretty normal with about a mile of traffic queued on the hardshoulder. The number of times that some half-baked dimble brain leaves it too late to join the queue and then tries to stop and force his way into the queue is unfunny. Worse is the number of HGV's having to panic brake and swerve into the middle lane. At least the limiters will keep the death toll down when the worst finally happens.

[NFS]

Originally Posted by mjh93sa

How do you get on and off the Motorway then

Junction 12 on the M5 is a classic cock-up by the Highways agency. Tonight was pretty normal with about a mile of traffic queued on the hardshoulder. The number of times that some half-baked dimble brain leaves it too late to join the queue and then tries to stop and force his way into the queue is unfunny. Worse is the number of HGV's having to panic brake and swerve into the middle lane. At least the limiters will keep the death toll down when the worst finally happens.

Very carefully judging the gap between the speeding lorries.

What's the queueing on the hard shoulder about then?

They do this on the M40 at Leamington and I think it's pretty dangerous to be honest.

I'd start my own breakaway queue.

[mjh93sa]

Originally Posted by needforspeed

What's the queueing on the hard shoulder about then?

They do this on the M40 at Leamington and I think it's pretty dangerous to be honest.

I'd start my own breakaway queue.

Apologies for the deviation, but.....

This particular junction (M5 J12) was upgraded from a restricted juntion to an all access juntion in 2002. In order to minimise the space taken (and cost) they elected to create a junction with a single over bridge and twin small roundabouts at either side. The slip roads would all then be single lanes with a hardshoulder. This was obviously chosen after extensive traffic studies and in view of the fact that work had just commenced on the building of more than 2500 homes less than half a mile away! :sad0147:

As a result the volume of traffic trying to use the junction far exceeds the capabilities of the junction. People were therefore having to queue on the hardshoulder to avoid coming to a full stop in the nearside lane of the motorway.

Shortly thereafter an annoymous police officer reported to the local radio that they had been ordered by their superior officers that they were to get down there and book anybody stopping on the hardshoulder, something that they felt would only make a dangerous situation lethal. Needless to say that press and public pressure stopped this from happening.

Under consistent mounting pressure even the police had to admit that the junction is just plain dangerous. "We would very much like to see it improved because of the volume of traffic it is carrying. It needs to be expanded. It has no hard shoulder to operate in or to put the static traffic on to while we try to clear the roundabouts above it," said Inspector John Pickersgill of Gloucestershire Police in 2005.

In 2006, following a fatal crash at the junction the coroner called for safety improvements and finally at the end of 2006 the Highways agency put their best brains to work to find a solution. So what did they do? Basically nick about 300yards of the hardshoulder to make into an exit lane and add some automatic signs to say "Queue ahead." The cost to the taxpayer? £350,000.

Even on the first evening after this work, traffic was queued back to the exit sign 2/3rds of a mile before the exit and well onto the hardshoulder. As time passes and more of the homes in the new development are occupied it just gets worse and worse and more and more dangerous.

They are now talaking about spending even more money to add traffic lights to the roundabouts at the junction in some desperate attempt to salvage something from a complete fiasco, when what they need to do is admit they screwed up and start again.

The whole thing is made even more dangerous by the fact that it is on a curve. Therefore you can be on the traffic queue before you even realise it. The entry slips are also quite short and descend steeply with little visibility for traffic either on the motorway or joining to see each other and so merge safely.

Given the number of near misses I have seen I always aim to go through in Lane 3, it's just so much safer.

Thanks for reading!

Matt.

Before and after shots: