It wouldn’t be so bad if the reduced speed limit only applied to the areas where work was actually being done, but to have miles of reduced speed in areas that aren’t being worked on is unnecessary and, IMO, an attempt to frustrate drivers into breaking the speed limit in order to raise funds through fines. There are enough “smart” signs, above the motorway, to be able to raise and reduce the speed limit by sections, based on the knowledge of where work is actually being done, to reduce the risk of accidents.
I actually agree with St Godders here. I remember the there was a study once that a reduced speed limit (when adhered to) actually sped up the traffic. Something to do with no one speeding up then braking that has the concertina effect of others breaking that eventually caused bottlenecks.
In heavy traffic (when on mainland) I always drop back....usually means I cruise along at the speed of the traffic scarcely needing my brakes....while ahead of me I watch every car brake, brake, brake. The journey time will be the same for all of us, but I have a much more comfortable journey. No point in denying it, lads, it’s mainly men who drive too close. No point when overtaking is not a possibility. And the problem when cars stop and start is that the traffic has to keep overcoming inertia. Waste of fuel.
I agree with Godders too. I wouldn’t mind betting that if the National Speed Limit on every road, including motorways, was 50 mph, there would be far fewer fatal accidents, far fewer traffic jams, and that the air quality would improve. I also agree that there would be no discernible difference in people’s travel times over longer distances. It’s time motorists learnt that speed is not only over-rated and dangerous, it’s also pointless.
Going 50 on a motorway is just ludicrously slow. And of course it would massively increase long distance journey times if all motorways were 50.
A lot of people don’t have the ability to drive on motorways. Speed is the killer, but bad driving is the accessory to that murder. There has been talk of making the M1 60 limit from Northampton to Leeds for sometime now.
No it wouldn’t, because you wouldn’t have tailbacks, which are invariably caused by people driving too fast and braking when they catch up with a slower vehicle.
I've always believed that motorway driving should be a mandatory part of learning to drive and should be on the driving test. I did the pass plus when I passed my test which gave me invaluable teaching of how to drive on a motorway but lots of people didn't take the pass plus course. At least learner drivers can go on motorways now, it was banned when I learnt to drive.
You rarely have tailbacks anyway. Only during rush hour but you can't go 70 then anyway. It would be ludicrous to have a speed limit of 50 when motorways are flowing nicely or at night when there's hardly any traffic on the roads.
In my view what is ludicrous is that people are killed on roads at all, or sustain life-changing injuries because they or other people drive too fast. What is the problem with driving at a safe speed and arriving a few minutes later? I just don’t understand it.
70 is safe on motorways a lot of the time. It's the people who don't adapt to the conditions or busy times who cause accidents.
70mph is fine in a motorway I am with Tom here 50mph is to slow , it’s the idiots on mobile phones, drink drivers and tailgaters who cause a lot of accidents.
In 2014, autobahns carried 31% of motorized road traffic while accounting for 11% of Germany's traffic deaths. The autobahn fatality rate of 1.6 deaths per billion travel-kilometres compared favorably with the 4.6 rate on urban streets and 6.5 rate on rural roads.
