Speeding , port talbot M4, 50mph

So you condone people speeding/boy racers! And anyone who gets hit by either,deserve what they get.
Let's hope you feel the same way should such a dreadful. Thing happen to anyone close to yourself
 
a lower speed limit woudnt have prevented the death...a three year old running down a garden path ,tall garden hedge , no pavement, out between 2 cars parked at the side of the road , no amount of driver skill would have avoided the accident.
arguably the parent of the child was as fault...for lack of control and having an open gate.

its not the facts of this accident that prompted me to refer to you as a moron its your attitude to the death of a child, any child whatever the circumstances.

im not sure what you were thinking when you posted.

"A child that runs out into the road is either not well trained or not being cared for by its parent and is probably going to die eventually from some other unthinking act."

perhaps you wernt thinking at all
 
Come on David, in all the time that you spent looking after your son when he was little, can you honestly say that there was never a moment when you took your eyes off him for a few seconds and a situation with lots of potential occurred. I can normally tell my twin grandchildren apart by their bruises and grazes. A car travelling at 20MPH is a lot less liable to kill than one travelling at 30MPH. Life changing injuries are still probable but when two objects collide, the less energy involved the better.

Yes I have broken the speed limits on many occasions over a period of many years but the three bumps that I have been involved in have all been at well under 10MPH so when I say that many speed limits are stupid I may just be lucky but I doubt it. Unless they are variable then a lot of the time they are ridiculous. I am all for reducing limits to 20 mph outside schools but why at 5am. On a sunny summers morning on a straight stretch of motorway with little traffic on it, when traveling in a modern family car that is well maintained a speed of 100mph does not seem fast at all. That same stretch in 6 months time when its dark, covered in snow, ice and freezing fog, 30mph may seem ridiculously fast. Why with all the modern tech can we not make speed limits sensible on major roads and then enforce those limits rigorously.

Richard
 
your always prepared to swear black is white, pull the miss read, miss understood, your simple minded cards when someone dissagrees with you

you rally are a waste of space
 
So now he races high powered motorbikes to make up for it. .:) Are you trying to tell me there was never that one moment when your heart skipped a beat or two. Not trying to say either of you are stupid or a bad drivers but maybe fallible like the rest of us.

Richard
 
My My, that seems to have caused a bit of upset. Now before anyone answers please think for a moment, SPEED may be a factor in a fatality, it isn't responsible, saying "speed kills" is a bit like saying "concrete kills" or "cars kill" if someone falls over and cracks their head open and is killed when they hit a concrete post, you cant say the post caused the accident.
As for saying "I was in or below the speed limit" cuts no ice, it depends on the conditions at the time, it may be a 30mph limit but depending on all the conditions at the time 10mph may be too fast, remember it's the moron with their foot on the throttle that is responsible.
and before you have a pop at me, I used to drive fast, but only within the conditions prevailing at the time (I tended not to go over 100mph) I have had a full license since 1962 which has remained unblemished to this day.
If more effort was put into teaching people how to concentrate when driving and react in an emergency instead of how to get through the test I believe our roads would be a lot safer.
 
ColinD said:
My My, that seems to have caused a bit of upset. Now before anyone answers please think for a moment, SPEED may be a factor in a fatality, it isn't responsible, saying "speed kills" is a bit like saying "concrete kills" or "cars kill" if someone falls over and cracks their head open and is killed when they hit a concrete post, you cant say the post caused the accident.
As for saying "I was in or below the speed limit" cuts no ice, it depends on the conditions at the time, it may be a 30mph limit but depending on all the conditions at the time 10mph may be too fast, remember it's the moron with their foot on the throttle that is responsible.
and before you have a pop at me, I used to drive fast, but only within the conditions prevailing at the time (I tended not to go over 100mph) I have had a full license since 1962 which has remained unblemished to this day.
If more effort was put into teaching people how to concentrate when driving and react in an emergency instead of how to get through the test I believe our roads would be a lot safer.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I think the term 'speed kills' is a dumb statement. You get people saying that driving at 69mph in a 70 limit is safe but driving at 71mph in the same limit is dangerous. Bad driving causes accidents, sometimes that bad driving is caused by excess speed, most times not. Good driving is a skill learnt after many years of driving, not just by passing a test. There are times and places to speed and times and places to be well under the speed limit. Observation is key.
 
Last edited:
ColinD said:
SPEED doesn't kill, it's poor driving skills, not driving within the vehicle, road and weather conditions prevailing at the time, that is what causes the accidents leading to loss of life.
Click to expand...

Tell that to Ayrton Senna!
 
Just a quick note about roadwork speed limits - it's right for it to remain in place when no workers are present because there is no safe haven for a broken down vehicle. Fast moving traffic having to avoid something stationary in a live lane is never going to end well.

What I don't agree with is the length of some of these roadworks - totally unnecessary most of the time.
 
As to the ongoing row..... well the conditioning about speed kills is indoctrinated in people - just as intended.
personally I think its better if people actually think rather than just obey, as the thinker will observe, concentrate and be alert, while too often Ive seen people driving under the limit and paying no attention to what they are actually doing.
Most accidents are avoided through looking ahead and pre-empting situations, and through not needing a reaction time before braking through being alert.
As has been said - it is bad driving that kills, and bad driving includes going too fast or too slow in the wrong place and conditions.

To say speed kills is a gross over-simplification for the hard-of-thinking, and to justify draconian means to extort money in the name of road safety. As I posted recently, most peopld fail to realise all these Safety Camera Partnerships are businesses set up for PROFIT.

On topic, the excuse for the Port Talbot averagd speed scameras is in the local news to alleviate congestion and aid traffic flow through this section. Given that traffic arrives from both directions at 70mph this is a nonsense, supported by the fact the cameras are live 24/7. Its now more of a bottleneck than before as no one can run through even a few mph in a open bit or the Scamera will get you.

There are several junctions and ramps on this stretch, although its not any more of an accident spot than elsewhere on the M4. If it does have numerically more, it'll be due to small bumps in stop-start rush hour than high speed crashes. It is more likely these bumps are due to nuggets on their mobiles, or web browsing and texting instead of looking where they are going.

I travel this section at least 4 times a week, and have seen it all.

Yes going too fast in the wrong place is dangerous, but dont kid yourselves that the draconian reduction of speed limits and heavy-handed usd of automated speed traps is really there for road safety. Its there as a not-very-stealthy stealth tax to prise open your wallet some more.
 
Mul said:
well its not often I jump into argie bargies.

speed (call it constant velocity) doesn't kill otherwise folks in jet engines (chose your own fast thing) would die - they don't without an impulse (control system talk for "change") and a deleterious one at that.

speed may be a contributory factor in deaths due to the rapid (near instantaneous deceleration) into the immovable object.

Consider the transfer of energy 1/2mv^2 its the v^2 that's important for energy, say v= 4, v^2 = 16 now if v=80 ... 80^2 ... All that energy has to go somewhere when you decide to hit your immovable object.

Alternatively consider things from the acceleration pov (same as deceleration - the two are equivalent in physics terms, that is the equation stays the same).
acceleration = metres per second per second or m/s^2 = change in velocity / time taken. Since the time taken is the denominator as it tends to zero .. ok bored now.

Anyway doesn't kill but contributes by its associated factors in physics, assuming you decide to hit something. Of course if you hit something travelling in your direction at 10mph difference that's completely different to two objects both doing 60mph in a head on.

I am totally against the state and single issue groups on the speed kills bandwagon, there's much more educational awareness things to take care of first etc. etc.

Having provided sufficient obfuscation I'll stop now.

Chrz Mul.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you cleared up any confusion on the subject. :)
 
Mul said:
well its not often I jump into argie bargies.

speed (call it constant velocity) doesn't kill otherwise folks in jet engines (chose your own fast thing) would die - they don't without an impulse (control system talk for "change") and a deleterious one at that.

speed may be a contributory factor in deaths due to the rapid (near instantaneous deceleration) into the immovable object.

Consider the transfer of energy 1/2mv^2 its the v^2 that's important for energy, say v= 4, v^2 = 16 now if v=80 ... 80^2 ... All that energy has to go somewhere when you decide to hit your immovable object.

Alternatively consider things from the acceleration pov (same as deceleration - the two are equivalent in physics terms, that is the equation stays the same).
acceleration = metres per second per second or m/s^2 = change in velocity / time taken. Since the time taken is the denominator as it tends to zero .. ok bored now.

Anyway doesn't kill but contributes by its associated factors in physics, assuming you decide to hit something. Of course if you hit something travelling in your direction at 10mph difference that's completely different to two objects both doing 60mph in a head on.

I am totally against the state and single issue groups on the speed kills bandwagon, there's much more educational awareness things to take care of first etc. etc.

Having provided sufficient obfuscation I'll stop now.

Chrz Mul.

p.s and force (... of impact) = mass x acceleration , good ol' Newton, bless his cotton pumpkins.
Click to expand...

Cant claim to understand all of that, only the gist. But you gotta love this post :bow:
 
GRWXJR said:
Cant claim to understand all of that,
Click to expand...

I'll translate.

If you're going fast and don't hit anything, you'll be fine.

If you're going fast and do hit something, it's going to hurt. How much depends.

HTH :)
 
I think the worst I've seen was a bloke at a junction to a busy main road with both hands on the steering wheel. In one hand a mug of coffee and in the other a slice of toast and in the the back his most precious possessions his two children.
Makes me wonder what thought process he used to come to the conclusion it was ok.:rolleyes2::rolleyes2::rolleyes2:
 
st3v3 said:
I'll translate.

If you're going fast and don't hit anything, you'll be fine.

If you're going fast and do hit something, it's going to hurt. How much depends.

HTH :)
Click to expand...

Thanks, though I'd got that far meself ;) !

As a motocyclist who had a nice lady in a 2-tonne Landy pull out of a farm drive without looking...... well lets just say Ive had a practical demonstration of abrupt deceleration when I hit the tarmac about 60 feet the other side of the Landy.

The physics bit I get. The maths? Not so much.
 
people die in car crashes at 30 mph , they also die at 70 mph ,but many survive at that speed aswell don't forget ,in fact one young lad a couple of years back that lived near us was killed in one crash at even less than 30 mph. but all i can say is that if anybody even thinks its sensible to drive the port talbot stretch of the m4 at speeds of 70 mph ,they must be crazy . its a twisting two lane road that is no better than a dual carriageway with on and off ramps that regularly has standing traffic or slow moving traffic .plus a rather poor road surface. and have you noticed how many drivers complain about speed cameras have been caught with one or two ,by the way before some on here think i am having a go at them for speeding there wrong ,unless its guilt that nips .

and why do many drivers always say that cameras are cash cows for the powers to be ,there only cash cows if there daft enough to get caught with them for speeding if your not speeding you wont get fined . theres usualy notices dotted about warning drivers or common sense should prevail
 
mandrake said:
people die in car crashes at 30 mph , they also die at 70 mph ,but many survive at that speed aswell don't forget ,in fact one young lad a couple of years back that lived near us was killed in one crash at even less than 30 mph. but all i can say is that if anybody even thinks its sensible to drive the port talbot stretch of the m4 at speeds of 70 mph ,they must be crazy . its a twisting two lane road that is no better than a dual carriageway with on and off ramps that regularly has standing traffic or slow moving traffic .plus a rather poor road surface. and have you noticed how many drivers complain about speed cameras have been caught with one or two ,by the way before some on here think i am having a go at them for speeding there wrong ,unless its guilt that nips .

and why do many drivers always say that cameras are cash cows for the powers to be ,there only cash cows if there daft enough to get caught with them for speeding if your not speeding you wont get fined . theres usualy notices dotted about warning drivers or common sense should prevail
Click to expand...

Well ok.... but its not that simple. My 76 year old Mum got nicked for the first time in nearly 60 years recently. 34mph in a 30, at 7:30pm at night, in the dark, on a deserted road, no cars, no pedestrians, no risk. She drifted a couple of mph over, simply as the total lack of danger had her driving sensibly and not slavishly rivetted to the speedo.
Technically she broke the Law, yes. Was she unsafe, dangerous, inconsiderate, reckless? No. If I was a copper and could use sense and discretion would I have booked her? No.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Back
Top