About speeding
- Thread starter goodoleboy
- Start date
- Status
Its all a matter of physics. Any increase in speed allows less time for reaction and less time for unit impact.
The amount of physical damage increases with the square of the sppeed. 70 mph vs 50 mph causes 1.96 (almost twice) the phisical damage to vehicles and body parts
unfortunately most folks don't argue from a rational point of view.
All objective studies btw have shown raising speed limits have resulted in more death/injuries.
The amount of physical damage increases with the square of the sppeed. 70 mph vs 50 mph causes 1.96 (almost twice) the phisical damage to vehicles and body parts
All objective studies btw have shown raising speed limits have resulted in more death/injuries.
quote:
Originally posted by Al:
Its all a matter of physics. Any increase in speed allows less time for reaction and less time for unit impact.
The amount of physical damage increases with the square of the sppeed. 70 mph vs 50 mph causes 1.96 (almost twice) the phisical damage to vehicles and body partsunfortunately most folks don't argue from a rational point of view.
We could save even more lives by going back to passenger trains. It would also get us off the Middle East oil hook. If you want to drive slower, go ahead, just yield the left lane.
All objective studies btw have shown raising speed limits have resulted in more death/injuries.
Our organisation doesn't beleive in any defensive driving courses that actually involve vehicles (sitting at a desk in front of a whiteboard hones your skills apparently).quote:
Originally posted by Al:
Its all a matter of physics. Any increase in speed allows less time for reaction and less time for unit impact.
The amount of physical damage increases with the square of the sppeed. 70 mph vs 50 mph causes 1.96 (almost twice) the phisical damage to vehicles and body partsunfortunately most folks don't argue from a rational point of view.
Lecturer was explaining that a head on with two cars doing 100km/hr is the same as hitting a brick wall at 200km/hr.
Pointed out that he was wrong. Two identical cars hitting head on is the same as hitting a wall at 141km/hr...unless you are in the bigger one.
But physics reveals some interesting stuff about crashes.
Average reaction time is of the order of 1 second. So before you can even touch the brake, at 100km/hr you've travelled 27 metres, then it takes a further 67m to stop. Driving at 80km/hr it takes 25m to reach the brake pedal, and a further 47m to stop.
about half an olympic pool difference.
Here in the good ole USA we get to sit in front of a board 16 hours.Then we get 16 hours of driving the course.
Its required to drive any emergency vehicle from police cruiser,fire truck, or ambulance in my state.
Its required to drive any emergency vehicle from police cruiser,fire truck, or ambulance in my state.
Yea..that's part of the double whammy of higher speeds. Not only do higher speeds cause more physical/bodily damage when the accident occurrs..but you get to "participate" in that accident much quicker.
I can say for dead certain that in my 42+ years of driving, I have avoided several serious acidents bc I drive a bit slower than average and more often than not have a practice of not traveling in the 2nd and 3rd lanes.
So I can listen to people talk all day about how speed doesn't cause accidents. But probably none of them have as much real world driving experience as I do. I had my last acccident 33 years ago (knocks wood) But to each his own
I think its obvious, and has been stated several times, accidents are caused from people being poor drivers. Its not from how fast they are going. Can someone really sit there and say that an 80 year old with poor eye site, poor hearing, and ultra-slow reactions drive as safely at the speed limit as I can at 10 or 20 mph over?
I think speed limits need to be based on a person's ability to operate their vehicle, and the condition and type of that vehicle. Why does an older person (or new driver) driving a '70's vintage car have the same rules that a person with above-average driving skill, and a 50,000 performance sedan with all the features? I just don't get it.
While that stuff bothers me, the thing that gets me above and beyond anything else while on the road is the Police officers. Every time I see a Police officer, its only a matter on a few turns, or miles before you see them breaking laws. Turn-signal violations, illegal lane changing, turning into the wrong lane, speeding with no lights or sirans. If I were to do the same thing, they could tag me at any time. They are trained professionals that are supposed to be experts on the rules of the road. I have seen this in any state, and at all times of the day...
Its fun to drive around following ALL the rules and ******* people off. Either enforce all the rules equally, or let us be...
I think speed limits need to be based on a person's ability to operate their vehicle, and the condition and type of that vehicle. Why does an older person (or new driver) driving a '70's vintage car have the same rules that a person with above-average driving skill, and a 50,000 performance sedan with all the features? I just don't get it.
While that stuff bothers me, the thing that gets me above and beyond anything else while on the road is the Police officers. Every time I see a Police officer, its only a matter on a few turns, or miles before you see them breaking laws. Turn-signal violations, illegal lane changing, turning into the wrong lane, speeding with no lights or sirans. If I were to do the same thing, they could tag me at any time. They are trained professionals that are supposed to be experts on the rules of the road. I have seen this in any state, and at all times of the day...
Its fun to drive around following ALL the rules and ******* people off. Either enforce all the rules equally, or let us be...
Actually, you both missed it.
Assuming he was refering to the brick wall as a clasical immoveable object.
Car hits immovable object at 100 km/hr. The entire 0.5 mv^2 ke is absorbed by the car and contents.
Two identical cars hit head on, both going 100 km/hr. Total ke is absorbed by the two cars. SO each car absorbs 1/2 of 2 x 0.5mv^2 = 0.5 mv^2
Same as the brick wall at 100 km/hr.
Do police cars actually have turn signals? I thought they got disconnected when they installed the police equipment.
I agree with the point you're making, DriveHard, but it would be impossible to implement that in a realistic way. When driving, you're going to see a conglomeration of all sorts of drivers with all sorts of varying skill levels. Unless you're willing to put an identification sticker with the driver's skill level on every car and use designated lanes for high skilled drivers, you'd never pull it off. Personally, I can't see the American public buying into a system like that. IMO, if lane discipline was legally enforcable, like on the Autobahn in Germany, it would go a LONG way toward relieving people's frustrations when driving.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Back in the day (an over used term) ..speeding was 12th in highway fatalities ..below mechanical failure. The number 1 killer was drunk driving.
I don't see a solution to it. Intense enforcement could reduce fatalities ..but not accidents. Aside from the oddball guy who is driving like a maniac ..the traffic tends to flow as fast as it can in the space alloted. Congestion is the mph governor for most of us.
I don't see a solution to it. Intense enforcement could reduce fatalities ..but not accidents. Aside from the oddball guy who is driving like a maniac ..the traffic tends to flow as fast as it can in the space alloted. Congestion is the mph governor for most of us.
Traffic accident statistics have always been more than a bit fuzzy. The cause reported tends to be what is expediant and what is politically popular in the officers jurisdiction.
Take the case of Joe Six pack who was sitting legggaly stopped at a red light, but had been drinking. Mrs Bluehair rear ended him with her Cadillac. Mrs Bluehair was 100% at fault, but Officer Law noticed that Joe Sixpack had been drinking. It then goes in the statistical database as an alcohol related accident.
Traffic officers are supposed to cite someone for an accident and put a reason on the ticket. Too fast for conditions is easier to write and has a related vehicle code number. "Driver needed a cranalrectomy" is harder to spell and not in the vehicle code. Guess which goes on the citation.
"Driving too fast for conditions" in various local dialects, gets way overused.
A San Jose cop I used to live near said that they needed a "DWS" violation in the vehicle code. Driving While Stupid.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Gallagher did suggest "stupid darts" ...when a car was spotted with 5 stupid darts attached to it ..a cop would issue a citation. "Hey, you're stupid".
I wrote a post on this before but I will summarize.
A)Speeding Tickets on American Higways** are a profit source not in any way a form of justice.
The courts are strictly capitilist stooges to this goverment enterprise.
B)Hence, my theory number 2# is that speeding is okay if your willing to pay the occasional "left-lane high rent tax" (ie traffic citation)
C)Theory 3# In America you can have and do whatever you want as long as you can pay for it.
Other notes.
Yes, you can not directly compare the Autobahn to the Interstates.
However, it is glaringly obvious to me that:
1)There are many, many Interstate segments that can clearly and safely sustain 140-160 kph (90-100mph) **conditions permitting.
2. I stand on that point...I-495 adjacent to the Delaware River near Wilmington is an example.
Many segments of I-35 from DFW - Austin - OKC
I-10
Florida, Atlanta, Nevada, Utah etc
And many people talk about that California Highway
Conditions, are traffic volume, daytime versus nightime, vehicle condition, tire type, drive skill, forward visibility, degrees of road curvature, etc.
Assuming your highly familiar with the road and skilled then it is hard for me to find you a "recklace driver"
At least taking an offer of immunity, relatively slow as it is vs. MB, Porsche, Vette, Viper, owners here I have been to 200 kph (120mph) and that was spooky for me tunnel vision wise.
I did it and have no reason to experiment again.
There was no reaction time as each second and i was near the horizon
Perhaps left lanes should be mandated high speed for no trucks/suvs/buses and those with special vehicle inspection and mandatory performance driving school attendence or something.
Instead of HOV lane it can be High Performace (HP) lane. *lol*
A)Speeding Tickets on American Higways** are a profit source not in any way a form of justice.
The courts are strictly capitilist stooges to this goverment enterprise.
B)Hence, my theory number 2# is that speeding is okay if your willing to pay the occasional "left-lane high rent tax" (ie traffic citation)
C)Theory 3# In America you can have and do whatever you want as long as you can pay for it.
Other notes.
Yes, you can not directly compare the Autobahn to the Interstates.
However, it is glaringly obvious to me that:
1)There are many, many Interstate segments that can clearly and safely sustain 140-160 kph (90-100mph) **conditions permitting.
2. I stand on that point...I-495 adjacent to the Delaware River near Wilmington is an example.
Many segments of I-35 from DFW - Austin - OKC
I-10
Florida, Atlanta, Nevada, Utah etc
And many people talk about that California Highway
Conditions, are traffic volume, daytime versus nightime, vehicle condition, tire type, drive skill, forward visibility, degrees of road curvature, etc.
Assuming your highly familiar with the road and skilled then it is hard for me to find you a "recklace driver"
At least taking an offer of immunity, relatively slow as it is vs. MB, Porsche, Vette, Viper, owners here I have been to 200 kph (120mph) and that was spooky for me tunnel vision wise.
I did it and have no reason to experiment again.
There was no reaction time as each second and i was near the horizon
Perhaps left lanes should be mandated high speed for no trucks/suvs/buses and those with special vehicle inspection and mandatory performance driving school attendence or something.
Instead of HOV lane it can be High Performace (HP) lane. *lol*
JHZR2
Staff member
outrun, Id buy that idea, except that then all the idiots who were impatient or who thought that the man couldnt tell them what to do, they have a right to use the whole road would get into that lane anyway. And people with ill-maintained cars would pull in anyway, figuring nothing would ever happen, and guess what?
JMH
JMH
Now, I'm not one to enjoy the state telling me what to do in my car, or anywhere else, but it does irk me to see these jerks acting as if they own the road, driving as fast as they want, because they think they're such capable drivers, weaving in and out of lanes, usually without signaling, getting mad if you get in their way,as if where they have to o is more important thanwhere you're going, usually talking on their cell phone all the while.
I actually overheard a woman I know spewing forth about how she deserved to drive as fast as she wants, because she owns a Porsche, and she's so much more capable of driving at high speeds than most people. This is the same Porsche I saw in a ditch last year.
I actually overheard a woman I know spewing forth about how she deserved to drive as fast as she wants, because she owns a Porsche, and she's so much more capable of driving at high speeds than most people. This is the same Porsche I saw in a ditch last year.
They would be the people who initiate the 100 car pilups bc they drove too fast in the fog. "duuuuuu I can't believe that old fogy was only driving 40 mph in the (zero visibility) fog when I rear ended him"
In the United States a similar rule applies, 85th percentile, in setting legitimate speed limits. California has a "speed trap law" that does not allow radar enforcement of artificially low speed limits.
A recent study of the causes of collisions in California was done and right-of-way violations, not speed or alcohol, is by far the main cause. It makes perfect sense. Very few "accidents" are solo or pedestrian involved. If two vehicles collide, someone is invading someone elses space.
I tend to drive much faster than the average driver, but never to the point of weaving around traffic. In 35+ years of driving, I have never gotten a speeding ticket or had an at-fault collision. Survival is all about paying attention at all times and not exceeding your, the car, the road or weather limits.
It's hard to drive at speed safely in the US. Simple rules in Europe like not passing on the right and moving over when someone blinks their lights at you go a long way towards making driving at speed safer. Those who weave lane to lane with no signals should have their valve stems clipped.
The insurance industry keeps good stats on accident rates by vehicle type, which they acknowledge is a sum of inherent vehicle safety and driver type. As an example I recall that a Honda Civic had a lower death rate than for some types of Suburbans, and that the main reason that 4wd full size pickups had a high death rate were males in rural areas getting killed on weekends, tyupically due to drinking.
The insurance industry keeps good stats on accident rates by vehicle type, which they acknowledge is a sum of inherent vehicle safety and driver type. As an example I recall that a Honda Civic had a lower death rate than for some types of Suburbans, and that the main reason that 4wd full size pickups had a high death rate were males in rural areas getting killed on weekends, tyupically due to drinking.
- Status
