The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: It all boils down to a lack of legislation and enforcement of existing legislation. Phoning, texting, Driving without Due Care and Attention, Dangerous Driving. There's plenty of relevant legislation but it's not being enforced. But speed is an additional factor in all of those as well, most incidents up on the Mountain involve speed unsuitable to the relevant conditions at the time. Which is also bad driving judgement. Easiest way out of that is to reduce the allowable speed because unfortunately there's a fair cross section whose judgement provenly can't be trusted. On an almost daily basis. OK, well let's say speed limit reduced to 60mph. Is that really stopping THAT many accidents? Most accidents up there are at less than 60. Edited October 19, 2020 by The Dog's Dangly Bits 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 7 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Much of that is not relevant to the discussion of speed related RTIs on the Mountain Rd unfortunately. People's bad habits and poor judgement aren't magically suspended between the Gooseneck and the Creg. 10 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: It all boils down to a lack of legislation and enforcement of existing legislation. Phoning, texting, Driving without Due Care and Attention, Dangerous Driving. There's plenty of relevant legislation but it's not being enforced. But speed is an additional factor in all of those as well, most incidents up on the Mountain involve speed unsuitable to the relevant conditions at the time. Which is also bad driving judgement. Easiest way out of that is to reduce the allowable speed because unfortunately there's a fair cross section whose judgement provenly can't be trusted. On an almost daily basis. Lots of accidents (most?) occur inside speed limits though. Two very serious pedestrian-vehicle collisions were in 30mph zones in the last fortnight weren't they? Similarly, speed limits aren't a guarantee that that speed is safe for all road/weather/vehicle conditions. Enforcement is part of the problem, certainly. But if people were taught to drive in lessons rather than being taught to operate a car (not the same thing), they would be better equipped to make appropriate decisions to begin with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, HeliX said: People's bad habits and poor judgement aren't magically suspended between the Gooseneck and the Creg. Lots of accidents (most?) occur inside speed limits though. Two very serious pedestrian-vehicle collisions were in 30mph zones in the last fortnight weren't they? Similarly, speed limits aren't a guarantee that that speed is safe for all road/weather/vehicle conditions. Enforcement is part of the problem, certainly. But if people were taught to drive in lessons rather than being taught to operate a car (not the same thing), they would be better equipped to make appropriate decisions to begin with. But this discussion is about the standard of driving on the Mountain Rd? And in respect of the in-30 limit incidents, were those limits being adhered to at the time? Speed limits are arrived at through full and prior assessment of the road concerned, Derek F. will give you the rundown on that. I'm in full agreement about the teaching/training. And the Test. The practical Driving Test now is only 30min long isn't it? It used to be an hour before somebody decided that the Theory Part should be half of the test. 30 minutes as opposed to the original hour is too short IMHO, the shorter the test the less time to show any weaknesses. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeliX Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 3 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: But this discussion is about the standard of driving on the Mountain Rd? And in respect of the in-30 limit incidents, were those limits being adhered to at the time? Speed limits are arrived at through full and prior assessment of the road concerned, Derek F. will give you the rundown on that. I'm in full agreement about the teaching/training. And the Test. The practical Driving Test now is only 30min long isn't it? It used to be an hour before somebody decided that the Theory Part should be half of the test. 30 minutes as opposed to the original hour is too short IMHO, the shorter the test the less time to show any weaknesses. It is about the mountain road, but demonstrating that speed limits don't seem to make a great deal of difference is relevant I think. As mentioned, enforcement is certainly a big problem. There ought to be no tolerance for speeding in 20 or 30mph zones. There are likely to be kids and animals running about. Not that I'm suggesting we should allow people to speed in 40+ zones, just that penalties ought to be more severe in 20/30. It was an hour when I did it (for each vehicle). But that wasn't exactly recently. Even an hour is a bit short though. I would prefer something that mimicked pilot training more, i.e. a set number of hours have to be logged and certain things have to be signed off by an instructor/examiner through the course of those hours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 16 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: But this discussion is about the standard of driving on the Mountain Rd? And in respect of the in-30 limit incidents, were those limits being adhered to at the time? Speed limits are arrived at through full and prior assessment of the road concerned, Derek F. will give you the rundown on that. I'm in full agreement about the teaching/training. And the Test. The practical Driving Test now is only 30min long isn't it? It used to be an hour before somebody decided that the Theory Part should be half of the test. 30 minutes as opposed to the original hour is too short IMHO, the shorter the test the less time to show any weaknesses. The practical driving test isn't half an hour. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevster Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 4 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: The practical driving test isn't half an hour. In the UK 1978 mine was 20 minutes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 16 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: The practical driving test isn't half an hour. How long is it then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 19 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: The practical driving test isn't half an hour. Just for the record, I've just enquired with a driving instructor mate who tells me 30-35 minutes for a car. The Dog's Dangly Bits. Posting dangly bits day and night. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Just for the record, I've just enquired with a driving instructor mate who tells me 30-35 minutes for a car. The Dog's Dangly Bits. Posting dangly bits day and night. Someone I know passed recently so I asked him. He said it was around 45 minutes. Edited October 19, 2020 by The Dog's Dangly Bits Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 13 minutes ago, Non-Believer said: Just for the record, I've just enquired with a driving instructor mate who tells me 30-35 minutes for a car. Yeh, of course you have Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Non-Believer Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 12 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said: Yeh, of course you have 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek Flint Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 1 hour ago, Non-Believer said: Speed limits are arrived at through full and prior assessment of the road concerned, Derek F. will give you the rundown on that. That is what SHOULD happen. But it doesn’t here. Taking the A18 out of the equation , there is no way on gods earth you would derestricted a large number of roads over here if you were applying an evidence-based approach. 1 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrighty Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 3 hours ago, Derek Flint said: That is what SHOULD happen. But it doesn’t here. Taking the A18 out of the equation , there is no way on gods earth you would derestricted a large number of roads over here if you were applying an evidence-based approach. Nobody’s ever derestricted a road here - the original status of all roads here was derestricted; same too in the UK. The IOM however is far slower to bring restrictions in - the old joke about not liking change applies. Same with the TT. If it were to be suggested today, as a new idea, there’s no way it’d happen. But since we’ve got it we’re stuck with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dog's Dangly Bits Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 40 minutes ago, wrighty said: Nobody’s ever derestricted a road here - the original status of all roads here was derestricted; same too in the UK. The IOM however is far slower to bring restrictions in - the old joke about not liking change applies. Same with the TT. If it were to be suggested today, as a new idea, there’s no way it’d happen. But since we’ve got it we’re stuck with it. For now. Health and Safety plus Insurance will probably put a stop to it. This Bray Hill case will ramp up the premiums and really that is just waiting to happen again with muliltiple fatalities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Voice of Reason Posted October 19, 2020 Share Posted October 19, 2020 On 10/18/2020 at 11:51 AM, HeliX said: I can choose not to carry a phone. Or to disable location services. But even if that weren't the case, that's not a valid reason not to resist yet another body collating huge swathes of information about me. Every bit of automation creates more distracted drivers. People are impatient and get bored easily. Phones are addictive. I’m not addicted to my phone. Why would you be? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.