Mountain Watch

[HeliX]

2 hours ago, Apple said:

why do some people religiously it seems want to get their thrill driving outside not just theirs but probably other people's comfort zones as well.

Do they?

[Apple]

37 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Do they?

So it seems.... given the comments on here and the numbers prosecuted for speeding.

[HeliX]

5 minutes ago, Apple said:

So it seems.... given the comments on here and the numbers prosecuted for speeding.

Is speeding necessarily being outside yours and others comfort zones? 

[Apple]

I know my limits, but from what I see and read some people don't know theirs. 

I am sure every driver knows their own limits but for some that seems to escape them just at the right time.

Derek has it about right. And so does the chief constable. Take it up with them.

[Banker]

4 minutes ago, HeliX said:

Is speeding necessarily being outside yours and others comfort zones? 

Yes, there’s too many speeders about particularly in built up areas. Speed cameras are needed, the amount of fines in first 6 months would pay for new bridges!!

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, Banker said:

Yes, there’s too many speeders about particularly in built up areas. Speed cameras are needed, the amount of fines in first 6 months would pay for new bridges!!

You can exceed speed limits without being over the limit of what's safe.

You can also be over the limit of what's safe without exceeding the speed limit.

 

The only reasonable, effective and long-term solution for reducing accident rates is better training. And perhaps outlawing terrible tyres.

[Banker]

Just now, HeliX said:

You can exceed speed limits without being over the limit of what's safe.

You can also be over the limit of what's safe without exceeding the speed limit.

 

The only reasonable, effective and long-term solution for reducing accident rates is better training. And perhaps outlawing terrible tyres.

Yes but if you’re over speed limit you’re breaking the law and automatic fines would soon stop it

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, Banker said:

Yes but if you’re over speed limit you’re breaking the law and automatic fines would soon stop it

But speed limits aren't all set appropriately. Nor are they variable to the conditions. Nor are they variable to vehicle and load.

If you feel like digging back through the pages, there are plenty of reports and analyses of UK crashes that show that excess speed is a minority. If the goal is fewer crashes, speed cameras and automated fining systems (which I don't believe can be implemented under IOM law as it stands?) are a fairly ineffective band-aid.

[Derek Flint]

30 minutes ago, HeliX said:

You can exceed speed limits without being over the limit of what's safe.

You can also be over the limit of what's safe without exceeding the speed limit.

 

The only reasonable, effective and long-term solution for reducing accident rates is better training. And perhaps outlawing terrible tyres.

Or electronic control, of max speeds in vehicles.

Safer people (training) and safer vehicles (tyres) are also part of the Safe System approach

26 minutes ago, HeliX said:

But speed limits aren't all set appropriately. Nor are they variable to the conditions. Nor are they variable to vehicle and load.

If you feel like digging back through the pages, there are plenty of reports and analyses of UK crashes that show that excess speed is a minority. If the goal is fewer crashes, speed cameras and automated fining systems (which I don't believe can be implemented under IOM law as it stands?) are a fairly ineffective band-aid.

I agree. Which is why I lobbied for a wholesale review of limits on a per route basis. 

Speed limits can never be a band aid. They have to make sense and be sensible. Over here in Englandshire there are some nonsensical 20 limits, which are broadly ignored. It undermines the whole system. 

That said, general conformity is pretty good round my neck of the woods. It makes the knobheads stand out even more!

[WTF]

best you get some camo the Derek.......................... 

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, Derek Flint said:

Or electronic control, of max speeds in vehicles.

Safer people (training) and safer vehicles (tyres) are also part of the Safe System approach

By this do you mean control of max speed to adhere to individual limits, or a generalised overall limit? Most cars have some sort of speed limiter (though often set at something like 150!). I'm not sure how I feel about a car refusing to accelerate once reaching posted limits. And I'm positive I don't like the idea for a bike, there are non-infrequently instances where speeding up is safer than braking to avoid an incident on a bike.

1 minute ago, Derek Flint said:

I agree. Which is why I lobbied for a wholesale review of limits on a per route basis. 

Speed limits can never be a band aid. They have to make sense and be sensible. Over here in Englandshire there are some nonsensical 20 limits, which are broadly ignored. It undermines the whole system. 

That said, general conformity is pretty good round my neck of the woods. It makes the knobheads stand out even more!

20s and 30s in particular should be placed with a lot of consideration, and penalties for exceeding them should be strong. In 40s and up I would argue that penalties could be less strong (or at least, more nuanced). I don't mean less strong than they are now, but in relation to strengthening the penalties for being a knob in 20-30 zones.

I don't support an all-island limit though. I do support some of the current NSL zones being turned into limit zones, mind. But I tend to err on the side of opposing removal of personal responsibility & freedoms unless the evidence suggests it would be noticably beneficial, and I'm not convinced that threshold is met in the case of an all-island limit. And certainly not when compared to other measures that I believe would reduce all accidents significantly, not just those on the mountain.

[Apple]

We have done all this before. 

20 is plenty on village roads, 40 everywhere else, 60 on the mountain.

Speed can kill. 

When is it going to be discussed in Tynwald, anyone know? Sooner the better.

[HeliX]

9 minutes ago, Apple said:

We have done all this before. 

20 is plenty on village roads, 40 everywhere else, 60 on the mountain.

Speed can kill. 

When is it going to be discussed in Tynwald, anyone know? Sooner the better.

Lots of things can kill. The question is which ones are doing it, and how do we best address them to lower the fatalities by the greatest amount with the least intervention.

[Boris Johnson]

Everywhere in the civilised world has a national speed limit. Our accident stats are about twice the rate in a similar rural location across.

What more evidence do we need?

Don't say the TT messes the stats up because it is part of the normal traffic as in it happens every year, this and next excepted.

If you need to compensate for small genitalia by driving fast get a race licence 

 

 

 

[HeliX]

1 minute ago, Boris Johnson said:

Everywhere in the civilised world has a national speed limit. Our accident stats are about twice the rate in a similar rural location across.

What more evidence do we need?

Don't say the TT messes the stats up because it is part of the normal traffic as in it happens every year, this and next excepted.

If you need to compensate for small genitalia by driving fast get a race licence 

Arguing that our stats should be comparable to other rural locations and then proclaiming that we should also include the TT stats is a bit of a farce isn't it.

 

What's your obsession with people's genitalia by the way?