Mountain Watch

[The Chief]

is that 6 or 8 RTC's now in the last 3 days after todays double. Gonna blow the Police and DoT's stats wide open if we keep up at that level.

C'mon people FFS look take a breath and get to your destination safely an extra minute or 2 is not going to make your macdonalds any colder or your pint any flatter. Doris and Jean will have still bagged the last meal deals and EVF will have still stuck 40p on a litre of fuel.

[Non-Believer]

By my reckoning since the removing of the lockdown 40mph restriction 15(?) months back, there have been in excess of 70 RTIs on the Mountain Road.

[Boris Johnson]

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

By my reckoning since the removing of the lockdown 40mph restriction 15(?) months back, there have been in excess of 70 RTIs on the Mountain Road.

We don't need speed limits and cameras though we need driver education.........................

Yeah right, how does that work then Mr Peters?

[ellanvannin2010]

I wonder what the RTC figures were during the first lockdown with the 40mph limit compared to the second/third lockdowns without the limit?.

[Non-Believer]

55 minutes ago, ellanvannin2010 said:

I wonder what the RTC figures were during the first lockdown with the 40mph limit compared to the second/third lockdowns without the limit?.

The regular argument against that is that there were fewer vehicles on the road during the first lockdown, due to most people being confined at home. But it was virtually zero to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

[Numbnuts]

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

The regular argument against that is that there were fewer vehicles on the road during the first lockdown, due to most people being confined at home. But it was virtually zero to the best of my knowledge and recollection.

Think your right and was it Quayle that mentioned this in one of the many briefings? Like Dohhh yes theres been no accidents but theres no one on the road boss man !  

Edited September 24, 2021 by Numbnuts

[AlanShimmin]

On 9/21/2021 at 7:42 PM, Shake me up Judy said:

I've said it on here before everytime this comes up, but the signage coming down into the Gooseneck is piss-poor for inexperienced drivers who don't know how tight it is. Has been for years and the DOI has never listened. Still one sign last time I checked showing a 60 degree left-hand bend. It's nearer 160 degrees. If you don't know the road and it's foggy it can take you by surprise.

If they drove to the road / conditions it wouldn't be an issue. Does every slight bend in the road need  sign?

[Shake me up Judy]

When it's a downhill near hairpin coming off a high speed unrestricted stretch, you bet it does.

[Derek Flint]

14 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

By my reckoning since the removing of the lockdown 40mph restriction 15(?) months back, there have been in excess of 70 RTIs on the Mountain Road.

The mountain road is the elephant in the room. It’s the contradiction that I find hard to reconcile. Close it, marshal it, put medical cover in and make it one way, and they slap a speed restriction on (per last weeks FOM, Audi launch) open it two way for general use, no upper limit?

that simply does not stack up. It’s either safe to traverse at a speed you think fit in your own head, or it isn’t. A speed limit is the by product of a risk assessment of a route. So someone, somewhere in the DOI has carried out that assessment and figured that it doesn’t need one. Personally one has to question competence there. 

The resistance to imposing limits is political, nothing else. Now the likes of Cregeen are out maybe we will see a shift.

[CallMeCurious]

12 minutes ago, Derek Flint said:

The mountain road is the elephant in the room. It’s the contradiction that I find hard to reconcile. Close it, marshal it, put medical cover in and make it one way, and they slap a speed restriction on (per last weeks FOM, Audi launch) open it two way for general use, no upper limit?

that simply does not stack up. It’s either safe to traverse at a speed you think fit in your own head, or it isn’t. A speed limit is the by product of a risk assessment of a route. So someone, somewhere in the DOI has carried out that assessment and figured that it doesn’t need one. Personally one has to question competence there. 

The resistance to imposing limits is political, nothing else. Now the likes of Cregeen are out maybe we will see a shift.

I was going to say it'd be the typical hot potato and therefore no-one would even look at formalising the position of no speed limit. The "it has always been like that" defence.

I'd be curious to know if there are any reviews carried out by the DoI at all, on the basis of each serious incident (i.e. damage to property, vehicles and occupants) seperate to the legal side. Surely sites like the hairpin where there are almost monthly incidents better signage and possibly a speed advisory (like Windy and the Creg) is the least that should happen.

Heck even the 'accident black spot' warning, if they even exist any more.

Do those responsible for the damage pay for the repair of the wall or even report it? I don't think I've ever seen it reported in the paper.

The risk is one day someone else is going to be coming uphill on that bend, or walking behind the wall when this happens and then it'll be too late to fix it.

 

[finlo]

1 hour ago, CallMeCurious said:

I was going to say it'd be the typical hot potato and therefore no-one would even look at formalising the position of no speed limit. The "it has always been like that" defence.

I'd be curious to know if there are any reviews carried out by the DoI at all, on the basis of each serious incident (i.e. damage to property, vehicles and occupants) seperate to the legal side. Surely sites like the hairpin where there are almost monthly incidents better signage and possibly a speed advisory (like Windy and the Creg) is the least that should happen.

Heck even the 'accident black spot' warning, if they even exist any more.

Do those responsible for the damage pay for the repair of the wall or even report it? I don't think I've ever seen it reported in the paper.

The risk is one day someone else is going to be coming uphill on that bend, or walking behind the wall when this happens and then it'll be too late to fix it.

 

The Gooseneck even?

[Roger Mexico]

6 hours ago, CallMeCurious said:

I'd be curious to know if there are any reviews carried out by the DoI at all, on the basis of each serious incident (i.e. damage to property, vehicles and occupants) seperate to the legal side. Surely sites like the hairpin where there are almost monthly incidents better signage and possibly a speed advisory (like Windy and the Creg) is the least that should happen.

As I keep on pointing out, every year the Chief Constable's Report includes a map showing the every one of the road traffic collisions in the relevant year.  This includes collisions with animals and presumably walls and the roof of your car colliding with a field..  Here's the one for 2020-21:

The road network isn't shown prominently, but you can soon work out where it is - and where the accidents occur and how serious they are. 

[WTF]

douglas looks really bad, perhaps there should be some sort of speed limit there.

[Non-Believer]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

As I keep on pointing out, every year the Chief Constable's Report includes a map showing the every one of the road traffic collisions in the relevant year.  This includes collisions with animals and presumably walls and the roof of your car colliding with a field..  Here's the one for 2020-21:

The road network isn't shown prominently, but you can soon work out where it is - and where the accidents occur and how serious they are. 

But presumably these are only the ones that are reported Roger and which maybe the authorities attend? As a daily commuter and regular work user of the Mountain Rd, there's evidence of any number of "off-road excursions" during the year, flattened fences, marks in turf and on verges, demolished walls, skid marks veering off the carriageway that perhaps are never reported and which didn't make it into the official figures? That graph doesn't appear to show half as many for the Mountain as I would have expected?

[WTF]

8 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

But presumably these are only the ones that are reported Roger and which maybe the authorities attend? As a daily commuter and regular work user of the Mountain Rd, there's evidence of any number of "off-road excursions" during the year, flattened fences, marks in turf and on verges, demolished walls, skid marks veering off the carriageway that perhaps are never reported and which didn't make it into the official figures? That graph doesn't appear to show half as many for the Mountain as I would have expected?

they'll  all be just where the fire engines have been on their way to incidents.