This morning's commute and other commuting stories

If that means doing 10mph over the limit to get past another vehicle, that's a fine.

ftfy

Yeah I get your point, but at least it’s easier to spot an asshole from a mile away. I was more just venting about the idiot who decide to stop an overtake halfway through and just sorta merge into a pack of cyclists

Yeah, everyone thinks they're a better driver than everyone else.

Amazing really that there's so many accidents given that everyone thinks they're bloody awesome behind the wheel and crashes and shit only happen to those other drivers..

Impatience + Stupidity

If all cars had at least a top-speed limiter then when crashes did happen, the outcome severity would be reduced, since no one is doing more than 70 rather than 110 or whatever people roll along out now. Also, if the top speed was limited you wouldn't have everyone piling into the overtaking lane while the other two lanes remain empty. Also, your reaction time doesn't need to be so quick so the number of accidents would be reduced.

All this could be applied in towns too but the car driver vote is large and ever driver is special...

It's not though.

As part of my Bike Safe course, i was followed by a Police bike for 6 hours and given pointers and tips when we stopped roughly 5 or 6 times. During those, i was encouraged to increase my speed when overtaking beyond what i was already doing.

By the end of the day, i was overtaking at 50 in a 40 etc, whilst being followed by a Police bike. It certainly drew a few odd looks from drivers I was passing.

Passed the course with distinction though...

If someone is doing 45 in a 50 for no need, it's better to pass that person at 60mph than 50mph so that the maneuver is made as quickly as possible. Obviously you'd then return to an appropriate speed.

Yeah, everyone thinks they're a better driver than everyone else.

Dunning Kruger effect

Everyone driving slower --> shit driver
Everyone driving faster --> dangerous cunt

It is though. Pretty sure hippy is right. I looked this up when I went through a speed camera overtaking a lorry one time. If you can't overtake at the speed limit, you aren't supposed to overtake.

However you are right that it's safer to overtake as quickly as possible in many cases, and the police know that. Certainly when I overtook that lorry my main concern was getting back into my lane ASAP. I think it's more a case of them allowing you to skirt the law slightly for your own safety.

Edit: I didn't get a speeding ticket, apparently there's no film in any of the cameras along the A1 or something

Has that excuse ever worked for riders caught speeding during an overtake?

In Oz, where they're a lot stricter on speeding, the cops would simply say "if you couldn't pass them while remaining under the speed limit you shouldn't have passed them.

Yeah, I should've paid more attention reading that psych book..

Hahahaha, this is me when I'm walking for the train.

Everyone walking slower --> stop fuxking dordling.
Everyone walking faster --> whats the fuxking rush.

If someone is doing 45 in a 50 for no need, it's better to pass that person at 60mph than 50mph

Sorry, but that's bonkers. If someone's driving 5mph under the maximum speed limit for the road and you can't overtake them without exceeding the speed limit, surely the safe thing to do is to drive at the same speed? The idea that they're being somehow dangerous or unnecessary by not driving as fast as they legally can baffles me.

Colliding with an oncoming car is bad, so people want to minimise the amount of time they're in the wrong lane, hence they go faster than the speed limit during the overtake.

What is supposed to happen is the lorry driver doing 10 mph below the speed limit pulls over to allow the long queue of people behind him to pass. But unfortunately they are incentivised to never stop by their employers.

(On the very rare occasions that I drive these days, if I'm behind someone slow I sit and wait, like you suggest, after the speed camera incident I mentioned above.)

I can see why people think they need to speed to overtake a slower vehicle but If they're not going slow enough to be able to overtake easily, then where is the pressing need to get past them?

I'm not going to pretend that I've never done it myself however I don't think I'd ever have the cheek to try and justify it as somehow thinking of safety :-) As you say, these days I tend to just be patient and wait - I'll happily go slightly slower without working myself up in to a frothing Clarkson.

don't think I'd ever have the cheek to try and justify it as somehow thinking of safety :-)

I'm not trying to justify the overtake as being done for reasons of safety.

I'm saying, practically speaking, people are still going to overtake other people. Hitting a limiter when overtaking is dangerous because it elongates the length of time spent in oncoming traffic. Being able to apply more speed to reduce that time is safer than not being able to.

How does that work on Oz motorways?

In Belfast you can forget about overtaking a car in the slow lane doing 65 at 70mph. As everybody else is going to be doing 80, at least... but perhaps that attitude doesn't exist if the speeding laws are strictly enforced.

Aside from some speedtraps it's a bit of a free-for-all here.

I understand the reasoning, I just think it's flawed. It's not the limiter that's creating the danger, it's the driver who decided to execute a dangerous and pointless manoeuvre. But yes, practically speaking, people make stupid decisions when driving and you're kind of removing the ability to hastily correct for one of those decisions by limiting their speed. Depressing!

We have shitloads of speed cameras, marked and unmarked police cars with speed cameras fitted. None of this namby pamby pretend speed camera nonsense they do here. Undertaking is commonplace though: https://practicalmotoring.com.au/voices/the-australian-overtake/

At least when people make a stupid overtake with limiters they'll be doing 70mph when they plow into each other rather than 120mph, so you know, maybe the backseat passengers survive?

Then again, maybe they won't try the overtake in the first place because that 5 seconds they save doing 100mph instead of 70mph becomes less 'worth it'.

Then again, maybe they won't try the overtake in the first place because that 5 seconds they save doing 100mph instead of 70mph becomes less 'worth it'.

I mean, when you put it like that it somehow doesn't seem as utterly unthinkable and insane as many people seem to think it is.

Ah. human nature then: "You wont' let me overtake? I'll undertake.

THAT'LL TEACH YOU PHYSICS!!!

Reading that article it seems having such "one off" speed checks really isn't helping.

The Netherlands has many "average speed" lanes. So, if you overtake somebody at 130, and the average speed is 120, you have to drop back a little. But you won't get a fine. And yes, there are apps to track your average.

In town of course the speed cameras do work with a "one off" system, cos there's no reason to overtake at 40 in a 20 zone.

maybe everyone should be encouraged to set off on their journey ten minutes earlier, no need to speed then.

If someone is doing 45 in a 50 for no need, it's better to pass that person at 60mph than 50mph

it's a speed limit, not a speed target ;)

Average cameras might help but the signed speed cameras don't really work. Look at the UK - people jam on the anchors when there's a camera but are straight back on the go pedal when they've gone past the camera. In Oz it's not just one-off cameras, they're everywhere and you don't know where they are - result? Fewer people speed because there's far higher risk of fines, etc.

"Started with a small trial in 1985 using signed cameras with minimal effect. The major introduction was at the end of 1989 with hidden speed cameras starting at around 500 hours/month increasing to 4000 hours/month by 1992. During the testing of the cameras the percentage of drivers speeding (over the speed camera thresholds) was 24% and by the end of 1992 this had dropped to 4%. The revenue collected by each camera dropped from $2000/hour to $1000/hour over 18 months. The road toll dropped from 776 in 1989 (no cameras) to 396 in 1992 (49% drop)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_speed_limit_enforcement_in_Australia#Victoria

As has been drilled into me by the TAC... "speed kills".

First you're attacking drivers now you're having a go at Brits and their "lie ins"?! umadbro?! :P

hey man, i'm attacking nobody.
i'm all about peace and love etc. x x x