I expect the majority of people who own a performance car think they can drive better than noobs in regular models. Even the ones who end up in ditches and fields. Just because a trained driver who works for a car magazine makes drifting around corners and flying over humps look easy doesn't make it a safe thing for Joe blogs to be doing on the public highway. If people have died on that stretch of road then the cameras are justified surely?
I think a lot depends on the reason for the collision that caused the loss of life.
- Did they go flying off the edge of a sharp drop because the road markings and signs were missing or not clear enough?
- Was an adverse camber not indicated, leading to loss of grip mid-corner?
- Did they plough into the side of someone because the sightlines at a junction were poor and they couldn't see a car waiting to pull out / the car waiting to pull out couldn't see approaching traffic?
- Was there diesel spilled on the road from an over-full tank and a poorly-fitting fuel tank cap?
- Was the road surface poorly maintained in places, leading to spalling and crumbling that led to 'gravel' being present within a braking zone and grip levels therefore being greatly and unexpectedly reduced?
- Were there potholes present that could have jarred a vehicle's steering and caused an unexpected change of direction into the path of an oncoming vehicle?
- Were there metal drainage or services covers that were highly polished through years of wear, leading to loss of grip by a vehicle traversing them first thing in the morning, when they might be colder than the road surface and therefore holding dew longer than the now-dry road surface?
- Was the vehicle correctly maintained in terms of brakes, ABS, suspension, bushes, wiper blades, screenwash fluid, horn, tyre pressures, tyre tread depths, quality of tyres, lights, electronic driver aids, removal of clutter from the passenger cell that could have impeded or distracted the driver, etc.?
- Was the driver poorly trained, meaning they did not know about limit point analysis and only driving at a speed from which one can stop in the distance to be clear on one's side of the road (or half that distance on a single-track road)?
- Were they off their face on intoxicating substances?
- Was the radio so loud as to mask the sounds of the road surface, and therefore grip levels, changing?
- Was the driver's eyesight up to the minimum permitted driving test standard and corrected by clean, correct-prescription spectacles if necessary?
There are so many potential factors involved in traffic collisions (single or multiple vehicle) yet the apparent 'easy fix' for all problems everywhere on the network is "lower the limit! Wheel out the cameras! Get those b******s doing 70 in a clearly-sighted 60 at 7am on a dry Sunday morning in August!!!".
Speed limits are such a blunt tool. If people were trained properly in this country then there would be fewer accidents - by which I mean:
- lessons on correct use of the highway network, whether on foot, bicycle, motorbike, car, etc. from an early age;
- followed by practical experience learning to control a vehicle in a controlled, off-road environment in all situations, including higher speeds, skid avoidance and skid recovery;
- then attitudinal training to engender responsibility for one's actions, an understanding of how other drivers act and react, and how one's own actions determine the reactions of others;
- and, finally, on-road training to bring together all of the previous learning and learn how to drive appropriately on the public highway, including 'advanced' (but surely necessary) techniques such as the aforementioned limit point analysis and driving-to-be-able-to-stop-if-required;
Doing it this way would minimise the workload on a new driver on the public highway, because the driver would only be learning how to drive on-road, rather than learning how to operate the vehicle
and how to drive on-road
and how to understand and deal with other road users
and learning where both their vehicle's and their own performance limits lie.
As it stands, new drivers have to do all of the above at the same time, which makes it bloody hard work and it's no wonder driving standards are so poor. And rather than learning to avoid having an accident, most people seem to learn how their car operates at its limits by having near-misses or driving like bell-ends when young. (I include myself in that latter category.)
Instead... we won't bother training people properly, we'll make the test easier (removing manouevres like the three point turn and reversing into a space), and we'll just make people drive so mind-numbingly slowly everywhere that when they have an accident they didn't see coming because they were staring out the side window from boredom, they'll be travelling too slowly to do any real damage.
And, of course, come 2022, cars will be 'intelligent' (haha) and apply rigid speed limiters at all times and in all places, so people will have one less thing to think about and driving standards can continue their decline towards r****d level, to the point that the authorities will have no option but to rule to bring in automated driving only and ban actual driving because, you know, machines can save us from our own (self-created) ineptitude.
[/victor Meldrew]
