Raising speed limit on A roads for PCVs.

[notadriver]

Certain sections of the A1 are single carriageway and therefore a 50 mph limit applies to PCVs. But these are often quite wide and straight - surely there is scope for increasing speed on these to roads to 60 mph?

I ran alongside a scheduled National Express service happily doing this speed at Grantshouse last night. It still took me a further 27 mins to reach Edinburgh. Is the route the road takes quicker?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would rather see the limit for all vehicles becoming 50 on singles (60 on duals, 70 on motorways).

 

[AndrewE]

I would rather see the limit for all vehicles becoming 50 on singles (60 on duals, 70 on motorways).

The Women's Inststute (at about the time they slow-handclapped Blair) did a lot of research and consultation and had a proposal for the default on all rural roads to be 40 mph, unless they had been partially derestricted to 50 (or I guess 60 on dual carriageways.)
(As a cyclist and walker who used to like rural roads) I though it was a very good idea...

 

[philosopher]

I would rather see the limit for all vehicles becoming 50 on singles (60 on duals, 70 on motorways).

The issue with single carriage rural roads is that they vary from National Highways truck A roads which are largely straight with 3.5 metre lanes to winding country lanes with hedgerows on both sides that are too narrow for two cars to pass. It has always amazed the latter typically has a 60 mph speed limit.

The latter would in general would not be appropriate for buses in any case.

 

[AndrewE]

The issue with single carriage rural roads is that they vary from National Highways truck A roads which are largely straight with 3.5 metre lanes to winding country lanes with hedgerows on both sides that are too narrow for two cars to pass. It has always amazed the latter typically has a 60 mph speed limit.

exactly, which is why the 40 mph default is there, but with derogations to be considered and (possibly quite widely) applied by local authorities.

 

[Meerkat]

The Women's Inststute (at about the time they slow-handclapped Blair) did a lot of research and consultation and had a proposal for the default on all rural roads to be 40 mph, unless they had been partially derestricted to 50 (or I guess 60 on dual carriageways.)
(As a cyclist and walker who used to like rural roads) I though it was a very good idea...

That’s extreme! The rural roads are how residents and businesses get around. Time is money……

 

[Bletchleyite]

That’s extreme! The rural roads are how residents and businesses get around. Time is money……

I could definitely see a strong case for rural roads with no marked centreline to be 40. But in the end it's a limit, not a target. Most non A/B rural roads aren't safe at 60.

To be fair you can shoot along the middle bit of the Hardknott/Wrynose at 60 quite happily despite it being single track as you can see for miles, but this is a very rare case.

 

[AndrewE]

That’s lunacy! The rural roads are how residents and businesses get around. Time is money……

Tony Blair didn't like it when he was on the receiving end of the WI's contempt. Time might be money to you, but too many walkers, cyclists and horse-riders get hit (and killed) on rural roads every year. That argument is usually the AA, the RAC or the British Road Federation's line and I don't buy it. What is the cost of ambulance attendance, hospital treatment, maybe a funeral and an inquest? I have a friend currently in intensive care who might not survive after being "knocked off his bike by a car."

I could definitely see a strong case for rural roads with no marked centreline to be 40. But in the end it's a limit, not a target. Most non A/B rural roads aren't safe at 60.

So why just accept people treating them as race tracks?

To be fair you can shoot along the middle bit of the Hardknott/Wrynose at 60 quite happily despite it being single track as you can see for miles, but this is a very rare case.

In which case I'm sure that you would be able to put a convincing case to whichever authority was involved for a derogation back up to the National Speed Limit.

 

[Meerkat]

Tony Blair didn't like it when he was on the receiving end of the WI's contempt. Time might be money to you, but too many walkers, cyclists and horse-riders get hit (and killed) on rural roads every year. That argument is usually the AA, the RAC or the British Road Federation's line and I don't buy it. What is the cost of ambulance attendance, hospital treatment, maybe a funeral and an inquest? I have a friend currently in intensive care who might not survive after being "knocked off his bike by a car."

Sorry to hear about your friend.
You basically just described a benefit v cost analysis. AIUI these aren’t done for speed limit reductions - some campaigners just decide slower is safer and insist on an arbitrary blanket speed reduction.

My commute became more and more miserable as the county threw in ever more ridiculous speed restrictions. Even more annoying as they slowed down residents and workers for the benefit of MAMILs who drove in from elsewhere and spent next to nothing in the area. Said MAMILs had a tendency to go inappropriately fast, tailgate each other, and wear all black outfits.

 

[GusB]

I could definitely see a strong case for rural roads with no marked centreline to be 40. But in the end it's a limit, not a target. Most non A/B rural roads aren't safe at 60.

No, thank you.

Many rural non A/B roads are perfectly fine to be driven at 60, with or without a centre line. There are also some where it's not safe to do so. I, as a driver, would like to be left alone to make that decision and I'm more likely to err on the side of caution. If somebody is going to drive like a maniac it's unlikely that they'll be adhering to the existing limit anyway. What you propose will increase journey times for many people who live in rural areas. How will it be enforced anyway? Police are stretched enough as it is and the traffic bods will be keeping an eye on the trunk routes more often than not.

The powers that be can already impose lower limits on roads where it is felt that the national speed limit is too much, whether the road is single track, two-way, dual carriageway or even motorways. When I was on holiday last year I encountered an A road which had 50mph limits along much of its length. I'd rather see stretches of road assessed individually than have a blanket 40/50mph restriction imposed. If needs be, speed cameras can be placed at those locations considered to be black spots.

To answer the original question posed in the thread, I think that coaches should be permitted to travel at 60mph on single carriageway roads, at least on stretches where there has been been work to upgrade to the latest standards. To be honest, if a coach can't safely negotiate a stretch of road at 60, I'd suggest that cars shouldn't be permitted to go at that speed either. Similarly, I'd permit HGVs to go up to 50mph on single carriageway roads, as is the case on the A9.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

100% agree on roads without a centreline being 40mph, in some areas at least. Around here (rural Oxfordshire) it would make a measurable difference to pedestrian and cyclist safety while not increasing motor vehicle times significantly: the road network follows a fairly predictable mesh with the centreline-equipped roads being the principal routes between villages.

There is actually DfT speed limit guidance that says they would welcome applications from local authorities for rural 40 mph zones, particularly in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. To the best of my knowledge it hasn’t been taken up anywhere. (There have been some interesting projects in Scotland, though, where a few authorities have floated Quiet Lanes with reduced limits.)

 

[Snow1964]

There is actually DfT speed limit guidance that says they would welcome applications from local authorities for rural 40 mph zones, particularly in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. To the best of my knowledge it hasn’t been taken up anywhere. (There have been some interesting projects in Scotland, though, where a few authorities have floated Quiet Lanes with reduced limits.)

I remember when they introduced the 40mph in New Forest National Park (mid 1980s from memory, as I moved away from area not long after), aim was to cut deaths of wild animals. Apart from some villages with 30mph, had previously been national limits.

It took about year to put and signs and paint the oval speed limit road markings. About 18 months later annual statistics for animal deaths and serious accidents were released for year and they had gone up compared to year before started introducing the 40mph

What seemed to happen is previously people had driven appropriate to road conditions, perhaps 60mph on open straight heathland sections, but just 25mph on narrow difficult to see bends. Basically old fashioned driving to road condition. But the new limits caused some to potter along at constant 30- 35mph, and lots more dangerous overtaking on the previously faster bits became common.

Ever since I have been against blanket speed limits where same limit is applied for simplicity rather than limits being set by road standards / Conditions.

Luckily where I now live in West Wiltshire, they set by conditions, many B and rural roads have mix of 30, 40, 50, national (60), and plenty of places where you can see all 4 within a mile as road transitions from town, to few houses, to rural road, to improved open section.

 

[Man of Kent]

To answer the original question posed in the thread, I think that coaches should be permitted to travel at 60mph on single carriageway roads, at least on stretches where there has been been work to upgrade to the latest standards. To be honest, if a coach can't safely negotiate a stretch of road at 60, I'd suggest that cars shouldn't be permitted to go at that speed either. Similarly, I'd permit HGVs to go up to 50mph on single carriageway roads, as is the case on the A9.

The important consideration is how long does it take you to stop? The distance needed by a psv or an hgv is very much more than for a car - some sources say two-thirds as much again. This is particularly crucial for signting distances at junctions and other hazards, and sometimes accounts for why roads have a lower speed limit than drivers think that it should.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd permit HGVs to go up to 50mph on single carriageway roads, as is the case on the A9.

I do agree with that (and it's already so in England).

The reason for the view overall is that limits at (40-)50-60-70 for all vehicles* would significantly reduce overtaking, and it's overtaking that is the most dangerous thing anyone routinely does on the road.

* Subject to mandatory limiters in place of course.

 

[Meerkat]

But the new limits caused some to potter along at constant 30- 35mph,

It amazes me how some (normally older) drivers do a constant 40mph, wherever. Though it entertained me greatly when such a driver who had held me up for the last few miles of 60 limit carried on into the 30 limit and was so dozy they didn't notice the copper in high viz pointing a speed gun and didn't even slow down until he frantically waved her over.

The reason for the view overall is that limits at (40-)50-60-70 for all vehicles* would significantly reduce overtaking

Is that proven? I would have a concern that overall overtaking might be down but the aggressive types who did the dangerous overtaking would be doing it more.

I buy into the theory that 85% (think its that) of drivers drive at or below a safe speed (we don't want to crash and most people are local) so that should be the limit outside of specific circumstances (unseen hazards, schools etc)

Its outrageous that speed limits are only consulted with residents, not the users of the road who also pay for them and usually don't even know of the plans until they are enacted. Its a clear ploy by campaigners that know the majority want a speed limit outside their own house but not to be held up by those outside other people's.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is that proven? I would have a concern that overall overtaking might be down but the aggressive types who did the dangerous overtaking would be doing it more.

I don't have a reference but it was part of the reason given for increasing the HGV speed limit to 50mph on English single carriageways. Previously it was normal for them just to speed (very rarely did an HGV actually do 40 as per the limit, and the original GATSO type cameras couldn't differentiate) but now enforcement is much stricter they had started sticking to 40 and this was causing far more overtaking to take place, particularly by people who aren't really very good at it and wouldn't have bothered if it had been doing 50.

There is of course still a differential from 50 to 60, but it's smaller, many singles are only suitable for 50 anyway and many are being signed down to that.

There's also that, for right or wrong, driver frustration results in drivers making bad decisions.

England went straight for it nationally, Scotland elected just to trial it on the A9, but nothing more seems to have happened of it in Scotland.

 

[cactustwirly]

I could definitely see a strong case for rural roads with no marked centreline to be 40. But in the end it's a limit, not a target. Most non A/B rural roads aren't safe at 60.

What's your justification for this statement? Why are they not safe?

 

[AlterEgo]

I wouldn't mind unmarked centreline roads to be 40mph, but a great many centrelined rural roads are able to be driven safely and comfortably at 60mph, especially if you have a capable car. Last year I significantly upgraded my car from a 1100cc VW Polo to a 3 litre Range Rover Velar, which can practically drive itself. What I have found from having this type of car is that because I can overtake, I am often tempted to, a temptation which was not present when driving the much smaller car. I rarely overtake on single carriageway roads, but I do share the concern about driver frustration - I can keep a lid on it, but not everyone can.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What's your justification for this statement? Why are they not safe?

If you seriously think most non-centrelined rural roads (=roads that are not wide enough for two cars to comfortably pass at speed) are safe at 60mph, please seriously think again. I find 40 a safe speed on the vast majority of these, and it's not unusual for it to be sensible to go a fair bit slower*. 60, almost never, as such roads typically have high hedges and winding routes that make visibility very poor.

A few are, but in my experience (there are plenty around here!) it's rare. Those of course could be signed up to a higher limit, or are roads (like the valley bottom section of the Hardknott/Wrynose where you've got a good few miles of clear visibility) where you'd never have enforcement anyway. That's why I find the Hardknott/Wrynose so remarkable - it's very unusual for such roads to have enough visibility that you'd guarantee to see an opposing vehicle at 60 in time.

* e.g. through small villages on these roads 20-30 max - you may not legally have to but only downright inconsiderate drivers shoot through these at 60.

I wouldn't mind unmarked centreline roads to be 40mph, but a great many centrelined rural roads are able to be driven safely and comfortably at 60mph, especially if you have a capable car.

This is true, but then there are also cars that feel slow at 80 on the motorway and cars that are terrifying at that speed (try a Citroen Berlingo) - the limit does tend to need to be set for the majority of drivers/cars as a bit of a "lowest common denominator".

 

[cactustwirly]

If you seriously think most non-centrelined rural roads (=roads that are not wide enough for two cars to comfortably pass at speed) are safe at 60mph, please seriously think again. I find 40 a safe speed on the vast majority of these, and it's not unusual for it to be sensible to go a fair bit slower*. 60, almost never, as such roads typically have high hedges and winding routes that make visibility very poor.

A few are, but in my experience (there are plenty around here!) it's rare. Those of course could be signed up to a higher limit, or are roads (like the valley bottom section of the Hardknott/Wrynose where you've got a good few miles of clear visibility) where you'd never have enforcement anyway. That's why I find the Hardknott/Wrynose so remarkable - it's very unusual for such roads to have enough visibility that you'd guarantee to see an opposing vehicle at 60 in time.

* e.g. through small villages on these roads 20-30 max - you may not legally have to but only downright inconsiderate drivers shoot through these at 60.



This is true, but then there are also cars that feel slow at 80 on the motorway and cars that are terrifying at that speed (try a Citroen Berlingo) - the limit does tend to need to be set for the majority of drivers/cars as a bit of a "lowest common denominator".

That's not what you said! You talked about every non A or B road is unsafe which is a completely different point!

There are many roads which don't have an official B number that are NSL and are centre lined, are these unsafe?

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's not what you said! You talked about every non A or B road is unsafe which is a completely different point!

I said most, and stand by that. Most rural non A/B roads are not centrelined and/or are twisty with other hazards like farms and houses.

There are many roads which don't have an official B number that are NSL and are centre lined, are these unsafe?

In rural areas very few.

 

[cactustwirly]

I said most, and stand by that. Most rural non A/B roads are not centrelined and/or are twisty with other hazards like farms and houses.



In rural areas very few.

I can think of at least 10 in my local area

 

[typefish]

With regards to the topic in hand, a speed limit increase would be moot as most non-coach PCVs are limited to between 90 and 95kph, as opposed to 100 or 105kph. Unless it's something like London spec buses, then good luck.

I buy into the theory that 85% (think its that) of drivers drive at or below a safe speed (we don't want to crash and most people are local) so that should be the limit outside of specific circumstances (unseen hazards, schools etc)

I've been involved with semi-successful attempts at increasing speed limits in areas that I've lived and despite local authorities being somewhat a fan of the 85%ile speed theory, it's something that they'll happily ignore and continue to propose inappropriately low speed limits.