20mph is just the start.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by jfman

You do understand the concept of stopping distances don’t you?

In modern cars at 20mph the stopping distance is about 10cm, ( joking, but it’s very small) my vehicle even stops for me, taking out the feeble human reaction time.


20mph zones are bollocks, any one that supports them are sub-normal on all levels.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by spiderplant

It's true. Let's do some sums...

I'll use metric to keep it simple, but feel free to convert to whatever units you prefer.

Firstly, 30mph (48km/h). Now I'm sure you're a sensible driver, and always leave a safe gap from the car in front so you can stop if necessary. The Highway Code tells me the typical stopping distance at that speed is 23m. And let's say a typical car is 4m long. So each car at 30mph occupies 27m of road. So each hour, 48000/27 cars can travel along the road. That's 1778 cars per hour.

Now 20mph (32km/h). The stopping distance is 12m, and cars are still 4m long, so each car occupies 16m of road. Each hour, 32000/16 cars pass. That's 2000 cars per hour.

So by reducing speed from 30 to 20mph, you've managed to get 12% more traffic down the same road.

..... Until they reach a junction or roundabout. You'll only get the increase in throughput on an open road with right of way priority.

Originally Posted by Pierre

In modern cars at 20mph the stopping distance is about 10cm, ( joking, but it’s very small) my vehicle even stops for me, taking out the feeble human reaction time.


20mph zones are bollocks, any one that supports them are sub-normal on all levels.

The RAC disagree with you

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/l...ing-distances/

20MPH 12 metres (3 car lengths)
30MPH 23 metres (6 car lengths)

Nearly twice the distance

So you think anyone who supports a 20MPH zone outside a school is sub-normal?

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by spiderplant

It's true. Let's do some sums...

I'll use metric to keep it simple, but feel free to convert to whatever units you prefer.

Firstly, 30mph (48km/h). Now I'm sure you're a sensible driver, and always leave a safe gap from the car in front so you can stop if necessary. The Highway Code tells me the typical stopping distance at that speed is 23m. And let's say a typical car is 4m long. So each car at 30mph occupies 27m of road. So each hour, 48000/27 cars can travel along the road. That's 1778 cars per hour.

Now 20mph (32km/h). The stopping distance is 12m, and cars are still 4m long, so each car occupies 16m of road. Each hour, 32000/16 cars pass. That's 2000 cars per hour.

So by reducing speed from 30 to 20mph, you've managed to get 12% more traffic down the same road.

How do you make out that relieves congestion? Cars spaced out become cars closer together. Have you thought about how much more difficult that is to cross the road?

---------- Post added at 00:29 ---------- Previous post was at 00:28 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

er, I'm the Waitrose shopper. OB shops at ASDA.

No way!!! My shopping is online and Asda is far too unreliable!

---------- Post added at 00:32 ---------- Previous post was at 00:29 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

The RAC disagree with you

https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/l...ing-distances/

20MPH 12 metres (3 car lengths)
30MPH 23 metres (6 car lengths)

Nearly twice the distance

So you think anyone who supports a 20MPH zone outside a school is sub-normal?

It depends what you are trying to achieve. It’s altogether a bad idea and if you want to reduce accidents, why not just ban cars? Ridiculous!

Originally Posted by spiderplant

Now 20mph (32km/h). The stopping distance is 12m, and cars are still 4m long, so each car occupies 16m of road. Each hour, 32000/16 cars pass. That's 2000 cars per hour.

So by reducing speed from 30 to 20mph, you've managed to get 12% more traffic down the same road.

Maybe you drive differently where you live, but around here drivers dont get tape measures out and measure how far they are from the car in front.

---------- Post added at 02:05 ---------- Previous post was at 02:02 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

So you think anyone who supports a 20MPH zone outside a school is sub-normal?

I presume you mean for the hour or so when schools start, and finish (weekdays only). At those times its so busy & "congested", you'd be lucky to do 10 mph past the school.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

How do you make out that relieves congestion? Cars spaced out become cars closer together. Have you thought about how much more difficult that is to cross the road?

Scraping the barrel here now, OB. Much like your favoured political party.

I’m not sure running across roads between cars going 40 is better than cars doing 20.

It depends what you are trying to achieve. It’s altogether a bad idea and if you want to reduce accidents, why not just ban cars? Ridiculous!

Straw man alert.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Scraping the barrel here now, OB. Much like your favoured political party.

I’m not sure running across roads between cars going 40 is better than cars doing 20.




Straw man alert.

The comparison is between 30 and 20mph. And yes, it is more difficult to cross a road even when cars are travelling slowly where they are bunched up.

As for your last 'point', I don't know how you make out it's a straw man argument. It's a balance of risk.My argument is that it's obvious that the more you reduce speed, the more accidents are prevented and lives saved, but everything we do has a measure of risk. You cannot eliminate it. 20mph on all residential roads is potty, and I think most people know that.

This issue will be Labour's Archilles heal at the next election. And they were doing so well...

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The co parison is between 30 and 20mph. And yes, it is more difficult to cross a road even when cars are travelling slowly where they are bunched up.

As for your last 'point', I don't know how you make out it's a straw man argument. It's a balance of risk.My argument is that it's obvious that the more you reduce speed, the more accidents are prevented and lives saved, but everything we do has a measure of risk. You cannot eliminate it. 20mph on all residential roads is potty, and I think most people know that.

This issue will be Labour's Archilles heal at the next election. And they were doing so well...

the word you are looking for is hope.

We will see. It's a last roll of the dice for a Government devoid of ideas.

Thus far all I can see is that the Venn diagram of GB News viewers and people "genuinely interested in the subject" that funnily enough they never raised before 2023 is broadly a circle. That's maybe a fraction of one per cent of the electorate.

A genuinely 'pro-driver' Government would reduce fuel duties and stop using drivers as a cash cow. 30mph vs 20mph in built up areas is neither here nor there. Even the Tories don't think it's a good idea, but like the Liberal Democrats they can say anything now knowing they'll never have to actually do it.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Scraping the barrel here now, OB. Much like your favoured political party.

I’m not sure running across roads between cars going 40 is better than cars doing 20.




Straw man alert.

There are moving parts here. How much time do you need "to run across roads between cars going 40 ..."? The cars are more separated than at 20 MPH; how wide is the carriageway? How fast do you run?

Having a pop at OB deserves better thought than you applied in this case.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

the word you are looking for is hope.

We will see. It's a last roll of the dice for a Government devoid of ideas.

Thus far all I can see is that the Venn diagram of GB News viewers and people "genuinely interested in the subject" that funnily enough they never raised before 2023 is broadly a circle. That's maybe a fraction of one per cent of the electorate.

A genuinely 'pro-driver' Government would reduce fuel duties and stop using drivers as a cash cow. 30mph vs 20mph in built up areas is neither here nor there. Even the Tories don't think it's a good idea, but like the Liberal Democrats they can say anything now knowing they'll never have to actually do it.

Have you taken note of the public reaction in Wales? If you think blanket 20mph limits are a good idea, I don’t know what is motivating you. Are you even a motorist?

I thought we were trying to clean up the atmosphere. This does the opposite. This blanket limit is causing havoc in Wales. Journeys taking longer, congestion increasing, buses having to rework their timetables and cut services….

Yes, jfman, brilliant idea. You should stand for election one day - you have the ability to argue absolutely anything.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

There are moving parts here. How much time do you need "to run across roads between cars going 40 ..."? The cars are more separated than at 20 MPH; how wide is the carriageway? How fast do you run?

Having a pop at OB deserves better thought than you applied in this case.

Quite.

However the idea that no-one can cross roads in 20mph zones (but can at 30 or 40) is preposterous. OB knows that, and if the Conservative Party weren't peddling this rubbish he'd be nowhere near the thread.

It also ignores the potential for local authorities to intervene by introducing crossings, or what existing crossings may exist on many roads.

---------- Post added at 09:37 ---------- Previous post was at 09:35 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Have you taken note of the public reaction in Wales? If you think blanket 20mph limits are a good idea, I don’t know what is motivating you. Are you even a motorist?

I thought we were trying to clean up the atmosphere. This does the opposite. This blanket limit is causing havoc in Wales. Journeys taking longer, congestion increasing, buses having to rework their timetables and cut services….

Yes, jfman, brilliant idea. You should stand for election one day - you have the ability to argue absolutely anything.

Interestingly, someone did stand for election with this very policy in their manifesto. The Welsh Labour Party!

[denphone]

Originally Posted by jfman

Scraping the barrel here now, OB. Much like your favoured political party.

I’m not sure running across roads between cars going 40 is better than cars doing 20.




Straw man alert.

He takes his cues from CCHQ.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Quite.

However the idea that no-one can cross roads in 20mph zones (but can at 30 or 40) is preposterous. OB knows that, and if the Conservative Party weren't peddling this rubbish he'd be nowhere near the thread.

It also ignores the potential for local authorities to intervene by introducing crossings, or what existing crossings may exist on many roads.[COLOR="Silver"]

I didn’t say it was impossible, and it depends on how much traffic there is on the road. But it’s certainly more difficult to cross with so much traffic bunched up and moving. I have seen this many times near our local schools.

The increased pollution from slow moving cars should also be taken into account.

---------- Post added at 11:54 ---------- Previous post was at 11:52 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

Interestingly, someone did stand for election with this very policy in their manifesto. The Welsh Labour Party!

Yes, and if you read the newspapers, you will soon see how that’s going down in Wales.

Now the reality of blanket 20mph limit is hitting home, the lesson is to be careful what you vote for.

Boris was a big fan of 20MPH zones - he introduced them as London Mayor.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Boris was a big fan of 20MPH zones - he introduced them as London Mayor.

ULEZ was his idea too. Tbf he to be fair he thought all these things would be popular which is the only reason he did anything.