Forum Message

Topic: Re:West Putney Speed Cushions
Posted by: Richard Hodges
Date/Time: 11/09/10 16:17:00

There's no practical problem with display limits. Despite some detractors, they have been shown repeatedly to bring speeds down, and do so over an extended period (ie not just when they are new). In terms of cost-benefit (the latter being the nominal cost of a death, injury or damage), they are more cost-effective than cameras, better accepted by motorists, and they avoid the problems of the various speed bumps - damage liability, emergency service accessibility, etc.

A question (apparently unanswered) is how effective they are at different speeds. They certainly work at 30/40mph, but less so at higher speeds (e.g. motorway advisory speeds), and my suspicion would be that they become ineffective below 30.

The other problem is the speed distribution. Mean/mode/median speeds are reduced in line with the relevant limit, but they do nothing about the hooli who is flagrantly ignoring the limit anyway. One might wonder who is more likely to be involved in an incident, the occasional hooli doing 50mph+, or the many more doing 31mph. This is an utterly fundamental question - who's actually causing the danger - and worryingly you'll find it missing from pretty much every claim for or against 20mph zones and the various speed control methods.

Similar problems exist with all systems. Speed bumps are less effective with certain vehicles that can handle rougher surfaces, and create their own issues with those they do slow. Fixed cameras are expensive (when they are not allowed to be used as revenue raisers) and whilst they have their place, the evidence grows that overall they did a lot less for safety than was being claimed.


Entire Thread
TopicDate PostedPosted By
West Putney Speed Cushions06/09/10 17:39:00 Guy Sunda
   Re:West Putney Speed Cushions07/09/10 09:12:00 Leonard S. Gore
      Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions07/09/10 12:59:00 Richard Carter
         Agreed07/09/10 14:12:00 Dan Bratton
            Re:Agreed07/09/10 15:17:00 Alan Sherman
               Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 16:37:00 Jonathan Callaway
                  Re:Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 16:59:00 Jean Gilmore
                     Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 18:48:00 Jonathan Callaway
                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed08/09/10 13:05:00 Mark Smith
                     Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 19:11:00 Dan Bratton
                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 19:17:00 Jonathan Callaway
                           Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 19:28:00 Richard Carter
                           Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 19:31:00 Dan Bratton
                  Re:Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 17:21:00 Leonard S. Gore
                     Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed07/09/10 18:40:00 Jonathan Callaway
                        Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed08/09/10 11:21:00 Leonard S. Gore
                           Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed08/09/10 12:22:00 Richard Carter
                              Stop Start B Smart08/09/10 13:52:00 Guy Sunda
                                 Re:Stop Start B Smart08/09/10 15:25:00 Peter Savage
                                    Re:Re:Stop Start B Smart08/09/10 16:21:00 Suzanne Taylor
                                       Re:Re:Re:Stop Start B Smart08/09/10 17:53:00 Jonathan Callaway
                                       Re:Re:Re:Stop Start B Smart08/09/10 18:15:00 Mark Smith
                                          Re:Re:Re:Re:Stop Start B Smart08/09/10 18:29:00 Suzanne Taylor
                           Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Agreed08/09/10 17:38:00 Jonathan Callaway
                              Damage caused by speed humps08/09/10 22:35:00 Ian Scott
                                 Re:Damage caused by speed humps09/09/10 09:50:00 Jonathan Callaway
                                    Re:Re:Damage caused by speed humps09/09/10 10:01:00 Mark Smith
                                       Re:Re:Re:Damage caused by speed humps09/09/10 17:53:00 Jonathan Callaway
                                 Speed humps - cause more harm than good10/09/10 11:31:00 Adam Bailey
                                    Re:Speed humps - cause more harm than good10/09/10 13:10:00 Jonathan Callaway
                                       Re:Re:Speed humps - cause more harm than good21/09/10 13:53:00 Adam Bailey
                              Fuel Efficiency10/09/10 12:21:00 Richard Hodges
   Re:West Putney Speed Cushions10/09/10 12:44:00 Nicki King
      Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 12:27:00 Jonathan Callaway
         Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 14:52:00 Caroline Whitehead
            Re:Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 15:46:00 Jonathan Callaway
               Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 16:12:00 Simon Knight
            Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 16:17:00 Richard Hodges
               Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 16:29:00 Martine Guy
                  Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 16:45:00 Simon Knight
                     Re:Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 20:18:00 Suzanne Taylor
         Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions11/09/10 21:17:00 Nicki King
            Re:Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions12/09/10 21:28:00 Jonathan Callaway
               Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions12/09/10 23:15:00 Alan Thomson
                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions13/09/10 10:05:00 Richard Carter
                  Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions13/09/10 18:40:00 Jonathan Callaway
                     Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:West Putney Speed Cushions14/09/10 13:18:00 Bryony Evens
   Re:West Putney Speed Cushions14/09/10 14:26:00 Nicki King

Forum Home