INSURANCE INSTITUTE FOCUSES ON SPEED, SPEED, SPEED
-> According to the cover story of the Insurance Institute for Highway
Safety's Nov. 22nd Status Report, "Speed limits are higher on many U.S.
roads than they used to be, and motorists are going faster -- in many
cases a lot faster than the newly posted limits. There's a notable
absence of public support for, or political will to, lower speed
limits, or even to enforce existing limits in the interest of public
safety.
"'The perception is that moderate speeding is a harmless infraction,
not a serious safety hazard,' Institute chief scientist Allan Williams
says. 'And for any individual motorist on any given trip, this
perception is probably accurate. Getting a ticket for speeding, let
alone getting into a crash or being injured, isn't likely to happen.
But this doesn't mean speeding is harmless. There's a significant
societal cost in the form of an increase in crash deaths and injuries.'
"For years, Institute and other research has quantified the price in
lives we pay to get from here to there a little bit faster. The most
recent estimate is that higher speed limits increase deaths on rural
interstates by about 35 percent. Yet motorists on both rural and urban
roads are going faster and faster, encouraged by automakers who build
ever more powerful cars and tout their speed capabilities in ad after
ad..." [There are several other articles on the topic in this issue.]
Source: http://www.hwysafety.org/srpdfs/sr3810.pdf (365k pdf)
Title: "Faster Travel - and the Price We Pay"
Speed may or may not be a significant safety problem on limited-access freeways, but speed definitely does kill on local roads with intersections, pedestrians, bicyclists, etc. I advocate traffic calming and aggressive enforcement on local roads, with the side benefit of encouraging motorists to choose the freeway, whenever practical.
BF members who drive have a special obligation to observe all traffic laws, including posted speed limits, when motoring.
LittleBigMan
Thank you, Randya, for this post.
Rather than speeding, people should try waking up 5 minutes earlier.
jdc2000
Bear in mind that the IIHS is not exactly an unbiased organization. Most of their 'studies' in the past have been designed to support their agenda. Without seeing any information on where and how they obtained their numbers, I'd have to remain a little skeptical of their conclusions.
For example, if an accident report lists "driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol" and "excessive speed", as causes for an accident, thats good enough for them to include it in their 'speed kills' study even though the driver would probably not have been driving too fast for conditions if he/she had not been impaired.
Chris L
Bear in mind that the IIHS is not exactly an unbiased organization. Most of their 'studies' in the past have been designed to support their agenda. Without seeing any information on where and how they obtained their numbers, I'd have to remain a little skeptical of their conclusions.
Fact is that very few, if any, studies released these days are unbiased. It's funny how the only studies claiming "speed makes no difference" are from car companies who rely on "speed" as a selling point in advertisements.
DnvrFox
BF members who drive have a special obligation to observe all traffic laws, including posted speed limits, when motoring.
Man, if I drove the posted speed limit on our local freeways, I would be clobbered from behind and would be much more likely to cause an accident than if I "go with the flow," which is what I do.
There is probably no more dangerous driver than soemone going the speed limit (i.e., 55 mph) when everyone else is going 65+.
I believe that highway engineers take this into consideration when setting speed limits, fully knowing (and, actually, counting on) cars going about 10+ mph faster than the posted limit. If the cars didn't, the freeways would be even more jammed with less volume of cars per hour.
Side streets are an entirely different issue, however.
Chris L
Side streets are an entirely different issue, however.
Unfortunately, the problem is that the vast majority of the human population lacks sufficient intelligence to actually know the difference. Of course, it's nothing that a bit of law-enforcement couldn't fix, but therein lie the problem. Governments depend on the occasional speeding fine as revenue in order to balance their budgets. If they started fining people $1,000 a go for speeding on side streets and removed serial speeders from the roads, it might actually make people stop doing it. In the long term, that would cause a decline in speeding fine revenue - hence it's unlikely to happen. :(
SamDaBikinMan
Speed is not as much of a problem as poor driver skills.
I drove ion Eurpoe when in the military and know first hand that if you can drive well then you can drive fast safely but unskilled motorists will always do something stupid to screw things up.
randya
Man, if I drove the posted speed limit on our local freeways, I would be clobbered from behind and would be much more likely to cause an accident than if I "go with the flow," which is what I do.
There is probably no more dangerous driver than soemone going the speed limit (i.e., 55 mph) when everyone else is going 65+.
I believe that highway engineers take this into consideration when setting speed limits, fully knowing (and, actually, counting on) cars going about 10+ mph faster than the posted limit. If the cars didn't, the freeways would be even more jammed with less volume of cars per hour.
Side streets are an entirely different issue, however.
This is nothing but a lame excuse for speeding. Talk to your local highway engineer -- The faster the speed the lower the actual road capacity.
DnvrFox
This is nothing but a lame excuse for speeding. Talk to your local highway engineer -- The faster the speed the lower the actual road capacity.
Using the above logic, and extending it to its logical conclusion, if everyone was stopped on the freeway and was not moving, the freeway would have unlimited capacity.
Just doesn't seem to work that way.
Your point is only valid if vehicles increase their following distance proportionally with their increase in speed. But, they don't do that. At least arounf here. They seem to maintian the same distance from the car in front, no matter what the speed they travel. It is called tailgaiting!
LittleBigMan
Man, if I drove the posted speed limit on our local freeways, I would be clobbered from behind and would be much more likely to cause an accident than if I "go with the flow," which is what I do.
There is probably no more dangerous driver than soemone going the speed limit (i.e., 55 mph) when everyone else is going 65+.
I respectfully disagree, Denver. I won't fault you for "going with the flow," but I find it far safer to drive 55 and let the speeders go on ahead, leaving me with the slower, safer drivers. When I barrel along with the faster drivers, I find myself stuck with them and their crazy, impulsive driving.
I've found there are actually groups of drivers who wind up travelling together according to their average speed. "Going with the flow" does not have to mean riding in the faster groups.
uciflylow
I think most people who drive do speed at some time or another! I also think that most drivers travel at a speed they are comfortable at. I have been a med tech for 21 years now and I can't remember a fatal crash on the limited access 4 lane highways around here. Most of the fatal crashes that happen here, happen on the smallish 2 lane roads (the ones I like to bike on)! Don't get me wrong! I don't think the speed laws should not be enforced, however I think they should be stricter on the smaller roads and in populated areas.
The speed limit on the 4 lane is 70mph. The traffic seems to travel at this speed give or take 5 mph. This is wether cops are present or not. I also ride a bike on the skirt of this same road and feel safe, I ride on the 2 lanes and feel safe also. The worst thing to look out fore on these roads when cycling is to watch out on on and off ramps. BTW the side of the 70mph+ roads is where you will see most of the bike riders around here, go figure! ;)
Study Shows That Motorists Drive at Reasonable Speeds
A study of speed limits on different freeway types in Michigan failed to show that speed was a substantial contributor to more frequent or more serious crashes. It showed that compliance with speed limits was not necessarily an accurate measure of safety. Although more crashes occur in urban areas, as can be expected from congestion and the need to react to other vehicles, drivers seem to choose speeds similar to the design speeds for different types of roads. The research suggests that lowering speed limits arbitrarily does not affect traffic safety. Speed limits and speed zones would be more effective if they were based on geometrics, traffic characteristics, and safety benefits rather than popular conceptions.
Matthew Thornton and Richard W. Lyles reported their research on this topic in "Freeway Speed Zones: Safety and Compliance Issues." The report appeared in the Transportation Research Board's Transportation Research Record No. 1560, Traffic and Highway Safety: Occupant Restraints, Safety Management, and Emergency and Commercial Vehicles, published in 1996.
BACKGROUND
In 1987 Congress allowed increased speed limits, from 55 to 65 miles per hour (mph), on rural Interstates and some U.S. routes. Population density was the criterion for speed zone boundaries. Since many urban freeways had rural elements such as wide medians and widely separated interchanges, transportation officials and engineers wanted more speed zone changes. In 1990 the U.S. Department of Transportation allowed the states to be more flexible in setting 65-mph limits.
LittleBigMan
From the same website, US Roads, comes the following data:
Speeding -- exceeding the posted speed limit or driving too fast for conditions -- is one of the most prevalent factors contributing to traffic crashes. The human and economic sacrifice is unacceptable. The economic cost to society of speeding-related crashes is estimated by NHTSA to be $28.8 billion per year. In 1996, speeding was a contributing factor in 30 percent of all fatal crashes, and 12,998 lives were lost in speeding-related crashes.
Motor vehicle crashes cost society an estimated $4,800 per second. The total economic cost of crashes was estimated at $150.5 billion in 1994. The 1996 costs of speeding-related crashes were estimated to be $28.8 billion -- $54,804 per minute or $913 per second.
LittleBigMan
Here's another interesting study presented in, US Roads:
Safety-improvement programs that only use motor-vehicle collision records to determine safety improvements are inherently biased against bicycles as a transportation mode. A change in the reporting requirements for bicycle collisions is necessary to allow problem areas to be better identified and safety improvements to be specifically targeted toward bicycles.
Avalanche325
I've found there are actually groups of drivers who wind up travelling together according to their average speed. "Going with the flow" does not have to mean riding in the faster groups.
Come on out here to LA and give it a try. Everybody does about 10MPH over the speed limit and it generally works well.
I lived in Miami before here. You have drivers doing 45MPH and dirvers doing 85MPH on the same freeway. It is an absolute mess.
It is not actually speed that is the major problem (within reason, of course). It is the speed differential that causes a problem.
Avalanche325
Speed is not as much of a problem as poor driver skills.
Man, this is one of my pet peeves! Here comes the rant: :D :D :D
What you have to do in this country (and most others) to get a drivers license is absolutely pathetic. Think about it. Here is your test. You get in the car and putt around a neighborhood at 30 - 32 MPH. Maybe, just maybe you have to merge onto a highway and hit 50 - 55 MPH. WoooHooo, you get a license!!!!
So on the way home you get on the freeway and traffic is doing 75MPH and you don't have a clue. You know nothing of how a car handles, driving physics, emergency manouvers, accident avoidence, or how to change a flat (God forbid you have a blowout at speed, because you don't know what to do).
We won't even talk about oversteer, understeer, threshold braking and the like. Heck, people don't even know the basic rules!!!
You should have to know all of these things before you are allowed to hurtle a 3000+ lbs piece of machenery down the road. THAT would solve the traffic problems right there. 75% of todays drivers would not get a license.
PS. Nothing erks me more than seeing a GROWN MAN with a simple flat tire on the side of the road on his stinkin' cell phone because he dosen't know how to change it.
Whew! I feel better now. :rolleyes:
LittleBigMan
I lived in Miami before here. You have drivers doing 45MPH and dirvers doing 85MPH on the same freeway. It is an absolute mess.
It is not actually speed that is the major problem (within reason, of course). It is the speed differential that causes a problem.
This is one reason we have speed limits.
LittleBigMan
From the...website, US Roads, comes the following data:
Speeding -- exceeding the posted speed limit or driving too fast for conditions -- is one of the most prevalent factors contributing to traffic crashes. The human and economic sacrifice is unacceptable. The economic cost to society of speeding-related crashes is estimated by NHTSA to be $28.8 billion per year. In 1996, speeding was a contributing factor in 30 percent of all fatal crashes, and 12,998 lives were lost in speeding-related crashes.
Motor vehicle crashes cost society an estimated $4,800 per second. The total economic cost of crashes was estimated at $150.5 billion in 1994. The 1996 costs of speeding-related crashes were estimated to be $28.8 billion -- $54,804 per minute or $913 per second.
I liked this so much, it deserved re-posting.
el Inglés
Speed is not as much of a problem as poor driver skills.
I drove ion Eurpoe when in the military and know first hand that if you can drive well then you can drive fast safely but unskilled motorists will always do something stupid to screw things up.
What ever the limits people will speed but it is not always a danger.
The problem is the wrong speed at the wrong time , the limit may be , for example 120 kph , on one morning at 4 am it may be safe to drive at 200 + kph but at another time 50 kph may be dangerous and a risk to other road users .
That said an accident at 50 will kill less people than an accident at 100 , so if in doubt slow down , and it´s usually the " skilled " drivers who forget the need to consider the abilities of other road users and cause the biggest pileups .
Hi from Europe , the home of the sports car .
:p
LittleBigMan
Cyclists and pedestrians are road users, too. Speed limits reflect the need for motorists to drive slowly because of their presence, but all too often, only motorist's desires are considered when the law is enforced (or not enforced.) To allow other road users (not just other motorists) to be endangered is unacceptable.
There have also been too many crashed police vehicles which were engaged in high-speed chases, some deadly. A nurse friend of mine recently arrived first on the scene of an officer who had crashed through a brick wall, which marked the entrance to her subdivision, only a short block from her front door. She couldn't help (aside from calling 911) because he was trapped in the car, and only paramedics could safely free him. Also, my wife saw a police car do exactly the same thing about a mile from our home, crashing through a stone wall entrance gate just off the road. This too was fairly recent.
John E
I believe that highway engineers take this into consideration when setting speed limits, fully knowing (and, actually, counting on) cars going about 10+ mph faster than the posted limit. If the cars didn't, the freeways would be even more jammed with less volume of cars per hour.
I presented a similar argument to Alan Hoffman, a well-respected authority on traffic and transit engineering. He quoted empirical studies which demonstrate that freeway capacity tends to peak at around 45mph and, because of motorist behavior, actually declines at higher (and, of course, lower) speeds. The physical analogy we finally agreed on was turbulent versus laminar flow of a liquid.
LittleBigMan
...Alan Hoffman, a well-respected authority on traffic and transit engineering...quoted empirical studies which demonstrate that freeway capacity tends to peak at around 45mph and, because of motorist behavior, actually declines at higher (and, of course, lower) speeds. The physical analogy we finally agreed on was turbulent versus laminar flow of a liquid.
I remember a film on the 1939 World's Fair. "Future Highways" were depicted, upon which motorists glided effortlessly in cars that steered automatically and speeds were controlled to maintain optimum traffic flow.
Veganese
Come on out here to LA and give it a try. Everybody does about 10MPH over the speed limit and it generally works well.
I lived in Miami before here. You have drivers doing 45MPH and dirvers doing 85MPH on the same freeway. It is an absolute mess.
It is not actually speed that is the major problem (within reason, of course). It is the speed differential that causes a problem.
Avalanche, I've got to disagree with you there. I have lived in CA my whole life. The reason our auto insurance rates are astronomical is because we have one of the highest accident rates in the nation. You'd be amazed at how cheap it is to get insured in rural, well-enforced areas. Southern CA as a whole, and LA in particular. Just because you haven't been hit yet doesn't mean its not a problem.