Speed Limit On Sheffield Parkway Set To Be Cut?

[PRESLEY 1,224]

42 minutes ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

Taking that attitude why not limit the speed to 15 mph. Low speed = no severe accidents.

 

Angel1.

Dont talk daft. 

[ANGELFIRE1 10]

1 minute ago, PRESLEY said:

Dont talk daft. 

" Taking that attitude why not limit the speed to 15 mph. Low speed = no severe accidents. "

 

The above MUST be factual.  Which bit of it is daft?. Just because it does not conform to your idea's does not make it wrong or indeed "daft".

 

Angel1.

 

[tinfoilhat 11]

1 hour ago, ANGELFIRE1 said:

I have not read all the posts, so apologies if this may be repeating something already posted. Re reducing speeds to reduce exhaust emissions, it comes down to this. Does slowing traffic to 40/50 thereby increasing the time taken between point a and point b reduce emissions more than letting traffic flow at 70 and reduce the time taken between a and b thus reducing time taken to emit emissions. My money is on free flowing 70mph.

 

Angel1.

 

It is literally impossible for traffic to flow at 70mph and you of all people know why. 

 

Thats why its is used to regulate traffic on busy motorways. Every vehicle on a motorway can do 50, so when an hgv moves into lane 3 nobody (should be) stamping on their breaks creating phantom jams so everything moves, albeit at 50 and not 70.  Mythbusters did an experiment on it and it was quite enlightening how the whole phantom jam thing works.

[Cyclone 10]

2 hours ago, makapaka said:

1. Isn’t in doubt.

 

2. 50mph is a sensible speed that isn’t going to significantly slow people down but is safer than 70mph.

 

Continually arguing that this means we should drive at 30mph / 10mph etc is a daft argument. 

 

you seem to be under the impression that a logical argument to justify greater speeds is that by applying reductions to make them safer must continue until you reach 0mph - nonsense.

 

3. It is relevant - because it means the same speed limit is applicable throughout the stretch which would be a sensible approach.

 

Just explain what your issue is with reduced environmental impact and slower speeds on the roads?

 

or just admit you don’t want it to happen because you like to drive fast and don’t really care about the above - that’s fine - your entitled to your view.

1. Is most definitely in doubt, unless you can prove that the balance of motor traffic is more efficient at 50 than any other speed.

2. So this is an entirely arbitrary number picked out of the air by you with no logical justification.  Being unable to understand that this is arbitrary is your problem, not mine.

3. No, still irrelevant.

 

The issues with slower speeds has been thoroughly explained to you.  It's slower, you get to your destination more slowly.  You've failed to provide a single reason to justify a reduction in speed, and even more so failed to justify why it should be 50 and not any other speed.

[willman 10]

2 hours ago, Padders said:

Seems to me that there are a lot of posters on this thread, whom seem to think they own the road.

I pay my road tax, insurance, clean and maintain my car to the highest standards.

I like to drive in a more sedate fashion than some on here.

I"m not an incompetent driver as some on here like to think.

I"m allowed on the road like anyone else, and always drive safely.

The problem is some on here have shown complete ignorance to the many thousands of drivers who drive in a sensible manner.

Learn some patience , and make allowances for people who don"t all drive cars with 8 gears.

Off topic slightly - but why should we have to make allowances?

I followed someone on the Parkway into Sheffield last night - 40 mph in the overtaking lane from Asda to Derek Dooley Way,obviously they were in the lane 'cos they wanted to go onto DD Way,as did i but i was trying to overtake.

But that is dangerous driving and completely against the rules of the Highway Code.

Why should i be patient for rule breakers.

Similarly I followed one of these "look at me" flat bed 4x4 things, third lane of m1 from Jn 28 to Jn 30 on Wednesday afternoon, i passed him on the inside at 70 mph,he didn't have a care in the world about anyone else.

 

(Like you i pay road tax,drive safely,i have to inspect my car monthly and submit a report, i have to undertake driving assessments for my job and insurance)

[Padders 2,850]

49 minutes ago, willman said:

Off topic slightly - but why should we have to make allowances?

I followed someone on the Parkway into Sheffield last night - 40 mph in the overtaking lane from Asda to Derek Dooley Way,obviously they were in the lane 'cos they wanted to go onto DD Way,as did i but i was trying to overtake.

But that is dangerous driving and completely against the rules of the Highway Code.

Why should i be patient for rule breakers.

Similarly I followed one of these "look at me" flat bed 4x4 things, third lane of m1 from Jn 28 to Jn 30 on Wednesday afternoon, i passed him on the inside at 70 mph,he didn't have a care in the world about anyone else.

 

(Like you i pay road tax,drive safely,i have to inspect my car monthly and submit a report, i have to undertake driving assessments for my job and insurance)

Bite the bullet and keep calm, impatience can be deadly as can tiredness.. lots of drivers out there that have"nt got a clue, maybe someone who has just passed their test.. nobody is perfect including you and me, sorry but when your driving (sometimes at 70mph.) a ton and half of metal around you simply have to take the good with the bad.

[Cyclone 10]

4 hours ago, Crissie said:

The fact that I'm not burning any fossil fuel at that speed and over that part of the journey is a reasonable measure of efficiency - I  don't really know any other metric that could easily be applied.  My car doesn't suddenly become a gas-guzzling monster when the petrol generator kicks in, so even over longer journeys I'll consume less petrol at 65 than at 70, and costs me around 4 seconds for every mile.  Your posh 8-speed car (is it a Diesel engine?) might well give different results, I don't mind.  Whether you believe me or not, I'm happy with my assessment.

 

It's really not.  The fact is that the energy you are using came from either a power station or from you earlier burning some petrol.  There's no free lunch here.

 

Over a longer journey would be the way to measure it, 200 miles at 65mph compared to 200 miles at 70mph.  I expect the difference would be negligible.

 

No, my car is most definitely not a diesel.  I suspect that the difference for me between 65 and 70 would be measured in the fractions of a mile to the gallon at best.

4 hours ago, makapaka said:

Yes because banning the people using their cars countrywide will be much more straightforward than changing the 4mile stretch of the parkway speed limit by 20mph.

 

Very sensible.

It's something that might actually have a measurable impact on pollution, whereas a change to a 4 mile stretch of road will achieve basically nothing.  (Older 4 speed cars though are most likely all in the scrap yard, I can't imagine that there are many still running, and so it wouldn't be a very effective measure in itself).

4 hours ago, Padders said:

Seems to me that there are a lot of posters on this thread, whom seem to think they own the road.

I pay my road tax, insurance, clean and maintain my car to the highest standards.

I like to drive in a more sedate fashion than some on here.

I"m not an incompetent driver as some on here like to think.

I"m allowed on the road like anyone else, and always drive safely.

The problem is some on here have shown complete ignorance to the many thousands of drivers who drive in a sensible manner.

Learn some patience , and make allowances for people who don"t all drive cars with 8 gears.

You would fail your test for the way you drive.  If that's not a measure of lack of driving ability then I don't know what is.  It isn't sensible to drive in a way which would cause you to fail the most basic of driving ability tests.

3 hours ago, redbig said:

70mph is too fast on the parkway, 50-60 is about right. 

According to what measure?

[Cyclone 10]

4 hours ago, makapaka said:

Another sensible response.........

 

I have to drive on 30mph roads because you don't agree that the parkway should be all 50mph.

 

That doesn't make sense.

No, you should stay off the parkway because you find that 70 mph is too fast for comfort (if that is the case).  If you aren't comfortable at NSL, then stay off NSL roads, don't advocate the limit be lowered to your competence level.

3 hours ago, PRESLEY said:

Free flow at 70 then more severe accdents. 

Demonstrate that the parkway has a safety issue or can it.

3 hours ago, francypants said:

Seems to me that men who think they have to drive at the speed limit all the time in big cars have something to prove.   Small appendages come to mind.................

Nobody is trying to prove anything by driving at 70mph, they simply want to get to where they're going in a reasonable time.

It seems to me that those who are advocating a lowered limit are not very good drivers and want to reduce everyone's speed to the best they are capable of.

2 hours ago, PRESLEY said:

Dont talk daft. 

What makes 15 daft but 50 sensible, explain.

[Cyclone 10]

2 hours ago, tinfoilhat said:

It is literally impossible for traffic to flow at 70mph and you of all people know why. 

 

Thats why its is used to regulate traffic on busy motorways. Every vehicle on a motorway can do 50, so when an hgv moves into lane 3 nobody (should be) stamping on their breaks creating phantom jams so everything moves, albeit at 50 and not 70.  Mythbusters did an experiment on it and it was quite enlightening how the whole phantom jam thing works.

Not true at all when the traffic is light.  Perfectly possible for all the traffic to be doing 70.

[PRESLEY 1,224]

27 minutes ago, Cyclone said:

Not true at all when the traffic is light.  Perfectly possible for all the traffic to be doing 70.

All traffic ?   What about HGV's.  I tink youve been playing with your Scalextric too long Sonny Jim. 

Edited July 19, 2019 by PRESLEY

[rudds1 102]

3 minutes ago, PRESLEY said:

All traffic ?   What about HGV's.  I tink youve been playing with your Scalextric too long Sonny Jim. 

One driver recently got his rig up to 89 mph on the a66 and was overtaking cars on there. 

[PRESLEY 1,224]

13 minutes ago, rudds1 said:

One driver recently got his rig up to 89 mph on the a66 and was overtaking cars on there. 

Thats not big and not Clever.   Infact Stupid and deserves to be banned from driving for life. Anyhow how do you know  what speed he was doing have you got a speed gun or summat.