M1 Speed Limit In Sheffield

[alchresearch 214]

11 hours ago, Brooker11 said:

I suggest you take this up with the families who have lost loved ones who have merely needed refuge after breaking down on a section of road that was a ludicrous idea and even worse in execution, I'm sure they'll be interested in your theories, the government also suspended the construction of any more until design changes were made, you obviously missed that meeting.

I can't speak for all cases, but  two Sheffield area deaths happened because people were stood in the live lane or sat in the car, instead of going over the barrier to safety.

 

Nargis Bashir and her husband broke down. They stayed in their car for seventeen minutes before they were hit by another car.

 

Jason Mercer was stood in the live lane exchanging insurance details when he was hit by a HGV.

[Rockers rule 673]

51 minutes ago, alchresearch said:

I can't speak for all cases, but  two Sheffield area deaths happened because people were stood in the live lane or sat in the car, instead of going over the barrier to safety.

 

Nargis Bashir and her husband broke down. They stayed in their car for seventeen minutes before they were hit by another car.

 

Jason Mercer was stood in the live lane exchanging insurance details when he was hit by a HGV.

Well that makes it all right then ?

[DT Ralge 10]

1 hour ago, Rockers rule said:

Well that makes it all right then ?

Not at all, but my point hinges on such fine detail.  
People have always died on the hard shoulder.  It is the most dangerous of all motorway lanes.  Returning, therefore, to motorways with hard shoulders isn’t necessarily the answer. 
I repeat, I’m not a fan (I’d brick it if I broke down on “smart” and bricking it even more on the A38/61/1...) but drivers make bad decisions on all types of road and my training work involves helping drivers to make better decisions and choices.   That’s my only angle.  
Part of that detail involves the where, when, for how long and why.   All too often you and I see broken down drivers and passengers standing, sitting in a very dangerous position on the hard shoulder, positions that have contributed elsewhere and at other times to serious injury and worse.   

Edited September 15, 2020 by DT Ralge

[Rockers rule 673]

18 minutes ago, DT Ralge said:

Not at all, but my point hinges on such fine detail.  
People have always died on the hard shoulder.  It is the most dangerous of all motorway lanes.  Returning, therefore, to motorways with hard shoulders isn’t necessarily the answer. 
I repeat, I’m not a fan (I’d brick it if I broke down on “smart” and bricking it even more on the A38/61/1...) but drivers make bad decisions on all types of road and my training work involves helping drivers to make better decisions and choices.   That’s my only angle.  
Part of that detail involves the where, when, for how long and why.   All too often you and I see broken down drivers and passengers standing, sitting in a very dangerous position on the hard shoulder, positions that have contributed elsewhere and at other times to serious injury and worse.   

You've lost me with the 'People have always died on the hard shoulder & it is the most dangerous of all motorway lanes'.

Hard shoulders are your first place of refuge  or should be, not stuck in a live lane waiting for the traffic or the motorway signalling to tell drivers there is a hazard to be avoided further on and you should be changing lane.

I'm sure there aren't or if there are figures it would say all lanes have the same percentage of fatalities in them.

Personally I'd have thought the lane where a slip road joins a motorway would have the higher instances of accidents.

 

Keep safe.

 

[butlers 259]

The childhood asthma rate in that area is  shockingly high  from memory about 4 fold the leafy west of Sheffield.

If it costs driver a couple if minutes to help with the health outcomes so be it

 Think it's the nitrous oxides that are the problem , on occasion the highest readings in the country

Edited September 15, 2020 by butlers

[DT Ralge 10]

3 hours ago, Rockers rule said:

You've lost me with the 'People have always died on the hard shoulder & it is the most dangerous of all motorway lanes'.

Hard shoulders are your first place of refuge  or should be, not stuck in a live lane waiting for the traffic or the motorway signalling to tell drivers there is a hazard to be avoided further on and you should be changing lane.

I'm sure there aren't or if there are figures it would say all lanes have the same percentage of fatalities in them.

Personally I'd have thought the lane where a slip road joins a motorway would have the higher instances of accidents.

 

Keep safe.

 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/9703443/thousands-brits-crash-vehicles-stopped-on-hard-shoulder-every-year/

 

... a quick google reveals.

 

They should be safe, indeed, but you need to know the truth of the matter.

 

[Rockers rule 673]

1 hour ago, butlers said:

The childhood asthma rate in that area is  shockingly high  from memory about 4 fold the leafy west of Sheffield.

If it costs driver a couple if minutes to help with the health outcomes so be it

 Think it's the nitrous oxides that are the problem , on occasion the highest readings in the country

So increase the speed limit to 80 and lets all get out the way even quicker.

31 minutes ago, DT Ralge said:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/motors/9703443/thousands-brits-crash-vehicles-stopped-on-hard-shoulder-every-year/

 

... a quick google reveals.

 

They should be safe, indeed, but you need to know the truth of the matter.

 

Having read the link to the Sun news (?) paper even using their figures only 3 crashes per day are attributed out of the 684 crashes per day on the motorway to vehicles on the hard shoulder. (3 too many) but hardly confirms your statement that the hard shoulder is the most dangerous lane. 

 

Keep safe.

 

 

[Resident 1,185]

On 13/09/2020 at 11:05, DT Ralge said:

Disagree as a Safed/EST trainer.  Both my vehicles (1.0-litre petrol Ibiza and 2.3 litre diesel Ducato) are quite happy in top gear at speeds below 60 mph.   I can't say that I always drive like that, preferring engine responsiveness but 60mph in top gear is eminently possible - your reasoning, therefore, falls at the first hurdle.

In top gear @ 60mph my engine sits dangerously close to stall speed. The turbo is in standby and producing little to no boost. The slightest of elevation requires increased throttle to maintain 60mph, increasing engine load and fuel usage. Typically on the stretch between 33-34 that load is upwards of 60%.

 

However at 70 mph, engine RPM, although higher is being assisted by the turbo, the engine load is a mere ~20% and fuel usage for the same stretch is less, to the point that the on-board trip computer states that it's around 18.3mpg more efficient than 60mph for the same stretch of road. 

 

[spider1 11]

Yes you are right

[Brooker11 10]

9 hours ago, DT Ralge said:

Not at all, but my point hinges on such fine detail.  
People have always died on the hard shoulder.  It is the most dangerous of all motorway lanes.  Returning, therefore, to motorways with hard shoulders isn’t necessarily the answer. 
I repeat, I’m not a fan (I’d brick it if I broke down on “smart” and bricking it even more on the A38/61/1...) but drivers make bad decisions on all types of road and my training work involves helping drivers to make better decisions and choices.   That’s my only angle.  
Part of that detail involves the where, when, for how long and why.   All too often you and I see broken down drivers and passengers standing, sitting in a very dangerous position on the hard shoulder, positions that have contributed elsewhere and at other times to serious injury and worse.   

I've broken down on an A road and the M1, being stood on the hard shoulder whilst huge lorries are flying past is terrifying, being in a broken down car with no refuge is unthinkable.

[Guest busdriver1]

13 hours ago, Resident said:

In top gear @ 60mph my engine sits dangerously close to stall speed. The turbo is in standby and producing little to no boost. The slightest of elevation requires increased throttle to maintain 60mph, increasing engine load and fuel usage. Typically on the stretch between 33-34 that load is upwards of 60%.

 

However at 70 mph, engine RPM, although higher is being assisted by the turbo, the engine load is a mere ~20% and fuel usage for the same stretch is less, to the point that the on-board trip computer states that it's around 18.3mpg more efficient than 60mph for the same stretch of road. 

 

All modern cars have a final drive ratio that optimises the engine output to the most economical at 70. At that speed the engine is obviously running at its best rate for fuel consumption meaning the fuel is being used to the most efficient level. In laymans terms the fuel is being burned most completely for the energy it produces. By burning it at its most efficient level any pollution is minimized at this speed. Like so many cases you can google any set of facts and by sticking in various anomalies come up with whatever "facts" you want. I therefore stick to the tried and tested education I had as a motor engineer.

[DT Ralge 10]

4 hours ago, busdriver1 said:

All modern cars have a final drive ratio that optimises the engine output to the most economical at 70. At that speed the engine is obviously running at its best rate for fuel consumption meaning the fuel is being used to the most efficient level. In laymans terms the fuel is being burned most completely for the energy it produces. By burning it at its most efficient level any pollution is minimized at this speed. Like so many cases you can google any set of facts and by sticking in various anomalies come up with whatever "facts" you want. I therefore stick to the tried and tested education I had as a motor engineer.

Thanks for that insight - what I wonder though is whether this optimal fuel burn rate is theoretical in the sense that it takes no account of wind resistance. 
Seriously, I am in the belief that any marginal savings in top gear between 60 and 70 on a test bed are far outweighed by increased wind resistance in the real world.

I wouldn’t bet my house on it but ...