Uno Hoo!
I'm not offering a one size fits all solution to a complex problem...
I still maintain that most miles of limit do no good.
I still have fundamental problems with robocopping.
I still think limits should be used *very* sparingly.
They can, if fully informed.
The "target" aspect is one of the negative effects of speed limits.
Just because lazy, unconfident or over-trusting drivers use the numberonastick to set their speed rather than their own judgement does not mean they lack the skill.
No, I've largely accepted the utility of limits "closely buttociated with hazards" throughout my time on this group.
Here in Edinburgh we have variable speed limit outside some schools - 20mph when lights flash - which strike me as a proper use of limits, if a little high.
I have no problem with limits protecting junctions (sensible asymmetric ones).
If there are no hidden hazards, yes.
Danger $HAZARD signs might work better than limits in most cases.
If speed limits were *only* used when "closely buttociated with hazards" they would be worthy of note. They are currently less effective due to overuse.
Due to the lack of relationship between posted limits and appropriate speed, limits have limited efficacy, just like overused anti-biotics.
Correct. No hazard free sofas either.
There are lots of roads with miles of clear sightlines and no cover for anything to leap from.
Yes, but it's not a linear relationship.
And blanket speed limits helped to stop these accidents how?
No you don't, you suspect.
A
