Scottish Infrastructure

[doulikefish]

6 minutes ago, shuggz said:

I live in a wee cul~de~sac. It's 67 yards long with a dog leg about half way,and cars parked everywhere, We are getting a 20 limit, a speed impossible to achieve in the circumstances.

They are challenging you..go for it 

[shuggz]

1 minute ago, doulikefish said:

They are challenging you..go for it 

Don't drive now...will try on foot.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

11 hours ago, Wee Bully said:

Which is why nobody’s suggested 5mph.   Strange point to make. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

[topcat(The most tip top)]

24 minutes ago, doulikefish said:

They are challenging you..go for it 

but maybe get your neighbours to move their car from the dog leg and put cones there while you practice before moving it back so you can try it for real once you're good at missing the cones

Edited 8 hours ago by topcat(The most tip top)

[10menwent2mow]

With regards to the bampottery on the roads. I would say almost at least once a week I hear or see someone (usually a young bam) driving like a f**king idiot on a motorbike with no plates or in a souped up ned-mobile in the part of Aberdeen that I live. 

I couldn't tell you the last time I saw a police car just randomly on patrol in the area. Now, I get that resources are thin and all that but lowering the speed limit will do absolutely f**k all in these circumstances. Only way to stop these bams either causing an accident or wrapping themselves round a lamp post is to get them off the road by catching them in the act.

[Alert Mongoose]

9 minutes ago, 10menwent2mow said:

With regards to the bampottery on the roads. I would say almost at least once a week I hear or see someone (usually a young bam) driving like a f**king idiot on a motorbike with no plates or in a souped up ned-mobile in the part of Aberdeen that I live. 

I couldn't tell you the last time I saw a police car just randomly on patrol in the area. Now, I get that resources are thin and all that but lowering the speed limit will do absolutely f**k all in these circumstances. Only way to stop these bams either causing an accident or wrapping themselves round a lamp post is to get them off the road by catching them in the act.

I always assume they will end themselves anyway. You just hope they don't involve anyone else.

Tbf I suspect it will actually be pretty tough to catch these since they can go anywhere off road. That's not to mention you then get inundated with do-gooders making complaints that the wee neds were getting chased when they ended themselves.

[10menwent2mow]

1 minute ago, Alert Mongoose said:

I always assume they will end themselves anyway. You just hope they don't involve anyone else.

Tbf I suspect it will actually be pretty tough to catch these since they can go anywhere off road. That's not to mention you then get inundated with do-gooders making complaints that the wee neds were getting chased when they ended themselves.

Same goes for drink drivers, if they stick themselves in a ditch, fine, but they shouldn't be on the road as a threat to others. Yet, there seems to be a 'don't be a grass' culture about it. 

[Alert Mongoose]

10 minutes ago, 10menwent2mow said:

Same goes for drink drivers, if they stick themselves in a ditch, fine, but they shouldn't be on the road as a threat to others. Yet, there seems to be a 'don't be a grass' culture about it. 

Aye. I would echo the points of others that the perceived safety of roads should be assessed when you have first removed deaths caused by blatant idiots. 

I doubt that would leave many accidents to include in the assessment, mind.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

On 23/09/2024 at 19:36, Melanius Mullarkey said:

In that case, where will Falkirk play?

In the f**king premiership next season, ya c**t

[scottsdad]

20 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop announced the move as she revealed road fatalities in 2024 so far were 26% higher than at the same period last year.

 

This is the kind of "stat" that really bugs me. Take two data points that make your point and ignore all the others.

Let's look at road fatalities in Scotland (link)

So...since 2020 we've had a wee uptick. If you take year-on-year you'll see rises and falls, but overall they've been falling for decades. They are now less than a quarter of what they were in 1969 (when, incidentally, we had far fewer cars and drivers on the roads). 

Show me please why we need to reduce all the speed limits, spend huge amounts of money on signage and updating speed cameras, a media campaign and so on. How low will that all get these figures to be?

[Leith Green]

2 hours ago, scottsdad said:

This is the kind of "stat" that really bugs me. Take two data points that make your point and ignore all the others.

Let's look at road fatalities in Scotland (link)

So...since 2020 we've had a wee uptick. If you take year-on-year you'll see rises and falls, but overall they've been falling for decades. They are now less than a quarter of what they were in 1969 (when, incidentally, we had far fewer cars and drivers on the roads). 

Show me please why we need to reduce all the speed limits, spend huge amounts of money on signage and updating speed cameras, a media campaign and so on. How low will that all get these figures to be?

Can only assume from your graphic that 1969 was peak "drink driving, no seatbelts and quite powerful cars" year.

[GordonS]

2 hours ago, scottsdad said:

This is the kind of "stat" that really bugs me. Take two data points that make your point and ignore all the others.

Let's look at road fatalities in Scotland (link)

So...since 2020 we've had a wee uptick. If you take year-on-year you'll see rises and falls, but overall they've been falling for decades. They are now less than a quarter of what they were in 1969 (when, incidentally, we had far fewer cars and drivers on the roads). 

Show me please why we need to reduce all the speed limits, spend huge amounts of money on signage and updating speed cameras, a media campaign and so on. How low will that all get these figures to be?

This is the kind of stat that really bugs me.

You have to factor in car use and distance travelled. There were big increases in these up to around 2000 and they levelled off after that. You should also factor in that people survive accidents that would previously have killed them due to better healthcare and car safety requirements, but they are more likely to have serious and life-changing injuries, especially to the brain. And then there's the breakdown - around a quarter of road fatalities now are pedestrians, with many being children. Obviously, most are on roads that are currently limited to 30 or 40 mph.

Also, the fact that things were much worse decades ago is irrelevant. It shouldn't make us willing to tolerate 3 deaths and 40 serious injuries a week if they're reasonably preventable. Cities like Helsinki and Oslo have managed to go whole years without any road fatalities at all - drivers, passengers, cyclists or pedestrians. That's what we should be aspiring to.

And finally there's the clear fact that improvements in these numbers have tailed off and have roughly flatlined for about 7 years. Complacency could well see them go back up, as they have done in recent years in the USA.

The cost of signs and cameras is buttons in the scheme of things. You say it's "huge" - how much is it exactly? 

[Todd_is_God]

15 minutes ago, GordonS said:

there's the clear fact that improvements in these numbers have tailed off and have roughly flatlined for about 7 years

Please show your working for this

[Salvo Montalbano]

 

15 hours ago, invergowrie arab said:

It's always the unintended consequences that catch you out

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/journey-times-wales-longer-due-30103752.amp

Journey times did increase, it says:  "Average journey times have increased on most routes assessed but generally not by more than two minutes"

Game changer, right there. 

[topcat(The most tip top)]

1 hour ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

 

Journey times did increase, it says:  "Average journey times have increased on most routes assessed but generally not by more than two minutes"

Game changer, right there. 

The worst thing is that even after a slightly longer journey you’re still in Wales

[10menwent2mow]

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

This is the kind of stat that really bugs me.

You have to factor in car use and distance travelled. There were big increases in these up to around 2000 and they levelled off after that. You should also factor in that people survive accidents that would previously have killed them due to better healthcare and car safety requirements, but they are more likely to have serious and life-changing injuries, especially to the brain. And then there's the breakdown - around a quarter of road fatalities now are pedestrians, with many being children. Obviously, most are on roads that are currently limited to 30 or 40 mph.

Also, the fact that things were much worse decades ago is irrelevant. It shouldn't make us willing to tolerate 3 deaths and 40 serious injuries a week if they're reasonably preventable. Cities like Helsinki and Oslo have managed to go whole years without any road fatalities at all - drivers, passengers, cyclists or pedestrians. That's what we should be aspiring to.

And finally there's the clear fact that improvements in these numbers have tailed off and have roughly flatlined for about 7 years. Complacency could well see them go back up, as they have done in recent years in the USA.

The cost of signs and cameras is buttons in the scheme of things. You say it's "huge" - how much is it exactly? 

As has been mentioned previously. Changing speed limits, more speed cameras etc, will not stop bams being bams. How many of those 174 are single vehicle accidents where a car has landed up in a park on a rural back road because some youngster has been driving a souped up ned-mobile and ended up killing themselves and often a mate or two?