Ireland's Lower Speed Limits



> Richard Bates wrote:
>
>> Heard on Radio Four this moring that ROI has now converted all speed
>> limit signs to Km/h.
>>
>> He also said that drivers would need to look at the speedometer more
>> often.
>>
>> Excellent, I say.

>
> Humm, a disaster more likely, looking at a speedo and trying to check
> the speed against the new limits whilst driving. Driver awareness is
> bad enough at the best of times, but each look down away from the
> road is bad enough, let alone trying to work out which point on which
> scale on a speedo as well, means more time to miss and register
> someone else on the road.


Of course, this is in a country were speed cameras are very rare, penalty
points less than 2 years old, and you only get two points out of twelve for
drink driving.

So there's not a huge worry in drivers about being caught speeding.

A
 
> Richard Bates wrote:
>
>> Heard on Radio Four this moring that ROI has now converted all speed
>> limit signs to Km/h.
>>
>> He also said that drivers would need to look at the speedometer more
>> often.
>>
>> Excellent, I say.

>
> Humm, a disaster more likely, looking at a speedo and trying to check
> the speed against the new limits whilst driving. Driver awareness is
> bad enough at the best of times, but each look down away from the
> road is bad enough, let alone trying to work out which point on which
> scale on a speedo as well, means more time to miss and register
> someone else on the road.


Of course, this is in a country were speed cameras are very rare, penalty
points less than 2 years old, and you only get two points out of twelve for
drink driving.

So there's not a huge worry in drivers about being caught speeding.

A
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Humm, a disaster more likely, looking at a speedo and trying to check
>> the speed against the new limits whilst driving.

>
>
> This wouldn't be a problem if more people didn't regard limits as
> targets to sit at...

True, but then going just gets in the way of the buses/trucks trying to
keep to timetable/make a living....

> As it is, in the longer term the speeds should (/if/ enforced) come
> down, plus it possibly brings forward the day when Britain joins the
> rest of the civilized world in having a single measurement system in use.
>
> Pete.

Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

Niel ;-)
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Humm, a disaster more likely, looking at a speedo and trying to check
>> the speed against the new limits whilst driving.

>
>
> This wouldn't be a problem if more people didn't regard limits as
> targets to sit at...

True, but then going just gets in the way of the buses/trucks trying to
keep to timetable/make a living....

> As it is, in the longer term the speeds should (/if/ enforced) come
> down, plus it possibly brings forward the day when Britain joins the
> rest of the civilized world in having a single measurement system in use.
>
> Pete.

Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

Niel ;-)
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Humm, a disaster more likely, looking at a speedo and trying to check
>> the speed against the new limits whilst driving.

>
>
> This wouldn't be a problem if more people didn't regard limits as
> targets to sit at...

True, but then going just gets in the way of the buses/trucks trying to
keep to timetable/make a living....

> As it is, in the longer term the speeds should (/if/ enforced) come
> down, plus it possibly brings forward the day when Britain joins the
> rest of the civilized world in having a single measurement system in use.
>
> Pete.

Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

Niel ;-)
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Humm, a disaster more likely, looking at a speedo and trying to check
>> the speed against the new limits whilst driving.

>
>
> This wouldn't be a problem if more people didn't regard limits as
> targets to sit at...

True, but then going just gets in the way of the buses/trucks trying to
keep to timetable/make a living....

> As it is, in the longer term the speeds should (/if/ enforced) come
> down, plus it possibly brings forward the day when Britain joins the
> rest of the civilized world in having a single measurement system in use.
>
> Pete.

Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

Niel ;-)
 
Scrumpy Joe wrote:
>
> And most people know that the roads they travel on can be travelled faster
> than the posted speed limit. Just because it's the posted limit it doesn't
> mean that it suddenly becomes dangerous at 10 mph more. As far as speed
> limits being seen as a target go; I never came across a driving instructor
> that didn't expect you to hit that 'target' in as short a time as possible.


I don't know about now but many moons ago when I took my test you could
fail for going too slowly. Failing to make adequate progress I think
they called it.

Tony
 
Scrumpy Joe wrote:
>
> And most people know that the roads they travel on can be travelled faster
> than the posted speed limit. Just because it's the posted limit it doesn't
> mean that it suddenly becomes dangerous at 10 mph more. As far as speed
> limits being seen as a target go; I never came across a driving instructor
> that didn't expect you to hit that 'target' in as short a time as possible.


I don't know about now but many moons ago when I took my test you could
fail for going too slowly. Failing to make adequate progress I think
they called it.

Tony
 
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:41:57 +0000, Scrumpy Joe <[email protected]>
wrote:

>And most people know that the roads they travel on can be travelled faster
>than the posted speed limit. Just because it's the posted limit it doesn't
>mean that it suddenly becomes dangerous at 10 mph more.


Correct - it becomes logarithmically more dangerous as you approach 10
mph more.


--
Amazon: "If you are interested in 'Asimov's I-Robot',
you may also be interested in 'Garfield - The Movie'.
... erm, how do they figure that one out?
 
On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 20:41:57 +0000, Scrumpy Joe <[email protected]>
wrote:

>And most people know that the roads they travel on can be travelled faster
>than the posted speed limit. Just because it's the posted limit it doesn't
>mean that it suddenly becomes dangerous at 10 mph more.


Correct - it becomes logarithmically more dangerous as you approach 10
mph more.


--
Amazon: "If you are interested in 'Asimov's I-Robot',
you may also be interested in 'Garfield - The Movie'.
... erm, how do they figure that one out?
 
njf>badger< wrote:

> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?


No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
used 1. Well done the Irish government for taking them a step closer.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
On 19/1/05 8:39 am, in article [email protected], "Peter
Clinch" <[email protected]> wrote:

> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

>
> No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
> measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
> used 1. Well done the Irish government for taking them a step closer.


Seconded (and yes I am English too[1])

...d

[1] Well, mostly, with bits of Scot, Welsh and Irish added for good measure,
and possibly a few more far flung bits too[2].

[2] They obviously didn't throuw them far enough.
 
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 08:39:36 +0000, Peter Clinch
<[email protected]> wrote:

>njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

>
>No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
>measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
>used 1. Well done the Irish government for taking them a step closer.



I'm generally a metric user and am perfectly capable of performing
calculations on them; but I still mix units when trying to visualise
in my head how big/heavy/fast something is. I even use both metric and
imperial units for the same purpose e.g. length.

For example:

Short lengths such as height of body, height of house, length of back
garden I use metric.

For longer distances such as the distance to the shops, distance
between towns, and distances between countries I use imperial miles.

For mass I think I always use kilograms, which is a stupid SI unit
since it contains the prefix "kilo".

For speed I use miles per hour.

--
Amazon: "If you are interested in 'Asimov's I-Robot',
you may also be interested in 'Garfield - The Movie'.
... erm, how do they figure that one out?
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

>
>
> No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
> measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
> used 1.


Why? It might be *slightly* easier, but I'd dispute "much" easier. I'm
a scientist, and happily switch between SI (mostly at work), cgs (since
some dinosaurs in the scientific community still use it ;-), imperial
(what I lurned at skool), and certain bits of American measurement
(since Mrs R is American). Horses for courses. And it's easy to
remember the various basic conversion rules for the most common
conversions (deg C/F, miles/km, lbs/kg, litres/gallons).

R.
 
Richard Bates wrote:

> I'm generally a metric user and am perfectly capable of performing
> calculations on them; but I still mix units when trying to visualise
> in my head how big/heavy/fast something is. I even use both metric and
> imperial units for the same purpose e.g. length.


So do I. But there shouldn't be any /need/ to do this, and the sooner
we get rid of the part we don't need the sooner everyone will know what
is meant when I say it's 20 degrees today, and so on.

I have no trouble using either myself, and am pretty good at converting
the two as needed, but the whole activity is pointless and it would be
better, ultimately, if /nobody/ had to do it. So if we get rid of one,
given we know both work, do we keep the one that is used for all serious
science and the great majority of engineering, and also domestic use by
most of the world, or the other one? Looks like a no-brainer to me!

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Richard wrote:

> Why? It might be *slightly* easier, but I'd dispute "much" easier. I'm
> a scientist, and happily switch between SI (mostly at work), cgs (since
> some dinosaurs in the scientific community still use it ;-), imperial
> (what I lurned at skool), and certain bits of American measurement
> (since Mrs R is American). Horses for courses. And it's easy to
> remember the various basic conversion rules for the most common
> conversions (deg C/F, miles/km, lbs/kg, litres/gallons).


You're a scientist. Most people aren't, and many can't easily move
between the two.

I don't have much trouble, but that isn't the same as saying it's no
trouble. It certainly isn't /helpful/.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Peter Clinch wrote:

> So do I. But there shouldn't be any /need/ to do this, and the sooner
> we get rid of the part we don't need the sooner everyone will know what
> is meant when I say it's 20 degrees today, and so on.
>
> I have no trouble using either myself, and am pretty good at converting
> the two as needed, but the whole activity is pointless and it would be
> better, ultimately, if /nobody/ had to do it. So if we get rid of one,
> given we know both work, do we keep the one that is used for all serious
> science and the great majority of engineering, and also domestic use by
> most of the world, or the other one? Looks like a no-brainer to me!


Drifting off-topic, but I think that on a psychological level, it's
better to have a variety of measurements simply to keep people on their
toes and actively thinking about what they're doing. The trouble with
trying to unify everything is that there's always a group who don't or
won't unify (for whatever reason, and some of those reasons are very
good ones). The more unified you get, the more people the unified
system fails to satisfy the requirements of. SI, for example, is really
awkward when dealing with astronomical distances, is marginally awkward
dealing with atomic distances, is really awkward when dealing with
geological timescales...etc.

R.
 
Richard wrote:

> Drifting off-topic, but I think that on a psychological level, it's
> better to have a variety of measurements simply to keep people on their
> toes and actively thinking about what they're doing. The trouble with
> trying to unify everything is that there's always a group who don't or
> won't unify (for whatever reason, and some of those reasons are very
> good ones). The more unified you get, the more people the unified
> system fails to satisfy the requirements of. SI, for example, is really
> awkward when dealing with astronomical distances, is marginally awkward
> dealing with atomic distances, is really awkward when dealing with
> geological timescales...etc.


A fair point, but since MA works better for the geologists talking about
the Palaeozioc, that's what they /all/ use, so there's no unifying to be
done there. But miles and km fulfill basically the same function, so
why have both in routine use?

I certainly don't want all times to be quoted in seconds, but since
everyone already uses minutes, hours and days there's no point in trying
to replace them. OTOH, 5+ billion people use metric routinely which is
hugely more than use imperial, and the same measurement system can be
applied to their day to day cooking recipes as their day to day
mechanical engineering needs. This isn't so much working on an ideology
of unification for its own sake, it's just consolidating so that one
system that provably works for general use is used by everyone for those
general uses.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Peter Clinch wrote:
> njf>badger< wrote:
>
>> Do I detect an old alliance connection here?

>
>
> No, I (who am English, btw) just wish we'd stop faffing about with two
> measurement systems when it would ultimately be much easier if we all
> used 1. Well done the Irish government for taking them a step closer.
>


I wonder how close the Irish really are to one system. When I've cycled
around Ireland, I've seen signs with at least two systems of road
numbering and three units of distance (kilometre, imperial mile, Irish
mile). Not to mention the big number of finger-post signs that have been
rotated by playful locals. You need to keep your wits working when
navigating there.

--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap