A question of etiquette

[Speedwheel]

Athy, don't be suprised. Besides, some of these boaters have boats the size of small trawlers. It's all relative. Not very close to nature, on one of those.

 

How do they get these small trawlers through locks? A boat can only be the maximum size of the locks it has to go through - which is the size of boat that the canals were designed for.

[Pretty Funked Up]

But why do 65? Why not 70?

 

Its so they dont cause traffic jams.

When road conditions allow you can do 77mph legally. Anyone with nothing to hide will do their 77mph. Hats off to them for it! Lets face it no one will overtake anyone while theyre about, out of fear of being arrested, if they sat at 70mph there would be a 3 lane wide growing snake of traffic all the way back from them.

well done I say!

Edited September 2, 2011 by Pretty Funked Up

[Timleech]

Its so they dont cause traffic jams.

When road conditions allow you can do 77mph legally. Anyone with nothing to hide will do their 77mph. Hats off to them for it! Lets face it no one will overtake anyone while theyre about, out of fear of being arrested, if they sat at 70mph there would be a 3 lane wide growing snake of traffic all the way back from them.

well done I say!

 

Says who?

My understanding is that the law requires a 'margin for error' on speeds before a prosecution, but that margin is not defined. Even if it is defined, it doesn't mean you can legally exceed the speed limit. Just because you're unlikely to be prosecuted doesn't make it legal.

 

Tim

[Pretty Funked Up]

Says who?

Tim

pretty sure I just did.

use it in a court of law at your own risk

[Blackrat]

Oh, I can beat that!

 

On Tuesday, travelling home along the M60, approaching J21, I was in the inside lane, with nothing ahead of me as far as the eye could see.

 

I can, however, see 3 cars coming up the slip road, to join the motorway, so I move out into the middle lane, to allow the (slower) joining traffic to join more easily.

 

The first of the 3 cars joins a litlle in front of me, and then after about 3 seconds in the inside lane dives over into the middle lane, without so much as a signal, barely 4 car lengths in front of me, and probably travelling at around 50mph to my 70mph.

 

The two cars that joined behind him shot up his inside, as I braked to avoid a collision, and he continued to bimble up the middle lane at 50mph.

 

For the life of me, I cannot conceive what thought led him to believe that having just joined the motorway at 50mph, and with NOTHING in front of him to overtake, a move without signalling in front of another vehicle was a good idea.

 

 

I can't remember the number of times that I have "suffed" centre lane hogs in the book for "Without due care and consideration". They were my pet hate. It was not un-common for LGV's to be racked-up behind them unable to pass.

 

When it was expained to them that Lane 1 was the driving lane and Lanes 2 and 3 were overtaking lanes they had nothing to say.

[Blackrat]

That's a point. Why do they do that?

 

 

 

1. We were always "advised" to patrol at a speed lower than the posted speed limit.

 

2. Fuel economy. A 3.5L motor would eat the "Motion Lotion" at a great rate of knots (it was not unusual to use a full tank in only 200 miles per shift). At one point the instruction came down that we would have to sit-up on the "hump" for a certain length of time each shift to conserve fuel, but be in a position to respond to incidents.

 

At that time (prior to the "plastic Highways Agency patrols) the Department of Transport dictated as to the number of police vehicles on a particular stretch of Motorway (2x pursuit,+ 1x 4x4 per 15 miles of Motorway) they were able to do this as they were paying the bills.

 

Says who?

My understanding is that the law requires a 'margin for error' on speeds before a prosecution, but that margin is not defined. Even if it is defined, it doesn't mean you can legally exceed the speed limit. Just because you're unlikely to be prosecuted doesn't make it legal.

 

Tim

 

You could do 79mph if you were sure that your speedo was acurate. Ours were tested every day before starting patrol on the rolling road at the base.

 

ACPO guidelines which have been in existance for a long time sipulate that an allowance of 10% + 2 is given to allow for variations in speedo readings. Therefore 70mph+10% = 77 + 2mph = 79mph.

 

This allowance is on all speeds (30mph +10% = 33mph + 2mph = 35mph.

 

In practice we never thought of writing anyone up in a 30 limit unless they were doing 40+, or there were other factors, as below that they would only get a letter ov warning.

[Guest]

In practice we never thought of writing anyone up in a 30 limit unless they were doing 40+, or there were other factors, as below that they would only get a letter ov warning.

 

AAhh the good old days when an officers discretion applied!!

 

Unfortunately a GATSO can't do this and I got done for a 34 in a 30...

[Timleech]

ame='Gibbo' timestamp='1314973149' post='742410']

 

 

You could do 79mph if you were sure that your speedo was acurate. Ours were tested every day before starting patrol on the rolling road at the base.

 

ACPO guidelines which have been in existance for a long time sipulate that an allowance of 10% + 2 is given to allow for variations in speedo readings. Therefore 70mph+10% = 77 + 2mph = 79mph.

 

This allowance is on all speeds (30mph +10% = 33mph + 2mph = 35mph.

 

In practice we never thought of writing anyone up in a 30 limit unless they were doing 40+, or there were other factors, as below that they would only get a letter ov warning.

 

Not Legally though, which was my point. You're breaking the law by exceeding 70 mph.

 

A friend of mine was 'done' for doing 34 mph in a 30 limit. Edit - I see he wasn't the only one!

 

Tim

Edited September 3, 2011 by Timleech

[Doorman]

I often have some wally tooting and shouting because he wants to get past, i will of course allow him to when i consider it safe for myself and the other person to do so

 

We had a boater following us in a GRP cruiser as we were heading towards a winding hole. His close proximity and weaving actions suggested that he wished to pass, so I slowed down on a wide section of the canal to let him go but he ignored my actions and continued to get cosy with our stern button.

 

As the winding hole loomed closer, I pointed the bow towards it hopefully letting the guy know what my intentions were, only to then see him open the throttle and pass us (in the winding hole) as we began our turn!

 

Meldrew

Edited September 3, 2011 by Doorman

[Blackrat]

AAhh the good old days when an officers discretion applied!!

 

Unfortunately a GATSO can't do this and I got done for a 34 in a 30...

 

Well quote ACPO Guidelines as to speedo variations. I take it that your speedo has never been tested since it was installed. Therefore it could/would be inaccurate after a length of time due to wear and tear.

 

Also that the Police Force in question are not abiding by ACPO guidelines.

 

That's the defence I would use. :-)

 

Also there is case law on the subject, although it's not widely advertised. Don't have the case ref at hand, and not expecting to get access until Nov when we winter-up.

 

Steve

Edited September 3, 2011 by Blackrat

[Timleech]

Well quote ACPO Guidelines as to speedo variations. I take it that your speedo has never been tested since it was installed. Therefore it could/would be inaccurate after a length of time due to wear and tear.

 

Also that the Police Force in question are not abiding by ACPO guidelines.

 

That's the defence I would use. :-)

 

Also there is case law on the subject, although it's not widely advertised. Don't have the case ref at hand, and not expecting to get access until Nov when we winter-up.

 

Steve

 

Surely guidelines are just that, and ACPO don't make the law (even if they might want to)?

 

Edit - a bigger margin for error would be appropriate for a traffic cop in a car, than for a static speed camera, surely?

 

 

Tim

Edited September 3, 2011 by Timleech

[Doorman]

Do wasps have lungs? Sorry, this seems to have gone a bit off-topic

 

Isn't that like the question; "what goes through a wasp's mind as its head hits the windscreen of your car"?........... Its bum!

 

Meldrew

[Blackrat]

Not Legally though, which was my point. You're breaking the law by exceeding 70 mph.

 

A friend of mine was 'done' for doing 34 mph in a 30 limit. Edit - I see he wasn't the only one!

 

Tim

 

 

Tim

 

Still off thread.

 

How do you know that you are doing 70mph? Do you have a calibrated speedo? The allowance is there because makers do not spend loads of money calibrating kit to a fine tollerance. We had the fitted speedo disconnected and another "calibrated" speedo fitted, which was tested daily and the variation noted in the vehicle's log book.

 

As we all know, equipment wears over time therefore a speedo will not give the same reading after 60,000 miles as it did on day one with zero miles on the clock.

 

Hence the guidelines which were brought into force and which allHome Office Police Forces should abide by.

 

If I was done for 34 by a GATSO camera then I would elect to take it to Court and fight it there. (My vehicle has done over 120,000 therefore the speedo cannot be accurate, although I normally take this into consideration and use my experience as a Police Class 1 in estimating my speed.

[nb Innisfree]

Not Legally though, which was my point. You're breaking the law by exceeding 70 mph.

 

A friend of mine was 'done' for doing 34 mph in a 30 limit. Edit - I see he wasn't the only one!

 

Tim

 

Exactly, it's ok for a policeman to say you are allowed to do 79mph or 35mph but it can be misleading and give a false impression, but you are still breaking the law, signed speed limits are legally enforceable and personally I wouldn't take the chance that a traffic cop might be in negative mood and decide to do me (not saying Blackrat was ever like that )

 

There is no legal allowance other than a very small percentage (at least there used to be I'm sure it must still apply but can't find any info) speedos are designed to overead with standard tyres fitted, as the tyres wear the speedo will overead even more, so keeping to speed limit according to your speedo is the safest way.

[Guest]

Well quote ACPO Guidelines as to speedo variations. I take it that your speedo has never been tested since it was installed. Therefore it could/would be inaccurate after a length of time due to wear and tear.

 

Also that the Police Force in question are not abiding by ACPO guidelines.

 

That's the defence I would use. :-)

 

Also there is case law on the subject, although it's not widely advertised. Don't have the case ref at hand, and not expecting to get access until Nov when we winter-up.

 

Steve

 

Too long ago now - paid the fine and took the points.

 

so keeping to speed limit according to your speedo is the safest way.

 

If I am honest I tend to go with what my Sat Nav is reading when I'm using it, rightly or wrongly.

 

It usually shows around a 5-6% difference at around 70 mph (Car speedo. reads around 74-75 mph.)

[Timleech]

 

 

 

If I am honest I tend to go with what my Sat Nav is reading when I'm using it, rightly or wrongly.

 

It usually shows around a 5-6% difference at around 70 mph (Car speedo. reads around 74-75 mph.)

 

I tend to do the same if it's switched on, I'd be interested to know what sort of accuracy should be expected - probably much better than a car speedo at steady speeds.

 

Going even further off the original topic, when I got my current car I thought the trip computer mileage counter was reading high so I checked it against the satnav over a couple of hundred miles. I expected the car display to be a bit higher because the satnav would probably average out more on twisting routes, but the discrepancy was only about a mile.

 

Tim

[nb Innisfree]

Too long ago now - paid the fine and took the points.

 

 

 

If I am honest I tend to go with what my Sat Nav is reading when I'm using it, rightly or wrongly.

 

It usually shows around a 5-6% difference at around 70 mph (Car speedo. reads around 74-75 mph.)

 

Yes so do I, we have just bought a replacement satnav and running it alongside our older one they both agree on speed and speedo is optimistic like yours, more so on a Ford Transit than an elderly Rover.

 

New toy satnav shows a picture of m-way junctions ahead to indicate traffic conditions, updated (allegedly) every 3 mins, seems to be true.

 

I tend to do the same if it's switched on, I'd be interested to know what sort of accuracy should be expected - probably much better than a car speedo at steady speeds.

 

Going even further off the original topic, when I got my current car I thought the trip computer mileage counter was reading high so I checked it against the satnav over a couple of hundred miles. I expected the car display to be a bit higher because the satnav would probably average out more on twisting routes, but the discrepancy was only about a mile.

 

Tim

 

Years ago car road tests in motoring magazines used to measure odometer accuracy and they were usually inaccurate by 1% at the most IIRCC, I assume it must be the same now.

[Guest]

I tend to do the same if it's switched on, I'd be interested to know what sort of accuracy should be expected - probably much better than a car speedo at steady speeds.

 

My understanding is that at the higher end speeds they are generally pretty well spot on. It's at the lower end ie trying to use them to accurately gauge the speed of a narrowboat that they are much less so.

 

Though I'm happy to be corrected on this.

[alan_fincher]

I'd be interested to know what sort of accuracy should be expected - probably much better than a car speedo at steady speeds.

I can say that when I have had multiple SatNavs in the same car, they agree with each other totally spot on.

 

If they were right, then the speedo was certainly calibrated on the "cautious" side, which you would expect.

 

SatNavs all reading 70, speedo read around 76.

 

Wasn't it the Ford Zodiac / Zephyrs where the speedos read grossly over, because the cars had been marketed at having a 100mph capability, that certainly could not have been indicated, had the speedos been calibrated right ? Or is that urban myth ?

[nb Innisfree]

I noticed that both our satnavs agreed on speed but one was slightly quicker to recalculate if speed changed giving a false impression that they differed in accuracy.

[Dalesman]

Think we have lost track of the original posting..

Edited September 3, 2011 by Dalesman

[Guest]

Think we have lost track of the original posting..

 

8 pages on though..

 

it sometimes happens after the second or third post...

 

I can say that when I have had multiple SatNavs in the same car, they agree with each other totally spot on.

 

Sorry Alan but someone is going to ask so it might as well be me........... why????

[Guest Quo Vadis]

I just saw this quote on Central TV's website

"Along the Worcester and Birmingham canal, users are being asked to cruise carefully to avoid pushing water over weirs."

Does this mean that if you don't cruise carefully .. and for that I read SLOWLY, water is pushed over weirs and wasted?

[ditchcrawler]

My understanding is that at the higher end speeds they are generally pretty well spot on. It's at the lower end ie trying to use them to accurately gauge the speed of a narrowboat that they are much less so.

 

Though I'm happy to be corrected on this.

Against Satnav our Citroen is +2 to 3 at 30mph and still +3 at 70mph

 

I just saw this quote on Central TV's website

"Along the Worcester and Birmingham canal, users are being asked to cruise carefully to avoid pushing water over weirs."

Does this mean that if you don't cruise carefully .. and for that I read SLOWLY, water is pushed over weirs and wasted?

In some places yes, where the weirs go to streams etc, not bywashes. but I would not have considered it excessive as once the water level dropped a couple of inches be low the weir the losses would almost stop.

[nb Innisfree]

[quote name='MJG' timestamp='1315049022' post='742720'

Sorry Alan but someone is going to ask so it might as well be me........... why????

 

A fearless and relentless quest for the truth.