1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184 
No advantage in running at 50
Page 24
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
Regarding the speed limits debate, the reason for the 40mph limit on single carriageways is that if two HGVs collide, both doing 40rriph , they have a closing speed of 80mph. That's like running a truck into the side of a battleship at 80mph, whereas travelling at 50mph gives a closing speed of 100mph!
I have been unable to find out the stopping distance for a laden 44-tonner from 50mph an hour — but you really have to wonder whether it would be appropriate on roads where there is frequently slower traffic.
Also, it would not improve productivity because most trucks are already doing 56mph on all roads whenever they get the chance (and they still don't get there any sooner!).
As for the average car driver, 50mph is hardly moving to them. as their legal limit on single carriageways is 60. Even then they don't stick to that, and woe betide anyone who gets in their way.
This is fuelled by idiots like Jeremy Clarkson and his ilk who say that accidents just happen; no-one is to blame and motorists should be free to drive at any speed they like.
So if you want to reduce the frustration of other road users, forget 50mph —just ban pedestrians,cyclists, farm tractors. buses and,most of all, trucks from ever using the roads if a car is in the area.
Alan Flirter Grimsby