If I remember correctly, the A13 from between Canning Town and Barking
and beyond used to have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has gone down to 40?

--
message by the incredible Robin May.
"The British don't like successful people" - said by British failures

Who is Abi Titmuss? What is she? Why is she famous?
http://robinmay.fotopic.net

In article , Robin May
writes
If I remember correctly, the A13 from between Canning Town and Barking
and beyond used to have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has gone down to 40?

Because it increases the camera revenue??
--
John Alexander,

"John" wrote in message
...
In article , Robin May
writes

If I remember correctly, the A13 from between
Canning Town and Barking and beyond used to
have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has
gone down to 40?

Because it increases the camera revenue??

Correct. The only way that upgrading roads to 70mph quality can be justified
financially is if the new road has cameras busting everyone going over 40.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 18:47:04 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

"John" wrote in message
...
In article , Robin May
writes

If I remember correctly, the A13 from between
Canning Town and Barking and beyond used to
have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has
gone down to 40?

Because it increases the camera revenue??

Correct. The only way that upgrading roads to 70mph quality can be justified
financially is if the new road has cameras busting everyone going over 40.

Are you saying that there are gatsos all over the place now? Sounds
like a cash grab and ripoff. Lots of corruption out of control.

"John Rowland" wrote the
following in:

"John" wrote in message
...
In article , Robin May
writes

If I remember correctly, the A13 from between
Canning Town and Barking and beyond used to
have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has
gone down to 40?

Because it increases the camera revenue??

Correct. The only way that upgrading roads to 70mph quality can be
justified financially is if the new road has cameras busting
everyone going over 40.

Problem with this is that everyone knows where the cameras are and they
slow down accordingly! There's one between Prince Regent lane and
Beckton (eastbound), and another at the foot of the flyover just before
the exit for the A406 and Sainsbury's (eastbound). Between Sainsbury's
and Canning Town there are as far as I can tell none on the westbound
carriageway, although there may be one just before Canning Town.

Most people travel at 50-60 mph along this stretch and slow down for
the speed cameras, i.e. they act as if it's a 50mph road. I do it too
because why should I obey a speed limit which is so strangely low?

--
message by the incredible Robin May.
"The British don't like successful people" - said by British failures

Who is Abi Titmuss? What is she? Why is she famous?
http://robinmay.fotopic.net

On 16 Oct 2004 15:09:56 GMT, Robin May wrote:

If I remember correctly, the A13 from between Canning Town and Barking
and beyond used to have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has gone down to 40?

To improve conditions for local residents? The quieter road surface may be a
clue. It's not so you can hear the "Today" program in your already-soundproofed
car on your way to work. It's so people who LIVE near the A13 (they exist, you
know) can hear themselves think. The lower speed limit also helps buses when
they need to pull out into traffic, and makes cycling safer.

The difference between 50mph and 40mph across the whole 14-mile stretch of the
A13 improvements is the difference between a 17-minute journey and a 21 minute
journey (assuming you treat the speed limit as a target and hit it perfectly).
That's an extra FOUR MINUTES on your commute. What's the problem in setting
your alarm clock 4 minutes earlier in the morning and just sticking to the speed
limit? You'll save wear-and tear on your car by not braking for GATSOs, you'll
save money by not paying speeding fines, you'll arrive less stressed at work,
and you'll probably have fewer accidents. If EVERYBODY did it, there'd be less
congestion caused by the GATSO-shy jackrabbits bunching up the traffic, and the
journey times for everyone would be quicker. And, of course, the nearby
residents would be able to hear themselves think.

"Marc Brett" wrote in message
...
On 16 Oct 2004 15:09:56 GMT, Robin May
wrote:

If I remember correctly, the A13 from between Canning Town and Barking
and beyond used to have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has gone down to 40?

To improve conditions for local residents? The quieter road surface may
be a
clue. It's not so you can hear the "Today" program in your
already-soundproofed
car on your way to work. It's so people who LIVE near the A13 (they
exist, you
know) can hear themselves think. The lower speed limit also helps buses
when
they need to pull out into traffic, and makes cycling safer.

The difference between 50mph and 40mph across the whole 14-mile stretch of
the
A13 improvements is the difference between a 17-minute journey and a 21
minute
journey (assuming you treat the speed limit as a target and hit it
perfectly).
That's an extra FOUR MINUTES on your commute. What's the problem in
setting
your alarm clock 4 minutes earlier in the morning and just sticking to the
speed
limit? You'll save wear-and tear on your car by not braking for GATSOs,
you'll
save money by not paying speeding fines, you'll arrive less stressed at
work,
and you'll probably have fewer accidents. If EVERYBODY did it, there'd be
less
congestion caused by the GATSO-shy jackrabbits bunching up the traffic,
and the
journey times for everyone would be quicker. And, of course, the nearby
residents would be able to hear themselves think.

Most of the nearby residents directly affected by the road have probably
already been paid a share of our taxes to have double glazing installed, if
they don't already have it. Perhaps the limit should be 70mph as the road
designed for. That would mean motorists could save nearly a quarter of an
hour using your figures.

Mikael

Mikael Armstrong wrote:
"Marc Brett" wrote in message
...

On 16 Oct 2004 15:09:56 GMT, Robin May

wrote:

If I remember correctly, the A13 from between Canning Town and Barking
and beyond used to have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has gone down to 40?

To improve conditions for local residents? The quieter road surface may

be a

clue. It's not so you can hear the "Today" program in your

already-soundproofed

car on your way to work. It's so people who LIVE near the A13 (they

exist, you

know) can hear themselves think. The lower speed limit also helps buses

when

they need to pull out into traffic, and makes cycling safer.

The difference between 50mph and 40mph across the whole 14-mile stretch of

the

A13 improvements is the difference between a 17-minute journey and a 21

minute

journey (assuming you treat the speed limit as a target and hit it

perfectly).

That's an extra FOUR MINUTES on your commute. What's the problem in

setting

your alarm clock 4 minutes earlier in the morning and just sticking to the

speed

limit? You'll save wear-and tear on your car by not braking for GATSOs,

you'll

save money by not paying speeding fines, you'll arrive less stressed at

work,

and you'll probably have fewer accidents. If EVERYBODY did it, there'd be

less

congestion caused by the GATSO-shy jackrabbits bunching up the traffic,

and the

journey times for everyone would be quicker. And, of course, the nearby
residents would be able to hear themselves think.


Most of the nearby residents directly affected by the road have probably
already been paid a share of our taxes to have double glazing installed, if
they don't already have it. Perhaps the limit should be 70mph as the road
designed for. That would mean motorists could save nearly a quarter of an
hour using your figures.

Do you seriously think that double glazing solves all these residents'
problems? What if it's hot and they want to open the window? What if
they ever want to spend time in their garden? Have you any idea how
noisy a 70mph road is, especially in wet weather?

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

"Mikael Armstrong" wrote in message
...
"Marc Brett" wrote in message
...
On 16 Oct 2004 15:09:56 GMT, Robin May
wrote:

If I remember correctly, the A13 from between Canning Town and Barking
and beyond used to have a speed limit of 50mph. Why is it that after
extensive improvements to the road this has gone down to 40?

To improve conditions for local residents? The quieter road surface may
be a
clue. It's not so you can hear the "Today" program in your
already-soundproofed
car on your way to work. It's so people who LIVE near the A13 (they
exist, you
know) can hear themselves think. The lower speed limit also helps buses
when
they need to pull out into traffic, and makes cycling safer.

The difference between 50mph and 40mph across the whole 14-mile stretch
of
the
A13 improvements is the difference between a 17-minute journey and a 21
minute
journey (assuming you treat the speed limit as a target and hit it
perfectly).
That's an extra FOUR MINUTES on your commute. What's the problem in
setting
your alarm clock 4 minutes earlier in the morning and just sticking to
the
speed
limit? You'll save wear-and tear on your car by not braking for GATSOs,
you'll
save money by not paying speeding fines, you'll arrive less stressed at
work,
and you'll probably have fewer accidents. If EVERYBODY did it, there'd
be
less
congestion caused by the GATSO-shy jackrabbits bunching up the traffic,
and the
journey times for everyone would be quicker. And, of course, the nearby
residents would be able to hear themselves think.

Most of the nearby residents directly affected by the road have probably
already been paid a share of our taxes to have double glazing installed,
if
they don't already have it. Perhaps the limit should be 70mph as the road
designed for. That would mean motorists could save nearly a quarter of an
hour using your figures.

What on earthe makes you think it was designed for 70mph? It is effectively
a new road, so I expect it was in fact designed for the new speed limit.

"Dave Arquati" wrote in message
...
Mikael Armstrong wrote:
"Marc Brett" wrote in message
...

Most of the nearby residents directly affected by the road have probably
already been paid a share of our taxes to have double glazing installed,
if
they don't already have it. Perhaps the limit should be 70mph as the
road
designed for. That would mean motorists could save nearly a quarter of
an
hour using your figures.

Do you seriously think that double glazing solves all these residents'
problems? What if it's hot and they want to open the window? What if
they ever want to spend time in their garden? Have you any idea how
noisy a 70mph road is, especially in wet weather?

A large amount of money was spent installing a new improved sound barrier
along the A34 where it passes to the west of Oxford. I remember the
disruption when Lane 1 was out of use while the work was being carried out.
However it still carries a 50 limit, even though the noise is negligible
behind the barrier: I pulled off the road and drove down the residential
road parallel to the barrier and immediately behind it, and with my car
window open and the engine turned off, I could see HGVs going past but they
were barely audible. Keeping down to 50 on a dual carriageway where it's
safe to drive at 70 is very difficult, especially goinf south when the 50
limit carries on a good half a mile beyond the houses. Thankfully they'd
recently installed flashing "50" signs that light up only if you are going
over the limit that help to remind you. Apparently the police have said that
they will not enforce the 50 limit because it is there only for the
residents' benefit and not for road safety reasons.