The Driver's Site for the East Midlands

Welcome to Drivers' Union East Midlands.
Our Mission: Better road safety at lower cost. No unnecessary delay or slowing of road transport. No unnecessary or unjust prosecution of safe drivers.

Motorists & Drivers' Union is at www.driversunion.co


For specific topics click the appropriate label (above).

Search This Blog

Sunday, 8 May 2016

The 85%tile rule was dropped so that Green anti drivers can screw UK.




So what was the 85%tile rule of setting speed limits?

Well basically we used to set speed limits scientifically and sensibly instead of on a totally arbitrary, Nimbyist, green political, subjective basis that we use now. In those days the strap line 'It's a limit for a reason' did have some merit. Now such claims are totally false. 


Let me say I am able to say this because, unlike virtually everyone else in this green and pleasant land, I have surveyed, at my own time and expense, lots and lots of speed limit orders. Most I have surveyed have not been introduced for any other reason than at the request of some local Councillor to please a dozen local voters. I have not studied one single Speed Limit Order that includes an accident history to justify it, and none where accidents were caused specifically because the speed limit was too high.

Here's the proof.

We used to set limits on a scientific basis, the 85%tile Rule, which had served the country well for many many years. It's main advantage was that in no way was it subjective and open to political abuse, profit creation, and ideology. What we did was to measure the average speed that the majority of drivers, excluding the fastest 15%, were choosing for that section of road. This included the slowest and most pedestrian of drivers, excluded the fastest and the limit was set to the nearest round number, so that at 34 MPH the limit would be 30MPH and so on. And it worked very well.  

Drivers' Union had this to say in a submission to the Enquiry on the Speed Limit Appraisal Tool in 2012:

 'However the 85% tile rule that applied until the speed limit review of 2006, and still being implemented, was the nearest sensible formulae that could be applied in setting limits and was so applied for many years entirely successfully until its abandonment, for spurious economic reasons by a non-expert too. 

Whilst the abandonment of the 85% tile rule saved local time and money, in road safety, the usual constraints on finance should never be applied or considered. 

However, as previously discussed, the cost of arbitrary, unscientific speed limiting at £3,000,000,000 per 1 MPH and the social costs of drivers losing their jobs too don’t seem to have been considered.

speed-limiting-review submission

Of course the 85%tile Rule wouldn't have allowed blanket speed limiting, as in 20 Zones, but 20 limits where drivers were showing they were appropriate and safe. Unfortunately the Green, Anti Driver, Anti Community Lobby, who do not see roads and streets as crucial infrastructure but more like play grounds, could not control our streets against a sensible formula so it has been abandoned.





The result is blanket limits where accidents were not happening, speed limits set for profit, major infrastructure slowed and hampered, and many thousands of perfectly safe drivers prosecuted for profit. They have been aided and abetted in this by no less than the Transport Research Laboratory,  who claim to be independent but who we now have linked to Green anti driver groups. Read it here.
Image result for professor nick reed 
A classic example of an unscientifically set limit

See TrL bogus numbers for 20 Zones here.

I have just come across this article against the 85% tile system because it 'makes it harder to change speed limits' Read it here

Ok so without reading it, the strap-line says what it's about. The 85% tile stops ideology, anti driver green and profiteering policy from imposing bogus speed limits on us and they don't like it. 

Here is some of it:  


  • 'because neither officials nor engineers really set speed limits. Drivers do.' 
  •  'the way we decide how fast people should drive is through something called the 85th Percentile Theory.'
  • 'it assumes drivers are 1) reasonable and prudent, 2) want to avoid a crash and 3) want to get to their destination in the shortest possible time.' 
  • “Why don’t we design our roads for the speed we want people to go?'
  • We get requests to look at speeding in neighborhoods and we take a look at 25 mile an hour streets and thirty mile an hour streets and they generally come out about the same 85th percentile speeds,” Bollich said. “That’s just kind of more evidence that just lowering the speed limit won’t necessarily have a large impact.” 'These kinds of studies can stop a proposed speed limit change right in its tracks.' And so on.
So according to these anti driver academics, drivers actually driving with a view to not having a crash, ruining their car, injuring themselves and others or not wanting to be prosecuted, can't be trusted, but local politicians, vested interested groups, green ideology and profiteers can be trusted. 

So here are the reasons for dropping the 85%tile and in the UK since 2006, the anti driver green profiteers have flourished and UK's crucial infrastructure is being made ever slower, against the interests of the economy and the community.

There is a cheaper alternative though. Involve the top police drivers in verifying a speed limit. All they need to do is drive the route at safe speeds to ascertain what is a fair, reasonable and efficient speed for the road and, as experts, over-rule any inappropriate proposal. That has to be far better than UK speed limits being set politically by non experts, Greens and anti drivers as they are now surely.  

My Petition says: 

'Reinstate the Eighty Five Percentile Rule for setting speed limits.

We used to set speed limits scientifically and sensibly instead of on a totally arbitrary, Nimbyist, green political, subjective basis that we use now. In those days the strap line 'It's a limit for a reason' did have some merit. Now such claims are totally false.

The abandonment of a scientific method has resulted in blanket speed limit areas where accidents are not happening, speed limits set to please minority local interests, the over-slowing of crucial infrastructure, the prosecution of many perfectly safe drivers by virtue of arbitrary speed limits and a profitable Speeding Industry. '

 An arbitrary Speed Limit Order: http://driveeastmidlands.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/and-here-is-basis-of-high-earning.html

Drivers' Union Speed Limit Submission: http://bit.ly/23zqtCC

Sign the petition now to restore scientific speed limits here: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/129756

Still not sure? Read this for more info:  National Motorists Association





1 comment:

  1. So to set speed limits they dropped the scientifically based 85%tile rule and replaced it with 100% Bullsh*t from the mouth of a local councillor or Nimby.
    Marvellous.


    ReplyDelete