On 16/04/2022 13:46, Jethro_uk wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 09:52:21 +0000, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>
>> I think the EU system relies on GPS.
>
> Not a great idea where motorways go over or under a dirt track.

I don't think that's the main problem, it is the poor quality of the databases that the GPS units use. I have two GPS units, one built into the car (2 years old but with a recently updated map) and one an older portable TomTom unit that I have also kept updated with the latest maps. On quite a few roads around there the two units indicate different speed limits, and on at least a few roads both units are wrong, at least according the signposts along the road, which I assume are always definitive.

If different cars have different brands of GPS unit relying on different erroneous databases, so some cars are legally doing 70 mph while others are limited to say 40 mph, there's quite a risk of accidents being caused by such database errors. Just as with driverless cars, I think the lawyers will make a lot of money.

--
Clive Page

On 17/04/2022 06:31 pm, Bob Eager wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Apr 2022 16:00:37 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:
>
>> Some of them are just plain evil. When my wife was still working, she
>> had to visit a couple of patients on the same road (a residential road,
>> with no through traffic, but near to Man Utd's ground). The road has two
>> separate sets of parking restrictions.
>
> Heads up to people in Sussex. The road that divides Hove and Portslade is
> like this. It's called both Boundary Road and Station Road (depending on
> the side). And the parking restrictions are totally different.

Chancery Lane (London) is Westminster and Camden on the west side and
the City of London on the east. Three different sets of parking
restrictions out of hours.

In message <jc3famFcn2fU1@mid.individual.net>, at 22:32:05 on Sun, 17
Apr 2022, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> remarked:
>On 16/04/2022 13:46, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 09:52:21 +0000, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>
>>> I think the EU system relies on GPS.
>> Not a great idea where motorways go over or under a dirt track.
>
>I don't think that's the main problem, it is the poor quality of the
>databases that the GPS units use. I have two GPS units, one built into
>the car (2 years old but with a recently updated map) and one an older
>portable TomTom unit that I have also kept updated with the latest
>maps. On quite a few roads around there the two units indicate
>different speed limits, and on at least a few roads both units are
>wrong, at least according the signposts along the road, which I assume
>are always definitive.
>
>If different cars have different brands of GPS unit relying on
>different erroneous databases, so some cars are legally doing 70 mph
>while others are limited to say 40 mph, there's quite a risk of
>accidents being caused by such database errors.

The most common change to speed limits are "stealth" ones where they
(eg) remove half a mile of 40mph road between two 30mph sections. This
catches a lot of people out (as well as satnav databases I expect) who
have been used to the middle section being 40mph all their lives.

However, the risk when it comes to speed limiters is that a car driving
at 30mph will suddenly (and without warning from roadside signage) try
to accelerate up to 40mph. But if the car in front is still limited to
30mph (because it has a more up to date database) the worst that should
happen is the car's forward collision detection should kick in, instead.

If the road ahead is clear, then the car might accelerate to 40mph, so
there's a risk of getting a ticket (if the driver is unobservant enough
not to have noticed the surge in the absence of a 40 sign), but not of a
collision. At the end of the invisible newly-30 streth, the car will
suddenly reduce to 30mph. Once again, no risk of a collision (cars
behind doing 40mph under GPS control will slow automatically and the
rest because the driver knows to leave a gap).

Again, observant drivers of [outdated] GPS equipped cars will soon get
the hang of the point on the road where this all kicks in. They might
even work out why (miracles can happen!).

The other type of new-speed-limit is stepping down on the approach to
built-up areas, so instead of going down from de-restricted to 30mph in
one go, a few hundred yards of 40mph. These are usually signed fairly
well, so shouldn't be a surprise to drivers.
--
Roland Perry

In message <EFLqRxIxiFXiFwa9@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>, at 19:13:05 on
Sun, 17 Apr 2022, Tim Lamb <tim@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>In message <J513IHmZREXiFAZQ@perry.uk>, Roland Perry
><roland@perry.co.uk> writes
>>In message <sAAwgrHd8DXiFw$h@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>, at 17:23:57 on
>>Sun, 17 Apr 2022, Tim Lamb <tim@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>>On a related parking matter, I, along with many other lazy drivers,
>>>use some slots on private land while the catering dept. fetch the
>>>Indian etc. take away. The site is festooned with threatening notices.
>>>Am I committing an actionable offence providing I move if asked or if
>>>a legitimate user turns up?
>>
>>>As a landowner, my simple understanding of trespass is that you have
>>>to cause damage to be successfully sued.
>>
>>Not if the parking spaces have compliant signage regarding a contract
>>you enter into by parking there. See supermarkets the length and
>>breadth of the nation.
>
>Indeed. My quibble was the term *parking*. I am in the vehicle and
>willing to move if necessary. Usually known as *waiting*.

But you shouldn't "wait" on private property if the owner doesn't want
you to. Could I come and "wait" on your front drive while my passenger
walked a hundred yards up the road and back to buy some fish and chips?

I promise they'll take less than 20mins, guv.
--
Roland Perry

In message <a9a30a64-281a-0b9d-1efc-365d5c3474b4@outlook.com>, at
18:13:31 on Sun, 17 Apr 2022, Robin <rbw@outlook.com> remarked:

>> As a landowner, my simple understanding of trespass is that you have
>>to cause damage to be successfully sued.
>
>If you park where there are signs like what Roland mentioned then
>you've implicitly entered into a contract and they can demand the
>charge stated on the signs. (NB "charge" - not penalty.)

Sometimes the signage is ambiguous. At my station there's ANPR at the
entrance/exit and lots of stuff about how to pay for parking.

However, they have four spaces near the ticket office marked on the
tarmac "20 minutes only", and strictly speaking there's nothing on the
signage which says one shouldn't pay the minimum fee (£1 for 1hr capped
at £7.50 a day) and that these four bays are reserved for people who
have paid, but only expect a short stay.

What I don't know (must go back and read the signs more closely) is if
you can pay the £7.50 and then come and go all day. Of course the £1
isn't transferable (even if it applies) to the next person patronising
those kiss-and-ride spaces. Not least because it wants your registration
number.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <jc3famFcn2fU1@mid.individual.net>, at 22:32:05 on Sun, 17
> Apr 2022, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> remarked:
>> On 16/04/2022 13:46, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 09:52:21 +0000, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the EU system relies on GPS.
>>> Not a great idea where motorways go over or under a dirt track.
>>
>> I don't think that's the main problem, it is the poor quality of the
>> databases that the GPS units use. I have two GPS units, one built into
>> the car (2 years old but with a recently updated map) and one an older
>> portable TomTom unit that I have also kept updated with the latest
>> maps. On quite a few roads around there the two units indicate
>> different speed limits, and on at least a few roads both units are
>> wrong, at least according the signposts along the road, which I assume
>> are always definitive.
>>
>> If different cars have different brands of GPS unit relying on
>> different erroneous databases, so some cars are legally doing 70 mph
>> while others are limited to say 40 mph, there's quite a risk of
>> accidents being caused by such database errors.
>
> The most common change to speed limits are "stealth" ones where they
> (eg) remove half a mile of 40mph road between two 30mph sections. This
> catches a lot of people out (as well as satnav databases I expect) who
> have been used to the middle section being 40mph all their lives.
>
> However, the risk when it comes to speed limiters is that a car driving
> at 30mph will suddenly (and without warning from roadside signage) try
> to accelerate up to 40mph.

Why would any “limiter” do this? A cruise control system possibly but not
a limiter.

The only way the car will “suddenly” try to accelerate is if you’re driving
In a particularly lead-footed manner and drive with your foot planted to
the floor and rely totally on the limiter to control your speed.
Ultimately, that’s under your control. It’s not the car’s fault if it
accelerates suddenly when a speed limit changes.

Even modern cruise controls accelerate fairly gently. I used to have an
old vacuum operated one that was quite fun to engage coming our of corners
as it would bang the throttle full open but it was a very old bit of kit.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

In message <myAMa+nNgPXiFAN4@perry.uk>, Roland Perry
<roland@perry.co.uk> writes
>In message <EFLqRxIxiFXiFwa9@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>, at 19:13:05 on
>Sun, 17 Apr 2022, Tim Lamb <tim@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>In message <J513IHmZREXiFAZQ@perry.uk>, Roland Perry
>><roland@perry.co.uk> writes
>>>In message <sAAwgrHd8DXiFw$h@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk>, at 17:23:57 on
>>>Sun, 17 Apr 2022, Tim Lamb <tim@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>
>>>>On a related parking matter, I, along with many other lazy drivers,
>>>>use some slots on private land while the catering dept. fetch the
>>>>Indian etc. take away. The site is festooned with threatening notices.
>>>>Am I committing an actionable offence providing I move if asked or
>>>>if a legitimate user turns up?
>>>
>>>>As a landowner, my simple understanding of trespass is that you have
>>>>to cause damage to be successfully sued.
>>>
>>>Not if the parking spaces have compliant signage regarding a contract
>>>you enter into by parking there. See supermarkets the length and
>>>breadth of the nation.
>>
>>Indeed. My quibble was the term *parking*. I am in the vehicle and
>>willing to move if necessary. Usually known as *waiting*.
>
>But you shouldn't "wait" on private property if the owner doesn't want
>you to. Could I come and "wait" on your front drive while my passenger
>walked a hundred yards up the road and back to buy some fish and chips?
Indeed again. But is anyone entitled to fine me for so doing?
>
>I promise they'll take less than 20mins, guv.

The private access splays at the entrance to my yard are regularly used
to collect/drop off walking parties. So long as there is a driver in
attendance, I don't see an issue. Not the same as your front drive I'll
agree.

--
Tim Lamb

In message
<32056344.671957571.163342.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>, at
06:59:54 on Mon, 18 Apr 2022, Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <jc3famFcn2fU1@mid.individual.net>, at 22:32:05 on Sun, 17
>> Apr 2022, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> remarked:
>>> On 16/04/2022 13:46, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 09:52:21 +0000, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think the EU system relies on GPS.
>>>> Not a great idea where motorways go over or under a dirt track.
>>>
>>> I don't think that's the main problem, it is the poor quality of the
>>> databases that the GPS units use. I have two GPS units, one built into
>>> the car (2 years old but with a recently updated map) and one an older
>>> portable TomTom unit that I have also kept updated with the latest
>>> maps. On quite a few roads around there the two units indicate
>>> different speed limits, and on at least a few roads both units are
>>> wrong, at least according the signposts along the road, which I assume
>>> are always definitive.
>>>
>>> If different cars have different brands of GPS unit relying on
>>> different erroneous databases, so some cars are legally doing 70 mph
>>> while others are limited to say 40 mph, there's quite a risk of
>>> accidents being caused by such database errors.
>>
>> The most common change to speed limits are "stealth" ones where they
>> (eg) remove half a mile of 40mph road between two 30mph sections. This
>> catches a lot of people out (as well as satnav databases I expect) who
>> have been used to the middle section being 40mph all their lives.
>>
>> However, the risk when it comes to speed limiters is that a car driving
>> at 30mph will suddenly (and without warning from roadside signage) try
>> to accelerate up to 40mph.
>
>Why would any “limiter” do this? A cruise control system possibly but not
>a limiter.

Because the driver will no doubt be in the habit of keeping his foot on
the accelerator. Especially if he's peeved his car has slowed to 30mph
on a road he supposed was 40mph.

>Even modern cruise controls accelerate fairly gently. I used to have an
>old vacuum operated one that was quite fun to engage coming our of corners
>as it would bang the throttle full open but it was a very old bit of kit.

What do you mean by "modern"? My 2006 design car has a cruise control
(which I hardly ever use, there just aren't enough long straight roads)
and if I engage it when travelling slower than its setting, the
acceleration is at least as rapid (in fact feels more rapid) than if I
were to floor the accelerator.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message
> <32056344.671957571.163342.tim.downie-gmail.com@news.individual.net>, at
> 06:59:54 on Mon, 18 Apr 2022, Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <jc3famFcn2fU1@mid.individual.net>, at 22:32:05 on Sun, 17
>>> Apr 2022, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu> remarked:
>>>> On 16/04/2022 13:46, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 16 Apr 2022 09:52:21 +0000, Jeff Gaines wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the EU system relies on GPS.
>>>>> Not a great idea where motorways go over or under a dirt track.
>>>>
>>>> I don't think that's the main problem, it is the poor quality of the
>>>> databases that the GPS units use. I have two GPS units, one built into
>>>> the car (2 years old but with a recently updated map) and one an older
>>>> portable TomTom unit that I have also kept updated with the latest
>>>> maps. On quite a few roads around there the two units indicate
>>>> different speed limits, and on at least a few roads both units are
>>>> wrong, at least according the signposts along the road, which I assume
>>>> are always definitive.
>>>>
>>>> If different cars have different brands of GPS unit relying on
>>>> different erroneous databases, so some cars are legally doing 70 mph
>>>> while others are limited to say 40 mph, there's quite a risk of
>>>> accidents being caused by such database errors.
>>>
>>> The most common change to speed limits are "stealth" ones where they
>>> (eg) remove half a mile of 40mph road between two 30mph sections. This
>>> catches a lot of people out (as well as satnav databases I expect) who
>>> have been used to the middle section being 40mph all their lives.
>>>
>>> However, the risk when it comes to speed limiters is that a car driving
>>> at 30mph will suddenly (and without warning from roadside signage) try
>>> to accelerate up to 40mph.
>>
>> Why would any “limiter” do this? A cruise control system possibly but not
>> a limiter.
>
> Because the driver will no doubt be in the habit of keeping his foot on
> the accelerator. Especially if he's peeved his car has slowed to 30mph
> on a road he supposed was 40mph.

That’s called “driver idiocy”. If a driver ends up ramming a slower car in
front because they have their foot so firmly planted to the floor and can’t
lift off in time they should surrender their driving licence.

>
>> Even modern cruise controls accelerate fairly gently. I used to have an
>> old vacuum operated one that was quite fun to engage coming our of corners
>> as it would bang the throttle full open but it was a very old bit of kit.
>
> What do you mean by "modern"? My 2006 design car has a cruise control
> (which I hardly ever use, there just aren't enough long straight roads)
> and if I engage it when travelling slower than its setting, the
> acceleration is at least as rapid (in fact feels more rapid) than if I
> were to floor the accelerator.

2006 = 15/16 years old design.

All the cars we’ve had with CC in the last 10 years have accelerated up to
the set speed below maximum acceleration possible.

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 08:24:39 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> [quoted text muted]
>
> That’s called “driver idiocy”. If a driver ends up ramming a slower car
> in front because they have their foot so firmly planted to the floor and
> can’t lift off in time they should surrender their driving licence.

+1

There is only so much you can do before it's the drivers responsibility.

Personally I would happily offer anyone caught speeding the choice
between careless driving ("I didn't know what the speed limit was
officer ...") or reckless driving (" I did know what the speed limit was
but broke it anyway. Officer ..."). There is no other interpretation.
Especially when a great part of the speed awareness course is the use of
observation to determine the speed limit.

On 17/04/2022 16:02, Fredxx wrote:
> On 17/04/2022 15:10, williamwright wrote:
>> On 17/04/2022 12:57, ARW wrote:
>>
>>> This morning the battery says 12.07V. Fire the car up and the voltage
>>> drops to 11.47V and the charging light comes on and revs increase to
>>> 1200RMP instead of the normal 750RPM. Rev the engine up and the
>>> charging light goes out and the voltage is then up to 14.04V
>>>
>>> Not like yesterday when it was "hunting " and revving up and down
>>> around the 750RPM mark when idling.
>>>
>>> New battery time IMHO.
>>
>> New alternator if the voltage drops when the engine is running. Fan
>> belt OK?
>
> I expect it's one of those eco putting power into the battery on the
> overrun etc. That will effect terminal voltage.
>

Charged the battery overnight. 12.54V this morning, turned on the
headlights (engine off) and after 5 seconds the battery showed 11.5V

On 18/04/2022 11:38, ARW wrote:
> Charged the battery overnight. 12.54V this morning, turned on the
> headlights (engine off) and after 5 seconds the battery showed 11.5V

Assuming you charged it adequately that does indeed sound like a fucked
battery. Fully charged, no load, should give at least 13.2V, and it
should hold up at 12.5V for several minutes with the lights on.

Bill

On 18/04/2022 13:37, williamwright wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 11:38, ARW wrote:
>> Charged the battery overnight. 12.54V this morning, turned on the
>> headlights (engine off) and after 5 seconds the battery showed 11.5V
>
> Assuming you charged it adequately that does indeed sound like a fucked
> battery. Fully charged, no load, should give at least 13.2V, and it
> should hold up at 12.5V for several minutes with the lights on.

Going to get a new battery before I next go dogging.

It's alright having tow-ropes and jump leads but some of the spectators
get the wrong idea when you take them out the boot.

On 18/04/2022 10:19 am, Jethro_uk wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 08:24:39 +0000, Tim+ wrote:

>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> [quoted text muted]
>
>> That’s called “driver idiocy”. If a driver ends up ramming a slower car
>> in front because they have their foot so firmly planted to the floor and
>> can’t lift off in time they should surrender their driving licence.

> +1

> There is only so much you can do before it's the drivers responsibility.

> Personally I would happily offer anyone caught speeding the choice
> between careless driving ("I didn't know what the speed limit was
> officer ...") or reckless driving (" I did know what the speed limit was
> but broke it anyway. Officer ..."). There is no other interpretation.
> Especially when a great part of the speed awareness course is the use of
> observation to determine the speed limit.

You remind me of a question I remember asking a couple of times in the
old uk.transport NG (but never got an answer to it).

Is it possible to drive a motor vehicle safely, whether in an urban area
or anywhere else, if the speedometer has failed? *

An extra dimension was posed to a retired traffic police inspector, as
to whether a police driver would be able to safely drive the same car
(if confiscated from a drunk driver, say) from incident location back to
the police station.

[* For example, is it intrinsically "unsafe" if the driver merely
estimates his speed and drives to the conditions, ensuring that he can
stop within the distance which can be seen to be clear?]

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 15:07:54 +0100, JNugent wrote:

> Is it possible to drive a motor vehicle safely, whether in an urban area
> or anywhere else, if the speedometer has failed? *

Legally possible, or simply possible ?

Legally, I believe a car has to have a working speedometer. Although I
presume there is some kind of test for reasonableness to allow a driver
whose speedo packs up on the M1 to get to a repair.

In terms of the mere possible it would depend on the driver. I was taught
to drive to never look at the speedo. But that's me. It seems that there
are other drivers who need a speedo to tell them that 100mph down a back
road might be too fast.

On 18/04/2022 11:38, ARW wrote:
> On 17/04/2022 16:02, Fredxx wrote:
>> On 17/04/2022 15:10, williamwright wrote:
>>> On 17/04/2022 12:57, ARW wrote:
>>>
>>>> This morning the battery says 12.07V. Fire the car up and the
>>>> voltage drops to 11.47V and the charging light comes on and revs
>>>> increase to 1200RMP instead of the normal 750RPM. Rev the engine up
>>>> and the charging light goes out and the voltage is then up to 14.04V
>>>>
>>>> Not like yesterday when it was "hunting " and revving up and down
>>>> around the 750RPM mark when idling.
>>>>
>>>> New battery time IMHO.
>>>
>>> New alternator if the voltage drops when the engine is running. Fan
>>> belt OK?
>>
>> I expect it's one of those eco putting power into the battery on the
>> overrun etc. That will effect terminal voltage.
>>
>
> Charged the battery overnight. 12.54V this morning, turned on the
> headlights (engine off) and after 5 seconds the battery showed 11.5V

Looks like a cell down, or the charger is U/S and actually discharging
the battery.

Is there some unknown heavy drain on the battery?

On 18/04/2022 14:58, ARW wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 13:37, williamwright wrote:
>> On 18/04/2022 11:38, ARW wrote:
>>> Charged the battery overnight. 12.54V this morning, turned on the
>>> headlights (engine off) and after 5 seconds the battery showed 11.5V
>>
>> Assuming you charged it adequately that does indeed sound like a
>> fucked battery. Fully charged, no load, should give at least 13.2V,
>> and it should hold up at 12.5V for several minutes with the lights on.
>
> Going to get a new battery before I next go dogging.
>
> It's alright having tow-ropes and jump leads but some of the spectators
> get the wrong idea when you take them out the boot.

Or even the right idea?

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 19:19:41 +1000, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com>
wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 08:24:39 +0000, Tim+ wrote:
>
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> [quoted text muted]
>>
>> That’s called “driver idiocy”. If a driver ends up ramming a slower car
>> in front because they have their foot so firmly planted to the floor and
>> can’t lift off in time they should surrender their driving licence.
>
> +1
>
> There is only so much you can do before it's the drivers responsibility.
>
> Personally I would happily offer anyone caught speeding the choice
> between careless driving ("I didn't know what the speed limit was
> officer ...") or reckless driving (" I did know what the speed limit was
> but broke it anyway. Officer ..."). There is no other interpretation.

Wrong. The other alternative is that you knew what the speed limit
is an knew it was safe to exceed that. That is obviously not a safety
risk like the PHucker is who goes as fast as the car can go.

> Especially when a great part of the speed awareness course is the use of
> observation to determine the speed limit.

Not applicable anymore given full speed limit databases that are always up
to date.

And don't try claiming that it isn't possible to always be up to date,
those doing the speed limit signs obviously use that.

ARW <adamwadsworth@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote
> Fredxx wrote
>> williamwright wrote
>>> ARW wrote

>>>> This morning the battery says 12.07V. Fire the car up and the voltage
>>>> drops to 11.47V and the charging light comes on and revs increase to
>>>> 1200RMP instead of the normal 750RPM. Rev the engine up and the
>>>> charging light goes out and the voltage is then up to 14.04V
>>>>
>>>> Not like yesterday when it was "hunting " and revving up and down
>>>> around the 750RPM mark when idling.
>>>>
>>>> New battery time IMHO.
>>>
>>> New alternator if the voltage drops when the engine is running. Fan
>>> belt OK?
>> I expect it's one of those eco putting power into the battery on the
>> overrun etc. That will effect terminal voltage.
>>
>
> Charged the battery overnight. 12.54V this morning, turned on the
> headlights (engine off) and after 5 seconds the battery showed 11.5V

The battery is almost dead. You into necrophilia ?

On 18/04/2022 03:17 pm, Jethro_uk wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 15:07:54 +0100, JNugent wrote:
>
>> Is it possible to drive a motor vehicle safely, whether in an urban area
>> or anywhere else, if the speedometer has failed? *
>
> Legally possible, or simply possible ?

Possible in practice.

It's obvious that it isn't lawful to drive a motor vehicle whose speedo
isn't working, so my question would and could not be about that.

That would be a different question.

My question was whether it is possible (for anyone, not necessarily
everyone) to *safely* drive a motor vehicle whose speedometer has
stopped working, as it might, for instance, between two motorway
junctions fifteen miles apart.

> Legally, I believe a car has to have a working speedometer.

Yes. That fact underpins my question. It is the very reasin for it.

> Although I
> presume there is some kind of test for reasonableness to allow a driver
> whose speedo packs up on the M1 to get to a repair.

That still doesn't address the issue of whether the vehicle may be
driven safely in such circumstances.

> In terms of the mere possible it would depend on the driver. I was taught
> to drive to never look at the speedo. But that's me. It seems that there
> are other drivers who need a speedo to tell them that 100mph down a back
> road might be too fast.

So what is the answer?

Is it possible to drive safely without knowing the exact speed of the
vehicle and having to rely upon one's estimate of it?

On 18/04/2022 15:24, Fredxx wrote:
> On 18/04/2022 11:38, ARW wrote:
>> On 17/04/2022 16:02, Fredxx wrote:
>>> On 17/04/2022 15:10, williamwright wrote:
>>>> On 17/04/2022 12:57, ARW wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This morning the battery says 12.07V. Fire the car up and the
>>>>> voltage drops to 11.47V and the charging light comes on and revs
>>>>> increase to 1200RMP instead of the normal 750RPM. Rev the engine up
>>>>> and the charging light goes out and the voltage is then up to 14.04V
>>>>>
>>>>> Not like yesterday when it was "hunting " and revving up and down
>>>>> around the 750RPM mark when idling.
>>>>>
>>>>> New battery time IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> New alternator if the voltage drops when the engine is running. Fan
>>>> belt OK?
>>>
>>> I expect it's one of those eco putting power into the battery on the
>>> overrun etc. That will effect terminal voltage.
>>>
>>
>> Charged the battery overnight. 12.54V this morning, turned on the
>> headlights (engine off) and after 5 seconds the battery showed 11.5V
>
> Looks like a cell down, or the charger is U/S and actually discharging
> the battery.
>
> Is there some unknown heavy drain on the battery?

No. The car is usually parked up for weeks without use and it has always
started up. The charger has been used many a time to stop the battery
going flat.

JNugent <jennings&co@fastmail.fm> wrote
> Jethro_uk wrote
>> Tim+ wrote
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote

>>> That’s called “driver idiocy”. If a driver ends up ramming a slower
>>> car
>>> in front because they have their foot so firmly planted to the floor
>>> and
>>> can’t lift off in time they should surrender their driving licence.
>
>> +1
>
>> There is only so much you can do before it's the drivers responsibility.
>
>> Personally I would happily offer anyone caught speeding the choice
>> between careless driving ("I didn't know what the speed limit was
>> officer ...") or reckless driving (" I did know what the speed limit was
>> but broke it anyway. Officer ..."). There is no other interpretation.
>> Especially when a great part of the speed awareness course is the use of
>> observation to determine the speed limit.
>
> You remind me of a question I remember asking a couple of times in the
> old uk.transport NG (but never got an answer to it).
>
> Is it possible to drive a motor vehicle safely, whether in an urban area
> or anywhere else, if the speedometer has failed? *

Yes, mine did in the 73 Golf and I drove it like that for decades.

Bit of a hassle to swap the cable, so I didn't bother.

> An extra dimension was posed to a retired traffic police inspector, as
> to whether a police driver would be able to safely drive the same car
> (if confiscated from a drunk driver, say) from incident location back to
> the police station.

> [* For example, is it intrinsically "unsafe" if the driver merely
> estimates his speed and drives to the conditions, ensuring that he can
> stop within the distance which can be seen to be clear?]

Corse not and most can drive roughly at the speed limit
without checking the speedo.

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 00:24:48 +1000, Fredxx <fredxx@spam.uk> wrote:

> On 18/04/2022 11:38, ARW wrote:
>> On 17/04/2022 16:02, Fredxx wrote:
>>> On 17/04/2022 15:10, williamwright wrote:
>>>> On 17/04/2022 12:57, ARW wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> This morning the battery says 12.07V. Fire the car up and the
>>>>> voltage drops to 11.47V and the charging light comes on and revs
>>>>> increase to 1200RMP instead of the normal 750RPM. Rev the engine up
>>>>> and the charging light goes out and the voltage is then up to 14.04V
>>>>>
>>>>> Not like yesterday when it was "hunting " and revving up and down
>>>>> around the 750RPM mark when idling.
>>>>>
>>>>> New battery time IMHO.
>>>>
>>>> New alternator if the voltage drops when the engine is running. Fan
>>>> belt OK?
>>>
>>> I expect it's one of those eco putting power into the battery on the
>>> overrun etc. That will effect terminal voltage.
>>>
>> Charged the battery overnight. 12.54V this morning, turned on the
>> headlights (engine off) and after 5 seconds the battery showed 11.5V

> Looks like a cell down,

Or all cells sulphated due to being left flat for too long.

> or the charger is U/S and actually discharging the battery.

Unlikely.

> Is there some unknown heavy drain on the battery?

That wouldn't see the voltage drop that much in 5 secs with the headlights
on and the engine not running.

On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 17:20:31 +0100, JNugent wrote:

> Is it possible to drive safely without knowing the exact speed of the
> vehicle and having to rely upon one's estimate of it?

With the caveat "it depends", I would say yes.

Practicing timed laps around a track without a speedo is good training.

I would presume that elite armed forces may need the skill too.

I would be much less confident in fog - that really ****s up speed and
distance perception.

On Tue, 19 Apr 2022 01:20:43 +1000, Jock wrote:

> On Mon, 18 Apr 2022 19:19:41 +1000, Jethro_uk <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com>
> wrote:
>
>> [quoted text muted]
>
> Wrong. The other alternative is that you knew what the speed limit is an
> knew it was safe to exceed that.

I am referring to legal, not actual. AFAIAA the law in the UK requires
that a driver does not exceed the stated speed limit. Not that they
"drive safely regardless of the limit".

Although there was someone that brain dead on my SAC who came within
about five seconds of being asked to leave and return to the court to let
them know they got it wrong. After being told that it would certain be a
first in any UK court ever, they decided not to pursue that line of
reasoning.

As an aside, I found myself driving for over 2 miles today inside a 20mph
zone. As I say, I look forward to when they are covered by average speed
cameras.