30mph???

Kormeera X

Ok, so ive heard that when people are driving through the city centre or wherever, its only supposed to be 30mph....what's that all about?? You are never going to get to where your supposed to be at this rate! :mad::mad: The country is gone bl**din' bonkers!!:mad:






:mad: What's going to happen next?! get told the buses are on strike, and wont be returning to normal!?!?!? :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

??????

seamus

It's 30kph. And it only applies to a small number of streets in the immediate city centre which are easily avoided and where you would rarely get above that speed anyway.

I'm heard all sorts of moronic statements such as;

"My car can't go at that speed" - then there's something wrong with your car or you need driving lessons
"A jogger passed me this morning" - 30kph is a fast sprint, certainly nothing your average morning jogger is even capable of.
"It's making the traffic worse" - How does a speed limit affect how much traffic is stopped in the city centre?

People will bitch about anything.

Borneo Fnctn

Metric system grandad. 30 km/h

walshb

I wouldn't have a problem with 30 mph; I do think 30 kph is too slow however.

I tried to drive at 30 kph last night, not in the city, just on a normal street and it was
so so slow and unnatural.

ibarelycare

30kph = 18mph.

MaybeLogic

It's understandable on O'Connell St., College Green ,Dame St. maybe places where there are a lot of pedestrians.
But Gardiner St? Bride St.? The Quays? esp. the Quays. WTF?
That speed limit is ridiculous. Even the AA have come out and said it's "absurd".

dr.bollocko

What city is this?
I mean I have no idea where you're talking about but it seems likely to me that the Northern side of it is poorer than the Southern side.
Baghdad is it?
Can tanks drive faster than 30mph?

elgriff

seamus wrote: »

It's 30kph. And it only applies to a small number of streets in the immediate city centre which are easily avoided and where you would rarely get above that speed anyway.

I'm heard all sorts of moronic statements such as;

.
"It's making the traffic worse" - How does a speed limit affect how much traffic is stopped in the city centre?

People will bitch about anything.

If the speed limit had no affect on the traffic, then why is it being brought in under the veil of improving traffic flow?

pickarooney

About 40% of the town I live in is limited to 30kph, as are pretty much all towns nearby. I wouldn't have thought it was unusual/outrageous/incomprehensible to have a similar limit in a large Irish town, but you learn something new every day.

I don't think I ever remember seeing traffic moving at over 30kph in Dublin city centre, now that I think of it.

seamus

elgriff wrote: »

If the speed limit had no affect on the traffic, then why is it being brought in under the veil of improving traffic flow?

Aha you're right, but the science behind it is fuzzy at best. Traffic will flow better when the roads are clear, that's what they've been saying. Did anyone go into town at 10pm last night check this?

However, theory might also back up the assertion that if traffic is moving slower, then less traffic will arrive at the traffic lights between changes, meaning less queues. However, this can only be effective up to a certain level of traffic. In Dublin levels, traffic will still build up no matter what the speed limit.

we'llallhavetea_old

the chance of gettin over 30kph on some streets in city centre would be a fine thing

CreepingDeath

It might have some resemblance of fairness if they introduced penalties for pedestrians who endanger themselves running across the road.

An on-the-spot fine of €50 for any idiot crossing the road while the traffic is moving.

MaybeLogic

seamus wrote: »

Aha you're right, but the science behind it is fuzzy at best. Traffic will flow better when the roads are clear, that's what they've been saying. Did anyone go into town at 10pm last night check this?

However, theory might also back up the assertion that if traffic is moving slower, then less traffic will arrive at the traffic lights between changes, meaning less queues. However, this can only be effective up to a certain level of traffic. In Dublin levels, traffic will still build up no matter what the speed limit.

During rush hour traffic's not gonna get up to those speeds but during certain times of the day, especially evening times, these limits are a joke.

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

I'm heard all sorts of moronic statements such as;

"My car can't go at that speed" - then there's something wrong with your car or you need driving lessons

Do you drive? Unless you're driving a 500cc trike, many cars will have to go in a lower gear to sustain that speed or the engine will stall and/or be bloody jerky. Both are hardly good for fuel efficiency(so bang goes the "green" argument). Even in a lower gear below 30kph is hard to sustain and going over the limit a strong possibility. Plus concentrating on a silly speed limit to avoid fines and points isnt exactly safe.

"It's making the traffic worse" - How does a speed limit affect how much traffic is stopped in the city centre?

Traffic flow is massively affected by variances in speed in different areas of a city. There's some good research on how traffic jams occur. Some stuff is obvious, some less so. This will ripple outwards.

People will bitch about anything.

They'll bitch about stupid things and this is one of them. It makes little or no sense. It's mostly a "we're seen to be doing something" exercise. Plus a few(D norris among them) have noted it will increase traffic to the privately owned toll bridge as a nice side line.

Its just another example of woolly headed thinking by dublin city council.

seamus

MaybeLogic wrote: »

During rush hour traffic's not gonna get up to those speeds but during certain times of the day, especially evening times, these limits are a joke.

I would have said so, but having thought about it more, I don't think it is. If you go into the city centre when's the no traffic, you'll find that suddenly people are driving quickly and racing around, though there's still a higher volume of pedestrians than you'd find elsewhere. As someone who, as a younger driver, has traversed the quays at speeds exceeding 80kph because I was late for work, I can attest that what's possible within the city centre is not necessarily what's reasonable. Outside of a couple of core wee small hours, there's a fairly constant high volume of pedestrians in the areas covered by the limit.

Wibbs wrote: »

Do you drive? Unless you're driving a 500cc trike, many cars will have to go in a lower gear to sustain that speed or the engine will stall and/or be bloody jerky. Both are hardly good for fuel efficiency(so bang goes the "green" argument). Even in a lower gear below 30kph is hard to sustain and going over the limit a strong possibility. Plus concentrating on a silly speed limit to avoid fines and points isnt exactly safe.

Most cars will do 30kph in 2nd or 3rd gear at low revs, no problem. I agree though that focussing more on your speed than on the road makes it more dangerous, but it's perfectly possible to cruise along at 30kph without checking your speedo every 5 seconds, regardless of how stupid you feel.

However, the aim here should not be to rigidly punish people for this but instead change their attitude and stop them sprinting from junction to junction like they do now.

Traffic flow is massively affected by variances in speed in different areas of a city. There's some good research on how traffic jams occur. Some stuff is obvious, some less so. This will ripple outwards.

As I say, it's a fuzzy science. Light sequences, road markings, lane and junction positioning have a much greater effect on traffic than the speed of the vehicles.
In fact the average speed through an area is generally a product of the traffic volumes, not a factor.

MaybeLogic

seamus wrote: »

I would have said so, but having thought about it more, I don't think it is. If you go into the city centre when's the no traffic, you'll find that suddenly people are driving quickly and racing around, though there's still a higher volume of pedestrians than you'd find elsewhere. As someone who, as a younger driver, has traversed the quays at speeds exceeding 80kph because I was late for work, I can attest that what's possible within the city centre is not necessarily what's reasonable. Outside of a couple of core wee small hours, there's a fairly constant high volume of pedestrians in the areas covered by the limit.

.

My problem is I ride a 1000cc motorbike (a bit excessive for the city centre maybe), I have trouble keeping it below 50kph, nevermind 30.

seamus

MaybeLogic wrote: »

My problem is I ride a 1000cc motorbike (a bit excessive for the city centre maybe), I have trouble keeping it below 50kph, nevermind 30.

Second gear is your friend then. I have yet to encounter any vehicle, motorbike or car, where if you lift off the clutch in second gear it takes off at a speed above 30kph.

You're on a motorbike anyway, you can easily avoid the affected areas without impacting your travel time in any major way.

MaybeLogic

seamus wrote: »

Second gear is your friend then. I have yet to encounter any vehicle, motorbike or car, where if you lift off the clutch in second gear it takes off at a speed above 30kph.

You're on a motorbike anyway, you can easily avoid the affected areas without impacting your travel time in any major way.

That's not the point.
I'm like a fish through traffic, it's the speed traps what kill me.
The Quays are lethal for it as it is.

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

Most cars will do 30kph in 2nd or 3rd gear at low revs, no problem.

2nd or 3rd gear? Are you seriously suggesting that driving for any length of time in 2nd or 3rd gear is a good thing? The most inefficient and most polluting way of driving possible(also increases wear and tear on the car). And not exactly safer either as in those gears chnages in speed are much greater with little pressure on the throttle

I agree though that focussing more on your speed than on the road makes it more dangerous, but it's perfectly possible to cruise along at 30kph without checking your speedo every 5 seconds, regardless of how stupid you feel.

Oh I was in town yesterday. Sounds great in theory but hard in practice.

However, the aim here should not be to rigidly punish people for this but instead change their attitude and stop them sprinting from junction to junction like they do now.

Reward people by setting the timing of the lights. Sprinters wont make up any more time. Then properly enforce the current limits, not just every time some health and safety nut is wheeling out their stall for the cameras.

As I say, it's a fuzzy science. Light sequences, road markings, lane and junction positioning have a much greater effect on traffic than the speed of the vehicles.
In fact the average speed through an area is generally a product of the traffic volumes, not a factor.

and reducing the speed to this level makes an impact on that? Nope. It'll increase it IMHO but that remains to be seen.

I still say PR exercise with a side order of moving the traffic to the various tolls around the city.

connundrum

Whilst I have no problem with the argument that a lower speed may reduce road deaths, I do argue with the actual affect it is having on traffic in the first two days of the new system i.e. I have never seen a traffic build-up like it. I can't believe that it didn't make the AA Roadwatch news?!

I've travelled from Finglas to the city centre for about 2 years now and have never seen the traffic backed up to the village itself, yesterday morning and this morning it was. Usually I'd get a decent run up to Glasnevin cemetary where things would naturally slow down.

I appreciate that it may take people a couple of days to get used to the new speed limits, but I would never have imagined that things would get this crazy. Hopefully it calms down, otherwise I'm gonna have to get up 30 mins earlier from now on

pickarooney

Are people seriously suggesting that they are not able to drive at 30kph or lower?

Wibbs

Yep like I suspected, a much lower speed in certain sections of a traffic system ripples out. I saw similar myself. It may settle down but I'll put money now that it wont.

Wibbs

pickarooney wrote: »

Are people seriously suggesting that they are not able to drive at 30kph or lower?

Of course not. It requires far more concentration and a lower gear. Its more polluting and inefficient. Fine for short distances, but down the quays say? 2nd gear through town? sweet zombie jeebus. Another dopey time and motion exercise that doesnt look at the simple reality of the situation.

seamus

Wibbs wrote: »

2nd or 3rd gear? Are you seriously suggesting that driving for any length of time in 2nd or 3rd gear is a good thing? The most inefficient and most polluting way of driving possible(also increases wear and tear on the car). And not exactly safer either as in those gears chnages in speed are much greater with little pressure on the throttle

Emissions and wear and tear are dependent on revs. Driving at 3000rpm in 3rd gear creates no more emissions than driving at 3000rpm in 5th gear. Same goes for wear and tear. These would only be factors if you had to drive at high revs in a low gear in order to maintain the 30kph limit, but you don't.
The responsiveness of the car shouldn't be an issue for any remotely competent driver. Those who regularly drive in Dublin traffic spend more time in 2nd and 3rd than in 4th and 5th anyway, so I don't see any major problem there.

I still say PR exercise with a side order of moving the traffic to the various tolls around the city.

PR exercise....meh, I don't think so. Who are they trying to please? Clearly not the media or the public.
Moving traffic, absolutely. Though they'd never admit it publically, the main aim of all of these measures is to discourage through-traffic from using the immediate city centre. And rightly so IMO.

stovelid

seamus wrote: »

Aha you're right, but the science behind it is fuzzy at best.

This science, perhaps?

seamus

For anyone who's confused about what "town" is, you might get incensed yourself to find out that this likely to be rolled out in other cities such as Cork and Galway, within the year.

connundrum

Wibbs wrote: »

Its more polluting and inefficient.

To back up that point with actual evidence - look at the recent bad weather/snow. For those couple of weeks everyone was forced to drive at approx 30kph anyway. My fuel efficiency went from €45 = 700km (approx) to €45 = 530km. Slower driving + idling engine = crap fuel efficiency.

On the pollution end, I'm sure that a morning runner/jogger will notice a difference. No doubt DCU or UCD will have a few students out studying the effect on the environment.

chosen1

seamus wrote: »

Emissions and wear and tear are dependent on revs. Driving at 3000rpm in 3rd gear creates no more emissions than driving at 3000rpm in 5th gear..

Of course it creats more emmisions. You'll go nearly twice as fast going in 5th gear so you'll spend half the time going the same distance.

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

Emissions and wear and tear are dependent on revs. Driving at 3000rpm in 3rd gear creates no more emissions than driving at 3000rpm in 5th gear. Same goes for wear and tear. These would only be factors if you had to drive at high revs in a low gear in order to maintain the 30kph limit, but you don't.

Actually it does, as it depends on where the emissions are likely to build up. 3000rpm in a city is a lot bigger of a localised pollution issue than 3000 on a motorway. Its also not directly dependent on RPM. Common extrapolation, but doesnt quite match up in reality. Drive around at 3000RPM in 2nd for a time, do the same length of time at 3000RPM in 5th and watch the difference in petrol consumption. distnace traveled over RPM. driving at 2000RPM in 4th in the city equals much less emissions.

The responsiveness of the car shouldn't be an issue for any remotely competent driver. Those who regularly drive in Dublin traffic spend more time in 2nd and 3rd than in 4th and 5th anyway, so I don't see any major problem there.

Momentarily they do, not consistently. We all drive in reverse every day, but not consistently.

PR exercise....meh, I don't think so. Who are they trying to please? Clearly not the media or the public.
Moving traffic, absolutely. Though they'd never admit it publically, the main aim of all of these measures is to discourage through-traffic from using the immediate city centre. And rightly so IMO.

They've already trotted out the health and safety spin. Which already appeals to the "its for our own good brigade".

I would have less issue with moving traffic away from the city centre if it was toll free. Its like that new bridge they built. the traffic flow has been purposely designed that its mostly pointless and you are better off going the toll route. Id have less issue again if they were at least honest about it.

anniehoo

MaybeLogic wrote: »

the Quays. WTF?
.

I drove down the Quays yesterday evening and i actually thought trying to stay at 30kph was hilarious. It was so unnnatural to be driving that slow. I also found it difficult to do without constantly looking down to check my speedometer, so god knows how many times i took my eyes off the road.

wildswan

This will definitely make traffic worse! Think about it, it will take longer for people to get between lights, and less cars will pass per light (assuming the traffic is actually moving)

Bear in mind that the same number of cars will enter the city centre per unit time as the speed limits are the same outside.

This is rediculous in the context of 100kph limits on some very dangerous country lanes where the locals "know the road" etc.
Surely 40kPH with better sineage/enforcement would be more reasonable.

Sounds like one of two things to me:
(1) A money making excercise - where else would be easier to install cameras then DCC?
(2) A red herring to distract from the coming strikes in the public sector. (The last time it was that bloody stupid blasphemy thing, now this)

Maybe I'm just paranoid

Blacey

CreepingDeath wrote: »

It might have some resemblance of fairness if they introduced penalties for pedestrians who endanger themselves running across the road.

An on-the-spot fine of €50 for any idiot crossing the road while the traffic is moving.

Seconded. And for cyclists who break red lights.

pickarooney

chosen1 wrote: »

Of course it creats more emmisions. You'll go nearly twice as fast going in 5th gear so you'll spend half the time going the same distance.

5th gear, at 60kph, in the city centre? That's silly talk.

mikom

pickarooney wrote: »

Are people seriously suggesting that they are not able to drive at 30kph or lower?

Won't somebody think of the Keanu.....

connundrum

More signs would be a help anyway, I've seen the maps of where the new 30kph zones are, but it still is a bit confusing as to where you're ok and where you're not.

I'm usually too busy texting to notice where I am though so maybe if someone could walk alongside me and tell me when I can speed up, that'd be great.

CreepingDeath

If they're that worried about pedestrian safety then there should be safety barriers/fences along the main city centre routes to clearly separate pedestrians from vehicles. This will avoid both sober and drunk people from crossing the road at inappropriate sections of the road.

But that costs money, and it's cheaper to penalise the drivers yet again.

seamus

chosen1 wrote: »

Of course it creats more emmisions. You'll go nearly twice as fast going in 5th gear so you'll spend half the time going the same distance.

That assumes that you are able to move without stopping though. Which is more efficient - going 100m at 50kph to a set of lights then stopping and idling for 4 seconds, or travelling the same distance in the same time at 30kph? Which creates more wear and tear? The former, obviously.

connundrum wrote: »

To back up that point with actual evidence - look at the recent bad weather/snow. For those couple of weeks everyone was forced to drive at approx 30kph anyway. My fuel efficiency went from €45 = 700km (approx) to €45 = 530km. Slower driving + idling engine = crap fuel efficiency.

Not really a fair comparison since the way you drive in the snow/ice is vastly different to how you drive in normal conditions, even at the same speed. You also have to consider that in colder weather, you have heaters/air con blasting.

Momentarily they do, not consistently. We all drive in reverse every day, but not consistently.

If you drive in rush hour traffic every day you will spend most of your commute, timewise, within the M50 boundary, starting and stopping in 2nd or 3rd gear.

RobbieTheRobber

CreepingDeath wrote: »

If they're that worried about pedestrian safety then there should be safety barriers/fences along the main city centre routes to clearly separate pedestrians from vehicles. This will avoid both sober and drunk people from crossing the road at inappropriate sections of the road.

But that costs money, and it's cheaper to penalise the drivers yet again.

Indeed or they could ban cars from the city centre, there would be no traffic problem then and public transport would be more efficent as it would not be stuck in traffic.

Or if people need their cars so much and really miss sitting in city centre traffic, how about we just ban people from the city centre unless they are in a car sure who the hell wants people walking around a city centre anyway.

Wazdakka

If public safety is an issue that these people are trying to tackle in Dublin city centre, how about enforcing the J-walking laws??

Why are the motorists always penalised and never the pedestrians?

But tbh this reeks of the same thing as the early off licence closings.
It's completely pointless, but some people who are after the 35 - 60 middle class vote have the idea that inconveniencing a large number of people makes it look like you're doing something constructive.
Realistically It's not actually helping or solving anything.

Sometimes this country just baffles me.
If more than 50% of the population want something, then the government should give it to them if it physically can...
That's the most basic concept of being a government in a democracy...
Still they manage to fúck that up with almost everything in this country.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

seamus wrote: »

"My car can't go at that speed" - then there's something wrong with your car or you need driving lessons

To drive at that speed, i have to keep it in second gear. Any tip on the accelerator at that speed and the car jumps in speed. also the engine burns more fuel

seamus wrote: »

People will bitch about anything.

Well this is a stupid idea. Drivers will spend more time looking at the speedometer than the road, is that safer? more chance of running a red light or hitting a pedestrian.

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

MaybeLogic wrote: »

especially evening times, these limits are a joke.

some fun getting a taxi from the O2 to heuston station (as an example) at 5am when the keys are nearly empty of people and traffic.

witnessmenow

So your telling me it takes you longer to look at your speedo than it does for the green light to turn orange then turn red!?

Is it written arrabic or something?

seamus

Caleb Mango Kangaroo2010 wrote: »

To drive at that speed, i have to keep it in second gear. Any tip on the accelerator at that speed and the car jumps in speed. also the engine burns more fuel

Burning more fuel is debatable. It burns more fuel per km than travelling in a higher gear because you're moving more slowly, but as I say above, your actual travel time through the city isn't affected (going by the council's theory), so you cover the exact same distance in the same time.

Well this is a stupid idea. Drivers will spend more time looking at the speedometer than the road, is that safer? more chance of running a red light or hitting a pedestrian.

You could use the same logic for any speed limit.

Wazdakka

Fundamentally I believe this is wrong and that it won't help anything.

Does anybody know how to voice an objection to the powers that be about silly laws like this?

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

Blacey wrote: »

Seconded. And for cyclists who break red lights.

what about cyclists that go over 3kph? :cool:

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

Indeed or they could ban cars from the city centre, there would be no traffic problem then and public transport would be more efficent as it would not be stuck in traffic.

give them 20 years. Im not joking

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

seamus wrote: »

You could use the same logic for any speed limit.

not really, every town in ireland has a 50kph speed limit, everyone is used to driving at that speed through a built up area. most cars can do it in 4th gear with the engine ticking over. 30kph is unnatural, especially to people why might only drive through the city center a few times a year.

homerun_homer

I'm dreading my next trip to Dublin. My friends live in the city centre and I'd always be travelling up on a Friday evening and hitting the leaving work traffic. It's going to be a bigger nightmare. I better bring a pee bottle just in case.

I was under the belief that lowering speed limits was in the interest of safety to people and to save lives on the road but how many people have died in car accidents in Dublin city centre - the Quays to be specific in the last 5 years?
The government should stick to sorting out the real black spot areas around the country and stop making it tougher in areas that aren't screaming for change.

Mike 1972

Caleb Mango Kangaroo2010 wrote: »

not really, every town in ireland has a 50kph speed limit, everyone is used to driving at that speed through a built up area.

everyone ???

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

Mike 1972 wrote: »

everyone ???

touche but you know what i mean

ejmaztec

"If we lay down a ridiculous speed limit, say 30kph, those feckin motorists won't be able to keep to it, so we'll make a feckin mint from all the feckin fines. Profit!"

I assume that this was the remark made by an anonymous civil servant behind closed doors before everything was set in motion.

brianthebard

Caleb Mango Kangaroo2010 wrote: »

not really, every town in ireland has a 50kph speed limit, everyone is used to driving at that speed through a built up area. most cars can do it in 4th gear with the engine ticking over. 30kph is unnatural, especially to people why might only drive through the city center a few times a year.

So no one has ever broken the 50kph speed limit because its 'normal', but 30kph, despite probably being the average speed you travel through dublin anyways (or faster) is an affront to the god of motoring? There are some truly ridiculous statements being made in this thread.

p.s. this issue has nothing to do with the culchies driving through dublin a few times a year, so don't even bother trying to argue that one.:rolleyes: