Cycling UK Forum

To CTC Members

A not generally known proposal by government which could impact on our safe riding of the country roads has appeared, as follows:

The DfT has opened a consultation on increasing the speed limit for HGV’s on single carriageway roads. The consequences to cyclists and other vulnerable road users is obvious and we only have until 1 Feb to fill in the on-line consultation at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/examining-the-speed-limit-for-heavy-goods-vehicles-over-7-5-tonnes-on-single-carriageway-roads

The questionnaire is mainly aimed at haulage contractors, but it is still possible to make your views known about safety issues.

...the last question

21 If you are an organisation that provides information and you believe that an increased speed for this class of vehicle on single carriageways would incur costs for your organisation in the form of publicity or conversion costs please indicate what these may be. Also please advise whether these costs would be reduced given a lead-in time between announcement and policy implementation as a result of costs being rolled into existing plans.

...my response

The cost to our organisation will be an escalation in dead cyclists

I live on such a road and it has recently been largely reduced from "unrestricted" to 50 mph.
I feel that to remove the speed differential between HGVs and other vehicles would make the roads safer for all concerned (even cyclists) on most of the road. However on the really twisty bits which have not yet been reduced to 40mph limits it would be a bad move.

So I am not really too concerned by this and I do a lot of riding on exactly the type of road this is aimed at.

My ideal situation would be an increase for the HGV limit but not universally for every mile of single carriageway through some more intelligent use of speed limits.

This has been discussed at length on here before.viewtopic.php?f=7&t=69985&hilit=hgvs&start=60

Anyone can express their views here https://consultation.dft.gov.uk/dft/htt ... intro/view Some of the questions are quite thought provoking.

I am generally in favour of the proposal with the proviso that it is linked to the also proposed reduction in single carriageway speed limits for motor vehicles.

It is my opinion that HGVs travelling at 40mph produce large tailbacks of closely following vehicles. When the HGV pulls out to overtake a clearly observed cyclist, the following traffic becomes a danger. At present the National Speed limit applies to all roads unless posted otherwise. There is clearly a good case to reduce the National Speed limit to 50mph for all single carriageways unless otherwise posted.

AFAIK the haulage industry has not pushed for this change, they are indifferent to it.

meic wrote:I live on such a road and it has recently been largely reduced from "unrestricted" to 50 mph.
I feel that to remove the speed differential between HGVs and other vehicles would make the roads safer for all concerned (even cyclists) on most of the road. However on the really twisty bits which have not yet been reduced to 40mph limits it would be a bad move.

So I am not really too concerned by this and I do a lot of riding on exactly the type of road this is aimed at.

My ideal situation would be an increase for the HGV limit but not universally for every mile of single carriageway through some more intelligent use of speed limits.

I can only reitterate this.
Most of my commute is on a 50 limit that was formerly an 'National Speed limit applies'. The HGVs regularly move along at 50.

There is an effective way of reducing speeds on single carriageways - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvYxXBMqEOM

Whether you're hit by an LGV (or indeed a car) doing 40mph or 50mph, the result will
be the same. Can't see a problem with this proposal.

garybaldy wrote:Whether you're hit by an LGV (or indeed a car) doing 40mph or 50mph, the result will
be the same. Can't see a problem with this proposal.

As with all speed issues, it's not the speed, it's the ability to stop.
10mph might not sound a lot but it significantly increases the stopping distance (and potential impact speed).

IME they already do well in excess of the speed limit anyway so what does this achieve other than legitimising existing behaviour?

kwackers wrote: what does this achieve other than legitimising existing behaviour?

Presents the opportunity to review single carriageway speed limits.

hexhome wrote:There is an effective way of reducing speeds on single carriageways - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvYxXBMqEOM

I wonder why he was arrested...

Taking photo's in public?

Very satisfying.

[XAP]Bob wrote:

hexhome wrote:There is an effective way of reducing speeds on single carriageways - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvYxXBMqEOM

I wonder why he was arrested...

Taking photo's in public?

Have you never been flashed in the face from a camera, it's blinding to say the least, at night like that it is very dangerous and could easily have caused an accident. Whilst I can sort of see his point of view his method I don't agreee with especially being so close to the carriageway he could easily have been a statistic himself.

kwackers wrote:[
IME they already do well in excess of the speed limit anyway

Not on the A9 they don't. I'm in favour of the increase. A long queue of frustrated drivers in a queue at 38mph is more dangerous than HGVs doing 50mph on appropriate roads.

irc wrote:

kwackers wrote:[
IME they already do well in excess of the speed limit anyway

Not on the A9 they don't. I'm in favour of the increase. A long queue of frustrated drivers in a queue at 38mph is more dangerous than HGVs doing 50mph on appropriate roads.

It's the use of the word "appropriate" here that is pernicious. The only appropriate responses a civilised society should expect from drivers frustrated by being made to drive slower than they would wish are an adjustment in attitude and greater tolerance.

The only appropriate responses a civilised society should expect from drivers frustrated by being made to drive slower than they would wish are an adjustment in attitude and greater tolerance.

I totally agree with that and as a whole, I would like to see a lot more done towards it.

However, I am not for frustrating motorists just for the sake of it (well not as a policy ).

Looking at it logically, I can see that the danger on a nice open road is increased by having a differential between the vehicle types and that reducing that differential by either lowering or raising the speed of a class of road user is probably a good idea.

There could be unintended consequences, like the HGV drivers may be forced to increase their speed as the employers will expect them to drive at 50mph at all times in a 50 limit as that is what the computer program says the journey time should be.

pliptrot wrote:

irc wrote:

kwackers wrote:[
IME they already do well in excess of the speed limit anyway

Not on the A9 they don't. I'm in favour of the increase. A long queue of frustrated drivers in a queue at 38mph is more dangerous than HGVs doing 50mph on appropriate roads.

It's the use of the word "appropriate" here that is pernicious. The only appropriate responses a civilised society should expect from drivers frustrated by being made to drive slower than they would wish are an adjustment in attitude and greater tolerance.

I agree. But in the less than ideal world in which we live actual driver behaviour should be recognised. If a 50mph limit for HGVs would reduce journey times while making the road safer with less frustrated drivers then I'm all for it.