h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Why is the collective descriptor of sleeping policemen, rumble strips, yellow lines across the road, slow down signs etc. called traffic calming - when it seems that it has the opposite effect on drivers. Can anyone think of a more appropriate name for these measures?

No, not one that doesn't contravene the agreement we made not to post offensive material ...

Traffic retardant...

Sleeping Policemen cause traffic jams when everyone slows down for them.

Traffic erraticizers...

Rumble strips cause drivers to jerk suddenly, rather than slowly correcting, making their vehicle loose control and possibly roll.

Traffic distracters...

Yellow lines across the road make people try to figure out what the yellow lines are for rather than paying attention to their driving.

Ineffective against traffic...

And slow down signs apparently have no effect. Maybe the physics behind slow down signs should be investigated.

In my experience, the only drivers who slow down when confronted with traffic calming schemes are those who drive annoyingly slow anyway (for example old men with cloth caps, Volvo drivers etc.)

Everyone else sees them as a challenge - sleeping policemen as a launch ramp, roundabouts and randomly placed flower planters as slalom courses.

does traffic calming work

No.

The London Ambulance Service did a study involving journey times and mortality whilst hospital-bound, and found that more people died because it took longer to get to hospital (because of the traffic calming measures), than the number of lives saved, comparing annual statistics before and after speed bumps were introduced.

The more enlightened local authorities are now removing speed bumps.

I've heard of this study before but nobody has been ablke to give me details, is it just an urban myth

Traffic calming is a good thing. so sorry if this is an untrendy or uncool thing to say, but rememnber;

Cars kill people.. More people than, feking mobile phone, bleedin masts, peadophiles, GM crops, or whatever your current death obsesion is.

All of the above are unproven and VERY probably a load of nonsense, whereas your fecking BMW piece of over hyped metal junk will kill insects, rodents, small mammels including foxes, and last but not least ferking human beings!

JUST BLEEDIN SLOW DOWN! IT'S NOT A SIGN OF WEAKNESS TO TRAVEL AT THE SPEED LIMIT YOU FERKING NO-BRAIN, SPEED JUNKY, SELF LOVING, SMALL PENIS'D/ LOOSE C**T'D W**KERS.

Oh OK, Peadophiles are not unproven, but you get the jist of what i'm saying!

I just don't get this "i'm breaking the law so i'm cool" thing. Yes I drive, and i'm sure that i have broken the speed limit on many occasions, but it will usually be for a short time, when i lose concentration(as all of us human beings are prone to do that), but on the whole i will stick to the speed limit. I'm SSSSSSOOOOOOOOOOooo bloody sorry if this frustrates any drivers behind me, but(to mis-quote) frankly my damn i don't give a dear.

YOUR problem, not mine.

"Traffic calming is a good thing"
yes, but wot about councils that have a policy of putting speed bumps on all roads regardless of there need in terms of safety but just to discourage the use of motor vehicle?

"JUST BLEEDIN SLOW DOWN! IT'S NOT A SIGN OF WEAKNESS TO TRAVEL AT THE SPEED LIMIT"

I'd love to be able to travel at the speed limit but on many roads that have been traffic calmed it is impossible to travel that fast without risking serious damage to ones car.

I'm sorry, but i honestly don't have a problem with travelling at 30mph in the city, and 70mph on the motorway.. i just don't get stressed by the speed limit!!

I really don't discriminate different roads, but i use common sense. If the road is narrow with lots of parked cars, as many of the roads in my area are, i will drive at 20mph or less... This is sensible and will probably save a life one day!

But if the road is empty, and i see no danger i will speed. A good example is when i was driving up north in the very far northern highlands at about 2 in the morning.My headlights illuminated so far ahead in the pitch darkness, that i was pretty sure 50-60mph was OK, even though this was a single track road. There was a small chance i could hit a deer or something but, hey- you only live once

could not agree more but I could show ya roads in London in which ya risking ya exhaust & sump if ya go over 10mph

I just wouldn't drive in London, full stop!

What brought home the futility of owning a car in London to me, was when a friend of mine, who was a total car addict when he lived here(Glasgow), sold his car when he moved to London.
If *he* felt a need to give it up, i can't imagine why anyone else in that part of the world would own one. After all, this was a man who would climb into his Merc. to travel a 2 minute walk to the local shop for chocolate..

I own one 'cos people pay me to drive it, such is the life of a PCO registered Private Hire Driver

Well, you're making money doing it, so that's a good enough reason

All i can suggest, is to find a speed at which no damage to your undercarriage results and stick to it!

I have to say that In my humble opinion, you having to slow to 10mph every time you traverse certain roads, is a small price to pay, if even one fatal accident is avoided in 10 years..

Afterall, for the local council to spend money on a certain road's road calming, there *must* be a very valid reason for doing so (X number of fatal accidents). Councils will *not* spend money if they don't have to, even if it is the end of the financial year.

nope..

as i said in post 10

"yes, but wot about councils that have a policy of putting speed bumps on all roads regardless of there need in terms of safety but just to discourage the use of motor vehicle?"

In the borough I live at the last local elections an administration that had such a policy was replaced by a an administration with no such policy and we now have gangs of workmen going around taking out unnecessary speed bumps (but leaving them where there is a genuine safety issue) but er.. I think this is unique in London (if not the country).

Well how do you know that is the case?

If you just drive throughthe road every day, but don't actually know anyone who lives there, how do you know there aren't accidents on it. Does it just *look* safe?

And what if the policy is 'just to discourage the use of motor vehicles'. Is that necessarily a bad thing? City's are, after all for people. Mybe the residents of this particular road would happen to enjoy being able to listen to their TV without the added sound effect of a diesel engine roaring past every few seconds...

in many cases we are talking about main roads.

I have no problem with traffic calming if there is a genuine safety issue involves. If accidents keep happening then calming should be put in place, but it should be appropriate to the road. An example of what I'm talking about here would be Musswell Hill Road, the main road into Musswell Hill if you are coming from central London. Musswell Hill has no rail link, the only way in is by road. Musswell Hill road has speed bumps, it cannot be fun for those that live on the road listening to trucks & busses clattering over the bumps. If traffic calming is needed here then cameras or even rumble strips would be more appropriate.

Oh and can i just say had a look at your page, happy.. how refreshing it is to see a list of conversations that aren't from 'ask the H2G2 community'... There is more to the site than that particular conversation forum!

Even though that is where i spend most of my online time