Speeding on site
Comments
-
I need no evidence DD other than my own eyes and the fact that at 5mph the stopping distance can be as little as 2m as opposed to 8m at 15mph and that fact has vertainly prevented me from possibly hitting a child travelling towards me out of control on a cycle
1 -
If I you observe a vehicle traveling along row of vans at 15 mph +, you don't need to see it actually hit someone to realise that it is a crazy thing to do. ET's post above provides definitive proof, if any is really needed.
As I said a site should be a safer environment than the street, hence the 5mph speed limit.
0 -
Although serious accidents or fatalities are likely to become public knowledge, near misses are not. Or even minor injury, as happened to my OH getting out of the way of a speeding MH. ( It did go in the CC accident book)
I have not come across any reported statistics from the CC, so all of us are speculating as to the size of the problem. I do know however, it is a very fine line between becoming a statistic and having a happy holiday. Although in that case it was nothing to do with a caravan site.
edit Clearly not just a car caravan problem DD, posted while you were posting.
1 -
ET's post above provides definitive proof, if any is really needed.
Indeed Steve. The child was probably little more than 5 metres ahead and was closing fast. His reaction time was good but not his competence. I sat there waiting for him to crash into the car. He had certainly learned how to go at a reasonable speed but mot mastered the art of stopping. Thankfully he fell off! Painful no doubt but less damaging to him than hitting the front of the car.
0 -
I believe the problem of excessive speed on sites is actually due to having a defined limit. Most drivers have not got a clue what five miles per hour actually is. Some of the speeders may well think they are doing just fine. A speed limit of "walking pace" should be more easily understood by the vast majority as they can walk themselves.
Without some mechanical/electronic record of speed attained the driver will still be in the "right" and complainers, staff or otherwise, "wrong". Even if multiple records show a particular vehicle was attaining a speed above the limit, there is no evidence as to who the driver was on each occasion. So no possibility of sanctions.
Removing every tree and hedge from every site will not stop those who want to go fast - in fact the very opposite since they will feel safer doing so because of the increased visibility they have. Other site furniture changes will have no effect on those who decide to go at speed. Even intermediate barriers that work on the same principle as an air-lock would not stop the determined driver from going as fast as possible between them!
0 -
I'm surprised ( well, maybe not) that you're attempting, possibly tongue in cheek, to turn this into a caravan v motor home dispute, DD. There are a couple of others on here far better qualified to do that!
Being serious, though, I agree with Nav that "walking speed" would be more sensible than 5 (or 6 or 7 etc) mph. The dangers come with the idiots, and we'very seen plenty on all types of site, who think smooth site roads are as safe as smooth main roads. Maybe a few potholes are the answer!
0 -
Let's not reduce this thread to a M/H versus Caravan dispute.
Speeding is down to the driver, no matter what he/she drives.
The design of the campsite is important in inhibiting speeding traffic
I would suggest that there are less opportunity to drive at speed when campsites are laid out in glades and small cul de sacs all of which are separated from each other by hedges and trees. ----The typical CMC supermarket car park clone campsite, generally has none of those and has almost circular site roads resembling Formula1 race tracks inviting the antisocial driver to drive at an unsafe speed..
A bit of divergent thinking on the part of Grimstead Towers could go a long way to reduce the dangers of fast moving traffic within their campsites.
K
2 -
Even if multiple records show a particular vehicle was attaining a speed above the limit, there is no evidence as to who the driver was on each occasion. So no possibility of sanctions.
Let's keep it simple- if Car Reg ABC 123 is seen to be speeding twice it matters not whether it was husband or wife or both they should be thrown off the site.
1 -
Hi
Here's my opinion as a site warden. There are issues that crop up on site occasionally, speeding included, normally a word in the ear works, most "offenders" don't realise they are going too fast. I've never had to speak to anyone a second time at all. I think this thread has blown things completely out of proportion. I'm not going to go off topic but unfortunately the biggest cause of complaint I experience is regarding our four legged friends, not speeders.
I like the idea of one of those digital read out things which show a drivers speed, I've spoken to my regional manager to see if we can trial one.
JK
2 -
Because, like the MOT test, it refers to capability at one single point in time. It does not mean the driver WANTS to act that way at other times.
0 -
I don’t think they’re taking you seriously, DD.
0 -
50 people in the UK are struck by lightning every year. The Club must take action to protect us. Something must be done.
1 -
I feel a lot safer reversing if I ignore any instructions from my girlfriend. However, she looks good in the yellow coat and makes a great warning for other road users that something is happening!
2
