Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Should the US government bring back the 55 mph max speed limit again?
1418 messages, Last post on Dec 16, 2008 at 11:21 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
...for the record: between December 18, 1941 and August 31, 1942 GrossAdmiral Erich Raeder's U-Boat task force began attacking American shipping from NewFoundland to the Carribean and the Gulf of Mexico. 184 patrols of 104 Type Vii and 80 Type IX U-Boats sank 609 ships comprising 3,122,456 tons of allied shipping, for an average killrate of 3.3 16,969 tons. The attack force was part of Raeder's Operation Drumbeat called "PaukenSchlag", directed to show the Bohemian Corporal what the U-Boat force could do with limited forces. Only 44 U-Boats were patrolling the Atlantic off America's coast in December 1941. Raeder withdrew the bulk of his attack force after August 1942 for a number of reasons, not the least of which was the fact that U-Boat Enigma codes were not safe from decoding by Bletchley Park. The British (and American's) often knew what orders the U-Boat's had before the prospective "Kaptain's" knew them. It did not stop them from effectively sinking many American and Allied ships, easily lighted up against the coast-line. Admiral Earnest Joseph King was Chief of the Atlantic Fleet until December 20, 1941, effectively being promoted by President Roosevelt to the newly created position of CominCH, Commander, essentially America's "First Sea Lord", which became effective in time for the Arcadia Naval Conference where Britain and America plotted strategy together to defeat the German Naval Operations in the Atlantic. His replacement was Admiral Royal E. Ingersol, with Admiral Adolphus Andrews as Commander of Eastern Sea Frontier. King was not liked but respected and it was said that he: 'shaved with a blow-torch'. King remained in command, and also as Chief of Naval Operations from March 1942 until 1945. As late as July 27/28 1943 German U-Boats were still able to assail the East Coast of the United States. KaptainLeutnant Herbert Werner's U505 and Seigmann's U-230 proceed past the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay: "Siegmann tuned the bow of his boat into the shallow waters of the Chesapeake Bay. Surprisingly not a single enemy vessel was there to stop us as the lights of Norfolk became clearly visible on port. The American sailors must have been at a big party that night; as we passed the Naval Base, the silhouette of the illuminated city rose sharply against the dark sky." So the German's were very adept until the tide of battle changed in 1943 at attacking our shipping, irrespective of whomever was Commander of the American Eastern Seaboard Frontier. The 55 Mph Speed limit was as effective in saving fuel/lives as Admiral Ingersol's campaign to stop U-Boat attacks against the Eastern Seaboard. I well remember when the speed limit dropped from 65 to 55 the first time round. Awful. It caused more accidents that it spared because people bunched up unnecessarily, driving at speeds they were not comfortable with. Plus the increased time-to-destination added an opportunity cost of incalcuable dimension because it took you that much longer to get where you were going. Safe driving, good driving technique, and common sense have more to do with saving lives than the initial speed at which you are driving. Flow of traffic and density is just as important as the speed at which you are traveling. Driving 10 mph slower on the interstate will actually cost more than driving 65, in lost time, increased traffic density and higher accident risk. I spent many an hour on the I-95 in frustration as operational speeds dropped to 45-50mph when traffic density got thick enough...you HAD to break the law to get anywhere!. If you did that, then you also ran the risk of a much slower driver pulling into the left-hand lane when you least expected it. Bad situation all round. I found in asking, that people who advocate 55 are not the ones most effected by it, and spend few miles on the road that frequent users. I routinely have driven 100 miles a day to get to work, so a 10-15mph slow-down on the interstate means a lost 30 minutes each way to work, more fuel consumed, and much uneeded aggrivation. My work also took me to Europe, where I drove between Paris and Brussels. Sane traffic laws and regulation made it easy to cruise safely at 85mph on the AutoRoutes National and AutoBahnen than the same drive distance-wise in America. European's of course, pay heavily for the priveledge of driving, a licence costing $1,500 to obtain with obligatory 1 year apprentice training (in England required to have an "L" on your license plates, for "Learner"). Speed comes at a price though, they have surveylance and GATSO cameras and fines in Germany for tail-gating which we do not have here. So speed per se is not the issue: driver training and proper social etticate behind the wheel is. Nor will going slower save fuel: you'll consume more, and conversely increase the amount of CO/2 displaced into the air, because we will be behind the wheel longer to get where we are going. We've been down this path before, it was stupid then and is stupid now. The arguments then, as now, just so much a "Paukenschlag" advocated by those least effected by it. Leave the speed limits well enough alone. Lower the limits, and some of us might end up like a lot of American shipping off the coast of America in 1942: Sunk!. DouglasR Sources: 'Iron Coffins', by Capt. Herbert A. Werner, Holt-Rinehardt & Winston, NY, 1969; 'Hitler's U-Boat War' Clay Blair, Random House, NY 1996) |
|
|
Take any stretch of road that's fairly heavily travelled, but still has traffic flow at 65mph. Now slow that same number of cars down to 55mph, with people entering and exitting from traffic. What happens? You increase the amount of time that everyone is on that section of road proportionately. you're basically making the road more congested, as people are on the road longer, rather then having gotten off the road. And when you reach a certain point of congestion, cars can no longer maintain distance, and traffic jams occur. So if you take traffic from 65mph to 55 mph, you will at least increase congestion by - 10/65 = 15.4%. It's simple that the slower you drive the longer you'll be on some section of road to your journey, and that's not the right way to go to keep congestion down. I think if you do that on many urban highways at many times of the day, you will create traffic jams where speeds drop to 15mph, and then you really screw things up and waste fuel.
|
|
|
Replying to: euphonium (Feb 06, 2008 12:24 pm)  The non-negotiable fine for an out of control government is usually (eventually) a guillotine, a noose, or a firing squad....time is ticking away. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Feb 06, 2008 1:45 pm) Five years of doing traffic studies has taught me a few things... 
|
|
|
Replying to: douglasr (Feb 06, 2008 12:48 pm) Hey, logic has no place in this thread! |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: douglasr (Feb 06, 2008 12:48 pm) That doesn't make any sense. Your car does not use the same amount of gas per unit of time at varying speeds. While you will be in your car longer if you slow down your car will burn less gas per hour too. Cars use gas in a miles per gallon rate, Presuming that rate is constant you will burn the same amount of gas no matter what speed you drive. So if your car gets 35 MPG and you drive 35 miles you will burn a gallon of gas, you will burn a gallon if you drive at 35 MPH at 45 MPH or at 85 MPH. Now the thing is that cars will start a reduction in their MPG figures above a certain speed, There are few, if any, cars out there that will get the same or better mileage ar 100 MPH than they will get at 50 MPH, So if you can get better MPG at 50 MPH than at 100 MPH driving 50 you will spend more time on the road but you will use less gas. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Feb 06, 2008 1:45 pm) And when you reach a certain point of congestion, cars can no longer maintain distance, and traffic jams occur. thats just the thing, if you maintain a higher speed cars need more space between them. Slow down traffic and less room between cars is needed hence more cars can be on the road. So if you take traffic from 65mph to 55 mph, you will at least increase congestion by - 10/65 = 15.4%. In reality you reduce congestion. At 65 MPH one lane of road can safely hold 47 cars safely in any one mile stretch, any more and there will be at least one car following to close. Now at 55 MPH that same mile of one lane can hold 55 cars safely (of course if weather conditions are right and the road conditions are good). I think if you do that on many urban highways at many times of the day, you will create traffic jams where speeds drop to 15mph, and then you really screw things up and waste fuel. You are putting th cart before the horse here. In rush hour its not a lower speed that creates the congestion its the congestion that causes the lower speed. |
|
|
Replying to: louiswei (Feb 06, 2008 8:31 am) |
|
|
Replying to: douglasr (Feb 06, 2008 12:48 pm) 
|
|
|
|
| Hail no. | |
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Should the US government bring back the 55 mph max speed limit again?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
