Wales becomes Trumpton

There is a factor that the data in the report doesn't account for and that is the lengths of roads with various speed limits. Worse than that and probably rather difficult to account for is the type of road and usage, junction etc. The stand out factor in the report is the % of KSI if various poor driving factors are all lumped together. It's interesting that speeding has low numbers. That is due to a small % of people doing it. LOL It urks me that speedo's read high if I am in a hurry.

There is another report here. Different area same problem
www.infrastructure-ni.gov.uk

The Fatal and Serious (KSI) Road Traffic Collisions caused by Careless Driving, Northern Ireland 2012-2021 has been published today

Fatal and Serious (KSI) Road Traffic Collisions Caused by Careless Driving, Northern Ireland 2012-2021 has been produced by Analysis, Statistics and
www.infrastructure-ni.gov.uk www.infrastructure-ni.gov.uk

I mentioned Volvo. No interest but a car maker produces the expected number of collision repair parts each year. Volvo found they produced far too many rear end parts after introducing the high level brake lights. They also moved to headlamps on in daylight. Interesting that many makers now do something similar. Poor visibility accounted for - to some extent.

20mph limits around me so far are school related. Relatively quiet roads. 2 schools close by. Seniors. Boys - the usual problem was stepping out onto the road and not to cross it, Girls school, car collisions due to the shear number being picked up by car. Further away on more main roads there is good reason to wonder why but if a 20mph limit is selected for schools they will be implemented. On some roads achieving 20mph isn't possible most of the time when people are out and about. Augmented by councils forcing drivers onto main roads. There are some side roads where too many people may exceed 30mph but that factor seems to be ignored. They just decide to change peoples routes. Actually in a few cases blockages have been removed due to protests by people living in the area and needing to use them. The initial need being very questionable.
 
Last edited:
ajohn said:
There is a factor that the data in the report doesn't account for and that is the lengths of roads with various speed limits
Click to expand...
...It's explicitly discussed in the 2023 road incident report...

Of incidents involving pedestrians in 20/30 regions 20% had failure to look properly as a factor.
 
IT Minion said:
That's logically flawed. As long as the stats are processed to the same precision then they can absolutely be combined.
Click to expand...
Nonsense.

A = 500
B = 50

A+B=550

Now A drops to 450 and B rises to 100. A+B no change.

A = serious injuries
B = fatalities.

Still think your point stands?
 
Brigadier said:
Even the posted article says it is too early to deduce anything meaningful from the figures.
Click to expand...
I entirely agree with this. They need 2-3 years data to rule out RTTM. But there has already been many studies that confirm. Blanket 20mph limits don’t work. Why would this be different?
 
IT Minion said:
...It's explicitly discussed in the 2023 road incident report...
Click to expand...
There are no official data sources currently available on the volume of traffic on roads with different speed limits. This is something we are continuing to explore.
I wonder why this factor is correct ;) I don't wonder really.
Road sections with a 70mph speed limit had the lowest proportion of collisions in 2023, accounting for 5.2% of all collisions.
This is why more data on the roads is needed. Another similar aspect - what type of 60mph road
KSI collisions occurring on 60mph roads accounted for the highest proportion (36.0%) of all KSI collisions reported in 2023 compared to roads with other speed limits.
The number of quarterly road collisions on roads with lower speed limits (20mph and 30mph), has generally been declining steadily over the last decade, but quarterly figures can be volatile. Care should be taken when interpreting this data over a short time period.
Actions of pedestrians were recorded as being at least partially responsible in 11.0% of all KSI collisions. On roads with a 20mph or 30mph speed limit, the proportion is higher at 21.1%, reflecting that roads with slower speed limits are more likely to be in built up areas (i.e. near schools, residential areas) where there are more pedestrians. Nearly all KSI collisions with a pedestrian ‘failing to look properly’ were on roads with a 20mph or 30mph speed limit.

The bar chart comparing 20 and 30. The 30 is for all of the year, The 20 isn't. ?

It's all currently statistical garbage, It will get clearer over longer periods of time. Actually I regularly drive in southern and west Wales. Mixed roads including single track and ones where they are in places. All of the other types as well. I have seen the effect of 20mph and the previous 30. Fact is it depends. The 20 may get ignored by the majority. 30 + a bit over is seen. Both depend on the roads. Also 60+ especially where there are overtaking aids on roads where these are limited.
 
motorbiking said:
Nonsense.

A = 500
B = 50

A+B=550

Now A drops to 450 and B rises to 100. A+B no change.

A = serious injuries
B = fatalities.

Still think your point stands?
Click to expand...
Yes. Of course it does. There are three measurements in your example that's all. It doesn't invalidate any of it.
 
IT Minion said:
Yes. Of course it does. There are three measurements in your example that's all. It doesn't invalidate any of it.
Click to expand...
So you are quite happy to report that KSI (in the example) is unchanged. When in fact fatalities have doubled.

Maybe you want to have a little think about how useful that is as a statement.

KSI unchanged. (Shhh about the doubling of fatalities).
 
motorbiking said:
So you are quite happy to report that KSI (in the example) is unchanged. When in fact fatalities have doubled.

Maybe you want to have A little think about that.
Click to expand...
Killed and Serious injuries would be the same overall. That doesn't mean you ignore the killed statistic.
 
denso13 said:
The reporter says that but the Esure person, who actually monitors the numbers, doesn't.

And mbk isn't simply saying that either, he's trying to prove his point by using non complete evidence from elsewhere, in his usual abusive manner.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should take your own advice and follow the science

Media hub - BMJ Group

Explore the latest published research, corporate updates, and insights from BMJ Group. Stay informed about cutting-edge scientific studies, medical innovations, and our impact on global healthcare.
www.bmj.com www.bmj.com

Explains the reduction in claims too
 
motorbiking said:
Maybe you should take your own advice and follow the science

Media hub - BMJ Group

Explore the latest published research, corporate updates, and insights from BMJ Group. Stay informed about cutting-edge scientific studies, medical innovations, and our impact on global healthcare.
www.bmj.com www.bmj.com

Explains the reduction in claims too
Click to expand...
Tiny studies have no value, there were reductions in some measures but not statistically significant, which means they must be ignored.

Let's see how the Wales one comes out.
 
motorbiking said:
Maybe you should take your own advice and follow the science

Media hub - BMJ Group

Explore the latest published research, corporate updates, and insights from BMJ Group. Stay informed about cutting-edge scientific studies, medical innovations, and our impact on global healthcare.
www.bmj.com www.bmj.com

Explains the reduction in claims too
Click to expand...
So do these premature incorrect figures mean much or not?

You're arguing that it's too early to tell but then using the figures to say speed isn't a factor.

You've decided your outcome and clutching at straws to back it up.

It's feeble
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top