Brunstrom is a twat

Lovely spot, I know it well. I spent a lot of time near the third wave on
the left.

ASAP

I want to make sure I can

Is "glug glug" really a greeting?

 

Because if there's a chance someone may pull out in front of you, it clearly
isn't.

 

How far down the scale does that extend?

Is it unsafe to drive at 85 because there's a chance someone may pull
out in front of you?

Is it unsafe to drive at 55 because there's a chance someone may pull
out in front of you?

[ ... ]

Is it unsafe to drive at 25 because there's a chance someone may pull
out in front of you? [If not, why not?]

 

If you can't stop within the distance you can see to be clear, you're going
too fast. On a single lane road, between brick walls, going past a blind
exit, 20 might be too fast. On an empty motorway, with clear vision for 2
miles, 170 would not. This isn't Uno-Hoo's argument that 90 is way too fast
because it's way too fast. It's adapting your speed to the conditions. The
conditions include the prospect of an enexpected road-block around the next
corner.

 

Hang on...

Blind corners and bends are one thing (I agree with you on that
point), but the possibility that someone might pull out is quite
another. They are supposed to give way. If it were not for the system
of priority at junctions, no vehicle could be driven at much more than
walking pace (even on the main through route) at intersections with
poor visibility (eg, brick walls extending right up to the footway).

 

The key word here is "supposed". Of course people should not pull out in
front of traffic on a major road, but the fact is they *do*, and when you
are tootling along the major road, you have to accept they *might*, despite
your right of way. No point in insisting on the niceties of the Highway
Code from a hospital bed, or worse. I don't think you need to take this to
extremes - if you can see the side road is clear for some distance, of if
the waiting car has seen you and is not moving, then I think you can proceed
with reasonable confidence (although I'd probably knock off 5mph and cover
the brake). If (to take your example) there were brick walls and poor
visibility, then I certainly would slow down, to a walking pace if
necessary. The great thing about a motorcycle is that you can be up to
speed again in seconds.

The only serious accident I have ever had was when someone pulled into my
path from the central reservation of a dual carriageway and we met head-on.
I walked away from that one, but if I'd been on a bike I would been in a
very bad way. Clear day, good visibility, and I had the absolute right of
way, but the other driver was distracted and failed to see me coming. Right
or wrong, this kind of thing happens, and the riders/drivers who take
account of the unexpected are the ones that survive.

To go back to the original point (Uno-Hoo's "he shouldn't be driving
anywhere near 90 mph"), I don't mind doing highly illegal speeds where it's
clear and safe, but I don't mind slowing down and taking extra care either,
when there are a number of unknowns in the picture. It adds seconds to my
journey and possibly years to my life.

I don't think we are too far apart on this one.

 

[ ... ]

Fair enough.