Are speed cameras too conspicuous?

[LSWR Cavalier]

It makes speed possible, does not encourage it
Vehicles are fitted with speedometers to enable one to keep below the maximum speed limit

 

[ainsworth74]

Maximum speed limits of course, phone use, following distances, passing distances, stop signs, pavement parking, incorrect use of flashing headlights etc &c

Gonna take a lot of extra police to achieve that! Are you sure your cost/benefit analysis stacks up? Let alone all the extra court capacity!!

Aim would be to significantly reduce the number of licence holders

Also I'm not sure that this is a wise idea unless you also wish to invest significantly in public transport. It will cut a lot of people out of all sorts of bits of life if a significant number of people lose their licences via a deliberately policy.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Many people pass the test but are just not fit to drive, look how many are on the phone

My list could be shortened to 'speed limit enforcement by safety cameras', the fines could be set to break even quite easily, costs nothing!

 

[ainsworth74]

Many people pass the test but are just not fit to drive, look how many are on the phone

I'm not quite sure why "being on the phone" equals "not fit to drive"? I agree that we should be doing something about it but you seem to advocating very extreme measures!

My list could be shortened to 'speed limit enforcement by safety cameras', the fines could be set to break even quite easily, costs nothing!

I wouldn't object to this. I wouldn't like it but I wouldn't object.

 

[radamfi]

I shall mention it again, as it is not being addressed in the discussion. New cars will soon have automatic speed limiters. Some already do. This will surely be a game changer.

 

[Volvictof]

I’ve been caught speeding several times over the years in my car and I only have myself to blame. I don’t understand people who kick off about them or say unmarked cars are entrapment... if you don’t speed then you don’t get a ticket. And everyone who passes a test knows the speed limits.
im convinced that if there were more speed cameras, and they were hidden, I would never have taken the chance to speed and would never have been caught in the first place.

 

[AM9]

I’ve been caught speeding several times over the years in my car and I only have myself to blame. I don’t understand people who kick off about them or say unmarked cars are entrapment... if you don’t speed then you don’t get a ticket. And everyone who passes a test knows the speed limits.
im convinced that if there were more speed cameras, and they were hidden, I would never have taken the chance to speed and would never have been caught in the first place.

How true. There have always been laws (and particularly those for motorists) where the attitude of so many is:

they are unfair​

they are cash generators​

why don't the police spend their time catching 'real' criminals​

I use my 'common sense' to decide whether the law is just​

I can't go about my business without breaking (whichever) 'petty or nanny state law'​

etc..​

The most voiciferous critics are those who have been prosecuted (with evidence of course) for offences such as:

speeding (where the speed limit for the road is obvious)​

driving without tax/licence/insurance​

driving an unroadworthy (i.e. unsafe or untested) vehicle​

driving whilst an unsafe person, (aka driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs)​

etc..​

Sometimes it seems that even prosecution doesn't get through to them so eventually, far more effective prohibition becomes necessary to remove them from the driving gene pool.

 

[87 027]

I shall mention it again, as it is not being addressed in the discussion. New cars will soon have automatic speed limiters. Some already do. This will surely be a game changer.

Indeed it could be, but the technology will need to be bulletproof if it is going to dynamically adjust to different limits on different roads. A while back, Honest John in the Daily Telegraph gave the example of a car which was travelling along a motorway and braked to adjust to a much lower speed limit which applied to a minor road crossing over the motorway (i.e. same GPS position if one ignores elevation). There are also concerns that technology based on optical recognition of road signs can be fooled by manipulation of those signs with similar effects. No doubt these problems are capable of resolution, but the technology shouldn't be introduced prematurely.

Honest John: should cars be restricted to the speed limit?

Our 'agony uncle' responds to the question of whether, with current technology, cars should be prevented from exceeding the mandated maximum

www.telegraph.co.uk

Given that dreadful accidents still occur with pedestrians, do you think it is time for technology to restrict cars to the speed limit? Traffic sign recognition is readily available; limiters exist for top speeds, so it shouldn't be difficult to install. I appreciate that the limits are sometimes slightly arbitrary and outdated when assessed against modern cars, but surely the only people to object would be those who are determined to break the law. Also it would reduce fuel consumed, an advantage in this ecologically sensitive age. What do you think? DC


That's not the point; drivers should always proceed according to the conditions. If I see people, especially children, hopping about on the pavement, I slow right down and watch them carefully. I see little sense in arbitrary speed limits that can be utterly ridiculous in some places. And 20mph limits do not improve fuel economy. On the contrary, they require many cars to run in second gear to keep engine revs above 1,500rpm. GPS technology to restrict cars to speed limits was tried in a Skoda experiment about 15 years ago. If a car doing 70mph on a motorway passed under a bridge over which the speed limit was 30mph, the car with the “Intelligent Speed Adaptation” would brake to 30. Camera-based technology might work better. But I've driven hundreds of cars fitted with this technology and they still miss some speed limit and derestriction signs.

 

[ainsworth74]

I’ve been caught speeding several times over the years in my car and I only have myself to blame. I don’t understand people who kick off about them or say unmarked cars are entrapment... if you don’t speed then you don’t get a ticket. And everyone who passes a test knows the speed limits.
im convinced that if there were more speed cameras, and they were hidden, I would never have taken the chance to speed and would never have been caught in the first place.

Yes. The one time I've been caught was annoying because I was doing 34mph in a 30mph limit area over a distance of probably no more than 100m (if that!), where there were no houses onto the road (large grassed area each side, and either a large wall or back garden fences beyond), no pedestrians ever use that road and there were no other cars around. But! It was a fair cop. I was momentarily inattentive to my speed (accelerating having turned onto the road before decelerating for a roundabout so wasn't paying close attention) and went over the limit and was caught. Annoying? Absolutely! But I only have myself to blame!

 

[typefish]

If traffic law were enforced leading to a halving of 'accidental' deaths and reductions of many thousands in 'accidents', the emergency services would have far fewer journies to make
A win-win situation

Not necessarily. I can very easily drive at 140mph and still not be involved in an accident or more importantly, not cause inconvenience to other road users.

It's not about adherence to law, it's about driver competency (for more information, see my previous post) - a fact that I thought would be kept highly in mind considering that this is a forum for those with interests in the railway

How true. There have always been laws (and particularly those for motorists) where the attitude of so many is:

they are unfair​

they are cash generators​

why don't the police spend their time catching 'real' criminals​

I use my 'common sense' to decide whether the law is just​

I can't go about my business without breaking (whichever) 'petty or nanny state law'​

etc..​

The most voiciferous critics are those who have been prosecuted (with evidence of course) for offences such as:

speeding (where the speed limit for the road is obvious)​

driving without tax/licence/insurance​

driving an unroadworthy (i.e. unsafe or untested) vehicle​

driving whilst an unsafe person, (aka driving under the influence of alcohol/drugs)​

etc..​

Sometimes it seems that even prosecution doesn't get through to them so eventually, far more effective prohibition becomes necessary to remove them from the driving gene pool.

My licence is clean ‍

Yes. The one time I've been caught was annoying because I was doing 34mph in a 30mph limit area over a distance of probably no more than 100m (if that!), where there were no houses onto the road (large grassed area each side, and either a large wall or back garden fences beyond), no pedestrians ever use that road and there were no other cars around. But! It was a fair cop. I was momentarily inattentive to my speed (accelerating having turned onto the road before decelerating for a roundabout so wasn't paying close attention) and went over the limit and was caught. Annoying? Absolutely! But I only have myself to blame!

How recent was this? If it was within the last 15 or so years, then you shouldn't have got a ticket.

 

[ainsworth74]

How recent was this? If it was within the last 15 or so years, then you shouldn't have got a ticket.

No ticket just speed awareness rather than an actual ticket. Which was actually quite interesting (if that's not too nerdy to admit )!

 

[typefish]

No ticket just speed awareness rather than an actual ticket. Which was actually quite interesting (if that's not too nerdy to admit )!

I've never attended a speeding awareness course but I've attended a voluntary "safety awareness day" - basically sitting in a room for an hour so I can have some fun on a skid pan for free and as much as I didn't learn anything, I left the room feeling a bit better that other people did

Anyway, back to my surprise - the guidelines are for 35mph and above for most forces in the UK (some are 1mph higher) and 34mph is naturally below 35mph

If you have any paper or electronic confirmation that you were offered a speeding awareness course for doing 34mph in a 30mph limit, I would be very interested in seeing this

 

[ainsworth74]

Anyway, back to my surprise - the guidelines are for 35mph and above for most forces in the UK (some are 1mph higher) and 34mph is naturally below 35mph

If you have any paper or electronic confirmation that you were offered a speeding awareness course for doing 34mph in a 30mph limit, I would be very interested in seeing this

God it was about six years ago now so the paperwork is well gone now (or might be in a drawer somewhere)! It might have been that 34 has stuck in my head as that was the speed I could have done and had no consequences. Though I feel like Cleveland Police were operating 10%+1 as their policy at that time.

 

[DelW]

Indeed it could be, but the technology will need to be bulletproof if it is going to dynamically adjust to different limits on different roads. A while back, Honest John in the Daily Telegraph gave the example of a car which was travelling along a motorway and braked to adjust to a much lower speed limit which applied to a minor road crossing over the motorway (i.e. same GPS position if one ignores elevation). There are also concerns that technology based on optical recognition of road signs can be fooled by manipulation of those signs with similar effects. No doubt these problems are capable of resolution, but the technology shouldn't be introduced prematurely.

Honest John: should cars be restricted to the speed limit?

Our 'agony uncle' responds to the question of whether, with current technology, cars should be prevented from exceeding the mandated maximum

www.telegraph.co.uk

A couple of years ago I drove from Lancashire to London in a Toyota hire car (RAV4) which had a dashboard display showing the current speed limit. It happily told me the southern end of the M1 had a 100mph limit, which had me completely baffled.
It was also a bit flummoxed by some of the extensive 50mph roadworks stretches on the M6, but that's a bit more understandable.
I'm not aware what system it used, but it certainly wasn't bulletproof.

 

[gswindale]

Indeed it could be, but the technology will need to be bulletproof if it is going to dynamically adjust to different limits on different roads. A while back, Honest John in the Daily Telegraph gave the example of a car which was travelling along a motorway and braked to adjust to a much lower speed limit which applied to a minor road crossing over the motorway (i.e. same GPS position if one ignores elevation). There are also concerns that technology based on optical recognition of road signs can be fooled by manipulation of those signs with similar effects. No doubt these problems are capable of resolution, but the technology shouldn't be introduced prematurely.

Honest John: should cars be restricted to the speed limit?

Our 'agony uncle' responds to the question of whether, with current technology, cars should be prevented from exceeding the mandated maximum

www.telegraph.co.uk

Indeed, took my car to the local Toyota dealer for its service & MOT today. Picked up the courtesy car and noticed it had a visual speed limit display, which I assume works by spotting the road signs and displaying the most recent on the display.

I exited one roundabout where the limit increased from 30 to 50, but the speed limit signs are slightly obscured by a lamp post on one side of the road and the car decided I was exceeding the limit of 5 mph until we got to the next marker sign.

 

[edwin_m]

Satnavs will also display the speed limit from their database. However that assumes it's updated correctly - ours shows 40mph for a local road that was downgraded to 30 a couple of years ago, despite it being downloaded at least once since then.

 

[87 027]

Satnavs will also display the speed limit from their database. However that assumes it's updated correctly - ours shows 40mph for a local road that was downgraded to 30 a couple of years ago, despite it being downloaded at least once since then.

I know of an opposite example where someone with a ‘black box’ tracker fitted for insurance purposes received a final warning that the policy would be terminated due to speeding violations, despite believing they had fully complied with all speed limits. On investigation it turned out the database being used by the insurance company hadn’t been updated to reflect a recent increase in speed limit from 30 to 40 on a stretch of road near the person’s home.

 

[ABB125]

I know of an opposite example where someone with a ‘black box’ tracker fitted for insurance purposes received a final warning that the policy would be terminated due to speeding violations, despite believing they had fully complied with all speed limits. On investigation it turned out the database being used by the insurance company hadn’t been updated to reflect a recent increase in speed limit from 30 to 40 on a stretch of road near the person’s home.

I've also heard of a similar case where there was a new dual carriageway running parallel with (presumably) the old road. The black box always decided that the car was on the old road, and therefore driving at 70 mph on the dual carriageway was classed as speeding.

 

[jonty14]

Usually in the UK this is dealt with not with cameras but with traffic calming, i.e. ramps, cushions and chicanes, which are designed to make it physically impossible to exceed the speed limit.

The quality of the road surface also slow you down. In County Durham it is impossible to exceed the speed limit without damaging your car. Potholes everywhere.

I have lived in Germany for over 20 years now and I remember when I came here I saw cameras hidden in wheelie bins and even with camouflage netting over them. My new car has a speed limiter function on it. This could save a few tickets.

 

[delticdave]

It wasn't about efficiency, it was about which gear gave the best level of control at that speed, i.e. which made it easiest to adhere to that speed.

Gear change indicators are just annoying. Wish I could turn it off (other than by way of a piece of black insulation tape). I bought a manual car because I wanted to control it (and to be fair because it was cheaper), if I'd wanted an auto I'd have bought one.

Gear change indication is quite common in automatic cars too. Usually when driving in "D" or "S" modes it just indicates which gear has been selected, but when using manual mode it's advice isn't very useful. Some newer cars with built-in GPS use that data to select the shift-points based on the curvature / gradients on the route, that can be quite helpful.

As for your 1st = 10 mph, 2nd = 20 mph, etc. that's not for me. When I was being taught to drive, (in a manual Mk. 1 Viva....)
driving at 30 mph in 3rd gear whilst undertaking the test = an automatic failure. (I was told to use all the gears during the test.) Many years later I discovered that my 3.0 V6 Mondeo would reach 30 mph in 1st gear, & would then happily trundle at the same speed in 6th.... Big naturally aspirated petrol engines really do have a very wide comfortable RPM range, as do our current 2.0 litre 4 cylinder turbo-petrol lumps.

I've driven a few modern diesel cars, including a Kuga & found most of them somehow lacking in their performance.
(An Audi A4 with a V6 diesel lump was impressive, in a straight line....)
It was only a Volvo V70 with the 2.4 5-pot & a 5-speed auto that I found to be acceptable. But 35.9 mpg over 9 months & 9K miles wasn't so good, the best ever was a 3-day trip to N. Wales where it just managed 40 mpg....

 

[60019]

Gonna take a lot of extra police to achieve that! Are you sure your cost/benefit analysis stacks up? Let alone all the extra court capacity!!

following distance could be enforced automatically fairly easily, since you just need to measure the speed of two vehicles and the time between them passing.

Passing distances and stop signs could be done automatically but would be a little trickier, and the gaps in enforcement would be more of a limitation.

For pavement parking, the obvious first solution would be to add that to the things traffic wardens can enforce, but allowing the public to send in photos or dash cam recordings works for traffic enforcement in some places.

If the fines are high enough, the extra enforcement and court costs would be revenue neutral, though I'd prefer the revenue raised by the justice system to be hypothecated for compensation to victims of crime where the criminal can't pay.

 

[edwin_m]

following distance could be enforced automatically fairly easily, since you just need to measure the speed of two vehicles and the time between them passing.

Highways England catches 10,000 tailgaters in just two weeks

New camera technology is being used by Highways in conjunction with the police to spot and record tailgating drivers

www.motoringresearch.com

Working in partnership with the police, drivers spotted tailgating by Highways England cameras will receive a letter in the post. The organisation is not looking to prosecute drivers, but instead wants to reinforce the message to leave a gap between vehicles.

Highways England’s Head of Road Safety, Jeremy Philips, commented that the cameras are there to “make drivers aware of their behaviour and encourage better driving.”

The new cameras monitor drivers passing through a 150m stretch, and include the option to link multiple cameras together.

Footage can be used to differentiate deliberate tailgating from overtaking or sudden braking by other road users.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Getting a friendly letter,weeks later, no chance of prosecution or punishment, probably achieves nothing at all

 

[AM9]

Getting a friendly letter,weeks later, no chance of prosecution or punishment, probably achieves nothing at all

But it does get registered, so if the recipient doesn't change their behaviour (as demonstrated by further observed offences), I imagine that they will attract more painful 'corrective action' from the police/highways agency.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

How painful? Twenty quid?

 

[edwin_m]

I think the system is quite new and it's possible it will start issuing penalties once it has had a chance to prove itself.

 

[60019]

Getting a friendly letter,weeks later, no chance of prosecution or punishment, probably achieves nothing at all

Once the technology is proved to work accurately they can see about getting them approved as enforcement tools, so you'd get points on your licence, which eventually achieves something even if the fine doesn't.

 

[Cloud Strife]

I have lived in Germany for over 20 years now and I remember when I came here I saw cameras hidden in wheelie bins and even with camouflage netting over them. My new car has a speed limiter function on it. This could save a few tickets.

I remember a particularly nasty camera between Frankfurt-Hahn Airport and the A1, which was at the bottom of a hill and very carefully concealed. The limit changed at 50km/h at the bottom, but you could easily fly through the junction at 70-100km/h if you weren't careful. It was really a money making racket, as a dangerous crossing like that should have been well marked with rumble strips and clear warnings of speed cameras in order to get people to slow down. The camera did nothing for road safety.

Many years later I discovered that my 3.0 V6 Mondeo would reach 30 mph in 1st gear, & would then happily trundle at the same speed in 6th

My new 1.5 130hp Seat Leon is like that. It has an astonishingly wide 3rd gear range, it's very happy to go from 40km/h to 120km/h, but then you can use 6th gear while driving around at 65-70km/h all the way through to 200km/h+. I chickened out after reaching 180km/h in it, but the car was still accelerating at that point.

 

[AM9]

I remember a particularly nasty camera between Frankfurt-Hahn Airport and the A1, which was at the bottom of a hill and very carefully concealed. The limit changed at 50km/h at the bottom, but you could easily fly through the junction at 70-100km/h if you weren't careful. It was really a money making racket, as a dangerous crossing like that should have been well marked with rumble strips and clear warnings of speed cameras in order to get people to slow down. The camera did nothing for road safety. ...

So long as the speed limit for the road was clearly marked, I don't see what the problem is.

 

[Cloud Strife]

So long as the speed limit for the road was clearly marked, I don't see what the problem is.

The problem is that such a speed limit should be decreased in stages, rather than having traffic go from 100 to 50. I wouldn't say it was clearly marked - the restriction began just before the junction, and the speed camera was just after it. A well designed junction would slow traffic down to 70 first before 50, along with safety features such as a rumble strip to emphasise the decrease in limit.