Speed camera

[SillyOldDuffer]

On SillyOldDuffer Said

Reminds me, I haven’t read the Highway Code this century – hope it’s not changed too much!

Dave

 

Not wishing to sound “self righteous” and I am probably just as guilty of not reading up on highway code updates, but the highway code changes regularly and we should all read the latest version more often. e. g. In recent years there have been major changes on priorities at junctions concerning pedestrians and cyclists not many drivers seem to have grasped these changes.

Andy.

[DodParticipant @dod]

SOD

Your last comment applies to nearly everyone who has passed their Driving Test.

Yes it has, worth buying a new copy for some light reading.

[NealebParticipant @nealeb]

I thought it was a very tongue-in-cheek comment as well – but it’s certainly one that I have heard expressed. “No need to slow down until you have passed the lower limit sign, and you can start accelerating before the higher limit.” Similarly, there has been a general policy of turning a blind eye to the “less than 10%+2” speeders but it’s still no defence – over the limit is over the limit. However, the general level of ignorance of the rules is pretty high – just ask a random bunch of people with licences and ask them to tell you the order of the standard sequence of traffic lights, and what an amber light means. Pound to a penny that most will get both wrong.

And if you have not read the latest Highway Code, it’s worth doing so. There are not many changes in most of it except in detail, but there is a new first section that deals with the Hierarchy of Road Users which is completely new. Still, given that you will be in the 1% of road users who are aware of this, maybe it’s not worth bothering…

Can’t say that I am too sympathetic to those caught for speeding. In fact, I would quite like to call to account all those who sit at 35+ in a 30 limit – but are in so little hurry that they continue at exactly the same speed after passing a National Speed Limit (not “derestricted” – hasn’t been that for a few years now!) sign. I can sympathise a little where the speed limit is continually changing, and it is a bit more difficult these days as 30 repeater signs are a dying breed. Yes, street lights are a clue and drivers should be aware of this. My area in Devon is also a bit tricky in places at this time of year as hedges often obscure limit signs so giving little advance warning but that’s no excuse to continue over the limit once you do see the signs even if it’s only as you pass them.

[Speedy Builder5]

On Speedy Builder5 Said:

Would you be reported for dangerous driving if you stamped on your brakes just before a reducing speed sign eg:-  You are travelling at 50mph in a 50 limit area and 10 feet before the 30 limit you stamp on your brakes sufficiently to reduce the speed to 30, and bloke behind runs into you. Are you at fault ?

Bob

Clearly you should be reported for that!

Highway Code is very clear on this.

 

Jimb

[Colin BishopModerator @colinbishop34627]

I always try to keep to the speed limits but sometimes there can be a momentary distraction and you miss the sign in which case it is unfortunate and you have to accept any consequences arising and just kick yourself. I do find some of the locations chosen by the mobile camera units a bit sneaky sometimes and wonder what prompted that particular positioning.

What does bug me however is the inconsistency of speed limits. You can have a road which crosses a County boundary and doesn’t change its characteristics at all but one side of the boundary it is 50mph and the other 40mph. So the ‘right’ limit is a moving feast depending upon the jurisdiction you happen to be in.

I have often thought that if it were possible to have limits at 25, 35 & 45mph these would be more natural break points. But I suppose that would complicate things too much.

You should definitely read up on the new road hierarchy rules though. For example:

give way to pedestrians crossing or waiting to cross a road into which or from which you are turning. If they have started to cross they have priority, so give way

Colin

[PlasmaParticipant @plasma]

I’ve tried to drive at 20 mph when the Wales decided to replace 30 with it.

My word it was hard to do! Like driving in treacle.

The measure places responsibility for pedestrian collisions on the driver for going too fast. I’ve dealt with a great many pedestrian collisions that the driver could not have avoided due to the pedestrian moving into the road heedless of traffic.

One involved a woman who walked in front of a truck stationary in a queue at traffic lights. The opposite carriageway was busy with moving traffic so she paused in front of the truck. The lights changed, the truck moved off, the pedestrian was killed.

She was wearing ear buds and was completely ignorant of the road environment, the truck driver could not see her beneath the apron of the windscreen and moved off not aware of her presence. He was absolutely distraught and needed a lot of support after finding the woman under his rear wheels.

We  are all road users whether in a car, on foot or cycle, or horse indeed. At least car drivers have had a glance at the highway code and appreciate there are rules to follow. When maybe everyone should be reminded they have a responsibility.

On my way out of lidl this morning a woman on foot decided that she had precedence over all  vehicles,  first strolling in front of me, then into the path of another car who had to brake sharply, before crossing a road without looking in either direction. Lucky it was clear as she was totally oblivious.

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi Amber means stop, and that means when it is with a red light, on its own, and when it is with a green light, the only times you are allowed to continue, is if you have already crossed the stop line when it shows, or you are so close to it when it shows, that stopping would cause an accident. You should not proceed until a green light only shows, and only then if your way is clear. The light sequence is Red, Red/Amber, green, Amber.

Regards Nick.

[John HaineParticipant @johnhaine32865]

I live in a small extended village with a couple of “outposts” a mile or so away from the “main” centre.  The main centre has a 30 limit and the “outposts” 40, with gaps between the limits where theoretically the national limit (60) applies.  In one of the outposts there is a bus stop where the school bus serving the local secondary school stops around 0800 and 1600.  There is no street lighting.  Children have to walk to the stop along unlit roads in the early winter mornings and there are no pavements.

I also look after a “movable vehicle advisory sign” MVAS which indicates speed to drivers, warns when over the limit, and logs speeds as long as it is switched on.  This gets moved from place to place as seems necessary.  The idea is to try to reduce speeds as well as gather evidence to improve enforcement.  So we have clear evidence of vehicle speeds.

We find that, consistently, 15% of vehicles are exceeding the speed limit.  Worryingly for the safety of children many of these violations take place in the morning rush hour.  50mph in a 40 limit is very common, and we have seen over 60 on many occasions. One neighbouring village has seen, probably the same idiot, doing 80 entering a 40 limit!

I’ve come to have no sympathy whatever for people who get booked for speeding – speeding cars are more dangerous, noisier, and wear out the roads faster.  If we survey what issues people in the village get most concerned about, speeding is consistently #1 or #2.

So what if speed cameras raise revenue?  We need more revenue to support enforcement and a whole raft of decaying public services.  Just consider it a tax on your enjoyment and if you don’t like it – JUST SLOW DOWN!

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

Mabe it was ironic but many could read it otherwise.

On 30MPH signs it’s actually prohibitied to put repeater signs where there are lampposts. A council where I lived had to take some down. They had put them up because part of a 40 limit was downgraded to 30. They were only alloed one large one at the start, no repeaters. They even took down homemade ones the locals put up.

 

[Dod]

On Dod Said:

SOD

Your last comment applies to nearly everyone who has passed their Driving Test.

Yes it has, worth buying a new copy for some light reading.

Don’t have to buy it anymore. It’s free online https://www.gov.uk/browse/driving/highway-code-road-safety

[Nicholas Farr]

On Nicholas Farr Said:

Hi Amber means stop, and that means when it is with a red light, on its own, and when it is with a green light, the only times you are allowed to continue, is if you have already crossed the stop line when it shows, or you are so close to it when it shows, that stopping would cause an accident. You should not proceed until a green light only shows, and only then if your way is clear. The light sequence is Red, Red/Amber, green, Amber.

Regards Nick.

It’s actually “..to pull up might cause an accident” not would cause. Subtle difference but it is almost impossible to prove a “would” in this case. This applies to both prosecution and defence. Might allow for application of probability. In practice it is rare to get a prosecution for crossing on amber unless it is blatant like suddenly accelerating to cross.

Talking of blatant, ome than once I’ve slowed on a amber, stopped on a red  and had the vehicle behind me overtake me and pass on red. One overtook on my left and turned right in front of me! That was before dash cameras but for the last two who did it I sent the video to the police. You don’t know what the penalty issued was but they do tell you if they are taking enforcement action rather than a warning as you have to keep the recording in case it goes to court. You are also not allowed to publise it so I can’t share here.

Robert.

[Nicholas FarrParticipant @nicholasfarr14254]

Hi Robert Atkinson, it’s a while since I’ve read it, but I’ve just had a look, and I should have said might instead of would. As far as proving crossing on amber when you shouldn’t, your own dash cam could let you down, as the police can use that as evidence in any accident your involved in, and I’ve got one in the front and back of my car, most of those that get to tailgate me, soon back off when they spot the camera in the back.

Regards Nick.

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Nick,

I, too, have a camera at both ends.  The unfortunate bit is that the rear camera is not (easily) seen from behind due to the tinted screen.  I am considering sticking some tape on the outside of the screen to warn the tailgaters that they are being recorded.

The dash cam is a good reason to follow the speed limits as it could be used in the event of a collision or speeding, etc.  My cruise control works down to 20mph, so gets used a lot, at that setting, these days.

One thing that is missing in the new highway code is that of not entering a zebra crossing while a pedestrian is still crossing.  The only ‘indirect’ reference is that a driver can proceed if the crossing is two-part affair and the pedestrian is on the second bit of the crossing.  A mistake on the part of the relevant committee, IMO.

[PlasmaParticipant @plasma]

My favourite bit if the road traffic act is section 163.
<p style=”text-align: left;”>A person driving a motor vehicle on a road must stop the vehicle on being required to do so by a constable in uniform.</p>
So a constable must be in uniform, it must be on a road, and it must be a motor vehicle.

But the funny bit is that once the vehicle has been caused to stop the officer has no power to cause it to remain. So you can just drive off, but then he’d stop you immediately,  then drive off, then stop you immediately etc etc.

And lawyers run the country and make the laws lol.

[PlasmaParticipant @plasma]

I wonder if speed was a factor in the Diogo Jota fatal overnight.

Super cars are super until it all goes wrong, and the scenery arrives at a frightening pace.

The remains of the lambo show how fragile these glued together flying machines are.

Run of the mill drivers just cannot handle such performance or temperamental handling.

I had a Ferrari fatal a few years back and the dealership said that their salesmen have to go on an intensive driving course at maranello so they can safely show customers the cars. Mechanics were not allowed to road test the vehicles after working on them, only the sales staff.

One salesman pulled onto the main road in a customer’s Ferrari after a two week holiday driving a Fiat uno and swapped ends very rapidly as he forgot how touchy the red beast was. He said that such cars are pure drivers machines and will catch out the unwary very quickly indeed.

 

 

 

 

[John Haine]

On John Haine Said:

… I also look after a “movable vehicle advisory sign” MVAS which indicates speed to drivers, warns when over the limit, and logs speeds as long as it is switched on.  This gets moved from place to place as seems necessary…

The ones that light up to tell me that I’m under the speed limit are an infuriating, and potentially dangerous,  distraction.  Why does anybody think I need to be told that, especially accompanied by a green smiley face?

Unfortunately, my dashcam does the same thing (though mercifully without a smiley face) and I’ve never been able to find a way of turning it off.  Yes, I know I’m not over the limit; I’m doing it on purpose!

George

[Another JohnSParticipant @anotherjohns]

Over here (Canada) we seem to have a problem with people driving over the sidewalks (pavements in UK lingo); some pedestrians get seriously injured or killed. Over the last 2 weeks, I’ve read of 4 pedestrians killed or hospitalized by being hit by a car while walking on sidewalks in this area. (Edit: see next paragraph)

We also have a spate of drivers driving into buildings; one that came across one of my groups just a second was a “beer store” (government here sells alcohol) with a car inside; 2 more people injured and doubtless a few bottles of beer broken.

Cars and people don’t mix; Newtonian physics, and human design (the “System 1” and “System 2” brain functions), and human nature make for a deadly concoction.  Please think about this statement.

Oh well; safest place is the workshop, so heading there shortly!

[PlasmaParticipant @plasma]

Cars and people don’t mix; Newtonian physics, and human design (the “System 1” and “System 2” brain functions), and human nature make for a deadly concoction.  Please think about this statement.

Absolutely!  Our ape brains are wired to deal with bipedal top speeds for short bursts. Putting us in anything that exceeds our physical speed limit is bound to lead to problems.

Our best reaction times are achieved when we are paying full attention, something that very few drivers actually do given the number of distractions both outside and inside the vehicle.

Throw in mobile phones, eating at the wheel and doing your paperwork on the motorway ( yes an Audi driving businessman type i followed on the M18 yesterday was hogging the middle lane so he could do some in depth written work while driving between appointments), and it’s a wonder we get anywhere.

On a side note, anyone see the recent tv cop shows that dealt with some serious collisions on the motorways?  Drove me nuts to hear professional cops calling the lanes slow middle and fast! It’s not a fast or slow lane, it’s lane 1, 2, 3 simple.

 

[David AmbroseParticipant @davidambrose86182]

I thought lane 1 was the slow lane, lane 2 was the fast lane, and lane 3 was for overtaking only.

[SillyOldDufferModerator @sillyoldduffer]

Still haven;’t re-read the highway code, but left most lane is for everything, and both right hand lanes are for overtaking.  The rightmost lane allows vehicles to overtake those in the middle lane.  All lanes have a 70mph limit, and it is forbidden to overtake on the inside.

I like to cruise in the leftmost lane at 55mph with the lorries for fuel economy, whilst the boy racers play in ‘fast lane’, many of whom are speeding.  If I catch up with a slower vehicle in my lane, I accelerate into one or both overtaking lanes to get past quickly, and then drop back into whatever lane is free at my cruising speed.

I don’t do what my dad insisted on.  He drove at 65 in the middle lane no matter what because he was scared of joining traffic and overtaking.   On a nearly empty M4 he drove from Reading to Bristol in the middle lane, despite me and two uncles telling him he was mistaken.  Lots of people do it!

Dave

[not done it yetParticipant @notdoneityet]

Plasma wrote:

<b>Our best reaction times are achieved when we are paying full attention, something that very few drivers actually do given the number of distractions both outside and inside the vehicle.</b>

<b>Throw in mobile phones, eating at the wheel and doing your paperwork on the motorway ( yes an Audi driving businessman type i followed on the M18 yesterday was hogging the middle lane so he could do some in depth written work while driving between appointments), and it’s a wonder we get anywhere.
</b>

I put some of it down to the multitude of driving assists.  People rely on ‘lane assist’ and ‘adaptive cruise control’.  Probably along with others.

With both of those selected, the vehicle should remain in lane, while keeping a safe distance from the car in front and slow down (even stop) in a queue of traffic without any input from the driver.  Plenty of time for phoning texting, etc, without being fully attentive!

I use the adaptive cruise but it stops the vehicle too close to the one in front, if relied on to stop in traffic queues.  Distance is often not set too far enough behind (because of the muppets that try to change lanes at the last moment).  Non-adaptive cruise is OK until it accelerates when not wanted.

Lane assist gets turned off every time I start off.  I hate it.  Continually jiggles around and could be forgotten whether on or off (unless on or off all the time).

My car tells me how attentive I am.  It is usually ‘high’.  If it ever drops to ‘average’ it’s time to take more inputs or have a break.  It, I believe it automatically tends to read ‘average’ when the normal 2 hour driving time is exceeded.

I recently encountered a deer (4 times this year on the particular stretch of road).  I swerved around it rather than slamming on the brakes – because the muppet following was far too close and stopping may well have ended in rear damage!  My car has auto emergency braking – but does the car behind!

Minimum braking distance may be OK following a train of vehicles at constant speed – but not if the person ahead has to suddenly swerve to avoid the vehicle which is already stationary immediately ahead of it.

[duncan webster 1Participant @duncanwebster1]

Chances of killing a pedestrian if hit by a car:

10% at 20 mph, 40% at 30 mph, 80% at 40 mph. Factor in that if you’re going more slowly, and paying attention, you’re more likely to stop before hitting them anyway, and you can see why I try to stick to speed limit or below. Having said that, some limits are difficult to understand. Near me the road changes from 30 single carriageway with houses both sides and junctions to a dual carriageway  with no houses but 40 limit. When it reverts to single carriageway it becomes 50, but there are houses one side. Then it drops to 40 presumably because there are some traffic lights, back to 50 for a bit, no houses, then national speed limit, all in a couple of miles. Mr Plod has built his own hardstanding for his speed van on the central reservation of the 40 bit, doesn’t catch many locals as we’re expecting him. If it changed to 50 after the 30 then stayed that way until after the lights it might make sense, and have saved a fortune in signs

[PlasmaParticipant @plasma]

The figures you quote speak for themselves. Lower speed impacts are less likely to result in a fatality.

But vehicles have changed a great deal, one recalls bumper bar lower leg fractures at relatively low speeds when bumpers were solidly made and mounted. New energy absorbing designs have  consigned those injuries to history.

Makers are actively looking to make pedestrians safer, but its never going to achieve 100% safety through engineering alone.

Neither is lowering speed restrictions to comical levels such as 15mph in some streets I’ve seen. I have dealt with several serious injury and fatal pedestrian collisions at walking speed, where the pedestrian was solely at fault, walking behind a reversing vehicle or, in one case, a couple laying down in the carriageway attempting to have drunken sex. Not recommended on an unlit and rubbish strewn roadway.

The only resolution is to separate pedestrians and vehicles wherever possible, either by barriers or awareness of the risks of jaywalking as the Americans call it.  The fact is pedestrians will walk into traffic heedless of oncoming vehicles, they will step off kerbs without looking behind, they will walk into queuing traffic placing themselves at risk when the traffic moves off.

If a car drives on the pavement there is a penalty in law, if a pedestrian does as they please in the carriageway and gets hurt we blame the vehicle, not the errant pedestrian.

The other big thing is driver behaviour around speed restriction signs; it is a maximum but not necessarily safest speed dependant upon conditions. You wouldn’t try to do 60 in thick fog, or would you?

So many drivers treat the sign as a target with discretion to go faster if they are late or feel the limit has been set lower than their ability dictates.

Young drivers are unbelievably unaware of risk when driving. They think that the car will react instantly to driver input. They never learn what it feels like to do an emergency manoeuvre, other than when the examiner taps the dash board at 30 mph. Driving in fog, snow, ice are spectacularly left to suck it and see.

Kids at 17 should not be allowed to drive, I’m sorry but it’s a fact. Literally they can go from L plates to a fast hatch in one day, never having experienced the conditions they will face. Let alone they may fsve them alone or worse with a car full of their peers urging them to “see what it will do”

I was 21 when I passed my test and still felt ill equipped to deal with the huge responsibility of driving, at 17 I would definitely not have been mature enough to cope. A friends son has just passed his test at 17. She is terrified of the police arriving to tell her he has been killed. He can’t even make his own breakfast or work the washing machine, but he’s on the roads in a ton of metal travelling at speed. NOT SAFE.

[Colin BishopModerator @colinbishop34627]

Young drivers are unbelievably unaware of risk when driving. They think that the car will react instantly to driver input. They never learn what it feels like to do an emergency manoeuvre, other than when the examiner taps the dash board at 30 mph. Driving in fog, snow, ice are spectacularly left to suck it and see.

Indeed!

Also youngsters rely on their reactions to get them out of trouble. By definition this means the trouble is already upon them. Older, more experienced drivers are more likely to anticipate a developing dangerous situation and take measures to avoid or mitigate it. This is reflected in the respective insurance premiums.

Colin

 

 

[Plasma]

On Plasma Said:

[…] They never learn what it feels like to do an emergency manoeuvre […] never having experienced the conditions they will face. […]

Aye … there’s the rub ^^^

One of the most useful driving days I ever had [as part of the ROSPA course] was on a Police skid pan in Hertfordshire.

MichaelG.

[Author]

Posts