Road safety or enforcement device? [Archive] - SaabCentral Forums

: Road safety or enforcement device?


Matthew
22nd April 2004, 11:38 AM
That could be a question about any of the camera devices currently used on British roads, but it isn't on this occasion. This is a new device, to take the place of cat's eyes in the road, currently on trial on the M8 in Scotland:
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40064000/jpg/_40064827_catseye203.jpg

These devices can measure speed, and monitor an individual vehicle's progress across the road network. However, according to the authorities, there are no plans to use them as a method of speed limit enforcement.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3645359.stm

"Intelligent Road Stud" - latest weapon in the anti-motorist persecution war, or genuine road safety device?

Jim
22nd April 2004, 01:21 PM
No doubt they will be used in the future to persecute the motorist but if they are only get used for road safety then they could be a good thing especailly if they can warn of adverse conditions like freezing road surfaces etc...

Munki
22nd April 2004, 01:28 PM
monitor an individual vehicle's progress across the road network.
Yet another step toward the 'Big Brother' state... :evil:

boxman
22nd April 2004, 01:33 PM
aren't we all ready there :!

boxman :wink:

GearHead
22nd April 2004, 03:06 PM
I hate big brother systems :evil: No freedom I tell ya!

Cuba
23rd April 2004, 08:27 AM
The whinging never stops about the speed cameras does it.

Cuba
23rd April 2004, 08:32 AM
Campers! your camping. Bluddy snipers, they're just camping...waiting for someone to come by.
Those damn police with their cameras only get you if you speed you wollys. Jesus wept get over it and slow down FFS!

Jetset
23rd April 2004, 08:41 AM
Firstly, well said cuba if you are not speeding it doesn't matter how many different ways they enforce the legal limit, if you break the law it's fair to be caught.

Secondly, I'm not sure how a road stud can catch u speeding, it can't provide any form of court submissible evidence without a camera attached to photograph your car breaking the limit. Even if we were all forced to have RFID numberplate transponders fitted, this still would not be court submissible evidence without a photo.. which the road stud cannot do.. so no danger of it being used for speed enforcement, it may provide data which means the police more closely monitor places that people speed, but the stud itself can't do anything.

I am suprised at the knee jurk stuff from the RAC, I would have thought they would think it through before going down the "big brother" route, my respect for their opinon has dropped considerably. It's the usual fly off the handle as soon as anyone starts taking about speeding rubbish.

Marrk
23rd April 2004, 08:44 AM
Okay, guy in front is cruising at a leisurely 50 mph, simgle lane road, speed limit 60mph...you overtake at 60mph...slowly so you don't break the speed limit. Car or lorry appears the otherway...you put your foot down to ensure you get by safely and speed goes over the limit...device in cats eyes monitors this and you end up with fine and points on licence.
Same person overtaking, as you start to pull out he speeds up so you are alongside doing 60 mph...you speed up to get by...you get fined, he gets away scott free!!

Glad to know someone in the world doesn't speed, nanny state subscriber, me thinks!!! :roll:

Jetset
23rd April 2004, 08:51 AM
Okay, guy in front is cruising at a leisurely 50 mph, simgle lane road, speed limit 60mph...you overtake at 60mph...slowly so you don't break the speed limit. Car or lorry appears the otherway...you put your foot down to ensure you get by safely and speed goes over the limit...device in cats eyes monitors this and you end up with fine and points on licence.
Same person overtaking, as you start to pull out he speeds up so you are alongside doing 60 mph...you speed up to get by...you get fined, he gets away scott free!!

Glad to know someone in the world doesn't speed, nanny state subscriber, me thinks!!! :roll:

You alternative solution is to break and pull back in behind, thus not breaking the limit and therefore in no danger from speed monitoring devices.

Secondly see my comment above about the studs and court submissible evidence

Cuba
23rd April 2004, 08:59 AM
Okay, guy in front is cruising at a leisurely 50 mph, simgle lane road, speed limit 60mph...you overtake at 60mph...slowly so you don't break the speed limit. Car or lorry appears the otherway...you put your foot down to ensure you get by safely and speed goes over the limit...device in cats eyes monitors this and you end up with fine and points on licence.
Same person overtaking, as you start to pull out he speeds up so you are alongside doing 60 mph...you speed up to get by...you get fined, he gets away scott free!!

Glad to know someone in the world doesn't speed, nanny state subscriber, me thinks!!! :roll:

If this happens then you've started overtaking without sufficient clear road in sight to complete a safe overtaking. I'm no nanna, speed in a straight line doesn't do much for me. I carry it through to interesting cornering where I'm still within the limit (though probably dangerous driving in the eye's of the law).
If your behind some nanna cruising slowly it's not necessarily because she/he is senile. Maybe they're just going to drink gin with their buddys. It's not going to get your there any quicker to risk yours and other peoples lives while making risky Maneuver for little gain.

Marrk
23rd April 2004, 01:56 PM
You alternative solution is to break and pull back in behind, thus not breaking the limit and therefore in no danger from speed monitoring devices.


And what happens when the car behind has moved up and there is no space??



Secondly see my comment above about the studs and court submissible evidence

This technology is just the start, the thin edge of the wedge, obviously automatic speed controllers, governers and satellite monitoring will all be welcome in the cars you have?

I thought not.....

Jetset
24th April 2004, 08:56 AM
This technology is just the start, the thin edge of the wedge, obviously automatic speed controllers, governers and satellite monitoring will all be welcome in the cars you have?

I thought not.....

Lol the level of paranoia displayed here is laughable, I assume you sleep with a tin foil hat on?

Seriously, a UK insurance company is offering to put a satellite tracker in your car and base your insurance on your driving patterns. The idea is that sensible drivers pay less for insurance at the cost of bad drivers. As I classify myself as a sensible driver, who doesn't scream down motorways at 100+ mph, I am quite keen to try this, if it reduces my insurance cost I'd be happy to use it.

IMO the public roads would be a much safter place with enforced speed limits, automatic driving systems etc. (as seen in minority report), if people want a driving experience then driving centers can cater for that.

900t
24th April 2004, 08:51 PM
Please tell me then why driving over the legal limit of speed has anything, at all, to do with safety or anything other than simply lining the pockets of the government with my dollars?!

Who has a better idea of what a safe secure speed is? Me, with a excellent knowledge of the abilities of my car and myself, or some bureaucrat in a land far far away?

ragtopcav
24th April 2004, 09:35 PM
Y'know if gps was available as a system to prove that you drove within limits then I'd be near the front of the queue, especially if big insurance savings were available. Trouble is that the gps system does not take into account the situation on the road at that point in time, due to traffic volume or weather the limit could be unsafe to drive at, but such excess speed would be sanctioned by virtue of the 'gps thingy saying it's within the limit'

Cuba
24th April 2004, 10:16 PM
Please tell me then why driving over the legal limit of speed has anything, at all, to do with safety or anything other than simply lining the pockets of the government with my dollars?!

Who has a better idea of what a safe secure speed is? Me, with a excellent knowledge of the abilities of my car and myself, or some bureaucrat in a land far far away?

Forgive me, your absolutley right! People should just go as fast as they think is safe. Yeah now that's a really good idea. Ever thought of career in politics? With those sort of brilliant ideas you will have boundless amounts of support.

Marrk
25th April 2004, 05:24 PM
I've never met any driver who hasn't exceeded 70mph on motorway, nor anyone who hasn't done more than 60 in a 60 limit. I must get out more :roll: :roll:

GearHead
25th April 2004, 07:04 PM
"its only illegal if you get caught" That being said I thought the speed liit was the route number( 94 on route 101) hehehe. long time ago :cheesy:

Slowpc
25th April 2004, 10:36 PM
Well , here in Mass there are speed sensors around on teh highways so that the local news can tell you the exact speed the cars are going at the time. Helpful to know how much traffic is going and how fast so it is not a big surprise to get stuck in traffic.

Cuba
25th April 2004, 11:25 PM
Exceeding the speed limit may be very well in a controlled situation ie. race track. Your far less likely to encounter the unusual and unexpected events that jump out at us in normal traffic. It's not so much your ability to drive fast, but more your ability to stop fast.
We've been through this discussion time and time again. Speeding is against the law, we cannot doubt that it is dangerous. If you speed you put yourself and others at more risk. If you doubt this then I beleive you should not have the priviledge to possess a license to drive.

Alex
26th April 2004, 08:49 AM
....People should just go as fast as they think is safe. Yeah now that's a really good idea. Ever thought of career in politics? With those sort of brilliant ideas you will have boundless amounts of support.

As a responsible driver I would be expected to reduce my speed to below that of the speed limit if the weather conditions/traffic conditions require, yet we are not allowed to make a decision on the speed limits in the case of excellent weather/ zero traffic conditions.

The 70mph limit on a motorway can be as equally inapplicable on a wet winter Monday morning during the rush hour as it is at 5am on a dry Saturday morning in the summer.

ragtopcav
26th April 2004, 09:01 AM
The 70mph limit on a motorway can be as equally inapplicable on a wet winter Monday morning during the rush hour as it is at 5am on a dry Saturday morning in the summer. Regardless of road surface/crowding conditions it is unlikely the UK will see any state sanctioned speed increase due to the UK's attempts to achieve low CO2 emissions. Much over about 60mph and you're fuel consumption climbs quite rapidly, so even if all the safety issues are considered and compensated for somehow a limit increase is unlikely due to enviromental issues.

Jetset
26th April 2004, 09:25 AM
Please tell me then why driving over the legal limit of speed has anything, at all, to do with safety or anything other than simply lining the pockets of the government with my dollars?!

Who has a better idea of what a safe secure speed is? Me, with a excellent knowledge of the abilities of my car and myself, or some bureaucrat in a land far far away?

You may well think that you are aware of your cars abilities and your own with regards driving, but in most circumstances you are unlikely to be aware of all the dangers on a road up ahead (note the *most* if it is a road you regularly travel in an area you know this is not the case). When travelling along a stretch of road, you most likely don't know which sections are dangerous, where there are common accident black spots etc. Without the full facts and history of the road in hand I don't think that any driver is in a good position to determine what the "safe" speed to be travelling is. However when setting speed limits and placing speed cameras the government does have such information at hand and so I think they are likely to do a better job.

Alex
26th April 2004, 01:03 PM
However when setting speed limits and placing speed cameras the government does have such information at hand and so I think they are likely to do a better job.

Speed limits can be changed/set by local councilors without even having to discuss the decision with the Police. Judging from the number of cases where people have been prosecuted for speeding in areas where the speed limit has been changed without following the correct procedures many are not even very good at it.

Jetset
27th April 2004, 06:35 AM
Speed limits can be changed/set by local councilors without even having to discuss the decision with the Police. Judging from the number of cases where people have been prosecuted for speeding in areas where the speed limit has been changed without following the correct procedures many are not even very good at it.

Ok, well I wasn't aware of that. Although I have no sympathy with the people being prosecuted for speeding in areas where the speed limit has changed, they should have been paying attention to the road signs and not breaking the limit. People being caught speeding says more about the people than the limit imo.

With this whole debate I think it all comes down to the attitude of the groups involved, below is a generalisation based on lots of reading on the topic, there are likely to be exceptions, I have also deliberatly polarised the view to make the point clear.

The people that want speed limits raised on many roads, and the restrictions removed are those that want to be allowed to go fast, the argument is not that going fast is safer than going slowly, more that it is not any more dangerous usually because "I am a good driver" or "my car is designed to go fast" or that the limits are set unreasonably low.

On the other hand the people setting the limits and trying to reduce them are do so because they genuinely believe that lower speed limits will mean safer roads for everyone. The anti-speeding lobby is trying to make the roads a safer place. I will grant you its a subtle devide, but I am much happier with a campain based on trying to improve the safety on our roads than one based on "I want to be allowed to go fast"

Matthew
20th November 2004, 09:48 AM
A little more information on the cat's eyes speed cameras:
http://www.ukspeedtraps.co.uk/cateye.htm

Slaab4life
20th November 2004, 12:52 PM
Well , here in Mass there are speed sensors around on teh highways so that the local news can tell you the exact speed the cars are going at the time. Helpful to know how much traffic is going and how fast so it is not a big surprise to get stuck in traffic.
Is that what all those sensors are along rt 24 just south of boston and on I-93 north of boston, up on the poles with the small solar panels? I've been curious about those since I saw them last fall.
This fall I've been taking a Traffic Engineering course that involves the geometric designing of highway sections, a lot of the geometry of a highway is directly based on the intended speed of that length of highway and vice versa.

ejenner
20th November 2004, 02:40 PM
When I go on my 'observed drives' with the Institute of Advanced Motorists I usually take the Ford KA instead of my car and we always have a huge queue behind us with people overtaking left, right and centre!! This happens a lot in the 30 limit because it is usually set at an un-reasonably low speed. I don't have to display L-plates because the I.A.M. is an extra driving qualification - i.e. they're not automatically passing the "learner" - so why do they go to all the effort of passing in a built-up area when the car in front is doing the speed limit?

The way I feel about this is simple. People shouldn't have to be told how to behave - the ability to correctly conduct yourself should be instinctive. Especially in a civilised country like ours.

English law is based on the principle of specifically legislating against certain actions but allowing everything else. It's one of the things which makes England different and it's slowly been eroded by those who [think they] know better than us.

Once the UK ID card scheme is in place it will actually be a crime just to exist.

Jezzadee
20th November 2004, 03:23 PM
I think what you say about many 30 limits is exactly right. Around this way we have mile after mile of 30 limits on deserted (like 3 cars a day) country lanes where you can often see a long way ahead - this was a result of Suffolk County Council's blanket (and often illegal) speed limit on all villages, extending a good distance either side of the village. However, my 'village' - more like a parish - is not unusual; it covers an area of about 8 miles with a population of about 30. The result is that it is utterly unrealistic to do 30 on many of the roads here all the time.

Conversely, there are roads that are classed as National Speed Limit where if you go over 45 you will end up in a field, or meet a tractor head on round a blind bend. In effect you have to use your judgement. If I pass a school, or anything that might pose a hazard, I slow right down, often below 30. But too many times now I've seen camera vans parked near busy junctions or roundabouts, and other roadusers with one eye on the speedo, the other on the camera van, and no idea what is happening around them. I think we do need limits, but the draconian enforcement of them has made driving more dangerous and stressful, and that people would have more respect for the limits if they were sensibly applied.

Alex
20th November 2004, 04:54 PM
Its absolutely hysterical driving along the A40 towards Gloucester. This is a wide main road which is mainly 50 limited. The single track side roads that lead off it all have the national (60) limited applied.

Jezzadee
20th November 2004, 05:09 PM
If you ever came up the A12 you'd feel right at home - it's exactly the same. That's why my car is permanently muddy - I refuse to drive up an empty A road through deserted countryside at 40 miles an hour when I can safely do 60 on the back roads.

ejenner
20th November 2004, 05:22 PM
It'd be very difficult to enforce anything on those roads - I guess this is part of the reason for not making a big fuss over them.

The principle of being seen to care so much about peoples welfare is quite noble but if you think about it for long enough you will start to realise that there is so much you could do to protect people from themselves and so much more people can do to endanger themselves that it must be more logical to ensure that the people are taught to be in control of themselves.

The more you try to prevent 'bad' behaviour the worse it gets.

raske9k
21st November 2004, 04:02 PM
Speed does not kill, it is the sudden stop that does. :wink: , let them do as they please, maybe this way those cops that are speeding for no reason will get caught at last :cheesy: