Radar detectors
Posted by: Bosh on 09 August 2001
which I'm loathe to do
Any UK experiences of the newer Bels or other models or solutions such as Laser jammers. I've read up on the Geodesy GPS systems which ID the Digital cameras the Radar Detectors dont but they dont ID the hand held Lasers and mobile Gatsos
Of course I intend to use them purely to detect automatic shop doors, Orange transmitters but if they also detect the occasional Gatso painted in army camouflaged colours hidden behind foliage or Police officer hidden in a hedge when I inadvertently creep past the speed limit then all the better
quote:
Originally posted by Steve B:
You seem to be implying that if your going over 40mph you're going to be killed or maimed anyway so why not do 80mph?
Nope. I was talking in the context of quiet stretches of motorway (they do exist), good visability and weather conditions. Certainly not in any other situation.
quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't these crash tests done at 40mph into a solid block of concrete?
Yup, you are correct. In real life however, crashes can involve more than one car/object and you may crunch each corner. Even worse than hitting a block at 40 due to being flung in multiple directions.
quote:
Also, at say 60mph you're far more likely to avoid a collision (or at least reduce your speed to something less deadly at the time of impact) than if you're doing 80mph or more.
Crap example I'm afraid. Near field situation maybe but not if your two miles behind someone - plenty of time to slow down from 80 me-thinks. If you re-read my comments you'll see I'm not encouraging (or practicing) speeding where safety to yourself or others will be a concern.
If anyones afraid to travel the roads due to the fear of speeding motorists, they should quit driving and take the bus. Mind you, that's harldy safe either - no seat belts for starters, never mind Ethals unsecured trolley breaking your face on impact.
Oh, and why not ask 60 million West Germans who have used unrestricted Autobahns for the past 50-60 years. They seem to be able to handle it quite well. You get fined for going too slow there!
Regards,
Steve
(Who happily drove at 70mph round the M25 tonight in his irresponsible 140mph car)
quote:
Originally posted by William: A truly skilfull driver will be assessing continuously the hazards both seen AND UNSEEN and be thinking about the possible UNFORSEEN outcome of every decision made before commiting him(her)self to a course of action.
If everyone did this (or even tried), this would make the roads a safer place.
Steve
quote:
If everyone did this (or even tried), this would make the roads a safer place.
Agreed, but how do you get everyone to do it?
Steve B
Regards,
Steve
I think it would put the fear of God into the majority of voting drivers!
Steve B
quote:
Retesting every 3-5 years
I take it you mean everyone. If so, this is not realistic. Too expensive.
How about just re-testing those people caught breaking the law? I'm sure Mick would give up his present job to be a full time examiner. 
Brian
Compulsury re-testing, definitely for anybody caught speeding, jumping lights etc, probably for everyone. Harder testing, please, please. The Germans have to have 25 or 30 hours experience before they can get a licence and are also taught how to drive on Autobahns.
Variable speed limits, think they are a great idea but giving the degree of congestion on the roads it would mean that most of the time the speed limit would be 50 or 60mph rather then 80 or 90mph.
SUVs are the biggest risk on the road with out a doubt. If am driving on the motorway and I have some dumb arse SUV driver sitting on my tail I get out the way as quickly as possible because if have to break hard I will end up nicely sandwiched between whatever is in front of me and the 2 tonnes of ego behind me. SUVs stopping distance are typically twice that of a moderate performance saloon.
Rant over
Matthew
quote:
Oh, and why not ask 60 million West Germans who have used unrestricted Autobahns for the past 50-60 years. They seem to be able to handle it quite well.
I think the Germans have better lane discipline than we have. They are better drivers than people in the UK. It's an educational thing.
I don’t think speed is the only problem. If people were able to drive more competently on motorways, speeds could probably be increased to similar levels as in Germany. However, you're up against a couple of generations of people who have little consideration for others, don't know how to drive properly, and in particular can’t drive on a motorway safely. Higher speed undoubtedly increases the possibility of accidents. In the short term, speed is the easiest to deal with because the other issues can only be tackled over the long term. Other issues are, for example, driver education (bad driving *) and transportation of freight (too much traffic on the motorway).
Here are some of what I consider to be very common and dangerous practices on motorways. I’ll leave driving in built up areas for another time:
1. Motorists joining from the left hand slip road, zooming across the inside and centre lanes to the overtaking lane immediately they join the motorway. They do this because they think they belong in the overtaking lane. Their action causes everyone approaching to hit the breaks, in turn this can cause a pile up.
The potential for accident in this situation is increased by people already on the motorway driving too fast.
2. Motorists busily cackling away on their mobile phones, almost missing their exit, so zooming across from the overtaking lane directly to the exit slip road. They leave it so late they have to cross the ‘solid white lines’ separating the slip road from the inside lane. Everyone behind slams the breaks on, anyone driving too close or driving too fast can’t react in time. The result is a major pile up. The person who caused the accident is totally oblivious to the damage they’ve caused and just carry on cackling into their mobile phone.
The potential for accident in this situation is increased by people speeding.
3. HGV’s doing 45mph in the middle lane overtaking about 6 other HGV’s doing 44mph in the inside lane. This causes a pile up in the overtaking lane. All those ‘ace’ drivers chomping at the bit to do 100mph are being held up by those wishing to obey the law and drive at just 70mph. The ‘ace’ drivers lose their patience, drive about 2 inches behind the car in front, and flash their lights a lot. The person with a car, or van, weaving about right behind them becomes a bit nervous, they start looking in their rear mirror too much, and what happens. They go a bit faster than they want to. A bit of old debris appears in front of them but they’re so worried about ‘ace’ behind they’re still checking their rear mirror, they don’t see the problem in time and.. Bang. Major accident.
There are a number of factors to look at here, not least too many HGV’s on the road. However, I’ve seen this situation ‘live’ and I can tell you that the main cause is the people ‘wanting’ to speed. They simply can’t wait to get past the vehicle in front, which isn’t travelling slowly. After all, they are still doing 70mph, the maximum permitted speed.
4. ‘Ace’ drivers overtaking using the inside lane.
No excuse for this I’m afraid. More cameras’ are needed to catch this, the culprits fined and banned
5. Treating the 3 lanes on a motorway as 'slow', '70' and 'fast' lanes. You may have noticed I refer to them as 'inside', 'middle' and 'overtaking' lanes. How often do you see someone ‘hogging’ the middle lane at just below 70mph because they think they MUST be in that lane? How often do you see people ‘hogging’ the so-called 'fast' lane, thinking that because they’re doing more than 70mph this is the lane they MUST drive in?
This is an educational issue that needs to be dealt with.
I view motorways as simply 3 lanes. For position, my starting point is in the inside lane. I move into the middle lane when I need to overtake. Should I need to overtake someone in the middle lane I move into the overtaking lane, returning to the inside lane as soon as possible.
Possible solutions:
Reduce traffic
We have too many HGV’s on the road so we should be looking to rail for freight. Using smaller lorries for shorter, local journeys. In addition, HGV’s could be subject to restricted times for access to motorways. I see nothing wrong with all HGV’s moving through the night reaching their destination in the early hours ready for unloading. Say, between 10pm and 6am.
Penalties
I would put speeding motorists into 2 categories when it comes to penalties.
The first category would be those out on a private journey. You get caught speeding, you lose your license for 30 days and get a fine related to a % of your salary. You do it again, you get banned for 60 days, a second fine at a higher % of your salary. You do it again, you go straight to jail for 90 days.
The second category would be those on a journey directly in relation to their job. Business journeys. Reps’ in their company cars, vans etc. You get caught speeding, your employer gets a £1000 fine. How long will it be before ALL employers actively encourage their employees to stop speeding?
*Speeding is also bad driving.
I agree with more cameras. I have no sympathy with anyone caught speeding or committing any other traffic violation. I also have no time for any equipment produced to alert people to the presence of cameras. However, it's no good just catching and fining people. Other measures need to be implemented at the same time, especially education.
Brian
[This message was edited by Python on MONDAY 03 September 2001 at 16:08.]
You're making me rethink some of my earlier, and long held, assertions. I wasn't going to post my thoughts since I had an idea I'd get some flak. I'm glad I did now 'cos I've got something to think about.
My comment about speeding being bad driving needs some clarification though. I tend to associate speeding either as someone driving at 50mph in a 30mph zone. I see this every day where I live. I think this is bad driving. I also associate speeding on motorways with the kinds of examples I gave. The type of person driving bumper to bumper is the person speeding. This is bad driving.
quote:
but I be b*ggered if I’m going to be made to feel guilty when undertaking on the M25 a car in lane 3 (out of 4) with me in lane 1(inside) – with no other traffic for at least a kilometer.
I take this point entirely. I wouldn't expect you to do any different no matter what the law says. Earlier I said there was 'no excuse'. Well, I was wrong. However, IF the prat hogging lane 3 was driving properly, he'd be in lane 1 and you'd overtake him in lane 2.
Do you take my point about HGV's crawling past other HGV's though? I think they do it just to wind people up.
Your point about night deliveries causing prices to rise a little is also good. This is a price I'd be more than willing to pay.
Brian
quote:
SUVs are the biggest risk on the road with out a doubt. If am driving on the motorway and I have some dumb arse SUV driver sitting on my tail I get out the way as quickly as possible because if have to break hard I will end up nicely sandwiched between whatever is in front of me and the 2 tonnes of ego behind me. SUVs stopping distance are typically twice that of a moderate performance saloon.
Yeah, oh you're so-oooo right! Not. Drivers are the biggest risk on the roads, not the equipment they are using. Oh what next - guns kill people?
And your "I quickly get out of the way" action is excellent! - although you'll find this is also known as "The Beckham Defense" - that is, the balded one took off at 70+ on the shoulder of a traffic-snarled A road (stopped traffic), in order to "get out of the way of a photographer driving dangerously, trying to get a pic". Needless to say, the judge penalised the misguided Ferrari driver.
The only thing dangerous about an SUV is when they are driven as a car. keep on blaming the equipment - it's cheaper than raising the standards of use.
How about compulsory skid-pan training before one is granted a license, along with how to change a tyre (practical), and breakdown safety (how to negotiate your way to a safe spot on a congested road or highway with a flat tyre or breakdown)... and the list goes on....
Rico - all your base are belong to us
Is there some chance of eliminating SUVs - No
Is there some chance of getting all SUV drivers realise how unsuited these vechicles are to high speed motorway drive - definitely not!
Will I have an irrational rant to make myself feel better - Yes.... I nearly got knocked off my bicycle on Saturday by an SUV with, yes you guessed it, no passengers in the vechicle!
I normally drive a 10 year old diesel which isn't my car so none of the Beckham stylistic driving!
I am heavily in favour of voluntary taxation, which I see as car and fuel tax for anyone who lives in London.
Matthew
Steve B
quote:
Will I have an irrational rant to make myself feel better - Yes.... I nearly got knocked off my bicycle on Saturday by an SUV with, yes you guessed it, no passengers in the vechicle!
Bummer dude. Perhaps they thought they might encounter mud at the garden centre, or need to climb the kerb en-route to selfridges - "I say, hadn't we better be prepared and take the Wange Wover?"
Not much call for SUV's in London. Or in the UK, for that matter - except where it's muddy.
Rico - all your base are belong to us
Radar speedtraps - do they have guidelines for 'margins' over the displayed speed limit as fixed cameras do - e.g. cameras set to trip at 82 on a 70 road. My question relates specifically to 40mph zones - I may have been caught doing around 46mph in one today*
Secondly, how do these speedtrap vans work - is it fully automated or is it a plod with a trigger, choosing which car to measure?
Thanks,
John
* reasons for which being a bus-lane activated green light sequence balls-up (Cramond Bridge area, Edinburgh) requiring me to temporarily exceed the speed limit to avoid careering into other flow of traffic also on green (madness!). May have hit 48, but spotted the van at a distance of around 200m.
quote:
Originally posted by Top Cat:
My question relates specifically to 40mph zones - I may have been caught doing around 46mph in one today*
Usually 10% + 2mph. At an indicated 46mph you're unlikely (although it is possible) to get done as most cars over-read by around 10% or so anyway.
My point is that individuals in society cannot choose which rules they would like to obey and which they can ignore 'because they know better'.
If the current upper limit is 70 mph then its not acceptable to drive faster. By all means lobby your MP and whoever else and attempt to get the law changed if you feel strongly enough about it.
But how do you know what 70mph really is - if car speedos overstate the speed by 10% then driving at 70 on the clock means that you are only going at aprox 64mph, the 10% plus 2 guideline enables one to drive at about 70mph by driving at 79mph on the speedo.
Derek
<< >>
I have been running a Snooper S6r Neo for around 5 Months now. This relies on GPS and a phone update to track known sites including SPECS and neo fascists. It also comes with a Radar and Laser Detector Module that can either be mouted in front of your rear view mirror on the windscreen, or in the bonnet. I fitted mine in around an hour. It relies on a monthly subscription to keep you up to date. It has been pretty reliable to date and I have found that I am:
a) Driving at lower speeds as I am far more aware of my speed than I used to be.
b) No longer panic braking at the site of a police car because I have already picked up his detector.
c) I am much more alert as a driver durring longer motorway journeys.
The only problem is random heart attacks from airport radars setting of the detector, as well as the sensors above automatic doorrs
Help Bunnys everywhere!!!!!
No Seriously, everywhere!!!!!!!
If the current upper limit is 70 mph then its not acceptable to drive faster. By all means lobby your MP and whoever else and attempt to get the law changed if you feel strongly enough about it.
Individuals in society should act responsibly and not just blindly follow the letter of the law. Of course we need laws because without them there would be no secure basis for our liberty. However, sometimes the only effective way to change the law, or government policy where it may be considered unjust or simply outdated, is actually to break the law.
The only reason why we can now buy groceries from a supermarket on a Sunday is because prior to the Sunday trading laws being changed the major supermarket chains blatantly broke the law by opening their stores on a Sunday.
The fuel blockades in September 2000 were another example of this. The voice of the electorate went unheard when the majority were trying to tell the government that its transport policy sucked, and that we as a nation of free individuals refused to be priced off the roads in keeping with socialist ideology of phase shifting thinly disguised as being for environmental reasons. By blocking the fuel depots people took the law into their own hands and made sure that it would be impossible for the government to raise even more revenue from fuel and force its anti-car dogma down our throats.
If instead we'd lobbied our MPs and taken no direct action by blocking the fuel depots a litre of unleaded would now cost £1.05 assuming the tax escalator had been allowed to continue at inflation plus six per cent per annum. Blair doesn't listen to his MPs as we discovered over Unversity tuition fees. To avoid paying those fees that are simply about establishing equality of outcome over equality of opportunity, students will need to take to the streets and refuse en masse to pay the top-up fees.
Regarding oppressive and inappropriate speed limiting and enforcement on motorways and rural main roads away from known accident blackspots, direct action to disable speed cameras may be more commonplace in the near future.
If the existing limits are routinely ignored by a majority of drivers then that in itself is an indication that something is wrong with the limit, and that it perhaps needs to be raised.
Regards,
Steve.
PS: Curiously radar detectors were legalised by this government for the simple reason that the only evasive action they encourage you to take is to slow down - which is kind of the point.
[This message was edited by Steven Toy on Thu 06 May 2004 at 3:56.]
Utter bollocks. What Car magazine publishes stopping distances from 70mph, The worst SUV listed is the Land Rover Discovery V8 at 68.5 metres, the worst "normal" car is the VW Polo 1.4 at 77.1m. The best SUV is the Range Rover Td6 at 44.1m - very few performance cars can match that, it is certainly much better than the Jaguar X-type (2.0) which recorded 60.1m (worse than nearly every SUV on the road)
quote:
Retesting every 3-5 years.
I'd add to that making the test harder too, maybe a two-stage affair, with a provisional intermediate licence.
If everyone took a test that was similar in theme to either the RoSPA or IAM advanced test, most of the problems discussed here would be dramatically reduced, our roads would be safer,we'd all make better progress etc. etc.
Andy.
How do we determine which laws can be reasonably challenged in the way you suggest? I for one would not allow any leeway in the law regarding paedophiles. An extreme case, I know but who's to say which laws are amenable to your argument and which are not.
quote:
If the existing limits are routinely ignored by a majority of drivers then that in itself is an indication that something is wrong with the limit, and that it perhaps needs to be raised.
I disagree with this statement. Drivers routinely ingnore 20 mph/30 mph limits as well as the faster ones and its because they are selfish/carelesss individuals who's own self interest comes above the safety of others.
That is where taking responsibility for your actions really counts. With crimes of violence or sexual abuse it is fairly easy to make a judgement of what is right and wrong. In other instances individuals need to play an active role in decision-making on the spot where governments and law enforcement agents cannot.
I disagree with this statement. Drivers routinely ingnore 20 mph/30 mph limits as well as the faster ones and its because they are selfish/carelesss individuals who's own self interest comes above the safety of others.
As a driver I make judgements as to whether or not the lowest limits are strictly necessary at any given time. If I judge the limit to be unnecessary because, for example it happens to be late at night and there are no children playing or walking close by, and all the drunks have gone home to bed, then in the absence of any obvious law enforcement I'll take my chances and drive a little faster. Where there are pedestrians around, especially children or drunks I slow right down, and I don't need a figure in a red disc to tell me to do so.
Many arterial routes into major cities have had their speed limits cut from 40 or 50 down to 30 and enforced by cameras even where the road has no buildings directly on either side. This means that a journey across a major city that used to take, say, about 20 minutes during the night now takes half an hour. Imagine how that feels - HALF AN HOUR driving at speeds of 30mph or below on wide, well-lit and near-empty roads. The concentration tends to wander as the boredom sets in.
Then there are those National Speed Limit roads that get cut to 40mph where there aren't even any streetlamps. If speed were really an issue on such roads then surely visibility ought to be improved first by adding street lighting ahead of cutting the speed limit...
If these measures had resulted in bringing the annual death toll on our roads down from around 3500 in the years that have followed since, then I could say, hand-on-heart, that the loss of liberty was a price worth paying for saving lives. However, this has not been the case, so such loss of liberty, lengthened (in terms of time) and more tedious journeys has been for no benefit whatsoever. It has all just been an ill wind.
It is therefore likely that direct action may be taken to disable suburban speed cameras as well as rural ones, bringing the whole system of speed limiting and enforcement into disrepute as drivers begin to ignore the limits that are clearly necessary as well as those that are more arbitrary. If the government chooses to meet such disregard of limits with even stricter enforcement then it will likely be met with rebellion and more vandalism.
A sense of balance and compromise needs to be restored if the majority are to be expected to respect as well as obey the law. I don't think lobbying your MP is going to achieve a lot, tbh.
The ballot box may of course be the answer if the electorate is not to believe the blatant lies told by those currently in government.
Regards,
Steve.
[This message was edited by Steven Toy on Fri 07 May 2004 at 3:36.]
I also know there are a lot of individuals whose morals or judgement I would not trust, so would not allow them that freedom.
I am willing to deny myself that freedom of choice to withold it from those who would use it irresponsibly.
(This argument only applies in an ideal world of course, because in reality the situation where individuals make arbitrary decisions already exists).