Speed camera information for drivers on M6, M56, M60 and M62

Back to the subject

The email is a hoax.

Regards

Mike

On the Yellow Brick Road and happy

Mike,

we know!

I admire the French for not tolerating te unacceptable. We just sit back and let the government walk all over us. We are weak and pathetic subjects.

Regards,

Steve.

some more stats for those who are still not convinced. Again from Roadcraft:

approximately:
1/3 of all accidents are rear end shunts.
1/4 of all accidents are caused by one vehicle driving across another vehicle's priorty.
1/6 of all acccidents involve loss of directional control.
Think about that. We could instantly cut out 30% of accidents just by ensuring people didn't drive too close to the car in front.
Now when was the last time you heard of someone getting 'done' for this? Come to think of it, when was the last time you heard of anyone getting pulled over for any form of bad driving. I know of only one person - a guy in my office who was was caught using a mobile (while attempting to turn a corner and change gear) a few months ago.

Steve,
If you drive your car exactly as how you were taught, don't exceed the speed limit, don't drive too close thus allowing enough distance to be able to stop in an emergency, don't drink/drug drive and are curteous to everyone else then this thread would not be here.
Instead 'we' dont'.
I think its prudent to look at what roadcraft says - It makes alot of sence.

And I have a relative who has had to go tell the next of kin their son/daughter etc has been killed by a speeding motorist who came up too fast behind their car thus causing the collison...not a nice job I'll bet!

In his experience there is no such thing as an 'accident'. Most collisions hold a degree of blameworhtiness to one party or another. This is a view I agree with.

quote:

---

And I have a relative who has had to go tell the next of kin their son/daughter etc has been killed by a speeding motorist who came up too fast behind their car thus causing the collison...not a nice job I'll bet!

---

Andy, you keep mentioning this mythical 'speeding motorist'. If your relative is a police officer, ask to see the real figures that they compile. As has been said previously on this thread, less than 10% of accidents are primarily caused by people exceeding the speed limit. Now if you were to say killed by someone 'driving too fast for the prevailing conditions' then that would be a whole different story.

John,
Would you not agree tho that a 10% reduction in deaths/serious injuries/collisions for what is little relative outlay is a good thing?

I do know that in Notts the sites used are collsion hotspots. I can't speak for the other counties of which members of this forum reside...
And I totally agree with you re driving too fast for the conditions...

quote:

---

Originally posted by andy c:
John,
Would you not agree tho that a 10% reduction in deaths/serious injuries/collisions for what is little relative outlay is a good thing?

---

Well in theory, yes. Unfortunately, once you take out things like emergency vehicles, criminals, joy riders etc from that 10% you really aren't left with a lot. There are other far bigger targets to hit but I guess there's not enough money to be made out of them. For instance, why people don't get upset that we still have 30% of fatalities caused by drunk drivers? In fact, there seem to be absolutely no policing of that here. What about all the other appalling driving you see every day? Surely better policing of bad driving behaviour would be a help. Then there's training. I wonder if I should I ask how many people here have done any training other than just enough to pass the 'drive around the block and do a reverse park' test? From what I see on the roads most people can't even hold a steering wheel properly, let alone turn a corner. Why does anyone think that turn their hand 180 degrees in order to hold the back of the steering wheel is a good idea? In short, if people can't even manage the basics, what hope do we have?

Andy,

Regarding our "mythical speeding motorist," I imagine the scenario to be thus: The speed limit is 60mph and an inexperienced driver is doing no more than, say 58mph. He steers too quickly through a sharp left-hand bend (at say 50 mph,) loses control of his vehicle and either rear ends a vehicle in front of him the other side of the bend that he could not see that may have just pulled out of a side road, or he loses control of the vehicle and collides with another head-on travelling in the opposite direction.

Equally, it could be the brow of a hill with someone at the top in front of him that he can't see until it's too late, waiting to turn right.

I hope you begin to realise that in all of the above instances the issue is not one of exceeding the blanket speed limit but of driving too quickly for the road conditions.

The camera - or Mr Plod with his speed gun on the downhill straight is going to catch a few people speeding, i.e: exceeding the legal limit, but no accident is going to be prevented.

The car that went round the corner too fast two years ago, slid and collided with the front end of my taxi, writing off both vehicles was probably not exceeding the speed limit. (I was already stationary by the time of impact, btw.)

The other car didn't look as though it would have passed an MOT even before the impact.



Regards,

Steve.

My thoughts,

Most of the reports do not consider the significantly safer cars out there now. For most the design also considers pedestrian impacts, (a major programme in the 80's)! Drivers and passengers are a lot better off in more modern cars.

Statistics can and are manipulated. Choose the numbers you wish to compare to favour the result you prefer.

Most Police Officers would far prefer to be catching muggers, burglars etc.

If you drive under the influence of Drink, Drugs etc you should pay the price. Very difficult to catch using cameras.

Bad driving causes the most accidents, speed is generally a factor not the ultimate cause.

Using displays to indicate you are speeding is proving to be as effective in villages. Enforced occaisionally be mobile cameras. This is more cost effective, has the desired effect, but creates less revenue.

The ultimate argument from authorities is if it saves lives then it is justified. Very hard to prove either way.

Milan

Interesting comments folks,
However in Notts the Traffic dept got reduced by 50 odd to bolster up lcal cops to deal with burglaries, violent crime etc.
With that happening camera's seemed to breed in all the hotspots.
I totally agree with driving to the conditions (Steve and John refer to this), and another good point made is that of training after passing the basic test.
I also smile when people complain of getting done for speeding or other traffic offences. The law in this area seems quite clear cut to me, so why moan?

I would like all areas where a speed limit is imposed to have regular repeater speed limit signs at the side of the road. I would also like to see positive action to ensure that speed limit signs are not hidden by trees and bushes.

When on unfamiliar roads, driving at 30 in a 40mph area just in case it is a 30 mph limit is a burden to all traffic as well as being embarrasing.

Derek

<< >>

quote:

---

I also smile when people complain of getting done for speeding or other traffic offences. The law in this area seems quite clear cut to me, so why moan?

---

Clear cut as in inflexible?

Yes. I'm lucky so far, my licence is clean, but I'd object to being penalised for exceeding the speed limit on an open straight road, a road that doesn't have a history of accidents while boy racers continue to take corners too quickly (still possibly within the speed limit) with front fog lamps blazing away - this is an offence that is never penalised and is dangerous because it makes speed and distance of the offending vehicle difficult to perceive.



Regards,

Steve.

Plod: Have you any idea what speed you were doing sir?

Good driver: 85 in a 70 in clear conditions officer. I hold up my hands! I don't think it was dangerous though.

Plod: No your driving was spot-on except the speed. You kept your distance, moved back to the inside lane after each overtaking manoevre, used your mirrors and indicators each time you changed lanes - more than I can say for some of the other idiots who, whilst driving more slowly than you were tailgating other vehicles in the middle lane before moving out and cutting up vehicles in the outside lane including you. You handled that one very well, btw.

Good driver: Are you going to do any of them?

Plod: No, too much paper work.

Good driver: What about me? You've admitted that I posed a danger to no-one.

Plod: You were still breaking the law so here's your fixed penalty notice. My job is done.



Regards,

Steve.

Steve,
Until the law changes then we are stuffed.
The speeding offences are supposed to be preventative - not reactive. In other words regardlesss of how late you are/how well you can drive etc you don't go above the limit set.

I do see your point re motorways - the limit was set when vehicles were not designed etc to cope with such speeds. But I built up areas I don't agree. If anything I agree with others re a potential reduction.
Also, If you get stopeed for speeding, dependant on location/time of day-night etc may that not lead to the drink/drugged driver mentioned?

Two thing worriy me. I know I'm a brilliant driver who can handle a car. Of course accidents don't happen to me I can handle them. Are you as confident that I know what my limitations are? And secondly I had a friend who was a brilliant driver, drunk, stoned or straight he could handle a car. He was a great tool user. Only thing was the other drivers around weren't quite as competent and if they went wide round a bend when my mate was doing 90 they tended to hit each other.

So it's not so much me I need to worry about on a clear road but me meeting incompetent drivers who can't deal with my startling ability.

Now where's that MX8?

Tom

Actively enjoying it all

quote:

---

I know I'm a brilliant driver who can handle a car. Of course accidents don't happen to me I can handle them.

---

Well Tom, if the first were true then you certainly wouldn't be saying the second.
As you're new to driving get yourself onto a course where you can find out the limits of both yourself and your car safely. Once you know those limits you will also hopefully know not to go near them on public roads.
As for the incompetent drivers you may meet along the way, the best way to deal with them is by making allowances in your driving not only for any mistakes you may make but for the mistakes of others as well.

isn't that an RX8?

What is this 'speeding' you talk of?

I live on one side of London, and work on the other. It's a 16 mile drive. My cars computer tells me I average 11mph on a good day, most days it's nearer 8mph. Am I speeding?

Could the speed be reduced? Surely if it was, I would be in danger of a parking ticket.

ag

John, you're an Australian so you might'nt get irony when you see it . I was pointing out the attitude of many people I meet. Yes, I've just bought a car but I've been driving for over twenty years and I hope I have learnt caution and consideration. As a youth I was dangerous, I hope with age I'm learning that I am not perfect and neither is any one else. Danger lurks round every corner and the majority of people don't appear to be bothered to learn the limitations of their vehicle so one has to drive defencively.

Tom

Actively enjoying it all

Alex said "My cars computer tells me I average 11mph on a good day"

You are Michael Knight and I claim my £5.

Matthew
Who had his licence revoked this morning so can't speed even if he wanted to

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tom Alves:
John, you're an Australian so you might'nt get irony when you see it .

---

I think you're confusing Australians with Americans. Don't worry, I did realise you weren't talking about yourself. The advice still stands though. There's always more to learn.

I agree with that. None of us a perfect and we all make mistakes. take care out there.

Tom

Actively enjoying it all

quote:

---

Until the law changes then we are stuffed.

---

So you agree that the law needs to change regarding motorways and good dual carriageways?

I agree with you about built-up areas, btw. I rarely speed in built up areas except late at night and only once I'm well away fom the drunken pedestrian zone (i.e: the vicinity of nightclubs/takeaway outlets) even then I'm talking no more than about 10mph over.

I nearly ran into a stag on Cannock Chase about two hours ago. I was doing 45 in a 60 zone because deer have a poor knowledge of the Green Cross Code and tend to demolish cars on impact.



Regards,

Steve.

quote:

---

Matthew
Who had his licence revoked this morning so can't speed even if he wanted to

---

I didn't know you drove Matthew. Pray tell, have you been a naughty boy?

quote:

---

Also, If you get stopeed for speeding, dependant on location/time of day-night etc may that not lead to the drink/drugged driver mentioned?

---

Andy,

The problem is that drink drivers tend to drive by the book (apart wandering across the road a bit and over-compensating for obstacles). They are annoyingly slow and all-too-frequently I tend to get stuck behind them - at this time of year in particular.

They are still a menace though because their reaction times are poor and they are unpredictable.

quote:

---

I would like all areas where a speed limit is imposed to have regular repeater speed limit signs at the side of the road. I would also like to see positive action to ensure that speed limit signs are not hidden by trees and bushes.

When on unfamiliar roads, driving at 30 in a 40mph area just in case it is a 30 mph limit is a burden to all traffic as well as being embarrasing.

---

Derek,

I totally agree, and why can't the cameras (GATSOs) themselves, as well as being painted bright reflective yellow, also show the speed limit on the back of them?

Regards,

Steve.

[This message was edited by Steven Toy on SUNDAY 07 December 2003 at 03:58.]

Perhaps we should send this thread to the Home Office

Tom

Actively enjoying it all

Steven -- I have been driving for nearly 20 years.

My license has been revoked because the DVLA seems to have lost the information from my doctor confirming that although I have Diabetes I am not likely to fall into a coma on the M1.

Matthew