OT: Smart Motorways and overly smart cameras?

[T i m]

Hi all,

So, after seeing HADECS 3 speed camera (flash) going off a few times in a 40mph variable speed section of the M25 (J29 anticlock)

the other day got me looking into it all and wondering what the

*actual* point was and where we might be going with all this.

In a nutshell, I think I remember these 'Safety Cameras' being originally being installed (initially grey then they were forced to paint them yellow?) in 'known accident blackspots' and in situations where it might be prudent to keep people down to the speed limit (like outside a school, even though that could still be way too fast in the fog or snow etc). ;-(

Since then we seem to have moved to a situation where against those original intentions we are could all (?) become 'soft targets' to receiving a fine (~50% of your weekly wage) and 3 points on your licence for momentarily straying up to say 41 mph in a (temporary even) 40mph zone, even where there is no practical, logical or safety implication for limiting a section of road down from 70mph to say 40 mph at_that_time (e.g. No road works, no debris on the road, no congestion there or for many many miles, perfect weather conditions etc etc).

I think the old NPCC or ACPO guidelines were perfectly reasonable and they typically stated things like...

"1.1.3 Speed enforcement is expensive - it is both time and resource intensive and competes with other important policing issues of equal public concern. Enforcement is mainly reactive and should not be seen as a preventative measure to achieve vehicle speeds. Prevention has to rely on public support and compliance by the majority and enforcement of the minority who ignore the law."

So, is drifting up to 42 mph on a clear, dry free moving motorway (to say get past a HGV that has started indicating to pull out as you were beside it) intentionally / directly 'ignoring the law' (by any RW view of such things) or in any other way 'driving dangerously or inconsiderately'?

Even if it was, how does that sort of action compare with those driving under the speed limit but who actually were driving erratically or dangerously but completely unrecorded by said cameras?

And then we come to the legal matter of 'De Minimis', where, in a real_human world, very few things will be *that* precise and we may well see an increase in road traffic accidents because of people fixating on their speed rather than the road around them?

We don't have a zero threshold for say alcohol in the bloodstream or many people would be 'done' after using a mouthwash or from the party two days earlier.

Is this just a way of pushing for vehicle speed automation or maybe even just raising revenue or will we all be just going 5-10mph under the speed limit from now on?

Maybe they can now raise the national speed limit to 80 mph rather than not bothering to prosecute at anything below 79 as they have been doing?

Cheers, T i m

p.s. I read of a case where a driver has his fixed camera location speeding offence prosecution dropped because he measured the spacing between the white lines on the road (secondary speed measurement) and found them 3" too close together. I wonder if all the previously issued / questionable penalties were withdrawn after that was discovered? ;-)

[The Natural Philosopher]

No. cameras generate income. They are there to generate income to pay for themselves, the consultants on 'speed awareness' courses and wherever the fines go.

[T i m]

Non camera speed enforcement is probably expensive though.

And some don't and why they have been removed.

When they are there and working and positioned where they are partly hidden or in an area where there is no particular risk but at say the bottom of a hill (where the upside of the hill will normally cancel out any speed increase naturally and ecological) they can do.

The courses cost the participants and at the current capture rate with these new Smart Motorways and variable speed cameras they will be in work for a long long time. I believe these funds do go to the Police

The Police Commissioners hoped they would go to that force (see Bedfordshire) but they have been told the moneys will go to the treasury (where some cash could go to the NHS to pay for all the extra accidents with people losing concentration on the road or getting bored etc). ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[Tim Watts]

Should be grateful - at least we can use GPS cam databases and alerters.

In France, any device that *can* identify the position of speed/lights cameras is illegal to possess in a car. Not just operate, but to possess.

[Tim+]

So, every smartphone then? ;-)

I seem to recall from our last trip to France that our navigation app (Waze) just stopped giving precise locations and instead just identified "speed camera zones", presumably to get around the ruling. I've no idea whether all navigation apps treat France the same way though.

To be honest though, the French seem to be pretty good at putting up signs a few hundred metres before every speed camera warning you of its presence so I'm not sure why they make such a song and dance about other systems.

Tim

[Tim Streater]

Those are going to be removed.

[Nightjar]

On 29-May-17 3:30 PM, T i m wrote: ...

Is there a zero tolerance policy on these cameras, rather than the previous policy of only taking action when the speed reached the limit +

10% + 2mph?

[Tim Watts]

I do wonder why the frogs stand for this nonsense - I thought they had more dignity...

[The Natural Philosopher]

Does that means you have to drive with your eyes shut?

Or remove your mk I eyeballs?

[T i m]

Yes, I believe there is (zero tolerance, which was think was covered in the links).

Cheers, T i m

[dennis]

Well the variable ones can be set lower in fog and snow to keep you happy.

Look up why and how smart motorways work and you might understand why you haven't run into congestion.

Smarter cameras will arrive and then you will moan about them too.

The usual argument from people that don't actually know how to drive.

No. its because people have alcohol in their blood as normal due to eating food.

Not those of us that can drive and we will be pissed off by those that can't drive. But we won't do anything dangerous.

Maybe they should just fine everyone doing 71+?

[T i m]

Whilst I'm sure you are right, although I'm not sure what use they are under the variable speed limit / zero tolerance scheme? Ok, they warn you there is a radar device ahead but not what speed it is *currently* policing and if you are following and about to overtake a couple of artics, what speed you might be doing (since the last speed marker) as you pass under the gantry that you don't see till the last moment?

I have never really considered them because I'm not sure you can rely on them and if you aren't regularly speeding and suitably are observant, you shouldn't need one?

I guess there may be the odd time they *could* pay for themselves though ...

Cheers, T i m

[dennis]

They can't, it is impossible as the revenue does not comeback to the police or councils so they have to pay for the cameras and their upkeep. If they don't have cameras it saves them money unless they still want to enforce the limits. The old system did allow the councils to keep the cash to spend on road safety.

It all goes in the general tax fund. It costs the police/highways agency money to run the cameras but they think it is worth the trouble of doing so. So do drivers that understand how smart motorways work and what they do.

[T i m]

Not to keep me happy but to at least better justify their supposed role as 'Safety devices'.

Doh. Drive enough miles on motorways with variable speed limits and you might understand why sometimes the limits are out_of_date.

Ok, as you know all the answers, please explain (consecutive variable speed gantries) a 50, 40, 50, 70, 70, 70, 70 ... (30+ miles and still

70) ... when there was no congestion around the 40 (ironically) ...but coincidentally there was a HADECS 3 camera on the gantry with 40).

I'm not moaning about anything. I'm question the actual purpose of a system that seems to treat human beings as if they were machines.

Aww bless. My only motoring offence so far was nearly 40 years ago and that was for exceeding the speed limit for a 'Goods Vehicle' when doing 63mph in an otherwise 70 limit in my Morris Minor van. This is in spite of regularly riding a motorcycle that can do nearly twice the max UK speed limit and touring the country.

'And' ....

Well good luck on that. Remember we are talking about a speed *limit* with nearly zero threshold past that. How accurately do you *think* can you track a variable speed system over say 500 miles without erring on the side of caution?

We? Is that you and your chauffeur? ;-)

What?

Cheers, T i m

[dennis]

If you can't see the signs you shouldn't be driving. The speed limit cameras don't change as soon as the sign does.

I take the view that if you got caught by a bright yellow gatso you should be banned and made to take an eye test before you could get your license back.

[dennis]

Who said they were just safety devices?

The system is working then! If it isn't working you are going to get congestion. If you drive along the M6 around brum you will see the big difference it has made.

Its just a simple way of passing a message onto the drivers and ensuring the stupid ones do as requested.

Ooh what's it like as I have never been caught.

How do you enforce a zero on something everyone has?

Very. Its not as though I don't already do it now.

[Tim Streater]

Much better if such funds do *not* end up with the local authority or local police. That way, you avoid the sort of legalised banditry they enjoy in the US.

[Tim Streater]

I don't have a license. I might have a licence though.

HTH.

[T i m]

Not directly no.

And potentially save money dealing with RTAs and hit-n-run damaged street furniture etc.

Yes, that's what I said wasn't it?

Quite. Didn't many turn some of them off? (Where a mate lives they are about to turn 6 back so I'm guessing that could be true).

I'm not sure those who also understand the zero tolerance / penalty system works would though.

So, for the hard of understanding (dennis) ... it has often amazed / frustrated me to see those blasting though the mandatory variable speed system zones at *way* above the speed limit (often including foreign articulated lorries) who are then typically putting others at risk because of the speed difference, let alone potentially adding to the congestion further on or putting those using the live lane 1 as a hard shoulder (reducing the number of live lanes and so also potentially decreasing the throughput further). I have nothing against Smart Motorways or speed camera usage, just the real world implications of zero tolerance systems on real world and typically law abiding / conscientious drivers.

Because you are a left brained droid, I don't expect you to understand such human things. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

See, in your left brained world there can be no circumstances where seeing the signs may be difficult. You would also be unable to understand why 'good drivers' might take prompts from their general surroundings re how the speed limits might change. It's the same reason people (ITRW) hit others up the back when they anchor up for no reason (and why 'slam on's' became so lucrative for the scammers).

One Police are have suggested there is a 60 second delay between the sign changing and the camera threshold changing to match but they may not apply across the country.

I agree, but there could well be times that those of us who aren't robots might not be looking for a yellow box on a pole but which way the deer might run in the oncoming HID headlights that are dazzling both you and the deer.

Cheers, T i m