+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 53
General Chat Thread, The French Ban SatNavs with Speed Camera Databases! in General; If only there was a way of creating a camera to to quantify and catch "driving like an idiot and ...
  1. #31

    Oaktech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Bournemouth
    Posts
    2,463
    Thank Post
    678
    Thanked 451 Times in 363 Posts
    Rep Power
    229
    If only there was a way of creating a camera to to quantify and catch "driving like an idiot and taking the pi55" rather than being penalised for just making a mistake.

  2. Thanks to Oaktech from:

    SimpleSi (29th May 2012)

  3. #32

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    4,467
    Thank Post
    750
    Thanked 1,210 Times in 852 Posts
    Blog Entries
    45
    Rep Power
    533
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    RTA's have reduced over the last 10 years. Since few seem to think that speed cameras are effective, what DO they think is driving down the number of accidents (in all fatal/serious/slight categories)?

    Fatal accidents require detailed investigation by specialist assessors and out of about ~60 odd factors which can be cited, excess speed (~30%) is by far the most frequent.
    Statistics on road traffic accidents seem hard to come by - the best I've found with a brief Google whilst I waited on a virtual server to be born was on BBC News and whilst they show a fall for the last few years, the first half of that data set shows no improvement - and that's the time period where the speed cameras were put on, so it would seem that the Yellow Boxes didn't make much difference.

    In all fairness, though, at that point they were Hidden Grey Boxes, so it may be that the decline coincides with Honest Signing and Visible Cameras. I can't remember the timing of that particular policy to verify, though.

    However, all those accidents where speed was an issue? I warrant that the speed being done was also being done for the previous half-hour by the offender, and the crash didn't happen at that point. The speed itself wasn't the issue; it was the ill-advised choice to be doing that speed at that time, in that particular situation. There are two options for helping there: either blanket the country in intelligent, adaptive speed cameras that adjust to lighting, weather and traffic conditions, or improve driver ability by enforcing better training and better testing and making sure everyone gets the idea that when you're in a car, you're in control of a lethal machine and are holding a metaphorical gun to the head of everyone you drive past, passenger or pedestrian, and you owe it to them and yourself to keep the safety on. As it were.

  4. #33

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,881
    Thank Post
    1,316
    Thanked 1,738 Times in 1,087 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    563
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    And yet, they have a worse record for safety.

    (p25 of the link)
    And the argument (from friends in the US) has been that the methods of gathering the stats differ so trying to compare them is flaming stupid. That is why the UN is trying to collectively gather information (including via WHO) to find out what the stats really say. The United Nations and Road Safety

  5. #34
    gshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    2,604
    Thank Post
    154
    Thanked 205 Times in 190 Posts
    Rep Power
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    RTA's have reduced over the last 10 years. Since few seem to think that speed cameras are effective, what DO they think is driving down the number of accidents (in all fatal/serious/slight categories)?
    Better cars with more focus on safety (pedestrian and passenger) will be a major part of it. Increased number of airbags etc will mean you have a much better chance in a crash than you would've had with say a mid-90's Fiesta compared to the equivalent today...

  6. #35

    Theblacksheep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In a house.
    Posts
    1,876
    Thank Post
    127
    Thanked 279 Times in 204 Posts
    Rep Power
    164
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    RTA's have reduced over the last 10 years. Since few seem to think that speed cameras are effective, what DO they think is driving down the number of accidents (in all fatal/serious/slight categories)?
    RTAs down since removal of speed cameras:

    Number of accidents has dropped since Bristol speed cameras switched off | This is Bristol

  7. #36
    chrisredfield93's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Wales
    Posts
    230
    Thank Post
    89
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Rep Power
    15
    IIRC i was told a while back they were going ditch speed cameras on the motoroway and dual carriage ways apprently the new method mentioned was that a camera takes a pic once and then another further on and then calculates between the two distances agaisnt the time to work out if you been speeding or not since they pointed out that people now taking notice where they are and slowing down before reaching them but

    speed camera databases should be allowed so that you can correct adjust your speed but not abused like

  8. #37


    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,135
    Thank Post
    1,307
    Thanked 808 Times in 513 Posts
    Rep Power
    632
    Just had a reply from Nissan.

    Thank you for your e-mail to Nissan on 29/05/12 regarding your sat nav system.
    Please be advised that there is currently an update available for your system at Application Number | Navigation System | Map Quest | Cash Advance at Naviation.com. This update will remove all French speed camera POI on your system and ensure your vehicle is compliant with French legislation.

  9. #38


    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    3,387
    Thank Post
    183
    Thanked 350 Times in 279 Posts
    Rep Power
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook View Post
    Afterwards he did explain though that 9 points had been on the same day, on the same stretch of road and was down to a change in the restrictions that were poorly signed (I've been along the road and would heartily agree) which would now be challenged and the points / fines dropped (as they were on many occasions and the signage has now changed).
    That one is a favourite of our council.

    40mph road enters a roundabout. "National speedlimit" signpost. Exit roundabout onto national speedlimit road.

    They reduced the national speedlimit road down to 40mph. Now the sensible thing to do would be either put up a 40mph signpost, a "speed limit changed" sign, or both. What they actually did was just remove the national speedlimit sign therefore making this entirely different road, separated by a roundabout, also a 40mph. For the next few months the cops sat in the layby raking in the cash/points. No one, and I mean no one knew it had changed until they were told about it. You'd have to be bloody observant to notice a sigpost had been removed!

  10. 2 Thanks to j17sparky:

    GrumbleDook (29th May 2012), SimpleSi (29th May 2012)

  11. #39


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,488
    Thank Post
    198
    Thanked 629 Times in 481 Posts
    Rep Power
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by gshaw View Post
    Better cars with more focus on safety (pedestrian and passenger) will be a major part of it. Increased number of airbags etc will mean you have a much better chance in a crash than you would've had with say a mid-90's Fiesta compared to the equivalent today...
    If that were true, then there might be a disparity between the categories fatal/serious/minor. They have all fallen. Also, airbags, crumple zones etc have been around for quite a while. Car safety has certainly been improving but over the last 10 years that surely can't account for the huge drop.

  12. #40


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,488
    Thank Post
    198
    Thanked 629 Times in 481 Posts
    Rep Power
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook View Post
    And the argument (from friends in the US) has been that the methods of gathering the stats differ so trying to compare them is flaming stupid.
    The stats I pointed out were deaths per million registered drivers. While the 'methods' of gathering the data might be different, most countries are reasonably conscientious about recording both deaths and the number of licensed drivers. A blanket description of 'flaming stupid' to a reasonably qualified metric is ... flaming stupid (IMO).

  13. #41


    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    51.405546, -0.510212
    Posts
    8,125
    Thank Post
    203
    Thanked 2,390 Times in 1,770 Posts
    Rep Power
    704
    Quote Originally Posted by gshaw View Post
    I've always wondered why cars don't have an extra instrument in the dash that knows the limit of each road...
    Already been invented (in a sense). The Nissan GT-R will automatically disable its speed limiter when the GPS system detects that you have arrived at a race track. On public roads it is limited to 112 mph, but on the track you can drive it at upto 200mph.

    If all cars had GPS I imagine it would be quite easy to implement. However, considering that electric windows, aircon and MFSWs are not standard features on all new cars, I am not holding out much hope.

  14. #42


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,488
    Thank Post
    198
    Thanked 629 Times in 481 Posts
    Rep Power
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by sonofsanta View Post
    However, all those accidents where speed was an issue? I warrant that the speed being done was also being done for the previous half-hour by the offender, and the crash didn't happen at that point. The speed itself wasn't the issue; it was the ill-advised choice to be doing that speed at that time, in that particular situation.
    So ... it wasn't that they were going too fast per se, it was just they were going too fast when they had a crash. Yea .... I see... So, it's really the fault that they *decided* to have a crash. What we need is ... err ... no crash signs, not speed limit signs. Hmmm...

  15. #43

    GrumbleDook's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Gosport, Hampshire
    Posts
    9,881
    Thank Post
    1,316
    Thanked 1,738 Times in 1,087 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    563
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    The stats I pointed out were deaths per million registered drivers. While the 'methods' of gathering the data might be different, most countries are reasonably conscientious about recording both deaths and the number of licensed drivers. A blanket description of 'flaming stupid' to a reasonably qualified metric is ... flaming stupid (IMO).
    In some states in US the death of registered drivers is not always recorded as vehicle related if due to drugs, gun crime, certain medical conditions ... or car chases involving police. Not all Counties report accurately to State level and not all States are consistent when reporting at Federal level. Similar inconsistencies in Oz, apparently, on collating figures.

    We have similar issues with collectively reporting stats in other areas due to the different ways things are recorded by different Constabularies ... which is why you get accusations about massaging figures on violent crime, theft, etc.

  16. #44


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,488
    Thank Post
    198
    Thanked 629 Times in 481 Posts
    Rep Power
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by GrumbleDook View Post
    In some states in US the death of registered drivers is not always recorded as vehicle related if due to drugs, gun crime, certain medical conditions ... or car chases involving police. Not all Counties report accurately to State level and not all States are consistent when reporting at Federal level. Similar inconsistencies in Oz, apparently, on collating figures.
    Thanks for the clarification, that's interesting. I can see why someone who is shot dead and then crashes isn't counted. However, it seems that all these things are likely to skew figures down (less deaths attributed to RTA), so the USA is likely to come off even worse than they already show if they were more methodical. I'd struggle to think that the IRTAD working group wasn't aware of the issue (and infact they source data from a number of different sources (page 28)), specifically cross referencing police reported data against hospital data. However, I have to admit I'm a little surprised that there is no quantification of error anywhere in the figures - that's ... unscientific.

    We have similar issues with collectively reporting stats in other areas due to the different ways things are recorded by different Constabularies ... which is why you get accusations about massaging figures on violent crime, theft, etc.
    True, but collection of RTA stats is quite methodical in the UK.

  17. #45

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    4,467
    Thank Post
    750
    Thanked 1,210 Times in 852 Posts
    Blog Entries
    45
    Rep Power
    533
    Quote Originally Posted by pcstru View Post
    So ... it wasn't that they were going too fast per se, it was just they were going too fast when they had a crash. Yea .... I see... So, it's really the fault that they *decided* to have a crash. What we need is ... err ... no crash signs, not speed limit signs. Hmmm...
    It's not that they were going too fast, per se, it's that they were going too fast for that particular situation, that particular moment and set of circumstances. If the crash happened at 80mph on a 60mph road, they probably habitually drive at 80mph down that road, and don't normally have a crash. The speed itself wasn't the cause of the crash; it's that it was inadvisable in those specific sets of circumstances, and the inability of the driver to identify that they should slow down because it's raining/dusk/heavy traffic/blind junction/etc.

    So yes, speed is a factor, but speed itself is not a danger, it's the circumstances under which it occurs. And traffic cameras are a blunt force instrument that cannot discriminate when it is and isn't appropriate.

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisredfield93 View Post
    IIRC i was told a while back they were going ditch speed cameras on the motoroway and dual carriage ways apprently the new method mentioned was that a camera takes a pic once and then another further on and then calculates between the two distances agaisnt the time to work out if you been speeding or not
    Nottinghamshire love these average speed cameras, they've had them for years. The old A46 between Newark and Nottingham was more or less covered by them. In all fairness, they do make you pay a lot more attention to your speed. If only they stopped people sticking to your back bumper because they've not realised those cameras are about and you're not going to speed up no matter how close they get to your rear windshield

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The French ban tomato sauce from primary schools!
    By Dos_Box in forum General Chat
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 6th October 2011, 09:44 AM
  2. [News] New speed camera - you have been warned...
    By Oops_my_bad in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28th April 2008, 07:05 PM
  3. Speed Camera Revenge
    By eduabncs in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 17th February 2007, 04:10 PM
  4. What the devil's wrong with IE?
    By indiegirl in forum Windows
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 13th April 2006, 02:54 PM
  5. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 7th February 2006, 03:02 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •