Speed camera mega-thread ***Read first post before posting***

ulinbac

kiwipower wrote: »

What I can never understand with all the new technology around, why do we need Garda Breathalizers and speed cameras trying to catch people out??

Why not use the available technology?
for example:

1. A breathalizer attatched to the ignition which wont allow the car to start if the driver is over the limit?
2. A GPS style system which tells the cars on-board computer what the limit is when the car passess the speed limit sign, the computer could then issue a high pitch annoying sound when you go slightly over the limit, and stops the car from accelerating past an agreed maximum?
3. A weight detector in carseats. If the belt is not then attatched car will not start or will be forced to slow down?

Then we could get into the real issuse. The correct speed limits (max and min) for individual parts of roads.

None of the above would be even sensible.
1) You would have to go to every car manufacturer and ask them to install this on Irish cars, can't be done, cost would be massive!!!
2) What if you are going at a 10 kmh over the limit pass a sign and a car behind u going at a faster pace, if you slow down quicker, it leads to an accident. Sometimes we don't always notice going over the speed limit. Imagine getting a shock from a sudden high pitch, could lead to a another accident.
3) Again cost of fitting devices to every speed limit sign,
4) For a breathalyzer, someone else could low into it. Brings back the mentality of its only a few minutes to the house and can't be caught.
5) Seatbelt might work, but what if your carrying stuff in other seats, leading to pressure on the seat and no starting car.

Your ideas work well in theory but not in practice:p

I.S.T.

kiwipower wrote: »

What I can never understand with all the new technology around, why do we need Garda Breathalizers and speed cameras trying to catch people out??

Why not use the available technology?
for example:

1. A breathalizer attatched to the ignition which wont allow the car to start if the driver is over the limit?
2. A GPS style system which tells the cars on-board computer what the limit is when the car passess the speed limit sign, the computer could then issue a high pitch annoying sound when you go slightly over the limit, and stops the car from accelerating past an agreed maximum?
3. A weight detector in carseats. If the belt is not then attatched car will not start or will be forced to slow down?

Then we could get into the real issuse. The correct speed limits (max and min) for individual parts of roads.

Why don't the Government just put a chip in our brain and control us totally. That would stop all the crashes :rolleyes:

Iwannahurl

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

Why don't the Government just put a chip in our brain and control us totally. That would stop all the crashes :rolleyes:

They seem to have put a chip on a lot of people's shoulders...

megapixel

Does the one near blanch southbound work yet?

Marlow

Today, around 12:30, Athlone bypass (N6) between Blyry and Athlone/Birr (Kilmartin) exits in the Dublin direction, which is restricted to 100 km/h.

Silver Renault Traffic van with scoop, full signage, reg 10-KY-1951.



With the snow and the fog he'll hardly find somebody speeding. Most pointless place and clearly that spot normally is only as a money making excercise.

/M

johnos1984

Does it not strike anyone as dangerous to pull a van over onto the hard shoulder in fog with no warning lights or reflective strips on it?

If you drove into one of these vans would you not be able to sue the company for dangerous work practices or some such nonsense?

Incidentially I saw one pulled in a couple of says ago on the Dublin side of Roscrea, N7, just past the hotel on the way towards town where the speed limit drops from 100kph to 60kph.

Money making scheme as I've never heard of an accident happening on that short piece of road.

Dempo1

Marlow wrote: »

Today, around 12:30, Athlone bypass (N6) between Blyry and Athlone/Birr (Kilmartin) exits in the Dublin direction, which is restricted to 100 km/h.

Silver Renault Traffic van with scoop, full signage, reg 10-KY-1951.



With the snow and the fog he'll hardly find somebody speeding. Most pointless place and clearly that spot normally is only as a money making excercise.

/M

Yes agreed yet again, this is ludicrous, WTF was this particular van hoping to catch in this weather? a cold. Complete waste of public resources. I also discovered who is behind this nonsense, surprise surprise the infamous Xaviour Mc Cauliff, major FF party donor, good friend of the late CJ Haughey. Predictably another money making exercise at the behest of FF.

Iwannahurl

Dempo1 wrote: »

Yes agreed yet again, this is ludicrous, WTF was this particular van hoping to catch in this weather? a cold. Complete waste of public resources. I also discovered who is behind this nonsense, surprise surprise the infamous Xaviour Mc Cauliff, major FF party donor, good friend of the late CJ Haughey. Predictably another money making exercise at the behest of FF.

The national committee monitoring the weather situation has warned that inappropriate driving is now the biggest problem on Ireland's roads.

Inappropriate driving is more dangerous than during heavy snowfalls last week, the Severe Weather Co-ordination Committee said.

It warned ice is now causing a major hazard and people are 'driving way too fast'.

PanhardPL

Should we not be looking for something similar here in Ireland, as the system of applying penalty points is another severe tax on the hard pressed motorist.

Atomic Pineapple

Marlow wrote: »

With the snow and the fog he'll hardly find somebody speeding. Most pointless place and clearly that spot normally is only as a money making excercise.

/M

They get €35k a day to do it, doesn't matter what the weather is etc... complete waste of money, even if people were driving too fast for the conditions the van wouldn't be effective as they can only catch someone breaking the 100km/h speed limit and not driving at an inappropriate speed for the conditions. (80km/h could be pushing it for example)

€35k would have the conditions on the road much better if it was pumped into clearing and gritting more roads rather than wasted on paying lads to sit in a van watching drivers have to deal with the terrible state of the roads.

Iwannahurl

PanhardPL wrote: »

Should we not be looking for something similar here in Ireland, as the system of applying penalty points is another severe tax on the hard pressed motorist.
http://i51.tinypic.com/30v27g0.jpg

1. Can't be called a "severe tax" if the targeted behaviour (ie speeding) is purely voluntary.

2. If there is technology available that can apply a range of penalties depending on the seriousness of the infraction then it should be used. Fairer, I wold guess, and possibly more acceptable if any of the comments in this forum are anything to go by.

Tucker Max

Apparently

If you get a penalty notice for say 80 euro

And you write a check for 81 euro

They cant apply the points to your license

They cant cash the cheque and they cant issue you the 1 euro change

But the system indicates you've paid

The payment sits in limbo

You'd think they'd solve that little problem as opposed to spunking 65 million euro on 45 vans with cameras

F*cking Fianna Fail i cant wait for the election

norrie rugger

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The national committee monitoring the weather situation has warned that inappropriate driving is now the biggest problem on Ireland's roads.

Inappropriate driving is more dangerous than during heavy snowfalls last week, the Severe Weather Co-ordination Committee said.

It warned ice is now causing a major hazard and people are 'driving way too fast'.

Which would still be below the speed limit. These magic safety cameras would not capture this though

Iwannahurl

draffodx wrote: »

They get €35k a day to do it, doesn't matter what the weather is etc... complete waste of money, even if people were driving too fast for the conditions the van wouldn't be effective as they can only catch someone breaking the 100km/h speed limit and not driving at an inappropriate speed for the conditions. (80km/h could be pushing it for example)

€35k would have the conditions on the road much better if it was pumped into clearing and gritting more roads rather than wasted on paying lads to sit in a van watching drivers have to deal with the terrible state of the roads.

norrie rugger wrote: »

Which would still be below the speed limit. These magic safety cameras would not capture this though

The vans serve as a general reminder to keep within the posted speed limits. Such deterrence is inherently worthwhile.

Driving at an appropriate speed for the prevailing conditions is a matter of (collective?) judgment which is why the national committee is issuing these public reminders asking motorists to slow down.

Near where I live many motorists are still driving at speeds well in excess of the posted limit, never mind at an indeterminate appropriate speed, despite warnings about black ice etc. Such irresponsible and downright stupid behaviour needs to be tackled by both law enforcement and driver education. There would be no money wasted here as the speed/safety cameras would have no trouble detecting substantial numbers of lawbreaking motorists.

Marlow

draffodx wrote: »

€35k would have the conditions on the road much better if it was pumped into clearing and gritting more roads rather than wasted on paying lads to sit in a van watching drivers have to deal with the terrible state of the roads.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The vans serve as a general reminder to keep within the posted speed limits. Such deterrence is inherently worthwhile.

While you've clearly made your point in this thread, over and over again, this is actually a case, that shows, that speed isn't the problem at all in Ireland.

Westmeath CoCo has not cleared ANY roads in the last days. If you check that picture, you can see that the overtaking lane isn't cleared and there is ice everywhere. Doesn't matter if it's a national road or not, it's the Council that does it. The driving lane is only cleared because it gets so much use, that the snow dissapeared from driving on that lane.

Hit any of the stretches maintained by the toll-road companies and you'll find they are perfectly cleared.

The 35k spend on that camera van would be more wisely used at clearing and salting that road. Leaving the roads in this state is playing hazzard with peoples lives disregard of speed, which I see as a way way way bigger problem.

End of rant and back on topic.

/M

Iwannahurl

Marlow wrote: »

this is actually a case, that shows, that speed isn't the problem at all in Ireland.

The 35k spend on that camera van would be more wisely used at clearing and salting that road. Leaving the roads in this state is playing hazzard with peoples lives disregard of speed, which I see as a way way way bigger problem.

End of rant and back on topic.

/M

1. Breaking of speed limits is one road safety problem that must be tackled, especially since the evidence is very strong that controlling speed makes a big difference.

2. Budgets don't work in that contingent way.

3. This is the Speed Camera Mega-Thread after all.

Marlow

Iwannahurl wrote: »

1. Breaking of speed limits is one road safety problem that must be tackled, especially since the evidence is very strong that controlling speed makes a big difference.

While that's the case, this scenary is clearly waste of tax money. First of all, the spot is NOT an area that is considered problematic, dangerous or any the likes. Matter of fact, the speed is increased to 120 km/h just 100 metres down the road. This is just before the last exit, before the N6 becomes M6 again, going to Dublin.

Also, placing that van in the hard shoulder on a dual-carriageway/motorway is risky in itself. Hardshoulders are for emergencies. For nothing else. Period.

There is nothing worse, than people breaking suddenly on motorways and it has been proven in several surveys on the continent, that this directly is the cause of accidents. People will brake when they see the van, no matter if they go to fast or not. It's an expected reaction.

Actually this is the reason, why these vans are an even worse idea.

And placing that van, in that position, in that weather, with those road conditions in that place is pure lunacy.

/M

Iwannahurl

Marlow wrote: »

While that's the case, this scenary is clearly waste of tax money. First of all, the spot is NOT an area that is considered problematic, dangerous or any the likes. Matter of fact, the speed is increased to 120 km/h just 100 metres down the road. This is just before the last exit, before the N6 becomes M6 again, going to Dublin.

Also, placing that van in the hard shoulder on a dual-carriageway/motorway is risky in itself. Hardshoulders are for emergencies. For nothing else. Period.

There is nothing worse, than people breaking suddenly on motorways and it has been proven in several surveys on the continent, that this directly is the cause of accidents. People will brake when they see the van, no matter if they go to fast or not. It's an expected reaction.

Actually this is the reason, why these vans are an even worse idea.

And placing that van, in that position, in that weather, with those road conditions in that place is pure lunacy.

/M

Worth considering in more detail. Can you provide links/references?

Marlow

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Worth considering in more detail. Can you provide links/references?

Do a google search. You'll find loads. German studies have been made to what causes "Stau" (km long traffic jams). It's one person tapping their brake, the next one brakes, the next one brakes a wee bit more and so on. That ripple effect even leads to accidents often enough.

A lot of the issues seen over here have been solved on the continent for decades, but it seems that nobody here ever checks what other countries on the continent do or gets some consultancy of people that actually do have a clue.

/M

Marlow

A simple search just gave me this for example:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2010/04/arizona-police-report-shows-speed-camera-caused-accident/

/M

Atomic Pineapple

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2212479.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1300830/Speed-cameras-caused-28-000-accidents-decade.html

http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/2010/08/08/new-study-speed-cameras-cause-bad-driving-increase-crashes/

Iwannahurl

Marlow wrote: »

Athlone bypass (N6) between Blyry and Athlone/Birr (Kilmartin) exits in the Dublin direction, which is restricted to 100 km/h.

/M

I'm not familiar with the details of this specific stretch of road. Do you mean N6 or M6? As far as I know there is a stretch of road in the vicinity of Athlone which is dual carriageway with a 100 kph speed limit. One those occasions when I have travelled this section at 100 kph I have been overtaken by several vehicles going considerably faster.

I would sincerely hope that the speed/safety camera vans are being parked legally. Wouldn't do their reputation any good at all otherwise.

Iwannahurl

Marlow wrote: »

Do a google search. You'll find loads. German studies have been made to what causes "Stau" (km long traffic jams). It's one person tapping their brake, the next one brakes, the next one brakes a wee bit more and so on. That ripple effect even leads to accidents often enough.

A lot of the issues seen over here have been solved on the continent for decades, but it seems that nobody here ever checks what other countries on the continent do or gets some consultancy of people that actually do have a clue.

/M

Not sufficient!

In order to substantiate a claim that speed/safety cameras are dangerous you would have to show that overall they cause more accidents than they prevent.

The relatively small number of cases you point to, such as that single American example, do not constitute such evidence.

I'll provide you with evidence to the contrary shortly. Will have to see where I put it...

Marlow

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I'm not familiar with the details of this specific stretch of road. Do you mean N6 or M6? As far as I know there is a stretch of road in the vicinity of Athlone which is dual carriageway with a 100 kph speed limit. One those occasions when I have travelled this section at 100 kph I have been overtaken by several vehicles going considerably faster.

I would sincerely hope that the speed/safety camera vans are being parked legally. Wouldn't do their reputation any good at all otherwise.

This is exactly that stretch. It becomes N6 just before Athlone (coming from Galway) and 100 km/h and then upgrades to M6 again just after the last Athlone exit (Kilmartins, signposted Athlone/Birr).

The van is parked on the last 150 m of it being the N6 in the 100 km/h zone just before it's upgraded to 120 km/h M6 again and just before that last exit.

If you check the picture that I've taken today, you can see, it's half in the hard should and half on the grass verge. Parking in the hard should is not legal to my knowledge, unless they got it excempt for those vans. It's very much in the grey zone anyhow.

/M

Marlow

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Not sufficient!

In order to substantiate a claim that speed/safety cameras are dangerous you would have to show that overall they cause more accidents than they prevent.

The relatively small number of cases you point to, such as that single American example, do not constitute such evidence.

I'll provide you with evidence to the contrary shortly. Will have to see where I put it...

So you did not read the full article then. There is a link to a british study, that shows, that road deaths/accident rates have not decreased significantly from using speed cameras (only 0.7%).

Read the full article please and follow all the references in it. I did select that one for the references also.

/M

Iwannahurl

draffodx wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/2212479.stm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1300830/Speed-cameras-caused-28-000-accidents-decade.html

http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/2010/08/08/new-study-speed-cameras-cause-bad-driving-increase-crashes/

Hmmm, some time ago when I posted links to newspaper reports I was castigated for "trolling".

No matter.

Question: in the Daily Mail article you link to, what is the reported proportion of accidents "caused" by speed cameras versus the proportion attributed to excessive speed?

What do you conclude from the ratio implied?

EDIT: Still waiting!

Iwannahurl

Marlow wrote: »

There is a link to a british study, that shows, that road deaths/accident rates have not decreased significantly from using speed cameras (only 0.7%).

/M

That BMJ paper doesn't mention speed or speed cameras at all. I don't have time to read it in depth now (should be in bed!) but the main issue seems to be to do with reporting of fatalities and injuries. However, such a study deserves to be read carefully and its implications taken seriously. I will try to get back to you about this when I get a chance -- please remind me if necessary.

In the meantime, here are a couple of points in support of speed/safety cameras.

Transport for London are claiming a 50% reduction in casualties 2002-2007 around sites where speed/safety cameras have been installed, estimated from data collated by the London Accident Analysis Unit.

This is a fully-referenced 2003 paper from the UK Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS), which identifies and debunks ten claims commonly made against speed/safety cameras. Similar claims are still appearing in Boards threads and individual posts, usually 'supported' by opinion and speculation rather than any substantiated evidence.

Marlow

Iwannahurl wrote: »

That BMJ paper doesn't mention speed or speed cameras at all. I don't have time to read it in depth now (should be in bed!) but the main issue seems to be to do with reporting of fatalities and injuries. However, such a study deserves to be read carefully and its implications taken seriously. I will try to get back to you about this when I get a chance -- please remind me if necessary.

While it does not mention the speed cameras at all, it points out, that no significant decrease in road accidents has made. If you correlate that with the amount of speed cameras rolled out in the UK at the same tame (which is massive) there is no clear benefit from these.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In the meantime, here are a couple of points in support of speed/safety cameras.

Either that, or they cause as many accidents as they prevent, which is more likely.

Transport for London are claiming a 50% reduction in casualties 2002-2007 around sites where speed/safety cameras have been installed, estimated from data collated by the London Accident Analysis Unit.

This is a fully-referenced 2003 paper from the UK Parliamentary Advisory Council for Transport Safety (PACTS), which identifies and debunks ten claims commonly made against speed/safety cameras. Similar claims are still appearing in Boards threads and individual posts, usually 'supported' by opinion and speculation rather than any substantiated evidence.

The problems with the links that you quoting is that they are basing themselves on the same flawed data as the police in the UK.

It has even been admitted, that the data that shows the decrease in accidents is flawed.

The most fun part is, that in 2006, there was a report in the UK, that showed, that "Exceeding speed limit was attributed to 3 percent of cars involved in accidents," the report stated. (Page 42). The report can be found here: http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2007/uk-2006roadsafety.pdf

The whole scenario, that "speed is the biggest killer" in Ireland is a joke. Sure, speed might be a contribution to a good few accident, but the main cause for the accident is often something else.

Anyhow, I don't have a problem with the camera vans, if they are placed as intended in accident prone spots on urban and maybe rural roads, where accidents have been an issue over the past.

The location on the N6 is neither an accident prone spot (I have never ever seen an accident there, nor heard of any), nor is there a problem with visibility and it's a dual-carriageway. The placement of the van there will cause disruption to traffic (because of people braking) more than delivering a safe environment.

/M

Dempo1

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The national committee monitoring the weather situation has warned that inappropriate driving is now the biggest problem on Ireland's roads.

Inappropriate driving is more dangerous than during heavy snowfalls last week, the Severe Weather Co-ordination Committee said.

It warned ice is now causing a major hazard and people are 'driving way too fast'.

Yes saw that report but not sure what they have to do with these ridiculous speed vans. In particular what in gods name was the point in having them out during the appalling weather the past couple of days, in the photo submitted, i doubt the van would have picked up a Robin Speeding!

Iwannahurl

Dempo1 wrote: »

Yes saw that report but not sure what they have to do with these ridiculous speed vans. In particular what in gods name was the point in having them out during the appalling weather the past couple of days, in the photo submitted, i doubt the van would have picked up a Robin Speeding!

Given that they're contracted to carry out a specified number of hours of surveillance, I doubt that the GoSafe operation would just be put to bed during severely inclement weather.

According to the national committee's warnings, black ice is even more dangerous than snow because the visual cues are not there telling people to slow down. Despite these warnings, motorists are still driving "way too fast". The chancers haven't gone away you know, not even during blizzards.

I have observed this phenomenon directly myself. Motorists are driving faster than the posted speed limit, never mind too fast for the icy conditions, even on residential streets and on children's routes to school.

How can any operation that aims to deter speeding and contribute to changing our culture of lawbreaking on the roads be regarded as "ridiculous" in such circumstances?