Temporary Traffic Lights

Stephen_Leak

Obukit wrote: »

The only exception to a red light is for emergency vehicles. There is no exemption if you think jumping a red will prevent an accident - sounds like a way of talking yourself into DWDCA if questioned by the police.

There is an exemption on amber lights for a vehicle "so close to the stop line that it cannot safely be stopped without proceeding beyond the stop line", which may be what you are thinking of.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/regulation/36/made

Oops. Yes, it was amber. And the wording was from when I learned it when learning to drive 35 years ago. I stand corrected. Thank you.

Stephen_Leak

Gavin83 wrote: »

How is being told that you run a red light equal to verbal assault exactly? I honestly don't see what the worker did wrong, except to possibly be mistaken.

OP, if you do get anything through the post make sure you ask for evidence. There is always the possibility a worker would have reported you themselves but I think it's unlikely a camera exists.

IMHO, it was the threatening way he (allegedly) acted that have, at the very least, brought his employer, and whoever they were working on behalf of, into disrepute. If you or I did the same, we should expect to face the consequences.

DUTR

Stephen_Leak wrote: »

IMHO, it was the threatening way he allegedly did it that was "out of order", shall we say. He also had no authority to do so. And ignorance (ie. being mistaken) is no defence. At the very least, his actions have brought his employer into disrepute. If I did so, I would expect to face the consequences.

Actually he does have authority to do so, the way the lights work they will both be on red for a time before one turns to green , this allows time for cyclists and slower traffic to pass, temporary lights are to be treated the same as fixed lighting.

Ich_2

These devices cost money to install and operate, and these costs have to be covered. As the level of compliance increases and the revenue falls, the operators are going to have to get more "inventive" to make up the shortfall

.

Stephen Leak

I'm trying to understand this comment, how would, say, one of the utility companies be able to get revenue from fines? Passing a temporary light on red is a moving traffic offence and can only be dealt with by the police.

I've never heard of cameras connected to temporary traffic lights (and I've been involved with the hire and use of them for years). The guy who shouted would probably have been operating them under manual control, as required for the convoy system so would have know the aspect of the light head the OP passed (the control points have miniature lights that mimic the actual aspect of all light heads).

I guess it was in part frustration at the number of drivers that pass the lights at other than green which does serve to increase the delays to other motorists waiting for them to clear the roadworks, that cause the operator to take the attitude he did.

We've had sections of road closed for our safety (by the police in some cases) yet still found drivers passing ROAD CLOSED signs by moving cones or barriers to save a short diversion. The excuses I got were pretty pathetic!

Lum

real1314 wrote: »

And why on earth do you see it as a negative that more and more drivers comply with red lights?

Do you think running red lights is ok?

You really need to get some education on the results that can occur from this sort of action. Or take your angry head off. :cool:

You also need to balance the reduction in casualties caused by people running red lights against the increase in rear enders caused by the combination of tailgating idiots and people who slam on rather than go through on amber out of fear of a ticket.

A number of US states have removed their red light cameras due to them causing an overall increase in casualties.

Stephen_Leak

Ich wrote: »

.

Stephen Leak

I'm trying to understand this comment, how would, say, one of the utility companies be able to get revenue from fines? Passing a temporary light on red is a moving traffic offence and can only be dealt with by the police.

I've never heard of cameras connected to temporary traffic lights (and I've been involved with the hire and use of them for years). The guy who shouted would probably have been operating them under manual control, as required for the convoy system so would have know the aspect of the light head the OP passed (the control points have miniature lights that mimic the actual aspect of all light heads).

I guess it was in part frustration at the number of drivers that pass the lights at other than green which does serve to increase the delays to other motorists waiting for them to clear the roadworks, that cause the operator to take the attitude he did.

We've had sections of road closed for our safety (by the police in some cases) yet still found drivers passing ROAD CLOSED signs by moving cones or barriers to save a short diversion. The excuses I got were pretty pathetic!

I haven't heard of red light cameras on temporary lights either. At least, not yet. But to do so would simply involve combining two existing technologies. It also sounds, to me at least, like a potential new "nice little earner". It is now unusual to see roadworks on motorways and major roads without SPECS average speed cameras. And you can always play the "what about the workmen" sympathy card, instead of the "what about the children" one, against those who complain.

The fact remains that the operator should not have taken any frustration out on an innocent driver (and that is still not an oxymoron), and ought to face the conesquences of his actions.

Stephen_Leak

DUTR wrote: »

Actually he does have authority to do so, the way the lights work they will both be on red for a time before one turns to green , this allows time for cyclists and slower traffic to pass, temporary lights are to be treated the same as fixed lighting.

He is a workman, not a uniformed police officer. In any circumstances, I would expect either to speak to me in a civil and professional manner.

Lum

To be honest, a lot of the problems at temporary traffic lights could be avoided if the workers actually set the bloody things up correctly.

When I lived up in the valleys, a common practice at temporary lights, particularly at night, was for the car that had just seen the lights change red to flash their lights and let the cars waiting to come the other way know that the junction is clear. They'd then just go through the red light rather than wait another 5 minutes for the bloody lights to change.

I also remember one set of temporary lights in Aylesbury that was set in count mode, rather than time mode, and left like that overnight meaning that they were on red for a good 20 minutes.

It's this sort of thing that causes people to get fed up with it and just drive through.

Not suggesting that this is what the OP did, however.


Also, you wont be seeing red light cameras on temporary local roadworks any time soon. You see them on motorway roadworks because these are always major large scale operations where it's feasible to put cameras up. There's no red light camera that's designed to sit on the back of a trailer half on the pavement. They'd have to be a proper installation, complete with inductive loops sunk into the road, that would take longer to do than the actual roadworks.