Britain's most effective revenue camera

GingerBob_3

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

Oh, you're from the North East! I often wondered. That explains a lot.

A banal comment, if ever I came across one.

almillar

Give them gas masks.

And what about the rest of the already polluted city?
Speed humps are for residential/low volume roads, and even then, shouldn't be necessary IMO.

I know what you mean, Bob, a fine landing on your mat 2 weeks after speeding might make you think twice in the future, but doesn't change that you already sped. Make the driving test harder? Electric shocks through the steering wheel?
You're ignoring the camera's main job - a deterrent. How many people AREN'T speeding past it for FEAR of being caught. You won't get the stats for that.

shaun_from_Africa

GingerBob wrote: »

Garbage. The camera is supposedly there to stop people speeding. It is not doing so. It is failing.

Of the approximately 80 people each day who are caught speeding by the device in question, how many of them do you think will now slow down when driving along the road now that they know that there is an active camera there?

If it's more than zero then the camera must be working as it is causing some motorists to slow down.

Kalamazoo

People, come on. I think its fairly obvious that GingerBob is not capable of the kind of critical thinking you're asking him to engage in.


In fact, its fairly obvious he's not capable of much beyond stamping his feet and throwing his toys out the pram when he doesn't understand things.

GingerBob_3

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Of the approximately 80 people each day who are caught speeding by the device in question, how many of them do you think will now slow down when driving along the road now that they know that there is an active camera there?

If it's more than zero then the camera must be working as it is causing some motorists to slow down.

Operative words highlighted. They are speeding - therefore they are a danger to the workforce; right now. Maybe not later, maybe still later, who knows, but at the time of the event they were causing a danger, and the camera didn't stop it. What's not to understand about that?

Mercdriver

Your attempt at a solution will force everyone to be held up whereas they could be travelling at 30mph they will be much slower with speed cushions. So instead of allowing 99.5% to attempt to make reasonable progress you'd rather that everyone got slowed down. This on a road you use how often exactly?

There is no such thing as a one size fits all solution. You also need to bear in mind that much of this section of the NC is a residential road and much of the traffic is buses. In some parts of South Wales they have removed speed cushions as buses hitting them has caused properties along the road to suffer damage to the foundations caused by the vibrations. The NC also has HGVs on it. Many of the properties are 1930's stock and very pricey. The local government would then be responsible for the damage caused by the speed cushions.

A solution that seems simple, will already have been considered.

GingerBob_3

Regarding the speed humps/ramps/cushions - it was a suggestion based on the observations I made when they were used on the A19. Remember we're not talking about a permanent situation here. They clearly worked on the A19. Another possibility - though I'm not sure as a temporary measure - would be the raised markings used is some areas to reduce speed on the approach to a junction. They absolutely do have the desired effect in that you can't really go fast over them without severe discomfort. As a temporary solution, when road works are in place, something that physically forces drivers to slow down is surely better than an after-the-event punishment?


Anyway, those are my ideas. I've not seen any others, so it seems most punters are happy with revenue cameras that don't have the desired, immediate, effect; so be it.

Mercdriver

They seem to be 99.5% effective and without causing the damage that speed cushions do the the houses around them, not to mention to cars that go over them within the speed limit. SO you punish everyone for the actions of a minority? Not a great alternative IMO.

Car_54

On the basis of the calculations above, the signs are seen and obeyed by about 99% of drivers. That's a pretty good success rate.

The camera is also doing the job it's intended for, catching the remaining 1%.

So, a non-story.

GingerBob_3

Mercdriver wrote: »

They seem to be 99.5% effective and without causing the damage that speed cushions do the the houses around them, not to mention to cars that go over them within the speed limit. SO you punish everyone for the actions of a minority? Not a great alternative IMO.

But the 99.5% effective still translates to one driver speeding past the workforce every six minutes. Consider the ramps, per the A19, not speed humps/cushions. They slowed down the traffic and I didn't see any adverse effects.


I wonder about that road in question - when are they carrying out the work? Maybe they should do it all at night?