Average Speed cameras

DoaM

He was probably tucked up right behind a lorry so couldn't see the road workers.

giraffe69

How long have those roadworks on the M3 been there?

Long enough for them to twice have to replace the signs to say when it will be finished. Looking at the state of the road on Saturday it will need an elastic definition of "Summer 2017" if it is to be finished on time.

docmatt

You could always use an average speed app. We've got them on the bikes for the twisties around the Peak District as the average speed camerge are everywhere there now. Mind you with all the bends that slow you down most of the time you are under the limit. :cool:

Car_54

docmatt wrote: »

You could always use an average speed app. We've got them on the bikes for the twisties around the Peak District as the average speed camerge are everywhere there now. Mind you with all the bends that slow you down most of the time you are under the limit. :cool:

Alternatively, you could just obey the speed limit.

Exceeding the limit at any point is an offence, even if your average speed is OK. There's nothing to stop the police employing other speed detection methods witihin the average speed camera stretch.

Bigphil1474

I thought the OP's question was pretty straight forward tbh, but obviously not. My take would be that, if you are going through works with multiple cameras, if one camera doesn't pick you up, your average speed would be calculated through the full series of cameras that do pick you up. Didn't see where the OP suggested tailgating a lorry either - "level with". If you are driving in the right hand lane, passing an HGV that's in the middle lane, then there are bound to be lots of times when a camera wouldn't pick your NP up. If there's a suggestion that doing that with every camera so you could speed and avoid a ticket, then you'd have to be very lucky to make it work at every single camera. The odds would be astronomical, and more hassle than just sticking to the limit. My 09 fiesta has cruise control and an average speed display so it's not that hard. It does make me laugh when I see cars come flying up the outside lane, slow down for the average camera, then speed up again. Where did they go to school?

ThinkingOutLoud_2

Bigphil1474 wrote: »

I thought the OP's question was pretty straight forward tbh, but obviously not.

I think the OP did clear up what perhaps was misread as ambiguous in his intent, if not meaning.

Although, as you comment usefully add about those trying to cheat the system and others feel re tailgating lay clear - there are certainly plenty of folks who would like to "beat the system".

That doesn't include the OP of course, who just wanted to know how it worked.

Of course, not all have multiple cameras (short stretches especially), so if you didn't get caught at entry or at exit - then those couldn't calculate your speed. And where there are multiple cameras - I reckon they work on average speed in each section not the whole distance.

This does remind me of how in the old days the French Gendarmes used to check your autoroute toll ticket entry and exit times and thus calculate very precisely over along distance your average speed without any cameras.

docmatt

Car_54 wrote: »

Alternatively, you could just obey the speed limit

mark1959

The average speed cameras [permanent] on the m60 approaching Stockport are a real money spinner for the council. Something like £230,000 per year in fines, 2nd in the country, so there are quite a few motorists who don't understand "average speed". Or maybe they don't notice them. :eek:

GingerBob_3

mark1959 wrote: »

The average speed cameras [permanent] on the m60 approaching Stockport are a real money spinner for the council. Something like £230,000 per year in fines, 2nd in the country, so there are quite a few motorists who don't understand "average speed". Or maybe they don't notice them. :eek:

I know them well. They are designed to slow traffic down prior to a sharp bend, but guess what? There is an exit slip immediately before commencement of the bend, but after the 'entry camera'. And guess what again: there's an 'exit camera' up the slip road! So even if you don't go round the bend (!) you can still be trapped by the revenue cameras, which are supposedly there for ONE PURPOSE ONLY!! Namely, to slow people down on the bend. This set of cameras really is an absolute scam. The positioning of the entry camera could be much closer to the bend - than the half mile it' currently away from it - and still have the claimed effect.


For anyone who has just the slightest of doubts about the real purpose of revenue cameras, get along to this section of the M60 and all will be confirmed.

ThinkingOutLoud_2

GingerBob wrote: »

I know them well. They are designed to slow traffic down prior to a sharp bend, but guess what? There is an exit slip immediately before commencement of the bend, but after the 'entry camera'. And guess what again: there's an 'exit camera' up the slip road! So even if you don't go round the bend (!) you can still be trapped by the revenue cameras, which are supposedly there for ONE PURPOSE ONLY!! Namely, to slow people down on the bend. This set of cameras really is an absolute scam. The positioning of the entry camera could be much closer to the bend - than the half mile it' currently away from it - and still have the claimed effect.


For anyone who has just the slightest of doubts about the real purpose of revenue cameras, get along to this section of the M60 and all will be confirmed.

Anyone who knows the exact laws - please affirm or clarify.

So as I understand it, the governing authority for a road has an obligation to respond to accidents on their patch. Not a choice, but a legal obligation to implement measures to try to prevent recurring accidents.

So if you see a flashing sign saying slow down at a sharp bend - that is because reality has proved it is needed - not because the council is flush with cash.

As to the junction I think you mean - here is why:-
"It became the first area of motorway with permanent speed cameras in the north west after a fatal crash 2005 in which three young people were killed.

The crash in April 2005 led to calls for a reduced speed limit on the stretch of road, which already had a reputation as an accident blackspot.

Four months later a motorcyclist was killed when he hit the central reservation.

At first a speed restriction was put in place, but no cameras. However, in 2007 the Highways Agency decided it was being ignored by too many drivers, and installed the cameras."

So four deaths nearby meant something had to be done. And the scale of the fines won't touch the cost of handling the multiple serious RTAs. So sounds like the revenue is more than offset by those and any future crashes? Sadly.

Of course, I expect you will have a counter view. Try putting it to the forum as if you were explaining your logic to the parents of the three younsters who died.