Speeding

System

Bigphil1474 wrote: »

I was under the impression that the variable speed limit cameras on the M62 only operate when the speed limit has been varied?

That is why I asked what the limit was at the time. Currently as far as I'm aware it has only been the M25 where they're being merely in the discussion phase of being left live all the time.

If it was 50MPH or even maybe 60MPH it becomes a whole different kettle of fish.

Mercdriver

Tarambor wrote: »

That is why I asked what the limit was at the time. Currently as far as I'm aware it has only been the M25 where they're being merely in the discussion phase of being left live all the time.

If it was 50MPH or even maybe 60MPH it becomes a whole different kettle of fish.

Cameras on smart sections of M4, M5, M1 are all live all the time, so it is not safe to assume that cameras elsewhere are not active if no limit set.

This is the problem of believing what they say down the pub etc. The days of being able to safely speed past cameras on the motorway are gone. If you speed past a site where you know there is a camera, then you deserve a ticket for stupidity as well as breaking the law.

tenchy

Mercdriver wrote: »

Cameras on smart sections of M4, M5, M1 are all live all the time, so it is not safe to assume that cameras elsewhere are not active if no limit set.

This is the problem of believing what they say down the pub etc. The days of being able to safely speed past cameras on the motorway are gone. If you speed past a site where you know there is a camera, then you deserve a ticket for stupidity as well as breaking the law.

Maybe you're right, but as a frequent driver on the M62 I have never yet seen a camera flash when no speed limit has been posted. Do you have a first party source for the assertion that motorway speed cameras are permanently active?

Mercdriver

tenchy wrote: »

Maybe you're right, but as a frequent driver on the M62 I have never yet seen a camera flash when no speed limit has been posted. Do you have a first party source for the assertion that motorway speed cameras are permanently active?

Go to pepipoo where there are many cases raised where they have been caught on all these motorways. I have also witnessed it myself on the M4 and M5. On the M4 in Wales, there were warnings on the matrix signs that speed cameras are active all the time.

The only way of guaranteeing not getting caught now is to not speed. Well at least not where there are cameras present. As more and more of them are being made permanently active and the powers that be don't have to tell you that they are. Just as CCTV cameras don't have to warn that they can be used for prosecution if you get caught burgling.

There used to be an internet myth that the cameras weren't active below 87mph when no speed limit displayed, but has been blown out of the water by the number of people that have been caught at 79 and above.

tenchy

Mercdriver wrote: »

Go to pepipoo where there are many cases raised where they have been caught on all these motorways. I have also witnessed it myself on the M4 and M5. On the M4 in Wales, there were warnings on the matrix signs that speed cameras are active all the time.

The only way of guaranteeing not getting caught now is to not speed. Well at least not where there are cameras present. As more and more of them are being made permanently active and the powers that be don't have to tell you that they are. Just as CCTV cameras don't have to warn that they can be used for prosecution if you get caught burgling.

There used to be an internet myth that the cameras weren't active below 87mph when no speed limit displayed, but has been blown out of the water by the number of people that have been caught at 79 and above.

Pepipoo is third party. You got a first party ref - e.g. DoT ? Again, you may well be right, and I suspect you are, but until we can all see a first party source there will always be doubt in the minds of motorists. As for the matrix signs - that proves nothing. It's a bit like the average speed cameras that have been on the western part of the M62 for a few years now for the road-works; most of them (not all) are very obviously fake.

Mercdriver

tenchy wrote: »

Pepipoo is third party. You got a first party ref - e.g. DoT ? Again, you may well be right, and I suspect you are, but until we can all see a first party source there will always be doubt in the minds of motorists. As for the matrix signs - that proves nothing. It's a bit like the average speed cameras that have been on the western part of the M62 for a few years now for the road-works; most of them (not all) are very obviously fake.

I have seen the flashes on the M4 and M5. I have also seen the scanned and redacted for identity NIPs on pepipoo for the M4 and M5. That's convincing enough for me.

People who don't err on the side of caution can expect no sympathy when things turn out bad for them. Safer to assume they are active than not, don't you think.

Many don't think this way and then go on to pepipoo moaning about the fact that they've been caught, despite the incorrect assumption that the cameras only work when a speed limit is shown. They think it's unfair.

Don't wanna pay the fine? Don't do the crime. Do I never speed? Of course I speed sometimes, but it's no good moaning when you've been caught breaking the law.

tenchy

Mercdriver wrote: »

I have seen the flashes on the M4 and M5. I have also seen the scanned and redacted for identity NIPs on pepipoo for the M4 and M5. That's convincing enough for me.

People who don't err on the side of caution can expect no sympathy when things turn out bad for them. Safer to assume they are active than not, don't you think.

Many don't think this way and then go on to pepipoo moaning about the fact that they've been caught, despite the incorrect assumption that the cameras only work when a speed limit is shown. They think it's unfair.

Don't wanna pay the fine? Don't do the crime. Do I never speed? Of course I speed sometimes, but it's no good moaning when you've been caught breaking the law.

Fair enough. I won't take this branch of the discussion any further, other than to observe that no first party source is forthcoming. To coin a phrase, you are the guy down the pub, so really we're no further on.

Trackman

tenchy wrote: »

Fair enough. I won't take this branch of the discussion any further, other than to observe that no first party source is forthcoming. To coin a phrase, you are the guy down the pub, so really we're no further on.

M1 in Nottinghamshire are always on

http://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/speed-cameras-m1-always-switched-1014370

Mercdriver

tenchy wrote: »

Fair enough. I won't take this branch of the discussion any further, other than to observe that no first party source is forthcoming. To coin a phrase, you are the guy down the pub, so really we're no further on.

Lol. Go on to pepipoo and you will see the actual documents showing someone being caught at 79 in a 70 from Avon and Somerset Police. That is a first party source. I have witnessed the flashes on someone overtaking me when I am at an indicated 75.

Remember that the police not enforcing a limit in an area does not give you defence when they go on to enforce it.

To be honest you're daft if you decide to err on the side of risk rather than caution, but it's your licence not mine. Just make sure you don't hurt any nuns or kittens, or nuns carrying kittens.

Car_54

tenchy wrote: »

Fair enough. I won't take this branch of the discussion any further, other than to observe that no first party source is forthcoming. To coin a phrase, you are the guy down the pub, so really we're no further on.

A good first party source is rule 124 of the HC. If you observe that then the present discussion is irrelevant.