Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Now this is a protest I like

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Now this is a protest I like

Reply

Old 11th Jan 2019, 01:30
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 15,030
Now this is a protest I like



https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46822472
NutLoose is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 03:13
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Peterborough
Age: 64
Posts: 203
People were doing that about ten years ago round here. Several were set alight, knocked down or sprayed. The one on the A605 just outside Thrapston is still covered in blue paint.
uffington sb is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 05:56
  #3 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 894
Originally Posted by NutLoose View Post
OK, well this is in France, however, are you equally in favour of this happening in the UK and thus endangering lives by negating an essential safety feature on the roads.
Krystal n chips is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 07:55
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 53
Posts: 299
Around here the speed cameras have been fitted with CCTV cameras so they can see 360 degrees around them. If you try to sabotage them they will see you coming.....
Ogre is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 08:14
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 589
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips View Post
OK, well this is in France, however, are you equally in favour of this happening in the UK and thus endangering lives by negating an essential safety feature on the roads.
They are damaging speed cameras - in this country, they would not therefore be targeting essential safety features.

(Average speed cameras being the sole exception)

Edited: It would be interesting to do an analysis of the impact of this action on the French roads - i.e. changes in the number of accidents vs the level of fines generated.
eal401 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 09:22
  #6 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 894
Originally Posted by eal401 View Post
They are damaging speed cameras - in this country, they would not therefore be targeting essential safety features.

(Average speed cameras being the sole exception)

Edited: It would be interesting to do an analysis of the impact of this action on the French roads - i.e. changes in the number of accidents vs the level of fines generated.
Ah, right, so a speed camera is not an essential safety feature then because every motorist diligently observes the speed limits do they ?.......however, it was not unexpectedly entertaining to read your contradictory support for average speed cameras. Remind us all again as to the reason both types exist......
Krystal n chips is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 09:37
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,562
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips View Post
Ah, right, so a speed camera is not an essential safety feature then because every motorist diligently observes the speed limits do they ?.......however, it was not unexpectedly entertaining to read your contradictory support for average speed cameras. Remind us all again as to the reason both types exist......
Speed cameras are primarily cash cows, and insofar as drivers more often than not hit the brakes when they see one (whether or not they are speeding) they are as likely to cause accidents than prevent them. Even with SPECS average speed cameras you often see drivers hitting their brakes as they go through them, despite the fact that if they have been speeding it makes minimal difference to the average speeds recorded. Sudden braking is dangerous and causes collisions.

I might change my mind regard traffic cameras if they were able to pick up drivers phoning, texting, shaving, putting on make up and whatever other idiotic things they do and fine them for it.
ATNotts is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 09:42
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by ATNotts View Post
Speed cameras are primarily cash cows, and insofar as drivers more often than not hit the brakes when they see one (whether or not they are speeding) they are as likely to cause accidents than prevent them. Even with SPECS average speed cameras you often see drivers hitting their brakes as they go through them, despite the fact that if they have been speeding it makes minimal difference to the average speeds recorded. Sudden braking is dangerous and causes collisions.

I might change my mind regard traffic cameras if they were able to pick up drivers phoning, texting, shaving, putting on make up and whatever other idiotic things they do and fine them for it.
You need actual real life traffic police for that though.

Actually it is officially acknowledged IN FRANCE that speed cameras have nothing to do with safety and are a form of secondary taxation.

Even the gendarmes will tell you so....
weemonkey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 09:48
  #9 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 15,030
Agree with ATNotts, one of the biggest revenue earners used to be in Lincolnshire mounted where it generates revenue and not on an accident blackspot, nothing wrong with putting them on accident black spots but they don't.. those on the M1 near Sheffield are similar, if speeding was causing accidents along that section then by all means fit SPECS average speed cameras to control the trafffic over that stretch, as is you have people that know where they are speeding between them then braking, that is not aiding road safety, far from it, that promotes the opposite.

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-3946560/Should-speed-cameras-axed-cause-80-braking-blackspots.html


..

Last edited by NutLoose; 11th Jan 2019 at 10:00.
NutLoose is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 09:54
  #10 (permalink)  
Tabs please !
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Biffins Bridge
Posts: 701
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips View Post
Ah, right, so a speed camera is not an essential safety feature then
In a word...."no". Travelling too fast for the prevailing conditions was not a factor in 93% of all reported accidents. Too fast for the conditions does not necessarily mean that the vehicle was exceeding the posted limit. My last "interesting event" was at under 10mph while tackling an ice covered hill however the snow banks provided a nice cushion so no damage done, unlike the motorcyclist who attempted the same hill.

I have been called to two inquests where I was witness to a fatal accident. In the first case, it was a borrowed motorbike and the rider's helmet came off before the final impact. In the second case, the driver was distracted by the child in the rear seat and did not see the pedestrian crossing or the pedestrian who in any case probably stepped off without looking.

We all want regulation that actually makes a difference so banning cyclists from passing vehicles on the left would be a great start.

The following study covers 5 years of data and is published by the Department of Transport so can be viewed as reasonably impartial. If you choose to consider that recklessness or loss of control infers speeding then can you explain why the rates were unchanged during a period when there was a significant increase in the number of cameras ?

https://assets.publishing.service.go...cgb2014-02.pdf
B Fraser is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 10:00
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Dundee
Posts: 42
Originally Posted by B Fraser View Post
In a word...."no". Travelling too fast for the prevailing conditions was not a factor in 93% of all reported accidents. Too fast for the conditions does not necessarily mean that the vehicle was exceeding the posted limit. My last "interesting event" was at under 10mph while tackling an ice covered hill however the snow banks provided a nice cushion so no damage done, unlike the motorcyclist who attempted the same hill.

I have been called to two inquests where I was witness to a fatal accident. In the first case, it was a borrowed motorbike and the rider's helmet came off before the final impact. In the second case, the driver was distracted by the child in the rear seat and did not see the pedestrian crossing or the pedestrian who in any case probably stepped off without looking.

We all want regulation that actually makes a difference so banning cyclists from passing vehicles on the left would be a great start.

The following study covers 5 years of data and is published by the Department of Transport so can be viewed as reasonably impartial. If you choose to consider that recklessness or loss of control infers speeding then can you explain why the rates were unchanged during a period when there was a significant increase in the number of cameras ?

https://assets.publishing.service.go...cgb2014-02.pdf
Excellent rebuttal.
weemonkey is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 10:09
  #12 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 894
Originally Posted by B Fraser View Post
In a word...."no". Travelling too fast for the prevailing conditions was not a factor in 93% of all reported accidents. Too fast for the conditions does not necessarily mean that the vehicle was exceeding the posted limit. My last "interesting event" was at under 10mph while tackling an ice covered hill however the snow banks provided a nice cushion so no damage done, unlike the motorcyclist who attempted the same hill.

I have been called to two inquests where I was witness to a fatal accident. In the first case, it was a borrowed motorbike and the rider's helmet came off before the final impact. In the second case, the driver was distracted by the child in the rear seat and did not see the pedestrian crossing or the pedestrian who in any case probably stepped off without looking.

We all want regulation that actually makes a difference so banning cyclists from passing vehicles on the left would be a great start.

The following study covers 5 years of data and is published by the Department of Transport so can be viewed as reasonably impartial. If you choose to consider that recklessness or loss of control infers speeding then can you explain why the rates were unchanged during a period when there was a significant increase in the number of cameras ?

https://assets.publishing.service.go...cgb2014-02.pdf
Ok , so how do you interpret this statement, cut and pasted from the link then ?

Maths aren't my strongpoint you understand....



Behaviour or inexperience and injudicious action (which includes travelling too fast for conditions, following too close and exceeding speed limit) were the next most frequently reported categories, involved in 25 and 23 per cent of all accidents respectively. The equivalent figures for fatal accidents, for both of these contributory factors, were higher at 27 and 29 per cent respectively
Krystal n chips is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 10:14
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Just north of Chester, UK.
Posts: 221
Originally Posted by weemonkey View Post
Excellent rebuttal.
But entirely irrelevant.

Whether or not you believe it's a safety or a revenue issue the essential fact is that you can only be caught by a camera if you are breaking the law.

I accept that this can happen accidentally, but speeding is, generally, a strict liability offence. I've been caught twice by cameras because I didn't see the signs. No one to blame but myself.
Captivep is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 10:21
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Southampton
Posts: 644
If safety was paramount, then safety (speed) cameras would not have a tolerance before they operate and someone is fined - the limit is either safe or it isn't.

The fact that they do have a tolerance suggests that revenue is a major factor in siting the cameras.
Saintsman is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 10:21
  #15 (permalink)  
Tabs please !
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Biffins Bridge
Posts: 701
Quite easily. "Includes" means that they are an undefined subset of the overall figure.

I'll help you with your argument in that I was a scientist many years ago and knew colleagues at the TRRL in Crowthorne. Their most pessimistic statistic was that speed was a factor in 12% of accidents and that was in the 1980's.
B Fraser is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 10:23
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 589
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips View Post
Ok , so how do you interpret this statement, cut and pasted from the link then ?

Maths aren't my strongpoint you understand....



Behaviour or inexperience and injudicious action (which includes travelling too fast for conditions, following too close and exceeding speed limit) were the next most frequently reported categories, involved in 25 and 23 per cent of all accidents respectively. The equivalent figures for fatal accidents, for both of these contributory factors, were higher at 27 and 29 per cent respectively
OK MR Expert. Provide a detailed description of how a fixed speed camera measures each of the above factors you have highlighted in bold. As, to my understanding, they can manage the last one only, provided they are correctly maintained and calibrated.

Otherwise, I have seen enough drivers fly down a road in excess of the speed limit, anchor on the brakes at the cameras and hurtle off again to have a basic understanding of their lack of effectiveness as a road safety measure. Whereas average speed cameras at least encourage such drivers to observe limits over a set distance - albeit they do not prevent accidents nor stop every speeder.

I have also seen enough mobile cameras positioned at the bottom of hills, round corners etc. to understand their real motivation. A junction I use regularly is a major accident blackspot - the only time a mobile camera is nearby is 400 yards away on a different road and just round a bend. Hmmm. certainly never get the cars sat up my arse because I am observing the limit.
eal401 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 10:34
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 9,109
Originally Posted by ATNotts View Post
Even with SPECS average speed cameras you often see drivers hitting their brakes as they go through them, despite the fact that if they have been speeding it makes minimal difference to the average speeds recorded
So if fixed speed cameras are a cash cow, that must make average speed cameras a tax on the stupid.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 11:02
  #18 (permalink)  
Thought police antagonist
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 894
Originally Posted by eal401 View Post
OK MR Expert. Provide a detailed description of how a fixed speed camera measures each of the above factors you have highlighted in bold. As, to my understanding, they can manage the last one only, provided they are correctly maintained and calibrated.

Otherwise, I have seen enough drivers fly down a road in excess of the speed limit, anchor on the brakes at the cameras and hurtle off again to have a basic understanding of their lack of effectiveness as a road safety measure. Whereas average speed cameras at least encourage such drivers to observe limits over a set distance - albeit they do not prevent accidents nor stop every speeder.

I have also seen enough mobile cameras positioned at the bottom of hills, round corners etc. to understand their real motivation. A junction I use regularly is a major accident blackspot - the only time a mobile camera is nearby is 400 yards away on a different road and just round a bend. Hmmm. certainly never get the cars sat up my arse because I am observing the limit.
Slight problem with your histrionic rant......I didn't " highlight in bold" any part of the statement ......I cut and pasted it verbatim from, erm, the link. Can we take it you haven't actually read this link then ? ....this often helps to ensure clarity and understanding of the contents.. ,
Krystal n chips is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 11:08
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 589
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK View Post
So if fixed speed cameras are a cash cow, that must make average speed cameras a tax on the stupid.
I would definitely agree with that! The A316 heading into London from the M3 is now fitted with average speed cameras for a substantial distance. It has made a big difference to speeding, but you still get the odd idiot bombing along.

Back to the argument on speed cameras. This website https://www.gov.uk/government/statis...butory-factors collates causal factors in road accidents. Exceeding the speed limit directly contributes to 5% of casualties - a statistic that doesn't really align to the reliance on these cameras and the resources allocated to them. Given many more casualties are a result of careless driving (a factor in at least 77% of accidents) surely resource should be prioritised on other forms of traffic policing? (Mind you - this has been the case since the year 2000 as far as I know - why would it change now!)
eal401 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 11th Jan 2019, 11:12
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Age: 42
Posts: 589
Originally Posted by Krystal n chips View Post
Slight problem with your histrionic rant......I didn't " highlight in bold" any part of the statement ......I cut and pasted it verbatim from, erm, the link. Can we take it you haven't actually read this link then ? ....this often helps to ensure clarity and understanding of the contents.. ,
What "histrionic" rant is that? I bemoan the fact that fixed speed cameras do not stop speeding drivers is "histrionic?"

I note you do not answer my question. Unsurprisingly.
eal401 is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service