Are speed cameras too conspicuous?

[py_megapixel]

Virtually all speed cameras seem to be painted fluorescent yellow. And when they're not in use, they seem to be required to put up bright yellow signs saying "SPEED CAMERA OUT OF USE". I'd love the highways agency to put up one of those signs on a functional speed camera and see how many drivers they catch...

In my view, this is a ridiculous decision. I personally don't see why speeding motorists deserve to be warned of the specific point at which their illegal actions will be enforced. This is why I much prefer average speed check systems. Clearly they can only catch someone who is constantly speeding, otherwise they'd have to catch everyone, but they also don't encourage slamming the brakes on for a speed camera and then speeding up again immediately afterwards... though even these cameras seem to be painted bright yellow and have huge signs!

So why don't they simply hide speed cameras? Camera technology is so small now that they could easily fit it into a small space and be well-concealed, and possibly they could not paint it bright yellow. And even if the radar technology used to actually measure speed can't be similarly miniaturised, it can presumably be hidden somewhere as well? This can't be technically impossible.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

They should be treated with camouflage paint

 

[Crossover]

I remember the days when they were just grey boxes. Them being conspicuous was a legal thing, I believe. Other countries, whilst not hiding them, don't make them so visible

 

[telstarbox]

In the UK, camera locations also appear on Google Maps in satnav mode. I understand this is illegal in France though.

 

[Kingspanner]

One philosophy is that they are safety cameras, and what you want them to do is slow people down in specific locations. Then, yellow is good.

 

[py_megapixel]

One philosophy is that they are safety cameras, and what you want them to do is slow people down in specific locations. Then, yellow is good.

In my experience, what they do is encourage slamming on of the brakes and then acceleration immediately afterwards.

Possibly the best situation would be big signs saying "concealed speed cameras in use" and then the locations of the actual physical cameras concealed, thereby requiring slow driving through an entire area.

 

[The_Train]

Aren't speed cameras supposed to be in accident blackspots with a purpose to reduce/eradicate said accidents? If that's so then visibility of them is surely a must?

On a slightly different note, albeit relevant, we currently have an electronic board portraying your speed and giving you a sad or happy face based on whether you are speeding or not on the entrance to Stafford. Unfortunately said board is about 20 yards before the road changes from 40 to 30 and yet it still gives you a sad face if travelling above 30 even though the limit is actually 40 at the point of passing the electronic board. Trivial thing but it annoys me

 

[edwin_m]

I remember the days when they were just grey boxes. Them being conspicuous was a legal thing, I believe. Other countries, whilst not hiding them, don't make them so visible

Yes it's a legal thing. Which means that average speed cameras are also painted yellow, so potentially people slam on the brakes for those then get caught because they speed up between them. I've seen "average speed camera" signs but I don't think they're universal or required.

 

[AM9]

Virtually all speed cameras seem to be painted fluorescent yellow. And when they're not in use, they seem to be required to put up bright yellow signs saying "SPEED CAMERA OUT OF USE". I'd love the highways agency to put up one of those signs on a functional speed camera and see how many drivers they catch...

In my view, this is a ridiculous decision. I personally don't see why speeding motorists deserve to be warned of the specific point at which their illegal actions will be enforced. This is why I much prefer average speed check systems. Clearly they can only catch someone who is constantly speeding, otherwise they'd have to catch everyone, but they also don't encourage slamming the brakes on for a speed camera and then speeding up again immediately afterwards... though even these cameras seem to be painted bright yellow and have huge signs!

So why don't they simply hide speed cameras? Camera technology is so small now that they could easily fit it into a small space and be well-concealed, and possibly they could not paint it bright yellow. And even if the radar technology used to actually measure speed can't be similarly miniaturised, it can presumably be hidden somewhere as well? This can't be technically impossible.

Making speed cameras highly visible was also (and still is) a political sop to motorists who don't really accept that their speeding is a problem. It also goes on in some other countries, there's an example of a warning to motorists on the A2 travelling east out of Madrid. On a gantry there is an electronic sign with the words "velocidad controlada por radar" which just means 'radar controlled speed', see here:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@40.4...4!1s7BH7FRKBdu-VzqVDgiKCtA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Having regularly visited the area on business for about 10 years, we were told by local colleagues (and taxi drivers) that hundreds were fined for ignoring the electronic warnings. So it seems that motorists there are as arrogant (or as stupid) as they are here, ignoring yellow painted boxes.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

They should be treated with camouflage paint

Lol. Indeed. Speeding motorists in residential areas in particular are a great worry to me.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Lol. Indeed. Speeding motorists in residential areas in particular are a great worry to me.

Usually in the UK this is dealt with not with cameras but with traffic calming, i.e. ramps, cushions and chicanes, which are designed to make it physically impossible to exceed the speed limit.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

Best to put up signs 'warning' of cameras at random locations, and hidden safety cameras at other random locations
Bleating about 'accident blackspots' is just trying to divert attention, 'accidents' happen at all sorts of places

As for average speed cameras, exceeding the maximum on average for mile after mile shows a lot of criminal energy

 

[PeterC]

Yes it's a legal thing. Which means that average speed cameras are also painted yellow, so potentially people slam on the brakes for those then get caught because they speed up between them. I've seen "average speed camera" signs but I don't think they're universal or required.

Is it actually a legal requirement? I know that the old Speed Camera Partnerships were only allowed to retain the fine income if they cameras were high-viz but I didn't think that it affected the validity of the ticket.

As for average speed cameras, exceeding the maximum on average for mile after mile shows a lot of criminal energy

I have normally found these on motorways or high quality dual carriageways where it is very easy to cruise at speeds higher than the posted limit.

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

It is very easy to keep *below* the maximum speed limit too

 

[py_megapixel]

It is very easy to keep *below* the maximum speed limit too

Unfortunately most motorists are somewhat intolerant of this, as anyone who regularly cycles on the roads will have discovered.
There are plenty of "30-zones" where 30 is achievable in a car, but not by the average cyclist. Tailgating is unfortunately common on these roads.

 

[87 027]

I think in the early days not every speed camera actually had a camera installed, so they were there as a visual deterrent

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unfortunately most motorists are somewhat intolerant of this, as anyone who regularly cycles on the roads will have discovered.
There are plenty of "30-zones" where 30 is achievable in a car, but not by the average cyclist. Tailgating is unfortunately common on these roads.

Segregation, Dutch-style, works best in these contexts.

 

[SargeNpton]

If the main aim is to fine people for speeding then camouflage them.

If the main aim is to reduce the instance of speeding at a particular place then make them as visible as possible.

 

[DelW]

In my experience, what they do is encourage slamming on of the brakes and then acceleration immediately afterwards.

I'm regularly baffled by drivers who brake at speed cameras even when they're driving well below the limit. Presumably it shows they've no idea what speed limit they're in.

I think in the early days not every speed camera actually had a camera installed, so they were there as a visual deterrent

The original GATSO cameras used a film cassette with (IIRC) 250 frames available. That had to be loaded and later removed for developing by a technician visiting the camera site. At that time I believe as few as one in ten mountings actually had a loaded camera, but of course cameras were frequently moved around the available mounting boxes.

 

[pdeaves]

Segregation, Dutch-style, works best in these contexts.

I disagree. We don't need apartheid on any given road, it conditions people to expect it in other places. I think it better for people to understand that a limit is a limit, not a target. I accept that it's an up hill struggle to get the message into heads!

 

[AM9]

Segregation, Dutch-style, works best in these contexts.

If only.

Is it actually a legal requirement? I know that the old Speed Camera Partnerships were only allowed to retain the fine income if they cameras were high-viz but I didn't think that it affected the validity of the ticket. ...

I didn't think that it was a 'legal' requirement, because there is no defence saying that you didn't see the camera. that's why I think that it is recommended, and effectively a sop so that there is no doubt that the driver 'took the risk'.
One thing that I do think should be changed is the visibility of speed limit signs, especially repeaters which are the small ones on grass verges and 30mph signs where there are no regular streetlights. Speed limit signs are after all, the means of legally defining the road's speed limit,* although mostly an experienced driver can tell what the speed limit really is.

* They need to be backed up with an official document that specifies the limit, (which on a few occasions is lost or misapplied) but that is of no consequence to the motorist when deciding whether to ignore the signs.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

30 MPH is easy to adhere to -anything less I struggle a bit with.

 

[Bletchleyite]

30 MPH is easy to adhere to -anything less I struggle a bit with.

I find that selecting the gear which is the first number of the lower limit you want to adhere to works fairly well on most cars.

That is 2nd for 20, 3rd for 30, 4th for 40, 5th for 50 and 6th for cruising at 60 or above.

 

[Trackman]

They actually cause accidents by being visible as people slam on and sometimes lose control in the process.
It's happened twice near were I am now. It's an average speed by-pass now.

 

[AM9]

30 MPH is easy to adhere to -anything less I struggle a bit with.

For years I've usually put the car on cruise in a 30 or 40 area. The interesting thing is the number of other cars that rush up behing trying to bully me into going faster, - I just ignore them as there's no pressure when the speed is determined by the car.

They actually cause accidents by being visible as people slam on and sometimes lose control in the process.
It's happened twice near were I am now. It's an average speed by-pass now.

Speed cameras don't cause accidents, - they are inanimate objects. The behaviour of a few motorists when they haven't been paying attention causes accidents though.

 

[Domh245]

For years I've usually put the car on cruise in a 30 or 40 area. The interesting thing is the number of other cars that rush up behing trying to bully me into going faster, - I just ignore them as there's no pressure when the speed is determined by the car.

Cruise control has been the single biggest factor in me no longer speeding. It's more effort for me to break the speed limit on a motorway now than it is just to press a button, so I don't, barring the rare overtake when someone realises mid overtake that they were going slower and accelerates to make the speed differential so low that the overtake gets drawn out. I also use it occasionally similarly to how you've described it, thankfully the minimum speed set on it is quite low, allowing it to work on the 20mph roads around here. I do, like you, often find cars closing in behind me when I'm doing the speed limit on these roads. I would understand if they'd changed recently but they've been 20mph for a few years now, and whilst the signposting isn't brilliant it is there.

The only trouble now I find is if I overaccelerate when pulling out onto a 20mph road, but that's 'solved' by just braking/learning after the 2nd time and modifying the my behaviour to remember that the speed limit is that low

 

[Bletchleyite]

I find that setting cruise control to either just below 70 or just over it (bearing in mind that an actual 70 by GPS in my car is an indicated 73) means you get a reasonable differential from others and don't start overtaking like a lorry.

 

[Domh245]

I find that setting cruise control to either just below 70 or just over it (bearing in mind that an actual 70 by GPS in my car is an indicated 73) means you get a reasonable differential from others and don't start overtaking like a lorry.

Agreed, usually it does work (and curiously enough, in my car as well 73/74 indicated is 70 GPS) and I'll usually even drop the set speed if I'm closing in on the car ahead very slowly to match their speed rather than making the overtake. I'll speed to overtake someone though if partway through they accelerate from (eg) 65 to 70, partially out of politeness just to get the overtake done, but also because I want to put a fair bit of space between them and myself quickly. I can recall one journey where I overtook one car about 4 times because he kept alternating between 60 and 80, would rather be away from drivers like that if I can help it

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed, usually it does work (and curiously enough, in my car as well 73/74 indicated is 70 GPS) and I'll usually even drop the set speed if I'm closing in on the car ahead very slowly to match their speed rather than making the overtake. I'll speed to overtake someone though if partway through they accelerate from (eg) 65 to 70, partially out of politeness just to get the overtake done, but also because I want to put a fair bit of space between them and myself quickly. I can recall one journey where I overtook one car about 4 times because he kept alternating between 60 and 80, would rather be away from drivers like that if I can help it

What I tend to find is a source of a little frustration is that people driving manually tend to keep the accelerator pretty static so will lose speed on uphills and gain it on downhills, whereas cruise maintains the chosen speed exactly.

 

[Snow1964]

Usually in the UK this is dealt with not with cameras but with traffic calming, i.e. ramps, cushions and chicanes, which are designed to make it physically impossible to exceed the speed limit.

Except in London, where it encouraged many to buy big wide fuel hungry SUVs so they could drive over them easily, or straddle the cushions.

I think one of London local reporters discovered that roads with these have 30-35% higher emissions than a road with similar traffic volume with no calming. Lower gears and braking and acceleration causes it. The high emissions side effect is usually omitted from most discussions about them as it is so embarrassing to most councils to admit to raising pollution.