Are speed cameras too conspicuous?

[cactustwirly]

Virtually none of it. Motorways are more likely to have multiple cameras focused on the carriageways, - often average speed types which force motorists to keep their speed at or below an average that meets the limit. Of course there are those idiots that don't understand the meaning of 'average' and race between the cameras only to slam the brakes on when passing them.


This is all irrelevant. It takes two to tango, getting impatient with the other motorist creates just as many problems, and if speeds of 80-90mph are part of that impatience, staying within the law removes the whole problem.


The problem with speeding in the UK is that some drivers won't accept that a speed limit means the fastest you can legally go at, - they see it as the speed that everbody must go at, especially those who might get in their way.

With lane hogging it is very frustrating, often it's people doing 50mph in the middle lane (when you're doing 70mph). And it's actually illegal, people have been fined for it.
People should be traveling at a reasonable speed on the motorways, and should exercise good lane etiquette.

Speed limits are limits ofc, but it's still dangerous to be doing 30mph on a nsl road, especially when the conditions are good. Other drivers won't be expecting you to be driving so slowly. Plus it's downright selfish.

Points effectively cause a level of means testing, as they whack your insurance up, and if you have a premium car that's higher anyway. The Swiss don't have points, so it's just considered a "going faster tax".

That's a common misconception, it's not always correct. Premium cars are often cheaper to insure than cheaper cars. This is because insurance is based on statistics and some premium cars are driven by a less risky demographic of driver.

Smaller cheaper cars are often driven by younger riskier drivers and are therefore expensive to insure, especially if you are a more experienced driver.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Speed limits are limits ofc, but it's still dangerous to be doing 30mph on a nsl road, especially when the conditions are good. Other drivers won't be expecting you to be driving so slowly.

It's not, because it could be a cyclist, or a car that is breaking down and losing power (or has broken down and stopped, if there is a total electrical failure the hazards may not work), or a pedestrian having fallen in the road, or a car that has hit something e.g. an animal that ran in front etc. It is the sole responsibility of the car "at rear" not to hit something that is on the road in front of them, nobody else's.

Of course taking into account that drivers aren't perfect it's sensible to take precautions, e.g. not stopping just round blind corners or wearing hi-vis when walking on country lanes at night. However, that's just common sense. I suppose another example of that would be that if I leave my house unlocked and go away on holiday for a week it is still both morally and legally wrong to go in and nick my stuff, but really knowing that people do that (compared to "knowing there are inattentive drivers") it is prudent to lock the door.

Plus it's downright selfish.

That is certainly true, on the other hand, in essence driving unnecessarily slowly for the vehicle and conditions is causing a (moving) obstruction, and would be a driving test major fault for "failing to make progress".

With lane hogging it is very frustrating, often it's people doing 50mph in the middle lane (when you're doing 70mph). And it's actually illegal, people have been fined for it.

Lane hogging, undertaking and similar aren't specifically illegal, but would be prosecuted as "careless driving", "driving without due care and attention" or "dangerous driving" depending on the precise circumstances. FWIW the difficulty in prosecuting those three offences (because they are rather subjective) is why there is a specific offence of using a mobile phone while driving, as strict liability offences are much easier to pursue.

 

[bramling]

In response to the question about J14-15 yes I think conversion is in progress?

The UK motorways were largely built with long sweeping curves which were intended to reduce the risk of inattention by requiring constantly changing steering input, by the way.

Yet I find something like the M4, with its long sweeping curves and little in the way of landmarks, utterly monotonous to drive. The earliest section of the M1, with its long straight sections I’d take any day. Likewise the London end of the A1(M) which is full of landmarks, quite sharp curves and straights.

 

[cactustwirly]

Yet I find something like the M4, with its long sweeping curves and little in the way of landmarks, utterly monotonous to drive. The earliest section of the M1, with its long straight sections I’d take any day. Likewise the London end of the A1(M) which is full of landmarks, quite sharp curves and straights.

The M4 isn't too bad, it's quite scenic between Reading and Swindon.

The M40 is far worse!

 

[Bletchleyite]

The M4 isn't too bad, it's quite scenic between Reading and Swindon.

The M40 is far worse!

I quite like the M40, like the Chiltern Line (at least before Arriva got its grubby mitts on it) it's a bit civilised and secondary.

 

[bramling]

The M4 isn't too bad, it's quite scenic between Reading and Swindon.

The M40 is far worse!

I shall have to look harder, apart from the brief glimpse of Windsor Castle it’s hard to recall *any* distinguishing features on the M4 between London and Bristol. From there to Carmarthen is a different story entirely however.

Can’t claim to be over keen on the M40 either, though at least there’s a few landmarks like the High Wycombe valley, passing over the old Watlington branch at Lewknor, et cetera. North of Oxford is pretty boring though.

 

[gswindale]

Indeed, the M4 is seriously dull. The drag from Swindon to Bristol is particularly monotonous

Much improved once you get across the bridge though. In some ways the stretch around Port Talbot is the best bit of it (travelling West it also means I've nearly got to my destination)!

 

[radamfi]

Agreed, 50mph roadwork sections with average speed cameras protecting them, or similar speeds on smart motorways, where everyone is doing the same speed and using cruise control is really monotonous. Very easy to lose focus or be more likely to distract yourself changing songs/stations etc. when driving isn’t taking as much of your attention.

Compared to “normal” motorway driving at National Speed Limit, you have more speed variation between vehicles, trucks at around 56mph, cars doing anything between that and well over the limit, and assuming you’re keeping left unless overtaking, etc. then to maintain your desired pace you’ll usually be changing lanes and moving around other traffic, much more actively driving and I find that far easier to stay alert.

According to the RAC Foundation, average speed cameras at permanent sites have cut accident rates. The analysis included roads with various speed limits, ranging from 40 to 70 mph.

On average, the permanent average speed camera sites analysed saw reductions in injury collisions, especially those of a higher severity. The number of average speed camera sites are likely to increase as installation costs continue to decrease. Installation costs are declining due to the falling cost of technology and increased competition in the market. Fatal and serious collisions fell, by 25-46% while personal injury collisions fell, by 9-22%.

https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/Average_speed_camera_effectiveness_Owen_Ursachi_Allsop_September_2016.pdf

Roadwork speed limits will be generally increased to 60 mph after recent trials.

 

[bramling]

According to the RAC Foundation, average speed cameras at permanent sites have cut accident rates. The analysis included roads with various speed limits, ranging from 40 to 70 mph.

https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/Average_speed_camera_effectiveness_Owen_Ursachi_Allsop_September_2016.pdf

Roadwork speed limits will be generally increased to 60 mph after recent trials.

Long overdue. The 50 mph through roadworks has always resulted in serious problems with aggressive tailgating by lorries, many of whom insist on driving through on their speed limiters (normally around 56 mph).

This causes a lot of problems as if you’re in a car and wish to simply set the cruise to 50, or even slightly over that, you are guaranteed to be tailgated. And of course what happens is you end up in either the middle or outer lane due to stuff going much slower in the left lane, which causes more angst as the lorries are either reluctant to or can’t fit in the third lane, or will undertake. All highly dangerous.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Long overdue. The 50 mph through roadworks has always resulted in serious problems with aggressive tailgating by lorries, many of whom insist on driving through on their speed limiters (normally around 56 mph).

This causes a lot of problems as if you’re in a car and wish to simply set the cruise to 50, or even slightly over that, you are guaranteed to be tailgated. And of course what happens is you end up in either the middle or outer lane due to stuff going much slower in the left lane, which causes more angst as the lorries are either reluctant to or can’t fit in the third lane, or will undertake. All highly dangerous.

I believe this has largely been made possible by moving from cones (which do nothing to protect the workforce from an errant vehicle at all) to continuous concrete or metal barriers (which do quite a lot, most notably the curve at the bottom directs an errant vehicle back into the running lane without significant damage).

The problems you outline might well have been caused by cameras - previously, they'd put 50 up but unenforced, which would result in most people doing about 60 and thus the problem not occurring. Widespread practice before cameras used to be to do about an indicated 10 over the limit in most circumstances - that's what my Dad did - and an indicated 60 in most cars is going to be about 56-57 anyway, so a similar speed to the lorries.

 

[bramling]

I believe this has largely been made possible by moving from cones (which do nothing to protect the workforce from an errant vehicle at all) to continuous concrete or metal barriers (which do quite a lot, most notably the curve at the bottom directs an errant vehicle back into the running lane without significant damage).

The problems you outline might well have been caused by cameras - previously, they'd put 50 up but unenforced, which would result in most people doing about 60 and thus the problem not occurring. Widespread practice before cameras used to be to do about an indicated 10 over the limit in most circumstances - that's what my Dad did - and an indicated 60 in most cars is going to be about 56-57 anyway, so a similar speed to the lorries.

I tend to find more cars drive under than over. A lot seem to go at around 45 mph (some of which may be accounted for speedo over reading), then there’s the infuriating ones who can’t keep to a constant speed. I’m conscious that I have it easy by having cruise control, but even without that it isn’t that hard just to drive at 50 mph!

As an aside, it’s surprising how many modern cars *don’t* have cruise control or speed ceiling buttons installed as standard.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I tend to find more cars drive under than over. A lot seem to go at around 45 mph (some of which may be accounted for speedo over reading), then there’s the infuriating ones who can’t keep to a constant speed. I’m conscious that I have it easy by having cruise control, but even without that it isn’t that hard just to drive at 50 mph!

I find this is often a matter of selecting a lower gear. It's hard to stick to 50mph in 6th in my car, but put it in 5th and it does it fine. Similarly sticking to 40 in 5th or 6th is hard, but in 4th it's easy. Most people don't think that way.

As an aside, it’s surprising how many modern cars *don’t* have cruise control or speed ceiling buttons installed as standard.

I use cruise control for limits like those, but "speed ceiling" buttons may be the cause of what you're saying. No doubt for a smooth driving experience, if I set a ceiling of 50 on my Ford Kuga I barely actually reach 50 - the acceleration it will give tails off above about 45, and 48 seems to be the highest you get for potentially well over a minute or more, then it slowly creeps up. You can get an effective ceiling of 50 by setting it to 52, but again most won't think to do that, they'll set 50 and sit with their foot to the floor.

It's certainly totally useless for sticking to 30s in town, which would seem to me to be the main use-case!

For roadworks, I'd say adaptive cruise is probably the ultimate (the type that slows and speeds up below a specified speed based on distance to the car in front) but that's still a pretty premium offering.

 

[bramling]

I find this is often a matter of selecting a lower gear. It's hard to stick to 50mph in 6th in my car, but put it in 5th and it does it fine. Similarly sticking to 40 in 5th or 6th is hard, but in 4th it's easy. Most people don't think that way.



I use cruise control for limits like those, but "speed ceiling" buttons may be the cause of what you're saying. No doubt for a smooth driving experience, if I set a ceiling of 50 on my Ford Kuga I barely actually reach 50 - the acceleration it will give tails off above about 45, and 48 seems to be the highest you get for potentially well over a minute or more, then it slowly creeps up. You can get an effective ceiling of 50 by setting it to 52, but again most won't think to do that, they'll set 50 and sit with their foot to the floor.

It's certainly totally useless for sticking to 30s in town, which would seem to me to be the main use-case!

For roadworks, I'd say adaptive cruise is probably the ultimate (the type that slows and speeds up below a specified speed based on distance to the car in front) but that's still a pretty premium offering.

Adaptive cruise fills me with horror, as it’s just inviting people not to pay attention (IMO).

The speed ceiling on my newest car is pretty accurate, I’d say you only end up going about 1 mph below. In my case I’d set it to about 2 mph over in any case as I know the speedo is more likely to over-read. The cruise on my old BMW is pretty good, I remember downloading a handheld GPS on it and it managed to maintain something between 50.0 and 51.0 mph without deviating for quite a few miles.

Personally I wouldn’t go down a gear, but then I tend to be one who heads for higher gears sooner rather than later.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Personally I wouldn’t go down a gear, but then I tend to be one who heads for higher gears sooner rather than later.

With the Kuga you pretty much have to, as with it having a small diesel engine (and so almost no torque if the turbo spins down, unlike a larger engine) you get a feeling of loss of power on reaching a hill while you wait for it to spin back up.

But I've always done that - I find the level of control you get by driving in the gear number that is the first digit of the speed limit (in most cases; I still do 20s in 3rd in most cars) gives you a superior level of control and makes it very easy to hold a speed without even looking at the speedo as well as less need to use the brakes, at the expense of a very tiny bit of extra fuel consumption (possibly none, as pushing too high a gear is also inefficient).

 

[py_megapixel]

Just how common is some from of speed control functionality?

Over the past decade or so I've been in 3 vehicles owned by my immediate family (across multiple households) of which I believe only one has cruise control, with the other two being too old (about 15 years) and too low-spec (base trim Fiat Punto) respectively. The one that does have cruise control (top trim Kia Piccanto) is only a few years old.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Just how common is some from of speed control functionality?

Over the past decade or so I've been in 3 vehicles owned by my immediate family (across multiple households) of which I believe only one has cruise control, with the other two being too old (about 15 years) and too low-spec (base trim Fiat Punto) respectively. The one that does have cruise control (top trim Kia Piccanto) is only a few years old.

The odd thing about it is that these days with most cars having electronic throttle control it's just turning on a piece of software that is already in the ECU and 2-4 extra buttons depending on the UI design. Yet it's still charged as a premium thing because it has historically had that value (years ago it required much more dedicated processing and control).

 

[bramling]

Just how common is some from of speed control functionality?

Over the past decade or so I've been in 3 vehicles owned by my immediate family (across multiple households) of which I believe only one has cruise control, with the other two being too old (about 15 years) and too low-spec (base trim Fiat Punto) respectively. The one that does have cruise control (top trim Kia Piccanto) is only a few years old.

Both my BMWs (2000 and 2016) have it, the newer one also has the inhibit function. My 2010 Hyundai doesn’t have anything.

 

[py_megapixel]

The odd thing about it is that these days with most cars having electronic throttle control it's just turning on a piece of software that is already in the ECU and 2-4 extra buttons depending on the UI design. Yet it's still charged as a premium thing because it has historically had that value (years ago it required much more dedicated processing and control).

I believe on Kia the cruise control is activated by pressing a button and then the speed is set using an up/down control, but that control is also used by the trip counter so is present even on non-cruise-control models.
I also have a feeling that the button might actually be present (just not labelled "CRUISE") on those as well; it just does nothing. Which theoretically means that they could sell cruise control as an option at a point after manufacturing, and it would require no modifications to the vehicle at all; just a software update.

(I don't believe they do so, however - but I think Tesla does)

 

[DustyBin]

My MK3 Granada has cruise control and being automatic it works very well, you can set it to the desired speed and let it do it's own thing. It was a £24k car in 1991 though, cruise control wasn't a common feature back then! All of our modern cars have it although to be honest I very rarely use it. Ironically I suspect the point of cruise control on the Granada was so that you could relax at 140mph on the Autobahn, somewhat outwith the context of this discussion!

 

[Efini92]

My MK3 Granada has cruise control and being automatic it works very well, you can set it to the desired speed and let it do it's own thing. It was a £24k car in 1991 though, cruise control wasn't a common feature back then! All of our modern cars have it although to be honest I very rarely use it. Ironically I suspect the point of cruise control on the Granada was so that you could relax at 140mph on the Autobahn, somewhat outwith the context of this discussion!

You must be one of the last Granada’s left on the uk roads. My mates dad had a ghia X and it used to feel like a rocket ship when we were kids.

 

[SteveM70]

My MK3 Granada has cruise control and being automatic it works very well, you can set it to the desired speed and let it do it's own thing. It was a £24k car in 1991 though, cruise control wasn't a common feature back then! All of our modern cars have it although to be honest I very rarely use it. Ironically I suspect the point of cruise control on the Granada was so that you could relax at 140mph on the Autobahn, somewhat outwith the context of this discussion!

Those were the days! My first proper girlfriend’s dad had a mid-80s Granada with an automatic box. They lived near Preston Road tube; I remember him picking us up from central London late at night, getting onto the Westway and flooring it at about 25mph. There was a massive “bang” as it dropped down a gear and then shot forward like a scalded cat

Happy days

 

[DustyBin]

You must be one of the last Granada’s left on the uk roads. My mates dad had a ghia X and it used to feel like a rocket ship when we were kids.

It’s actually off the road at present as I decided to bite the bullet and give it a full restoration. It’s a rare car these days being a 1991 (pre-facelift) 24v version. Most had their engines stolen when the cars themselves became next to worthless. I actually have a spare engine that I liberated from a Capri (don’t worry, no Capris were harmed and it now has the correct 2.8 V6 instead).

Those were the days! My first proper girlfriend’s dad had a mid-80s Granada with an automatic box. They lived near Preston Road tube; I remember him picking us up from central London late at night, getting onto the Westway and flooring it at about 25mph. There was a massive “bang” as it dropped down a gear and then shot forward like a scalded cat

Happy days

I presume that will have been an early MK3. As above, mine is a 24v version with 195bhp (originally anyway!) so it’s quick even by modern standards. Rather thirsty though!

Actually you're wrong - increasingly CVTs are common as many hybrids use them - all the Toyota and Hyundai / Kias are. And Honda use them in both their hybrid and non hybrid powertrains.

Rover used to use them, certainly in the 200/400 series anyway. They weren’t very good. Subaru still use CVT’s as well.

 

[OldNick]

Speed limits are limits ofc, but it's still dangerous to be doing 30mph on a nsl road, especially when the conditions are good. Other drivers won't be expecting you to be driving so slowly. Plus it's downright selfish.

Bit of a generalisation there. Many rural lanes around me are NSL once you are off the A roads (which are largely 50mph around here), many of which are narrow, twisting, flanked by hedgerows and are frequented by farm equipment and horses. Many drivers belt along them clearly assuming nothing will be coming in the opposite direction, or hoping they'll be at a wide spot when they do.

It's quite possible to be behind valid, legal road users that cannot travel at the speed limit on various different types and class of road and to drive around everywhere at speed assuming that there is no reason to or likelihood of meeting a slower vehicle/road user is ridiculous (and selfish, incidentally).

There seems to be a similar attitude to those who clearly believe the outside lane on the motorway should only be occupied by those in certain makes of cars, and that the limit does not apply to them.

That is of course difficult when having to overtake people sat in the middle lane with no one on the inside lane...

 

[cactustwirly]

Bit of a generalisation there. Many rural lanes around me are NSL once you are off the A roads (which are largely 50mph around here), many of which are narrow, twisting, flanked by hedgerows and are frequented by farm equipment and horses. Many drivers belt along them clearly assuming nothing will be coming in the opposite direction, or hoping they'll be at a wide spot when they do.

It's quite possible to be behind valid, legal road users that cannot travel at the speed limit on various different types and class of road and to drive around everywhere at speed assuming that there is no reason to or likelihood of meeting a slower vehicle/road user is ridiculous (and selfish, incidentally).

There seems to be a similar attitude to those who clearly believe the outside lane on the motorway should only be occupied by those in certain makes of cars, and that the limit does not apply to them.

That is of course difficult when having to overtake people sat in the middle lane with no one on the inside lane...

But a straight NSL which is plenty wide enough.
You get people dawdling along at 30mph, even in good conditions. They turn out of side roads and don't accelerate afterwards, causing me and others to brake sharply.

I do get your point that NSL isn't appropriate for a windy single track road.

 

[AMR]

For speed cameras I think they are ok as it is, or get less conspicuous even as speedcameras work as a deterrent more then to catch people speeding. If you make it clearly visible that a speed cameras coming up the driver would slow down.

 

[AM9]

For speed cameras I think they are ok as it is, or get less conspicuous even as speedcameras work as a deterrent more then to catch people speeding. If you make it clearly visible that a speed cameras coming up the driver would slow down.

Maybe in the view of the camera but as soon as they are clear of it theyr speed up again. So unless the only places where they are needed happens to be where the cameras are, there's no incentive for the majority of drivers to keep within the speed limit.

 

[PeterC]

They turn out of side roads and don't accelerate afterwards, causing me and others to brake sharply.

A schoolfriend of mine did that on his little Honda 90. The truck couldn't brake sharply enough.

He never managed to buy a legal pint, not sure if he had ever managed to shave either.

 

[Bald Rick]

But how much of that is due to the "brake for the camera" approach? **cough cough** my dad **cough cough**

Not much; many people don’t know what the cameras look like, and another sizeable proportion of the population have points already and don’t want more **looks quizzically at Mrs BR**

Compare that to the M1 between J14 & J15, it's nearly 20 km there. Are they still converting that to 'smart' status?

Yes. 3 years into a four year job! When the signs went up 3 years ago saying ‘complete Spring 2022’ I assumed it was a typo...

Yet I find something like the M4, with its long sweeping curves and little in the way of landmarks, utterly monotonous to drive. The earliest section of the M1, with its long straight sections I’d take any day. Likewise the London end of the A1(M) which is full of landmarks, quite sharp curves and straights.

The M4, notably, was the first Motorway designe dljke this, and also the first designed using a computer.

The A1 proper from Peterborough to Blyth is hard to beat though. It’s not dissimalr to some of the original Autobahnen.

I quite like the M40, like the Chiltern Line (at least before Arriva got its grubby mitts on it) it's a bit civilised and secondary

The M40 north of High Wycombe is one of the last bastions of motorway driving as it used to be - plenty of people doing 90 in the outside lane in executive cars. M6 north of Lancaster is similar. That’s about it in my experience.

Just how common is some from of speed control functionality?

I’m on my 5th car in 17 years, all have had it.

 

[87 027]

Don’t vehicles which are limited to a speed well below the national speed limit have to show a flashing yellow beacon by law when travelling on such roads?

 

[antharro]

There's a speed camera just up the road from me which has been switched off for years. But it still serves a purpose - it's a visual deterrent. And if you spend a little time standing on the pavement alongside it, you'll see it works. As the road leads into a town where speed limits are naturally slower due to volume of traffic, it does help keep limits down. So I'm very much in favour of making cameras as obvious as possible, even if they're not operational. I'd actually like to see decommissioned cameras given to local councils so they can place them as visual deterrents.

As for the middle lane drivers - I had one on the M27 a couple of weeks back. 11pm, very few vehicles around, sat in the middle lane doing about 50-60mph. Idiots, and I am very glad they can being prosecuted.

My other pet hate is, as have been mentioned already, the 40mph folk. 40mph regardless of whether it's a 30, 40, 50 or 60...

I once had a lift home from the girlfriend of a friend. She refused to go above 30mph because it was too scary. Seriously, too scary. I assume she ended up being one of those people who do 60 on motorways causing the trucks to overtake at 62mph (100kph limiter) and causing congestion.

Cruise control is a godsend for helping to stick to the limit, especially on motorways and even moreso in roadworks where it's temping to follow the traffic or just creep up a few mph. Set the cruise and just point the car where it needs to go. Adaptive is good too. As for it being a modern thing - I used to drive a 1986 Honda Accord that had it. My 1993 Accord also had it, and my 1991 Mitsubishi 3000GT has it.

Very much against speed limits being enforced by the car. As has been previously pointed out, the technology isn't there yet. Plus, there may be times where exceeding the speed limit is a safety issue - being able to escape a potentially dangerous situation, for example. I very much believe it is the driver's responsibility to maintain a speed appropriate to the road and conditions and speed limit - and if they don't then that's on them.

Someone mentioned earlier they were unhappy with getting 40 mpg... I'd love to see that; my 3000GT gets 18 on average! I haven't seen 40 since I had a Civic, years ago. My choice tho, I like V6s and V8s.