HADECS 3 cameras on the M25
Discussion
vonhosen said:
V8 Fettler said:
vonhosen said:
Makes for dismal reading:
Why are several of our major ports not connected directly to the motorway network? Felixstowe being a prime example. £1.5billion for the A14 is laughable, for what should be the primary link between the Midlands and rest of the world
Once again, gubmint meddling at the margins.
When they are talking about investment in their solution.
Googie said:
vonhosen said:
V8 Fettler said:
vonhosen said:
Makes for dismal reading:Why are several of our major ports not connected directly to the motorway network? Felixstowe being a prime example. £1.5billion for the A14 is laughable, for what should be the primary link between the Midlands and rest of the world
Once again, gubmint meddling at the margins.
When they are talking about investment in their solution.
speedyguy said:
Googie said:
Very dismal indeed- apparently we are all " customers" not sure how many will share their 60mph vision on page 22 "Our vision is that mile a minute speeds on the network will become increasingly common"
Surely that's a massive improvement going on the usual slow speeds round the M25 and the constant 40 MPH or lower around Bham or the M60.TBH the 60MPH 'vision' is meaningless without context.
The recent planning circular DfT 02/2013 mentions impacts on the 'network' being 'severe' but no definition of severe is given as it will be 'on a case by case basis' i see the same happening with the 60MPH network, the figures will be fiddled to suit each individual scenario.
It stinks but you will never get a straight answer as "it's playing politics"
Has it just appointed a new power crazed leader?
emmaT2014 said:
There is what appears to be 'crying-wolf' however the speed detection and limit setting is automatic for the vast majority of teh time. Manual control is resperved for traffic management and incidents as I understand it.
While it may appear that the limits are set for no good reason that is usually not the case.
When the system works it works well, the automated MIDAS system does what it can to keep traffic flowing, it uses the loops in the roads to detect the speed of the traffic and uses its programme to set the VSL further back.While it may appear that the limits are set for no good reason that is usually not the case.
It's not set up to catch people out at all.
It has many problems, some of what you mention, and it seems to be getting worse!!!
The loops detect slow moving heavy loads or ones with multiple wheels and gets confused and lowers the limit and chucks out the Queue ahead boards as it beloved that traffic is bunching up and tries to rectify it by slowing the traffic behind, I have seen this many times as the system follows the load around the M'way.
Then there is roadworks, as approaching and the TM crew are setting up you'll have restrictions in place some way out getting people to move over and reducing the speeds, this I agree with for roadworker safety and the fact you get big queues all squeezing through the remains lanes - HOWEVER once the cones and signs are out and the traffic has died down CLEAR the signals!!! It seems at the moment they are left on, sometimes even after the crews have packed up and left 😡
Stuck VSL signs and matrix, there is a couple of these around my way at the mo, and belive it or not there is no kill switch to remove the signals?!?
So all in all its a good system going bad, it's losing battle with the HA!! But I don't think you need a tin foil hat that it's targetting you or that it's just cause they are trying to make money!!
mybrainhurts said:
Highways Agency has just notched up from irritatingly incompetent and inconsequential to patronisingly bloody annoyingly authoritarian.
Has it just appointed a new power crazed leader?
Non exec Chairman Colin Matthews ?Has it just appointed a new power crazed leader?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-chairman-of...
He did the usual round the office tour.
I suppose he needs to get to know 'the business' or maybe not
emmaT2014 said:
There is what appears to be 'crying-wolf' however the speed detection and limit setting is automatic for the vast majority of teh time. Manual control is resperved for traffic management and incidents as I understand it.
While it may appear that the limits are set for no good reason that is usually not the case.
Close to 11pm on a clear (~1 car every 200yds) M42 where the limits were yo-yo'ing?!? What's the programming reason for that?While it may appear that the limits are set for no good reason that is usually not the case.
Because that was a real ball-ache after a long flight home from holiday, to have to (a) not get frustrated at the sheer ridiculousness of it when we just wanted to get home and to bed; and (b) keep concentrating on the overhead signs changing every-other gantry and slowing/accelerating accordingly, rather than concentrating on the more important aspects of driving at night...
speedyguy said:
Non exec Chairman Colin Matthews ?
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-chairman-of...
He did the usual round the office tour.
I suppose he needs to get to know 'the business' or maybe not
Oh Christ, I remember him well. Harry the Hatchet.https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-chairman-of...
He did the usual round the office tour.
I suppose he needs to get to know 'the business' or maybe not
mygoldfishbowl said:
emmaT2014 said:
Well I'm not confusing them, HADECS2, HADECS2.5 and HADECS3 can all enforce the 70mph speed limit and often do.
No they don't. What they do is enforce higher than 70 in a nsl, they don't enforce 70.Landshark said:
emmaT2014 said:
There is what appears to be 'crying-wolf' however the speed detection and limit setting is automatic for the vast majority of teh time. Manual control is resperved for traffic management and incidents as I understand it.
While it may appear that the limits are set for no good reason that is usually not the case.
When the system works it works well, the automated MIDAS system does what it can to keep traffic flowing, it uses the loops in the roads to detect the speed of the traffic and uses its programme to set the VSL further back.While it may appear that the limits are set for no good reason that is usually not the case.
It's not set up to catch people out at all.
It has many problems, some of what you mention, and it seems to be getting worse!!!
The loops detect slow moving heavy loads or ones with multiple wheels and gets confused and lowers the limit and chucks out the Queue ahead boards as it beloved that traffic is bunching up and tries to rectify it by slowing the traffic behind, I have seen this many times as the system follows the load around the M'way.
Then there is roadworks, as approaching and the TM crew are setting up you'll have restrictions in place some way out getting people to move over and reducing the speeds, this I agree with for roadworker safety and the fact you get big queues all squeezing through the remains lanes - HOWEVER once the cones and signs are out and the traffic has died down CLEAR the signals!!! It seems at the moment they are left on, sometimes even after the crews have packed up and left ??
Stuck VSL signs and matrix, there is a couple of these around my way at the mo, and belive it or not there is no kill switch to remove the signals?!?
So all in all its a good system going bad, it's losing battle with the HA!! But I don't think you need a tin foil hat that it's targetting you or that it's just cause they are trying to make money!!
If the system works reliably I don't see why it couldn't allow limits higher than 70mph at quiet times. This was proposed, 80mph limits were to be trialled on smart motorways. The system would be capable of warning motorists of traffic building up ahead and other dangers and slow them down well in advance. It would be a safer system than people exceeding 70mph on an ordinary motorway. Whatever you say about the status quo and enforcing thresholds, the status quo has always been that people often can and do drive at around 80mph and the police don't bother about it so long as they aren't doing something stupid like tailgating along with it. The idea behind the 80mph limit was to bring safe drivers who weren't causing a problem within the law rather than having lots of ordinary people doing something harmless outside the law. That's how law should work, if a majority of people break a law without it causing a problem the law needs to be addressed to see if it needs modification. We see it in many areas of law, reclassification of drugs being another example. Suddenly filling the motorways with speed cameras enforcing the 70mph limit may stir things up as, in a way, it's a lowering of the limit in many people's minds. There's no confusion between whether we object to enforcement or the limit. If we're to have stricter enforcement it simply needs to be for a limit people see the need for, whether it's an NSL or a limit reduced for a particular situation.
I'm aware of noise and emissions arguments but noise has more to do with road surface and sound deadening through things like trees along the edge of the motorway. I live within audible distance of a motorway and it seems louder when there's a mass of slow traffic than when there's a lower amount of faster traffic. Emissions are tackled through vehicle design and maintenance.
Earlier I said:
emmaT2014 said:
While it may appear that the limits are set for no good reason that is usually not the case.
Your faith is touching, but complete b
ks....current swathes of limit reductions are down to new guidelines from the Commons Transport Select Committee under Gwyneth Dunwoody. If you read the minutes of all meetings leading up to the setting of theses guidelines, you'll see the utter tripe that was offered up to the Committee, by way of oral and written evidence, from the likes of BRAKE, Brunstrom, the Pedestrians' Association, the Council for the Preservation of Rural England, Ramblers and many more incompetents. The views of a handful of people who knew what they were talking about were ignored and ignorance triumphed.That's why the majority of limits are set today.
Are you a lady trucker or do you work in the camera industry or transport related civil service?
Do the people who are defending, and/or advocating the use of stringent enforcement, be it by camera, patrol car, what have you, really believe in the position they're taking here? If so, given the tenaciousness of your stance, the assumption must be that you drive at no more than the legal limit at all times, whatever the circumstances? Please confirm.
Heaveho said:
Do the people who are defending, and/or advocating the use of stringent enforcement, be it by camera, patrol car, what have you, really believe in the position they're taking here? If so, given the tenaciousness of your stance, the assumption must be that you drive at no more than the legal limit at all times, whatever the circumstances? Please confirm.
Why would you assume that?It is possible to see a societal value & reasonableness (greater good) behind something, whilst (for totally selfish reasons) not binding yourself strictly to it.
I would imagine that many people for instance support the principle of speed limits & believe it is entirely reasonable for a government to seek to limit people's speeds, whilst at the same time admitting that they don't strictly adhere to speed limits 100% of the time. They are the sort of people who will think it fair enough that they receive sanction if caught.
vonhosen said:
Heaveho said:
Do the people who are defending, and/or advocating the use of stringent enforcement, be it by camera, patrol car, what have you, really believe in the position they're taking here? If so, given the tenaciousness of your stance, the assumption must be that you drive at no more than the legal limit at all times, whatever the circumstances? Please confirm.
Why would you assume that?It is possible to see a societal value & reasonableness (greater good) behind something, whilst (for totally selfish reasons) not binding yourself strictly to it.
I would imagine that many people for instance support the principle of speed limits & believe it is entirely reasonable for a government to seek to limit people's speeds, whilst at the same time admitting that they don't strictly adhere to speed limits 100% of the time. They are the sort of people who will think it fair enough that they receive sanction if caught.
jm doc said:
vonhosen said:
Heaveho said:
Do the people who are defending, and/or advocating the use of stringent enforcement, be it by camera, patrol car, what have you, really believe in the position they're taking here? If so, given the tenaciousness of your stance, the assumption must be that you drive at no more than the legal limit at all times, whatever the circumstances? Please confirm.
Why would you assume that?It is possible to see a societal value & reasonableness (greater good) behind something, whilst (for totally selfish reasons) not binding yourself strictly to it.
I would imagine that many people for instance support the principle of speed limits & believe it is entirely reasonable for a government to seek to limit people's speeds, whilst at the same time admitting that they don't strictly adhere to speed limits 100% of the time. They are the sort of people who will think it fair enough that they receive sanction if caught.
Not, it's OK for them to prosecute you & me.
Hypocrisy would be criticising you for doing something I do.
Hypocrisy wouldn't be supporting a governments rights/reasons to prosecute you & me for doing something that you & I do.
Edited by vonhosen on Monday 19th January 21:36
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff