HADECS 3 cameras on the M25
Discussion
drf765 said:
I can't think of one reason why the NSL on a motorway wouldn't be enforced.
How about; given a limited amount of resources to reduce KSIs where would you be best deploying the technology? A: Not on motorways, which are the safest roads, but at junctions on fast A roads, outside schools etc. Target the areas where you are most likely to improve safety first. Proves to me its about the easy money, not saving lives.speedking31 said:
drf765 said:
I can't think of one reason why the NSL on a motorway wouldn't be enforced.
How about; given a limited amount of resources to reduce KSIs where would you be best deploying the technology? A: Not on motorways, which are the safest roads, but at junctions on fast A roads, outside schools etc. Target the areas where you are most likely to improve safety first. Proves to me its about the easy money, not saving lives.In placing those cameras on the motorway would it be acceptable to ignore drivers who routinely exceed the NSL on the motorway? No because the cameras are there, the law stating that limit exists and it undermines the purpose of the camera if certain laws and limits are ignored; in this case ignoring the NSL is the cause of a lot of the slowing of traffic that necessitates the HADECS system in the first place.
If all of the motorway was enforced permanently would there be a need for variable limits? Maybe not, who can tell.
If the NSL was never or seldom enforced or only enforced at a few sites then some drivers choose to drive at 150mph or thereabouts; now is that acceptable, coz that's what'll happen, and it does. People who have done that have published the consequences on the internet.
I don't believe turning the other cheek for some selected limits that have permanently deployed enforcement systems is justifiable and socially acceptable.
Easy money? I'm not sure how much the motorway systems cost but I wouldn't say it is a small amount; looking at a rough cost I would say it is going to take more years to pay for than the systems will be deployed for.
Edited by drf765 on Friday 4th November 09:47
drf765 said:
speedking31 said:
drf765 said:
I can't think of one reason why the NSL on a motorway wouldn't be enforced.
How about; given a limited amount of resources to reduce KSIs where would you be best deploying the technology? A: Not on motorways, which are the safest roads, but at junctions on fast A roads, outside schools etc. Target the areas where you are most likely to improve safety first. Proves to me its about the easy money, not saving lives."Smart" motorways are about a cheap way of increasing capacity* and a stealth-introduction of automated speed enforcement across the network, contrary to the promises of the previous Conservative government.
* So we can waste >£50 billion (!!!) on HS3, or whatever the latest pork-barrel project is.
havoc said:
drf765 said:
speedking31 said:
drf765 said:
I can't think of one reason why the NSL on a motorway wouldn't be enforced.
How about; given a limited amount of resources to reduce KSIs where would you be best deploying the technology? A: Not on motorways, which are the safest roads, but at junctions on fast A roads, outside schools etc. Target the areas where you are most likely to improve safety first. Proves to me its about the easy money, not saving lives."Smart" motorways are about a cheap way of increasing capacity* and a stealth-introduction of automated speed enforcement across the network, contrary to the promises of the previous Conservative government.
* So we can waste >£50 billion (!!!) on HS3, or whatever the latest pork-barrel project is.
Smart motorways sure are a cheaper way of increasing capacity compared with building a new road or making motorways significantly wider. Well spotted.
Have you just come from Mars or something?
drf765 said:
The motorway systems are designed and deployed to manage the flow of traffic. They do that by regulating the speed of most drivers when speed differential and traffic volume combine to cause congestion and slows the traffic down unacceptably. The cameras work very well in doing that. Witness the M42 10-20 years ago to now, vastly improved.
In placing those cameras on the motorway would it be acceptable to ignore drivers who routinely exceed the NSL on the motorway? No because the cameras are there, the law stating that limit exists and it undermines the purpose of the camera if certain laws and limits are ignored; in this case ignoring the NSL is the cause of a lot of the slowing of traffic that necessitates the HADECS system in the first place.
If all of the motorway was enforced permanently would there be a need for variable limits? Maybe not, who can tell.
If the NSL was never or seldom enforced or only enforced at a few sites then some drivers choose to drive at 150mph or thereabouts; now is that acceptable, coz that's what'll happen, and it does. People who have done that have published the consequences on the internet.
I don't believe turning the other cheek for some selected limits that have permanently deployed enforcement systems is justifiable and socially acceptable.
Easy money? I'm not sure how much the motorway systems cost but I wouldn't say it is a small amount; looking at a rough cost I would say it is going to take more years to pay for than the systems will be deployed for.
I'd challenge the assertion that they work very well for easing congestion and not slowing down traffic. In placing those cameras on the motorway would it be acceptable to ignore drivers who routinely exceed the NSL on the motorway? No because the cameras are there, the law stating that limit exists and it undermines the purpose of the camera if certain laws and limits are ignored; in this case ignoring the NSL is the cause of a lot of the slowing of traffic that necessitates the HADECS system in the first place.
If all of the motorway was enforced permanently would there be a need for variable limits? Maybe not, who can tell.
If the NSL was never or seldom enforced or only enforced at a few sites then some drivers choose to drive at 150mph or thereabouts; now is that acceptable, coz that's what'll happen, and it does. People who have done that have published the consequences on the internet.
I don't believe turning the other cheek for some selected limits that have permanently deployed enforcement systems is justifiable and socially acceptable.
Easy money? I'm not sure how much the motorway systems cost but I wouldn't say it is a small amount; looking at a rough cost I would say it is going to take more years to pay for than the systems will be deployed for.
Edited by drf765 on Friday 4th November 09:47
a) if that were the case why is the M25 near M40/M4/M3 always congested?
b) vast majority of drivers pay no attention to VSL unless there is a camera on the gantry.
c) more often than not the VSL is in place when there is no traffic, no incident, no animals in the road, no stranded vehicle etc etc.
If the signs were always accurate you would change the culture of ignoring them pretty quickly, but unless they are it will only be seen as revenue generation
MarcelM6 said:
drf765 said:
The motorway systems are designed and deployed to manage the flow of traffic. They do that by regulating the speed of most drivers when speed differential and traffic volume combine to cause congestion and slows the traffic down unacceptably. The cameras work very well in doing that. Witness the M42 10-20 years ago to now, vastly improved.
In placing those cameras on the motorway would it be acceptable to ignore drivers who routinely exceed the NSL on the motorway? No because the cameras are there, the law stating that limit exists and it undermines the purpose of the camera if certain laws and limits are ignored; in this case ignoring the NSL is the cause of a lot of the slowing of traffic that necessitates the HADECS system in the first place.
If all of the motorway was enforced permanently would there be a need for variable limits? Maybe not, who can tell.
If the NSL was never or seldom enforced or only enforced at a few sites then some drivers choose to drive at 150mph or thereabouts; now is that acceptable, coz that's what'll happen, and it does. People who have done that have published the consequences on the internet.
I don't believe turning the other cheek for some selected limits that have permanently deployed enforcement systems is justifiable and socially acceptable.
Easy money? I'm not sure how much the motorway systems cost but I wouldn't say it is a small amount; looking at a rough cost I would say it is going to take more years to pay for than the systems will be deployed for.
I'd challenge the assertion that they work very well for easing congestion and not slowing down traffic. In placing those cameras on the motorway would it be acceptable to ignore drivers who routinely exceed the NSL on the motorway? No because the cameras are there, the law stating that limit exists and it undermines the purpose of the camera if certain laws and limits are ignored; in this case ignoring the NSL is the cause of a lot of the slowing of traffic that necessitates the HADECS system in the first place.
If all of the motorway was enforced permanently would there be a need for variable limits? Maybe not, who can tell.
If the NSL was never or seldom enforced or only enforced at a few sites then some drivers choose to drive at 150mph or thereabouts; now is that acceptable, coz that's what'll happen, and it does. People who have done that have published the consequences on the internet.
I don't believe turning the other cheek for some selected limits that have permanently deployed enforcement systems is justifiable and socially acceptable.
Easy money? I'm not sure how much the motorway systems cost but I wouldn't say it is a small amount; looking at a rough cost I would say it is going to take more years to pay for than the systems will be deployed for.
Edited by drf765 on Friday 4th November 09:47
a) if that were the case why is the M25 near M40/M4/M3 always congested?
b) vast majority of drivers pay no attention to VSL unless there is a camera on the gantry.
The amount of a
holes who ignore the limits and the lane control don't help either. MarcelM6 said:
c) more often than not the VSL is in place when there is no traffic, no incident, no animals in the road, no stranded vehicle etc etc.
Well that simply isn't the case. Yes it happens but not most of the time and very often you think it is inappropriate after the congestion has cleared.MarcelM6 said:
If then signs were always accurate you would change the culture of ignoring them pretty quickly, but unless they are it will only be seen as revenue generation
If you simply observed the limit as signed the signs wouldn't come on as often and congestion would be less than it is.
i think this fella drf might be yet another reincarnation of that fool tapereel.agtlaw said:
Geekman said:
As I thought. I'm almost certain the cameras are set to trigger under NSL conditions at somewhere between 90-95MPH. Doesn't stop me slowing to 79 for them though 
Depending on the speed limit, I usually drive under the gantry at 78, 67, 56 or 45 (GPS indicated).
Oh well, the 2 week wait begins.
NiceCupOfTea said:
I've just been flashed at one around Westerham going anticlockwise at (according to my dashcam GPS) 83mph in an NSL. Nobody else around other than the car I was overtaking (so obviously going slower than me) so I assume it was for me. I'm assuming the flash fires twice in order to take a pic rather than "warn" and leave the pictures for 90+? That's what used to happen in the non-digital camera days IIRC.
Oh well, the 2 week wait begins.
That one has been flashing like that for over a week now, seems to be triggered by anything over 80. I have adjusted my speed to suit just in case when going through it but was with a friend a week or so ago, making progress and got flashed, he hasn't had anything back yet.Oh well, the 2 week wait begins.
drf765 said:
MarcelM6 said:
drf765 said:
The motorway systems are designed and deployed to manage the flow of traffic. They do that by regulating the speed of most drivers when speed differential and traffic volume combine to cause congestion and slows the traffic down unacceptably. The cameras work very well in doing that. Witness the M42 10-20 years ago to now, vastly improved.
In placing those cameras on the motorway would it be acceptable to ignore drivers who routinely exceed the NSL on the motorway? No because the cameras are there, the law stating that limit exists and it undermines the purpose of the camera if certain laws and limits are ignored; in this case ignoring the NSL is the cause of a lot of the slowing of traffic that necessitates the HADECS system in the first place.
If all of the motorway was enforced permanently would there be a need for variable limits? Maybe not, who can tell.
If the NSL was never or seldom enforced or only enforced at a few sites then some drivers choose to drive at 150mph or thereabouts; now is that acceptable, coz that's what'll happen, and it does. People who have done that have published the consequences on the internet.
I don't believe turning the other cheek for some selected limits that have permanently deployed enforcement systems is justifiable and socially acceptable.
Easy money? I'm not sure how much the motorway systems cost but I wouldn't say it is a small amount; looking at a rough cost I would say it is going to take more years to pay for than the systems will be deployed for.
I'd challenge the assertion that they work very well for easing congestion and not slowing down traffic. In placing those cameras on the motorway would it be acceptable to ignore drivers who routinely exceed the NSL on the motorway? No because the cameras are there, the law stating that limit exists and it undermines the purpose of the camera if certain laws and limits are ignored; in this case ignoring the NSL is the cause of a lot of the slowing of traffic that necessitates the HADECS system in the first place.
If all of the motorway was enforced permanently would there be a need for variable limits? Maybe not, who can tell.
If the NSL was never or seldom enforced or only enforced at a few sites then some drivers choose to drive at 150mph or thereabouts; now is that acceptable, coz that's what'll happen, and it does. People who have done that have published the consequences on the internet.
I don't believe turning the other cheek for some selected limits that have permanently deployed enforcement systems is justifiable and socially acceptable.
Easy money? I'm not sure how much the motorway systems cost but I wouldn't say it is a small amount; looking at a rough cost I would say it is going to take more years to pay for than the systems will be deployed for.
Edited by drf765 on Friday 4th November 09:47
a) if that were the case why is the M25 near M40/M4/M3 always congested?
b) vast majority of drivers pay no attention to VSL unless there is a camera on the gantry.
So what? Changing the rules of the argument.
The amount of a
holes who ignore the limits and the lane control don't help either. MarcelM6 said:
c) more often than not the VSL is in place when there is no traffic, no incident, no animals in the road, no stranded vehicle etc etc.
Well that simply isn't the case. Yes it happens but not most of the time and very often you think it is inappropriate after the congestion has cleared. ? Do you have access to the data that can prove this? I'm talking from personal experience based on what I have seen, so only my opinion, but....if you have data to prove me wrong please share.
MarcelM6 said:
If then signs were always accurate you would change the culture of ignoring them pretty quickly, but unless they are it will only be seen as revenue generation
If you simply observed the limit as signed the signs wouldn't come on as often and congestion would be less than it is.You're not selling it to me yet. Trying to make the argument that if we all drove slower we would ease congestion is fatally flawed. If it were true, then HGV's (limited to 58ish mph) would reduce congestion, not increase it. And in 10 yrs the NSL would be 10mph.
drf765 said:
agtlaw said:
For anyone who doesn't believe that the M25 HADECS system enforces a NSL, I'm now looking at the paperwork for M25 Epping Post 5563A. Speed limit: 70 mph. Court hearing pending.
I can't think of one reason why the NSL on a motorway wouldn't be enforced.TJM22 said:
NiceCupOfTea said:
I've just been flashed at one around Westerham going anticlockwise at (according to my dashcam GPS) 83mph in an NSL. Nobody else around other than the car I was overtaking (so obviously going slower than me) so I assume it was for me. I'm assuming the flash fires twice in order to take a pic rather than "warn" and leave the pictures for 90+? That's what used to happen in the non-digital camera days IIRC.
Oh well, the 2 week wait begins.
That one has been flashing like that for over a week now, seems to be triggered by anything over 80. I have adjusted my speed to suit just in case when going through it but was with a friend a week or so ago, making progress and got flashed, he hasn't had anything back yet.Oh well, the 2 week wait begins.
Swole said:
Well, after a considerable amount of time travelling all over the place for work, all HADECS3 camera's countrywide appear to be have been made yellow as required by end of October.
There goes your get-out clause
No they haven't.There goes your get-out clause
Some are yellow, some aren't, on the same section of motorway.
Anybody know why?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff