RAC want speed trackers.........
Discussion
www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1472996,00.html
In-car spy best to curb speeding drivers
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
DRIVERS who persistently break the speed limit should be forced to fit electronic tracking devices to their cars that would detect speeding, the RAC says in a report published today.
More than 15 million drivers, 55 per cent of all those with licences, break the limit on most days, according to a survey by the motoring group. The RAC has broken ranks with other motoring organisations by calling for tough action to tackle what it calls a “speeding epidemic”.
It says that speed cameras are an insufficient deterrent because too many drivers simply slow down for 100 yards and then accelerate again beyond the limit.
In its annual Report on Motoring, the RAC proposes that “repeat or serious offenders” should be compelled to fit black boxes to their cars. The boxes could be used as an alternative to a driving ban for motorists who had accumulated four speeding penalties.
Several companies have developed black boxes that contain satellite tracking systems that can check a car’s speed constantly against the local limit and record the information. Data would be downloaded by police at regular intervals to check the driver’s behaviour.
Similar boxes are due to be installed on more than 400,000 lorries by 2008 under the Government’s plan to introduce a satellite-based charging system for each mile driven.
Norwich Union has also begun to fit black boxes to policyholders’ cars in return for cheaper premiums.
The RAC report, which involved in-depth interviews with more than 1,000 drivers, concludes: “Few motorists consider that the current regime will make them stick to the speed limit as a matter of course; our more fervent speeders would respond to more traffic police or a ‘big brother’ system where their movements are monitored by an in-car electronic device.” More than 60 per cent of habitual speeders questioned in the survey said they would obey the limit if they had a black box fitted.
An RAC spokeswoman said: “More than 30,000 drivers lose their licences each year after getting a fourth three-point speeding penalty. A black box could be an alternative to a ban, which can cost people their livelihoods.”
The report also suggests that habitual speeders should have to display their penalty points on their windscreen.
Road safety officials at the Department for Transport believe that black boxes could significantly reduce the number of fatal crashes, a third of which are partly caused speeding. Ministers have been reluctant to order trials for fear of alienating the motoring vote, but the RAC’s support may encourage the Government to consider adding them to the penalties available to the courts.
Nine out of ten drivers in the RAC survey said that they would find it difficult to adjust their lifestyles to being carless, but almost half agreed that “all the fun has gone out of motoring” because of congestion and overzealous traffic wardens.
More mobile camera sites
The number of mobile speed camera sites on Britain’s roads has soared by more than a third in a year. The mobile units, which have less stringent rules on where they can be placed, are often favoured over fixed cameras, Cyclops, the supplier, said.
Sites for mobile cameras must have seen at least two fatal or serious injury crashes per kilometre within a 36-month period. Fixed camera sites must record at least four such accidents.
In-car spy best to curb speeding drivers
By Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
DRIVERS who persistently break the speed limit should be forced to fit electronic tracking devices to their cars that would detect speeding, the RAC says in a report published today.
More than 15 million drivers, 55 per cent of all those with licences, break the limit on most days, according to a survey by the motoring group. The RAC has broken ranks with other motoring organisations by calling for tough action to tackle what it calls a “speeding epidemic”.
It says that speed cameras are an insufficient deterrent because too many drivers simply slow down for 100 yards and then accelerate again beyond the limit.
In its annual Report on Motoring, the RAC proposes that “repeat or serious offenders” should be compelled to fit black boxes to their cars. The boxes could be used as an alternative to a driving ban for motorists who had accumulated four speeding penalties.
Several companies have developed black boxes that contain satellite tracking systems that can check a car’s speed constantly against the local limit and record the information. Data would be downloaded by police at regular intervals to check the driver’s behaviour.
Similar boxes are due to be installed on more than 400,000 lorries by 2008 under the Government’s plan to introduce a satellite-based charging system for each mile driven.
Norwich Union has also begun to fit black boxes to policyholders’ cars in return for cheaper premiums.
The RAC report, which involved in-depth interviews with more than 1,000 drivers, concludes: “Few motorists consider that the current regime will make them stick to the speed limit as a matter of course; our more fervent speeders would respond to more traffic police or a ‘big brother’ system where their movements are monitored by an in-car electronic device.” More than 60 per cent of habitual speeders questioned in the survey said they would obey the limit if they had a black box fitted.
An RAC spokeswoman said: “More than 30,000 drivers lose their licences each year after getting a fourth three-point speeding penalty. A black box could be an alternative to a ban, which can cost people their livelihoods.”
The report also suggests that habitual speeders should have to display their penalty points on their windscreen.
Road safety officials at the Department for Transport believe that black boxes could significantly reduce the number of fatal crashes, a third of which are partly caused speeding. Ministers have been reluctant to order trials for fear of alienating the motoring vote, but the RAC’s support may encourage the Government to consider adding them to the penalties available to the courts.
Nine out of ten drivers in the RAC survey said that they would find it difficult to adjust their lifestyles to being carless, but almost half agreed that “all the fun has gone out of motoring” because of congestion and overzealous traffic wardens.
More mobile camera sites
The number of mobile speed camera sites on Britain’s roads has soared by more than a third in a year. The mobile units, which have less stringent rules on where they can be placed, are often favoured over fixed cameras, Cyclops, the supplier, said.
Sites for mobile cameras must have seen at least two fatal or serious injury crashes per kilometre within a 36-month period. Fixed camera sites must record at least four such accidents.
Have the RAC noticed the true cause of most accidents or the fact that the numbers because of excess speed as a cause is vanishingly small?
I'm begining to think not.
I'm also beginning to think that the RAC is becoming at best schizophrenic.
Here are some RAC foundation findings:
There is an increased accident risk among unlicensed and disqualified drivers. They are between three and nine times more likely to be involved in accidents than lawful drivers.
Uninsured drivers are up to nine times more likely to be involved in an accident
Uninsured drivers are more likely to be involved in hit and run collisions.
Uninsured drivers now account for five per cent of motorists. These drivers cause more accidents and are more likely to be involved in other serious crimes than insured drivers.
Carelessness by drivers who overfill their diesel tanks contributed to some of the six thousand deaths and serious injuries among bikers in the UK last year - but simple caution could reduce that number of casualties dramatically.
Figures for 2003 show that 360 bikers and their pillion passengers were killed compared with 288 in 2002. While a number of factors could have contributed to these deaths, hazardous diesel spills on the road are consistently brought up as cause of motorcycle accidents.
New figures reveal that more than seven out of ten of young adult pedestrians (aged between 16 -34) killed on the UK’s roads and included in the study had been drinking.
And the incidence of pedestrian fatalities with more than two and a half times the legal limit of alcohol for drivers in their systems has risen by 50 per cent in the past 15 years.
(Dec ’04) over half the drivers killed in road accidents in one police force area had illegal drugs in their systems, and young drivers are twice as likely to have been driven by someone high on illicit drugs rather than over the drink drive limit.
The DfT says more than one-fifth of motorway collisions are caused by drivers falling asleep at the wheel and up to one in ten crashes on all of Britain's roads – around 23,000 a year – are also linked to fatigue.
Does excess speed feature highly or the need for speed control? In a word, NO.
So why are the RAC coming out with this drivel?
I'm begining to think not.
I'm also beginning to think that the RAC is becoming at best schizophrenic.
Here are some RAC foundation findings:
There is an increased accident risk among unlicensed and disqualified drivers. They are between three and nine times more likely to be involved in accidents than lawful drivers.
Uninsured drivers are up to nine times more likely to be involved in an accident
Uninsured drivers are more likely to be involved in hit and run collisions.
Uninsured drivers now account for five per cent of motorists. These drivers cause more accidents and are more likely to be involved in other serious crimes than insured drivers.
Carelessness by drivers who overfill their diesel tanks contributed to some of the six thousand deaths and serious injuries among bikers in the UK last year - but simple caution could reduce that number of casualties dramatically.
Figures for 2003 show that 360 bikers and their pillion passengers were killed compared with 288 in 2002. While a number of factors could have contributed to these deaths, hazardous diesel spills on the road are consistently brought up as cause of motorcycle accidents.
New figures reveal that more than seven out of ten of young adult pedestrians (aged between 16 -34) killed on the UK’s roads and included in the study had been drinking.
And the incidence of pedestrian fatalities with more than two and a half times the legal limit of alcohol for drivers in their systems has risen by 50 per cent in the past 15 years.
(Dec ’04) over half the drivers killed in road accidents in one police force area had illegal drugs in their systems, and young drivers are twice as likely to have been driven by someone high on illicit drugs rather than over the drink drive limit.
The DfT says more than one-fifth of motorway collisions are caused by drivers falling asleep at the wheel and up to one in ten crashes on all of Britain's roads – around 23,000 a year – are also linked to fatigue.
Does excess speed feature highly or the need for speed control? In a word, NO.
So why are the RAC coming out with this drivel?
Just imagine though, all these black boxes on the roads, POLICE checking the results and cross-referencing them to see if they are still speeding.
So we have even more of the under-staffed police sitting checking up on drivers who speed all the time anyway (albeit by a small 5% margin lets say), and further still, dickhead drivers who go stupidly fast or drive like loons are even LESS likely to get caught because police are busy watching computer screens checking up on average joe, not out on the road!
And after all that, is a black box REALLY going to stop people dying on our roads. They are flogging a dead horse...
Doing even more to try prevent speeding WON'T increase safety, it undermines the real causes of accidents even more... like said above, fatigue, sleep and just generally pissing about with radio, phone, hair kinda stuff, not paying attention basically.
Bit off topic...
Personally, I'd like a black box in my car, but it only stores information for like 30 seconds or so, and then dumps old data. If you don't crash or cause an accident, then why record it... ok, you may speed day to day a bit now and again, but if it doesn't cause a problem, who cares? Clearly everyone does it, and it's hardly ever a problem...
However, having been in a crash, and having had family involved in a few, it would be nice to have the data there, to prove what happened just before an accident. Some people get let off for what was their fault, or manage to wangle their charge to driving without due care when they were clearly being a loony...
Haivng data there for "accident analysis" ONLY would be nice. And it could be usefull to prove WITHOUT DOUBT, that most accidents are not speed related at all, and other factors are clearly at play!
Hmmmm
Dave
So we have even more of the under-staffed police sitting checking up on drivers who speed all the time anyway (albeit by a small 5% margin lets say), and further still, dickhead drivers who go stupidly fast or drive like loons are even LESS likely to get caught because police are busy watching computer screens checking up on average joe, not out on the road!
And after all that, is a black box REALLY going to stop people dying on our roads. They are flogging a dead horse...
Doing even more to try prevent speeding WON'T increase safety, it undermines the real causes of accidents even more... like said above, fatigue, sleep and just generally pissing about with radio, phone, hair kinda stuff, not paying attention basically.
Bit off topic...
Personally, I'd like a black box in my car, but it only stores information for like 30 seconds or so, and then dumps old data. If you don't crash or cause an accident, then why record it... ok, you may speed day to day a bit now and again, but if it doesn't cause a problem, who cares? Clearly everyone does it, and it's hardly ever a problem...
However, having been in a crash, and having had family involved in a few, it would be nice to have the data there, to prove what happened just before an accident. Some people get let off for what was their fault, or manage to wangle their charge to driving without due care when they were clearly being a loony...
Haivng data there for "accident analysis" ONLY would be nice. And it could be usefull to prove WITHOUT DOUBT, that most accidents are not speed related at all, and other factors are clearly at play!
Hmmmm
Dave
nonegreen said:
Just imagine all these black boxes sitting on driveways with a power supply connected and not a car in sight. Are these muppets born stupid or have they had their brains removed?
Ah, but if the usual spinmasters can convince (confuse?) the grey teeth grinders that they are a good thing, then that will be all that matters.
It's all about looking like you're doing the right thing and damn the truth.
I dont understand why organisations such as the RAC or the AA come to that feel they can actually comment on any of these issues anyway.
Decades ago, they were motoring organisations representing the motorist. Today they are breakdown insurance, that is all. You pay a premium, and if you breakdown, they help.
My car insurer doesnt comment, nor does my home insurer. Breakdown insurers shouldnt either.
Its like Cadburys or Sainsburys taking a view, they should keep it out.
Decades ago, they were motoring organisations representing the motorist. Today they are breakdown insurance, that is all. You pay a premium, and if you breakdown, they help.
My car insurer doesnt comment, nor does my home insurer. Breakdown insurers shouldnt either.
Its like Cadburys or Sainsburys taking a view, they should keep it out.
Balmoral Green said:
I dont understand why organisations such as the RAC or the AA come to that feel they can actually comment on any of these issues anyway.
Decades ago, they were motoring organisations representing the motorist. Today they are breakdown insurance, that is all. You pay a premium, and if you breakdown, they help.
My car insurer doesnt comment, nor does my home insurer. Breakdown insurers shouldnt either.
Its like Cadburys or Sainsburys taking a view, they should keep it out.
Yes and the AA (maybe the RAC also) used to warn motorists of bobby ahead armed with stopwatch.
But that was a long time ago.
Now, they've lost their way and just become too political and marketing-based, seemingly wanting only to brown-nose to the Labour government / camera partnerships and subscribe to their spin. Sad.
Just listened to an interview between AA 's Andrew Howard undthe good Captain G on Johnny Walkr's show.
AA thought the RAC report "interesting" but conceded that speeding ist still at same levels as 5 years ago -but that we might be more speed aware now than 5 years ago He acknowledged thataccidents have reduced from 8,000 in 1966 to 3,500 in 2003.
But we have a lot of other reasons to explain this ... seat belts, better engineered cars, some better made roads...
Und on the m/way he siad that 80 mph would be interpreted at 90 mph.
Ist simple - you do as Italy did - und have some sections at 90 mph =und make clear that you allow the perk in return for good behaviour on the other stretched. You also have mtraix showing clearly limit for 70 mph in wet und higher speed limit elsewhere
Ach! have forgotten - they have not got the discipline to use the matrices properly und accurately!
When asked about the speed cam - Andrew Howard of AA carefully said that the KSIs have been UP in recent years but blamed motorcyclists for this. Und also said very carefully that statisticians claim the scams save 100 lives per year.
But this ist regression to mean - nicht? Und it does not prove which scma site saved these 100 lives und we have over 5,000 static scams und Gott only knows how many mobiles und talivans on bridges.... Ist not a convincing statistic really ....gelt?
Und dann the Good Captain - he came across well. Called
RAC "Republicans against Cars" 
und described exactly where we should see scams und don't - like in those nice responsible places on urban roads, near crossings, ped zones,....und described very accurately wehre we do see them - on safe straights, by speed limit changes, on m/way bridges... und threw the police stats back - 30% decrease in careless und dangerous driving.
The only reason why we are seeing this apparent improvement ist because we have no cops around to spot it! Not that standards are better - if they were better - we would have few accidents. Bad driving und error causes accident in first place
Good Captain pointed out the whilst careless driving figures are showing we are getting better at driving - speeding fines are up. He also mentioned that the demise of Hendon ist compromising police driver expertise most negatively. Und pointed out thatpolice have killed significant number of 2003 KSIs - und these are poorly trained pretzels in Pandas und not our elite such as Dibble, gone, Strassen:cop und Freunde.
As for the black box ... ist violation of human rights. Intrusive tracking. It can cuase no end of problems. Ist not a case of "nothing to hide". Governemnts change und in hands of less benign government ist dangerous.
Andrew Howard mentioned the breathlyser gizmo in USA whereby you puff into it und if you are drunk = your car does not start.
Ist in theory a good idea - but person has to blow into this every so often or car conks out.
if you are at 70 mph und overtaking HGV mit limiter on m/way ...
What if the gizmo ist programmed to do likewise the minute you travel 1 mph above the speed limit - und how does it cope mit variables ....
They really are mad .....
AA thought the RAC report "interesting" but conceded that speeding ist still at same levels as 5 years ago -but that we might be more speed aware now than 5 years ago He acknowledged thataccidents have reduced from 8,000 in 1966 to 3,500 in 2003.
But we have a lot of other reasons to explain this ... seat belts, better engineered cars, some better made roads...
Und on the m/way he siad that 80 mph would be interpreted at 90 mph.
Ist simple - you do as Italy did - und have some sections at 90 mph =und make clear that you allow the perk in return for good behaviour on the other stretched. You also have mtraix showing clearly limit for 70 mph in wet und higher speed limit elsewhere Ach! have forgotten - they have not got the discipline to use the matrices properly und accurately!
When asked about the speed cam - Andrew Howard of AA carefully said that the KSIs have been UP in recent years but blamed motorcyclists for this. Und also said very carefully that statisticians claim the scams save 100 lives per year.
But this ist regression to mean - nicht? Und it does not prove which scma site saved these 100 lives und we have over 5,000 static scams und Gott only knows how many mobiles und talivans on bridges.... Ist not a convincing statistic really ....gelt?
Und dann the Good Captain - he came across well. Called
RAC "Republicans against Cars" und described exactly where we should see scams und don't - like in those nice responsible places on urban roads, near crossings, ped zones,....und described very accurately wehre we do see them - on safe straights, by speed limit changes, on m/way bridges... und threw the police stats back - 30% decrease in careless und dangerous driving. The only reason why we are seeing this apparent improvement ist because we have no cops around to spot it! Not that standards are better - if they were better - we would have few accidents. Bad driving und error causes accident in first place
Good Captain pointed out the whilst careless driving figures are showing we are getting better at driving - speeding fines are up. He also mentioned that the demise of Hendon ist compromising police driver expertise most negatively. Und pointed out thatpolice have killed significant number of 2003 KSIs - und these are poorly trained pretzels in Pandas und not our elite such as Dibble, gone, Strassen:cop und Freunde.
As for the black box ... ist violation of human rights. Intrusive tracking. It can cuase no end of problems. Ist not a case of "nothing to hide". Governemnts change und in hands of less benign government ist dangerous.
Andrew Howard mentioned the breathlyser gizmo in USA whereby you puff into it und if you are drunk = your car does not start.
Ist in theory a good idea - but person has to blow into this every so often or car conks out.
if you are at 70 mph und overtaking HGV mit limiter on m/way ... What if the gizmo ist programmed to do likewise the minute you travel 1 mph above the speed limit - und how does it cope mit variables ....
They really are mad .....
I wonder if the RAC have some self interest in all this....?
Having some inside knowledge on the "new" technology & the RAC being a possible supplier to the masses of it I can see what they are thinking ££££££££'s
This is a typical data log from one of "those devices", information has been adjusted to protect the innocent
however the data tables can be requested to include: mph over the posted limit, no of times limit exceeded, % of time limit exceeded etc etc. Mind you handy if your car gets nicked 
Driver -
Vehicle K**** (soon to be out the country at this rate!)
Started somewhere in Dorset 07:59:20 (BST) on 05/Feb/2005
Ended A359, SPARKFORD at 08:21:50 (BST) on 05/Feb/2005
Journey Type Personal
Total Distance 17.5 Miles
Maximum Speed 102.5 Mph
Total Duration 22 minutes, 30 seconds
Total Driving Time 22 minutes, 30 seconds
Total Idle Time 0 seconds
Date Time Street Town Max Speed [Mph] Duration [hrs:mins:secs] Alerts
05/Feb/2005 07:59:20 Ignition On
05/Feb/2005 07:59:20 Somewhere in Dorset 0.0 00:01:12
05/Feb/2005 08:00:34 B Road in Dorset 38.9 00:01:07
05/Feb/2005 08:01:43 B Road in Dorset 45.6 00:01:37
05/Feb/2005 08:03:20 B Road in Dorset 6.9 00:03:02
05/Feb/2005 08:06:22 B Road in Dorset 38.3 00:01:00
05/Feb/2005 08:07:22 B Road in Dorset 44.5 00:01:01
05/Feb/2005 08:08:23 B Road in Dorset 65.1 00:04:41
05/Feb/2005 08:13:04 a test track in dorset 102.5 00:08:25
05/Feb/2005 08:21:29 A359 SPARKFORD 21.9 00:00:21
05/Feb/2005 08:21:50 Ignition Off
>> Edited by cptsideways on Monday 7th February 19:09
Having some inside knowledge on the "new" technology & the RAC being a possible supplier to the masses of it I can see what they are thinking ££££££££'s
This is a typical data log from one of "those devices", information has been adjusted to protect the innocent
however the data tables can be requested to include: mph over the posted limit, no of times limit exceeded, % of time limit exceeded etc etc. Mind you handy if your car gets nicked Driver -
Vehicle K**** (soon to be out the country at this rate!)
Started somewhere in Dorset 07:59:20 (BST) on 05/Feb/2005
Ended A359, SPARKFORD at 08:21:50 (BST) on 05/Feb/2005
Journey Type Personal
Total Distance 17.5 Miles
Maximum Speed 102.5 Mph
Total Duration 22 minutes, 30 seconds
Total Driving Time 22 minutes, 30 seconds
Total Idle Time 0 seconds
Date Time Street Town Max Speed [Mph] Duration [hrs:mins:secs] Alerts
05/Feb/2005 07:59:20 Ignition On
05/Feb/2005 07:59:20 Somewhere in Dorset 0.0 00:01:12
05/Feb/2005 08:00:34 B Road in Dorset 38.9 00:01:07
05/Feb/2005 08:01:43 B Road in Dorset 45.6 00:01:37
05/Feb/2005 08:03:20 B Road in Dorset 6.9 00:03:02
05/Feb/2005 08:06:22 B Road in Dorset 38.3 00:01:00
05/Feb/2005 08:07:22 B Road in Dorset 44.5 00:01:01
05/Feb/2005 08:08:23 B Road in Dorset 65.1 00:04:41
05/Feb/2005 08:13:04 a test track in dorset 102.5 00:08:25
05/Feb/2005 08:21:29 A359 SPARKFORD 21.9 00:00:21
05/Feb/2005 08:21:50 Ignition Off
>> Edited by cptsideways on Monday 7th February 19:09
Mr Whippy said:
Personally, I'd like a black box in my car, but it only stores information for like 30 seconds or so, and then dumps old data.....Having data there for "accident analysis" ONLY would be nice. And it could be useful to prove WITHOUT DOUBT, that most accidents are not speed related at all, and other factors are clearly at play!
Hmmmm
Dave
Nice! I like it. So we know why it won't happen, don't we.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff