Monday 18th July 2005

UK's longest speed trap goes live

26 miles of A77 monitored in name of safety

---

Costs a fortune, easily avoided

Despite growing evidence that the simplicity of the Government's 'Speed Kills' message masks the complexities of reality and driver behaviour, the longest continuous speed trap in Britain is set to go live any time now. Sometime in the next two weeks, according to the Glasgow Herald, a series of cameras measuring average speeds on a 26-mile stretch of the A77 in Ayrshire will be switched on.

When driving on the stretch from north of Ayr to south of Girvan, drivers will be kept guessing whether the sector they are in is actually in use, and the first they will know about driving faster than the limit will be a statutory penalty notice landing on the doormat, bearing a payload of a £60 fine, three points on the licence -- and possibly higher insurance premiums.

The £775,000 system measures the time it takes a car to travel between various points and calculates its average speed. The first of its kind, the justification is that it will cut deaths on a stretch of road which has reportedly become one of Scotland's worst accident blackspots, with 20 deaths and 95 serious injuries between January 2000 and December 2004. we are told that slowing down will make the road safer.

However, Kevin Delaney, head of traffic and road safety for the RAC Foundation, said he supported the use of average speed cameras on roads where problems are spread over a wide area, but added: "We need to look at the underlying causes of accidents and ask whether there could be other factors, such as line of sight at junctions."

Cathy Jamieson, justice minister, who launched the 12-month pilot project yesterday, said: "Too many people have lost their lives or loved ones as a result of road accidents on the A77. That's why we are determined to do all we can to improve road safety along this stretch and prevent more deaths and serious injuries.

"My message to critics of this system is this - if it was your relative that was a victim, you would want everything possible done to improve the road. Any critics should imagine having to speak to families of these victims and hear how their lives have been devastated."

Meanwhile, an examination of the map shows a perfectly adequate network of A and B roads suitable for avoiding the stretch -- thus helping to cut the A77's accident rate. Wonder if that's what they intended?

[timmy30]

Great so they will artificially increase the transit time for drivers on that section of road with the result that as soon as they leave that zone they'll put the foot down and drive far faster to make up time that they would have in the first place.

Brilliant thinking that, just shift the accidents elsewhere and infact create hundreds of frustrated hence more agressive drivers outside the area.

Of course the idea of a system that spotted when someone was i) tailgating at speed ii) occupying the middle/ outer lane needlessly iii) using the left hand lane to overtake. Might have a better impact on safety than simply measuring the speed of the car wouldn't occur to them!

Why is it that driving in light traffic with 1 mile between you and the next car in front, at 85mph is considered less dangerous that driving perched 5ft off the rear bumper of the car in front at 70mph or for that matter undertaking at 70mph, failing to indicate at 70mph, driving in the incorrect lant at 70mph?

Come all of you traffic cops out there who are supposed to lurk around these sites, explain the above to me!

[PhantomPH]

I have been thru a similar stretch of raod (albeit for only half a mile or so), but I never looked at the road once - I was transfixed on my speedo, ensuring I did not sneak over the limit even for a second.

"if it was [my] relative that was a victim", I would much rather that people were looking at the road and it's potential hazards, than at their dashboard.

P~

[w00dy]

Alot of the A77's problems are design related and condition related, i wonder if victims relatives would like to see that addressed.... Not withstanding the longterm neutral financial costs of a scamera scheme and the huge cost of improving the actual road.

[DanL]

Cathy Jamieson in the article said:

My message to critics of this system is this - if it was your relative that was a victim, you would want everything possible done to improve the road

Yes. Yes I would, and I really don't see how speed cams improve the road. Re-engineering it may improve it, speed cams probably don't (all said from a position of not knowing the road! )

Dan

[MEMSDesign]

timmy30 said:

Why is it that driving in light traffic with 1 mile between you and the next car in front, at 85mph is considered less dangerous that driving perched 5ft off the rear bumper of the car in front at 70mph or for that matter undertaking at 70mph, failing to indicate at 70mph, driving in the incorrect lant at 70mph? Come all of you traffic cops out there who are supposed to lurk around these sites, explain the above to me!

Sounds sensible to me?

[richardthestag]

Bet it won't be long before some enterprising victim finds a way to get a flaming Pirelli of petrol to hang on that very ornate gantry.

[parrot of doom]

Or an angle grinder...


"TIMBER......"

[DaGinge]

Interesting that it seems to already be live according to a friend who got a ticket from it last week!!

[Stuart J]

How far can a paint ball gun fire, I see a new sport with peoples heads poking out of sun roofs brandishing paint ball guns

[joephandango]

What about times where it's a shed-load SAFER to put your foot down hard, driving OUT of danger. Personally I'd be more concerned about getting out of potentially dangerous situation than perhaps creeping over an average speed limit.

But then I guess I have the benefit of discretion.

[jewhoo]

cathy jamieson said:

My message to critics of this system is this - if it was your relative that was a victim, you would want everything possible done to improve the road. Any critics should imagine having to speak to families of these victims and hear how their lives have been devastated.

Yet another rational, logical reason for speed cameras then.

And what would Cathy Jamieson say to victims' families when someone dies in an accident caused by traffic bunching, panic braking etc etc?

[Smoking Monkey]

Speed cameras are seen as a quick (and cheap) fix and they are certainly not! I dont want this to turn into a rant, but I question whether the council has explored every avenue to improve the safety of this road! If there is a dangerous, blind junction along that road then people will still be killed when somebody else pulls out in front of them whilst travelling at (the perfectly legal) 69mph! Its about time we had engineers to dictate road policies instead of accountants!

[crossma]

When the BBC aired this on the evening news, I think I remember that behind the reporter was a tailback of traffic caused by trucks slowly plodding up a hill.

Am I right in thinking that in addition to constantly looking at the speedo and bunching up in frustration etc, that drivers will be mentally calculating how much "spare" time they have left from following slow traffic. ie "followed this truck for 10 minutes at 35 mph therefore can drive at 105mph for 10 mins" to maintain the average of 70mph? Does anyone else think this may be distracting and therefore dangerous?

Personally I found that doing a few long journeys recently after a fairly sedentary driving lifestyle - the sheer amount of freight trucks on the roads seem to cause a lot of the problems. As they try and overtake at 2mph speed differences a long queue of cars backs up, the trucks finally move over and everyone then serially overtakes going slightly faster each time. End result is the last person of the enforced convoy is travelling pretty rapidly to get past before the next hill/holdup.

That to my mind is what we should be doing with the public transport, subsidise the trucks off the road = more space, less frustration, less pollution, less accidents, less danger, less wear and tear on the roads which all leads to less frustration and safer roads. Which is what all this is about isnt it?

[FunkyNige]

26 miles?
So stopping just before the start, taking off the front number plate, driving past the camera then reattaching the plate isn't too much time wasted.
Bonus.

[james_j]

DanL said:

Cathy Jamieson in the article said: My message to critics of this system is this - if it was your relative that was a victim, you would want everything possible done to improve the road Yes. Yes I would, and I really don't see how speed cams improve the road. Re-engineering it may improve it, speed cams probably don't (all said from a position of not knowing the road! ) Dan

Yes indeed. WTF does she mean by "improve"?

Plus, why should monitoring speed of traffic be the answer?

A simple knee-jerk reaction from someone hysterical I'm afraid.

[simonpac]

"My message to critics of this system is this - if it was your relative that was a victim, you would want everything possible done to improve the road. Any critics should imagine having to speak to families of these victims and hear how their lives have been devastated."

How will Cathy explain to families of fatal crashes that their loved one was killed because another driver was to busy looking at their speedo for nearly 26 miles to notice the coming incident.

They have this system in Northampton and you spend about 1/3 of the journey time glancing at the speedo, if anything swerved in front or came out of a junction fast, well you can imagine. These things are dangerous.

[neil.b]

simonpac said:

"My message to critics of this system is this - if it was your relative that was a victim, you would want everything possible done to improve the road. Any critics should imagine having to speak to families of these victims and hear how their lives have been devastated." How will Cathy explain to families of fatal crashes that their loved one was killed because another driver was to busy looking at their speedo for nearly 26 miles to notice the coming incident. They have this system in Northampton and you spend about 1/3 of the journey time glancing at the speedo, if anything swerved in front or came out of a junction fast, well you can imagine. These things are dangerous.

I wonder what she'll say if deaths stay around the same or even increase?

[cdp]

crossma said:

When the BBC aired this on the evening news, I think I remember that behind the reporter was a tailback of traffic caused by trucks slowly plodding up a hill. Am I right in thinking that in addition to constantly looking at the speedo and bunching up in frustration etc, that drivers will be mentally calculating how much "spare" time they have left from following slow traffic. ie "followed this truck for 10 minutes at 35 mph therefore can drive at 105mph for 10 mins" to maintain the average of 70mph? Does anyone else think this may be distracting and therefore dangerous? Personally I found that doing a few long journeys recently after a fairly sedentary driving lifestyle - the sheer amount of freight trucks on the roads seem to cause a lot of the problems. As they try and overtake at 2mph speed differences a long queue of cars backs up, the trucks finally move over and everyone then serially overtakes going slightly faster each time. End result is the last person of the enforced convoy is travelling pretty rapidly to get past before the next hill/holdup. That to my mind is what we should be doing with the public transport, subsidise the trucks off the road = more space, less frustration, less pollution, less accidents, less danger, less wear and tear on the roads which all leads to less frustration and safer roads. Which is what all this is about isnt it?

I imagine they would calculate the average between two gantries, so I wouldn't try making up for lost time if I were you.

Does anybody know how the triggers are activated? Is it over the limit? The gantries in Nottingham can have roundabouts between them, so would the gangsters operating the cameras decide that a speed lower than the limit is suitable.

[Peter Ward]

neil.b said:

simonpac said: "My message to critics of this system is this - if it was your relative that was a victim, you would want everything possible done to improve the road. Any critics should imagine having to speak to families of these victims and hear how their lives have been devastated." How will Cathy explain to families of fatal crashes that their loved one was killed because another driver was to busy looking at their speedo for nearly 26 miles to notice the coming incident. They have this system in Northampton and you spend about 1/3 of the journey time glancing at the speedo, if anything swerved in front or came out of a junction fast, well you can imagine. These things are dangerous. I wonder what she'll say if deaths stay around the same or even increase?

I think we can guess the sort of thing:

1) "...random nature of accidents..."
2) "...dangerous drivers deserve to be caught and prosecuted..."
3) "...speed limit is too high but we'll reduce it.."
4) Other stuff to indicate it's anyone else's fault but hers.

[7db]

cdp said:

Does anybody know how the triggers are activated? Is it over the limit? The gantries in Nottingham can have roundabouts between them, so would the gangsters operating the cameras decide that a speed lower than the limit is suitable.

They are not triggered as such -- just record all plates through them. Non-offending plate details are deleted, apparently, for your privacy.

Roundabouts usually have the same limit as the roads they are on so there would be no reduction for that. They will have to take the distance as the straight-lined distance.