Insane scamvan siting

[Observer2]

Up until a year ago, I drove the A308 Crooked Billet to Fordbridge roundabout (Ashford) every day to work (for ~12 years). This is a two lane d/c, no junctions, no footpath, very little in the way of cyclists or pedestrians. There are some sweeping bends which, in a decent car, can be easily negotiated at 80mph or more without getting close to limit of grip.

It was NSL until ~3 years ago and then reduced to 50 limit, I understand because of a number of cross-over crashes with fatalities. About a year ago, central barriers were installed but of course the 50 limit remained. Mobile enforcement had been carried out from a layby on the straight section just before the Fordbridge roundabout, which provides a view of 400m or more to the exit of the previous bend.

I have not driven the road for several months but did so this morning and was stunned to find a scamvan positioned about 200m from the exit of the LH bend half-way along the stretch. Thus anybody taking the bend above 50 will sight the van whilst still on the exit and possibly accelerating out of it. An incautious application of brakes at that point could easily provoke loss of grip and result in a serious high speed crash. I'm sure the site nets a healthy catch. Anybody taking the bend above 50 has absolutely zero chnace of reducing speed before being nabbed.

I can't think of anything more stupid than siting a speed trap exactly where it is most likely to produce a dangerous reaction. It could easily have been located 200m further on, just before the next RH bend, where there would be at least a stronger probability that drivers would finished straightening their wheels before braking.

I was so utterly gobsmacked that I turned round at the roundabout and went back to drive it again. I stopped to speak to the enforcement officer and, after some ten minutes of converstion, he admitted that the location is dangerous - but of course it complies with the visibility guidelines so that's all right then.


>> Edited by Observer2 on Thursday 13th April 11:41

[cooperman]

So contact the Chief Police officer for the region, the local press and the local radio stations with this.

[motco]

I know where you mean 'cos I was on that stretch very soon after it dropped to 50. As I am not a regular user of the road I wasn't aware of the change and I bundled over the top of the last hill before the Ashford rbt at about 60-65 and spotted the dreaded white van in that layby near the end - and braked smartish just as you say. Fortunately I was in the nearside and reckon he was focussing on the offside lane as I didn't get the dreaded envelope. It's TFL territory so killing off a few errant motorists is alright. As a balancing argument, a member of my family worked as an emergency doctor in Ashford Hospital A&E for a few weeks and saw some very nasty injuries come in that were sustained in crossovers on that road.

[turbobloke]

motco said:

A member of my family worked as an emergency doctor in Ashford Hospital A&E for a few weeks and saw some very nasty injuries come in that were sustained in crossovers on that road.

Not nice, agreed. But why not close the gaps and have people invest, what, several minutes of their lives visiting the nearest roundabout, build a footbridge over the cw for pedestrians (there's only £40 billion excess income from motoring taxes and duties over transport expenditure each year) rather than try and engineer the t-bones at 50mph which must be no fun either. Speed restrictions with rigid and/or automated enforcement is no long term answer to anything except the indulgence of control freakery.

[smeggy]

Observer2 said:

It was NSL until ~3 years ago and then reduced to 50 limit, I understand because of a number of cross-over crashes with fatalities. About a year ago, central barriers were installed but of course the 50 limit remained. Mobile enforcement had been carried out from a layby on the straight section just before the Fordbridge roundabout,

My bold

Which measure do you think is responsible for the reduction of accidents?
Which measure do you think will be credited for the reduction of accidents?


This is ‘bias on selection’ as well as ‘bias by selection’ (RTTM)

[supermono]

motco said:

some very nasty injuries come in that were sustained in crossovers on that road.

Not any more. That new central barrier has changed that road from what I considered to be the most dangerous bit of road I had to travel to a good safe one.

Now that it's safer, I presume the proportion of "speeders" has reached the level that makes enforcement a viable enterprise.

Once the inevitable pile up occurs after braking mid turn they'll be saying "Ahh, well if he wasn't speeding it wouldn't have happened."

Words fail me.

SM

[justinp1]

supermono said:

motco said: some very nasty injuries come in that were sustained in crossovers on that road. Not any more. That new central barrier has changed that road from what I considered to be the most dangerous bit of road I had to travel to a good safe one. Now that it's safer, I presume the proportion of "speeders" has reached the level that makes enforcement a viable enterprise. Once the inevitable pile up occurs after braking mid turn they'll be saying "Ahh, well if he wasn't speeding it wouldn't have happened." Words fail me. SM

I agree. With the limit down to 50 a lot more than the '85th percentile' will be travelling over the limit, making the stretch a cash cow despite the road being re-engineered to stop accidents.

[puggit]

supermono said:

Once the inevitable pile up occurs after braking mid turn they'll be saying "Ahh, well if he wasn't speeding it wouldn't have happened."

Not everyone who speeds brakes hard on viewing a cash collecting van! We've all been behind a numpty with the same behaviour.

Having lived in Ashford for a year and commuted on that road I also know it well. I assume a proportion of accidents could also be due to rear-enders when people catch up with the traffic queuing for the Crooked Billet rdbt...

[Observer2]

cooperman said:

So contact the Chief Police officer for the region, the local press and the local radio stations with this.

Done.....


The Chief Constable
Surrey Police HQ
Mount Browne
Sandy Lane
Guildford
Surrey
GU3 1HG



Dear Sir,

I wish to draw your attention to what I consider to be extremely dangerous siting for mobile speed enforcement on the A308 between the Crooked Billet roundabout, Staines and the Fordbridge roundabout, Ashford.

This stretch of road is a two-lane dual carriageway with no junctions or footpath and very little pedestrian or cyclist activity. I know the road extremely well as I travelled it every working day for about 12 years, up until a year or so ago. The road used to be NSL but the speed limit was reduced to 50mph about 3 years ago. I understand that there had been a number of cross-over crashes during the preceding period, including some fatalities.

This stretch of road includes some sweeping bends which, if taken at excessively high speed or if poorly driven (e.g. mid-corner braking, coarse steering etc.) can result in loss of control. However, a reasonably competent driver in an average, roadworthy car would have no difficulty in driving the bends at 70mph or more without coming even close to the limit of grip in normal conditions. Therefore, it is only wildly excessive speed (I’d suggest 100mph or more) or ‘bad driving’ (such as mentioned above) that will result in loss of control.

Moreover, the road does not present as a 50mph road by comparison with other 50mph limited roads in the locality, principally because of the absence of any common hazards. For example, on the A308 itself, the 50mph limit continues from Fordbridge roundabout nearly up to the Sunbury Cross roundabout. The last part of that stretch (from just before the BP garage) is quite different in character, having multiple shops, junctions, houses, traffic lights, service roads etc., so the reason for the speed limit is quite clear. For another example, the road from Laleham village towards Shepperton is also 50mph limit, but this is single carriageway with footpath, houses, junctions and other vehicle turning points.

In addition, the risk of cross-over incidents on the A308 arose principally because of the absence of barriers in the central reservation. However, central armco barriers were installed along the entire stretch of road during the last year (although the 50mph limit remained), and I would assume that cross-over type collisions are now unlikely. The risk of crashing due to wildly excessive speed and bad driving of course remains, albeit with mitigated consequences. However, acknowledging the possibility of poor driving and excessive speed resulting in loss of control on those bends, it seems to me that the last thing needed, from a road safety perspective, is to introduce an additional factor that may induce loss of control.

I was astonished, therefore, on driving this stretch this morning (for the first time for some months) to see a mobile speed enforcement van sited about 200 metres past the exit of the left-hand bend approximately in the middle of the Crooked Billet - Ashford stretch. I had previously seen the enforcement van in the layby just before the Fordbridge roundabout. This lies approx. 400m past the exit to the final bend but it is unlikely that any speeding driver would see and react to the presence of the van before having straightened his wheels.

By contrast, at the moment a speeding driver catches sight of an enforcement van sited in the middle location (where I saw it today), he would still have steering lock applied and would quite possibly be accelerating out of the bend. A harsh application of brakes at such a moment, as I am sure you are aware, could have disastrous consequences. You may say that a driver who is not speeding will have no reason to brake. That is quite true (although many drivers do brake for speed cameras even when they are not speeding) but, with respect, is also entirely irrelevant. What matters is what drivers actually do, not what they should do or might do if they were more restrained or better trained. The undeniable fact is (and I witnessed it myself, having been so concerned that I turned round, back to the Crooked Billet roundabout, in order to drive the stretch again) that a driver travelling at high speed round that bend is quite likely to brake on seeing the enforcement van at precisely the worst possible moment from the perspective of vehicle stability. I should add that there is no apparent reason why, if enforcement at this particular site is considered to offer real road safety benefits (which I personally doubt), the location of the van could not be moved 200 metres or so further away from the bend exit, just before the turn-in to the following right hand bend. It would have no little or no practical effect on enforcement because of the range of the speed measurement device but, the fact of the van being some 400 metres distant instead of 200 metres distant at the moment it comes into view of a fast moving vehicle is likely to mean that any breaking reaction is less abrupt or will be delayed at least until the driver has straightened his wheels.

I wish to put on record my prediction that a crash will be provoked by the presence of speed enforcement at this location. As you are probably aware, there is increasing evidence that the presence of speed cameras at some locations is provoking or inducing crashes that would not have occurred if they had not been present. It is undeniable that such a negative effect is possible. The presence of speed enforcement at this location, in my opinion, makes such a negative effect not merely possibly but quite probable. I urge you to take action to cease enforcement here immediately.

Yours faithfully,

[Observer2]

puggit said:

Having lived in Ashford for a year and commuted on that road I also know it well. I assume a proportion of accidents could also be due to rear-enders when people catch up with the traffic queuing for the Crooked Billet rdbt...

That was indeed a significant risk for fast traffic heading towards Crooked Billet (the enforcement I referred to in my first post wast for traffic going towards Ashford). The major reason for the existence of that risk was the poor sight-line round the bend (particularly the right-hander before the rise) due to high vegetation in the central reservation. That was removed before the barriers were installed and I think the risk is now eliminated, or at least very much reduced. Obvious step really - shame it took so long for somebody in the right place to recognise it.

[puggit]

Observer2 said:

puggit said: Having lived in Ashford for a year and commuted on that road I also know it well. I assume a proportion of accidents could also be due to rear-enders when people catch up with the traffic queuing for the Crooked Billet rdbt... That was indeed a significant risk for fast traffic heading towards Crooked Billet (the enforcement I referred to in my first post wast for traffic going towards Ashford). The major reason for the existence of that risk was the poor sight-line round the bend (particularly the right-hander before the rise) due to high vegetation in the central reservation. That was removed before the barriers were installed and I think the risk is now eliminated, or at least very much reduced. Obvious step really - shame it took so long for somebody in the right place to recognise it.

A positive step then! And before sticking the cash collectors in there... Whatever next

[autismuk]

smeggy said:

Observer2 said: It was NSL until ~3 years ago and then reduced to 50 limit, I understand because of a number of cross-over crashes with fatalities. About a year ago, central barriers were installed but of course the 50 limit remained. Mobile enforcement had been carried out from a layby on the straight section just before the Fordbridge roundabout, My bold Which measure do you think is responsible for the reduction of accidents? Which measure do you think will be credited for the reduction of accidents? This is ‘bias on selection’ as well as ‘bias by selection’ (RTTM)

There's a similar idiocy here. There's a D2 with a standard crossing, which is used as a ratrun by a lot of commuters. They blocked the ratrun, then the Scumera Mob claimed credit for the consequent reduction in accidents.

There's a reason the Scum don't use a sensible measure of accidents. Common sense would suggest that "KSIs / year" is useless, a sensible measure would be KSI's per million vehicle miles or something like that.

The scumerati don't want that, because it doesn't allow them to claim traffic moving to avoid the scams as reductions in accidents.

[motco]

turbobloke said:

motco said: A member of my family worked as an emergency doctor in Ashford Hospital A&E for a few weeks and saw some very nasty injuries come in that were sustained in crossovers on that road. Not nice, agreed. But why not close the gaps and have people invest, what, several minutes of their lives visiting the nearest roundabout, build a footbridge over the cw for pedestrians (there's only £40 billion excess income from motoring taxes and duties over transport expenditure each year) rather than try and engineer the t-bones at 50mph which must be no fun either. Speed restrictions with rigid and/or automated enforcement is no long term answer to anything except the indulgence of control freakery.

The crossovers are not gaps in the centre island but vehicles, often motorcycles, that lose control and cross the grass strip into oncoming traffic.

[motco]

Observer2 is it not the case that an amazingly similar stretch of road, also Staines bypass, is NSL. That is the stretch from the M25 to the Crooked Billet - or have they put a 50 limit on that as well?

[Observer2]

motco said:

Observer2 is it not the case that an amazingly similar stretch of road, also Staines bypass, is NSL. That is the stretch from the M25 to the Crooked Billet - or have they put a 50 limit on that as well?

No that's still NSL (well apart from 30mph!!!? limit travelling towards M25 about 400 yards before the roundabout) and it is similar but without the bends. But they're really no problem at all unless you do something extremely silly.

[motco]

That 30mph bit is stupid. No-one obeys it and to try to do so is near suicide with everybody else bombing past on all sides.