M4 death again
Discussion
Was travelling home along the M4 west bound this afternoon (monday)just after a nasty collision had occured between Swindon and Chippenham again. I saw the vehicles involved and emergency services rushing to the scene. 10 minutes after I passed through the motorway was closed in both directions.
One person died.
Now, my GPS camera detector was shouting "Safety Camera Protection Zone - limit 70mph" and sure enough a mile past the accident scene there was a camera van sitting on the bridge pointing at the ever slowing Eastbound carriageway, blissfully unaware that a major incident had occured one mile up the road.
This made me ask myself exactly what that camera van was achieving on this or any other day? It sits there collecting many Thousands of £60 fines no doubt, but to what end? Of course it can't prevent collisions, that fact is plainly obvious to most people and well demonstrated today. All it can do is fine drivers passing by safely around or above probably 80mph, which as we all know is somewhere near the average motorway speed.
Perhaps I'm missing something? Can anyone explain what a "safety camera protection zone" is? And why did it fail again today? If they don't actually prevent fatal collisions yet they are operating in the area when the collisions occur, what the hell is the point of them?!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/6677747...
ETA: UPDATE PAGE 3
One person died.
Now, my GPS camera detector was shouting "Safety Camera Protection Zone - limit 70mph" and sure enough a mile past the accident scene there was a camera van sitting on the bridge pointing at the ever slowing Eastbound carriageway, blissfully unaware that a major incident had occured one mile up the road.
This made me ask myself exactly what that camera van was achieving on this or any other day? It sits there collecting many Thousands of £60 fines no doubt, but to what end? Of course it can't prevent collisions, that fact is plainly obvious to most people and well demonstrated today. All it can do is fine drivers passing by safely around or above probably 80mph, which as we all know is somewhere near the average motorway speed.
Perhaps I'm missing something? Can anyone explain what a "safety camera protection zone" is? And why did it fail again today? If they don't actually prevent fatal collisions yet they are operating in the area when the collisions occur, what the hell is the point of them?!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/6677747...
ETA: UPDATE PAGE 3
Edited by deeps on Thursday 12th July 18:24
deeps said:
Perhaps I'm missing something? Can anyone explain what a "safety camera protection zone" is? And why did it fail again today? If they don't actually prevent fatal collisions yet they are operating in the area when the collisions occur, what the hell is the point of them?!
Exchange "safety camera protection zone" for "crumple zone", "seatbelt", "ABS", "better tyres" and unfortunately your rant is still just as valid. I don't like the cameras on the M4 bridges either, but poor logic irks me more.
Accidents are caused by poor driving, speed cameras aren't designed to detect poor driving, only driving in excess of a number on a stick. I suspect that this accident was caused by poor driving, therefore it's no surprise that the local camera van failed to have an effect!
Edited by MilnerR on Tuesday 22 May 09:30
what worries me more is that the M4 does seem to have a high number of accidents, and worse, fatal ones in specific sections...
so is this the road, or the drivers, or a combination there-of?
I know around Slough the spray is just awful as the run-off is practically non-existant, so its like thick fog at the first sight of rain...
so is this the road, or the drivers, or a combination there-of?
I know around Slough the spray is just awful as the run-off is practically non-existant, so its like thick fog at the first sight of rain...
Fidgits said:
so is this the road, or the drivers, or a combination there-of?
I know around Slough the spray is just awful as the run-off is practically non-existant, so its like thick fog at the first sight of rain...
Yet everyone still drives with their thumb up their ar$e and very close to each other at high speed!
One thing I have noticed (and been a victim of) on that section of the M4 is glare from the sun when travelling Eastbound in the evening. I tend to drive with my headlights on, even before it gets properly dark as seeing overtaking cars in your mirrors with a great burning orange globe behind them can be very difficult. Headlights help to make a vehicle stand out. I had a chap pull out in front of me resulting in heavy braking not so long ago and (unless he was truely a moron) I can only think that he was unsighted by the glare and couldn't see me.
dougc said:
One thing I have noticed (and been a victim of) on that section of the M4 is glare from the sun when travelling Eastbound in the evening. I tend to drive with my headlights on, even before it gets properly dark as seeing overtaking cars in your mirrors with a great burning orange globe behind them can be very difficult. Headlights help to make a vehicle stand out. I had a chap pull out in front of me resulting in heavy braking not so long ago and (unless he was truely a moron) I can only think that he was unsighted by the glare and couldn't see me.
hey, try driving westbound...
it is awful..
MilnerR said:
Accidents are caused by poor driving, speed cameras aren't designed to detect poor driving, only driving in excess of a number on a stick. I suspect that this accident was caused by poor driving, therefore it's no surprise that the local camera van failed to have an effect!
Edited by MilnerR on Tuesday 22 May 09:30
Yup, sums it up nicely!
herewego said:
A57 HSV said:
As described in a previous post, I was nearly involved in a crash on the M4 thanks to everyone slamming on the brakes when they spotted a camera van. Safety my ar*e!
They do the same when they see BiB.
And when they see HATOs. Which is why HATOs shouldn't be made to look like Police cars!
jezzaaa said:
herewego said:
A57 HSV said:
As described in a previous post, I was nearly involved in a crash on the M4 thanks to everyone slamming on the brakes when they spotted a camera van. Safety my ar*e!
They do the same when they see BiB.
And when they see HATOs. Which is why HATOs shouldn't be made to look like Police cars!
don't the French equivalent drive around in orange transit sort of vans?
esselte said:
jezzaaa said:
herewego said:
A57 HSV said:
As described in a previous post, I was nearly involved in a crash on the M4 thanks to everyone slamming on the brakes when they spotted a camera van. Safety my ar*e!
They do the same when they see BiB.
And when they see HATOs. Which is why HATOs shouldn't be made to look like Police cars!
don't the French equivalent drive around in orange transit sort of vans?
I don't know to be honest, but it sounds alot more sensible. Why they spend so much money providing Range Rovers, Discoverys and Shoguns when they could do the same job in a Transit is beyond me. Far be it from our officials to do anything sensible to save money.
J.
OK, if you travelling at a safe distance why would people need to slam there brakes on???
Ever thought that if the van wasn't there that there might be a lot more crashes??
The problem is with the Crap Driving in this country that everyone tries to blame for not paying enough attention, they had to ban mobiles cause people are to thick to realise it is dangerous to use one when driving
Travel at the speed limit and you'll never get a ticket, the cameras will run at a loss and they will de decommissioned, simple
Ever thought that if the van wasn't there that there might be a lot more crashes??
The problem is with the Crap Driving in this country that everyone tries to blame for not paying enough attention, they had to ban mobiles cause people are to thick to realise it is dangerous to use one when driving
Travel at the speed limit and you'll never get a ticket, the cameras will run at a loss and they will de decommissioned, simple
combemarshal said:
Travel at the speed limit and you'll never get a ticket, the cameras will run at a loss and they will de decommissioned, simple
No they won't! There are thousands of people who NEED people to be caught speeding to pay the mortgage every month. They aren't going to let you get away with driving at or below the limit for long. What will happen if everyone sticks to the speed limit is that accident rates will remain the same (less than 7% of accident are caused by excessive speed according to the DfT), this will be blamed on the limits being set too high and so the limits will be set so low that you are bound to stray over them. This, combined with lower tolerance enforcement, will safe-guard the jobs of those employed by the SCPs whilst having little or no impact on road safety. Even now cumbria SCP is going start using ambush cameras to trap drivers. The SCPs are behaving like over effecient predators who have decimated one feeding ground and are having to employ ever-greater stealth tactics to mainitain their existence. Edited by MilnerR on Tuesday 22 May 13:47
The M4 is a real problem motorway IMHO. Couple of thougths on this:
its east/west direction causes problems in the morning and evening with low sun issues...
Its the most boring road around, people literally get bored to death on it, and concentration levels drop - its mostly too straight and flat...
People entering the motorway from the services are still having heart palpitations and breathing difficulties having been royal ripped off over the price of a cuppa....
The road runs through many differing regions of varied driving skills - whether it be the area of 'little asia' between Hounslow and Slough, Wellie wearing tractor drivers through Wiltshire, the smack heads around Bristol or the sheep worriers further west, the road runs through real culture shock Briton....
its east/west direction causes problems in the morning and evening with low sun issues...
Its the most boring road around, people literally get bored to death on it, and concentration levels drop - its mostly too straight and flat...
People entering the motorway from the services are still having heart palpitations and breathing difficulties having been royal ripped off over the price of a cuppa....
The road runs through many differing regions of varied driving skills - whether it be the area of 'little asia' between Hounslow and Slough, Wellie wearing tractor drivers through Wiltshire, the smack heads around Bristol or the sheep worriers further west, the road runs through real culture shock Briton....
7db said:
deeps said:
Perhaps I'm missing something? Can anyone explain what a "safety camera protection zone" is? And why did it fail again today? If they don't actually prevent fatal collisions yet they are operating in the area when the collisions occur, what the hell is the point of them?!
Exchange "safety camera protection zone" for "crumple zone", "seatbelt", "ABS", "better tyres" and unfortunately your rant is still just as valid. I don't like the cameras on the M4 bridges either, but poor logic irks me more.
All those things will improve your chances of survival in a collision, my question is how does the safety camera do the that? They can be proven to not prevent collisions so why are they allowed to operate there?
MilnerR said:
Accidents are caused by poor driving, speed cameras aren't designed to detect poor driving, only driving in excess of a number on a stick. I suspect that this accident was caused by poor driving, therefore it's no surprise that the local camera van failed to have an effect!
So when do you think it does have an effect? If it doesn't detect poor driving and the collisions continue, what is the point of it and how can it be justified?
herewego said:
A57 HSV said:
As described in a previous post, I was nearly involved in a crash on the M4 thanks to everyone slamming on the brakes when they spotted a camera van. Safety my ar*e!
They do the same when they see BiB.
Does that justify the camera vans existance then? Atleast BiB are actively looking for poor driving, all the scammer does is catch safe drivers at average motorway speeds. The fact he is also a panic braking hazard makes him doubly useless!
deeps said:
MilnerR said:
Accidents are caused by poor driving, speed cameras aren't designed to detect poor driving, only driving in excess of a number on a stick. I suspect that this accident was caused by poor driving, therefore it's no surprise that the local camera van failed to have an effect!
So when do you think it does have an effect? If it doesn't detect poor driving and the collisions continue, what is the point of it and how can it be justified?
Exactly! The point is to make the government appear to be proactive about road safety witout having to actually spend any money. To get real safety improvements you have to approach the problem from multiple angles. i.e. driver training road engineering and increased trafpol. However, all these things cost money. It is easier to set up a self funding SCP and make a big song and dance about how much safer they make the roads whereas they evidence doesn't show this.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff