Cameras Fail To Cut Accidents
Discussion
Thought I'd seen something on this before but done a search and can't find anything. If it has been posted before - apologies.
www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=161818&command=displayContent&sourceNode=161644&contentPK=14070198&folderPk=88499
Speed cameras on the M4 in Port Talbot have failed to cut the number of road accidents, new figures suggest today.A camera was placed on the eastbound carriageway in December 2002, and a westbound camera followed in February 2003. They enforce the 50mph stretch of the motorway between Baglan and Margam.The Mid and South Wales Safety Camera Partnership said it installed the cameras in response to accidents on the stretch of road near the junction 41 Port Talbot exit.But statistics suggest accidents have not been reduced since - instead they have gone up.Figures from the Welsh Assembly show three accidents took place at the site in 1999, with five in 2000, seven in 2001 and five in 2002 - an average of five per year.After the cameras' arrival, there were 10 accidents in 2003 and six in 2004 - an average of eight.Initial statistics released by the Assembly painted a much more alarming picture.These showed four people were killed or seriously injured in 2002, before the introduction of the cameras, rising to eight people in 2003. In 1999 there were 34 total accidents on the road, with 44 in 2000, 48 in 2001 and 59 in 2002. But in 2003 there were 68 accidents, and this rose further to 91 in 2004, marking almost a 300 per cent rise since 1999.However, in a flurry of communication with the Evening Post over the past 24 hours, the Assembly dramatically withdrew these figures and re-released the new set, with confusion over the length of road as the reason.Fears that cameras in fact endanger lives have been voiced by the Association of British Drivers."Reducing speed through enforcement causes bunching, as people are reluctant to overtake," said director of policy, Mark McArthur-Christie."So the separation distance between vehicles becomes less, and when the vehicle at the front of the queue brakes, problems arise further back and collisions are more likely."Mr McArthur-Christie said safety at the site would be increased if the 50mph limit was removed."I know it is a counter-intuitive argument which people find difficult to accept," he added."If you crash at 50mph, the impact is going to be less than at 70mph or 80mph. But enforcing a reduction in speed leads to drivers becoming distracted from the road and to tailgating."The Safety Camera Partnership insists cameras do reduce fatalities and serious injuries, and has issued its own figures relating to the period December 2002 to September 2005. These claim no-one was killed or seriously injured in that time, while there were 30 personal injury claims.Discrepancies between the two bodies' figures has been attributed to different lengths of road being taken into consideration, with the camera partnership saying only the exact camera site within the dotted lines is relevant. The two bodies are now meeting to discuss the discrepancy and agree on final figures.The Evening Post is currently fighting for more information about the number of motorists caught speeding at the enforcement site.A request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 was refused by the Safety Camera Partnership, but a legal appeal to the Information Commissioner is underway.Motorist Peter Evans, from Margam, who passes the cameras on a daily basis, said: "If someone at the back of the queue does not check their speed in time, there could be a nasty accident."
The westbound camera is actually sited a couple of hundred yards AFTER the entry slip-road where accidents had happened in the past. Perhaps it's coincidence that it's after the blackspot but just where most driver's will consider it safe to resume the motorway speed limit which is re-intated a little further on.
Nothing to do with money of course - it's all about safety
www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=161818&command=displayContent&sourceNode=161644&contentPK=14070198&folderPk=88499
Speed cameras on the M4 in Port Talbot have failed to cut the number of road accidents, new figures suggest today.A camera was placed on the eastbound carriageway in December 2002, and a westbound camera followed in February 2003. They enforce the 50mph stretch of the motorway between Baglan and Margam.The Mid and South Wales Safety Camera Partnership said it installed the cameras in response to accidents on the stretch of road near the junction 41 Port Talbot exit.But statistics suggest accidents have not been reduced since - instead they have gone up.Figures from the Welsh Assembly show three accidents took place at the site in 1999, with five in 2000, seven in 2001 and five in 2002 - an average of five per year.After the cameras' arrival, there were 10 accidents in 2003 and six in 2004 - an average of eight.Initial statistics released by the Assembly painted a much more alarming picture.These showed four people were killed or seriously injured in 2002, before the introduction of the cameras, rising to eight people in 2003. In 1999 there were 34 total accidents on the road, with 44 in 2000, 48 in 2001 and 59 in 2002. But in 2003 there were 68 accidents, and this rose further to 91 in 2004, marking almost a 300 per cent rise since 1999.However, in a flurry of communication with the Evening Post over the past 24 hours, the Assembly dramatically withdrew these figures and re-released the new set, with confusion over the length of road as the reason.Fears that cameras in fact endanger lives have been voiced by the Association of British Drivers."Reducing speed through enforcement causes bunching, as people are reluctant to overtake," said director of policy, Mark McArthur-Christie."So the separation distance between vehicles becomes less, and when the vehicle at the front of the queue brakes, problems arise further back and collisions are more likely."Mr McArthur-Christie said safety at the site would be increased if the 50mph limit was removed."I know it is a counter-intuitive argument which people find difficult to accept," he added."If you crash at 50mph, the impact is going to be less than at 70mph or 80mph. But enforcing a reduction in speed leads to drivers becoming distracted from the road and to tailgating."The Safety Camera Partnership insists cameras do reduce fatalities and serious injuries, and has issued its own figures relating to the period December 2002 to September 2005. These claim no-one was killed or seriously injured in that time, while there were 30 personal injury claims.Discrepancies between the two bodies' figures has been attributed to different lengths of road being taken into consideration, with the camera partnership saying only the exact camera site within the dotted lines is relevant. The two bodies are now meeting to discuss the discrepancy and agree on final figures.The Evening Post is currently fighting for more information about the number of motorists caught speeding at the enforcement site.A request under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 was refused by the Safety Camera Partnership, but a legal appeal to the Information Commissioner is underway.Motorist Peter Evans, from Margam, who passes the cameras on a daily basis, said: "If someone at the back of the queue does not check their speed in time, there could be a nasty accident."
The westbound camera is actually sited a couple of hundred yards AFTER the entry slip-road where accidents had happened in the past. Perhaps it's coincidence that it's after the blackspot but just where most driver's will consider it safe to resume the motorway speed limit which is re-intated a little further on.
Nothing to do with money of course - it's all about safety
Sod's law applies once again - just found the original thread;
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=243555&f=10&h=0
Sorry about that.
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=243555&f=10&h=0
Sorry about that.
I still can't get over what these people are on - they are supposed to be making the roads safer, but they've decided it's far better to raise money. WHAT are they thinking, and how do they sleep at night? It's not just irresponsible, it's immoral AND arguably a breach of their fiduciary duty to the public.
hanse cronje said:
its just like the on the A303 i saw yesterday at the top of an incline where the road has an overtaking lane, just where your speed and power would be at its max as you try to pass the lorry, is a camera
Indeed and it's pretty short so you want to get your foot down, still according to one SCP the safest way to overtake is to accelerate up to the speed limit and maintain that while passing
cuneus said:
its just like the on the A303 i saw yesterday at the top of an incline where the road has an overtaking lane, just where your speed and power would be at its max as you try to pass the lorry, is a camera
Indeed and it's pretty short so you want to get your foot down, still according to one SCP the safest way to overtake is to accelerate up to the speed limit and maintain that while passing
You have to be kidding! Espcially considering lorries have a large blind spot... idiots.
hanse cronje said:
its just like the on the A303 i saw yesterday at the top of an incline where the road has an overtaking lane, just where your speed and power would be at its max as you try to pass the lorry, is a
First time I passed that one I was overtaking two lorries...managed to spot the camera in the gap between them
No ticket so I guess I either slowed enough or one of the lorries blocked it
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff