SpeedSpike

In fairness when overtaking is one of the more unforgiving situations to make a mistake. It usually ends up messy. I’ve seen the result of such mistakes more times than I care to remember to be honest.

Yea, sorry. My driving just isn’t as perfect as yours. Sometimes I make mistakes.

Moggy

Do share with us how?

Moggy

Is that a rhetorical question? Only overtake when you know that the conditions will allow you to do so in complete safety. I don’t understand the problem.

I trust they will also put the speed limit signs up as frequently as the cameras. The times I have been on a road keeping my speed down only to discover I could have done another 10 mph.
I suppose it is good for safety but I use a car to get places. If I have got all day or want to site see I’ll take a bus.
Also if the camera is meant to slow traffic why do they cover them up with the words “camera not working”? Surely telling drivers is not working defeats the object completely? In fact adds to the suspician that there just for making money. Also since the government has withdrawn some funding safety suddenly is not so important and the cameras have been withdrawn by some councils.

Complete the overtake safely and drop back to a couple of mph above the 60 or 70 mph speed limit applying to that road.

In this case I do not allow blanket speed limits imposed by bureaucrats to impinge on my own (and other people’s) safety.

Moggy

I have the ‘nagger’ in my car set at 97 mph.

It is amazing how frequently it triggers during overtakes.

And when it sounds what do you do; ignore it? 😀

Do share with us how?

Moggy

Surplus Harrier engine? 😉

I have the ‘nagger’ in my car set at 97 mph.

It is amazing how frequently it triggers during overtakes.

Moggy

And pray that you never, ever get caught out in the middle of an overtake with the need to get past sharply. 😮

The device I had in mind would operate in a similar way to my existing cruise-control (which I almost never use) in that I could switch it on/off and that I could select the speed (I’d have to do that anyway) that I’d be limited to so I’d be unlikely to ever be in the position you suggest (and you should always be able to brake out of trouble).

The only real problem is that my car would need a ‘radar’ speed sensor because currently cruise-control switches off when you change gear and I’d want to use it mainly in 30mph or 40mph limits when there are lots of hazards to look for and when I’m also changing gear a lot.

Do share with us how?

Moggy

That course of action is always avoidable, but requires a degree of patience.;)

What I really want on my car is a speed limiter so than no matter what I do with the accelerator my car cannot break the speed limit. The annoying thing is that all the technology to do this is already built into my vehicle and it would only take a minor ‘software’ modification to the cruise-control.

And pray that you never, ever get caught out in the middle of an overtake with the need to get past sharply. 😮

Moggy

Cameras are easy, cheap and contribute little or nothing to road safety…

That’s the real problem, like most government thinking…..it is ‘safety’ on the cheap!

Ironically I’d like to see more Police making our roads safer, and I say that as a habitual speeder. Speed cameras don’t catch people who falsify their DVLA details, they can’t help with traffic or first-aid when there is an accident and they aren’t much use if somebody is breaking into my house one night!

I see plenty of idiocy caused by the ker-ching cameras- idiot hurtling along, sees the gatso, chucks the anchor out, trundles past, boots it again. How has that contributed to safety?
SPECS cameras in roadworks annoy me too- while I agree they’re a bloody good idea to keep the speeds down where there’s guys trying to do their job on the road, they’d be better employed to survey traffic for idiots as well. For example, the idiots who swap lanes and attempt to swap bumper paint at any opportunity. Or the Foreign truckers who pile through at full speed regardless, knowing fully well the authorities won’t bother to persue the speeding fine. Or the truckers who force their way through in the outside lane, even though it’s clearly marked for vehicles under 6ft 6 wide.
Have the cameras, yes, but also monitor them for idiots and have motorway patrol police standing by to collar the morons.

Accidents are caused by lousy driving, which many of us see every day and every journey. The lousy driver might also be speeding but often is not.

Yes…some of the worst drivers I have seen are quite slow and clueless !
Indeed as a generalisation I would say that slow drivers cause more problems than fairly fast drivers !

Pauldyson – you are undeniably right. However, much as many of us would happily blow up every one of these yellow eyesores, we have to accept that if we speed and get caught we have to pay the penalty.

My complaint is that their raison d’etre is flawed. They contribute zilch to reducing accidents and are simply a cash-cow for a bankrupt government. Once we separate the false relationship between “speed” and “accident” we might make some progress.

Accidents are caused by lousy driving, which many of us see every day and every journey. The lousy driver might also be speeding but often is not.

I don’t drive personally but I’ve spent an insane amount of time travelling by road in various countries of varying levels of general road sense so I’ve seen quite a few examples of idiocy, and I couldn’t agree more with what you’ve said here. Speed cameras simply aren’t there for safety; if the real focus were on safety then there wouldn’t be so many drivers who simply can’t drive or drive in an unsafe manner because a way would have been found to get rid of them. They focus on something that’s extremely common and not necessarily inherently unsafe to make money. A car driven sensibly at 35mph through a 30mph zone is infinitely safer than one being driven by an idiot talking on his phone/texting/generally being a brain dead inattentive moron at 28mph.

Conversely to the pro-speed camera argument, I’d like to see the figures on how many accidents cameras have actually caused by people instinctively slamming the brakes on when seeing the white marks on the road. It has to be a reasonable amount!

:D:D But the serious point is that if the authorities took steps to improve driving, it would be a better result. Cameras are easy, cheap and contribute little or nothing to road safety, but plenty to the kitty.

Accidents are caused by lousy driving…

Yes, but a lousy-driver-camera would be harder to make! 😀

Please don’t quote the entirety of the post directly above yours – Mods

I agee with 100% on every count.

Pauldyson – you are undeniably right. However, much as many of us would happily blow up every one of these yellow eyesores, we have to accept that if we speed and get caught we have to pay the penalty.

My complaint is that their raison d’etre is flawed. They contribute zilch to reducing accidents and are simply a cash-cow for a bankrupt government. Once we separate the false relationship between “speed” and “accident” we might make some progress.

Accidents are caused by lousy driving, which many of us see every day and every journey. The lousy driver might also be speeding but often is not.