M1 Variable Speed Limits

[cb1965]

Just as a slight aside the relatively new variable limit section of the M62 near Bradford/Leeds has the gatso gantry cameras active and working even when the variable limit is not enabled.

I know this as a customer of mine received a nice NIP in the post for the heinous crime of 82mph at 05:15 on a dry clear summer Sunday morning.

 

[meeeb]

Just as a slight aside the relatively new variable limit section of the M62 near Bradford/Leeds has the gatso gantry cameras active and working even when the variable limit is not enabled.

I know this as a customer of mine received a nice NIP in the post for the heinous crime of 82mph at 05:15 on a dry clear summer Sunday morning.

There are no rest periods for speed cameras.

"In addition to the death of a 36-year-woman at the scene, police have announced a second casualty, a 89-year-old woman, has also died from her injuries in hospital. The incident occurred at 5.40am on the Northbound carriageway of the M1 between junctions 11 and 12 and closed the motorway for several hours."


Bedfordshire, last Monday.


Whilst not knowing whether or not speed was an issue on that occasion, it's an indication that accidents happen even at off-peak times, and why speed restrictions are enforced 24/7

 

[Deleted member 65149]

I've only just visited this thread for the first time. Way back the OP asked a question about "stupid variable speed limits" on motorways. I felt sure that someone would have quickly explained the reasoning behind them and why they appeared unnecessary to the majority of motorists: because they are very good at distributing traffic flow (when obeyed) thereby reducing congestion, so we don't get to see any problems.

Sure enough this was covered in a couple of early posts. Yet the majority of contributors missed these or chose to ignore them because they prefer to keep their Mr Angry hats firmly planted on their heads. So as usual, instead of learning a lesson and appreciating the real reasoning behind a motoring issue, we've been treated to the usual stream of ill-informed "facts" together with a few (relatively mild) insults. The self-elected downtrodden masses continue to rail against their perceived mistreatment on the road. Why appreciate the efforts to make our journeys easier and more pleasant, when instead we can indulge in self-flagellation whilst maintaining the belief that everything is done purely for the purpose of lining the pockets of the Establishment?

 

[markjay]

I read the word 'stupid' as relating to the fact that lower speed limits were in force in spite of there being no obvious reason for it.

I don't think the OP objects to variable speed limits as such, just to them being applied in a seemingly random manner.

Obviously he was not suggesting that someone is having a laugh, just that the system does not work as it should, hence it was 'stupid'.

 

[Stratman]

There have been a few posts in this thread to the effect of "The traffic was flowing freely but the 40/50/60 limit was still on"

Possibly the former was due to the latter

 

[meeeb]

I read the word 'stupid' as relating to the fact that lower speed limits were in force in spite of there being no obvious reason for it.

I don't think the OP objects to variable speed limits as such, just to them being applied in a seemingly random manner.

Obviously he was not suggesting that someone is having a laugh, just that the system does not work as it should, hence it was 'stupid'.

The word 'obvious' is key.

My perception is that knighterrant was trying to counter this by correctly stating that the reasons for the imposition of a speed limit may not be evident to drivers.

In regard to incidents, as opposed to congestion caused by volume, although my direct experience of operating such warnings is 20 years out of date, "in my day" speed limits would be indicated on a matrix when a member of the public reported an incident. A patrol would be dispatched and confirmation passed to the control room, or amendments made as necessary. Considering that many motorists on motorways don't know whether they are punched, bored, or countersunk, and haven't a clue where they are, or even which motorway they are on and in which direction they are travelling, it could be found that the signs which had been set were erroneous. (How many people don't know of the existence and purpose of marker posts?)

Although signs would be set as a precaution when a report was received - better to have them when they are not needed than vice versa - they would never be lifted until sanctioned by a patrol, by naked eye on the spot, so to speak, so if no patrol was immediately available the signs could be on 'unnecessarily' for a period of time.

The latter could be an instance of why variable speed limits remain on when 'not necessary', but as previously suggested, it could also be that they are on because they successfully efficiently regulate traffic.

Departing slightly from the strict point of the thread, my view of advisory speed limits on matrix, as opposed to variable limits which are enforceable, is that although many people ignore the advisory, they do at least alert them to the fact that there may be something ahead to be prepared for.

The ignorant often over simplify these issues and are totally unrealistic in their expectations.

Has anyone on here ever considered that 'speeders' cause congestion?

 

[John]

I've seen the M1 gantry cameras flash. Not at me, you understand, but on the other side of the road.

Your mate Dave?

 

[Peter T]

Your mate Dave?

Possible, but unlikely. My mate Dave lives near Leicester. The flashing cameras were near Hemel Hempstead.

I say unlikely because he's originally from Cumbria and is not a fan of all things southern so rarely travels in that direction.

 

[Dieselman]

What a charming person you are!

According to G Maps -

Rugby to Gatwick airport via M1/M25 - 126 miles
Rugby to Gatwick airport via M40/M25 - 138 miles

And there are considerable road works in this area that make the trip from here to the M40 a pain.

And, no I didn't know the extent of the 50 mph zone south of here.

And, no I haven't made this up nor am I ranting. I'll leave those things to you!

I use both those motorways and it's always worth taking the long route via the M40 if you intend to go west on the M25.

Admittedly, the 50mph restriction north of Northampton has recently been extended, but that section always comes to a standstill anyway.

You get the choice of saving 11 miles but it costing an extra hour, or getting to your destination on time.

To me, there is a clear choice. M40 everytime.

 

[Peter T]

I'm not sure when all the roadworks finished on the M25 between the M1 and Heathrow. End of last year maybe?

Since then I've found driving that route, at the times I choose to do it, usually early morning, to be a delight, even with the variable speed cameras. 4 or 5 lanes in each direction, newly surfaced, it's one of the best bits of motorway to use, if you pick your times.

Despite all the carp on the M1, we did Rugby to Stanstead in 2 hours, no problem.

 

[Dieselman]

I'm not sure when all the roadworks finished on the M25 between the M1 and Heathrow. End of last year maybe?

Since then I've found driving that route, at the times I choose to do it, usually early morning, to be a delight, even with the variable speed cameras. 4 or 5 lanes in each direction, newly surfaced, it's one of the best bits of motorway to use, if you pick your times.

Despite all the carp on the M1, we did Rugby to Stanstead in 2 hours, no problem.

I assume you meant Gatwick?

I too like the freshly opened section of the M25, but getting to it is a major problem and it still blocks up near the M4 intersection.

I haven't needed to go that way for a few months but was doing it 2 or three times a week earlier this year.
The M40 is always flowing well.

 

[johns E350]

I have been travelling to Gerard's Cross recently I can use either the M1/M25 or M40 from Northampton the 1st route is the shortest but at the time I go in the morning 6.30ish it is quicker to go Towcester Brackley M40 and the M40 just seems to flow better than the M1 M25

 

[Peter T]

I assume you meant Gatwick?

I too like the freshly opened section of the M25, but getting to it is a major problem and it still blocks up near the M4 intersection.

I haven't needed to go that way for a few months but was doing it 2 or three times a week earlier this year.
The M40 is always flowing well.

Sorry, yes Gatwick.

 

[E55BOF]

Just as a slight aside the relatively new variable limit section of the M62 near Bradford/Leeds has the gatso gantry cameras active and working even when the variable limit is not enabled.

I know this as a customer of mine received a nice NIP in the post for the heinous crime of 82mph at 05:15 on a dry clear summer Sunday morning.

Unless the cameras cannot be remotely switched on or off, this is enforcement for enforcement's sake. Pointless, and alienates the (generally, and more-or-less) law-abiding motorist. If the punishment is a speed awareness course, there will not even be any revenue raised.

 

[itaintemeyouno]

Unless the cameras cannot be remotely switched on or off, this is enforcement for enforcement's sake. Pointless, and alienates the (generally, and more-or-less) law-abiding motorist. If the punishment is a speed awareness course, there will not even be any revenue raised.

I don't mean to stir the pot, but how can you be law-abiding while breaking the law? You can't be more or less law-abiding as speeding is an absolute offence. You either are speeding or not, so you are either law abiding or not.

 

[def90cars]

I don't mean to stir the pot, but how can you be law-abiding while breaking the law? You can't be more or less law-abiding as speeding is an absolute offence. You either are speeding or not, so you are either law abiding or not.

Driving a car is a privilege that's why there is a test.
Abiding the law should be a given. Checking you are should be perfectly acceptable. Only those breaking it should be worried.
More speed cameras and more ANPR to check insurance and tax is fine by me.

 

[meeeb]

Unless the cameras cannot be remotely switched on or off, this is enforcement for enforcement's sake. Pointless, and alienates the (generally, and more-or-less) law-abiding motorist. If the punishment is a speed awareness course, there will not even be any revenue raised.

Great. So speed cameras are not a revenue raising exercise. Glad someone else besides me thinks so. And it's not a punishment you get. Once an offence has been committed, punishment of past events is in itself pointless, it's intended to be a process of education and a deterrent for the future. Further, the average traffic cop doesn't give a sh*t about alienating the "more-or-less law-abiding" public. When they've seen their first few dead people, especially children, they become aware how futile law-breaking on the highway is, whether it's to save a few seconds on a journey, or to have "a minor bit of fun on the M40" (quote from a previous thread).

I don't mean to stir the pot, but how can you be law-abiding while breaking the law? You can't be more or less law-abiding as speeding is an absolute offence. You either are speeding or not, so you are either law abiding or not.

Most people remove road traffic offences and certain other offences from the equation when they're classing themselves as law-abiding. It's a known fact that people pick and choose which laws to obey, on the basis of their own level of 'morality', and how much those laws inconvenience them, or, through ignorance appear unnecessary, or are perceived to relate to other people. I well remember a discussion with a man who insisted he was a law-abiding member of the public even though he'd admitted reversing up a very busy motorway at peak time to get back to the exit slip-road he'd missed.

Psychology is a very interesting subject, and the psychology of motoring no less so. The human mind works in wondrous ways!

 

[cb1965]

Unless the cameras cannot be remotely switched on or off, this is enforcement for enforcement's sake. Pointless, and alienates the (generally, and more-or-less) law-abiding motorist. If the punishment is a speed awareness course, there will not even be any revenue raised.

To be honest I genuinely don't think my views on motorway speed limits would be welcome on here. Basically I would like to see them raised and urban limits reduced and enforced more rigorously. I would also like to go back to manned policing on the motorways with more focus on general driving than speed limits. Does anyone really think the general standard of driving in the UK has improved in the last 20 years? I don't! Quite the opposite!

Anyway I simply mentioned it in case anyone thinks they aren't active when the 'no reduced limit' signs are on as seems to be the case elsewhere. I am not saying whether it is right or wrong or whether it should be. Just information

 

[E55BOF]

"You can't be more or less law-abiding as speeding is an absolute offence. You either are speeding or not, so you are either law abiding or not."

A touch of pedantry, surely? Yes, speeding is an absolute offence, but you all understand my meaning, I think.

Further, the average traffic cop doesn't give a sh*t about alienating the "more-or-less law-abiding" public. When they've seen their first few dead people, especially children, they become aware how futile law-breaking on the highway is, whether it's to save a few seconds on a journey, or to have "a minor bit of fun on the M40" (quote from a previous thread).
{QUOTE]

I agree entirely, and you unintentionally reinforce my point, I think. I rather doubt whether, early on a summer Sunday morning on a deserted motorway, the average traffic copper (who very much lives in the real world of motoring law enforcement) would give more than an admonishment, if that, for 81 mph in a 70mph limit.

Cb1965 hits the nail on the head, too; we need more human enforcement, and less robot. The difference is common-sense discretion, which cameras do not have.

 

[meeeb]

Further, the average traffic cop doesn't give a sh*t about alienating the "more-or-less law-abiding" public. When they've seen their first few dead people, especially children, they become aware how futile law-breaking on the highway is, whether it's to save a few seconds on a journey, or to have "a minor bit of fun on the M40" (quote from a previous thread).
{QUOTE]

I agree entirely, and you unintentionally reinforce my point, I think. I rather doubt whether, early on a summer Sunday morning on a deserted motorway, the average traffic copper (who very much lives in the real world of motoring law enforcement) would give more than an admonishment, if that, for 81 mph in a 70mph limit.

Cb1965 hits the nail on the head, too; we need more human enforcement, and less robot. The difference is common-sense discretion, which cameras do not have.

You are right about police officer discretion and cameras being inflexible in that sense, but you have to deal with things as they are, not as you and like-minded people would want them to be.

All drivers know, or ought to know that driving at 81 mph on a 70 mph motorway is an offence punishable by fine and penalty points and sometimes disqualification, even on a summer Sunday morning on a deserted motorway, and that if their excess speed is recorded by a camera they are going to 'get done', irrespective of what a police officer would do.

If they get caught they have been either careless, or have knowingly and deliberately flouted the law, and they and their 'supporters' shouldn't complain when the law takes its natural course. It's what's going to happen sometimes.