New Motorway Cameras To Enforce Speed Limit

[Deleted member 65149]

As for variable speed limit, e.g. on the M25 Western stretch, I read some time ago that the speed cameras are only active when the variable speed is enforced, but they are switched off on all other occasions. This may have changed since, though.

Not so. My old boss got done at 85mph when the limit was 70 between M4 and M40 (well, at least he SAID the limit was 70!)

 

[flango]

Pal of mine installs and calibrates them so we always get the heads up first

http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/driving-incidents-roadrage/160289-speed-cameras-heads-up.html

Smart Motorway cameras do not have home office approval nor never will as they are the wrong type of camera for the application.

 

[Dieselman]

HADECS cameras do not have home office approval nor never will as they are the wrong type of camera for the application.

What does that mean? Are they used or not and is any record of speeding on them valid?

 

[flango]

What does that mean? Are they used or not and is any record of speeding on them valid?

Sorry bad original post by me which I have now corrected but to clarify.

The cameras used to detect traffic flow and monitor and manage smart motorways are basically cctv and do not detect individual vehicles so are not suitable or approved for speeding offences.

The gantry mounted GATSO cameras are used for speed detection and offence capture as in the link I posted referring to those on the M1 and M62 it is these that are referred to as HADEC cameras

Apologies for the confusion, hands faster than the brain this evening

 

[meeeb]

Apologies for the confusion, hands faster than the brain this evening

Don't apologise flango, the whole thread, like all threads on speeding and enforcement, is the epitome of confusion.

Fascinating for those interested in driver psychology though.

 

[markjay]

Don't apologise flango, the whole thread, like all threads on speeding and enforcement, is the epitome of confusion.

Fascinating for those interested in driver psychology though.

I suspect that some of the confusion is intentionally spread by the authorities, the message from police forces is that if you do not drive over the speed limit you do not need to concern yourself with how speed cameras work.

 

[E55BOF]

Surely you're not suggesting the Daily Mail could get it wrong? Princess Diana would not have been amused...

As most of us, I suspect, all I'm really interested in is knowing how fast I can reasonably go without significant risk of getting a speeding ticket, and as I generally keep within the ACPO guidelines anyway, it seems little will change for me.

Dryce, I see where you're coming from with the cynic's view, but I suspect the level of enforcement, as with the ACPO guidelines, has more to do with the public's perception than anything else. If large numbers of drivers exceed the speed limit by a small margin (and they certainly do), drastic enforcement would I suggest inevitably lead to the "why aren't you catching REAL criminals" attitude becoming much more prevalent, and be bad PR for the police generally.

 

[RWDpetrol]

if you do not drive over the speed limit you do not need to concern yourself with how speed cameras work.

That's a tiny minority.

 

[meeeb]

My view is that some degree of enforcement is necessary but that enforcement without *immediate* feedback - either by a flash or an actual stop is bad practice.

I'm inclined to agree with that point of view. There are times when a 'burst' of speed over the limit can be argued to be necessary for safety, so if you are caught by a camera when doing that it could be unjust to be prosecuted. The problem is that if you are not notified of an infringement until a week or so later, you may have difficulty convincing the enforcing agency of the validity of your defence.

I suspect that some of the confusion is intentionally spread by the authorities, the message from police forces is that if you do not drive over the speed limit you do not need to concern yourself with how speed cameras work.

I doubt it. You overlook the fact that you are dealing with individuals who have individual points of view regarding enforcement. You only need read threads on forums to know the disparity of opinion on such matters. Also different locations need a different approach depending on, for example, historical accident figures.

As most of us, I suspect, all I'm really interested in is knowing how fast I can reasonably go without significant risk of getting a speeding ticket, and as I generally keep within the ACPO guidelines anyway, it seems little will change for me.

.... drastic enforcement would I suggest inevitably lead to the "why aren't you catching REAL criminals" attitude becoming much more prevalent, and be bad PR for the police generally.

Believe me, most traffic cops don't give a hoot about public perceptions, and rightly so. Such politics are for the hierarchy who drive a desk. When you've seen decent people, sometimes whole families lying in a car, killed by some s--thead who wasn't as good a driver as he though he was, but didn't know it until he killed someone, you tend to be more focused on enforcement rather than public relations. This is why traffic cops and speeders have a different perspective on the offence.

And here's a copy and paste from the ACPO guidelines which show that they don't offer you watertight protection:-

"1.1.6 These guidelines are intended to assist officers in the exercise of their individual discretion and achieve some consistency of approach. They do not
restrict and are not intended to restrict or fetter that discretion so as to form the basis for any complaint that a decision, which may be inconsistent with them, is unlawful or unreasonable.

1.1.7 This guidance on where to enforce and how to assess the appropriateness of enforcement has no bearing on whether the law has been broken, nor does failure to follow these guidelines provide any mitigation of a defence for an offence committed under current law.

Don't get too complacent!!

 

[moff]

None of the variable speed cameras are set to capture at 79mph as far as I am concerned - obviously just my opinion but backed up by Pistonheads too.

I know someone who drives a lot of miles and tends to sit between 85-90 mph and has never had a fine from any of these locations and drives them regularly.

 

[E55BOF]

Believe me, most traffic cops don't give a hoot about public perceptions, and rightly so. Such politics are for the hierarchy who drive a desk. When you've seen decent people, sometimes whole families lying in a car, killed by some s--thead who wasn't as good a driver as he though he was, but didn't know it until he killed someone, you tend to be more focused on enforcement rather than public relations. This is why traffic cops and speeders have a different perspective on the offence.

And here's a copy and paste from the ACPO guidelines which show that they don't offer you watertight protection:-

"1.1.6 These guidelines are intended to assist officers in the exercise of their individual discretion and achieve some consistency of approach. They do not
restrict and are not intended to restrict or fetter that discretion so as to form the basis for any complaint that a decision, which may be inconsistent with them, is unlawful or unreasonable.

1.1.7 This guidance on where to enforce and how to assess the appropriateness of enforcement has no bearing on whether the law has been broken, nor does failure to follow these guidelines provide any mitigation of a defence for an offence committed under current law.

Don't get too complacent!![/QUOTE]

It's not a matter of complacency; it's a matter of attitude. I know a number of policemen, including some traffic officers, and (just like me...) what they really want is a shift where nothing at all happens, there's no paperwork to do and they get to knock off on time. Like many people, I exceed the speed limit from time to time, but I try not to do anything stupid on the road, and I don't suggest that the ACPO guidelines give any sort of imagined immunity from prosecution. Unless it's well over the limit, speeding per se is not the problem; it's inappropriate speed that is, and in my experience any reasonable officer takes that view too.

Consider two scenarios: one is the driver sitting five feet from the bumper of the car in front of him in the right-hand lane, flashing to be allowed past, at 70 mph in the rain on a busy motorway in the Friday evening rush hour; the other is the alert and well-rested driver doing 95 mph on a bone-dry motorway in light traffic early on a Sunday morning, in a car limited to 155 mph, with the handling and brakes to match that potential, and with the distant scan and situational awareness to be able to see and react to hazards in time. I know which one I would consider to be driving unsafely, and the coppers I know share that view.

 

[markjay]

In some cases they even flash at over 100mph but no ticket.

And you know this because.....?

 

[RWDpetrol]

And you know this because.....?

Experience.

 

[meeeb]

Unless it's well over the limit, speeding per se is not the problem; it's inappropriate speed that is, and in my experience any reasonable officer takes that view too.

Consider two scenarios: one is the driver sitting five feet from the bumper of the car in front of him in the right-hand lane, flashing to be allowed past, at 70 mph in the rain on a busy motorway in the Friday evening rush hour; the other is the alert and well-rested driver doing 95 mph on a bone-dry motorway in light traffic early on a Sunday morning, in a car limited to 155 mph, with the handling and brakes to match that potential, and with the distant scan and situational awareness to be able to see and react to hazards in time. I know which one I would consider to be driving unsafely, and the coppers I know share that view.

That may well be the case, but it doesn't change anything I said.

 

[E55BOF]

I didn't suggest it did, but I rather formed the impression from your reply that you considered traffic patrol officers saw speed on its own as a serious problem. That is not how I have found it with those I have known; they see driver behaviour as the problem, with speed just a part of that. The driver doing something unsafe, albeit within the speed limit, is more likely to get a pull than the one who is speeding, but otherwise not a problem, unless he or she is well over the speed limit.

Largely academic argument, though, is it not? When did you last see a traffic patrol car on the motorway, unless with blues and twos going on the way to an emergency? Speed enforcement is left pretty much to cameras these days, and they have no discretion whatever. Their operating parameters, however, are determined by the hierarchy who drive a desk, who ARE concerned with the image of the police, which is why draconian enforcement of speed limits is unlikely.