The reason would be because this is a popular boy-racer stretch... People drive like complete nutters along it.

This is actually a common theme, and if you think about it makes perfect sense from a pen-pusher accountant's point of view.

When you look at a lot of places that speed cameras have been installed, you will see obvious defects in road planning or maintenance. It is far cheaper to install a £300,000 speed camera system and reduce the speed limit than to tackle the real issues of poor planning, design and bad maintenance.

Mike Barrett

And it still won't prevent cars ending up in the river.

Darren Griffin

Barriers are not likely to be effective on this stretch of road unless they are installed on very deep concrete piles at enormous expense. The road runs very close to the edge of the river, normal barrier support posts would just be pushed into the river when struck by a vehicle.

The safest solution would be to move the road away from the river but this would also be prohibitively expensive.

If the cameras cause drivers to lower vehicle speeds then small driving mistakes will be less likely to result in vehicles entering the water.

I am not a fan of cameras but I can see that they may provide the cheapest solution in this case.

Paul

Also, the LACK of barriers puts more responsibility on the driver to be careful driving. If there are barriers, the driver can think "it's OK the barrier will stop me" when it won't necessarily.

Are there any of those "x accidents here" signs up saying how many have driven into the river?

Is there an extra road on any satnavs there - you know "my satnav told me to turn there"?

Gerry
TomTom730T
Cameralert for Android
Brodit ProClip mount

I for one absolutely hate unnecessary cameras; HOWEVER as up to last year I had to travel on this stretch of road daily to work for 4 years.

I am not a slowcoach, however people who travel on this stretch would appreciate, that the only safe speed in good conditions is aprox 60mph.

The usual thing that happens is that some nutters fly past at 80-90, not 70 but 80-90 and they seem to relish the challenge of beating you to the next corner.

This is in my honest view the only way ahead, being average speed cameras is better and more efficient then static ones.

It will not stop the accidents in thick fog, but what would?

I've said previously that I am generally in favour of average speed cams whereas I'm wholly against the other types.

But whilst in this case I accept it may help, there is no substitute for a decent barrier to keep cars on the carriageway should the inevitable occur.

Darren Griffin