Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Posted: Wed Jul 31, 2013 10:04 pm Post subject: Something has to be done
With fatalities (relatively) frequently, Transport Scotland and the politicians have to be seen to be doing something.
A dual carriageway will take 4+ years from today.
What we are never told is the cause or the assumed reason why someone overtook. I have seen the photos of a few recent crashes going head on into another car (not a lorry).
It will be interesting to see whether people use their "banked time" to travel beyond 60/70mph to overtake a line of a few vehicles. This would depend on how far the sensors would be placed.
Personally I would like to see more police enforcement of careless driving. Between yesterday and today there were 4 significant crashes on the M8 motorway between Glasgow airport and east of the city (about 12 miles). Weather was per normal.
This morning one driver swerving late off the motorway, then having to brake, causing another car to brake also. 5 minutes later a different driver talking into his phone who had caught my attention for some reason or other. When I looked over at traffic lights there he was for all to see why.
A good number of the accidents and fatalities on the A9 in particular especially in the summer are due to foreign visitors being on the wrong side of the road when emerging from stopovers, and also being confused by the various changes from dual to single carriageway. We've had several already this year (as we do every year). These are not related to speed or overtaking.
There are no permanent cameras north of Perth on the A9 (and anywhere else for that matter). Mobile cameras require manning and taking police away from other duties (we now have a single police force in Scotland looking for cuts and savings). It seems to me average speed cameras is one way to make those savings. Again this has nothing to do with speeding or overtaking or the future of supposed dual carriageway plans (I'm not holding my breath). _________________ Mark B
Garmin nüvi 350
SW V6.20, GPS SW V3.00
City Navigator Europe NT 2018.10
Not rude, just pointing out what most people who shout about the dirty, smelly, slow lorries, don't seem to realise, which is the obvious.
No trucks = no food in supermarkets. Simples.
No...actually Russ is right:
a) you are rude, and
b) there IS another way
Excerpt from the Rail Freight Group website:
“The introduction of speed cameras will do much to cut the accident toll on the A9, but it’s important that the Scottish Government goes further to reduce the volume of HGVs on the road. HGVs are disproportionately involved in fatal accidents, and moving freight by rail is vastly safer. The daily freight train of Tesco supermarket supplies from Central Scotland to Inverness takes no less than 20 lorries off the A9, and there is scope for rail to carry far more supermarket traffic as well as Highland exports such as whisky and timber. But the Perth-Inverness railway is still two-thirds single-track and there is limited capacity for additional freight and passenger traffic, so a substantial upgrade is essential. The big worry is that full A9 dualling will lead to freight traffic switching back from rail to the A9 – an outcome nobody except road hauliers would wish for.”
The point under discussion is reducing the number of HGVs on the the A9 to and from Inverness, which clearly IS possible with the right investment. Nobody is claiming the need for road transport can be eliminated altogether. Of course road is needed for the final leg of the deliveries (which should be as short as possible) but for long distance transport, rail freight IS substantially cheaper, not to mention being significantlly better for the environment:
Per tonne of cargo conveyed rail freight produces 76% less carbon dioxide than road freight. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) estimates that on average HGV road freight emits 118.6g of CO2 per tonne km of freight carried whilst rail freight only produces 28.5g CO2 per tonne km of freight carried
Source: 2009 Guideline to Defra’s GHG Conversion Factors: Methodology Paper for Transport Emission Factors, October 2009, Defra
Joined: Apr 05, 2006 Posts: 61 Location: Stafford, UK
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 11:40 am Post subject:
I'm not sure how to word this, but I'll have a go anyway.
When driving on West Mids motorways with average speed cameras, conversation in the car is severely hampered by the announcement by CamerAlert of each camera in quick succession. Of course, as the driver, I want to know what my traffic obligations are, and whether I am within the law, but at the same time I don't want my passengers to get annoyed by the technology in my car.
Is there any way of managing the situation? Obviously I don't want to turn off or disable CA, or even turn the volume down any further, or wear a socially isolating earphone.
Perhaps the usual audible announcement at the beginning of an average speed stretch followed by some kind of visual signal until an "all clear" announcement at the end of the stretch? (And I do realise that this approach will require a way of identifying "a stretch".)
Or something else -- I don't know what, but I'm sure the clever chaps at PGPSW would be able to come up something far better than that.
Joined: Jun 22, 2004 Posts: 322 Location: Swindon, Wiltshire
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 2:17 pm Post subject:
Upgrading the A9 to dual-carriageway is long overdue; even 20 years ago it was sorely lacking. Come on SNP and take back your oil from England and spend the money on the A9 amongst others roads.
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 2:26 pm Post subject:
psyskiesman wrote:
Come on SNP and take back your oil from England
I hope that at the same time that they do what you suggest that they also forgo the huge amounts of grant money that the (English) government dish out to them as well.
Joined: Jun 22, 2004 Posts: 322 Location: Swindon, Wiltshire
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 2:34 pm Post subject:
I'm not high on politics, but I'm sure the oil revenue would be way more than any grants received from the Treasury. Just thought I'd throw that suggestion in to see the response; I haven't lived in Scotland since 1985 but back then I saw the SNP as a viable option in local elections, not sure about national, i.e. full independence.
When driving on West Mids motorways with average speed cameras, conversation in the car is severely hampered by the announcement by CamerAlert of each camera in quick succession.........I don't want my passengers to get annoyed by the technology in my car.
Is there any way of managing the situation?
You know, I wholly agree. I have a Road Angel device and it goes crazy on the M6/M42 near Birmingham.
Often I unplug it for the 20-30 minutes usually necessary.
Incidentally the cameras I refer to are not average speed but (temporary/rush hour) mandatory red circle maximum speed signs. But the point of your message is the same.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14902 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Fri Aug 02, 2013 10:45 pm Post subject:
gem wrote:
AntonM wrote:
When driving on West Mids motorways with average speed cameras, conversation in the car is severely hampered by the announcement by CamerAlert of each camera in quick succession.........I don't want my passengers to get annoyed by the technology in my car.
Is there any way of managing the situation?
You know, I wholly agree. I have a Road Angel device and it goes crazy on the M6/M42 near Birmingham.
Often I unplug it for the 20-30 minutes usually necessary.
Incidentally the cameras I refer to are not average speed but (temporary/rush hour) mandatory red circle maximum speed signs. But the point of your message is the same.
And I wholly disagree. I don't believe any average speed (or variable speed) sets are so close as to be described as in quick succession. And complaining about being warned of speed cameras makes an oxymoron of your membership of this site! Incidentally, if I were so daft as to switch the warnings off, it only takes two taps on my iPhone version of CamerAlert. _________________ Dennis
Joined: Apr 05, 2006 Posts: 61 Location: Stafford, UK
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 1:37 am Post subject:
DennisN wrote:
And I wholly disagree. I don't believe any average speed (or variable speed) sets are so close as to be described as in quick succession. And complaining about being warned of speed cameras makes an oxymoron of your membership of this site! Incidentally, if I were so daft as to switch the warnings off, it only takes two taps on my iPhone version of CamerAlert.
I had to read that twice to be sure I didn't misunderstand your tone.
I don't think anyone was "complaining about being warned of speed cameras". The issue lies with the frequency of the audio warnings which are most definitely "in quick succession" on some stretches of the motorway in Brum, to the extent that they become intrusive and annoying to passengers. I was urging for another way of "being warned of speed cameras" in such situations which would be just as effective but less antisocial.
But evidently, DennisN, this does not affect you. _________________ Anton
The issue lies with the frequency of the audio warnings which are most definitely "in quick succession" on some stretches of the motorway in Brum, to the extent that they become intrusive and annoying to passengers. I was urging for another way of "being warned of speed cameras" in such situations which would be just as effective but less antisocial.
You are quite correct, I travelled from Scotland to France and back again recently, the areas with variable speed limits, M6 and M25, and the sections with road works which use SPECS average speed cameras mean the camera warnings are announced one after the other for what can seem like 100 miles at a time.
Maybe an announcement warning you that you are entering an average speed zone or variable speed limit with another announcement as you leave it would be better than the current set up which is extremely annoying after a while. You could still have a discreet sound at each individual camera to remind you that they are there without the full announcement. This is only going to get worse as these cameras are getting used more and more.
Many a time with the current system I've felt like ripping it from it's mount and tossing it out the window. If the A9 is going to be another road like this I think I'll avoid it more than I already do.
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14902 Location: Keynsham
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 8:12 am Post subject:
I think you'll find that what you're asking for is not possible, simply because intermediate cameras to you are Start cameras to anybody joining along the set. You're dealing with computer logic here and I'm sure I've seen it mentioned that all av speed cameras are, of necessity, treated as Start cameras, except the End ones. Notice that the End cameras don't warn? They just trigger the All Clear. As for series of Variable speed cameras, frequency is down to the nice council or highway authority.
So I reckon it's a choice between warn and not warn - my choice is warn. _________________ Dennis
Joined: Jun 04, 2005 Posts: 19991 Location: West and Southwest London
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 9:47 am Post subject:
Agree with Dennis here.... We are limited by the available functionality on the Sat-Navs we are using. It would be lovely if the system could determine ONLY a start and end camera and keep quiet in between, but the manufacturers don't give us that flexibility in the normal POI system, espaecially when (as said above) one person's "middle" camera" may be another's start camera.
But I fully sympathise with the multiple alerts, especially on devices like TomToms, where you get alerts for the cameras on the other carriageway too. It can drive you mad.. especially when (like me) you have two units running on the dashboard simultaneously AND you have TomTom's own alerts switched on too (for testing purposes). _________________ "Settling in nicely" ;-)
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 12:10 pm Post subject:
DennisN wrote:
I think you'll find that what you're asking for is not possible, simply because intermediate cameras to you are Start cameras to anybody joining along the set. You're dealing with computer logic here and I'm sure I've seen it mentioned that all av speed cameras are, of necessity, treated as Start cameras, except the End ones. Notice that the End cameras don't warn? They just trigger the All Clear. As for series of Variable speed cameras, frequency is down to the nice council or highway authority.
I don't 100% agree with your first statement Dennis. Because we are talking computers here, it would be trivial (I think) to supress av. speed cams if you are already in an average speed zone. The device knows that you are in one, as it's calculating the average speed.
Psuedo code would read
New SPECS cam detected
IF device is already calculating average speed THEN
Suppress warning output.
ENDIF
But of course, this would only work on applications over which 'we' have the coding privileges such as CA.
Joined: Apr 05, 2006 Posts: 61 Location: Stafford, UK
Posted: Sat Aug 03, 2013 1:34 pm Post subject:
M8TJT wrote:
Because we are talking computers here, it would be trivial (I think) to supress av. speed cams if you are already in an average speed zone. The device knows that you are in one, as it's calculating the average speed. [...]
But of course, this would only work on applications over which 'we' have the coding privileges such as CA.
I was just going to say something along those lines, but you said it better.
I use other satnav apps but I always turn their camera alerts off and run CA in the background.
As it's possible to know about thousands of cameras, it must be very much easier to identify stretches of avg speed cameras, possibly with the help of PGPSW subscribers. Then your algorithm would work, given that all SPECS cameras are avg speed, which I didn't know -- or cameras within an identified avg speed stretch could be flagged as such in the database with the ones at either end flagged "start_end", or something.
Perhaps the CA authors might consider this for a future version? _________________ Anton
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
All times are GMT + 1 Hour Goto page Previous1, 2, 3Next
Page 2 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
to travel beyond 60/70mph to overtake a line of a few vehicles. This would depend on how far the sensors would be placed.
device and it goes crazy on the M6/M42 near Birmingham.
