http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-27892952

The A77 average limit cameras may have improved flow but they actually make it worse when you're trying to cross the other carriageway to get to a junction, due to the lower variance in traffic speeds which lead to fewer gaps

The 2 exits from Ayr onto the A77 South of the last circle with the off to the Hospital are unbelievably dangerous, 

(A79 & Doonholm road.)

i just never come out that way if i am heading South.

 

george

All SPECS cameras do is slow things down, it doesn't stop erratic lane changes & other loony behaviour.

 

Me, I just find an alternative route away from the afflicted one, it may take me a tad longer, but the main thing is I'm not concentrating on the speedo, I'm concentrating on my driving & my surroundings + prevailing conditions.

 

All of which means some bits will be slower, others will be faster, but I don't have to worry about getting nailed by a stupid SPECs camera.

 

If more people had the balls to rebel against all of these scameras, instead of rolling over & being treated like naughty children then better!

If more people had the balls to rebel against all of these scameras, instead of rolling over & being treated like naughty children then better!

 

Just try it!   I got done twice in one week in February with average cameras on M4 roadworks at Slough (50 mph limit).   Like many people, I had the misconception that they were accurate!

 

The first offence copped me at "57 mph" the second nabbed me at a whopping "68 mph" at 04.00 am.

 

I use cruise control and had set it at 50 mph and the motorway at this point is straight and level.   I have a Garmin Nuvi Sat Nav which monitors speed limits and pings loudly if I am exceeding them and the speed display on the screen changes colour to red.   I concede that the first offence may have been slightly over 50 mph, but not as high as 57 mph and the second one is just plain idiotic!   I can't help wondering how many other innocent drivers were caught on this stretch, especially as the roadworks started in November 2013 and finished at Christmas, but the cones and narrow lanes were not restored to normal until April 2014!

 

However, you don't get the option to contest a camera - all you get is a questionnaire asking you to confirm you were the driver so I ended up with a Speed Awareness Course and 3 penalty points on an SP50.    My wife went mad and accused me of taking chances.

 

Funnily enough, she has just bagged a 35 mph in a 30 mph limit somewhere in rural Berkshire and swears blind she was doing less than 30!   I believe her because, if anything, she dawdles along and, when I'm with her, I constantly have to remind her that the scenery is supposed to move!   Again, there's no way to appeal - just a form to say whether or not she was driving!

 

The police and authorities may swear blind that these cameras are accurate, but I know for certain they are not!

But what can we do?.................The cynicism of the police will always tell you that the jails are full of people protesting their innocence! 

Edited 19 June, 201411 yr by bealine

Visit pepipoo. Demand to see the calibration certificate for all of the cameras.

Whilst on the subject of cameras, install an in car camera which has a gps module on it, because you can use the video & the gps data to provide the evidence.

And to say it can't be accepted is BS, because in the event of an accident the video & gps data is admissible to your insurer who in turn can use it in court to defend you against the 3rd party.

 

If more people had the balls to rebel against all of these scameras, instead of rolling over & being treated like naughty children then better!

 

I look forward to the Court hearing.

Just try it!   I got done twice in one week in February with average cameras on M4 roadworks at Slough (50 mph limit).   Like many people, I had the misconception that they were accurate!

 

The first offence copped me at "57 mph" the second nabbed me at a whopping "68 mph" at 04.00 am.

 

I use cruise control and had set it at 50 mph and the motorway at this point is straight and level.   I have a Garmin Nuvi Sat Nav which monitors speed limits and pings loudly if I am exceeding them and the speed display on the screen changes colour to red.   I concede that the first offence may have been slightly over 50 mph, but not as high as 57 mph and the second one is just plain idiotic!   I can't help wondering how many other innocent drivers were caught on this stretch, especially as the roadworks started in November 2013 and finished at Christmas, but the cones and narrow lanes were not restored to normal until April 2014!

 

However, you don't get the option to contest a camera - all you get is a questionnaire asking you to confirm you were the driver so I ended up with a Speed Awareness Course and 3 penalty points on an SP50.    My wife went mad and accused me of taking chances.

 

Funnily enough, she has just bagged a 35 mph in a 30 mph limit somewhere in rural Berkshire and swears blind she was doing less than 30!   I believe her because, if anything, she dawdles along and, when I'm with her, I constantly have to remind her that the scenery is supposed to move!   Again, there's no way to appeal - just a form to say whether or not she was driving!

 

The police and authorities may swear blind that these cameras are accurate, but I know for certain they are not!

But what can we do?.................The cynicism of the police will always tell you that the jails are full of people protesting their innocence! 

 

Wrong.

You can contest the NIP by requesting your time in the Magistrates Court.............................good luck.

Visit pepipoo. Demand to see the calibration certificate for all of the cameras.

Whilst on the subject of cameras, install an in car camera which has a gps module on it, because you can use the video & the gps data to provide the evidence.

And to say it can't be accepted is BS, because in the event of an accident the video & gps data is admissible to your insurer who in turn can use it in court to defend you against the 3rd party.

 

And again wrong.

Your GPS and dash cam are not calibrated, therefore they are deemed inadmissible in that context.

Wrong.

You can contest the NIP by requesting your time in the Magistrates Court.............................good luck.

 

A complete farce and a waste of time.   I tried, once, to contest a wrongly issued parking ticket in Crawley, West Sussex.   Not only did I lose two full days waiting while every piece of low-life up for armed robbery, thuggery and general scumbaggery enjoyed their little moment of fame before remand, but the magistrate took just 45 seconds to decide, without hearing my case, that I was guilty.

 

Conversation like this:

 

"Mr Bealine, you are charged with failing to display a valid parking ticket.   Do you plead guilty or not guilty?"

 

"Not guilty, ma'am."

 

"So, you what parking ticket did you display?" 

 

"I didn't ma'am.   The parking machines were brand new and not yet commissioned.   The PCN was issued on 29th May, the machines were not put into service until 1st June."

 

"That's irrelevant.   You are charged with failing to display, by your own admission you weren't displayaing a ticket.   I find you guilty - fined £85!   Call the next case!"

 

For the motorist, therre is no justice in Britain.

Stupid idea that forces people to spend the journey looking at the speedo not the road.

Like speed limits you mean?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

In all of the time that I've been through sections of the M25 & M3 with SPECs cameras, all I've done is use my sat nav to bring my car to the speed that the boards say (usually 50) and then lock the speed at that with cruise control, never had a ticket.

 

The new cameras that you REALLY, REALLY should be worried about are HADECS, the size of a shoe box, painted grey and very discretely placed on the side of the gantries on the M25 & other "managed motorways" and they have been noted as flashing motorists as low as 72 mph in normal traffic conditions, so that begs the question: 

 

Where is the 10% discrepancy allowance gone? I always though that the rule was 10% to allow for speedo differential. 

 

And if you really want sneaky low life tricks, go to North Wales, Dorset & Wiltshire, where the plod do really sneaky tactics and use small shoe box sized boxes over the brow of bridges & stop in the central reservations and the list can go on & on.

The 10% 'allowance' is I believe only acpo guidance, I.e. they don't have to apply it if they don't want to and it's not uncommon for people in Worcestershire to get a nip for doing barely over the 30 limit for mobile camera vans in the 'hot spots' where there have been accidents or the locals are revolting in the villages with main a roads running through them.

personally I think your suggestion of using cruise in the 50 spec areas is sound advice. I've used it on the M6 to good effect and it certainly makes for a more stress free drive.

The guidance is 10% + 2 mph I believe. The problem with speed enforcement is similar to that which has been partially addressed today with parking cameras, and what Eric Pickles described as " over-zealous and unfair rules" he also said the situation was "detrimental to natural justice". As the technology has become available and cheap to use, in theory, every square inch of a councils area could legitimately be policed and they feel legally within their rights to behave as the have been on road safety grounds. The UK has never previously been in a position where laws could be enforced everywhere and all of the time instead they have been targeted in the worst areas and the most blatant offenders. This is not a perfect system but has the advantage of taking the majority along with the various enforcement agencies. I think the danger with the same over zealous pursuit of speeders is losing the backing of the majority of road users.  

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27952341      

The 10% 'allowance' is I believe only acpo guidance, I.e. they don't have to apply it if they don't want to and it's not uncommon for people in Worcestershire to get a nip for doing barely over the 30 limit for mobile camera vans in the 'hot spots' where there have been accidents or the locals are revolting in the villages with main a roads running through them.

personally I think your suggestion of using cruise in the 50 spec areas is sound advice. I've used it on the M6 to good effect and it certainly makes for a more stress free drive.

 

Most speedometers have tolerances of some ±10%, mainly due to variations in tire diameter.Sources of error due to tire diameter variations are wear, temperature, pressure, vehicle load, and nominal tire size. Vehicle manufacturers usually calibrate speedometers to read high by an amount equal to the average error, to ensure that their speedometers never indicate a lower speed than the actual speed of the vehicle, to ensure they are not liable for drivers violating speed limits.

Excessive speedometer error after manufacture can come from several causes but most commonly is due to nonstandard tyre diameter, in which case the error is

 

Nearly all tyres now have their size shown as "T/A_W" on the side of the tyre

 

 

For example, a standard tyre is "185/70R14" with diameter = 2*185*(70/100)+(14*25.4) = 614.6 mm (185x70/1270 + 14 = 24.20 in). Another is "195/50R15" with 2*195*(50/100)+(15*25.4) = 576.0 mm (195x50/1270 + 15 = 22.68 in). Replacing the first tyre (and wheels) with the second (on 15" = 381 mm wheels), a speedometer reads 100 * (1-(576/614.6)) = 100 * (1 - 22.68/24.20) = 6.28% higher than the actual speed. At an actual speed of 100 km/h (60 mph), the speedometer will indicate 100 x 1.0628 = 106.28 km/h (60 * 1.0628 = 63.77 mph), approximately.

In the case of wear, a new "185/70R14" tyre of 620 mm (24.4 inch) diameter will have ~8 mm tread depth, at legal limit this reduces to 1.6 mm, the difference being 12.8 mm in diameter or 0.5 inches which is 2% in 620 mm (24.4 inches).

International agreements

In many countries the legislated error in speedometer readings is ultimately governed by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Regulation 39, which covers those aspects of vehicle type approval that relate to speedometers. The main purpose of the UNECE regulations is to facilitate trade in motor vehicles by agreeing uniform type approval standards rather than requiring a vehicle model to undergo different approval processes in each country where it is sold.

European Union member states must also grant type approval to vehicles meeting similar EU standards. The ones covering speedometers are similar to the UNECE regulation in that they specify that:

• The indicated speed must never be less than the actual speed, i.e. it should not be possible to inadvertently speed because of an incorrect speedometer reading.
• The indicated speed must not be more than 110 percent of the true speed plus 4 km/h at specified test speeds. For example, at 80 km/h, the indicated speed must be no more than 92 km/h.

The standards specify both the limits on accuracy and many of the details of how it should be measured during the approvals process, for example that the test measurements should be made (for most vehicles) at 40, 80 and 120 km/h, and at a particular ambient temperature. There are slight differences between the different standards, for example in the minimum accuracy of the equipment measuring the true speed of the vehicle.

The UNECE regulation relaxes the requirements for vehicles mass-produced following type approval. At Conformity of Production Audits the upper limit on indicated speed is increased to 110 percent plus 6 km/h for cars, buses, trucks and similar vehicles, and 110 percent plus 8 km/h for two- or three-wheeled vehicles that have a maximum speed above 50 km/h (or a cylinder capacity, if powered by a heat engine, of more than 50 cm³). European Union Directive 2000/7/EC, which relates to two- and three-wheeled vehicles, provides similar slightly relaxed limits in production.

Edited 22 June, 201411 yr by bealine

I will be looking out for what sentence she receives.  

http://dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/amazed-traffic-police-find-pensioner-5393704

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-33551742

 

More ASC's in Scotland and on the Motorways. 

(Briskoda members visiting Scotland in their Golf R's need pay special attention.)

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-33551742

More ASC's in Scotland and on the Motorways.

(Briskoda members visiting Scotland in their Golf R's need pay special attention.)

I assume they rarely use ASCs north of the border?

Actually they use them rather a lot now.

Many miles of the A77,  and 120 miles of the A9, and the Access's to the Forth Road Bridge on Motorway.

 

But this is a change as in use more commonly on Motorways in Scotland.

http://bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-33551742

More ASC's in Scotland and on the Motorways.

(Briskoda members visiting Scotland in their Golf R's need pay special attention.)

Ahh dear.

Thats helping fund the £500m then.

Helping reduce emissions they say. Any excuse. I can ride rhe bike at 2nd gear at 50mph (9k rpm at a guess) and im sure im putting out more emmisions than 70mph at 4.5k in 6th.

Emissions is more about driving style than any speed limit isnt it.

Particularly since the problems on that stretch of the A9 are dangerous overtaking, and people pulling out of 1-level junctions without adequate space. Average speed scameras will do nothing for either of these issues.

no, but you can bet that figures will be plucked out of the air to make a case for the cameras "making the roads safer". Cameras are the ACPO way of policing roads on a low budget.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Knives don't kill people, people kill people.

Speed doesn't kill people, people kill people.

 

So everyone should tear about the countryside armed with an Uzi and a Zombie Killer - you know it makes sense