Deterring mobile phone use

Bonefishblues
Posts: 4085
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Bonefishblues » 11 Jul 2018, 7:13pm

Bmblbzzz wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:But you can't buy a speed camera off the shelf. This is something a community can choose to do for itself. Mine included.

Why does everything have to be nickle and dimed on here?

You and your neighbours can club together and buy a speed camera if you've got enough money. What you can't do is set it up at the roadside and issue fines - though you might be allowed to put it in a roadside garden, for instance (and not issue fines). The linked article gives no indication of what permission would be necessary to install one of these phone detectors at the roadside: planning permission? Maybe it comes under permitted development? Maybe the same as erecting a road sign?

I wasn't saying we bought a speed camera as a Parish Council. I was referring to the discussion about signs that display speed, which apparently have only a tiny effect, so that's money wasted.

thirdcrank
Posts: 26227
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby thirdcrank » 16 Jul 2018, 11:36am

On the subject of the signs which flash up a driver's speed, I see that there's a move to relax some of the speed limits at roadworks.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-44837339

Simon Williams, RAC spokesman, said: "The safety of road workers is paramount but the use of average speed cameras have been very successful in controlling speed.
"Increasing the limit will do away with some of the frustration for drivers."


I think I've posted before - probably several times - that I think that the signs which display the speed of an approaching vehicle would be very useful here. At present, there's a mix of drivers really trying to comply who are driving at or just below 30 on their own speedo so they are probably driving even more slowly and of drivers who "know" that their speedo is over-recording and who also "know" that there's waggle room for driving a bit over the limit. This leads to some drivers resorting to intimidating tailgating. If drivers had a visual official indication of the speed the system was recording, I think there would be a more homogenous traffic flow

brynpoeth
Posts: 5360
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby brynpoeth » 16 Jul 2018, 1:56pm

Increasing maximum limits in roadworks is madness
The limits must be reduced, the lanes must narrow and weave
Anyone here ever worked on a motorway? I had to stop on the hard shoulder once, that was terrifying enough
Alternative facts welcome
......
Cycling? Of course, but it is far better on a Gillott

Bonefishblues
Posts: 4085
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Bonefishblues » 16 Jul 2018, 2:19pm

Why? There's no workforce to protect, and we've already rehearsed on here that this will reduce frustrations and in particular allow people to exceed the speed of a speed limited lorry.

brynpoeth
Posts: 5360
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby brynpoeth » 16 Jul 2018, 2:34pm

The article mentions times when "fewer" workers are there
The lanes are still narrow even if no work is being done
Hgvs can do 56 mph, that is too fast for me in a car through narrow winding lanes
The suggestion is like introducing a minimum speed limit by stealth
Besides, to keep ahead of the terrorists one would have to aim for 60+ mph. Madness with narrow lanes, curves and no hard shoulder

Maybe the same could be done with the law on telephoning, just end the ban because so many ignore it :(
Alternative facts welcome
......
Cycling? Of course, but it is far better on a Gillott

thirdcrank
Posts: 26227
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby thirdcrank » 16 Jul 2018, 3:10pm

There have been some glaring anomalies with speed cameras at roadworks. Let me say, BTW, that enforcement is only necessary because some people do not recognise the dangers to people - human beings - working in the carriageway.

A few years ago when the junction of the M62 / A1(M) was being rebuilt there was an old-style speed camera on the westbound M62 after drivers had passed the junction which made £1,000,000+ p.a. because at weekends when no work was being dome, the cones were moved to the verge and a lot of drivers assumed the limit no longer applied. Legally, they were wrong but the enforcement seemed indefensible to me. (And no, I wasn't caught by it.) The Highways Agency as was defended this by saying that the law did not allow a temporary speed limit that could be suspended. Obviously, the law is whatever is passed and I think that if the HA were to request the law be changed it would happen and this looks as though it has happened. Not before time.

Bonefishblues
Posts: 4085
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Bonefishblues » 16 Jul 2018, 4:05pm

brynpoeth wrote:The article mentions times when "fewer" workers are there
The lanes are still narrow even if no work is being done
Hgvs can do 56 mph, that is too fast for me in a car through narrow winding lanes
The suggestion is like introducing a minimum speed limit by stealth
Besides, to keep ahead of the terrorists one would have to aim for 60+ mph. Madness with narrow lanes, curves and no hard shoulder

Maybe the same could be done with the law on telephoning, just end the ban because so many ignore it :(

Widely reported as no workers working on the carriageway in the reports I have been listening to.

To keep ahead of a lorry at 56mph limited one needs to do 56+1mph, an indicated 60mph or just below on many/most speedos, which is why the conflict comes about in 50 limits, IMHO.

Remember that everyone going at 55-60 in the same direction is much safer than driving at a cumulative closing speed of up to 120mph.

And no, of course using a hand held phone shouldn't be legalised, given the abundance of evidence that it's about the most dangerous thing one can do in a moving vehicle (well I can think of some others, but this is a family show, as the saying goes!)
Last edited by Bonefishblues on 16 Jul 2018, 4:08pm, edited 1 time in total.

brynpoeth
Posts: 5360
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby brynpoeth » 16 Jul 2018, 4:08pm

Bonefishblues wrote:
brynpoeth wrote:The article mentions times when "fewer" workers are there
The lanes are still narrow even if no work is being done
Hgvs can do 56 mph, that is too fast for me in a car through narrow winding lanes
The suggestion is like introducing a minimum speed limit by stealth
Besides, to keep ahead of the terrorists one would have to aim for 60+ mph. Madness with narrow lanes, curves and no hard shoulder

Maybe the same could be done with the law on telephoning, just end the ban because so many ignore it :(

Widely reported as no workers working on the carriageway in the reports I have been listening to.

To keep ahead of a lorry at 56mph limited one needs to do 56+1mph, an indicated 60mph or just below on many/most speedos, which is why the conflict comes about in 50 limits, IMHO.

Remember that everyone going at 55-60 in the same direction is much safer than driving at a cumulative closing speed of up to 120mph.

There is no minimum speed limit
56+1 is not enough, I ease off for curves or to create a gap when being overtaken
The terrorists never ease off
Alternative facts welcome
......
Cycling? Of course, but it is far better on a Gillott

Bonefishblues
Posts: 4085
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Bonefishblues » 16 Jul 2018, 4:10pm

brynpoeth wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:
brynpoeth wrote:The article mentions times when "fewer" workers are there
The lanes are still narrow even if no work is being done
Hgvs can do 56 mph, that is too fast for me in a car through narrow winding lanes
The suggestion is like introducing a minimum speed limit by stealth
Besides, to keep ahead of the terrorists one would have to aim for 60+ mph. Madness with narrow lanes, curves and no hard shoulder

Maybe the same could be done with the law on telephoning, just end the ban because so many ignore it :(

Widely reported as no workers working on the carriageway in the reports I have been listening to.

To keep ahead of a lorry at 56mph limited one needs to do 56+1mph, an indicated 60mph or just below on many/most speedos, which is why the conflict comes about in 50 limits, IMHO.

Remember that everyone going at 55-60 in the same direction is much safer than driving at a cumulative closing speed of up to 120mph.

There is no minimum speed limit
56+1 is not enough, I ease off for curves or to create a gap when being overtaken
The terrorists never ease off

Do what you report doing, which is to drive at a speed you feel comfortable with in L1, but do make sufficient progress that you don't impede, of course.

brynpoeth
Posts: 5360
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby brynpoeth » 16 Jul 2018, 4:13pm

Bonefishblues wrote:
brynpoeth wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:Widely reported as no workers working on the carriageway in the reports I have been listening to.

To keep ahead of a lorry at 56mph limited one needs to do 56+1mph, an indicated 60mph or just below on many/most speedos, which is why the conflict comes about in 50 limits, IMHO.

Remember that everyone going at 55-60 in the same direction is much safer than driving at a cumulative closing speed of up to 120mph.

There is no minimum speed limit
56+1 is not enough, I ease off for curves or to create a gap when being overtaken
The terrorists never ease off

Do what you report doing, which is to drive at a speed you feel comfortable with in L1, but do make sufficient progress that you don't impede, of course.

I always stay in lane one
Driving at an appropriate/comfortable speed, comfortably below the maximum does of course hold up and infuriate normal drivers
I overtake them later when they have to buy fuel :wink:
Alternative facts welcome
......
Cycling? Of course, but it is far better on a Gillott

Bonefishblues
Posts: 4085
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Bonefishblues » 16 Jul 2018, 4:19pm

Then do consider, under UK law (no idea about Germany) whether you are making sufficient progress. But we're already in Groundhog territory now.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 9771
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby mjr » 16 Jul 2018, 4:28pm

Bonefishblues wrote:Then do consider, under UK law (no idea about Germany) whether you are making sufficient progress. But we're already in Groundhog territory now.

Isn't the oft-misinterpreted speeder's friend about making progress in the driving standards rather than the law? If not, can you cite the law, please?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Bonefishblues
Posts: 4085
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby Bonefishblues » 16 Jul 2018, 4:35pm

mjr wrote:
Bonefishblues wrote:Then do consider, under UK law (no idea about Germany) whether you are making sufficient progress. But we're already in Groundhog territory now.

Isn't the oft-misinterpreted speeder's friend about making progress in the driving standards rather than the law? If not, can you cite the law, please?

I'm absolutely not talking about that, nor am I an advocate of speeding, as I suspect you know :lol:

I am taking about a vehicle travelling at a speed such that it becomes a hazard in that context equally as much as driving in excess of the prevailing limit. It was advice I was given as a learner driver, and is still the advice now, seemingly https://www.theorytestadvice.co.uk/driv ... ogress.htm

thirdcrank
Posts: 26227
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby thirdcrank » 16 Jul 2018, 4:39pm

It's open to interpretation of course, but I'd suggest that intentionally driving slowly in any lane might amount to driving without reasonable consideration for others, depending on the reason for doing so. There's been a lot of policing-by-media-release about middle-lane hogging without AFAIK a lot of enforcement, but when there is I believe it's for this offence.

User avatar
meic
Posts: 18493
Joined: 1 Feb 2007, 9:37pm
Location: Caerfyrddin (Carmarthen)

Re: Deterring mobile phone use

Postby meic » 16 Jul 2018, 5:13pm

I am taking about a vehicle travelling at a speed such that it becomes a hazard in that context equally as much as driving in excess of the prevailing limit. It was advice I was given as a learner driver, and is still the advice now, seemingly https://www.theorytestadvice.co.uk/driv ... ogress.htm

There is a difference between how you are expected to drive in order to prove competency and how you are expected to drive every day.
On a test you are obliged to make progress in order to prove that you are capable of doing so.
Once you have passed your test you are perfectly free to drive at a speed which is efficient for your vehicle. There is a significant fuel advantage doing 60mph compared to 70mph.

Look at this advice from the Department of Transport.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/vca/fcb/smarter-driving-tips.asp
Yma o Hyd