Sneaky mobile speed camera van - do you warn people?

[fastpedaller]

The other reason I ask is that there is so little obvious reward. They just get to the next holdup earlier. There are few journeys where the odd minute is crucial. Certainly the risks taken with their own and other's lives are not objectively justified.
The urgency of the mgif and the desperation to overtake are almost pathological. Why not just relax, take it easy, not put yourself and others under so much pressure? Is the real reward that a need for stimulation is gratified? This may be the reason for "motorway madness".

This seems to be a strange 'human conditioning' which has taken over (maybe overtaken ) - I notice this on buses..... As the bus is over 200m from the stop, folk are getting out of their seats, jockeying for position and dashing for the door, risking potential injury (when bus stops) which would mostly be avoided if they remained seated. Quite bizarre to watch, as I sit in my seat and end up maybe 40 seconds behind when I get off. Is it because they 'are important' and want to demonstrate they are unable to lose a few seconds? I sure don't know.

[Cyril Haearn]

They are afraid the bus driver doesna stop long enough to let them off
Best to remain seated for fear of an emergency stop, I try to sit facing backward too. May I refer the Rt Hon Member to my thread 'buses (+ coaches): why'?

People are rather undisciplined at the train station too, instead of making space for others to disembark first they try to get on asap
Of course a train or bus cannae move off until all doors are closed

[pwa]

Close passing would concern me much more, when cycling, than someone going a few mph over a limit. While I do see the point in speed limits, the excess speed that really bothers me is speed above what is safe for the circumstances at that moment. So on a clear bit of road with no parked cars, no pedestrians, etc, if a car passes at 35mph and the limit is 30 it is, for me, a small concern. If someone drives past a row of parked cars at 29mph in a 30mph limit that is much more of a concern to me. That looks like real danger.

Of course, we are not being offered a choice between close passers and speeders. All too often we get both in a bumper package. I suspect one leads to the other.
I have no confidence that what a driver thinks is a safe speed in the circumstances is that.
Both antisocial behaviours make the roads feel less safe for less intrepid cyclists.

I am talking about what concerns me most when I observe it in another driver. A driver a little over the speed limit on a road currently free of hazards is far lower on my list of concerns than a driver within the speed limit but going too fast for the circumstances. That latter is the bigger concern. By a long way. I want to see people slowing for hazardous situations. It doesn't bother me if they are doing 31 in a 30 so long as they take the speed down as they get to the row of parked cars or when they approach a cyclist they will have to wait behind until they get around a corner and can see well enough to pass safely. My priorities work that way.

I would have more faith in a driver who is doing 31mph in a 30 but then sees a school bus parked up ahead and slows down to 20 as he approaches, than I would in someone who is doing 29 and continues at that speed as they approach and pass the school bus. And both those types of driver do exist.

[Bonefishblues]

Close passing would concern me much more, when cycling, than someone going a few mph over a limit. While I do see the point in speed limits, the excess speed that really bothers me is speed above what is safe for the circumstances at that moment. So on a clear bit of road with no parked cars, no pedestrians, etc, if a car passes at 35mph and the limit is 30 it is, for me, a small concern. If someone drives past a row of parked cars at 29mph in a 30mph limit that is much more of a concern to me. That looks like real danger.

Of course, we are not being offered a choice between close passers and speeders. All too often we get both in a bumper package. I suspect one leads to the other.
I have no confidence that what a driver thinks is a safe speed in the circumstances is that.
Both antisocial behaviours make the roads feel less safe for less intrepid cyclists.

I am talking about what concerns me most when I observe it in another driver. A driver a little over the speed limit on a road currently free of hazards is far lower on my list of concerns than a driver within the speed limit but going too fast for the circumstances. That latter is the bigger concern. By a long way. I want to see people slowing for hazardous situations. It doesn't bother me if they are doing 31 in a 30 so long as they take the speed down as they get to the row of parked cars or when they approach a cyclist they will have to wait behind until they get around a corner and can see well enough to pass safely. My priorities work that way.

I agree.

MS, why do you think one might lead to the other, out of interest?

[peetee]

In my last years of car ownership (I have not owned a car for 9 years) I spent all of my time trying to eek out the best milage from my fuel. It bought a bit of interest and enthusiasm back to driving as it had developed into a frustrating and stressful waste of my time and resources. Driving slower made no appreciable difference to the journey time because the extra time spent bimbling along motorways made me only a little further back in the queue on the slip road and the 4 miles into the city and home.
I have always had cars stuck to my back bumper because I refuse to drive at 35mph in a 30 limit which seems to be the norm. Having said that, about 3 years ago I did receive points on my licence driving my wife's car on a downhill stretch of quiet dual carriageway. Some might say I was unlucky. I dont. I deserve a slap on the wrist and as such this hasn't changed my view on speeding. Warn people of a speed camera? No. In fact I think all speed cameras should be hidden. Just one more example of drivers looking to dodge responsibility for their actions. In our road there is a visible speed camera 150 yards from our house and it doesn't stop drivers from speeding past our door. If the camera was hidden word would soon get round there was one here or hereabouts but without an exact location drivers would be careful for a much greater length of road.

[eileithyia]

Do I warn others, absolutely NOT, if they can't drive appropriately then tough.

[pwa]

Do I warn others, absolutely NOT, if they can't drive appropriately then tough.

I have never warned another driver about a camera. I do not want to facilitate complete disregard for limits.

[The utility cyclist]

My view on the matter is that the government should pass a new law that stipulates every motor vehicle should be retrofitted with a speed restriction device (at motorists cost) and that our road network should be set up in such a way that makes it impossible to break the speed limit set unless you act criminally and try to defeat the device, in which case this would be picked up at your next MOT when the device information/seals are seen to have been tampered with. From that, retrospective prosecution, say crushed car plus hefty fine and banned from driving for 6 months.

Problem immediately solved of warning people about speeding/speeding as a whole as in theory no-one could do it.

it would also mean massively fewer incidents, thus fewer if any police/civilians needed to be a deterrent and to do the admin/speed awareness etc. They could be used elsewhere, say monitoring driver behaviour and prosecuting that more readily. Roads would be far less intimidating and the added benefit that manufacturers would be forced to actually develop motorvehicles for efficiency rather than having engines that need to propel huge lumps of mass on toward and in excess of double the maximum speed for motorways, this in turn means less pollution.

Nope, instead the UK gov peed away best part of a billion quid onto everyone to force them to have a utilities use measuring system that is not only flawed and dangerous but is absolutely a lie in that it saves people money

[fastpedaller]

My view on the matter is that the government should pass a new law that stipulates every motor vehicle should be retrofitted with a speed restriction device (at motorists cost)

I usually agree with most of what you write, but you clearly know very little about how cars operate - this would be pretty much impossible (or cost more than the value of the vehicle) if applied to existing cars. Maybe you mean just for new ones?
I'm not sure restricting speed is a good idea - I don't want (an albeit speeding) car being restricted in their bid to overtake me on my bike or in my car. If they MUST get past, I'd prefer them (having made the move) to get further in front as quickly as possible.

[The utility cyclist]

My view on the matter is that the government should pass a new law that stipulates every motor vehicle should be retrofitted with a speed restriction device (at motorists cost)

I usually agree with most of what you write, but you clearly know very little about how cars operate - this would be pretty much impossible (or cost more than the value of the vehicle) if applied to existing cars. Maybe you mean just for new ones?
I'm not sure restricting speed is a good idea - I don't want (an albeit speeding) car being restricted in their bid to overtake me on my bike or in my car. If they MUST get past, I'd prefer them (having made the move) to get further in front as quickly as possible.

No, all of them, how much is it going to cost to fit such a device, a few hundred quid. We know how little it costs to fit GPS tracking devices and speed limiters, there's already speed sign readers that control speed but there are simpler and more accurate methods when installed in the signs. Would it cost the UK gov a lot to put the signals into signs at certain junctures, yup, but a lot less than the savings from fewer lives lost and the massive number of serious and slight injuries, damaged vehciles etc.
Getting these devices made and fitted would also bring a lot of employment and them being made by the tens of millions would reduce the price enormously.

Restricting overtaking is a good thing, overtaking increases the chances of collision/incidents massively, this should be very obvious quite honestly.

[pwa]

I cannot see why cars and other motor vehicles being made today are not being fitted with some sort of speed control. It would suit most drivers, who don't want speeding tickets, and it would suit other road users. The technology exists and isn't going to cost a fortune. The only real technical obstacle is that the speed limit of each bit of road would need to be properly installed in a database. We would have a decade or so in which older cars did not have the restriction, but they would gradually become outnumbered by those that did and would have fewer and fewer chances to exceed speed limits. As a driver I would welcome that.

On a purely practical level, this has to be more appropriate to modern life than having some bored out his mind officer parked up in lay-bys for his/her working day, implementing a system based on fear of prosecution. Compliance would start increasing quickly and would rise to close to 100% eventually.

[Oldjohnw]

I cannot see why cars and other motor vehicles being made today are not being fitted with some sort of speed control. It would suit most drivers, who don't want speeding tickets, and it would suit other road users. The technology exists and isn't going to cost a fortune. The only real technical obstacle is that the speed limit of each bit of road would need to be properly installed in a database. We would have a decade or so in which older cars did not have the restriction, but they would gradually become outnumbered by those that did and would have fewer and fewer chances to exceed speed limits. As a driver I would welcome that.

On a purely practical level, this has to be more appropriate to modern life than having some bored out his mind officer parked up in lay-bys for his/her working day, implementing a system based on fear of prosecution. Compliance would start increasing quickly and would rise to close to 100% eventually.

Many cars are, although voluntarily applied. My VW has: Adaptve Cruise Control. It can both maintain my speed of choice or impose a maximum. I reguraly use both. I imagine it would very easy to have these connected to speed limits externally. We have satnav, after all. I often travel less than the limit because the conditions tell me that is wise.

[Cunobelin]

Close passing would concern me much more, when cycling, than someone going a few mph over a limit. While I do see the point in speed limits, the excess speed that really bothers me is speed above what is safe for the circumstances at that moment. So on a clear bit of road with no parked cars, no pedestrians, etc, if a car passes at 35mph and the limit is 30 it is, for me, a small concern. If someone drives past a row of parked cars at 29mph in a 30mph limit that is much more of a concern to me. That looks like real danger.

Of course, we are not being offered a choice between close passers and speeders. All too often we get both in a bumper package. I suspect one leads to the other.
I have no confidence that what a driver thinks is a safe speed in the circumstances is that.
Both antisocial behaviours make the roads feel less safe for less intrepid cyclists.

I am talking about what concerns me most when I observe it in another driver. A driver a little over the speed limit on a road currently free of hazards is far lower on my list of concerns than a driver within the speed limit but going too fast for the circumstances. That latter is the bigger concern. By a long way. I want to see people slowing for hazardous situations. It doesn't bother me if they are doing 31 in a 30 so long as they take the speed down as they get to the row of parked cars or when they approach a cyclist they will have to wait behind until they get around a corner and can see well enough to pass safely. My priorities work that way.

I would have more faith in a driver who is doing 31mph in a 30 but then sees a school bus parked up ahead and slows down to 20 as he approaches, than I would in someone who is doing 29 and continues at that speed as they approach and pass the school bus. And both those types of driver do exist.

31 in a 30 limit is acceptable and will not be ticketed

[Bmblbzzz]

Adaptive speed control is to become mandatory EU-wide (effectively this will include UK despite Brexit) from 2021 or thereabouts, but it does not in its current state absolutely limit speed. Some other markets have other systems, eg Japan, but afaik no hard limits other than on HGVs and PSVs.

[rfryer]

My VW has: Adaptve Cruise Control. It can both maintain my speed of choice or impose a maximum. I reguraly use both. I imagine it would very easy to have these connected to speed limits externally. We have satnav, after all. I often travel less than the limit because the conditions tell me that is wise.

My Leaf has these too, as well as speed limit sign recognition which enables the car to display a maximum speed limit sign in the middle of the dashboard at all times. It's not 100% accurate,, but it's surprisingly effective.

It frustrates me that these systems aren't linked. When the speed limit changes, I have to make multiple button presses to reconfigure the cruise control or speed limiter to match the new limit. It would be so much better if the system just prompted me to accept a change to the new limit.