[Closed] Mobile Speed Cameras and Overtaking

Everytime I see a mobile van on the A9 its enforcing the speed limit on the dual carraigway sections rather than the single carraigeway sections.

Surely the single carraigeway sections are more dangerous and deserve the focus.

Or are they simply placing cameras in the sections where they know more people will speed.

I agree its a dangerous road and needs to be enforced but it needs to be done properly otherwise the usual criticisms of "revenue generation" seem justified

There is a third option of course...

Speeding, getting penalised, and causing an accident! Hopefully that will never occur! (by a camera van!)

[quote=richmtb ]Everytime I see a mobile van on the A9 its enforcing the speed limit on the dual carraigway sections rather than the single carraigeway sections.For balance, I've often seen a van on single carraigeway sections of the A9. However, as already pointed out above, placement is determined by the need to have a decent straight with good visibility for the camera.

It's not 'revenue generation' it's penalising people for speeding.

What speed where you going at?

I know that road very well, and it's not all that wise to go hell for leather along it as deer have a nice wee tendency to jump onto the road without warning.

I'm guessing that you already know the rules regarding disqualification and retesting on newly qualified drivers.

Take it as a rap on the knuckles and learn that you need to improve your observation and decision making in the car.

For balance, I've often seen a van on single carraigeway sections of the A9. However, as already pointed out above, placement is determined by the need to have a decent straight with good visibility for the camera.

To be fair my comment is from a fairly limited set of observations. And the fact that the one and only speeding ticket the wife got was on a dual carraigeway section of the A9!

I don't drive on it very often (too many speed cameras!)

Its an interesting one though. Given the rules about where they can site speed cameras they are pretty much always going to be placed on stretches of road that are "overtaking opportunities"

druidh - Member

richmtb » To be fair, there are very few speed cameras in Scotland compared to the rest of the UK

can I just say A68?

[quote=richmtb ]To be fair my comment is from a fairly limited set of observations. And the fact that the one and only speeding ticket the wife got was on a dual carraigeway section of the A9!
I don't drive on it very often (too many speed cameras!)
Your observation skills really are poor then 😉 The only [i]fixed[/i] speeding cameras between Perth and Inverness are at Dunkeld (Northbound) and Blair Atholl (Southbound).

On single carriageway you tend to be limited by the caravan driver in front of you. Dual carriageways allow the Audi drivers amongst us a mandate to drive 3 inches from your bumper thus can actually be more dangerous.

Your observation skills really are poor then The only fixed speeding cameras between Perth and Inverness are at Dunkeld (Northbound) and Blair Atholl (Southbound).

But still on the A9, there are an additional two north/east bound - one at Blackford and one at Auchterader plus a south/west bound one at Blackford too.

MS - speed limits are a load of crap in my opinion. There are to many variables such as your car, how you are feeling, weather, temperture, other drivers, road surface, etc.

ehhh... no they are a MAXIMUM speed if all the other things are in order, not a target. If the conditions dictate you reduce from the MAX not increase when favourable.

Custard Cream?

sometimes i feel bad about driving at the speed limit cos of the odd obviously furious driver screaming and swearing at me in my rear view mirror... but then i remember that only a complete and utter crusty underbeard gets that angry about somebody daring to drive at 60 on a single carriage way or 70 on a motorway. if i'm overtaking slower vehicles i have every right to move into the overtaking lanes on a motorway whether they wanted to be doing 90+ or not.

Bearing in mind that your speedometer probably over-reads by maybe 10% or so. So whilst you're happily 'doing the speed limit', you're actually doing nearer 60mph on that dual carriageway.

Not that I'm saying you have to strive towards doing exactly the posted speed at all times; drive at whatever speed you like, of course. Just, worth considering next time you're making yourself into a rolling roadblock in the outside lane and wondering why the guy behind with a GPS speed display is getting a little frustrated.

Also, arguably, just because you [i]can [/i]do something, doesn't mean you should. I have every right to stand in a doorway doing up a soluble child's coat, for instance.

If someone drives up fast behind me, I'll try my best to get out of the way. It's not my place to punish speeders or get all pissy about it just because they're going faster than I am. I've no idea what their motives are; they could just be an impatient arsehole, or they might have just got a call that their child has fifteen minutes left to live for all I know.

Besides, if someone is pushing to drive at licence-losing speeds, I'd rather they did it in front of me than on my back bumper.

I was under the impression that they could struggle to get an accurate reading if there are other cars nearby.

I'd expect that would be wholly dependent on the type of technology being used.

I'd expect that would be wholly dependent on the type of technology being used.

So we need the most super duper 'with it' GPS in order to accurately not piss people off?

I'll just look at the speedo, thanks. Works for me.

i do try to get out of the way... but if i'm overtaking a long line of cars doing 50 approaching an exit i'll sit at the middle of what my speedo says is 70 and what my sat nav says is 70... so speedo reading about 73-74mph. i'm not going to race up to 90 just because a fool appears behind me or pull over if there isnt a safe gap to do so.

its not my place to punish other drivers for driving faster than me no, thats down to the 5.0 if they're around to catch em, but i wont be forced into risking my life or other drives life because they want to break the speed limit.

if they've recieved a call saying their kids got 15 minutes to live they're probably not in the mindset to be driving safely at 20-30mph over the speed limit so i'm not going to start entertaining every possibility about why somebody might be doing those speeds when i'm not.

Now if you were on a bike, you'd be able to overtake at will [i]and[/i] reduce your chances of getting a ticket... A lot of those vans take front on piccies and these don't work so well on a boik 🙂 Poddy will be along soon to help out 😉

So we need the most super duper 'with it' GPS in order to accurately not piss people off?

I'll just look at the speedo, thanks. Works for me.

Sorry, I thought Mark was tangentially talking about speed cameras for a minute there.

Anyway, that wasn't really the point I was making. Just that if you're going to take the moral high ground on the basis that you're "doing the speed limit" and so everyone else can lump it, the chances are that you're not actually doing the limit at all.

So your stance should actually be "I'm doing about 90% of the limit," which somewhat invalidates the fundamental premise that anyone daring to overtake you is breaking the law.

bigyinn - Member
Completely ruined a lovely road to drive quickly. Good visibility and decent surface. Begged to be driven fast.

If you want to drive fast book a track day.

i'm not going to race up to 90 just because a fool appears behind me or pull over if there isnt a safe gap to do so.

Sure. I don't think anyone was suggesting you should?

if they've recieved a call saying their kids got 15 minutes to live they're probably not in the mindset to be driving safely at 20-30mph over the speed limit so i'm not going to start entertaining every possibility about why somebody might be doing those speeds when i'm not.

... which is why it's best practice to get the hell out of their way, IMHO. (-:

Sorry, I was talking about cameras I thought the problem was the signal could bounce off the wrong car giving a false reading

Now if speed cameras also recorded tailgating, they'd be a little less unpopular.

Now if speed cameras also recorded tailgating, they'd be a little less unpopular.

I would dearly welcome tailgating cameras.

why dont people leave earlier? then there'd be none of this rushing around and speeding surely.

I would dearly welcome tailgating cameras.

+1squillionz

and box junctions, why dont people understand box junctions!?

well done you've just added an hour onto everyone in reading's journey by locking up the entire one way system through town because you can't use a box junction.

and box junctions, why dont people understand box junctions!?

HULK SMASH!!

I drive the A9 north to Inverness quite often and it is a lethal road, what it needs more than anything else in the short term is average speed cameras. I think putting white crosses at each fatality location like they do in australia would get people to reel it in a bit too, there have been so many fatal accidents on the road they would be a constant reminder.

People seem to think its OK to do ridiculous speeds overtaking traffic, but it just makes the consequences that much worse - I've driven past the remains of head on crashes and the remains of the cars are just unrecognisable, is it really worth putting your engine where your body used to be and doing the same to someone innocent, when everyone you overtake will be 20 feet behind you in the queue at the next roadworks lights anyway?

I don't care what anyone says they are mainly a money making devices.

If that were true then everyone exceeding the limit by 1mph would be prosecuted.

Exactly the same thing happened to me on the A65. Bit north of Settle heading south where you get a 3 lane bit. I'd been stuck behind a 40mph chap for a while and overtook. It was straight, road clear, so I nipped past. When I saw the copper with his hand camera I was doing nearly 70mph. My fault for letting go a bit, I needn't have, but I wanted to get the manoeuvre done. I spent the next 2 weeks on tenterhooks having never had a conviction of any kind. Guess the copper used his discretion. Made me think though - just how much of a hurry am I in?

I hate the A9. Every time you get to a long straight, there is at least one set of headlights bearing down on you on the wrong side of the road, in a very dodgy overtake. If the person coming the other way has to brake hard to make room for you, it's not a safe overtake !

But I guess if you have ninja driving skills and the latest GPS technology then you know better than me.

They should put up those signs "X number of people killed in the next 8 miles since December".

I get quite angry about this, so much risk and such violent death if it doesn't work out, just to get home 20 mins earlier.

when everyone you overtake will be 20 feet behind you in the queue at the next roadworks lights anyway?

There's nothing wrong with overtaking safely.
Its called making progress and on long journeys that are mainly single carraigeway it makes a big difference to journey times.

The A82 is single carrage way all the way from Ballock to Inverness.

So if you were setting out to head to say Spean Bridge thats over 90 miles of single carraigeway. Thats 90 minutes of driving at 60mph or 135 minutes driving stuck behind someone at 40mph (in reality your average speed is lower than both due to villages etc but you get my point)

I hate the A9

To be fair the A9 is probably an exception to the idea of making progress. Its busy enoough to make most overtakes in the single carraigeway section either dangerous or pointless. I just wait to the dual carraigeway bits.

I hate it too!

Lifer - Member

bigyinn - Member
Completely ruined a lovely road to drive quickly. Good visibility and decent surface. Begged to be driven fast.

If you want to drive fast book a track day.

What do speeding folk do with the extra 10-20 mins though? Seriously.

If that were true then everyone exceeding the limit by 1mph would be prosecuted.

No.

If they did that for a week, the courts would be doing nothing but process appeals for years. It's not practical either in terms of sheer volume or in terms of people accepting the fixed penalties.

It's also a really stupid idea from a safety perspective. How much time would you have to spend looking at your dash instead of the road to ensure your speed hadn't fluctuated by 1mph since you last looked?

What do speeding folk do with the extra 10-20 mins though? Seriously.

Talk shit on the Internet. Duh.

WillC9999 - Member

What do speeding folk do with the extra 10-20 mins though? Seriously.

I save toddlers from burning buildings.

This is the same stretch of road talked about months ago.. where a certain forum heid reckoned it was safe on the long straight to hit 100mph. Pity he wasn't in front of you at the time to distract the camera man! Well I hope you get off with it.

Makes you think about clipping a video camera on a bar behind the headrests to film the speedo and every manoeuvre we make. You get done for what you have described but you fill out the form when it arrives through the door to say you'll take it to court. You turn up with a lap top and the video footage to show how you were driving for the journey and see how it goes from there.

To be honest,if I was in this position and I had filmed the drive within the speed limits,I'd go to jail before accepting any fine. Just to show them up. I would never pay that fine.

Another thing, I'm with Philcons on the tailgating. I'm really getting sick of it. Every day in 30 and 40 zones I seem to cause problems with folk reeling me in and holding them up.

martinxyz - Member

To be honest,if I was in this position and I had filmed the drive within the speed limits,I'd go to jail before accepting any fine. Just to show them up. I would never pay that fine.

Yeah! That would show them.

Somehow?

You turn up with a lap top and the video footage to show how you were driving for the journey and see how it goes from there.

Where it would go is you'll just have proved yourself guilty, thus saving yourself all that fiddly hassle of having to defend yourself. Points and probably increased fine for not accepting the fixed penalty. Next case please, Clerk.

I'd go to jail before accepting any fine.

I sincerely hope that you're just blowing smoke on the Internet and aren't actually that daft. I have to share a road with you.

I took my advanced driving test years ago. In the test you get the pleasure of having a traffic copper sitting in the passenger seat throughout.

When I went for an overtake he encouraged me to increase my speed to above the legal limit in order to get past the vehicle as quickly as possible so to minimise the risk of overtaking. ie, safer to speed than sit there overtaking.

Once I'd overtaken he encouraged me to slow down again back to the speed limit the only way a traffic copper can.

The problem with cameras is that they can't offer this judgement I guess.

The problem with cameras is that they can't offer this judgement I guess.

When I went for an overtake he encouraged me to increase my speed to above the legal limit in order to get past the vehicle as quickly as possible so to minimise the risk of overtaking. ie, safer to speed than sit there overtaking

This was kind of always my view, even though as I understand it has no basis in law.

Overtaking is often complicated by the strange British custom of slow drivers forming up in convoys on single carraigeway roads. Sometimes I wonder if they are in a club.

Driver 1 Plodding a long a 44mph
Driver 2 was set for an afternoon at a brisk 51mph and catches Driver 1, Driver 2 feels that Driver 1 is probably trying his best and it would be a bit rude to interrupt his clearly earnest attempts to make progess on a decent road in good conditions.
Driver 3 is really just glad to have something take his mind of the three screaming kids behind him so merrily joins the convoy.
etc
etc