Capturing speeders. Anywhere. Anytime.
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Sylvia Else on 19 Jul 2010 03:27 On 19/07/2010 4:53 PM, Athol wrote: > Sylvia Else<sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote: >> http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/mobilespeedcameras/index.html > >> "Locations have been selected from those previously used in the previous >> NSW Police Force program and selected based on strict criteria. The RTA >> has reassessed these police locations and prioritised mobile speed >> camera enforcement at those locations that have been identified as >> having a high number of crashes." > >> Fair enough. > >> But wait - if these locations are known to have a high number of >> crashes, shouldn't there be road signs saying so? Otherwise it looks as >> if the locations are being kept secret so as to be able to exploit their >> revenue generating potential while at the same time saying that the >> camera location was jusitified by the crash rate. > > http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/mobile_speed_camera_locations.html > Yes, *now* it's there. I think the RTA have spies reading this group ;) Mind you, the published "locations" are pretty broad, tending to include all of the length of a road within a suburb. The RTA used to publish a report specifying individual blackspot intersections, but they appear to have stopped a while back. This 1997 document seems to be the last to contain it: http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/accidentstats1997.pdf When were speed cameras first introduced? I'd like to see the raw accident data, and I've asked the RTA to publish it. What are the chances? Sylvia.
From: veritas on 19 Jul 2010 03:39 On 12/07/2010 10:38 AM, Sylvia Else wrote: > http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/speedandspeedcameras/mobilespeedcameras/index.html > > > "Locations have been selected from those previously used in the previous > NSW Police Force program and selected based on strict criteria. The RTA > has reassessed these police locations and prioritised mobile speed > camera enforcement at those locations that have been identified as > having a high number of crashes." > > Fair enough. > > But wait - if these locations are known to have a high number of > crashes, shouldn't there be road signs saying so? Otherwise it looks as > if the locations are being kept secret so as to be able to exploit their > revenue generating potential while at the same time saying that the > camera location was jusitified by the crash rate. > > Time for an FOI? Would the RTA seek to argue that it's not in the public > interest for motorists to know where the danger spots are? > Nah. They just INCREASE the speed limit, at that spot, by 10 KPH a week later - that irrefutably proves that it was a black spot. How can the public have respect for the blue uniforms that crawl to that low level.
From: Doug Jewell on 19 Jul 2010 18:02 Athol wrote: > Sylvia Else <sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote: >> On 19/07/2010 4:53 PM, Athol wrote: > >>> http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/mobile_speed_camera_locations.html > >> Yes, *now* it's there. I think the RTA have spies reading this group ;) >> Mind you, the published "locations" are pretty broad, tending to include >> all of the length of a road within a suburb. > > Yep. Broad enough to allow them to actually operate the speed camera at > a known high-speed position just far enough from the actual black spot > to provide no actual safety benefit, no doubt. :-/ Around here in QLD, the local camera spots were published in the local rag a while back along with why those spots were there - I don't think it was a QLD wide thing, perhaps just something the local coppers were doing. Anyway, with only 1 exception, the blackspots were intersections, and the intersection accients were failure to give way because of poor sight lines, lots of right-turning traffic but no right light etc, and the fact that the locals cannot use roundabouts to save themselves. And of course the camera then was far enough away from the intersection that they could catch motorists whose speed crept up on the downhills. ie, _if_ some of those intersection blackspots were caused by people speeding through the intersection, the camera spot would be after the fact, not before. Anyway, the one exception I mentioned above was the down section of the Toowoomba range - it has had many accidents and mostly speed related, BUT - they have mostly been heavy vehicle accidents, and although speed related, good chance they were still less than the speed limit. The main reason HV's come to grief is that they don't go low enough on their gears at the top, and run out of brakes half way down. Too fast for the conditions and vehicle, probably still much less than the posted limit. The Toowoomba range has such a bad record, that they decided to grace it with a fixed camera - on the up section on a very small section where the road levels out after 10% grades. In 30'odd years of being in the district I can't recall a single accident on the up section. > > Oh, and the slogan "Mobile speed cameras. Anywhere. Anytime." is now > verifably false. There is a prescribed list of locations, which makes > the word "Anywhere" clearly and irrefutably false. :-) > -- What is the difference between a duck?
From: D Walford on 19 Jul 2010 19:39 On 19/07/2010 10:42 PM, Toby wrote: > On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 12:20:04 GMT, Athol posited in: > >> Sylvia Else<sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote: >>> On 19/07/2010 4:53 PM, Athol wrote: >> >>>> http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/mobile_speed_camera_locations.html >> >>> Yes, *now* it's there. I think the RTA have spies reading this group ;) >>> Mind you, the published "locations" are pretty broad, tending to include >>> all of the length of a road within a suburb. >> >> Yep. Broad enough to allow them to actually operate the speed camera at >> a known high-speed position just far enough from the actual black spot >> to provide no actual safety benefit, no doubt. :-/ >> >> Oh, and the slogan "Mobile speed cameras. Anywhere. Anytime." is now >> verifably false. There is a prescribed list of locations, which makes >> the word "Anywhere" clearly and irrefutably false. :-) > > The Qld GovCo plays the same game. > In reality, the sites used are supposedly carefully surveyed. Really. By > the operators of the walletraper machines. > That survey is much more about ensuring convictions than, say, slowing > traffic in dangerous areas. In Vic they don't even claim to place camera's in high accident zones so in one way they are more honest. Mobile speed camera locations are very predictable around here so IMO they should only catch non locals or locals who aren't paying attention which is worse than speeding so in a way they deserve a fine for their lack of observation skills and lack of attention to the task at hand. Daryl
From: Bernd Felsche on 19 Jul 2010 21:14
D Walford <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote: >On 19/07/2010 10:42 PM, Toby wrote: >> On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 12:20:04 GMT, Athol posited in: >>> Sylvia Else<sylvia(a)not.here.invalid> wrote: >>>> On 19/07/2010 4:53 PM, Athol wrote: >>>>> http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/mobile_speed_camera_locations.html >>> >>>> Yes, *now* it's there. I think the RTA have spies reading this group ;) >>>> Mind you, the published "locations" are pretty broad, tending to include >>>> all of the length of a road within a suburb. >>> >>> Yep. Broad enough to allow them to actually operate the speed camera at >>> a known high-speed position just far enough from the actual black spot >>> to provide no actual safety benefit, no doubt. :-/ >>> >>> Oh, and the slogan "Mobile speed cameras. Anywhere. Anytime." is now >>> verifably false. There is a prescribed list of locations, which makes >>> the word "Anywhere" clearly and irrefutably false. :-) >> >> The Qld GovCo plays the same game. >> In reality, the sites used are supposedly carefully surveyed. Really. By >> the operators of the walletraper machines. >> That survey is much more about ensuring convictions than, say, slowing >> traffic in dangerous areas. >In Vic they don't even claim to place camera's in high accident zones so >in one way they are more honest. Statistical analysis in the UK showed that placing a garden gnome would have the same effect in most of the "black spot" locations. It's called "regression to the mean". Where there is an unhappy coincidence of crashed, it's labelled a black spot. The natural tendency is that any extremes will tend to smooth out. Unless there's a real problem in road layout/management in which case somebody with a brain has to be called in to recognize the significant problem and to recommend the most-appropriate change to the road. -- /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia \ / ASCII ribbon campaign | For every complex problem there is an X against HTML mail | answer that is clear, simple, and wrong. / \ and postings | --HL Mencken |