Safe Speed Forums

I have often wondered why there is not a discrimination issues with the cameras that take photo's from the front, motorbikes do not have licence plates on the front. - not to mention speed humps that have a "bike gap" in them

i apolgise if this question has been raised before and look forward to the forums replies

..

I don't think it's discriminating in favour of bikers so much as an effect of badly thought out policies.

Forward facing scameras are not there to let bikers off, although that is a side effect. I'm not sure what the attraction is over rear facing types, but given some of the hype from TPTB about mad bikers being so dangerous (and the mad ones probably are of course) I doubt it's got anything to do with it.

"Bike gaps" on speed humps... well, not sure I've ever seen this. There's plenty of the cushion efforts where I know that bike's can get round either side and avoid them entirely. But often that means going along the gutter or the central white lines, which doesn't sound too appealing (though I'm no biker so can't really say). Actually, they're more car friendly than bike friendly. I find that if I get it right my wheels just run along the edges of most speed cushions, which of course does next to stuff all to slow me down. They're supposed to be for buses and ambulance and other wide tracked vehciles to get over with minimal disturbance, but the track on my aging Honda is just wide enough that almost all speed cushions cause no problem to me either. I'd expect quite a bump in the backside if I hit one at too high a speed and was also slightly off, and being fairly low it often looks like I'm going to ground it out (though I never actually have as it isn't that low, but sometimes the cushions look higher than they are - mountainous cowboy jobs on some private roads are another matter, and I've scraped the bottom of my mud flaps even going over in 1st gear ). There are other cars with wider tracks and softer suspension that would be even less affected. Landie Freelanders have a track 30mm wider, and though I've never driven one I'd expect its suspension to cope with any bump much better. Really bikers suffer the most as they can't avoid the damn things in safety.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

It was all to do with helping to identify the driver I believe, and in the big picture bike speeding is by proportion a small 'speeding' problem. But as a biker myself it's a welcome by-product. There are bikers who will 'salute' the camera or worse as they blast past them, but I prefer not to be flashed and have my piccie on JJ's desk!
Max

_________________
Tailgaters - Please Pass
You have an Accident to go to!

I think the ones marzyfloyd is referring to are the ones that use 3 cushions across the road, with the central cushion straddling the centreline - these give bikers a gap in the middle of each lane, but force cars/vans etc. to place their wheels on two of the cushions (unless there's nothing coming the other way, in which case you just straddle the centreline cushion )

Edited to add: This page on the DfT site, disucssing speed humps, has some small photos of triple-cushion setups, including one at the end showing exactly how a bike can sail through the gap without having to go into the gutter or along the centreline...



Likewise, and if I get it slightly wrong the only thing that happens is one side of the car gently rises and falls as those sets of tyres clip the rounded edge of the cushion. It's only if you well and truly get your positioning wrong that you suffer the full effects of the hump. Pity the humps in our local multi-storeys aren't this forgiving, I'm sure the damn things are doing some damage to my suspension/steering - even going over them at whatever speed is generated at tickover revs is enough to make the back end "bunny hop" over, and if the steering isn't EXACTLY centred then the feedback through the steering wheel isn't pleasant either But at least they're low enough such that the front end doesn't ground if I take them slightly faster than snails pace, which is more than can be said for some of the full-width humps I get to encounter on my regular trips into north London...

It is not discrimination, just lucky for us bikers



Wonderfull loop hole



Not a bike gap, they are for Emergency vehicles, saves them slowing down. It is somehow perfectley safe for a 7.5 ton Ambulance to travel at what speed it prefers in an area that requires speed humps

Go Figure

For us bikers to use the gap, we have to ride in the gutter with all the debris. Not really an option on 2 wheels, with tyres that cost £190.00 each.

OR

the other side, which is white lined, again not an option as the white lines are one of the biggest causes of bike accidents, as they provide no Grip.

OR

We go over the hump, again not a safe option, as this casues major upset to the bikes stability. If we slow right down, we risk being rear ended, by whom ever is behind, go over them at normal speed, and we are in an unsafe & unstable position.

Their is also the problem of lack of repair, a vast number of them are pot holed at the front. I have had a few near miss situactions, If one ever has me off, it will be a definate court action against the highways department.

Humps, just do not offer a safe route for bikers

My Sunday car, will not go over them, without an impact to the sump, my route needs to be planned by avoiding them altogether.

Damned road humps should be banned

_________________
Steve

Ah yes, I'd forgotten that some are laid in threes. A bit more bike friendly, but as you say it doesn't stop drivers going over the middle one. But I've just seen a possible safety problem with this layout that I'd never sussed before.

The picture in the link you gave looks like there's still masses of room in the gutters to get the n/s wheels between the cushion and the pavement without kerbing it, and I think that applies to most if not all the triple cushion jobs I've seen. Presumably it's expected that emergency vehicles and PSVs will do that, but if there's that much room inevitably most drivers will too. The side effect of that would be that traffic ends up moving closer to the kerb where these things are placed. If there's peds about isn't it a bad idea to install something that moves traffic closer to them? Looking at that picture it seems like a pedestrian presence is expected there.
That short barrier on the left might indicate a footpath or alleyway, or maybe a gate... something used by pedestrians anyhow. That might be a school or sports ground on the left as there seems to be an entrance just beyond the barrier. If there are pedestrians around often enough that a barrier is needed then it seems a really daft place to encourage traffic closer to the kerb. Same applies for that entrance - if someone coming out of there misses an oncoming vehicle a collsion might be avoided if the other driver was closer to the middle, but they've just been encouraged to drive in the gutter, possibly turning near misses into collisions. Somehow I don't think that would calm anybody.

Worst I've come across was a metal bump on the exit of a car wash. Honest the damn thing was like driving over a steel Toblerone, and it wasn't little. Never realised it was a problem in the Rover, but first time I washed the Honda there stiff suspension, low clearance, metal lip ... all combined to tear a hole in the plastic splash shield under the engine. I went over dead slow, and I mean dead slow. but the car was just low enough and the suspension had just enough travel to catch the shield on that *&%$ing steel lip.

Those giant black plastic Toblerones in multistories do the same thing, but I've got a technique for that. Get the ropes and crampons ready and climb up the north face in 1st gear on the clutch's biting point. Then use the handbrake to pause briefly at the summit for photographs with Sherpa Tenzing and radio check with base camp, and also to change right foot over to the brake. Then very slowly descend the south face on the brakes to prevent any damage from dropping on the springs too quickly, and pause briefly before accepting knighthood.

Bloody things. I hate them.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Brilliant!

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

In those particular photos, it's pretty much a certainty that this is the expected way for traffic to negotiate the cushions, given the hatched diamond covering the centre cushion. However, all the triple-cushion humps I've seen have had no such markings associated with them and are typically installed on quieter roads where there's usually nose to tail parking along one or both sides of the road - in these instances the only way to avoid going over the cushions is to straddle the centreline, and that's only possible with no oncoming traffic (or for some ******* drivers, even if there is oncoming traffic ). Bikers meanwhile get to stay on their side of the road whilst riding straight through the gap.





Tell that to all the local authorities who seem to think slapping a 6-foot wide hatched-off and red-tarmaced area (in some cases with the added attraction of closely spaced islands whos sole purpose is to ensure that no-one even thinks about trying to use the hatched area for overtaking - including the emergency services who end up having to slalom down the road) along the centre of a nice wide road, thus squeezing all the traffic into the newly narrowed lanes right next to the kerbs, is a good idea in built-up areas... Prior to such meddling, you could happily drive along in the middle of your lane with a good couple of feet between the kerb and the nearside of your car, so if a pedestrian stepped into the road without looking, or stumbled/was pushed, you had the time it took them to cover those couple of feet to react (if indeed any reaction was necessary). Now you're driving along inches from the kerb, and if a pedestrian steps/stumbles/etc into the road, that extra reaction time is gone.

We keep on being told how vulnerable pedestrians are when confronted with motor vehicles, yet it seems like every bit of urban road re-engineering results in an increased chance of such a confrontation





Why does this sound oh so familiar, seems we have a similar love of these things...

I know there's a perfectly sound reason for wanting to slow traffic down in cramped car parks where the risk of pedestrian/vehicle conflict is high, but I fail to see how installing widely spaced bits of swiss confectionary solves anything - especially when said bits of plastic/rubber seem to be located practically anywhere except where the pedestrians are most likely to be crossing the path of vehicles (i.e. next to the stairs/lifts/paystations). So, vehicles are brought practically to a standstill at odd intervals around the carpark, and human nature being what it is, their drivers are then likely to drive faster in between the humps, precisely at the points within the car park where we really want them to be going at their slowest.

Add to that the potential/actual damage caused by the damned things, and you have to wonder which geniuses were responsible for their introduction. I suspect accountants figure large in the decision, given how cheap this "solution" is compared to, say, surfacing the entire car park with rumble strip/cobbles/some other uneven surface which allows drivers to maintain a consistent and suitably low speed whilst making higher speed driving unpleasant, but which doesn't cause the same amount of physical stress on vehicles or their human occupants as the toblerones.

Don't know if this has happened in other areas, but warks cc have fitted bollards on the pavement around humps. Always wondered why till i had chat with a councillor who told me that he was driving over one in frosty weather when his car decided to slide sideways onto the pavement - the hump being the same height as the pavement . After this Warks cc fitted bollards around these humps as a "safety " measure ----hohohohoh fit humps for safety, then
find out safety features need safety features - - is the world going daft??

I don't think it's discrimination either.



It's not without good reason that they used to be known as "bacon slicers"

They ceased to be required on safety grounds, both for pedestrians and the biker themselves.



Those of us who care about our safety slow down for 'em anyway - to misjudge one and hit the bump at speed would have us sideways and high-siding, plumeting to earth like Greg Luganis



Fair questions for a non-biker to ask.

_________________
HornetRider

Trying to survive in South Wales

Have you ever seen the program American Chopper on Discovery Channel? Those guys (Orange County Choppers) build outrageous theme bikes (they've done a Snap-On one, a POW MIA one, a Firebike to commemorate 911 and others) which are a safety nightmare. I'm sure you'd never be able to ride one on the Uks roads. They have thwacking great belt drives that thrash around by the riders right ankle, and sticky-out welded-on bits that would nicely impale either the rider or the unfortunate sod they got entangled with in an accident.
Beuatifully crafted, but blinkin' dangerous

The Hampshire scamps have gone over to front facing Truvelo cameras because of the problems they have been having with drivers who have said they do not know who was driving.

(Please see the Christine and Neil Hamilton case).

Motorbike riders now make up 1/5 of the fatalities (and growing).

So the fastest growing group of fatalities dont get picked up if they speed on the new cameras.

A puzzle if these are a really supposed to be "safety cameras".

TCOO1 ASKS "A puzzle if these are a really supposed to be "safety cameras".

Therebye raising a question,

ARE THEY -

safety cameras,
speed cameras
police enforcement cameras

Different areas call them different things ( one at time gents , i think we all know what we call them) .

Any other names??


Not particularly relavent, but twisters bit about cones reminds me of a sign i saw scrawled on the dirt on the rear of a motorway pickup which was puting out cones "xyz conpany - creating jams since 1977"

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Peter, was thinking of some of the political names they call them - that name dont qualify - "Too honest and near the truth""


Different areas call them different things ( one at time gents , i think we all know what we call them) .

Any other names??


Back now to humps (sleeping policemen)

Gatsobait said "Ah yes, I'd forgotten that some are laid in threes" - Not in Warks , we only seem to have two trafpols, unless the ANPR VAN IS OUT.
Rumour abounds that Warks are negotiating with the manufacturers of the "john smith" adv to get some cardboard cutouts with white helmets, sitting in carboard volvos