Safe Speed Forums

It pains me to say it, but in the last 5 years, my average speed on the roads has decreased substantially and this is entirely due to speed cameras. It's not just because I'm getting old.

Even on roads I know well, I do not speed up between cameras. I can't be bothered.

On roads around London I definitely drive more slowly than I used to, especially in 30mph zones. I confess my blood pressure is lower as a result.

Since I haven't had an accident in the 26 years I've been driving (well, one, in 1987, that was proved to be the other driver's fault), I have no statistical evidence that I'm safer as a result.

But I also reckon that since I'm not 'whizzing around' quite so much (i.e more sedate), other drivers treat me less as a 'competitor', so I get better treatment.

Crikey, I'll be wearing driving gloves next.

But the bottom line is that this blunt instrument, the speed camera, which I resent in the extreme, (and I am a supporter of the arguments in this web site) has modified my driving behaviour.

_________________
Most people are stupid, most authority is malignant, God does not exist and everything is wrong

Crashes are too infrequent to be a good measure of indivdual driver quality in most cases.

But 'near misses' or incidents are more frequent and not usually distinguished from crashes by pre-conditions.

Do you think your personal incident rate has increased, decreased or stayed the same?

Do you feel safer or less safe?

Do you think drivers are getting better or worse or staying the same?

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

I don't think that near misses are a very good indicator of driving quality either. While it may be true that driver quality can turn a certain proportion of near misses into far misses (if you like), the number is principally determined by the number of hazards one encounters.
Putting it another way, if a driver spends a lot of time driving along narrow streets where there badly-parked cars, lots of concealed exits and children running around, they can expect to have a lot of near misses - whereas if they spend most of their time on quiet motorways then they can expect to have few.
What would be a measure of driver quality is the ratio of accidents to near misses - but, as you said, accidents are too infrequent to be usefully measured.

Cheers
Peter

..

That's what my missus says

Cheers
Peter

I wished I'd added 'mistakes and surprises' to my last post in this thread.

We're looking for low level incidents in the risk triangle - if we can make them less frequent we can seriously hope and expect to have fewer crashes.

I don't agree that driver quality defines the ratio of near misses (or mistakes or surprises) to crashes. In some cases it might, but the difference between a near miss and a crash is usually luck+the general 'error tolerance' of the road safety system. Your statement is close to the classic boy racer assumption: "I can get away with it because I have quick reactions". That assumption scares the hell out of me.

Near misses and crashes are mostly the results of Observation, Anticipation and Planning (OAP) failures - as such they are highly similar in cause.

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

I think from what you say it is true that speed cameras have modified your behaviour in that they have slowed you down, and this is the only thing they can do, but the important point is have they made you safer? Well as you have such a low incident rate anyway I would argue no it hasn't, in exactly the same way as they will not help the bad driver not have incidents.

Yeah, you're right.
My point, however, was that while accidents aren't a reliable indicator of driver quality, neither are near-misses - and that the ratio of near-misses to accidents is closer, although still way off the mark.

Cheers
Peter

I don't know why you say that. I believe that mistakes, surprises, incidents and near misses are fundamental indicators of driver quality.

My objective when driving is to be 100% incident free. No mistakes, surprises, incidents, near misses or crashes.

Don't you agree that fundamentally bad drivers get into a pickle everywhere they go? And that fundamentally good drivers don't? And if we've established the extremes then we should reasonably assume a continuous scale connecting the end points?

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

Yes, funamenally bad drivers are more likely to get themselves into a pickle than fundamentally good drivers.
And they will, provided that all other factors are equal - which they never are.
At the end of the day, it may be true, and probably is. But believing something to be true, no matter how soundly based that belief is, doesn't necessarily make it true.
Until we know the precise relationship between all the factors involved, we simply cannot say with any degree of authority that having more than x number of near-misses per year makes one a bad driver.
The number of near-misses I 've had in my entire driving career is not much more than I can count on my fingers. But I did have a comparable number of accidents in my first few years of driving.

I think you're much closer to the mark when you say that a measure of good driving is the number of things which take you by surprise.
And the number of mistakes you make.

Cheers
Peter

Ahh, so that's your mistake!

All other factors are equal in the average cases.

You're talking about individuals and I agree it's fundamentally unsafe to define a drivers' quality by looking at a period of his history (and especially so when the period is short). I'm also quite sure that drivers in high hazard areas (big cities) have more incidents than drivers in quiet rural areas where traffic and hazard densities are much much lower.

But I'm talking about the average case. We define bad drivers in terms of their mistakes, surprises, incidents, near misses and crashes.

In fact if we were to sort drivers by quality I think we'd see reliable fixed ratios of (for example) surprises to crashes for every percentile on the graph of driver quality.

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

My driving has probably improved with the advent of speed cameras because taking part in the overall debate has made me far more self aware when behind the wheel. But I regard this as correlation rather than causation. I also regard it as anecdotal evidence that raising driver pride & self-awareness is infinitely more useful than speed (& fiction) focussed marketing.

My perception is that my driving is without any doubt worse thanks to speed cameras, and I am really worried about it too...

Before speed cameras I didn't worry about actual speed at all - never crossed my mind. There were a few simple rules that appear to have worked fine: 1) when behind other motorists keep up with the flow of the traffic, but always leave a gap that will allow me to safely stop, or that will allow another driver to safely pull into if they are overtaking. 2) when there is nobody in front drive at a speed such that you can stop in what you can see without going into anybody elses space, if there is a speed limit, then it is a guide, and overriding both of them.. 3) Observe and anticipate - always be looking out for people not paying attention, children running out, etc.

Now things have all changed, and definitely for the worst. I try to do 3, but I am often forced to look at my speedo 3 or 4 times for a fixed camera: first check (uh oh 3 mph over), lift off throttle for a second, second check (thats ok 2 under), oh no I am almost at it - has my speed drifted up again (no I will be ok), now I am in the middle of the target zone has my speed changed?

So I used to be looking for hazards all the time, but now every camera site forces me to look at a stupid dial for 5 seconds or so out of 10. I can't help it - I know that the 3 mph over is unlikely to trigger the bloody thing, but I still do it because I know that the probability of being caught is much higher than the chances of an accident happening. But there are some sites where the camera is deliberately located in a steep downhill section, and that is much worse - because the only way to maintain a constant speed is by applying braking, and because the slightest lift from the brake and gravity will cause me to accelerate I will concentrate totally on the speedo untill my periferal vision tells me I am past the thing - genuinely 10 seconds of not looking where I am going.

Even my danger rating for hazards has been altered - nowadays number one hazard is spotting the cameras, and that can be tricky when the local method used to be hidden video linked to under-road sensor. Yes I genuinely spend more time checking small grey posts to see if it has the flap open and a wire plugged in, than I do worrying about that car pulling out in front of me.

Don't get me started about people not leaving safe gaps any more...but I have no doubt at all - speed cameras have made me a much more dangerous driver, and I really hate that fact, and consequently I really, really hate the idiots that have forced me into this position.

Rewolf,

Excellent posting - I find myself in the same situation on all counts - but worse. I've decided that I will stay 100% inside limits that means not just checking my speedo in a camera zone, it's all the time in any built up area !

I failed to stop for a zebra crosing today - why ? - I was looking at my speedo, thank God the old dear hadn't stepped out when she saw the car coming in the opposite direction stop my focus would previously been on the hazard not my speed.

Coming out of Hull on the flyover, happy doing 38, (I know it's a common place for a mobile) - check speedo - look up because the car in front is braking - do I need to ? - look down check speedo - hey presto 43, I've gone over the brow of he hill and speeded up , I can't break the laws of physics ! Two weeks agony now waiting to see if I get the ticket.

Regularly do this route, took me another 3 goes to be able to maintain a constant speed over this 200yd stretch of road - am I supposed to survey the local geology now before I start my journey to make sure I don't break the law ?

OK so lets drive at 30 in a 40 to allow for this - what happens ? Idiot within an inch of your bumper, that's more dangerous and stressful, less time looking at the road.

Here's another - Used to brake and change down a gear for left/right hand turns - but guess what, if I'm doing 30 I don't even need to brake for most of them, just swoop round - obviously I've stopped myself doing this now - but are other people picking up the same habit and accounting for it ?

If anyone has an accident from now they should give 1 reason - 'I was looking at my speedo'

Speed camera's make roads safer - no chance !


Regards

Chris