Safe Speed Forums

There's a news story coming along today about installing cameras to detect tailgating. While I broadly agree that reducing tailgating is a worthy road safety objective, I have a whole series of concerns about using cameras to deter the behaviour.

1) The government's record on camera use is awful. We can't possibly trust them to do this job properly.

2) When two vehicles are close together, it isn't always the fault of the rearmost driver - for example, the front vehicle may just have swerved front. In order for a camera to distinguish which driver is to blame there would have to be continuous evidence, probably for at least a quarter of a mile.

3) Rather than just installing cameras, it would be better to have a fair stab at educating drivers first. While drivers probably do understand that they should keep a safe distance, they may not understand what a safe distance is and they may not understand the effects of leaving smaller distances. I would love to see prime time TV advertisements explaining things. For example, do drivers understand that in a group of 8 close following vehicles, when the first brakes, then next tends to have to brake harder, and the next harder still. after four or five or six vehicles doing this the next simply cannot brake hard enough and there's an accident.

4) It might be possible to avoid a tailgating camera if you are close to other vehicles both in front and behind. When vehicles are close together, it's hard for a camera to get a view of the numberplates. This might actually encourage tailgating in the area of a tailgating camera!

5) It is reasonable and recommended to adopt a transient close following position in preparation for overtaking. This sort of tailgating tends to represent best practice and should not result in prosecution.

6) Tailgating cameras would be subject to many of the serious issues affecting speed cameras including:
fears of revenue raising objectives
violation of human rights (assumption of innocence, right to silence)
more serious offences neglected
raised levels of paranoia from drivers

7) Police traffic officers can easily recognise and prosecute serious cases of tailgating. They can tell the difference between aggressive tailgating - clearly the most dangerous sort - and other patterns. Traffic officers are hundreds of times better than any camera.

8) Lawless drivers unaffected. If the vehicle isn't registered the no one can be prosecuted.

There's probably more too, but the way things stand, Safe Speed says no to tailgating and no to tailgating cameras.

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

There was a short bulletin about 'tailgating' on our local radio station (Beacon FM) this morning.
It merely reported that 'we' are to be reminded about the dangers of following the vehicle in front too closely. Apparently a survey has shown that 70% of motorway users do this -no mention of whose survey - however my own observations of motorway driving here in the W Midlands tells me that this isn't far off the mark. I'm talking about mindless, brain in neutral tailgating not the overtly aggresive stuff you see people do now and again.
However, I'd personally like to see any campaign initially aimed at reminding drivers about the dangers (a public information film such as, oh I don't know, the 2 second rule perhaps ), not slapping up cameras and opening up another cashier in the local scamerati.

This is another prime example of where they're trying to replace what can be easily achived with a good copper in a patrol car ith technology.

I think these camera will be dangerous to road safety and work in contradiction with efforts to reduce congestion on the road. Whilst the 2 second rule is a good guildeline, a safe distance between one vehicle and the vehicle infront is somethign which can only be determined through judgment and taking into account a broad range of environmental factors.

Will these fantastic new "Don't get to close now" camera's detect whether it's raining or icey or snowing and make necessary adjustments? WIll it detect whether the vehicles brakes are high performance ceramic or not breaking effectively 'cos they're shot? Will it accurately detect acceleration/deceleration (unlike our friend Gatso)?

And if you're crawling along at 10mph in a traffic jam it isn't anyone's fault as the gaps can be much smaller. And if it's smashing down with rain the gaps would of course need to be much bigger. The safe distance between behicles is no more a constant on a given piece of road than the safe speed is.

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

Yet another fine example of misguided policy being developed without looking at reasons, cause and consequence.

I think we could do with some ar*ehole cameras in whitehall to detect, photograph and automatically fine the individuals coming up with these ideas!!!

I think it's just another back door way of trying to "sell" speed cameras to an unwilling public.

If you think about it. for a camera to be able to make any sort of measured judgement about tailgating it needs to measure the distance between the vehicles and the speed they are travelling at. So any "tailgating camera" will have to accurately measure the speed of the vehicles involved to be of any use at all.

So what's going to happen when the new camera sees that one (or both) of the passing vehicles are speeding? Do we really believe that the Government will turn a blind eye to it, just because the camera is notionally there only to detect tailgating. Doesn't seem very likely, does it?

Much more likely is that 3 tickets will be issued: one for the tailgating offence, and one to each of the two drivers for speeding...

I think this is just an attempt to try and make speed cameras more acceptable by re-branding them. I mean, how can we possibly oppose a "tailgating camera" when we have spent all these years complaining that speed cameras don't tackle tailgating.

And of course, when we try and point out all the points made above, we will be accused of "nit-picking".

It just shows that you have to be very careful what you wish for in this World!

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Is it coninscidence that the idea of tailgating cameras have come about since a number of surveys revealed that Britains motorists' pet hate is tailgating?

We're now starting to see the suspiciously unverified statistics relating to how many accidents are caused by tailgating. Look out for conflicts here - for example, I've already seen a statistic stating that tailgating causes 70% of motorway accidents. Does this comply with the statistic that 2/3 of all accidents being caused by speeding?

Personally, I couldn't give two hoots whether the person behind wants to drive 2ft off my bumper. I keep aware of their movements without letting them distract me and concentrate on my driving. If they hit me from behind, I'll thank them for the wiplash compensation. I say this because I've been shunted from behind in the past, and it wasn't due to tailgating - the other driver admitted she was adjusting her stereo and not paying attention. I'd rather see the police do something about this kind of driving! As it was, the police didn't even attend the accident scene (Northumbria again!!)!

Is there some research that suggests tailgating as a significant cause/contributing factor of crashes and/or serious injuries? Or are the majority of tailgating accidents damage only? It could be argued that it does not matter how important a causation factor tailgating is, if it can be auto-detected then it makes sense to have tailgating cameras. Fine, as long as the net benefit can be shown to be positive first. There may be direct or indirect positive and negative effects. For example one possible effect is prevention of pile-ups on motorways which is positive in itself and could also prevent accidents resulting from frustration due to delay and from drivers diverting via inherently less safe routes. It could turn out also that the throughput of the road is reduced by these devices in which case that would probably translate into accidents as drivers switch to alternative routes. In other words, is the game worth the candles?

On the other hand, the real 'game' may not be safety

ad

_________________
DO NOT PANIC

What happens if, when driving past one of these camera, the car in front slams on their brakes? The thinking distance alone would reduce the distance between the leading and trailing vehicle, but both would be decelerating and therefore could be driving perfectly safely.

Is this going to start a new game amongst wreckless drivers (Stupid People) where-by they slam their brakes on when passing Tailgate cameras when there is a vehicle behind them?

Hi

In France, I heard of a similar project... and then later I read somewhere that those in charge of road safety were thinking of how to get around the fact that the driver following is not always responsible for the close distance. In that piece of reading, I think the idea was to have a police officer somehow watching the traffic on a screen and pressing a button to validate each picture taken by the camera - for example he was supposed not to validate the pic if the driver in front was braking (I think this must have been a very boring job! )

That was at least several months ago, and I did not hear anything on that project since, so I can hope that this time they were clever enough to finally realize this was a bad idea from the start.

On the other hand they are still installing speed cams, while nothing is done against tailgating

Brilliant, so as well as forking out £30k for the camera, we'll be paying £20k minimum for someone to fire the camera!!!

On the subject of tailgating though, I know of stories I've hear about police in Lancashire. On the M6 particularly, I've heard of a few people who've seen evidence that if your above the limit but driving safely, the police will turn a blind eye. But if you're tailgating (or driving like a dick) they'll do you for it.

If true, this goes to show how good old police work can help to make roads safer!

The operators of mobile cameras have shown they can't be trusted and the scamera partnerships have shown they can't be bothered to check their own evidence before sending out prosecutions so I seriously doubt their ability to operate any system with any fairness.

As far as I'm aware, tailgating has been made illegal in Germany.
As far as I'm aware, the police spent a long time trying to get this done.
I was done for "speeding" of an unrestricted stretch of autobahn, in fact it was really for tailgating.
What happened, I was travelling from my army quarter in Beilefeld to the Military Hospital in Rinteln, I was overtaking two HGVs with a french car in between them, at the last second the car pulled out in front of me, I had assessed the situation and decided that lifting off the gas would do the job adequately, letting the french car pull away and give a good gap.
I hadn't seen the Polizei car sat behind me, he pulled me and fined on the spot DM60.
He explained that I should have used my brakes to slow down a little.
Technically speaking I wasn't speeding, but you just don't argue with a copper with a gun on his waistbelt.
It also taught me a lesson about french drivers on autobahns.

_________________
Semper in excreta, nur quantitat variat.

How are these cameras going to differentiate between stupid person driving to close and stupid person that is not keeping up with the flow and hasn't looked in their mirrors is January?

When I did my advanced course (just signed up for the RoSPA one) we discussed the 2 second rule and it's practicalities on motorways and the instructor guy (Class1 police driver and he trained class 1 drivers, so he knew his stuff) said it would be resonable to to reduce your gap to 1 second on a motorway.

If we are having the roads policed by camera we will surely need a camera for ever conceivable factor in accidents.

We'll need speed cameras, tailgating cameras, dodgy overtake cameras, not watching what your are doing cameras, crossing the white line cameras, drink camera, drug cameras, Not looked at highway code since the '70's cameras, using your phone cameras, jumping lights cameras, not mot cameras, not maintaining your car cameras, crap roads cameras, stupid pedestrian walked out into road cameras. We won't be able to see the verge for bloody cameras!

Then as usuall, if you nicked the caror it isn't registered you won't care, costhey will never stop you.

I like to apologize in advance for writing incorrect English, as Dutch is my “native tongue”.

I've read the tailgating section on this site (which is excellent) a number of times and I have given reference to this section in two Dutch Forums dealing with traffic safety matters already.

The use of camera’s to detect cases and to fine offenders is already in use in Holland for a few years. The system the police are using is the VCS (Video Control System). A description of this system can be found under the URL: http://itctraffic.com/tailgaters.htm

The definition of tailgating is determined by two factors:
1. the distance to the car in front is too short and
2. the offence should take place during a considerable time span.
Using the VCS, the cars will be observed concerning speed and distance during a certain distance.

It may occur that you temporary remain on a too short distance from the car in front.
This may happen because car(s) from adjacent lanes insert in front of you. If you then slow down
to retrieve the correct distance, this will not be considered as “Tailgating”.

Offenders will be taken from the road by motor police and led to a parking place. There, they will get the opportunity to see on video their own offence. The fines for this kind of offence are very high and depend on both speed and distance. (up to 320 Euro)

However, the criterion concerning the distance is very mild. You will only be fined, if your distance to the car in front is equal or less than a ½-second distance related to the average speed you were driven over the observed distance. As the average car driver, under normal conditions, has a reaction time of one (1) second, an 1-second distance should at least be the criterion.
The measured and calculated distance, using the VCS, is not quite adequate, and works in favour of the tailgater.

The reasons for this mild performance by the KLPD (korps Landelijke Politiedienst) are the following:
1. both the police and the justice are overloaded with work and have lack of staff,
2. the justice forces the KLPD only to bring in “sound cases”. They do not like to go into discussions with offenders, who claim to have such brilliant reactions capacities, etc…
This all is a great pity, as only a fraction of the offenders will come in sight.

That tailgating is also a major problem in Holland, is emphasised by the KLPD’s statement:-

“Keeping insufficient distance or the well-known tailgating is still a big problem!
It is accident cause number one: 40 (forty) percent of the accidents on the Dutch highways consists of “front end – rear end” crashes. 90 (ninety) percent of these might have been avoided by keeping better distances”.

When I had my (early) retirement in 1995, I made a spread sheet in MS Excel to simulate tailgating. This was just for fun and purely for my own pleasure.
Later on, it appeared that “DUURZAAM VEILIGVERKEER”, a Dutch institute dealing with traffic safety was interested.
In cooperation with a small software firm in Maastricht (Limburg), a graphical module / presentation named “Bumperkleven = tailgating” was made and placed on the website.
During last year the need of a supplementary module was required. This was because it often happens that an approaching car has a considerable higher speed than the car in front before this car starts tailgating. End last year this module was placed on the website. The title is “Noodstop = emergency stop”.
This all can be found under the URL: http://www.veiligverkeer.com/ and the submenu “Uw veiligheid = your safety”.

These presentations do not provide save distance related to speed.
However, everyone is aware of his own common behaviour on the road (and that of others) concerning distances and speeds. With these two modules anyone may check if his position on the road is save or may result in a crash as the car in front of him is forced to an emergency stop.

However, for the British visitors of the website, there are two big disadvantages: it is in the Dutch language and in metric units.

For the MS Excel spread sheet, which performs the calculations on the background, I have made a version in English Units.
Paul, if there are any visitors of your website, which are interested in this modified spread sheet, I could send it to you as an attachment to an e-mail to you, as your forum does not provide the possibilities of attachments?

For people who like to use the present modules, here are the required unit exchanges:

Afstand = distance: 1 meter = 3.2808399 feet
Snelheid = velocity: 1 km/h = 0.621371192 mph
Remvertraging = deceleration: 1m / (s^2) = 3.2808399 ft / (s^2)

Best Regards, arisbrou

_________________
If you have a moment, then visit the website of DUURZAAM VEILIGVERKEER, under URL:
WWW.veiligverkeer.com, submenu "uw veiligheid".

http://www.amasci.com/amateur/traffic/trafexp.html suggests that leaving large gaps can reduce congestion. If tailgaiting cameras were introduced, the extra large gaps people would leave could have a beneficial effect.

Personally, I still think they're a bad idea.

Don't know about reasearch but, to my mind, tailgating is a strong indicator of:

(1) aggressive driving - which should be curbed because even if it doesn't lead to an accident immediately, it quite likely will in due course; or
(2) lack of attention (brain switched off, autopilot mode engaged).

Not sure which of the above is more dangerous/undesirable. On balance, I think probably 2 - at least an aggressive driver may be concentrating sufficently to avoid an accident.

I also completely buy in to the theories explained on http://www.amasci.com/amateur/traffic/trafexp.html which indicate that tailgating significantly contributes to congestion.

And - I know this may be unpopular - I am coming around to thinking that EVERY accident resulting in some significant damage to vehicle (even own vehicle) or other property should be followed by a prosecution for (at least) driving without due care and attention - some element of carelessness by one or more of the drivers involved being a self-evident factor in any such incident.

Good point and very interesting link, though I was only considering the minimum distance to stop safely. But I believe the technique described in that link can work. The section of A3 just north of the Esher turn off is a good place to try this. You've got an NSL dual carriageway with 3 lanes in each direction, and just before you get into the built up area lane 3 is lost, the limit drops to 50 and there's a Gatso just after the beginning of the lower limit. Needless to say there's certain times of day when the occupants of lanes 2 and 3 have to sort out who goes where, not always in a friendly way, and nearly everyone ends up hitting the anchors for that bloody camera. I prefer to stay in lane 1 and just take my foot off the throttle well in advance of the Gatso. By the time I get there I've slowed to 50 without using the brakes at all. The only irritating thing is that there's always a couple of planks who roar past me in lane 2 and jump in front of me. Occasionally they don't leave quite as much room as they should and force me to brake anyway.

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

Really? But.. Two seconds at 70 mph only gives you ca 65 metres. Gosh - sound like a thingy beginin' with "t" here (GASP! HORROR! OOO-ER!! Help - I'll be wearin' slippers and a cardy next !) Dunno about IG (have to say he keeps two second gap whenever I've been with him ) - but think I will keep me two second gaps - ta!

But .... what if numpty ahead slams on the anchors for scamerati on the bridge (which leads to sudden jam effect, tailgating, crunches ), plus blow outs, cambelt failure, blablabla! You need the space OK! Simple Tis but the ST in COAST!!!!

Course - tailgating camera is "excuse for making speed scam acceptable - that is par for the course. Inevitably - there will be flaws and it is essential that the "offenders" at least get to see the evidence against them.

Much better to bring back the two second rule advert on the telly. (Plus all the others! ) The one which demonstrates how to calculate your two seconds and explains the importance - graphically from the safety/injury aspect and beneficially from the steady free-flow of traffic aspect.

As far as am aware - Germany uses existing CCTV footage (VCS as Holland) plus traffic police to enforce both lane discipline and prevent tailgating on the A/bahn, and I think the prosecution criteria is marginally stricter than arisbrou experiences in Holland.

Always have cruised at calmish speed on motorway anyway. Track days are a different matter



Um - NO! See what you mean to certain extent - but what if person hit in rear. Onus has always been on chap behind looking where he is going and keeping sufficient distance in which to stop.

Are you suggesting that my wife should have been prosecuted for having misfortune to be rear-ended at speed - when she had pulled to halt behind a car, left text book space between herself and said car, and got smashed in rear by chap who was taken ill and hit the throttle?

Or that my wife's cousin's family should have been prosecuted when a truck crossed central reserve and hit him head on?

There are accidents and there are accidents - tha knows! Not always case of six of one and half dozen of the other.

But on topic of original thread - the tailgating camera is non starter because track record on electronic policing is not that successful, it is open to abuse, can lead to road rage as some motorists may "engineer" tailgating ping in retaliation for some minor mistake, will be equally as useless in copping the real undesirables (unlicenced, uninsured drunk/drugged/ in their throw aways).

Much better solution - forget the scam - bring back the BiB. And the advert of the telly!

At 70 mph you are travelling at ca 100 ft per second - and you need the time to react. In other words - use our friend COAST!

You need to extend observation, anticipate early and maintain a safe distance

I do indeed keep a two second rule in good weather - which I increase in bad weather

WHY IS THIS SO DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND? HELLO!- O-O!


When driving at high speeds - scan th horizon in front of you and behind you in your mirror. Scan to the sides as well. Use all mirrors!!!!

Observation aids concentration.

As for tailgating cameras .........to get the message across properly .... we need to hammer the dangers of tailgating by driver adverts and acid lectures by police officers when we see it. Cameras, as we know from current atmosphere, need much more careful thought in deployment than we are seeing.