Safe Speed Forums

that's fair enough - and true, their best use is probably as evidence - but all the complaints here seem to be that they're no good because it's too difficult to work out if you should stop or not.



plenty of cyclists round here will give the same excuse. Does that mean it's ok for all the rest of us to run reds if we find them frustrating?

I don't think I explained it very well. I think it's only a problem at low speeds, where you are close to the first line.

Most of the time, you can stop at the first stop line. But at some point, you are too close to the first line to stop if the lights go amber. So you have to continue past it. Then, you have the problem of whether to stop at the second line.

If you do stop at the second line, you will commit an offence (technically) if any part of your vehicle is moving while still over the first line as the lights go red. It may be possible to brake hard and late to avoid this, but it makes me uneasy.

If you look at this diagram:

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/16.htm#154

the lines are far enough apart to cause a problem, but too close to comfortably fit a car between them.

I always thought a set of lights was considered "broken" if they hadn't changed for more than 10 minutes. I have no idea where I picked this up, probably not the highway code, but it seems reasonable to me.

As for RLC enforced broken traffic lights, about the only thing I can think of is to carry some bin bags and cable ties in the car. Since the light is permanantly on red you will have plenty of time to cover the camera and then drive through

Seriously though, research in the US shows that red light cameras increase rear-end shunts, and the problems for emergency vehicles has already been covered. I guess the real problem though is the way the films from the cameras are used.

The emergency vehicles problem is easy to solve. Many traffic lights have systems in place to detect oncoming emergency vehicles and change to green for them. The type approval for red light cameras should be changed so that they can only be used on traffic lights fitted with this system (and where the system changes sufficiently in advance to allow all cars to clear the junction on green). Red light cameras should also be painted yellow like speed cameras so that a driver at a junction not fitted with this system (and no camera) knows they're not going to get done when the emergency vehicle approaches.

The problem of stopping times in marginal cases could be solved by increasing the amber time, though I imagine that this would cause more amber gamblers. I really think there should be a review of amber times and posted as such in the thread about the East Lancs road. I think it should be 1 second for every 10mph on the speed limit (or 85th %ile if you prefer) so 3 seconds in a 30 etc. Perhaps an additional second for junctions with the cyclist storage thing at the front would help allieviate that problem.

I also understand that most red light cameras don't start monitoring the junction until 2.9 seconds which may help the decision making process a little.

These days, if I don't know the phasing of a particular set of lights, I'll tend to back off until I've seen a complete cycle and seen it change to green. I then know exactly how long I've got to reach and clear the stop line and will start to slow down very early if it's not going to be possible to make it (in quiet times, I aim to be reaching the stop line just as it changes to green so that I don't have to waste time accelerating)

Well if it's safer to do so then... Maybe. I wouldn't normally go driving through red lights unless they were broken or an ambulance wanted to get past. I was just giving this as an example of "really badly placed" traffic lights. The rest of the lights areound Poole are mostly ok. Well most of them. Not so sure about Fleets Bridge roundabout...

_________________
Andrew.

I don't think I would

There is a difference between intent and a mistake.

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

I run red lights on the bike sometimes, but only if it's very early in the morning (I work funny hours) and there's no one around. Like I said in my first post on here, lots of lights don't register the presence of a cyclist so I can either wait until a car arrives to change the lights for me (a long wait a 3am) or look, listen and go through the red. If there is a car within sight I'll wait and go through on green. Of course, it could be said that it might be safer to run a red light (carefully!) than to wait for lots of traffic to catch up with you and go through at the same time, but I wouldn't say such a thing
It strikes me (playing devil's advocate for a minute) that if you can say "road safety is about more than driving according to arbitrarily imposed speed limits", as this organisation does, then surely you can also say "road safety is about more than driving according to arbitrary coloured lights"? Granted, many traffic lights are essential road safety features (as are many speed limits), but some, particularly the proliferation of 24 - hour traffic lights on roundabouts, seem to invite a lack of respect. I know that round Wolverhampton, there are now traffic lights on most of the roundabouts, all of which worked far better without them.
This is only intended as a debating point, incidentally: I don't want anyone to get the impression that I ignore traffic lights everywhere I go! I just think that more and more lights will be ignored the more "silly" ones get erected, leading to more and more traffic light cameras.

so it would be interesting to find out if the accident causing red light runners driving through intentionally or mistakenly. I'm guessing it would be more of the latter as they'll tend to be going through later.

http://www.stvincent.ac.uk/Resources/Ph ... redlt.html

http://www.stvincent.ac.uk/Resources/Ph ... edlt2.html

not a mistake, so punsh away.

http://www.stvincent.ac.uk/Resources/Ph ... edlt3.html

These are clearly 'OH S£$T!!!' moments.

(I do think there is something worng with the renault breaks)

Punshment for mistakes may not change behaviour.

I do not like the idea of having the same punshment for a mistake as you do for an intentional act.

For example murder, manslaughter, death by misadventure? ( I think). In all cases someone has been killed by the actions of another person, however the 'level' of intent is different.

According to what you seem to be saying, why not call it all murder? After all someone was killed by another person in all cases.



Three times
Once when learning to drive

_________________
Oct 11 Birmingham Half Marathon. I am running for the British Heart Foundation.
http://www.justgiving.com/Rob-Taylor

The only thought that came to mind when viewing the first two was "why did they run the light?"

It looks like they weren't just running past a light that'd just changed.

Perhaps there's a visibility issue with these lights?

Oh what the hell, just keep writing tickets.

all still result in punishment of some sort do they not? Why should negligence behind the wheel be any different?



daydreaming, talking on the phone, berating the kids, fiddling with the radio, perhaps just plain not looking where they're going.

None of those reasons are prevented by red light cameras... People who miss seeing the lights will still miss seeing the lights. They also lead to highly dangerous crashes because the red light will probably be run somewhere in the middle of the phase when cross traffic is flowing freely.

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

and that's a far better argument for why red light cameras are bad than "It's too difficult for me to decide whether I should stop or not". On the other hand, at least you have proof of who stuffed up.

Some people could(and do, I've seen it) easily panic and slam on when the safest option would have been to carry on, the fact the red light camera is there may cause them to make a bad judgement. Maybe those people shouldn't be on the road, but they are.

which will cause you no problem at all as naturally you're leaving a safe gap between your car and theirs...
and for those that are too stupid to manage this it will teach them an expensive lesson

Except that coming up to traffic lights there is more switching on the panic button as more drivers attempt to get through in time, so closer tailgaiting.

So here you are, a driver approaching a green light and hoping to make it through. Driver in front starts to slow down on approach thus holding you up - of course driver in front is doing technically the right thing, enabling himself to stop in time. Light turns amber as front driver reaches the line and he slams on the brakes to stop - wonder what driver behind does?

By the way, in the scenario when the driver in front gets through, the chasing driver will often follow with the notion that "I would have got through this had the one in front not held me up".

Now maybe if they didn't take so long to turn back again...

Can a school crossing patrol step out from behind a bus or other large vehicle and then expect you to stop? That happened me one day when I had only been driving a few weeks, completely inexperienced... I made the (bad) decision of stepping on the brakes, I managed to lock the wheels, but I was only doing about 10mph... It caught me by surprise, and made me wonder, why did he chose to step out from behind a bus, where he was completely hidden to any oncoming vehicles...

_________________
Mike

Of course not, I'm super-human and have no lapses in concentration and make no mistakes whatsoever.

But for those other mere motals out there it's not a great idea that some people make emergency stops for amber traffic lights, when pre-camera they would have safely, and rightly, gone through.

Those side effects would on balance be worth it if, and only if red light cameras actually stopped accidents. Afterall isn't that the purpose? But they don't.

surely you should always be expecting any car (vehicle) in front of you to do this?

You should, yes. I think the point Capri was making (which you've hidden with your somewhat selective snipping of his quote) is that it's not a good idea to add things to the road system which may artificially increase the likelihood of you being behind someone forced into doing an emergency stop.

_________________
Chris

Yes of course I do, because I said I never make mistakes, misjudge anything, and I always make sure I leave the correct braking distance taking into account the road surface and I never ever get distracted for even the briefest of periods.

However, unfortunatly not everyone is as good as me. Yes they should leave enough room in case the vehicle makes an emergency stop but lets accept reality, they don't. Yes it maybe their fault, and maybe they deserved it, but come on, there no point creating needless accidents for no benefit.