Linn gets into road legislation

Reading the letters page of this week's "Autocar" and as usual there are a handful of irate letters about speed cameras, particularly as Autocar is championing the issue with its "Talking Sense on Speed" campaign.

However, there was one such letter that caught my eye. I won't reproduce it in full here but it starts:

"I have followed developments of your speed campaign with wry amusement." and ends:
"The sanctimonious hypocrisy that covers speed camera policy and practice and the vilification of critics makes it all the more offensive and counter-productive".

Fairly normal stuff. Who was it written by though? It's signed by none other than:

Ivor S Tiefenbrun, Glasgow.

Can we look forward to the Linn Kamera?

Michael.

 

Presumably with a trial in camera.

 

If people observed speed limits they'd not need to whine about speed cameras would they?

Why would Ivor care about speed anyway? Most modern Linn stuff grooves about as much as a dead pensioner anyway...

 

If they put the camera's in proper places* then people wouldnt need to moan


* near schools, hospitals, residetial areas etc.....

 

dom,
1) the speed limits in the uk are ludicrous. they were legislated in the 1960's when there were cars on sale which could not even reach 70 never mind exceed it. car technology, from structural rigidity, tyres, electronics and brakes to engines mean that the 70 limit is obsolete, frustrating and would be better set at 85.

2) speed cameras were origionally meant to be put in at accident black spots, outside schools, on blind corners, at dangerous junctions etc. this hasn;t happened. they are in fact put where they can generate the most revenue.

3) the above 2 mean that when a speedcamera is encountered traffic slows to about 40 mph (on a 60 mph a road), a long queue forms and tempers boil. they've just put 2 sets of speed cameras on the a6 at the junctions into my villiage. it's now a nightmare getting on to the a6 in the mornings as people jam on their brakes for the camera and then accelerate like maniacs once they are past it. either that or they try to swerve round the strips in the road and go into the central turning bit which is mental when you come round the corner in the middle of the road to turn and some cock is heading straight for you at 90 mph.

speed cameras are the bane of the modern driver. that **** gatsonides should be strung up by his bollocks with piano wire and used as a pinata - instead of a stick a baseball bat with rusty barbed wire should be used instead. ****er. BTW. i have a clean license so i'm not outraged from being caught.
cheers


julian

 

What Julian said. B*stards :inferno:
I also have a clean license!

 

Hi,

I side with Julian on this. The speed limits do need looking at in more detail. On some roads, it should be higher. Cars are better performing & a lot safer. It's bad driving that causes a lot of accidents.

The speed cameras should mainly be in accident hot spots but a lot are put in areas where the danger low. Cameras can cause acidents as people slow down all of a sudden when they see them.


A lot of traffic will travel at it's own pace. On ceratin roads this pace can be higher than the speed limit. This will not cause problems. I have no problem with camaras & certain traffic calming measures in the right places. But find it strange when accident hot spots don't have these things.



It's interesting to note that the 30 mph speed limit was first introduced in 1935 in Urban areas. There were no upper limits in other areas. (there were some restrictions due to the war.) The turning point was in 1964 when an AC Cobra was reported in the newspapers of travelling up the M1 at nearly 190 MPH. I think they were testing the car. This caused uproar in the houses of Parliament.This lead to the 70mph limit being introduced as a temporary measure on all unrestricted roads in 1965. It wasn't until 1978 that a 60mph National speed limit and 70mph motorway speed limit came into force. A 50 mph limit was introduced in 1965 on some major roads.


SCIDB

 

I wasn't going to get into the whole speeding debate thing but basically I'm with Julian

When I lived in the UK only got busted once for 88mph at night on the M11 by a panda car with the "Vascar" timing you over a fixed distance thing. £30 + 3 points which have long since gone.

Thankfully Portugal doesn't have speed cameras yet My two "biggest" speeding events have been in Portugal: 155mph (the electronically limite top speed of my car :MILD: ) on an utterly deserted stretch of the A6 that goes out to Evora (and then Spain). That was fun. That motorway is always totally empty and I can't understand why as it's the main route to Madrid. Last time I came back from the Spanish border and I noted one stretch where I didn't see a single other car for 20 minutes in either direction - and I was doing 110mph.

The other time was a 120mph average on the A2 down the Algarve last summer. Took about an hour and a half

The main A1 going North from Lisbon though is usually packed and it also has hardly any straight stretches more than 100 metres long so more sensible speeds (about 80mph) are the norm.

Speeding in urban areas though is a different matter. Completely against it.

Michael.

 

I on the other hand resent them as I have 9 points, the bastard things...

I have no idea why a car like mine is for sale in the UK if I'm supposed to potter around in it at 70.

Bah...

 

Well its not speed as such that kills, sure if you hit a pedestrian at 40mph, the chances are they will die, whereas at 20mph, they usually live.

But there is much to be said for reducing urban areas to 20 mph, I really hate it when cars shoot down at 40mph+ its really fast, when you are standing right next to it.

But on open roads, cars do handle better now, and on motorways, speed itself is not wrong, you could do all day at 120mph if there was no-one else there and be safe, provided you didn't fall asleep or have a mechanical problem.

The problem lies with drivers concentration, judgement, and driving to fast too damn close, a lot are also now hugely selfish with no decency to let you in or out. Witness how some put their foots flat down when joining the m-way and pull across all lanes.

the answer partly lies in limiters, its no good for the council to put in road hazards like chicanes to limit, and idiot devices like advance warnings with those red slashes, hazard white lines down the centre and good observation gives clues to oncoming hazards, and if motorists cannot read the signs, should they be driving?

the problem in urban areas is with the power of the car.

Cameras are largely for revenue and they use safety to justify their cause.

They are designed to catch out the decent person who makes a simple mistake rather than the outright disregarder of the law....note how they are placed strategically on hills.

If safety was an issue, they would be placed for the pedestrians at key places. They are not.

AS to dangerous blackspots, that is not the road, it is drivers errors, incompetance, and general lunacy. Generally

Do you know you could get a ban in a short journey in london, if you were say late for work...disgraceful...

 

I am not sure which side I am.

Cars design has not really progress enough for us to go faster then the speed limits at the moment.

If a child or adult is hit by a car travelling no faster then 30mph or 48Km/h the chance of serious or fatal injury is very high.

From my knowledge the crash test like Euro NCAP standard are too low. For example frontal impact tests take place at 64kph (40mph). It may look impressive but average motorway speed are much higher. So if we have a head on accident at speed of 70-90 mph I am doubtful we have much chance of walking away with no injury.


I have got 2 speed fines in the last 4 years. Both for travelling at 40mph. First was with handheld meter at the very beginning of a 30mph road. The later a fixed speed camera located about 1 mile away after the entrance of hospital.

If anything as you guys points out I am no more a safer driver now. It has been always been my intention to be as safe as possible but now just more delegent in looking out for speed cameras to avoid getting fine again.

 

Moved to Chat as it really it's tenuous link to hifi was totally ignored by everyone

Michael.

 

I had 11 points at one time.
mostly for speeding, a couple for rideing on a pavement and being cocky to a copper
Was a courier at the time though, er, no excuse really.
Yes i go faster than the limit, but not in town or built up areas, if i want to think im Barry Sheene i leave it for the open roads, and if i do get caught i have no excuse and i accept that.
Personal fastest speed = 187.6
that was on a drag strip with a tuned GSXR11.
Fastest road speed = 165ish, M32 into Bristol, no way was that poxy lil 600 gunna beat me

 

Classic

For those who don't know the crazy roads of Brizzle, the M32 is about 5[?] miles long, about 2 miles of it above the city, and ends in a set of traffic lights!

 

yer, that lil corner just before Eastville isnt so little

 

Most i have done is 155mph limited in a V12 6.0litre S class merc - translated = cruiseliner - it felt more like 80mph. The suspension can be set so that it doesn't even roll in a bend, or lurch forward under breaking. Not really a car. The tv is the most entertaining thing about it.

I've managed 130mph in my Pug, downhill with a tailwind - it accelerates linearly to 120mph, then completely dies, and takes about 3 days to get to 130mph, so need plenty of tarmac.

Personally i hate cars, and would quite happily set fire to it tomorrow if i didn't need one, but thats another story.

But since i have one, and i hate the bloody endless traffic, it makes sence to get from A to B as quickly as possible. In my younger days, i was stupid enough to regularly cruise at insane speeds - not hhowever that i thought they were dangerous, just that over 100mph i would loose the licence, and that would be insane, hence these days, i tend to cruise at 90-100mph and I use the motorway every day for work.

I personally feel as though i am the greatest driver ever to have lived, but of course all other drivers are absolute incompetent fools, so an accident is not impossible, though because of my bionic vision and lightening reactions, and stealth like car handling capabilities, it would most likely be averted.

So far i have some how managed to avoid any sort of fine or points whatsoever. The only time i came close, was when i got pulled speeding through Manchester town centre, and a copper latched on from a side road. I was chatting to a mate and not applying my Schumacheresque talent to the task at hand, hence i got pulled. Luckily i knew the copper. whahooo! Very jammy. I actually knew him very well, through dealings in retail security.

Cameras are a pain but getting fined by one is just lack of care and attention plain and simple (without discussing their merits). If i got a ticket, i wouldn't complain about it, i should have seen it in the first place. In fact, funnily enough, i always think that the faster i drive the better i am, as i invariably concentrate much more - not from a driving perspective, but because i'm constantly on the look out for coppers.

I've forgotten what the topic was now. Anyway cars are evil, and far worse than cameras is car insurance :JOEL:

 

, what have i been wittering about, i think the fruit teas have gone to my head. will have to review that thing in the morning.

the driving genius thing was meant to be a sarcastic commentary upon the driving demographic type .

i'm going to bed

penance - anything above 20mph on a bike is very dangerous, and wet. exposure to the elements could give you a cold.

m40 is very good for going fast.

question for bedtime'
is there anything which does not serve a purpose?

i expet some good answers tomorrow

 

Andy's beat me on a bike best time I had was 168.75mph 9.65 at the pod 1986 (1385cc gpz 1100 rayjay FF40 race turbo and 3 stage nos), but I whimped on the Nos, as I had flipped it at the previous meeting at Black bushe at over 100, 4 acres of gravel rash smarts a bit, and you pick the bits out for weeks after
My old ZZ1100 turbo, best indicated was 187mph junctions & cars come up pretty quick at this point, strangely enough down the M5 to Bristol
Max recorded 208mph mulsanne straight 1995/6 on a jolly hot summers afternoon, I must of lost a stone in those 2 hours
takes a lot of concentration to keep a car on the road at that speed. although I have had a 'Virgin licence' for over 10 years now, once got banned (12 months) for 146 in 70 by oxford magistraigts court, plus a £1000 fine in 1984, on the way back from the bike show at the Oylimpa barstewards.

 

Agree with point 2 - there's one in Reading by the Oracle in a 40mph zone - well, the start of one anyway; the previous zone is 30 and my mate got "done" for the acceleration between 30-40; this camera is deliberately set to con motorists like this. I also agree that there aren't enough cameras by schools.

1 and 3 though - disagree completely. No matter how many cameras are out there, drivers get there quicker than pedestrians and bus commuters; drivers always get a seat and a dry head as well. Since you're getting there quicker, there should be no need to get irate round the cameras either. If you don't like driving slow, don't drive. Simple. And don't say "I can't not own a car" blah blah - I don't need one and have managed to live for 28 years, so what's your excuse? (A general question to all motorists btw - not you personally Julian )

Sorry - as a moaning blind git -it always cracks me up to hear motorists carrying on and on...

Re the motorway 70mph limit - yeah, it's too slow - but only if you don't have bell ends who hog your car's butt like a two bit faggot, or believe they can do >400 mps in a force 10 hurricane, or of course, 70 mph in the dry with their back fog light on - cretins of the highest order! If you get rid of cretins, then yeah, the speed limit could go up.

Oh - and another thing that would help on the roads - why do drunk drivers get a second chance - should be an automatic ban for life if you're caught pissed behind the wheel...

Finally - in inner cities, there should be a congestion charge for school run parents (with a £10000000 surcharge for a fuel-guzzling 4x4 with one child and parent in!!!); with THAT amount of traffic about, it would surely be faster and BETTER for your kid to walk him/her to school wouldn't it?

We're not as bad as America YET re cars, but not far off. And they wander why there's so many obese people in the country...

I'll get my (flame proof!) coat

One thing though - is it true that a properly serviced, modern car causes more emmissions during manufacture then when on the road? If so, that puts a mockery on the whole thing of making cars more efficient etc...

 

dom,
speed limits in the uk ARE ludicrous mainly because they are totally inapropriate for the situations... for example 30mph through rural villiages and towns is far TOO FAST! it should be 20 with a special limit of 15 imposed within a mile of schools at all times Enforced by speed cameras. The only limit which is even vaguely right is the single carriageway a / b road limit of 60mph with is ok. the biggest gripe i have with automatic enforcement is that the road conditions are not taken into account. to a speed camera 70 mph is the limit if it's 3am on a warm summer morning with no traffic or if it's 5.30 on a friday afternoon before a bank holiday weekend with a freak ice storm in progress and a pea souper that would keep jack the ripper happy.

my third point was to indicate that speed cameras cause more dangerous driving than most things this side of a pensioner in a rover with a hydrogen filled right foot.

the school run is a necessity now. you've got both parents starting work at 9.30 in order to pay the stupid mortgage, no more supervised school busses and the media screaming about child abductions and paedophiles, i know your stance on children, but as a parent i'f buggered if i'm going to put my 7 year old at risk just so some dippy hippy biker can get to his destination a little quicker. also bigger cars are safer than little ones so if you do have to swerve into oncomming traffic to avoid the wobbly hippy on a bike then you and your child are going to survive.

drunk drivers - if they kill someone it should be murder not some 4 month comunity service. 1st time they are caught drunk driving they should get a ban until they've been dry for a year. 2nd time ban for life.

the driving test should be tougher and you should have to retake every 10 years.

busses shoudl be banned and taxi's should be subsidised instead with a computerised sharing scheme.
cheers


julian