Red Light cameras - effect on traffic flow - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 02:08:02 am
content: To open with, don't get me wrong, Red Light cameras catch morons racing, or running a legitimately 'red' light - and save many lives... (read on!)This discussion is whether thelazyimplementation of cameras slows down, or impedes traffic flow at previously functional junctions for completely unrelated reasons!At many red-light intersections, there are multiple light phases, varied by the time-of-day and other factors to assist traffic flow and pedestrian safety.At these (non-camera) intersections, the signalling frequently passes the onus to the driver - to identify 'safe-turn' opportunities, and u-turns etc, as allowed in the prevailing traffic conditions - or indeed adds 'green arrow' or 'no-arrow' phases.When a red-light camera has been installed - these 'no arrow' phases (regardless of the 'main' lanes being 'green') are often eliminated. I suspect because programming the camera would have become more complex for the enforcement authority.This puts a harsh spotlight on those authorities - reducing the efficiency of traffic flow, to implement a camera site for safety andrevenueopportunities.If we ignore the safety aspect (the junction worked perfectly well* before the camera was installed), the reduction in smooth traffic flow can be attributed to revenue raising.*conceded that the 'new' camera now catches red-runners, but it would be exactly as effective if it was integratedproperlyto coordinate already known traffic patterns, rather than lazily to make it cheaper and easier.Just a thought. Maybe I expect too much from statutory authorities.

author: Rerouter
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 02:22:06 am
content: You expect too much, this week i got into conversation with one of the guys while he was working on a signalling box (i was working nearby and it was lunchtime) apparently there is half a mountain of red tape to change any of the signalling systems programming or timers,This was mainly in response to me asking why some rows of lights that realy should be staged in peak hour are not,

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 02:26:10 am
content: ... and that's why it intrigues me...Theydomake significant changes - to add the camera, and reduce the traffic flow opportunities. SO the red tape adds another layer of proof they went out of their way to make traffic flow less efficient - wjhile adding a camera for whatever purposes it fulfills.The street techs are nice guys, and pretty good at their jobs, but only implement templates delivered from above.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 03:42:12 am
content: I've seen some changes in traffic signals around here, that suggest they're actually doing some things. But it takes years. It's a slow process, as any governmental procedure surely is.Not sure if we have camera lights around here, and if so, where. I've heard many stories where they've been installed; suspiciously (and dangerously!) reduced yellows coming with, for example. More than a few cities have had to refund millions in wrongful citations. Often in those situations, a contractor has been hired to manage the intersections, with predictable results given the reward method (X% revenue from citations issued..).Tim

author: VK3DRB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 03:57:27 am
content: Red lights cameras make no difference to traffic flow. But over-population and poor urban planning does.Red light cameras are good to stop drivers running red lights, except when they are used by authorities to trick motorists into paying fines. There are two examples I know of. One where the camera was set up with illegal timing to increase revenue (they were caught out, causing a public outcry). The other where they use ambiguity to catch out motorists.But we need red light cameras because most drivers are basically ignorant and lack the necessary IQ to drive a car safely.

author: miguelvp
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 04:25:21 am
content: If you live on a city where 18 wheelers or any large trucks drive through I can see how a red light camera can affect traffic.It takes them longer to break and to start so they have to leave gaps and a-holes just cut in front of them slowing the whole row behind the truck in the process.Facilitating flow wouldn't impact things that much because one thing is cutting off a large truck in slow traffic and another is doing it when they are at a regular speed.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 04:54:47 am
content: Ok, to recapthere seems to be resistance in agreeing thatmore(notlonger) red cycles doesn't slow the traffic?

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 05:35:43 am
content: Quote from: Rerouter on May 31, 2015, 02:22:06 amThe Roads & Maritime Services in NSW monitor traffic flow at intersections remotely from the Traffic Management Centre. Where needed, phasing is increased/decreased. Police also have access to modify phasing through their communications centres; a simple radio call is all that it takes to change phasing, disable green lights or flash the entire intersection to amber if there are traffic issues or a side street is closed due to a crash or other incident.I have noticed in the ACT, the phasing is absolute nonsense. The main issues I've noticed down there are that lights show red in all directions for longer than is necessary (even after traffic from the previous phase is well clear of the intersection), a green signal at one intersection is met with a red signal at the next intersection a short distance away causing continual start/stop traffic and signals showing green for extended periods even when there is no traffic travelling in that direction.Getting back on topic, personally I don't think red light cameras alone significantly contribute to traffic congestion however combined red light and speed cameras do. People are too afraid of doing even 1 KM/hour over the limit on approach to a yellow light, that they apply the brakes much earlier and harder than they would normally at a non-camera intersection.Our biggest issue in Sydney is that our roads simply can't cope with the population and upgrades are too little and too late. Take the M5 motorway for example: for many years that was a two lane road (in each direction). Now that has been increased to three or four lanes in some parts (but eventually reducing back down to two lanes at the M5 East Tunnel). When they initially announced the upgrades, it should have been aminimumof four lanes in each direction, the entire way.As a side note, I think the focus on "excess speed" in this country is a ridiculous one. Exceeding the posted speed limit by, say 10% is not dangerous. There is far more danger in the lack of lane discipline (not keeping to the left where required, not giving way etc...), not driving with the flow of the traffic and not driving to road conditions. This is also where the speed restrictions for Learner and Provisional drivers cause more issues than they solve. An L plater travelling 90KM/hr on a freeway while everyone else is sticking to 110-115 KM/hr is asking for trouble. I would support the idea of red light only cameras at almost every intersection if it meant ridding our roads of fixed speed cameras.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 05:40:35 am
content: you're right. RMA NSW have always been progressive in traffic management strategies (occasionally they slip). Many cities around the world have evolved their systems from SCATS, thanks for raising that.I must admit that my specific observations are in VIC - I should have said that at the outset.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 05:43:32 am
content: IME, "red-light cameras" are just another government scandal on the growing pile. At least in my corner of the planet.Many studies have shown that the lights at the camera intersections are short-timed by both general guidelines, and comparison with similar intersections with similar traffic patterns. They are financed, installed and operated by out-of-state private companies as nothing more than a revenue generating scheme for the city. I simply avoid the camera intersections just to not get sucked into the scandal. My GPS warns me about which intersections have the traps.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 05:48:35 am
content: to be fair, the jurisdictions that I've seen, generally have well defined protocols for timing and related issues, it's just the corner-cutting during the planning, and opportunistic nature of the beast.Less effort, more reward. The bottom line rules over the greater good or community benefit.

author: kolonelkadat
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 06:38:49 am
content: Here a ticket will run you between $800 and $2000 (read: more than a months rent, and more than my daily driver is worth). Because of this, I will not go through an intersection if the light is yellow. If I get rear endedinsurance will pay for it. Insurance wont pay a ticket though.I know other people drive the same way. I cant imagine it having anything other than a net negative impact on traffic flow.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 06:46:40 am
content: Quote from: kolonelkadat on May 31, 2015, 06:38:49 am99% of the time, the person behind is at fault if they collide with the driver in front of them. I'd say 70% of drivers (in Australia at least) drive way too close to the car in front of them. As you correctly put it, if I come to a stop at a yellow light and someone hits me from behind, I'm covered, plus the driver behind me will have to pay my excess.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 06:48:13 am
content: There are almost none left here, they get shot out by taxi drivers or get painted over. Same with any unattended camera and the cameras that are supposed to monitor the dedicated taxi lane. they had a few cases where they had to refund the fines ( expensive for the metro's involved) due to poor installation, poor operator training and other things.

author: dexters_lab
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 08:33:15 am
content: Quote from: kolonelkadat on May 31, 2015, 06:38:49 ami've just taken one to bits on my youtube channel (an old Traffipax one from the mid 1990s), the camera will never activate for a period of time after its red, it would certainly never fire on an amber. The exception is if they are also acting as a speed camera too, which the one i have can be. So it can catch those that floor it when it's on amber and get through on amber but end up breaking the speed limit to do it.I am of the opinion red light cameras only do good if you have a problem junction or crossing

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 08:55:44 am
content: When I lived in Cambridge during the 70's the government passed a regulation stipulating that there had to be a certain number of traffic lights per thousand population/vehicles. After some deliberation the council duly installed said extra traffic lights to meet the requirements, knowing that extra lights would increase snarl ups traffic lights started to appear in back streets in one small road less than 150 meters long there were two sets of lights which did absolutely nothing as there were only a dozen cars a day went down that road, but the council had met the legal requirements of the government and not unduly upset the traffic flow. As a result of the initial traffic survey to meet the standards some of the traffic lights already installed were removed and replaced with mini roundabouts, which improved the traffic flow immensely.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 08:58:20 am
content: Great story!This exactly the blinkered knee-jerk logic that pervades public office nowadays. Hard to beat!

author: David_AVD
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 09:01:48 am
content: I see cars run red lights (the other direction has gone green!) every day on the way to and from work. It's a shame those intersections don't have have cameras installed to catch those morons.

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 09:14:12 am
content: If red light cameras are implemented correctly, I don't think they will slow down traffic.Bad planning or switching red light in stupid sequences will slow down traffic.When I grew up in Germany, some big cities had a sign above a traffic light, saying something like "green wave at 55 km/h"So, if you were driving at that speed and had one green light, most likely all upcoming light on this road would be green as well and traffic would float nicely. All these signs have been removed in the German cities and no matter what speed you are trying to get a "green wave", it will not work. It seems the govenment has implemented a way to slow down traffic by NOT keeping traffic light in sequence.Or the amount of traffic has increased so much, that it make no longer sense or is too complicated.In the US there was always a joke that if you could not pass your electrical engineering classes, you would end up as a traffic engineer.May be there is some truth to that as well.I have definitely seen some intersections, were you can only shake your head of stupidly implemented traffic flow.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 09:48:32 am
content: Quote from: David_AVD on May 31, 2015, 09:01:48 amEventually cross traffic does stop them..............Got that T shirt, plus the nerve damage as well. 50m from home.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 09:57:20 am
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on May 31, 2015, 09:14:12 amThat's very true. I've known several EE's and a number of complex 'systems engineers' that have insight and foresight well beyond their employers and customers. Unfortunately they're the first to get cut with a budget, as the boss has no idea what what they do!Is this poor engineering, or poor management?

author: BradC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 10:06:14 am
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on May 31, 2015, 05:43:32 amUnfortunately in Western Australia they are an absolute necessity. I left the country for 6 years between 03 & 09, and when I returned I was absolutely floored (and still am) at the number of drivers that routinely shoot lights that are so red the other direction has gone green. My wife has nearly been killed twice in the last 5 years with late night red light runners.The 6 years I was away was in the middle east. When I arrived the traffic was as bad there as it is here now. During my time over there the government basically installed red light cameras on every second intersection, and the penalty for running a red light was impound of your vehicle for 28 days enforceable when you renewed your rego yearly. Traffic behaviour changed almost overnight. Problem solved, and no observable negative consequences.So given what we have to put up with on a day to day basis in WA, I actually support the governments promise to add another hundred or so red light cameras. The fact that they double as speed cameras is an unfortunate consequence, but you learn to slow to within 7 of the limit as you pass through an intersection. Not difficult.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 10:31:47 am
content: Least of the problems here.....

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 10:35:54 am
content: For those already following - a poll has been added at the top.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 10:51:34 am
content: Very easy to have a red light camera on controlled turn intersections. You have a pair of loops for each lane, so simply do not arm those loops ( either by a relay in the camera box that disables triggers from those sensors on green arrow) or simply do not connect them, even if you do cut the loops into the roadway and install the 5 turns of 1.5mm wire to make them. That way you can trigger on straight runners, as the turning ones will hopefully slow down before the turn.The camera typically only arms 0.5s after red, and if the loop is occupied already by a vehicle in the first or second detector block it will ignore it till clear.The newer cameras use a video camera to do image recognition, so they generally are able to detect vehicles that creep across the line after the light is red, and those also are able to catch those who drive through before green. They also have video of each trigger, so can also do accident reconstruction, you find quite a lot of that video on youtube from US cameras. Most are also used as traffic monitors as a secondary function, already there, already a data stream into a control centre.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 11:01:19 am
content: The exact situation I was referring to in the OP...- anexistingintersection had a phase with a red turn arrow -which would go offafter a period allowing traffic to turn 'when it's safe' in the remaining 'main green' time before the full red phase...This scenario is usually implemented at a clear & level 4-way with good visibility... also a good candidate for red-light-runners.After a camera was installed, the safe-turn option was removed - making longer turn queues as there was no longer a safe-turn phase when the traffic is clear... My belief is that it was more cost effective to eliminate the safe turn period than to implement better red-light logic.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 11:35:55 am
content: This should solve the problem.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 11:39:24 am
content: There are some people who dangerously run red lights but going on red isn't always dangerous. Sometimes nothing is coming, yet the lights stay stubbornly red for a couple of minutes and it's perfectly safe to go. Pedestrian crossings are a prime example. A person may press the button, then walk across the road when the pedestrian lights are still red (this is not an offence in the UK), then when the traffic lights go red, there's no one crossing so it's perfectly safe to go. Then there are the times when the lights change to red when there's a traffic jam, so the road will remain blocked if people don't go.I don't know about other parts of the world but I believe here in the UK red light cameras are speed sensitive and will not trip if the traffic is moving below a certain speed, so if you go through a red light slowly enough, then you won't be caught.

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 02:18:10 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on May 31, 2015, 11:39:24 amI didn't know we had them over here, I wish my local councils would install them. It's got to be at least once a week I have to dodge people who jump the lights while I'm crossing, and more often I see people do it while I'm on the road, even if there's a jam and they'll only move a few tens of yards. Most drivers over here seem to think pedestrians deserve to get run over for slowing them down, forgetting that as soon as they park up they are pedestrians themselves.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 03:52:50 pm
content: Quote from: David_AVD on May 31, 2015, 09:01:48 amIt is mostly due to poorly adjusted traffic lights; the ones that stay red when there is absolutely no other traffic or stay red by default and have the habbit to jump to green just as you have halted. Those cause most of the accidents.

author: AndreasF
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 06:23:31 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on May 31, 2015, 11:39:24 amI do that all the time. Most pedestrian lights I've ever come across here in the UK take WAY to long to switch to green for the pedestrians. I understand that they can't switch immediately as soon as a pedestrian pushes the button, and that there should be some minimum "time-out" period between pedestrian green phases, but in my opinion those time-outs should start after a pedestrian green phase, not before. For many of the pedestrian crossings I come across on my way to work, I don't even bother pushing any more.Quote from: Hero999 on May 31, 2015, 11:39:24 amI agree that you should go, but technically you shouldn't enter the intersection if you can't clear it.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 06:51:37 pm
content: They should require that any light with a camera also have a countdown display indicating how much time is left. That allows drivers to plan ahead. Having a countdown also makes red lights appear to pass faster. (I noticed that effect during a class project about implementing a simulated traffic light in Verilog, and noticed that it seemed to go much faster once the time display was implemented, even though I know the actual timing did not change.)

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 06:56:54 pm
content: Countdown times have the unintended effect of increasing accidents, as the other drivers will start across the intersection when the counter reaches zero, without actually looking for oncoming traffic. That has been proven with the pedestrian crossing timers, which count down time till red and also are an indicator the cross traffic will be green.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 07:42:44 pm
content: Maybe have the display blank at 10 seconds remaining? Or what about have the actual transition happen when the display has a few seconds left, but randomized.The good drivers try to time the lights (faster and more efficient), so maybe what we need is something to help them do just that?

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 07:50:25 pm
content: Quote from: AndreasF on May 31, 2015, 06:23:31 pmI'm amazed they work at all (at least, as you seem to initially imply).Most reports I've seen, they are explicitly designed just as one would figure intuitively from their [lack of] response: they literally do absolutely nothing.Last article I read, they were studying the effectiveness of those buttons -- apparently, adding a "boop" sound to the button makes it seem more efficacious, leading to pedestrians waiting patiently, more often.Until they figure that out, too, I suppose.Tim

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 08:57:39 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 31, 2015, 03:52:50 pmThe topic of anger and impatience in society is a whole 'nuther big subject!

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 09:34:17 pm
content: While red light cameras probably don't have much effect on flow, they have certainly reduced my frustration. When I lived in Tucson, AZ it was routine to see half a dozen cars "stretching" a light into the green for your direction. This occurred during high traffic times of day when it was usual to have to wait for at least two cycles of the traffic light before you got to the front of the line and got to go through. People who had waited through a couple of lights just didn't feel like waiting one more. After red light cameras showed up this stopped. As frustrating as it is/was to sit through multiple light cycles, it was even more frustrating watch people using up "your" turn.Speed cameras, on the other hand, definitely slow the flow of traffic. On many streets, where the flow of traffic was five or ten mph above the posted limit, speeds dropped to five or ten below the posted limit as many drivers hit the brakes (just to be sure). The sudden braking at a speed camera is far more hazardous than the higher speeds ever were.Since the "stretching" of the light was going on in both directions I don't overall traffic throughput was changed much. The extra people going through at the end of one light just made up for the late start at the beginning of the light due to people running the other direction. While the police claimed an improvement in safety, it was marginal, maybe one or two collisions a year less. Of course those two collisions were extremely important to the people not involved.

author: David_AVD
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2015, 10:02:49 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 31, 2015, 03:52:50 pmNo, it's a simple case of dickheads who think they are more important than everyone else, deliberately running the red light. There's plenty of time to stop before it goes red. If you can't do that you don't deserve a licence.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 12:01:27 am
content: Google's research pointed out that it is often safer to drive above the speed limit if that is the rate at which the other traffic is moving. Besides that there is a wide variety in errors in the speedometer. If I drive close to 140km/h according to the speedometer in my car the actual speed is 130km/h. People adhering to the speed limit could drive as slow as 120km/h on a place where you are allowed to go 130km/h. That is a huge difference and could make other people who are adhering to the speed limit as well look as they are exceeding the limit. That is why it is better to go with the flow. Only in rare cases going with the flow makes you exceed the speed limit.Regarding driver's competence: it helps to take an additional course on how to drive on wet and iced roads. Otherwise Darwin will sort things out.

author: steve30
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 12:08:07 am
content: Quote from: AndreasF on May 31, 2015, 06:23:31 pmI could ramble on for ages about crossings. There are many 'puffin' crossings around here which don't detect the person's presence correctly, therefore, it never allows you to cross, or it will only allow you to cross if you stand in a very specific location. There are several like this near my house.I don't see many red light cameras around these days. Never did see many, but I'm sure I see fewer these days. Wouldn't mind seeing them on some crossings though. I had several near misses on a crossing in Doncaster when I was at the college there.

author: BradC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 12:29:10 am
content: Quote from: David_AVD on May 31, 2015, 10:02:49 pmThis is the crux of the problem on the roads. Most of the traffic issues I witness are entirely caused by people too self-important to obey the road rules while rectifying their errors, instead just blocking traffic or pulling dickhead maneuvers because they can't spare the extra 30 seconds from their day to go around the block, wait to be let in or stop where and when they are supposed to stop. The facebook generation (me, me, me, me, me).

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 01:46:58 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on May 31, 2015, 11:24:05 pmPosted speed limits may or may not have something to do with safe speeds. In an area I once lived there was a gently curved road with no driveways or other side roads that had a posted speed limit of 45 mph (quite reasonable). Two young ladies doing an estimated 65 mph were unable to manage the curve and perished in the resulting accident. (Police and other drivers easily handle this road at the speed the young ladies were driving.) The mothers of the deceased ran a very active and successful campaign to reduce the speed limit to improve safety and "keep anyone else from their daughters fate". The new limit was 35 mph. A similar event occurred in another road near a later residence of mine. The only difference was that it was two young men and their estimated speed was in excess of 125 mph. Their vehicle left the ground for over 100 feet on one of the bounces.While speed was a factor in both accidents, in neither case did the speed of the driver have anything to do with the posted speed limit.How should you set the speed limit? While you can always justify a lower speed based on the longer reaction times and lower energies involved, how can you justify any speed above zero if these are your criteria? Zero provides infinite reaction time and no energy. A method that works well in some jurisdictions that I have lived in is to initially set the speed limit by judgment of the traffic engineers, and then adjust it up or down if it is found that a high percentage of the traffic is either exceeding or falling below the original posted limit.

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 01:54:40 am
content: Quote from: kolonelkadat on May 31, 2015, 06:38:49 amFlow probably, average health outcome not necessarily ... you can have a lot of rear ends before it becomes as relevant as a single side impact.

author: David_AVD
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 02:36:01 am
content: Quote from: BradC on June 01, 2015, 12:29:10 amAs the dickheads going through the red light are often passing right in front of me, I usually see them fairly clearly. The age of the red light runners does seem to be biased towards the younger end, but I regularly see people of all ages do it - businessmen, little old ladies and mothers with a carload of kids included.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 09:29:32 am
content: Quote from: wilfred on June 01, 2015, 12:13:54 amDon't you read the news?http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28851996QuoteNo. 130km/h (close to 140kph on the speedometer of my car) is pretty common across Europe nowadays including the NL. Usually my cruise control is set at that speed when cruising through France.QuoteI agree and most of the times there are speed limits based on the condition and curvature of the road in the parts of Europe I have driven in. Having good tires and suspension are very important too. There is a huge difference between cheap Chinese tires and a good brand (especially when the road is wet). Shock absorbers don't have an eternal life as well. These really need to be changed after 100k to 150k km (sooner if the roads in your area are bad). Unfortunately many people don't seem to care about these things and put their faith in the hands of Darwin.

author: BradC
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 09:46:12 am
content: Quote from: David_AVD on June 01, 2015, 02:36:01 amSorry, I was probably not clear. When I refer to the "facebook generation" it's not so much a generation as referring to that group of people who are so self-important as to believe that the world actually wants to hear what they have to say. They also tend to believe they own the road, that nobody minds when they hold up the coffee queue as they talk on their phone and that restaurants exist purely to give their instagram feed something to look at.A little more consideration for others goes a long way and that includes self-censorship.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 10:13:22 am
content: @Wilfred: So you are saying the lead engineer on one of Google's flagship projects is just dumb and had his programmers add some lines of code without any scientific backup? Here is another one

author: David_AVD
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 11:19:45 am
content: Quote from: BradC on June 01, 2015, 09:46:12 amAhh... I get you now. I just call them "fucking morons".

author: GreyWoolfe
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 12:29:31 pm
content: I have seen more and more red light cameras popping up. I have even been caught out at a couple. I don't find them as near an issue as light timing. I have to use a major street in the next town over to get to the highway. Because our company vehicles are now GPS tracked for speed, among other things, I find that if I catch the light to turn onto that street, I will catch every other light on my way to the highway. Granted that there are only 4 and are widely spaced, but to me, this doesn't help traffic flow or gas mileage. Before the GPS, I knew exactly what speed I needed to travel to make all the lights and it was only 5 MPH over the limit. Just as you are getting up to speed, you have to slow down for the next light and so on. Makes no sense. I guess it only does to bureaucrats.As a side note, there are several major streets in Orlando, FL that have red light cameras at every intersection and signs before every one of them stating that running the red light is a $268 fine. People still run them.

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 03:51:06 pm
content: I think the red light cameras might also have something to do with money making. I have noticed on the few junctions around here where they are fitted the timing interval between green and red is shorter far shorter in one case so that the light has hardly gone green when it reverts to red and this is on a very large roundabout where a number of main roads converge (A10 A47 A149) There are a large number of drivers caught there and most are not trying to run the red, it is just not possible for them to stop in time or safely.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 04:14:08 pm
content: Quote from: wilfred on June 01, 2015, 04:21:50 amSorry I was unclear. These were two examples of cases where speed limits were not based on safety issues, but on an emotional response of distraught parents. Your previous post implied that anyone driving above the posted speed limit was driving unsafely. I will agree with you to the extent that it is always safer to drive near the speed of the traffic around you, even if the roadways are appropriate for a much higher speed. The two examples were easy to bring to mind, but there are many cases where speed limits are not set appropriately. Other examples I have seen include limits which were lowered (for the safety of construction workers) on a project that was then abandoned before starting. The speed limits were never returned to the original value. Numerous cases where road conditions have changed and speed limits haven't changed also (this works both ways. In many cases the limits should be lowered and are not). The most widespread example was the US in the 1970s and 1980s. Most of the interstate highway system was engineered for 80 mph speed limits, but speeds were set at 55 mph for energy conservation reasons. While this may be appropriate, it wasn't done for safety reasons. Many people have touted the safety benefits, which are real. But many of those people citing improved safety statistics have ignored the safety impact of other changes such as mandatory seat belt laws, air bags which occurred at roughly the same time. As speed limits have crept back up on the interstates problems have not returned to earlier levels.Some of the silliest speed limit laws are those in many states of the US setting speeds for trucks and vehicles towing trailers at 55, while passenger vehicles and light trucks are allowed to go at speeds up to 70. While 55 for the heavy vehicles may be good for fuel conservation and road wear, these rules encourage two traffic streams on the same roadway at widely different speeds. There are many unsafe behaviors that result.

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 04:20:23 pm
content: Quote from: G7PSK on June 01, 2015, 03:51:06 pmThis is very much the case in my corner of the planet. We (the rest of them, not me!) love Government so much we have 5 layers (6 if you count the UN) of bureaucrats and cronies ostensibly looking after us. it is obvious to most citizens that the "red light cameras" are simply automatic money-generating scams for local government. They are demonstrably short-timed to maximize the profits.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 05:14:54 pm
content: FYI, most US states allow speeds of 20% over posted. Why this is a thing, I don't know. Likely it has to do with the history of speed limits and their enforcement. (And yes, it does create the bizarre paradox where you can be given an excessive-speed ticket, for being above the speed limit, while being dangerous by driving slower than traffic! Such marginal cases aren't usually handed out, usually reserved for drivers who are being a real pain in the ass. Still doesn't make sense, but that's how it is.)There was a stretch of state highway around here with limited access (i.e., center divider, on and off ramps, walls and guard rails, the works), which was paved good enough for full highway speed, but was posted at 45 MPH (72 kph). Traffic regularly flowed in the 55-60 range. I suspect police could go down there and fish for citations whenever they liked; seems like they would be serving a motorist as often as lying in wait, when patrolling that section.Since a year or two ago, they finally upped it to 55 MPH.The traffic still flows about 60 MPH.Another road (which is also a state highway, but not limited access (private drives and intersections come right up to the road) has a posted 45 MPH, which suggests you're okay to go 50-55, but traffic regularly flows 40-50 because it's not worth going faster between stop lights. I suppose this road is actually ideally posted. Although given the convention of "20% over", it should be reduced to 40, or even 35.On federal highways (usually posted 65 MPH / 104 kph), I've driven straight past speed traps at 80 (128 kph). Obviously I can't know the exact thoughts of the officers watching, but I would assert it was appropriate for conditions -- long stretches of nothing between major cities (you can go for 100s of km between cities in this country, remember), little to no traffic (and I do slow down on approaching traffic, in those situations).I've heard of going 90-100 MPH (up to 160 kph) on desert roads down in Arizona and whatnot (replace 100s of km with 1000s of km between cities!), and occasionally being pulled over at that speed -- but usually getting off with a warning, no ticket.FYI, as I recall, there is no longer any "unposted" stretch of road in the country. There used to be some of that in Montana. Maybe there is again, now, I don't know. Even if so, it's not something you'll see in just any state. (Which I suppose shouldn't be unfamiliar to European readers, as Germany is about the only state in the EU with something resembling the Autobahn, as far as I know?)Also for any AU readers... go ahead and laugh at our distances. Please, do so. I am well aware your desert is truly awe-inspiring.Tim

author: XynxNet
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 01, 2015, 08:22:41 pm
content: I never experienced a more disciplined traffic in regard of speeding, average speed and red lights than on my vaccation in NSW Australia a few years back.I always did attribute that to the numerous red light and speeding cameras there.Coming from a country which shares some kind of national believe that speed limits are a violation of our inate rights and driving at speed limit +10 km/h is ok, that was a really strange experience and an eye opener.Driving in Australia was way more relaxed and felt safer than in Germany.

author: Someone
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2015, 12:15:25 am
content: Quote from: T3sl4co1l on June 01, 2015, 05:14:54 pmPuff and rubbish, reliable sources list maximum distances on US highways in the 50-100 mile region, not that far behind the 100-200km gaps on the major highways in Australia. Its only remote minor roads where these distance jump up into the 500km+ (8 hour drive) region.

author: T3sl4co1l
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2015, 04:18:12 am
content: Quote from: Someone on June 02, 2015, 12:15:25 amEspecially outside of the desert (southwest, and many parts on the east side of the Rockies), I think that's true; that's including smaller towns with basic amenities (gas, food, lodging). I said "big cities" -- for example, there's ~300mi of wilderness (including small towns, truck stops and whatnot) between Madison (WI capitol) and St. Paul (MN capitol). No, not at all inhospitable (not like barren desert), but my intent was to emphasize the low density, for readers who may not be familiar with that kind of thing. If you go south instead, you see mile upon mile of corn fields; again hardly inhospitable, but practically as low-density as can be.And like I said, you Aussies have your desert...Tim

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 02, 2015, 08:27:44 am
content: Slightly off-topic but yet another reason speed cameras should be abandoned:http://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/queensland-man-zac-murray-was-fined-for-doing-the-speed-limit/story-fnj4alav-1227379323256Better driver education and more Police on the road who have discretion, reasoning and ability to monitor and enforce several road rules at once rather than the no-tolerance, cash cow approach is far more effective. I'm sure the amount spent on buying, maintaining, repairing, calibrating and testing cameras (not to mention the cost of administration and collecting payment) would be far better spent in enhancing Police numbers and capabilities such as ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) etc...In one single traffic stop lasting a few minutes, a Police offer can perform a random breath/drug test, check your licence and registration, observe for any obvious defects on your car, speak to you about the initial reason for the stop (if it wasn't just for a random breath test) and act as a high visibility deterrent to drivers passing you. On the extreme end of the scale, stopping motorists simply for the purpose of a random breath test has resulted in some pretty serious charges, everything from drug trafficking to firearms offences and locking up people with outstanding warrants.What do speed cameras do? Slow down observant drivers just long enough for them to pass short distance between the inductive loops?

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2015, 09:35:47 am
content: The distraction, or waste of time effect is strong.I like to think of public transport (in some cities) in a similar way...I strongly believe if the public trains and buses were thrown open for free use, that private commuter traffic would drop by 20% in a few months... yes, more investment in track & rolling stock, less on roads and times wasted in congestion.Its not an overnight solution, but a government with balls could bring change like this about in a couple of election cycle - 5-10 years, and become heroes in the electorate!Professional drivers still need the roads,but reduced pollution and make the public transport option attractive - people will come! FFS - it's free! Other related income streams may help defray the costs to government as well... restaurant strips etc.

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2015, 09:50:58 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on June 02, 2015, 08:27:44 amReminds me of a friend in Florida, who got a ticket for "Avoiding being caught in a speed trap"How did he avoid it, you might ask...He drove 1 MPH below the speed limit.Also slightly off topic:I received last year a ticket for driving too slow on the German Autobahn.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 02, 2015, 09:57:58 am
content: Quote from: HighVoltage on June 02, 2015, 09:50:58 amThat I agree with on many levels.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2015, 05:06:58 pm
content: Minimum speed limits..... Here a heavy good vehicle is not allowed to do over 80kph on the freeway, but conversely the minimum speed limit on the freeway is 80kph. Hard to get a max legal load 65ton combination up to 80kph irrespective of road inclination, and definitely hard to keep it slower than that on a downhill, especially as there are a few hills here wherer the top has a layby for HGV's that also indicate they MUST engage low gear during the descent.Having done the alternate route in a bus, and getting worried about the brakes failing, even though the bus was in second gear, the Voith retarder was on full and warning of overheat, the exhaust brake was doing it noisiest ( Not a Jacobs brake, which is seemingly able to convert fuel to noise without slowing you down much) and still we had to climb on the brakes to keep the bus under 50kph down this road. Thankfully the police were not allowing HGV traffic, seeing as the main road had been closed by a HGV overturning because he did not engage low gear, and went down till the foundation brakes would not work any more ( drum grown beyond actuator travel, due to the heat) and the Fuller box would not allow him to change gear ( non synchromesh box, so you need to double clutch, and the engine cannot rev enough to get the input shaft going fast enough to engage any lower gear or after the speed is over 70 any gear) so the accident always happened on the one corner, ironically just before the arrestor bed and 800m past the first bed. No way to put an arrestor bed there either, seeing as the left side was a sheer drop down 50m to the bottom of the valley, and the right a retaining wall for the up side.There are some rather scary passes here in SA, you can look at them on Google Earth, but they are best experienced in real life.https://www.google.com/maps/@-29.730044,30.810889,3a,79.3y,12.88h,88.31t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1s4WCK3oKtGqQkbxfRL3nk4A!2e0Take a street tour....... Work colleagues live at the bottom of the hill, on the left.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2015, 05:48:02 am
content: Related - but here's a great example of automated enforcement technology.Gotta Love it!Isaac Asimov - where are you ?

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 03, 2015, 08:04:02 am
content: Quote from: SL4P on June 03, 2015, 05:48:02 amPosted that one yesterday SL4P :-) The point I made was that the money from these sorts of "Road Safety Initiatives" should be poured directly into the state Police. I personally don't like the idea of the NSW Roads and Maritime Services taking law enforcement into their own hands with fixed and mobile speed cameras (plus who knows how many private organisations benefit from it).There is a reason NSW Police abolished camera cars fitted with slant radar years and years ago.

author: SL4P
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 03, 2015, 08:06:11 am
content: Reading on too many different devices!!The one that slipped through.. Cheers