# Network of privately run Speed Safety Cameras  Nov 2010: Locations & Effectiveness



## Ceist Beag (12 Nov 2010)

The map at garda.ie (link below) shows the sections covered (all those with a red line).

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/privately-run-speed-cameras-to-operate-from-next-week-481532.html

http://garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=6497


----------



## z107 (12 Nov 2010)

Wouldn't it be cheaper just to increase road tax, or fuel tax?


----------



## RonanC (12 Nov 2010)

This is not just a money making exercise as some will make it out to be. 

*It is to make people slow down and drive within the speed limits.*


----------



## z107 (12 Nov 2010)

Here we go again.
There must be hundred of threads about this already.

It's to collect money.


----------



## RonanC (12 Nov 2010)

umop3p!sdn said:


> Here we go again.
> There must be hundred of threads about this already.
> 
> It's to collect money.


 
Here we go again and again and again....

I know it is to collect money, *but it will also make people slow down*

The standard of driving in this country is a total joke and the Gardai are simply not resourced to catch every speeding loonatic or bad driver on our roads. 

Why should I as a safe driver who sticks to the limits set on the roads have to pay extra because some prat in his merc wants to hog the outside lane and drive to fast ?


----------



## Boyd (12 Nov 2010)

RonanC said:


> Why should I as a safe driver who sticks to the limits set on the roads have to pay extra because some prat in his merc wants to hog the outside lane and drive to fast ?



People hogging the outside lane are usually in a Corolla driving too slow


----------



## Sue Ellen (12 Nov 2010)

Ceist Beag said:


> The map at garda.ie (link below) shows the sections covered (all those with a red line).
> 
> http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/privately-run-speed-cameras-to-operate-from-next-week-481532.html
> 
> http://garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=6497



Did anyone else get a warning message that 'this site is untrusted' when trying to look at the list of cameras?


----------



## RonanC (12 Nov 2010)

username123 said:


> People hogging the outside lane are usually in a Corolla driving too slow


 
We all know the outside lane is the Merc/BMW lane and how dare anyone else use it

anyway.... Conor's had his say on the speed cameras


----------



## Pique318 (12 Nov 2010)

I love how the roads are colour coded into Red (cameras, slow down) and Green (no cameras, foot-to-the-floor). 

Nice to know where it's safe to speed !


----------



## huskerdu (12 Nov 2010)

I heard the Conor Faughnan interview this morning. 

He made a few valid points about why the AA are happy with the new system. 

The experience in Britain was that speed camera were positioned to make money which rightly causes cynicism about them.

The speed cameras here have been positioned, it is claimed, in 
known accident black spots where deaths have occured. The positions
are publicised. 

If this is true, then anyone who speeds, and gets fined, deserves it
for being stupid.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (12 Nov 2010)

Sue Ellen said:


> Did anyone else get a warning message that 'this site is untrusted' when trying to look at the list of cameras?



No .... no warning at all.


----------



## ang1170 (13 Nov 2010)

I was as cynical as anyone who shared this view (common in the UK, with good reason). However, looking at the map, I think this is a genuine attempt to solve a real problem. I could well believe the marked roads are genuine blackspots for speed related "accidents". That, with the knowledge payment to the operators isn't linked to number of fines, plus the publicity (and the existance of the maps) would surely lead anyone to support the initiative?

Now if the maps included any of the motorways (well known to be the safest of roads, despite having the highest speeds), or some of the notorious "fish from a barrel" locations such as the N11 at UCD, then one would have to be cynical. The fact is, they don't, so I think this deserves support.


----------



## JEON50 (13 Nov 2010)

I am looking at the map, and it seems to be a "fish in the Barrel" money raising exercise. Who picked the location, the Garda or the Contractor ? whom will get a fee on each transaction.
I am very much in favour of speed camera's. to save lives, especially the 19-25's. I live in West Cork, I can not see any Camera's. This is one of the highest death rates in Europe, but no proposed camera's. The road are bad. TO SAVE LIVES, it's parts of rural Ireland, that need to have moving camera's, not Ireland's motorways


----------



## Fatphrog (14 Nov 2010)

JEON50 said:


> I am looking at the map, and it seems to be a "fish in the Barrel" money raising exercise. Who picked the location, the Garda or the Contractor ? whom will get a fee on each transaction.
> I am very much in favour of speed camera's. to save lives, especially the 19-25's. I live in West Cork, I can not see any Camera's. This is one of the highest death rates in Europe, but no proposed camera's. The road are bad. TO SAVE LIVES, it's parts of rural Ireland, that need to have moving camera's, not Ireland's motorways



If the roads are bad in rural areas, cameras won't help because the speed limit will still be 80/100 km/hour while the safe driving speeds might be much lower. So you can dive unsafely fast and still adhere to the limit.


----------



## JEON50 (14 Nov 2010)

I could not agree more, how ever at 100 /120 on a motorway is still a lot safer than 80/100 on small rural roads. I have twice come across fatal accidents, one I actually saw happening, both were caused by speed. It will always stay with me. Yes, there is a culture of speeding in the country, and not all by young drivers


----------



## thedaras (14 Nov 2010)

Would anyone know the following;
On the map for the traffic camera positions, it shows a long red line,which is the position of the speed camera.
On a particular road, the red line only goes half way up the road.
Does this mean that only half of the road is liable to have a camera on it?
Say for example the longmile road, if the red line just shows on half of that road,would that mean that the rest of the road has no camera on it?


----------



## huskerdu (14 Nov 2010)

JEON50 said:


> I am looking at the map, and it seems to be a "fish in the Barrel" money raising exercise. Who picked the location, the Garda or the Contractor ? whom will get a fee on each transaction.



The operator of the cameras  is paid a fixed fee for their services. 

If you are caught speeding and fined the money goes to the national coffers, just like it always did, not to the Gardai or the operator of the cameras.


----------



## fago76 (15 Nov 2010)

Looking at the roads selected in Galway it seems like they are selecting them based on solid criteria where a number of people have been killed over the last 2-3 years.
And as I understand it the operators are paid by the hour, not by the tickets issued. 
If it was revenue generating surely you just wouldn't publish the locations that are being covered?


----------



## ColinTomson (15 Nov 2010)

Great Idea
There should be more like this
Ok, more fees, more tickets but for good


----------



## fandango1 (15 Nov 2010)

Does anyone know if the map is displayed anywhere other than the Garda website? The Garda site doesn't seem to be able to cope with the amount of traffic it's getting these days.

Thanks


----------



## irishlinks (15 Nov 2010)

The location map was also showing here http://www.towns-ireland.com/speed-cameramap/


----------



## Complainer (16 Nov 2010)

mugga said:


> And then you'll have those who'll be afraid of their lives of going over the sometimes ridiculously slow speed limits in these areas that they'll crawl along at a snails pace. Far more annoying and dangerous than anything.


Can you please clarify as to how driving within the speed limit (or in your words, at a snails pace) is dangerous?


----------



## Ceist Beag (16 Nov 2010)

mugga said:


> just another money making exercise, the nanny state strikes again. I'm sure when people are given two penalty points for speeding / dangerous fast driving  on the road when doing maybe 45 in a 40 they'll be none too pleased.  And then you'll have those who'll be afraid of their lives of going over the sometimes ridiculously slow speed limits in these areas that they'll crawl along at a snails pace. Far more annoying and dangerous than anything. We are already paying too much for the use of the roads between the picky, over fussy NCT and taxes.  We don't need this!!!!!!!



Ah yes mugga, you'd be one of those drivers who knows better than anyone else what is a safe speed to drive at then yeah? I knew someone would make a post using the cliche nanny state in it.


----------



## PetrolHead (16 Nov 2010)

Speed cameras are not a... I repeat... NOT a "money making exercise".

In the UK over the financial period 2008/2009 speed cameras generated about £67m. 

[broken link removed]

This is a trifling amount within the wider context.


----------



## DrMoriarty (17 Nov 2010)

It's nonetheless a licence to print money. My understanding is that they are getting paid by the camera/hour, so the company can't lose. Detection rates are immaterial, as are the deterrent factor and the impact on road safety.

Interesting thread over on [broken link removed] about the GoSafe Consortium who were awarded this contract. They're led by a multi-millionaire Fianna Fáil supporter who once gave a £50,000 digout to CJH, according to the Moriarty Tribunal report:


> In 1992, Celtic Helicopters was in a perilous financial condition and it became necessary to refund the company. A number of individuals were approached and provided substantial funding. They were Mr. *Xavier McAuliffe*, Mr. John Byrne, Mr. Patrick Butler, Mr. Mike Murphy and Mr. Guy Snowdon. Mr. Haughey indicated that by this time he was taking a more active interest in Celtic Helicopters but informed the Tribunal in the course of his examination that he knew nothing about Mr. McAuliffe's £50,000 contribution; that he had no recollection of Mr. John Byrne's involvement; that he was aware Mr. Butler had made an investment but he wasn't aware of the amount; that he knew nothing about the investment made by Mr. Mike Murphy... [etc.] Mr. McAuliffe's investment was routed through offshore banks and ultimately transmitted to an Ansbacher account in Dublin in the Irish Intercontinental Bank.


I wouldn't call it a 'Nanny State' exercise. 'Banana republic' are the words that come to mind.


----------



## irishlinks (17 Nov 2010)

It sounds like GoSafe have a contract to do a certain amount of hours a month - and they get €65 million over 5 years . http://www.*****************.com/speed-cameras.html



It's also sad that the crowd operating the cameras here decided to use the name GoSafe - which is the same name used by the partnership in Wales doing their mobile speed cameras!


----------



## Binomial (20 Nov 2010)

*Bizzare Traffic Camera Location in Tralee: Princes St- Rock St - Monavalley.*

*



			How will the locations be decided?  Who is responsible for deciding the locations?
		
Click to expand...

*


> An  Garda Síochána has completed an extensive analysis of the collision  history on the road network.
> Sections of road have been identified  where a significant proportion of collisions occurred where speed was a  contributory factor.
> The Garda National Traffic Bureau (GNTB) will  decide on the locations where the speed cameras will operate.


The location for the new traffic cameras in Tralee is truly bizzare. The route winds its way through the medieval little streets of Tralee encountering numerous traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, junctions, schools, churches and entrances exits to supermarkets and car parks.


Not alone is it nearly impossible to speed along these streets but it is difficult to imagine where a camera van can even safely park up.

Check the route out on G streetview: 
http://maps.google.ie/maps?hl=en&ie...oid=1ajZfNIqAjy98XDLdrTHjA&cbp=12,350.28,,0,5

http://maps.google.ie/maps?hl=en&ie...52.269681,-9.708481&spn=0.006316,0.01929&z=16

http://maps.google.ie/maps?hl=en&ie...52.269993,-9.708383&spn=0.006316,0.01929&z=16

If there have been any collisions on this stretch they are of the urban fender bender type where speed is not a factor.


I find it hard to imagine that the Garda National Traffic Bureau (GNTB) has conducted an *extensive analysis* of the collision  history at this location.


I can only speculate that the choice is either A) a control for comparison B) a mistake or C) situated near a Garda Station for convenience.

Perhaps the cameras can be placed in the prosaically named Island of Geese!

http://maps.google.ie/maps?f=d&sour...2.273094,-9.706335&spn=0.023739,0.077162&z=14


BiN


----------



## ollie323 (20 Nov 2010)

In the 30kph areas i find myself referring to the speedo much much more. It's such a slow speed that i find it extremely hard to just look at the road and drive. Normally i would stick it a few kph under the limit and any variations due to undulations in the road wouldnt amount to much. But if i do that in a 30 zone i will hardly be moving at all! 
Plus i get overtaken on double solid lines (northbound into slane, before the bridge) in these areas by drivers who obviously dont care about getting points on their licences. I can't stand driving at 30kph but i have to.


----------



## redchariot (21 Nov 2010)

Having a look at the map on the Garda website, I am pleased to see that motorways are not included.

I checked around my local area and wider afield where I would often drive to and I could not find fault with any of the locations; I was a bit surprised that one wide stretch of road was included as it appeared quite safe but apparently there had been a number of deaths there over the years so fair enough.........


----------



## Westie123 (21 Nov 2010)

For anyone familiar with Ballincollig, Co. Cork, I think it is a joke that the red line extends all the way through the town. I would love to be corrected, but can someone tell me of any serious accidents in the centre of Ballincollig due to speeding in the last 5 years?


----------



## werner (22 Nov 2010)

An ostensibly good idea if the cameras were sited appropriatley but as many posters have shown the cameras are sited in areas with no real  history of fatal accidents.

The extremely unprofessional behaviour of the Garda management in allowing these cameras to be sited in areas that will simply be used for revenue collection is a disgrace

The cameras need to be sited in genuine "accident blackspots" (not that there should be any "accident blackspots" as they should be engineered out of the road system) They should be as visually bright as possible and with large visual signage on the road near where they are located, not to be hidden from view but to highlight their  location to show the dangerous blackspots to prevent accidents. 

Otherwise the system will be held in contempt and what could have been used to hopefully reduce fatal accidents will just be another cynical system of stealth tax with no discernible affect on road safety


----------



## gianni (22 Nov 2010)

werner said:


> An ostensibly good idea if the cameras were sited appropriatley but as many posters have shown the cameras are sited in areas with no real  history of fatal accidents.
> 
> The extremely unprofessional behaviour of the Garda management in allowing these cameras to be sited in areas that will simply be used for revenue collection is a disgrace
> 
> The cameras need to be sited in genuine "accident blackspots" (not that there should be any "accident blackspots" as they should be engineered out of the road system) They should be as visually bright as possible and with large visual signage on the road near where they are located, not to be hidden from view but to highlight their  location to show the dangerous blackspots to prevent accidents.



1. How do you know the areas have no real history of fatal accidents ? What are you basing this on ? The posts of a few AAM contributors who never *heard *of accidents in these area -(which you take to mean they never occurred...)

2. Why would the Garda management want to collect revenue for the Govt?? I would imagine they are more concerned with reducing crashes/injuries/deaths.

3. The locations are already publicised.


----------



## werner (23 Nov 2010)

gianni said:


> 1. How do you know the areas have no real history of fatal accidents ? What are you basing this on ? The posts of a few AAM contributors who never *heard *of accidents in these area -(which you take to mean they never occurred...)
> 
> *HSE stats and my profession, many of the camera sites have had no fatal car accidents*
> 
> ...


 
*They are not correctly highlighted, only a long stretch of road is being published not the location of the Camera vans. If a spot on a road is so lethal apart from the need to have it "engineered" out of the road, the public should be made aware of it by locating a highly visible Camera van at the location to reduce fatalites*


----------



## PetrolHead (23 Nov 2010)

werner said:


> The extremely unprofessional behaviour of the Garda management in allowing these cameras to be sited in areas that will simply be used for revenue collection is a disgrace




Speed cameras are not for revenue generation. Previous figures demonstrate this. 

I'm fed up of these ill-informed heuristic assumptions on the purpose of speed cameras.


----------



## T McGibney (23 Nov 2010)

I don't doubt for a second that there are places on our roads with high accident rates - my question is why are we only being told of these now? Why haven't "accident black spot" signs been erected in these places long before now in order to warn drivers appropriately?


----------



## Fatphrog (23 Nov 2010)

I've only seen one of these vans so far, on the Dundalk to Ardee road. The limit is 100 km/h but the van was in a spot where if you tried going anywhere near 100, you'd crash off the road at the first bend.


----------



## Firefly (23 Nov 2010)

I don't think this a purely money-making exercise. By introducing so many locations at one time, people are going are going to have a hard time remembering which areas are covered and which are not, which will result in slower speads in more areas. Even if people obey the limits in the covered areas (where lives have been lost) only, lives will be saved. IMO people will also slow down in non-covered areas as they will get used to driving at, or below, the spead limits. I think this is a superb initiative and a proper example of public/private partnership.


----------



## RonanC (23 Nov 2010)

werner said:


> *They are not correctly highlighted, only a long stretch of road is being published not the location of the Camera vans. If a spot on a road is so lethal apart from the need to have it "engineered" out of the road, the public should be made aware of it by locating a highly visible Camera van at the location to reduce fatalites*


 
They ARE highly visable vans.... 

[broken link removed]

http://www.towns-ireland.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/gosafe.jpg 

They are also mobile and are permitted to work within the area that is mentioned on the Garda website, these areas were selected due to the high level of crashes that have occured at them. Targeting the blackspot is as important as targeting the stretch of road leading to it.


----------



## missdaisy (23 Nov 2010)

+1 to Firefly. I think this is a good initiative, one that is needed and one that from what I can see is not a money making exercise. Everybody can be very clear on where the speed cameras may be and I think will slow down as a result. This is the aim - safer driving.


----------



## Cheeus (23 Nov 2010)

I wonder while they're at it can they dish out penalty points for those caught by the cameras driving while using their phones. Enforcement of that prohibition is a joke.


----------



## dahamsta (23 Nov 2010)

Cameras probably aren't good enough.

Personally I can think of plenty of better ways of spending the money, particularly now. If you actually want to spend the money on death-prevention as it relates to cars though - despite the already low numbers in Ireland - you could hand the money over to mental health in general and suicide prevention in particular. That'll take a good chunk of "single vehicle collisions" out of the figures, which of course shouldn't have been in there in the first place.


----------



## TLC (26 Nov 2010)

I thought that the vans were to be marked - 
"It is intended that in general the camera vans will be marked and will operate overtly" this was in the ministers statement about them.  But when I watched the news this evening about the one which was burned out, they showed another one with didn't have any markings?  Marked - or Unmarked?  I know it shouldn't make a difference I'm just wondering.


----------



## ajapale (27 Nov 2010)

[broken link removed]



> Gardai are treating the attack on the marked mobile speed van near Dundalk at 4.45am today as arson.
> 
> 
> The sole occupant of the van was in the back of the vehicle carrying  out a survey of a stretch of the *Dundalk to Carrickmacross Road near the  Kilkerley Junction* at the time.


----------



## Delboy (31 Mar 2011)

missdaisy said:


> +1 to Firefly. I think this is a good initiative, one that is needed and one that from what I can see is not a money making exercise. Everybody can be very clear on where the speed cameras may be and I think will slow down as a result. This is the aim - safer driving.



there's been a van parked 3 mornings in the past 5 weeks at Mount Argus on the lower Kimmage Rd.....now if thats not a money making excercise I don't know what is. Plus I thought they were to have some sort of warning out so drivers knew a van was about the area....but nothing to be seen. The van is even half hidden in the parking area
doubt anyone has ever crashed either on that stretch of road


----------



## Ceist Beag (1 Apr 2011)

Have to admit I was originally optimistic that this was finally an attempt to help reduce road deaths rather than a money making exercise but so far I've only seen evidence of the latter. There are road works (long since finished I might add, only roadmarkings left to complete which seem to be taking an age to finish out, wonder why!) between Abbeyleix and Portlaoise and a temporary 60km speed limit along this stretch - and there slap bang in the middle of it is one of these cameras! Shysters.


----------



## tinkerbell (1 Apr 2011)

Money making exercise?   How?  Only those who drive above the limit get fined i.e. only those who break the law!    I drive that Mount Angus route nearly every day and have seen several accidents in that short stretch between Mount  Angus and the park at Harolds Cross in the last few months.    Location of the vans is public knowledge and they are clearly marked with big camera signs!   If they make drivers think more about the speed they are doing they are doing a good job IMO.   Too many drivers think they know best what speed to do irrespective of the road conditions, etc.


----------



## Latrade (1 Apr 2011)

tinkerbell said:


> Money making exercise? How? Only those who drive above the limit get fined i.e. only those who break the law!


 
I do tend to agree and that if you stick to the speed limit you have nothing to worry about. However, my current issue on the couple of vans I've seen is that initially it was stated that they would be at accident blackspots. In the couple of locations I've seen them, they are not accident blackspots.

The current frequent one is on the Malahide Road at the junction with the Feltrim Road. I've lived in the area for nearly 10 years and in that time have never observed any accident or heard of or been aware of any accident, even a small tip at that junction. The lights slow the traffic significantly, so much so that at peak times there can be fairly long tailbacks (they changed the sequencing a few years ago and immediately caused the tailbacks).

The only time where people may be able to go above the speed limit is before 7:00 am where you have relatively few cars and the lights give priority to the Malahide Road. Even then, even as a cyclist, it is extremely rare that anyone is signficantly over the limit that they would even be pulled in by the Gardai. And yet they have the van parked there. Why? It isn't contributing a thing to safety. It isn't a dangerous junction, it doesn't have huge pedestrian activity and it certainly isn't an area of concern for accidents.

It's there to catch out the early motorist who's crept slightly over while the road is clear and traffic free.


----------



## Delboy (1 Apr 2011)

tinkerbell said:


> Money making exercise?   How?  Only those who drive above the limit get fined i.e. only those who break the law!    I drive that Mount Angus route nearly every day and have seen several accidents in that short stretch between Mount  Angus and the park at Harolds Cross in the last few months.    Location of the vans is public knowledge and they are clearly marked with big camera signs!   If they make drivers think more about the speed they are doing they are doing a good job IMO.   Too many drivers think they know best what speed to do irrespective of the road conditions, etc.



I walk that stretch every morning and evening, and have done so for the past 7 years. And I have never seen any sort of accident there. As for the location been public knowledge...unless you log-on every day or so, you won't know where they are. And who does that?
Plus....where are those camera signs??? Maybe I'm walking too fast and missed them!


----------



## gianni (2 Apr 2011)

Delboy said:


> I walk that stretch every morning and evening, and have done so for the past 7 years. And I have never seen any sort of accident there. As for the location been public knowledge...unless you log-on every day or so, you won't know where they are. And who does that?
> Plus....where are those camera signs??? Maybe I'm walking too fast and missed them!



You only walk it morning and evening (weekdays only?) and for the past 7 yrs. Perhaps there are some collisions that you don't know about. 
The conspiracy theories on this van are up there with the Census conspiracies... in my opinion...


----------



## Meath Lady (2 Apr 2011)

These vans are on the Fairyhoouse Rd. at least three times every week. Again use this road every day and definetely would not consider it an accident blackspot.


----------



## roker (3 Apr 2011)

The radar gun is not 100% accurate it has a tolerance, our car has a tolerance of 10% so I hope they are not going to nit pick over couple of km/hr.
Have you noticed that now that we are using km/ph which are smaller graduations than mph, how quickly the speed can rise and fall, which requires us to look at the speed more frequent, which means that we are looking at the road less.


----------



## Time (3 Apr 2011)

Justice at last?
http://i52.tinypic.com/a47xv7.jpg


----------



## PaulyB63 (3 Apr 2011)

I got "done" for doing 87km/h in an 80km/h zone at 9:00AM on a Saturday - Sun splitting the stones, I was in the ONLY car on the road - Dual Carriage way between The N3/M50 junction and the halfway house roundabout heading towards town. 

I was bringing my son to Rugby practice in Coolmine. There were THREE garda at the side of the road just hidden from view, one car and a bike. 

How is this behaviour not revenue generating? 

By the way, I'd appreciate not hearing the same old line trotted out that I'm a law breaker and therefore deserve the punishment. I am a law abiding driver with years of accident free (thank god) driving experience. I maintain my car, pay my taxes (road tax and MASSIVELY inflated fuel duty) and I Insure and NCT my car religiously yet now, I have 2 points on my licence, a potential increase in my insurance premium next year and a chip on my shoulder about "Safety Cameras"...

I do not understand how fining me makes this country a safer place to drive in? I could have driven at 100km/h and it still wouldn't have endangered life on that beautiful straight stretch of road.


----------



## PaulyB63 (3 Apr 2011)

PS... I am not the type of driver to think I can dictate the speed that I should be driving at... I obey the speed limits in general. I drive from Westport to Dublin and back very regularly and the speed limits for the whole journey in my opinion are very suitable...


----------



## mercman (3 Apr 2011)

PaulyB63 said:


> I could have driven at 100km/h and it still wouldn't have endangered life on that beautiful straight stretch of road.



What a crazy post.  You have stated that the Sun was splitting the stones. What might happen if you leaned across to drop the sun visor and for a single moment your concentration slipped. Then the car could easily flip or you might end up careering across the road into a bus and killing 8 or 9 people. But of course you said the road was empty. So you can see around corners as well !

Do you have any value on your own life or that of your son ??


----------



## ajapale (3 Apr 2011)

Topic Reminder: Network of Privately run Speed Cameras rolled out Nov 2010: Locations & Effectiveness.



PaulyB63 said:


> I got "done" for doing 87km/h in an 80km/h zone at 9:00AM on a Saturday - Sun splitting the stones, I was in the ONLY car on the road - Dual Carriage way between The N3/M50 junction and the halfway house roundabout heading towards town.



Were you "done" by the new network of camera vans? If not then your posts (and responses) are off topic.

aj
moderator


----------



## tinkerbell (3 Apr 2011)

"Just a little bit" over the limit!!!   The Northern Ireland RSA (sorry dont remember the exact name) use that for their facts on speed and road deaths and injury.    Just a little over the limit can cause considerably worse injuries in any accident besides getting points and fine? Agree with mercman - your son is your previous cargo as are my kids to me -  its not worth the risk of speeding and causing possible destruction to so many lives.


----------



## PaulyB63 (3 Apr 2011)

Fair enough - Off topic a bit. 

You are completely missing my point. I was referring to Garda "Shooting Fish in a Barrell"

Mercman the road is arrow straight and is a 3 lane dual carriageway seperated by a barrier from the opposite side. I was annoyed at myself for breaking the limit but I was in no way being reckless. I totally see your points by the way... I admit my comment re 100km/h was flippant... Having said that, flipping my car and carreening into bus stops etc is a little OTT.

The behaviour I see on a regular basis on my travels to and from Mayo would make your hair stand up.... Really crazy stuff, mad overtaking, reckless tailgating not to mention speeding and NEVER a garda in sight...


----------



## mercman (3 Apr 2011)

I am fully aware of the road you are referring to near the M50. Just think of others as well as your hurry. I also know the road to Mayo and the part you refer. Those that wish to carry on as you state will get caught....... whether dead or alive is the question.

I spoke to a friend who is an Inspector in the Gardai. The whole purpose of the  Privately run speed cameras is to slow people down, nothing else. Their purpose is NOT to increase Revenue, but so be it if fools think they can beat the law.


----------



## Complainer (3 Apr 2011)

PaulyB63 said:


> I do not understand how fining me makes this country a safer place to drive in?


Has the experience changed your driving habit at all?


----------



## amh (4 Apr 2011)

Are all the go safe vans white? I passed a van sitting parked which had that box thing on top of it's roof this morning. The van was red. So my question is was it go safe or garda that'll have possibly caught me doing about 2 kilometers per hour over the limit?


----------



## PaulyB63 (4 Apr 2011)

All the go safe vans I have seen have been white. I saw one in Tulsk, Co. Roscommon about 3 weeks ago and it was fairly clearly a safety camera van. (And it was in a great spot - dangerous chicane style bend on the way into Tulsk from the West)


----------



## amh (4 Apr 2011)

PaulyB63 said:


> All the go safe vans I have seen have been white. I saw one in Tulsk, Co. Roscommon about 3 weeks ago and it was fairly clearly a safety camera van. (And it was in a great spot - dangerous chicane style bend on the way into Tulsk from the West)


 

Yeah Pauly,

all the ones I've seen previously have been white but this one was def red. It had that box on top at the back but I didn't notice any markings cos I was in shock at seeing that it was a red van.


----------



## PaulyB63 (4 Apr 2011)

@Complainer - Not really no because I am a responsible driver. I genuinely don't think that drifting 8% over the speed limit on an arrow straight, empty road is a danger. I was caught, fair and square but again, I was referring to the "fish in a barrel" mentality that it seems pervaded. This was and is and hopefully will be my only offence.

On to go safe vans.

I have seen the go safe vans in some good spots and some ridiculous ones. I saw one between the first roundabout on the old airport road and the turn off for Airside retail park which I think from memory is a 50 zone and one of those where you're constantly under pressure from behind to speed up. I think the NRA could do with improving that stretch in some way (Not sure how). I've also seen one quite regularly on the Charlestown bypass in Mayo just before the turn off for Knock Airport Westbound. This one is one of the more ridiculous ones as again, straight, high quality road. 

I think they'd be better served enforcing the speed limit between Castlebar and Westport as there are some very dodgy bends which IMHO should be reduced to an 80km/h limit instead of 100km/h all the way.


----------



## Complainer (4 Apr 2011)

PaulyB63 said:


> @Complainer - Not really no because I am a responsible driver. I genuinely don't think that drifting 8% over the speed limit on an arrow straight, empty road is a danger. I was caught, fair and square but again, I was referring to the "fish in a barrel" mentality that it seems pervaded. This was and is and hopefully will be my only offence.


If you keep driving at 8% over the speed limit, it won't be your only offence. Come back when you have 6 or 8 points, and see if you're planning on changing your driving habits then.


----------



## Ceist Beag (4 Apr 2011)

ah yes the old holier than thou attitude Complainer! How exactly does "drifting 8% over the speed limit on an arrow straight, empty road" equate to "keep driving at 8% over the speed limit"? Are you actually addressing the point made by PaulyB63 or just using his post as a flimsy excuse to make your statement? Have you ever drifted over the speed limit yourself Complainer?


----------



## Complainer (4 Apr 2011)

Ceist Beag said:


> Have you ever drifted over the speed limit yourself Complainer?


I'm sure I do it every time I get into the car. And if I get caught, I'll pay the price and shut up about it.


----------



## Ceist Beag (4 Apr 2011)

So it will only be if you get caught and get up to 6 or 8 points that you will change your own driving habits then? You don't actually have a problem with the offence (seeing as you do it yourself every time you get into the car)? You certainly seemed to be lecturing PaulyB on the offence rather than the fact he is not just shutting up about it!


----------



## PaulyB63 (4 Apr 2011)

@Complainer - By the sounds of things you are an irresponsible driver. If you are as you say, drifting over the speed limit every time you get into the car, then this says a lot about you.... Not me!! 

Anyway... I have just seen another Safety Camera van and it was on the stretch between, Castlebar and Westport.... Just where I said it should be.... Now if they just lower the limit to 80km/h for whole sections of that road, then I would see this as an effective campaign to increase safety on our roads!


----------



## PaulyB63 (4 Apr 2011)

Oh yeah @AMH - It was White!


----------



## Complainer (4 Apr 2011)

PaulyB63 said:


> @Complainer - By the sounds of things you are an irresponsible driver. If you are as you say, drifting over the speed limit every time you get into the car, then this says a lot about you.... Not me!!


Every driver in every car breaks speed limits in Dublin city on every journey.



Ceist Beag said:


> So it will only be if you get caught and get up to 6 or 8 points that you will change your own driving habits then? You don't actually have a problem with the offence (seeing as you do it yourself every time you get into the car)? You certainly seemed to be lecturing PaulyB on the offence rather than the fact he is not just shutting up about it!



I asked some questions to probe his position - no lecturing was involved.


----------



## amh (4 Apr 2011)

I am a careful driver who keeps a close eye on my speed however as with any driver sometimes my speed does creep above the limit due to hills etc. I realise that these speed cameras take a snp shot of a persons speed and then are sent to the Garda for processing. Why can as part of the processing proceedure can it not be that the gardai examine past images of the same driver to determine if it's routine that the said driver breaks the speed limit or was it simply a moment of lapsed concentration on speed? Ie. 2 strikes and you are fined as oppossed to the current we spot you one kmph over you're done for.

All details are stored I assume when a driver is spotted over the limit, so how much harder could it be to compare two images?

Anyone out there agree.


----------



## roker (4 Apr 2011)

I will repeat what I said earlier, Surely you shoud not get done for drifting the speed slightly

"Have you noticed that now that we are using km/ph which are smaller graduations than mph, how quickly the speed can rise and fall, which requires us to look at the speed more frequent, which means that we are looking at the road less.


----------



## Complainer (4 Apr 2011)

Here's an interesting alternative approach;

http://www.marketingnetwork.ie/?p=475


----------



## Leo (4 Apr 2011)

amh said:


> Are all the go safe vans white? I passed a van sitting parked which had that box thing on top of it's roof this morning. The van was red. So my question is was it go safe or garda that'll have possibly caught me doing about 2 kilometers per hour over the limit?


 
The Go Safe vans are all white with the high-vis markings, but the Gardai are still opperating their own vans which are not so visibly marked, at least one of which is red. 
Leo


----------



## Ciara2011 (4 Apr 2011)

As far as I know, some of these private vans (without markings) are not just for catching speeding traffic, they also have to carry out speed surveys as part of their contract, as i noticed one of these vans right at the 120 KM/H on the Clonee Bypass as I was heading northbound


----------



## Ciara2011 (4 Apr 2011)

Leo said:


> The Go Safe vans are all white with the high-vis markings, but the Gardai are still opperating their own vans which are not so visibly marked, at least one of which is red.
> Leo



Hi Leo, not all Go Safe Vans are White, whilst they are white in Adverts on TV they are in different colours with markings. I have seen these vans in Red & Blue also, some with High Vis and some not


----------



## dahamsta (4 Apr 2011)

One of the issues I've noticed is that camera notices are going up at places where crashes have occurred, but were caused by drink-driving, which has absolutely no relation.

I also have to wonder why the Gardaí have retained their vans. We've invested millions in outsourcing policiing to this private company for some bizarre reason, we should be selling off what's left to make back some of it.


----------



## PaulyB63 (4 Apr 2011)

Complainer said:


> Here's an interesting alternative approach;
> 
> http://www.marketingnetwork.ie/?p=475




SUPER idea!!


----------



## SemperFi (4 Apr 2011)

Complainer said:


> Here's an interesting alternative approach;
> 
> http://www.marketingnetwork.ie/?p=475




This is brilliant.


----------



## Complainer (4 Apr 2011)

dahamsta said:


> One of the issues I've noticed is that camera notices are going up at places where crashes have occurred, but were caused by drink-driving, which has absolutely no relation.



Whereabouts has this happened?


----------



## werner (7 Apr 2011)

The revenue raising Speed camera vans do little for road safety as can be clearly demonstrated by the recent rise in road fatalities. The fatalities have little to do with "speed". All the speed camera vans do is extract a profit and do nothing for road safety. 

The truth is that a speed camera cannot tell if a vehicle is being driven safely. It is perfectly possible to drive within the speed limit in a very dangerous manner, or above the speed limit in a perfectly safe manner. The few appropriately trained Garda Traffic corps members should be using their discretion to spot dangerous driving, instead we have  privately run speed cameras vans, criminalising safe drivers on safe roads whilst the fatal accident rate rises due to drink/drug driving and stupid driver behaviour especially on unpoliced country roads late at night. 

The point is that often speed limits are broken without people having accidents. What we have to focus on is where speed is actually causing accidents. Needless to say there are numerous locations where these vans are placed simply to make a profit rather than increase road safety.

It is not speed that kills and injures people, but inexperience, lack of attention, reckless driving and poor judgement, in which speed cameras provide no effective help or solution. 

They are a total waste of public money and worse, fail to increase safety.


----------



## dereko1969 (7 Apr 2011)

You do realise there are other people on the roads and that your speed will determine your breaking distance? Or are you living in an alternate universe?


----------



## tinkerbell (7 Apr 2011)

*It is not speed that kills and injures people*    My goodness!!!!    I hope you were joking when you wrote that Werner?   RSA spokesman said "“Reducing your speed by just 5% could reduce road deaths by 20% and injuries by 10%. But breaking the speed limit by just 5km/h could mean the difference between life or death for pedestrians, cyclists or unrestrained passengers travelling in the car. Hit by a car at 60km/h, 9 out of 10 pedestrians will be killed. And the faster the speed, the more serious the consequences."


----------



## ajapale (7 Apr 2011)

werner said:


> ..clearly demonstrated by the recent rise in road fatalities.



Can you point to any data to support your contention?


----------



## Leo (8 Apr 2011)

tinkerbell said:


> *It is not speed that kills and injures people* My goodness!!!! I hope you were joking when you wrote that Werner?


 
Speed is what is referred to as a contributory factor, in many cases it is not the primary cause.

In relation to road death numbers, there has been a rise this year. As of Patrick's weekend, "there have been 15 more road deaths to date in 2011 compared to last year." (RSA)

But last year had the lowest number on record:   





> The number of Irish road deaths fell to 212 in 2010, the lowest level on record, down 26 from 2009. The Government’s road safety target of achieving no more than 252 deaths per annum by the end of 2012 was achieved three years ahead of schedule.


----------



## roker (8 Apr 2011)

Speed limits are man made, I hope it's not the same men that put the road markings down. I agree with werner, speed at the wrong time can kill, but there are too many factors to take in to consideration when allowing a speed limit.


----------



## ajapale (8 Apr 2011)

roker said:


> Speed limits are man made, I hope it's not the same men that put the road markings down.



Sorry  but what do the contractors who apply road markings have to do with the topic of this thread?:   Network of Privately run Speed Cameras  Nov 2010: Locations & Effectiveness.


----------



## dahamsta (8 Apr 2011)

Speed doesn't kill, it's a nonsense assertion by a nonsense organisation with a _non-driver_ for a chairman.

*Bad driving* kills. If people were educated better about driving and paid more attention to the road, the environment around them and their own cars, rather than constantly watching their speedo, speed limits signs and speed vans, we'd be a lot better off.

I was behind a woman today doing 10kph under the speed limit on a national road, presumably for "safety". She was all over the road and her (not that old) car was in bits, with a half a hubcap hanging off one side and the _driver's side mirror folded in_.

Take people like that off the road and the rest of us can get on with our lives, instead of doing ridiculous manoeuvres in the name of safety, like navigating a _dual carriageway_ right the way around Waterford at 80kph. It's just nonsense.


----------



## roker (9 Apr 2011)

The contractor only apply the markings as they are told to do by the authorities, the same Engineers who fix the speeds also detemine road markings which they are not very good at.


----------



## tinkerbell (9 Apr 2011)

Speed we drive at dictates how many seconds we have to 1) react and 2)try to prevent an accident by effective braking.   It could mean the difference between a fatal/serious injury accident and a minor one


----------



## ajapale (9 Apr 2011)

A working group on speed cameras under the chair of the Department of  Justice and Law Reform was established in December 2003. On 2 August  2005 the Department of Justice issued a [broken link removed].



> Executive Summary
> The objective of a safety camera project is to reduce the number of speed related
> collisions by:
> 1. increasing compliance with speed limits across the entire road network;
> ...


----------



## werner (11 Apr 2011)

tinkerbell said:


> *It is not speed that kills and injures people* My goodness!!!! I hope you were joking when you wrote that Werner? RSA spokesman said "“Reducing your speed by just 5% could reduce road deaths by 20% and injuries by 10%. But breaking the speed limit by just 5km/h could mean the difference between life or death for pedestrians, cyclists or unrestrained passengers travelling in the car. Hit by a car at 60km/h, 9 out of 10 pedestrians will be killed. And the faster the speed, the more serious the consequences."


 Speed Does Not Kill! 

Private company promoters of the Revenue raising Speed cameras like to claim "Speed Kills". By promoting false claims they can increase their profits Without speed you cannot travel! It the incorrect and irresponsible misuse of speed that kills

In order to make safe progress the good driver assesses the accident risk for the driving environment he/she encounters and adjusts his/her driving behaviour accordingly. In a high risk traffic environment it makes sense to slow down. However, higher speed in a safe traffic environment is safe and responsible: travelling faster here buys the driver time to slow down for high risk situations that could potentially develop in any traffic environment.

Reducing speed in safe conditions has a negative pay-off in the saving of life. Reducing speed in high risk traffic environments will save lives. To make the most effective use of resources speed reduction measures must therefore be targeted at high risk traffic environments only. Shooting fish in a barrel in the way the Speed camera vans are being used does not increase safety.

The motorways are our safest roads. However, a significant minority of motorists do not drive properly on motorways. Bad motorway drivers have poor lane discipline, do not use their mirrors, undertake, hog overtaking lanes, follow too closely and fail to adjust their speed to take account of poor weather conditions, road works and heavy traffic.

Other countries have addressed these problems. In Germany proper motorway driving behaviour (safe following distances, correct lane discipline and adherence to speed limits applied only when and where they are needed) is strictly enforced!

There is no correlation between maximum motorway speed limits and accident and casualty rates. Consequently, many stretches of the German Autobahn network have an excellent traffic signalling system which supports a variable speed limit regime with no upper limit! This real world situation and experience demonstrates that it is possible to have an inherently safe road without the equivalent of our 120kph maximum!

Of course the big difference is not the relicance on revenue raising camera vans that have no effect either on road safety, safe  driving or a reduction in road casualitie But there is strict and professional enforcement of driving skills by trained professional traffic police and that is the key to safety.

Speed camers have done and will continue to do nothing for road safety


----------



## Cantona7 (18 Apr 2011)

Last Saturday afternoon while driving from Wexford to Enniscorthy, I passed 2 Speed Vans ( Gatso's) and 1 motorbike Guard policing the road.

It's only 15miles...surely 1 Van would have been sufficient..,


----------



## dereko1969 (18 Apr 2011)

Cantona7 said:


> Last Saturday afternoon while driving from Wexford to Enniscorthy, I passed 2 Speed Vans ( Gatso's) and 1 motorbike Guard policing the road.
> 
> It's only 15miles...surely 1 Van would have been sufficient..,


 
How many times have you seen people speed up the second they've gone past a speed check?


----------



## Pique318 (19 Apr 2011)

werner said:


> The revenue raising Speed camera vans do little for road safety as can be clearly demonstrated by the recent rise in road fatalities. The fatalities have little to do with "speed". All the speed camera vans do is extract a profit and do nothing for road safety.



I'm sick of reading this type of post. It's all macho bravado and posturing. I generally pay it no heed on the likes of Boards.ie.
I drive a fast car and ride a fast motorbike. I have 2 points on my licence (expiring this year) from driving by overtaking a car towing a trailer at 20mph. 
I crossed a continuous white line even though I could see the road ahead was clear.
I deserved the points, I broke the law, it was on a road where numerous people died in recent years so it was a fair cop.
I don't drive like a loon, but I don't necessarily keep to the limits everywhere either.
Speed does not kill, I agree. Inappropriate speed kills.

The assertion by werner is something that I once agreed with when all I saw was speed traps on dual carrigeways or wide open, straight stretches of road where a 747 could land.
However, the GoSafe vans are different, and the problem is not the vans.  They are advertised and signposted, so if you get snapped by one, whose fault is it ?



> THE number of motorists caught speeding almost tripled in a year after privately operated speed cameras were deployed nationwide.
> In March 2010, just over 9,500 motorists were caught breaking the speed limits by gardai.
> But this soared to 26,000 in March this year, after the arrival of the private GoSafe cameras.
> The private cameras,* located at known speed crash zones*, are operating in addition to the speed checks carried out by gardai.
> ...


----------



## ajapale (19 Apr 2011)

Pique318 said:


> However, the GoSafe vans are different, and the problem is not the vans.  They are advertised and signposted, so if you get snapped by one, whose fault is it ?



I agree and would remind posters that this thread is   Network of privately run Speed Safety Cameras (GoSafe)  Nov 2010: Locations & Effectiveness. Generalised discussions about other aspects of road safety may be considered as off topic.

I have a problem with the concept of siting the GoSafe cameras at so called "known crash zones" for a number of reasons.

1) They are not always in "known crash zones". 

For example the "Princes Street-Rock Street - Monavalley" area of Tralee is a "GoSafe" camera area. This road winds its way through the narrow medieval one-way street system of the Town passing a Church, Town Hall, Garda Barracks, Hotel, traffic lights, little roundabouts, junctions. It is hard to imagine how traffic could even attain the speed limit not to mind breach it on the road.

My theory is that the designers had to include a certain number kilometers of urban road or else this stretch (and ones like it) act as a kind of control to allow the system managers to calibrate the system.

2) While the concept of siting the GoSafe cameras "known crash zones" appeals to "common sense" of designers and motorists - I would point out the "Sports Illustrated Cover Jinx". It goes like this: when Athletes feature on the cover of Sports Illustrated their career deteriorates. Like wise if you choose accident "Blackspots" things will all ways improve whether or not you have an intervention such as GoSafe etc.


----------



## ashambles (19 Apr 2011)

Vans have a disadvantage to fixed cameras as they’re limited to certain types of locations. You could put a fixed camera on a narrow road, at the brow of a hill, at a dangerous bend. 

  With a van you tend to have to put it on a wide straight road with a hard shoulder.

  I once heard a UK policeman explain that locations for speed checks,  due to limitations with the technology and concern for the safety of the operators and road users, have to be in road locations that are relatively safe. However he felt this was compensated by studies that showed that people who speed on safe roads are more likely to also speed on dangerous roads.

  I’d say most people would accept this honest sounding  explanation, what is harder to take is where the Irish public are assumed to be idiots and are told a particular stretch of road is used because there was a fatality. 

  If you go back far enough and take a long enough stretch of road you’ll be hard pressed to find a road which doesn’t meet this criteria. To use an accident as a convenient excuse is something I find cynical.

  It also ignores any road improvements (lower speed limits, extra lanes, flyovers, pedestrian lights, footpaths, junction redesign) that have taken place since the road had an accident. It’s these very improvements that often allow the opportunity for the speed van to take up a position.


----------



## PaulyB63 (3 May 2011)

I saw the GoSafe vans again on the stretch just leaving Castlebar heading towards Westport.

This time on the arrow straight wide bit with no turnoffs... Completely pointless in my opinion. Speed limit is 100km/h and TBH unless you're in something quite powerful the chances of breaking that speed prior to hitting the camera zone is slim...

Waist of resources...


----------

