Average speed cameras to blight the life of many Londoners

One of my early pieces on this blog was about the new cameras appearing on the A406 that I thought could become average speed cameras. They didn't but anyone travelling along some of London's main roads will have noticed new gantries and cameras appearing. These are for a new average speed camera system that will soon infest four trial sites and then no doubt spread their revenue raising way across the capital.

The first four road sections to be blighted are the A406 (North Circular Road) from the Hanger Lane Gyratory to Bounds Green Road; the A40 from the Polish War Memorial to the Paddington slip road, the A2 from Black Prince to Tunnel Avenue and the A316 from the M3 to the Hogarth roundabout.

The claim from Transport for London (TfL) is that these are to eradicate accidents at gaps between existing, but obsolete spot speed cameras. But the reality is that they are to a) raise revenue and b) victimise drivers who realise that the 40mph speed limit on most of these roads is set far too low for the quality of the roads.

A report to TfL’s finance policy committee, which approved the spending on the trial, said members had “concerns about the public acceptability” of the new cameras.I bet they have.


In France there would be riots, I'm not suggesting that we go down that route but the motorist needs to fight back somehow. Any suggestions?

I favour a drive slow when 20 motorists in each direction on each section on the same day all drive at 4mph preceded by a man with a red flag, for that is what  the anti-car zealots would like us to return to, after all it would reduce traffic accidents for as well know, 'Speed Kills'. Except it doesn't...

This is of course rubbish as I pointed out over seven years ago

"A DfT strategy paper claimed speed was "a major contributory factor in about a third of all road accidents". The "excessive and inappropriate speed" that helped "to kill about 1,200 people" each year was "far more than any other single contributor to casualties on our roads". The source given for this claim, to be repeated as a mantra by ministers and officials for years to come, was a report from the government's Transport Research Laboratory, TRL Report 323: "A new system for recording contributory factors in road accidents". Not many people would have looked at this report, since it was only available for £45. But some who did were amazed. The evidence the report had cited to support its claim that speed was "a major contributory factor in about a third of all road accidents" simply wasn't there. Many other factors were named as contributing to road accidents, from driving without due care and attention to the influence of drink; from poor overtaking to nodding off at the wheel. But the figure given for accidents in which the main causative factor was "excessive speed" was way down the list, at only 7.3 per cent."

Do read the whole of that piece but this extract might also prove interesting:

"The statistics for Durham showed that, of 1,900 collisions each year, only three per cent involved cars that were exceeding the speed limit, just 60 accidents a year. Look more closely at the causes of these 60 accidents, the "actual cause of the accident invariably is drink-driving or drug-driving". Drug-taking was now involved in 40 per cent of Durham's fatal road accidents. Many accidents, he said, were caused by fatigue, although one of the most common causes was the failure of drivers to watch out for oncoming vehicles when turning right. To none of these could speed cameras offer any remedy. "The cause of accidents," Garvin (chief constable of Durham) concluded, "is clearly something different from exceeding the speed limit"."

Also

"In September 2006, the DfT finally conceded one of the central points that Safe Speed's Paul Smith had been arguing for five years: that only five per cent of road accidents were caused by drivers who were breaking the speed limit. In The Daily Telegraph, Smith was quoted as saying "the government's case for continuing to install cameras has been destroyed"."

So the truth is that speed cameras do not make the roads safer, are not needed and are being used to raise revenue - who would have thought it?

Why are electric cars so slow and boring?

Why are electric cars so slow and boring?

They aren't... Here's someone demonstating the Tesla S P85D's insane mode..





That's fast but without engine noise is it an aural delight? Here's a souped up Lambo...

Road Rage Karma

Road Rage Karma:

Top Gear do bicycle public information films

Jeremy Clarkson's work of genius - 'Work Harder. Get a Car.'


I can't find James May's  - 'Act Your Age. Get A Car' but it's also well worth a watch. Can anyone source it for me?

I also can't find the other two public information films, sheer genius. Watch last night's Top Gear for them all.

..

Tyres are important, especially in the winter

Well worth watching, no? Another odd Japanese video.

How Much Can CNN Get Wrong About F1 Engines, Physics In One Article?

'While a standard engine is powered by a belt connected to the crankshaft, a turbo engine runs on its own exhaust steam, making it more energy efficient.'

More here in case you can't see why that sentence is gibberish

http://jalopnik.com/how-much-can-cnn-get-wrong-about-f1-engines-physics-in-1111423405

If CNN are that wrong about F1 engines, how wrong are they about other matters?

The one hundred and seventy fifth weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

Tory Aadvark reports the simply incredible news that: 'Greens Admit Electric Cars Are Not That Green' Apparently:

'An EV is zero emissions when in use, in so much as the vehicle produces no emissions itself, this was and is still the Green meme, the inconvenient truth is that if the electricity that was used to charge the battery was generated by a fossil fuelled power station then the emissions for each EV journey are almost identical to that from a small modern petrol or diesel car.'

As if intelligent people didn't already know this... 'Electric cars are not that green' - "No shit, Sherlock"

Are electric cars that efficient?

Jeff ID has found the work of a scientist re the effectiveness of electric cars:

'The author is a physicist and engineer with additional degree equivalent qualifications in accountancy, economics and management. He worked for the UK government (HMG) and in 1974 was transferred to a newly formed division considering how to mitigate the effects of the oil price shock which included examining all possible alternative sources of energy as to cost and effectiveness. In 1976 he became increasingly involved in the electric car team and was formally seconded to it in 1977 when it became the Electric Car Group, (ECG) which had a brief from HMG to develop and report on the technology of a practical small electric city car and provide technical support to British manufacturers. He retired some years ago. The views expressed below are entirely his own as are any errors.'

It's a good, and long, read; do read it all, here's part of the conclusion:

'... however vilified, as the Infernal combustion engine always has been and still is, it remains along with its liquid hydrocarbon fuel a faithful servant and a very formidable competitor when it comes to propelling motor cars. In the end it is simple, robust, reliable and cheap. It has been around so long that any mechanic from London to Outer Mongolia can twiddle, tweak and fix it. And behind these mechanics is an organised supply chain that can deliver spare parts almost anywhere, even Darkest Peru, within a day or two. And it has seen off its rivals, even those hardy perennials such as steam and electricity many times before and bids fair to do so again.

Do politicians really imagine, for all their delusions of grandeur, that by squandering a few billions of the taxpayer’s money, they can change a great worldwide industry overnight? That is for you, not the author to judge. He has his own view.'

© ajgjones 2009 whose moral right is asserted.

If you drive a Nissan Micra...

If you drive a blue Nissan Micra and you pulled slowly out of a garage onto the northbound A1 across two lanes of traffic into the outside lane before driving at a steady 30 miles an hour in a 50 miles per hour limit causing cars to brake and/or swerve to avoid you; please don't do it again!

I love the casual mentioning of speeds in this video

'On-board with the TT's quickest ever recorded lap in the Senior TT 2007 race in the TT's 100th Anniversary Year with British rider, GUY MARTIN (who provides the lap commentary), wired up with Greenlight Television's mini-bullet-cams.'

The Isle of Man TT races are an incredible  spectacle, you should goif you get the chance.

Well it would have to, wouldn't it?

AutoExpress report that:

'The wraps are officially off the soft-top version of Mercedes’ SLS AMG supercar – and as expected, it has lost the famous upward-opening gullwing doors, opting instead for traditionally hinged units.'

Well it would have to, wouldn't it? How would you fit gullwing doors to a convertible?

BBC 2 tonight - Graham Hill: Driven

In the background at the BBC Sports Personality of the Year when Graham Hill was interviewing Jackie Stuart who had just won the Formula One World Championship (so 1969, 1971 or 1973), who was the mustachioed gentleman in the PINK suit with orange tie?

Finally some good news for enviromentalists

The Mail has some news that should have enviromentalists evrywhere leaping for joy. It seems that:

'Artificial petrol that costs 19p per litre could be on forecourts in as little as three years.

British scientists are refining the recipe for a hydrogen-based fuel that will run in existing cars and engines at the fraction of the cost of conventional petrol.

With hydrogen at its heart rather than carbon, it will not produce any harmful emissions when burnt, making it better for the environment, as well as easier on the wallet.

The first road tests are due next year and, if all goes well, the cut-price ‘petrol’ could be on sale in three to five years.

Professor Stephen Bennington, the project’s lead scientist, said: ‘In some senses, hydrogen is the perfect fuel. It has three times more energy than petrol per unit of weight, and when it burns, it produces nothing but water.

‘Our new hydrogen storage materials offer real potential for running cars, planes and other vehicles that currently use hydrocarbons.’

The fuel is expected to cost around $1.50 a gallon, or 19p a litre. Even with fuel taxes, the forecourt price is likely to be around 60p a litre – less than half the current cost.

That would bring the price of filling a 70-litre Ford Mondeo down to around £42.'

If this story has more than a smigeon of truth then why aren't enviromentalists hailing the good news on, the 'all important' CO2 emissions? It is almost as though enviromentalists hate motoring more than they love the planet. Of course the flaw in the cheap fuel story is that once this fuel became widely available the governmnet would find a way of taxing it as heavily as oil; they will find a reason, they always do.

The finely tuned minds of the British police

The Telegraph relates that:

'despite police managers spending thousands of pounds installing "talking" petrol caps on their vehicles which play a recorded reminder not to use the wrong fuel, petrol has been put into diesel vehicles over 300 times.

The mistakes by Essex Police were disclosed in a Freedom of Information request which showed that officers had filled up with the wrong fuel 332 times in the last seven years, costing the force £62,000.

The force claims the problem is a national issue and if the figures are replicated across the 43 forces in the country, refuelling errors are costing the taxpayer roughly £380,000 a year.

The problem in Essex was revealed in 2008, when it was disclosed that officers had failed to notice the warning "diesel" on the fuel caps of their vehicles on 222 separate occasions in the previous five years, costing £42,000.

Senior officers decided to take action and installed a warning system on each car which cost a total of £4,000.

The new petrol caps are bright yellow to draw attention to the act of refuelling and light triggers the playing of a recorded warning when the flap is opened which announces: "This is a diesel vehicle."

But despite the extra precaution 110 diesel police cars were filled up with petrol in the following two years.

Essex Police has 715 diesel vehicles - one in 13 of which has mistakenly been fuelled with petrol. '

So there are policemen (and presumably women) patrolling our roads in police cars who have managed to miss the warning "diesel" on the fuel caps of their vehicles and some also ignored the "talking" petrol caps on their vehicles which play a recorded reminder not to use the wrong fuel.

Just remind me why we should trust people who are that stupid or inattentive?

Tiff Needell drives the Bentley Continental GTC with the help of two models

Tiff Needell, a Lotus Evora and two contortionists

If only this was true - 'Labour's 13-year war on the motorist is over: Tories pledge to halt rise of speed cameras, road pricing and cowboy clampers'

The Mail reports that:

'The war on the motorist is over, the Transport Secretary said yesterday on his first day in the job.

Philip Hammond promised to end the way the country's 33million drivers have been targeted by an array of speed cameras and cowboy clampers.

He also pledged to 'sweat the assets' of the road, rail and aviation infrastructure to get value for money for taxpayers.

The secretary of state pledged to scrap public funding for speed cameras and said he would consult on a plan to curb pump prices when oil prices soar

Mr Hammond promised: 'We will end the war on motorists. Motoring has got to get greener, but the car is not going to go away.''

It would be nice if this was the case but there are too many local councils and police chiefs who have bought into the 'cars are evil' and 'speed kills' mindset for this to be an easy and quick change. But I suppose one must celebrate good news wherever one finds it these days.


Meanwhile the The BBC report that:

'Police forces across Scotland are carrying out a crackdown on dangerous driving and speeding on rural roads.

Patrols are being increased in country areas to catch drivers and motorcyclists who are failing to observe the rules of the road.

The three-day campaign is being coordinated by the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (Acpos). '

Ah well, it was good whilst it lasted!

How to explain the real cause of high petrol prices to the public

Cazzy Jones has a fantastic idea to bring home to the public who is to blame for high petrol prices:

'Just imagine a dual till system on the forecourt, where the driver goes to the first till and pays £28 for the cost of the fuel and the retailer’s profit margin, and is then channelled to the second till, coming face to face with a bureaucrat who tells him: “Because you have spent money filling your car up, you must now give more money to the government.” “How much?” “£52.” “But that’s almost twice as much as what I’ve just paid the garage!” “Tough. Pay up and shut up.”'

The last day to buy a car before the hideous rises in Vehicle Tax are implemented

On 1 April 2010 new rates of Vehicle Tax are introduced and some of the rises are spectacular:

Band M cars (those with a CO2 g/km rating above 255) will pay £950, instead of the current £405, for a 12-month tax disc. Don't be fooled into thinking that this applies only to big 4x4s and supercars, it does apply to Range Rovers but also to vehicles such as the Vauxhall Insignia 2.8.

Band L cars (ranging from 226-255g/km) will now pay £750 instead of £425 for the first year; cars affected include the Ford S-Max 2.3.

Band K cars (201-225g/km) cars will pay £550, up from £215; that's for cars including the Ford Mondeo 2.3 or Focus 2.5.

Band J cars (186-200g/km) will pay £425 rather than £235; that's for cars such as the Honda CR-V 2.0 and even the Vauxhall Corsa 1.6.

Band I cars (176-185g/km) will see their first year tax rise from £200 to £290; affecting cars such as the Land Rover Freelander 2.2 diesel and the Vauxhall Astra.

Band H cars (166-175g/km) cars see a tax increase from £180 to £250 for such 'gas guzzling' cars as the 38mpg VW Beetle 1.6.

Band G cars (151-165g/km) see no increase and neither do band F and band E.

The increases go on and on but here's the percentage increase for each band:
M +118%
L +76%
K +124%
J +81%
I +50%
H +39%
G 0%
F 0%
E 0%
D -100%
C -100%
B -100%
A -100%

So if you are thinking of buying an interesting new car, I'd buy it this afternoon....

I should make clear that the new Vehicle Tax rules apply only to motorists buying new cars from 1 April 2010. Owners of existing will pay the old rates, unless another stealth tax is required...

Possibly the scariest motoring video I have ever seen

This is video of a foreign registered lorry pushing a Renault along the motorway whilst the driver is, presumably, unaware.

I can only imagine how scared the driver and passengers in the Renault must have been. Also how did the truck driver not notice the increase in resistance to his forward motion, let alone the original collision?