Inside Track blog

Speed cameras: the rise, fall... and rise again?

The traditional fixed speed camera may be losing ground in the UK, to the relief of motorists, but the respite for law-breaking drivers may be brief. The future speed camera may be more effective than ever before...

By richardauock 22/05/2012 14:50

In little more than 20 years, the speed camera may have come, caused huge outrage (and many motorists a lot of money)… and then gone again. 


OK, the horror of the speed camera flash hasn’t completely disappeared - they remain very much out there, waiting to catch errant speeders – but the threat of the fixed-site Gatso is not the danger it once was.


Speed cameras: 20 years old today

 

It hasn’t been since 2007. Until then, speed camera numbers had been growing enormously across the UK. Local councils, empowered by the government to keep a proportion of the money they raised, were installing as many speed cameras as they could justifiably afford. Many drivers suspected they were not only doing this, but were also tightening the threshold cameras were triggered at.

 

Once, said some, you had to be doing 38mph in a 30 zone to get flashed – quite justifiable, many would argue. In time, this appeared to lower, to 35mph: on a modern speedo, that’s a fraction of an inch over, a trigger point easy to be caught out by. More cameras, then, and less tolerance of them: no wonder so many were angered.

 

Some took the law into their own hands. Others purchased camera detectors, others still simply cried outrage, at how local councils were setting traps to catch motorists out. In the mid-noughties, speed cameras were amongst the most detested sites on our road, their mere presence enough to elicit outrange in even the most mild-mannered (and, ironically, law-abiding) driver.


Speed cameras: everything you need to know

 

In 2007, things changed. Local councils were not allowed to keep as much money from revenues raised by speed cameras. A few years later, the rules changed again. Result? Fixed speed cameras started to become less popular. Many sites actually became inactive, flashing as if they were live but not actually containing any film.

 

A survey last year revealed nearly half of the speed camera sites in the UK were dummies – in Susses, 60 per cent of all speed cameras were inactive. The trend was turning.

 

Evidence that accident rates increased at some sites following the installation of a speed camera didn’t help. Nor did so much outrage from motorists. But the biggest issue with speed cameras was ultimately their inflexibility. They can only monitor one section of road – at a cost of at least £20,000, doubled if it’s in a remote area. They can also only take 400 speeding photos before the film is finished, adding maintenance cost to the upfront expense. As drivers learned whether they are and stared braking to negate them, their revenue generation dropped.

They were achieving their aims – they were stopping motorists speeding – but that was not changing driver behaviour at unmonitored sites, nor was it exactly helping the police force budgets.

 

So now, two decades after the speed camera was installed, their popularity is dropping. They will not disappear – once installed, it doesn’t cost anything to leave them up, particularly if no film is loaded within. But new speed camera installations are rare. The spread of the fixed speed camera site is becoming a thing of the past.

 

The speed camera of the future

But while fixed speed cameras may be set for the history museum, it does not mean speed detection is going away. Far from it. Know the average speed cameras in motorway roadworks, which prove so remarkably effective in maintaining average speeds? They may be coming to a town near you soon.

 

Inventors have now created a city centre average speed camera, which can monitor speed between two points in the road and fine motorists if they exceed this. There will be no escape from speeding, and no slowing down for a fixed point in the road. Motorists will have to start driving within the speed limit throughout their operational zone, or risk points on their licence and a hefty fine.


They are coming. Some will say they’re fairer, as there’s no being fined if you accidentally slip over the limit (you can simply slow down to lower the overall average again). They’re thus also a lot more effective overall achieving the desired aim of all speed cameras – keeping overall averages within the legal limit.

 

Such speed cameras are still external detection devices though, and are thus still restricted by certain external factors out of their control. How much better would it be, say legislators, if individual cars could be tracked and monitored instead – and automatically fined if they did stray over the limit?

 

Big brother gone mad? Well, not if you’re signed up to a modern form of data tracking car insurance, which uses a GPS trace from your car to tell where you are, and what speed you’re doing, whenever you’re driving. Some youngsters are voluntarily signing up for these as they lower overall insurance costs – quite rightly, too. The insurance company knows when the driver speeds and charges them more when they do so: the driver knows this too, so chooses not to speed. On paper, it’s a brilliant win-win.

 

And as this technology is already in place, then, surely it won’t belong before it becomes more commonplace? If youngsters save money on car insurance because of them, when will sensible drivers also see the advantages and have them installed? And when they do in growing numbers, how long before car insurance firms make them mandatory?

 

Then, things could snowball. Government could tie taxation to them: offer people savings if they drive less, with the proof coming from the data logger. It would of course monitor speed, but only in return for an extra reduction in taxes, paid for by a reduction in motorway police.

 

Seriously, once onboard black box tracking hits a tipping point, all sorts of initiatives may follow.

 

Is this a bad thing? After all, if you have nothing to hide, and are not a habitual speeder, surely this would be a good thing? Particularly if your actual location were hidden, and only the difference between your speed and the GPS-logged legal limit for that road were recorded. People are probably already working on this solution to those who bristle at the thought of onboard tracking devices as we speak…

 

Summary

The speed camera was a much-hated device that may be on its way out. But the time of respite won’t last forever, because newer and far more effective solutions to speeding are on the way. There will be no escape if you speed.

 

Of course, there is one obvious solution to all this. Don’t speed. Easier said than done: we all know that. But if new technology has its way, it’s something we’ll all have to learn.

 

Unless, of course, the car physically stops us from speeding, thanks to a data-tracked speed limiter. But that’s another matter entirely…

 

---


Speed cameras: 20 years old today

Speed cameras: everything you need to know

 

10Comments
22/05/2012 19:21
avatar
All very well, but freely available information and evidence proves that speeding is not the main factor in road related accidents. Bad driving is by far the largest cause of accidents. For example when you are driving along in a 30 mph limit and some idiot pulls our in front of you, as they do, and cause an accident, they will not be breaking the speed limit. In addition, a lot of young male drivers where I live in Dorset get stopped for drink driving and yet many of them still drive within the speed limit so the question is, what is the point?....answer, get more revenue from the driver.....just talking about Dorset, a recent report says that 78%  of crime goes undetected in Dorset, meaning burglary, rape, muggings, violence and car vandalism crimes are not solved, however, Dorset Police are very good at running road side stops  under the " No Excuse " banner and busting people for not wearing their seat belts and talking on their mobiles because motorists are an easy target.......Those people who use their mobiles whilst driving are stupid because they are a danger and quite frankly they are easy so spot so they deserve what they get, however, people not wearing a seat belt is not putting anyone else in danger other than themselves and only if they have an accident......so break into someones house and steal their goods or mug someone or  terrorise an old lady and you can act with impunity, but dont put your seat belt on where you are no more dangerous than someone who does and you get busted.....hope the Police are satisfied they have their priorities right. 

Going back to speed camera's what is the point of having average speed camera's in a city where you spend more time sitting in traffic than driving?........on that basis, you could when you finally find a clear stretch, drive at 120 and still not be above the speed limit....or if you drive at 40 plus in a 30 mph limit and thus put kiddies and other at risk, you can then park up for a few mins just before the second camera and still be within the limit even though you have just driven a much higher speed than the limit and put a load of people at risk....and as for GPS systems.....well they have one very fundamental flaw.  They only work when the GPS chip has signal contact with the relevant satellites so block the signal which is a lot easier than you think, and you cannot be detected so what value is that?


23/05/2012 09:50
avatar

I would not speed if the speed limit were real.

How often you go on perfect roads, 2 lanes ,  empty only to say  40mph

 

or in town , near a school at night that says 20mph.
Are you expected to drive at 20mph in the middle of the night when schools are closed

 

or even a Motorway on a clear day,, 70mph is very boring.

 

Car , tyres, etc have improved a lot over the years, so that should be taken into consideration too when setting the limit.

maybe we need a more flexible,, Speed Sign that change according to Traffic conditions, weather and time of the day.

* and just to clarify, during day hours and respect the School zone 100%

 

Most people break the speed limit, bcos the same does not reflect thereality of the road

22/05/2012 21:10
avatar
One of the best money makers the councils have thought up. 
23/05/2012 15:13
avatar
the camden road in london there are 3 sets of speed cameras in 800 meters... absolutely over the top as its a 30mph road, 
buy a satnav that rings everytime you go near a speed camera, less than 60.00 and no points, 
its all about not giving the money grabbing greedy councils your hard earned cash... and they say "we only put speed cameras in areas where there has been speed related crashes"....utter bowlocks....
THEY JUST WANT YOUR MONEY !!!!!!!!!
23/05/2012 14:59
avatar

It is turnover, that is all, safety is not of any importance to the government / councils, IF  and only IF, safety mattered, then all cars motor bikes, would be fixed with a speed regulator, as with all trucks, That idea was knocked back by Blair & Brown as it produced no financial gain,

avatar
Speed cameras for the most part are simply fund raisers. They operate under the guise of safety but it is more likely that big business in the trains and buses is managing this legislation through Parliament to slow road traffic down so their interests in buses and trains can make more money. We now have bus lane cameras. Bus lanes don't make buses quicker, if one bus stops the others stop behind. What these cameras are all about is central control. They do not want to leave it to the individual to judge when speed is correct or not. Likely if the individual gets it wrong then it will be duff education at stake. Cars and lorries can be taken of the motorways if boats were to come into port like Hull, Liverpool, Edinburgh and Glasgow. Also if a car transport train ran from Scotland to England but no.
The other thing about speed cameras is that many are sited in completely dited situations where reasonable speed could quite easily be attained. Many speed limits are ridiculously low and then further encumbered with a speed limit. Limits should raised in many main roads and roads and infrastructure safety should be improved. Keep pedestrians off roads and force push bikes onto pavements.

avatar
all of this assumes that speed is the problem. It isn't. The safest roads in Europe are the English Motorways. Ultimately it is bad driving of which inappropriate speed is a factor, but so is proximity, car condition, weather conditions, observation. All this money to address speed would be better spent improving the overall standard of driving. 
27/05/2012 20:00
avatar

ok, but when these black box things get tested it should be a year long trial and the lab rats should be the council workers and police officers of the entire country. Lead by example! I bet half of them would lose their licences within 6 months. Also for the trial the information should be collected and points handed out by an independent company of the peoples choosing, so fair play can be assured!

Report
Please help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of Conductplease use this form to notify the moderators. They will investigate your report and take appropriate action. If necessary, they report all illegal activity to the proper authorities.
Categories
100 character limit
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
About Richard
  • Richard AucockRichard Aucock

    So committed to car journalism he is Guild Chairman of the Guild of Motoring Writers. He has been writing about cars since he was 15 and is living the dream.

  • CJ HubbardCJ Hubbard

    CJ is thoroughly enjoying fulfilling the ambition he's always had to become a motoring writer. Don't ask him about working in retail, though, or he may start to twitch...

  • Ian DicksonIan Dickson

    Ian is the senior editor on MSN Cars, a job that involves planning, writing and editing content and generally keeping the site ticking over day-to-day.

Latest Cars videos
MSN Cars poll

Which of these endangered 1970s and 80s cars would you be saddest to see become extinct?

Thanks for being one of the first people to vote. Results will be available soon. Check for results

  1.  
    9 %
    Austin Allegro
    1,219 votes
  2.  
    9 %
    Austin Maxi
    1,230 votes
  3.  
    5 %
    Austin Montego
    683 votes
  4.  
    15 %
    Austin Princess
    1,943 votes
  5.  
    19 %
    Hillman Avenger
    2,424 votes
  6.  
    13 %
    Morris Marina
    1,678 votes
  7.  
    2 %
    Morris Ital
    208 votes
  8.  
    28 %
    Vauxhall Viva
    3,658 votes

Total Responses: 13,043
Not scientifically valid. Results are updated every minute.