Speed cameras approved for Ireland - implementation by approx May 2010

Theta

Meh, wont change anything/waste of money blah blah blah.

KamiKazi

Complete farce that will do nothing to improve road safety but will make a markable improvement in revenue generated.

Our government is getting more and more useless by the day.

I.S.T.

trad wrote: »

They won't be able to operate on motorways, they are mobile units and it's an offence to park a vehicle on a motorway (they won't be owned by the Gardai). They are supposed to be operating on the speeding blackspots on the Garda website.

According to this piece they will operate on motorways
http://www.newstalk.ie/news/news-headlines/contract-for-private-speed-cameras-signed/

The roll out of privatised speed cameras will get underway next year.

The Government has today signed a long awaited €60 million contract with “Go-Safe” – a private consortium who will run the scheme.

The forty mobile units will be placed on motorways, national routes as well as non-national routes and will record up to 7,000 hours of driving per month.

no1beemerfan

cashel girl wrote: »

how do people get on and off motorways?? if they speed on a motorway where the limit is 120 then i cant see them slowing down for a limit of 50/80. didnt know they had to be caught in an exact place they could get killed!!

I think your missing the point.

Its VERY SAFE to do 130/140 kmh on a motorway as they ARE designed for these speeds. Sure you could go faster still.

So a LOT of people will drive faster on a motorway than they will off the motorway and I'm probably one of those people. Its inappropriate speeds off the motorways these cameras should be used for.

I've no complaint to speed camera's once they are used properly and we are warned about their existance.

smash

cashel girl wrote: »

yes i think the blackspots need to be sorted, but look at that crash, the damage to the car and van, it took speed on at least one side to cause that amount of damage!

Sorry but you've obviously never seen a crash test, 2 cars colliding at 30kph can end up disintegrated!

Theta

steve06 wrote: »

Sorry but you've obviously never seen a crash test, 2 cars colliding at 30kph can end up disintegrated!

Yeah collision speed is still 60mph. That will total both of the parties involved.

Speed kills stupid people.

BlackWizard

Some more information below.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/1120/breaking54.htm

The project will remain under the control of An Garda, through a new Garda Office for Safety Camera Management, who will decide the location, frequency and timing of speed checks.
These decisions will be also be based on 700 collision prone stretches of road which have been identified by gardaí.

I actually thought that the private company would choose where to put them. I don't know which I prefer now

In bold font, the companies that will be providing this profiteering life saving service.

The Go Safe consortium, which includes Spectra, French firm Egis (the parent company of Transroute, which operates the Dublin Port Tunnel) and Australian multinational Redflex, was identified as the preferred bidder in June 2008.

Sizzler

I expect Lenihan will be refining his 2010 budget upon this agreement now being signed, I expect the budget deficit will be halved within 6 months of this project being implemented!

tbh

I.S.T.

BlackWizard wrote: »

In bold font, the companies that will be providing this profiteering life saving service.

The Go Safe consortium, which includes Spectra, French firm Egis (the parent company of Transroute, which operates the Dublin Port Tunnel) and Australian multinational Redflex, was identified as the preferred bidder in June 2008.

How on earth does it require three companies and €16 million to implement this. I wish I put a tender in myself now!

cashel girl

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It took a mistake by one driver nothing more nothing less, Speed is a term give to what is commonly known as motion, it's required to get from one point to another. It's not always at fault but always involved.

im not saying speed was the cause:rolleyes:
im saying if they had been going slower there would have been less damage:P loads of things can cause a crash but speed affects the outcome

De Hipster

If cars didn't move at all there would be virtually NO damage...speed means moving 2mph is a measurement of speed, therefore spped would be a factor in any incident.

This seems to be more than enough justification for the Gov & RSA to vomit this mantra to justify revenue generation.

crocro

Some of the information that we have so far doesn't seem to add up.

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

I think you are a little off the mark there. It will cost €16 million per year :eek: running costs. That works out at €307,692 per week!! Are they having a laugh or what. They will need to issue 3,846 speeding fines per week to pay for this.

3,846 speeding tickets per week between 45 speed cameras is just 12 tickets per camera per day. That doesn't sound like a lot to me.

The story says that the cameras will monitor for 6,000 hours a month. That's just 4.5 hours per day per camera. Why so little? Maybe it's because they're mobile and need to be moved around and maintained.

How does the 45 cameras tally with the initial stories of 300 cameras?

How many cars do they expect to check in 6,000 hours?

I lived in France a few years ago when they brought in a load of new cameras. They were checking so many cars that it got to the point where you couldn't afford to speed because you'd expect to get a fine in the post. It took a few weeks before everyone started getting their letters and then the average speed on roads just fell like a stone.

Absurdum

youareyou wrote: »

"If it saves one life ......." yawn

lol some Garda dinosaur just said this on the news

youareyou

youareyou wrote: »

"If it saves one life ......." yawn

There would be alot more people alive today if we spent money on motorways even dual carriageways with barriers.

:mad:

mondeo

I would much rather see fixed cameras then mobile ones... At least you will know where they are instead of the element of surprise with mobile units.
Still mad money for just 45 mobile units..

cashel girl

De Hipster wrote: »

If cars didn't move at all there would be virtually NO damage...speed means moving 2mph is a measurement of speed, therefore spped would be a factor in any incident.

this is what i mean > http://www.metacafe.com/watch/94641/30_wont_kill_you/

Absurdum

Deleted User wrote: »

There would be alot more people alive today if we spent money on motorways even dual carriageways with barriers.

:mad:

or making a start on proper driver education

Tefral

Absurdum wrote: »

or making a start on proper driver education

Funny you should say that, the government cant afford to implement biker training which i would see as far more important than speed cameras.
So the day they announce this they also say this

Good to see the government has their priorities in place anyway

Absurdum

Absurdum wrote: »

or making a start on proper driver education

Your dead right, though people will always make mistakes/act stupid and by putting a barrier between the roads or building more motorways you eliminate head ons thus negating mistakes.

The roads are costing people their lives & there is no excuse. We dont even have to build motorways or barriers everywhere. Take the corner where those 4 died so recently. Widen it and put a barrier just around the corner and the lead up to it either side. Why cant things like this be done to all the accident blackspots?

Here is my anecdote, I was at the scene of an accident, not a bad one, but it was a caused by oil on a corner left over from a previous accident. A few enquiries and I learned that there had been an accident on the same corner EVERY WEEK for 5 weeks before the one I saw.

Something more than driver error at play here. But as ye have pointed out above the government has its priorities straight.

Sizzler

I'd have a hell of a lot more respect for them if they outsourced drink driving enforcement,underwritten by frequent and random checkpoints around the country on a daily basis. A scurge that still sadly seems to be part of the "culture" in certain parts of Irish society :mad:

donvito99

RSA wrote:

The announcement was welcomed by the Road Safety Authority, which said in the last three years, speeding killed 157 people and injured 310.

Should really be, Speed was a contributing factor.

mayoireland

cameras! wouldnt worry about them.By next may we wont be able to afford to drive a car ha ha

CiniO

cabrwab wrote: »

If the speed of both vehicles was 100Kmh impact speed 200kmh so within speed limits.

Not exactly.
You cannot add speeds in this case.
Head on collision of two cars travelling at 100km/h (both) is not the same as one car hitting the stone wall at 200km/h.

If the cars had exact the same mass and exact the same speed, then head on collision of these two travelling at 100km/h would be the same as each of them hit the wall at 100km/h.

patmartino

tomcollins97 wrote: »

Remind me again - is it excess speed or excess drink that causes accidents?? Each time the government try to roll out some new safety drive that tackles a particular offence that becomes the 'killer of the month'.

Would the govt. ever make up their mind - does drink kill? If so, reducing drink drive limit will save lives. Plus, fines will raise revenue.

Does speed kill - if so, bring in speed camera. Plus, fines will raise revenue.

how about stupidity? Could we test drivers more often? Answer: No, this will cost money

How about age? Could we check the eyesight of over 50 drives regularly? Answer: No, this will cost money

How about poor road condition? Will we repair the roads? Answer: No, this will cost money

The truth of the matter is that all 'accidents' have a number of contributary factors. The government will only tackle those which generate money. If we eradicate drink-driving and speeding we will still have some stupid person driving with poor eyesight that will miss a pothole and send their car out of control. No amount of speed-cameras and low alchohol limits will save the stupid blind person from hiting a pot hole

I drove home 100 feet behind a middle aged woman last night in appalling conditions on an appalling road. She was doing 80kmh in the most ridiculous corners and then slowing to 40kmh everytime she met an oncoming car, her car placement on the road was deplorable. These are the people that cause accidents yet never get caught for it.

Tragedy

****ing RSA and their "WONT SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN" type campaigning. Deplorable.

Mr. Presentable

PaintDoctor wrote: »

Speed is a factor is less that 5% of road fatalities.

This is a popular mantra. Can you back it up with any kind of data?

LookBehindYou

SAFETY ???
The only Safety the rsa think of is their SAFE cosy jobs for life.

antodeco

cashel girl wrote: »

im not saying speed was the cause:rolleyes:
im saying if they had been going slower there would have been less damage:P loads of things can cause a crash but speed affects the outcome

By your rational, Motorway speed is dangerous on a motorway. 100kph stretches are dangerous also. It's innapropriate speed that kills. Someone who does 70kph in a 50kph is more dangerous then someone doing 120kph on a motorway, yet the first speed is nearly half the 2nd. When looking at 'speeding' you need to look at : traffic, road quality, weather, driver competence, condition of vehicle and THEN speed.

AugustusMaximus

This money would be much better spent on fixing the secondary road network which after all the rain, has probably collapsed into a myre of potholes and collapsed verges.

But no. Instead we are going to get speed cameras on our safest roads where the fewest crashes happen. Some logic that.

These cameras obviously won't be able to fit on (or put on) secondary roads where the vast majority of crashes happen.

AugustusMaximus

nipplenuts wrote: »

This is a popular mantra. Can you back it up with any kind of data?

I believe the correct stat (from the UK) is that speed is the CAUSE of 7% of road accidents.

Speed is obviously a factor in every accident. But so is

- Air tempreature
- The gravitational pull of the moon

In fact, every force of bloody nature if you want to get technical.