RSA road collisions map updated

Iwannahurl

The RSA have updated their road collisions map, showing the (approximate) locations of fatal, serious and minor crashes around the country.

It now includes crashes up to 2011.

http://www.rsa.ie/RSA/Road-Safety/Our-Research/Ireland-Road-Collisions/

My impression, based purely on local knowledge, is that it can be inaccurate in terms of location and speed limit.

Perhaps there are other flaws as well.

Stonewolf

Sorry for the late reply but, I just checked all the locations I've seen speed camera vans since they started being deployed. (Along the Malahide Road from the cemetary at Clarehall to Malahide Park, Under the bridge in Finglas and opposite the Esso in Artane).

Not a single incident listed at any of them.

Iwannahurl

I see three fatal collisions marked on the R107 Malahide Road. There are others marked on side roads close to the Malahide Road, and if the map is as inaccurate as it is in my locality then the fatalities could well have occurred on the R107 itself.

The question then is: does it matter exactly where speed surveillance is carried out along the Malahide Road, and if so, why?

By the way, what is the speed limit in the areas you mention, and do motorists adhere to it?

In my opinion speed surveillance does not need to be justified by previous fatalities, so if motorists are driving at a legal and appropriate speed then they can have no beef with the presence of a GoSafe van anywhere on the route.

Stonewolf

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I see three fatal collisions marked on the R107 Malahide Road. There are others marked on side roads close to the Malahide Road, and if the map is as inaccurate as it is in my locality then the fatalities could well have occurred on the R107 itself.

There's none that I can see inside the area I specified from the cemetary to the park, a number of minors but no fatals. The map is a little screwy on loading though I found. As it happens this stretch of road has a reasonable daytime limit but I've seen the van most commonly at night when the road could handle a higher speed (lots of accesses is the main reason why the limit is low).

Across the Esso in Artane is a location where the speed limit is also justified but regularly ignored as it's a short bit of wide road where people have just accellerated out of a junction, plenty of people go over a bit on it.

Under the bridge in Finglas is a different matter entirely, this is a location where there's a restricted access dual carriageway with no footpaths and a grade separated junction. The posted limit is 60 because the stretch from the lights under the bridge to the roundabout (or visa-versa) is not long (about a kilometer) but traffic regularly does about 80 because it's a low risk area (most of the accidents here are actually at the light controlled junctions on top of the bridge). Whenever I've seen the van it's been hiding in the dip under the bridge.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

The question then is: does it matter exactly where speed surveillance is carried out along the Malahide Road, and if so, why?

We live in a country with generally very poorly set out speed limits, we also border a juresdiction where speed cameras are used as a blatant revenue generation scheme. When the vans were rolled out therefore, in order to reassure us that they would be used for real safety purposes*, we were told they would only be deployed where there had been sufficient fatalities to warrant extra enforcement. The comparison therefore of speed camera deployment and accident data is very relevant.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

By the way, what is the speed limit in the areas you mention, and do motorists adhere to it?

60, 60 and 50, both on the Malahide road are reasonable, the Finglas example is incongruous with the road but exists because it's a short stretch (nevertheless long enough for people to achieve speed easily).

In Artane it happens outside peak often enough but not into the realms of excessive speed, during peak you'd be lucky enough to be moving. The presence of a van here (at about 10am on a weekday) actually surprised me.

In Finglas, I haven't lived there in a couple of years so I can't speak for currently but it used to be the case that speeding along that section was sufficiently common you'd be causing a disruption by sticking to the limit. This is because peoples perception of risk is low due to the good quality of the road and they drive appropriately.

On the Malahide road you wouldn't want to be going faster during the day but as I may have said elsewhere the van is there at night when most of the accessways off/on the the road aren't in use (these being the main reason for the limit) and you would be fairly comfortable doing 80 (obviously you'd want to take caution around the petrol station but that's just good driving). You'd do much better in terms of road safety with a breathalyser patrol on that road at 2am on a Sunday morning than a GoSafe van.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

In my opinion speed surveillance does not need to be justified by previous fatalities, so if motorists are driving at a legal and appropriate speed then they can have no beef with the presence of a GoSafe van anywhere on the route.

As mentioned earlier, the legal speed is not always appropriate (in both directions, try driving the N56 from Killybegs to Ardara some time), In 1.5 of my above cases it is because that's where I've seen the vans not because it's a comprehensive review of vans. As also noted, it's important to look at where these vans are being deployed because we have been told they will only be deployed where there are enough fatalities to warrant it. If the deployment of these vans does not appear to take these points into consideration then we have to ask exactly what the motivation for that deployment is.

* As long as there is a fine for speeding all such efforts are futile. It is my opinion that it should not be possible to get a fine for something you also get penalty points for. The penalty points are your punishment, the fine just gives us the impression we're being screwed for money.

cml387

Essentially what you are saying is that the entire basis for the introduction of speed vans is flawed because of their deployment on the wrong part of the Malahide road.

Stonewolf

cml387 wrote: »

Essentially what you are saying is that the entire basis for the introduction of speed vans is flawed because of their deployment on the wrong part of the Malahide road.

No, what I'm saying is we were told certain things about the way they would be deployed and from comparing what I've seen of that deployment to the figures available what we were told is not true.

I've no problem with the way they're supposed to be deployed.

Iwannahurl

The GoSafe vans (and Garda speed surveillance units) are deployed to detect speeding. The exact sites may depend on local geography and/or survey findings.

Personally, I don't give a flying two hoots where they are sited, because (a) they are serving a useful and evidence-based function and (b) I will in all probability not be at the receiving end of their services. In fact, if the current level of speed surveillance was doubled, trebled or even quadrupled I still wouldn't be satisfied. I've been trying for years to have the speed limit enforced in my general locality, with zero response from the authorities so far.

As I have said elsewhere on Boards, my belief is that the GoSafe programme was politically justified on the basis of previous fatalities. That justification was probably aimed at the sceptics who like to portray speed cameras as purely revenue-generating mechanisms.

The potential revenue from speed cameras is a motivating factor for the State, but so is the proven benefit in terms of lives saved and injuries prevented.

Road deaths have dropped significantly in recent years -- no reason to complain there.

SeanW

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Personally, I don't give a flying two hoots where they are sited, because (a) they are serving a useful and evidence-based function and

So, pray tell Mr motorist basher Road Safety Expert, how does it "serve a useful function" if a speed trap is placed, for example, here, on the HQDC N85 East of Ennis with a 50kph limit.
https://maps.google.ie/?ll=52.826456,-8.957012&spn=0.004253,0.01929&t=m&z=16&layer=c&cbll=52.826459,-8.957018&panoid=cBYptnqs7IfbowyZmJhHwQ&cbp=12,262.04,,1,0.9

Or 30kph on the N3 crossing the M50 as it goes into Dublin, another grade separated dual carriageway.
https://maps.google.ie/?ll=53.384544,-6.363058&spn=0.002099,0.009645&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.384544,-6.363053&panoid=PX_jgv3xRbzHsACNbtBeOA&cbp=12,136.72,,0,7.53

It had been suggested in other fora that for the benefit of people not familiar with the Cork and Galway merges off the M7 and M4, that a certain distance leading up to both junctions should have their speed limits cut to 100kph. I opposed it because I knew anything of the sort would lead to more fnckwittery by cyclopath2001, you and your ilk about how all speed limits must be enforced with an iron fist.

In fact, if the current level of speed surveillance was doubled, trebled or even quadrupled I still wouldn't be satisfied.

Most of us know that already: but in case anyone is under the mistaken illusion that you're a well balanced individual, this is a small sampling of your 'great ideas' :P

Iwannahurl wrote: »

• Make 30 km/h the default speed limit in city centre areas
• Make pedestrian-priority (eg Zebra) crossings the default standard
• Maximise the pedestrian/cyclist/bus user capacity at every junction and on every street
• Make motorists 100% responsible for any injury caused to pedestrians (regardless of circumstances)
• Introduce a zero-tolerance policy (eg tow-away) towards motorists who drive and/or park on footpaths, crossings and other pedestrian facilities
• Introduce road pricing to deter "unnecessary" car use and reduce traffic volumes
• Introduce "performance pricing" for car parking, in order to reduce traffic congestion, free up road space for congestion-busting 'active commuters' and provide a funding stream for street improvements to attract people rather than vehicles
• Make motorists 100% responsible for other 'external' costs of their car use, eg CO2 emissions, air pollution, noise, effects on local businesses, public health impacts etc.

And there's probably a lot more.

Iwannahurl

Tiresome repetition of the same old quotes, special pleading, attacking the poster etc does not a good argument make.





.

SeanW

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Tiresome repetition of the same old quotes, special pleading, attacking the poster etc does not a good argument make.

Neither does repeatedly dodging simple questions.

Iwannahurl

Ah, so that's what the Ignore function looks like...

SeanW

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Ah, so that's what the Ignore function looks like...

I had a feeling that would be your response. After all, ignoring a question is easier than answering it :rolleyes:

Let's just hope those in authority also know enough to put YOU on Ignore ...

Victor

SeanW wrote: »

So, pray tell Mr motorist basher Road Safety Expert,

Less of the name calling please.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Ah, so that's what the Ignore function looks like...

If you have a problem with a post, report it, don't comment on-thread.

Moderator

---

SeanW wrote: »

Or 30kph on the N3 crossing the M50 as it goes into Dublin, another grade separated dual carriageway.
https://maps.google.ie/?ll=53.384544,-6.363058&spn=0.002099,0.009645&t=m&z=17&layer=c&cbll=53.384544,-6.363053&panoid=PX_jgv3xRbzHsACNbtBeOA&cbp=12,136.72,,0,7.53

The problem is that trucks have difficultly negotiating the curve in this view: https://maps.google.ie/?ll=53.383386,-6.360666&spn=0.001491,0.010568&t=m&layer=c&cbll=53.383388,-6.360665&panoid=ri2kTebxLRtmzhhXGq49Qw&cbp=11,145.73,,0,1.55&z=17

SeanW

Victor wrote: »

---

The problem is that trucks have difficultly negotiating the curve in this view: https://maps.google.ie/?ll=53.383386,-6.360666&spn=0.001491,0.010568&t=m&layer=c&cbll=53.383388,-6.360665&panoid=ri2kTebxLRtmzhhXGq49Qw&cbp=11,145.73,,0,1.55&z=17

Fair enough, but when I used that junction some time back (in my car) and found that limit to have no bearing whatsoever on safe driving speed.

According to IWH, among many other very strongly worded statements on speed, this is a sign that I have a "dangerous attitude" to speed, that needs to be "knocked on the head, the way attitudes to drink-driving were." "proof that more enforcement is necessary" etc. etc. etc. Because it's his view that there's no such thing as safe speeding, there's no difference between a motorist breaking that limit at 10pm versus speeding past a school at discharge time, and recently compared all the above to driving drunk.

And each time I ask him/her "well, OK, but what about places where the speed limit is too conservative for the conditions? like this (and others) and his response is something along the lines of "look, I've got this triangle that explains everything" or in the most recent response "So that's what the ignore function (for your simple question I refuse to answer) looks like"

To be generous, I will say that I find IWHs view on "speeding" and motoring in general, to be biased, logically insolvent and deeply questionable. I could go further, frankly but the response might not be family-friendly.

Carawaystick

Victor wrote: »

---

The problem is that trucks have difficultly negotiating the curve in this view: https://maps.google.ie/?ll=53.383386,-6.360666&spn=0.001491,0.010568&t=m&layer=c&cbll=53.383388,-6.360665&panoid=ri2kTebxLRtmzhhXGq49Qw&cbp=11,145.73,,0,1.55&z=17

I'd imagine trucks have trouble negotiating this
https://maps.google.com/?ll=52.145314,-10.083368&spn=0.006939,0.016222&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=52.14591,-10.088889&panoid=wa15bu-fZWqPRJoL3WEXUg&cbp=12,322.12,,0,17.4
but it doesn't have a 30 limit


or
here which definitely has a 100 limit
https://maps.google.ie/?ll=53.183099,-8.643236&spn=0.005478,0.027595&t=h&layer=c&cbll=53.183095,-8.643256&panoid=bVBlo3ymjsmURKgtjpAIFQ&cbp=11,60.8,,0,3.06&z=15


Why not have a sharp bend sign rather than a rediculously low limit.

Davy

Victor wrote: »

The problem is that trucks have difficultly negotiating the curve in this view: https://maps.google.ie/?ll=53.383386,-6.360666&spn=0.001491,0.010568&t=m&layer=c&cbll=53.383388,-6.360665&panoid=ri2kTebxLRtmzhhXGq49Qw&cbp=11,145.73,,0,1.55&z=17

I use that regularly I don't find it an issue in a truck. I actually find the left bend before joining the mainline SB much worse.

The Bishop Basher

Stonewolf wrote: »

Sorry for the late reply but, I just checked all the locations I've seen speed camera vans since they started being deployed. (Along the Malahide Road from the cemetary at Clarehall to Malahide Park, Under the bridge in Finglas and opposite the Esso in Artane).

Not a single incident listed at any of them.

Same for north Wicklow. No incidents listed in the areas known for speed vans with ridiculously low limits. Plenty of fatalities and incidents on the surrounding roads unfortunately. It's very clear that the current tactics employed by AGS are targeting revenue as opposed to road safety.

Iwannahurl

Swanner wrote: »

Same for north Wicklow. No incidents listed in the areas known for speed vans with ridiculously low limits.

Plenty of fatalities and incidents on the surrounding roads unfortunately.

It's very clear that the current tactics employed by AGS are targeting revenue as opposed to road safety.

Can you list a few specific examples, giving the precise or approximate locations on Google Maps or equivalent?

tonc76

Back on topic ....

It should be noted that the RSA's road collision map is based on Garda reports from the scenes of collisions, so inaccuracies are often related to recording. The Gardai complete stats forms and send to RSA, collisions are entered onto RSA database system and the RSA compare systems & check for inconsistency – not errors. The RSA make data available to Garda, Road Authorities, NRA, Research Organisations & Consultants.

The accuracy of data can suffer as the priorities of a Guard at the scene of a collision are:

Protection of life and property
Evidence gathering
Traffic control / safety
Minimise network disruption .... and then ...
Completing statistics

Chris_Heilong

something tells me this map is way off, check out this motor fatality that happened out at sea. The Motorist has had things really hard recently and with all these speed cameras it is just making things worse, what we need is wider roads with no pot holes.

Iwannahurl

That's a good example of the inaccuracy I mentioned earlier.

With regard to motorists "having things really hard recently", have we really?

Road deaths have been at a record low for the past few years. How can that not be regarded as an improvement, and how can speed/safety cameras have made things worse in that regard?

If this bankrupt country can't afford to fix potholes, I doubt there's enough money in the kitty for major road-widening schemes.

Chris_Heilong

Iwannahurl wrote: »

That's a good example of the inaccuracy I mentioned earlier.

With regard to motorists "having things really hard recently", have we really?

Road deaths have been at a record low for the past few years. How can that not be regarded as an improvement, and how can speed/safety cameras have made things worse in that regard?

If this bankrupt country can't afford to fix potholes, I doubt there's enough money in the kitty for major road-widening schemes.

yeah but the record low has nothing to do with speed cameras or the RSA, it has to do with the recession(notice the timeframe of the record low) and people not having the money to run their cars so less people on the roads and far less money on going to the pub on a night out so alcohol related accidents are also greatly reduced and a lot more people emigrating so again less people on the road.

as regards your other point motorists are being taxed to the hilt, the government see motorist as a soft spot that they can just keep hitting, my current car is over €700 a year to tax which is crazy compared to the UK were the same machine would cost just £205.00 a year. Retrospectivly the Government should have rebuilt the roads back when the times where good, the roads are a countries infrastructure and when they are in bad order it says a lot about the country as a whole.

Biggest mistake was having motor tax instead of road tax.

Iwannahurl

The causes of road deaths in the aggregate are multifactorial so it would be no surprise if the recession and related social changes such as emigration made some difference.

The fact remains that speed cameras also make a positive difference, as does road traffic law enforcement generally.

The long-term trend in road fatalities has been generally downwards, although the year-to-year figures have sometimes fluctuated.

There have been significant reductions at certain key times, such as following the introduction of penalty points and random breath testing. These improvements have occurred independently of economic circumstances, and are in line with what happened in other countries.

The inexorable rise in road fatalities in many countries up to the 1970s tracked increasing motorisation. China is a good example of where economic growth has lead to increasing motorisation which in turn leads to a lot more road deaths (and other public health problems).

The Bishop Basher

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Can you list a few specific examples, giving the precise or approximate locations on Google Maps or equivalent?

No problem...

The R118 between the M50 and the CWD roundabout. Go safe vans are regularly parked on both sides of the road and a traffic cop on a motorcycle is often parked up by the roundabout catching people heading down towards CWD. The speed limit is 80kph. There have been no serious incidents or fatalities however the Wyatville Road has had both. I have yet to see a go safe van on the Wyatville road and I drive it every day.

http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Cherrywood+Business+Park,+Loughlinstown&hl=en&ll=53.242568,-6.148267&spn=0.000051,0.039783&sll=53.3834,-8.21775&sspn=6.188352,20.368652&oq=cherrywood&hnear=Cherrywood+Business+Park,+Bray+Rd,+Loughlinstown,+County+Dublin&t=m&z=15&layer=c&cbll=53.242984,-6.147499&panoid=5Pb4a2g0Nz7FiXGPuyE6BQ&cbp=12,87.76,,0,-0.47

The southern Cross Rd in Bray. Speed limit is 60kph. Again, a GoSafe van is regularly parked on the east bound side and AGS are often hidden in an entrance to an estate on the Eastern end of the road. Again no serious incidents or fatalities here however unfortunately both have occurred on surrounding roads.

http://maps.google.ie/maps?q=Cherrywood+Business+Park,+Loughlinstown&hl=en&ll=53.181761,-6.127625&spn=0.043618,0.31826&sll=53.3834,-8.21775&sspn=6.188352,20.368652&oq=cherrywood&hnear=Cherrywood+Business+Park,+Bray+Rd,+Loughlinstown,+County+Dublin&t=m&layer=c&cbll=53.181665,-6.127759&panoid=C9TaeTv2nzvKX5NhwHsMqw&cbp=11,87.37,,0,7.05&z=12