Average speed cameras on M7

irishgrover

Jeremy Beagle wrote:

The M18 was never a dual carriageway, it was designed and built as a motorway from the N19 junction to Tuam. It has no sharp bends on the mainline either, so stop talking bolloçks

1. There is no need for the bellend attitude
2. You are wrong

punisher5112

Cruise at 130 no more no less ...

frozenfrozen

irishgrover wrote: »

1. There is no need for the bellend attitude
2. You are wrong

I'm not sure about the other part but where would you say the bends are? There are a few shallow exists alright

But I wouldnt say there's a lot of bends on the motorway itself other than the fact you can't just drive straight. Nothing youd need to adjust speed for though in my experience?

irishgrover

frozenfrozen wrote: »

I'm not sure about the other part but where would you say the bends are? There are a few shallow exists alright

But I wouldnt say there's a lot of bends on the motorway itself other than the fact you can't just drive straight. Nothing youd need to adjust speed for though in my experience?

the shallow exits leading directly to 90degree turns are numerous and have already directly resulted in significant and fatal accidents.
The more "bendy" parts of the road are north of Ennis, around Crusheen.
There are fine when driving at 120kmph. They would be dangerous at 140kmph in any type of adverse weather.
That road could not safely operate with a universal 140kmph limit.

Tomrota

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

What we need on certain motorways, like for instance the M50 is;

Average Speed checks, but in conjunction with variable speed limits.

Monday morning (in normal times), and the M50 is quite busy... reduce limit to 80 or 60
heavy congestion in parts.... reduce speed limit to 5-60 leading into the congestion to clear it quicker.....
Poor weather conditions.... reduce limit
off peak quiet periods... increase limit to 120

All limits strictly signposted, all limits strictly enforced...

Kind of like the M25 around London...

then other suitable sections of N/M roads get the same treatment, variable limits with average checks...

I agree with most of this. However, there is no reason we can’t do over 120 on the M50 during off-peak night time hours. It’s such a shame to be limited to 100km/h in a car that’s designed to average 200+km/h on the Autobahn. If weather conditions are ideal and the time is 2am, speed limits should be much higher. Speed limit signs should be electronic. There is no one speed that is suitable for all hours and weather conditions.

pippip

Tomrota wrote: »

I agree with most of this. However, there is no reason we can’t do over 120 on the M50 during off-peak night time hours. It’s such a shame to be limited to 100km/h in a car that’s designed to average 200+km/h on the Autobahn. If weather conditions are ideal and the time is 2am, speed limits should be much higher. Speed limit signs should be electronic. There is no one speed that is suitable for all hours and weather conditions.

I don't agree, I hate the 100km/h stretch of the m50 but I wouldn't raise it. The road is just not built for it. Lane width is an issue for one and matched with some of the raised sections the cross winds can be very sudden and dangerous. There is absolutely no run off area in the centre medians either. If they ever felt they could safely raise the limit I'd only do it for lane 3 and leave lanes 1-2 as 100.

At the end of the day the junction layouts within the 100km/h stretch are just too close. Combined on and off ramps, like in this section, are just plain dangerous no matter what time of day it is. Especially since alot of them have traffic lights at the top of them meaning the flow of traffic is all at once instead of being more spread out.

punisher5112

pippip wrote: »

I don't agree, I hate the 100km/h stretch of the m50 but I wouldn't raise it. The road is just not built for it. Lane width is an issue for one and matched with some of the raised sections the cross winds can be very sudden and dangerous. There is absolutely no run off area in the centre medians either. If they ever felt they could safely raise the limit I'd only do it for lane 3 and leave lanes 1-2 as 100.

At the end of the day the junction layouts within the 100km/h stretch are just too close. Combined on and off ramps, like in this section, are just plain dangerous no matter what time of day it is. Especially since alot of them have traffic lights at the top of them meaning the flow of traffic is all at once instead of being more spread out.

What????

pippip

punisher5112 wrote: »

What????

ah ffs ask a specific question about my post or don't post at all .... I hate stupid posts like that all over boards.

i57dwun4yb1pt8

m50 could easily support 120 kmh off peak

Leonard Hofstadter

Oddly enough the M50 is one place where I wouldn't have a problem with speed limit enforcement. It's often way too busy for more than 100 (even if it was allowed) but more importantly, enforced variable speed limits smooth out the traffic flow, which actually means the average speed is higher and thus we get to where we want to quicker.

Too high a limit and you're right into queuing theory territory.

Off peak 120 would be fine for anyone that's capable of driving. It seems to be a uniquely Irish thing that somehow we're not capable of doing more than 100 km/h on anything more than a two-lane carriageway. The junctions layout and angles are certainly no worse than the M8 around Cashel, which has the full 120 limit (though of course is nowhere near as busy).

It also irks me the way the M8 just outside Cork is limited to 100 (outside of peak traffic hours of course so as to reduce congestion around the Jack Lynch Tunnel), it would be well capable of 120, yeah it's a bit twistier but not by much. I wouldn't allow more than that, though - whereas the rest of M8 would be fine for 140 if it was allowed (apart from the Cashel bypass).

newmember2

pippip wrote: »

I don't agree, I hate the 100km/h stretch of the m50 but I wouldn't raise it. The road is just not built for it. Lane width is an issue for one and matched with some of the raised sections the cross winds can be very sudden and dangerous. There is absolutely no run off area in the centre medians either. If they ever felt they could safely raise the limit I'd only do it for lane 3 and leave lanes 1-2 as 100.

At the end of the day the junction layouts within the 100km/h stretch are just too close. Combined on and off ramps, like in this section, are just plain dangerous no matter what time of day it is. Especially since alot of them have traffic lights at the top of them meaning the flow of traffic is all at once instead of being more spread out.

What motorway has a "run off area in the centre median"??

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

Oddly enough the M50 is one place where I wouldn't have a problem with speed limit enforcement. It's often way too busy for more than 100 (even if it was allowed)...

Some of the M50 has a 120km/h speed limit, and I did see a speed van on the Northbound side after the Tallaght exit the other day - and think it's the first time I've ever seen a speed van on the 100km/h part.

punisher5112

pippip wrote: »

ah ffs ask a specific question about my post or don't post at all .... I hate stupid posts like that all over boards.

Whatttttt

Damien360

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

Oddly enough the M50 is one place where I wouldn't have a problem with speed limit enforcement. It's often way too busy for more than 100 (even if it was allowed) but more importantly, enforced variable speed limits smooth out the traffic flow, which actually means the average speed is higher and thus we get to where we want to quicker.

Too high a limit and you're right into queuing theory territory.

Off peak 120 would be fine for anyone that's capable of driving. It seems to be a uniquely Irish thing that somehow we're not capable of doing more than 100 km/h on anything more than a two-lane carriageway. ).

The M50 is plagued by middle lane slow moving traffic. I have regularly seen cars travelling at 80 towards the airport and trucks forced going up the inside. The N7/M7 is no better. Until lane discipline is enforced, I’m afraid 100 max is here to stay.

Also a unique problem with the M50 is the tendency of a lot but not all drivers coming on at entrances and immediately darting across all lanes into the far right. Not safely either. They have to be blind for at least 2 lanes. N7/N4/N3 north and southbound are terrible for it. So I agree with 100kmph on the M50 during peak hours.

Agree also with off peak 120 but only if variable speed signs gantries confirm the speeds, not time based as it will cause confusion and frustration for those that are aware.

Charles Babbage

Damien360 wrote: »

Also a unique problem with the M50 is the tendency of a lot but not all drivers coming on at entrances and immediately darting across all lanes into the far right. Not safely either. They have to be blind for at least 2 lanes. N7/N4/N3 north and southbound are terrible for it. So I agree with 100kmph on the M50 during peak hours.

They now have adjusted some of the lane markings to hazard markings. The next step should be cameras in the vicinity of these junctions. Anyone zipping across 3 lanes should get a ticket. It is well within the capacity of technology to have a program to identify such actions on a video then one person could review this and identify offenders.

Darc19

Tomrota wrote: »

I agree with most of this. However, there is no reason we can’t do over 120 on the M50 during off-peak night time hours. It’s such a shame to be limited to 100km/h in a car that’s designed to average 200+km/h on the Autobahn. If weather conditions are ideal and the time is 2am, speed limits should be much higher. Speed limit signs should be electronic. There is no one speed that is suitable for all hours and weather conditions.

This is simply ridiculous.

#1 - many autobahns have speed limits now due to the number of crashes there were and the resultant fatalities

#2 - speed limits are not set based on just high performance cars and their drivers wanting to speed at 2am in the morning

#3 - likewise, limits are not set based on 80year old granny in her nissan Micra


M50 is set at 100kmh for most of its length due to several factors. The number of exits, the level of traffic and the topography.

You simply cannot set a limit for one type of car at a certain time in certain weather conditions.

HBC08

ratracer wrote: »

The miserable €80 fine is not a deterrent to speeding in this country. It should be ramped up to €250 or more, then that would make some think twice about their speed.

BTW, I also think 120km/h is too low a limit on the motorway network, it could be raised to 140km/h safely.

You do realise there are penalty points for that offense too? Nobody cares about the €80.

I agree motorway speed should be 140km.

pippip

newmember? wrote: »

What motorway has a "run off area in the centre median"??

ratracer

HBC08 wrote: »

You do realise there are penalty points for that offense too? Nobody cares about the €80.

I agree motorway speed should be 140km.

Of course in aware of the penalty points...... it keeps my foot light.

But that is my point, nobody cares about the fine because it’s too small. Increase that, as well as the points and people might think twice about it.

ratracer

Also, I presume that, like a GATSO van, the camera only records the front number plate? Motorbikes will still have a free pass

Leonard Hofstadter

ratracer wrote: »

Also, I presume that, like a GATSO van, the camera only records the front number plate? Motorbikes will still have a free pass

The vans here can do rear number plates also - I know because my Mum got a speeding ticket years ago and it was clearly the back of the car they photographed.

pippip

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

The vans here can do rear number plates also - I know because my Mum got a speeding ticket years ago and it was clearly the back of the car they photographed.

The vans can only read plates coming towards or away from the rear of the van.

If a bike is coming towards the rear of the van (camera) there's no plate to read but if the bike is going away from the rear of the van it can read it. (assuming those terrible tax discs haven't slipped again....awful design )

From the images I've seen of the cameras on the M7 I think bikes are safe.

ratracer

Leonard Hofstadter wrote: »

The vans here can do rear number plates also - I know because my Mum got a speeding ticket years ago and it was clearly the back of the car they photographed.

Correct! They can record your reg no if you are driving away from the rear window of the van..

Time to get plates on the front of bikes then. They’re the biggest offenders on the road.

ReginaldSmythV

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Time to get plates on the front of bikes then. They’re the biggest offenders on the road.

Haha, where would you suggest?

Maybe a plate instead of headlights..

Stihl waters

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

Must be a nightmare for truck drivers having someone tail you so closely for so long on a motorway!!!

That doesn't bother me as they're behind me, it's the numptys that can't merge onto motorways at more than 90 km an hour that pull out in front of you while doing 86 causing me to break the law and move into the overtaking lane to pass them out, although if they don't make an attempt to merge I'll hold my line and make them stay in until they either speed up or slip in behind me, if you're on a motorway doing less than 90 you should probably use the old roads

newmember2

pippip wrote: »

Do you mean 'run off' area through a concrete wall?

pippip wrote: »

The vans can only read plates coming towards or away from the rear of the van.

If a bike is coming towards the rear of the van (camera) there's no plate to read but if the bike is going away from the rear of the van it can read it. (assuming those terrible tax discs haven't slipped again....awful design )

From the images I've seen of the cameras on the M7 I think bikes are safe.

I dunno how many times I have to post this but I've been done before on a bike where I was driving away from the front of the van.

pippip

newmember? wrote: »

Do you mean 'run off' area through a concrete wall?




I dunno how many times I have to post this but I've been done before on a bike where I was driving away from the front of the van.

Yes, in 120 zone you have run off area, no concrete wall there. Concrete wall starts where 100 zone starts.

Did you get a photo? I can't see how as all the radars and camera equipment are pointing out the back. I know there's a few people on here who have good knowledge about them so may be able to correctly say what's possible.

ratracer

ReginaldSmythV wrote: »

Time to get plates on the front of bikes then. They’re the biggest offenders on the road.

Now, now....... don’t be jealous

ratracer

ratracer wrote: »

Now, now....... don’t be jealous

Strange breed.

newmember2

pippip wrote: »

Yes, in 120 zone you have run off area, no concrete wall there. Concrete wall starts where 100 zone starts.

Most motorways will have either concrete wall or narrow verge with tensioned wire fence on central median no?

pippip wrote: »

Did you get a photo? I can't see how as all the radars and camera equipment are pointing out the back. I know there's a few people on here who have good knowledge about them so may be able to correctly say what's possible.

Yes, photo of reg plate on the FCPN...I couldn't believe it. It's possibly 7 or 8 years ago now.

newmember?

newmember? wrote: »

Do you mean 'run off' area through a concrete wall?



I dunno how many times I have to post this but I've been done before on a bike where I was driving away from the front of the van.

What's your point? That's how it works .


The camera is on the back of the van. If there is a van with its rear to you as you pass it then you will not be caught speeding on a bike.

I'f a van is on the other side of the road parked 180° the opposite way, it can catch you as you drive away on the opposite side of the road and it can see you rear plate.

I assume if there is a high volume of cars on its side of the road this would make a difference as to whether it could detect you on the opposite side.

For a speed van on a motorway to catch you on a bike and it was parked on your side of the road it would have to be parked backwards, i.e facing towards you.

However if on a bike you would want to be a clown to be caught this way as you can slow down before you ever pass the back of a van on the other side of the road.

Darc19

pippip wrote: »

That's not a "motorway runoff", it's there to allow a further lane in future without having to remake the bridges.

It is always advisable to get into the left side hard shoulder is anything goes amiss

pippip

Darc19 wrote: »

That's not a "motorway runoff", it's there to allow a further lane in future without having to remake the bridges.

It is always advisable to get into the left side hard shoulder is anything goes amiss

And if that third lane goes in then maybe the speed limit will drop.

And on point two it's also advisable to come to a slow controlled stop but sh!te happens and if it does at 120 which is safer a concrete barrier or a green run off area beside you.

The Continental Op

I'm fairly sure that before it was necessary to use up the extra land taken up by wide grass central reservations motorways with them were considered safer than without. For example a large truck can just drive straight through a lot of motorway barriers and hit oncoming traffic. The large grass areas reduce the chance of that by a big margin.

newmember2

Naya Immense Penalty wrote: »

What's your point? That's how it works ..

You quoted the post...maybe read it again?

Darc19

pippip wrote: »

And if that third lane goes in then maybe the speed limit will drop.

And on point two it's also advisable to come to a slow controlled stop but sh!te happens and if it does at 120 which is safer a concrete barrier or a green run off area beside you.

Of course it's better to go onto a green area, but it is not a "run off" area. Suggesting such would almost encourage some fools to stop on it to change a tyre.

It's a central reservation and the primary reason is to future proof the motorway for a third lane. If it means in the meantime someone can avoid a collision, that's a bonus.

The Continental Op

Darc19 wrote: »

Of course it's better to go onto a green area, but it is not a "run off" area. Suggesting such would almost encourage some fools to stop on it to change a tyre.

It's a central reservation and the primary reason is to future proof the motorway for a third lane. If it means in the meantime someone can avoid a collision, that's a bonus.

My understanding is that thinking has changed over the years on that score. While I believe the original idea behind wide central reservations was safety the need for more lanes has made them a bonus for future proofing.

pippip

Darc19 wrote: »

Of course it's better to go onto a green area, but it is not a "run off" area. Suggesting such would almost encourage some fools to stop on it to change a tyre.

A run off area in motorsport is an area where if a car leaves the course it won't hit anything. Don't know where you're getting the impression it's somewhere anyone would intentionally end up.

I think you're confusing that with sitdown area, layby or hard shoulder

Johnrazz

Seen these today for the first time. Don’t think they’re live yet are they? Wasn’t getting much people to slow down anyways

The Continental Op

Johnrazz wrote: »

Seen these today for the first time. Don’t think they’re live yet are they? Wasn’t getting much people to slow down anyways

I drive fairly regularly in the UK and they were a little slow to catch on over there but they certainly take them a lot more seriously now.

Went through several last week (most were for 50mph) and hardly anyone was doing over the limit. Using the speed off my satnav and sticking to the limit I was overtaking a lot of cars.

Just wait to the tickets start to drop through letter boxes.

Damien360

Johnrazz wrote: »

Seen these today for the first time. Don’t think they’re live yet are they? Wasn’t getting much people to slow down anyways

Curious about this also. I was on that stretch a couple of weeks ago early morning and I reckon I was one of the few cars sticking to the limit. It’s quite a long stretch of road near Birdhill covered. A few faster cars exited westbound at Birdhill itself but the gantry is before the exit. Eastbound later that day was far more compliant.

Johnrazz

V

The Continental Op wrote: »

I drive fairly regularly in the UK and they were a little slow to catch on over there but they certainly take them a lot more seriously now.

Went through several last week (most were for 50mph) and hardly anyone was doing over the limit. Using the speed off my satnav and sticking to the limit I was overtaking a lot of cars.

Just wait to the tickets start to drop through letter boxes.

Oh 100% correct yeah. Just was wondering were they live yet? Don’t remember hearing anything about it and they normally announce it don’t they. Funnily I only see one set on each side, didn’t notice the second.

frozenfrozen

Someone passed me today in it at easily 160+ in the rain

Another van about an inch behind a car going through it

Then the madness 10 seconds after it ends with people doing mad speed to make up the time or to overtake anyone back who overtook them inside the average zone...

zg3409

M50 is getting variable speed limit electronic signs. They were testing some last week. M50 has regular fixed vans in 100km and 120km zones, only regular in past 6 months.

I don't agree with average speed limit zones unless you are 100% warned you will be fined such as a warning letter first, then a fine, then points. Many cars don't have cruise control and many people will pass through these twice a day. They really need to be on dangerous stretches like they were on the old Dundalk Newry road which was lethal.

If they rolled them out on all motorways then at least they would be fair warning, but the odd location seems like money grabbing. Motorways are typically the safest roads.

Johnrazz

I can only find articles saying they’re in the testing stage, presumably that means they aren’t sending out fines yet?

Mimon

frozenfrozen wrote: »

Someone passed me today in it at easily 160+ in the rain

Another van about an inch behind a car going through it

Then the madness 10 seconds after it ends with people doing mad speed to make up the time or to overtake anyone back who overtook them inside the average zone...

These are the numpties who we need to get off the roads, not the people cruising at 130 in good conditions.

Was very heavy showers at times today so slowed down to 110 at times.

The 120kph limit is a blunt instrument. Variable ones depending on the conditions makes more sense. E.g. 130 good conditions, 120 light rain, 110 heavy rain.

mikeecho

The Continental Op wrote: »

I drive fairly regularly in the UK and they were a little slow to catch on over there but they certainly take them a lot more seriously now.

Went through several last week (most were for 50mph) and hardly anyone was doing over the limit. Using the speed off my satnav and sticking to the limit I was overtaking a lot of cars.

Just wait to the tickets start to drop through letter boxes.

The tickets won't come.. they never did for me.. I was doing the ferry dash, and blasted thru a few 40mph specs zones, doing 70+mph

brucky

If they are to be welcomed by the virtue signing brigade I have one very simple question. They have been around in other countries for a while.

Can anyone provide any statically based evidence that they have saved lives or reduced accidents? Simple before and after stats would suffice.

irishgrover

brucky wrote: »

If they are to be welcomed by the virtue signing brigade I have one very simple question. They have been around in other countries for a while.

Can anyone provide any statically based evidence that they have saved lives or reduced accidents? Simple before and after stats would suffice.

Have the non woke brigade lost the ability to use the internet/search engines unsupervised?

whippet

This research (behind a paywall .. but you can see some citations) indicates that there is a decent enough drop in traffic related injuries and fatalities since the introduction of the french average speed cameras

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234088360_An_assessment_of_the_safety_effects_of_the_French_speed_camera_program