[Closed] A9 average speed camera preparatory work starts today

Following our review of the speed limits, we consulted with the 8 police forces to seek their local knowledge and to gain support of our proposed recommendations. In some cases the police did not support our recommendation and we have amended our outcomes in line with the recommendations of the police.

So it does seem to include the thoughts of people with a good deal of experience, rather than being pulled out of the arse of some brainless bureaucrats. Note use of the word 'seem'.

Yep I read that. But oddly enough there are no proposals to amend the speed limits south of Inverness and this is the safest part of the A9. But where are the sticking the average speed cameras?

Upgrade to dual carriageway is due to complete on 2025.

Upgrade to dual carriageway is due to complete on 2025.

I've driven lots of rural single carriageways. Why's this so different?

They obviously want to reduce the existing average speed limits to ensure that everyone complies with the maximum legally allowed speed limit.

I have never driven on the A9 north of Perth. Why ? Does everyone north of Perth drive faster when average speed cameras are installed ?

It's all a big conspiracy to piss you off 🙂

No, I was just wondering if you knew anything about what you're talking about.

I do yes thanks.

Just been reading the contributing factors for accidents and speeding was only reported in 26 cases, which ranks it only 15th.

Travelling too fast for conditions ranks at 7th with 58 cases - but given the nature of the road in the winter I'd expect a lot of them to have been within the speed limit (which the stats would appear to back up).

How can you eliminate speed as an issue?

Let's talk hypothetically for a moment. If you are driving along at 70mph on some road, and someone pulls out in front of you and you hit them - what's the cause of the accident? If you die, what's the cause of your death?

It's also worth noting that on the A9 South (i.e. Inverness to Perth) the accident rates for both single and dual carriageway's are below the national average for those types of road. On the north section it's 29% higher than the national average.

How can you eliminate speed as an issue?

There is a difference between speed and speeding as issues. Speed cameras (average or otherwise) might deal with speeding, but not inappropriate speed (which in many/most cases will be within the speed limit).

Only on STW could people who have never driven on a road pass judgement about the driving on said road.

FWIW I'm not actually that bothered about average speed cameras on the A9. I drive up it twice a year (maybe).

But installing them will cause 6 months of roadworks and they are being placed in the areas where there is the least accidents.

Only on STW could people who have never driven on a road pass judgement about the driving on said road.

Wait a minute. I'm talking about speeding in general. It may be that this road is special, and pepole should be allowed to drive as fast as they like on it, but given the accident stats this doesn't sound like a good idea.

I understand that it is straight and has few junctions - I can use a map and google streetview - but apparently there's some special quality I can only understand by being there? Like Woodstock?

Anyway back to seriousness:

Speed cameras (average or otherwise) might deal with speeding, but not inappropriate speed (which in many/most cases will be within the speed limit).

Of course. But given that there are accidents happening, if more people are travelling more slowly then regardless of accident, consequences will be less severe. I don't see why this is controversial..?

Of course. But given that there are accidents happening, if more people are travelling more slowly then regardless of accident, consequences will be less severe. I don't see why this is controversial..?

It appears the vast majority of accidents take place within the speed limit (from the official accident analysis) so while there may be some positive impact it doesn't look like it'll be big. i.e. If most of the accidents are happening within the speed limit then introducing cameras isn't going to lower the average speeds, so won't make accidents less severe. That's what's controversial i.e. perhaps the cash might be better spent on other safety related factors.

I'd ask you to explain why reducing the speed limit will mean that people will stick to the reduced limit when they apparently don't stick to the higher limit, but i doubt there would be much point.

I get the impression that you've never driven somewhere where there are average speed cameras.

No one in the OP's link is talking about "reducing the speed limit", where do you get that from ? Average speed cameras are installed to stop individual drivers from exceeding the maximum permitted speed limit. IME they are extremely successful in doing exactly that. They also have the effect of making drivers drive more calmly and with greater space between vehicles, IME.

No, I was just wondering if you knew anything about what you're talking about.

[img] [/img]

No worries mols, it wasn't specifically directed at you, you not the only contributor to the tread who hasn't actually driven along the road in the title.

PS I'm off to Mumsnet to post on a topic about menstrual pain. I've never actually menstruated but I am aware of "pain" in general, so I think I'm well qualified to comment 😀

It appears the vast majority of accidents take place within the speed limit (from the official accident analysis)

That's a fair point. Does the accident analysis report speed at impact, or initial speed?

you not the only contributor to the tread who hasn't actually driven along the road in the title.

Why does this matter? I know it's long and straight with few junctions - what else do I need to know?

They also have the effect of making drivers drive more calmly and with greater space between vehicles, IME.

😆 😆 😆

Sorry Che, I live just off the A14 and have very differing experiences.
Chronic tailgating and snail racing between cars as well as HGVs. I'm told the road is now safer but accidents still bring the road to a standstill on an almost daily basis.

That's a fair point. Does the accident analysis report speed at impact, or initial speed?

It's a determination of whether speeding was a contributing factor - not a measurement of what the speed was at impact.

There's no need to apologize sbob if your experience has been different. And if it's made you laugh hysterically, as apparently it has, then so much the better 🙂

So tailgating with no chance of overtaking is your experience of average seed cameras ? Well there's a lot of daft people in this world and I guess many must live close to you.

I'm told the road is now safer but .....

But you know better.

I'm told the road is now safer but accidents still bring the road to a standstill on an almost daily basis.

Wow, it must have been really bad before. I can see why they put the cameras in...

😉

It's a determination of whether speeding was a contributing factor - not a measurement of what the speed was at impact.

Right.. so no indication of whether or not lives will be saved then?

So tailgating with no chance of overtaking is your experience of average seed cameras ? Well there's a lot of daft people in this world and I guess many must live close to you.

The standard of driving on the A14 is notoriously abysmal, but I'm happy to bring up the average.
It simply isn't designed for the sheer volume of traffic that use it.
Definitely one of the worst roads in the UK, although still not as bad as the A9.

Right.. so no indication of whether or not lives will be saved then?

It's an assessment of whether speeding was a contributory factor. Not sure what your point is. The official accident survey says speeding isn't a factor in the vast majority of accidents on the road, so it's unclear why you think enforcing the existing speed limit will drastically impact safety on the road. I'd have thought spending any available money on something that will significantly affect safety might be a better idea.

bails - Member

Wow, it must have been really bad before. I can see why they put the cameras in...
😉

Hmmm....
Placing large NSL signs had a greater effect on reducing speed as half the muppets using the road think the limit for cars is 60.

I love average sped cameras, mainly because motorcycles are immune to a lot of them 😈
I pass one very badly thought out on where the M25 meets the M3 every day. It's only set up for cars entering from the M25, and as I'm going straight through on the M3, I only pass the second camera. Immune in the car as well! Bonus! (Not that I ever take the car)

It's only set up for cars entering from the M25, and as I'm going straight through on the M3, I only pass the second camera. Immune in the car as well! Bonus! (Not that I ever take the car)

It's an assessment of whether speeding was a contributory factor. Not sure what your point is.

Well - is the point to reduce accidents, or improve safety?

Molgrips:
Of course. But given that there are accidents happening, if more people are travelling more slowly then regardless of accident, consequences will be less severe. I don't see why this is controversial..?

I don't use that road either but I can imagine that most if not all the crashes will be the result of overtaking or pulling back in. If a driver chooses to rag the arse off his astravan for 400 yards to get past a lorry and exceeds the limit, it will not have a significant effect on his average speed (unless he does hit a lorry coming the other way 🙁 ).

Although IME average speed cameras do have the effect on speed that Ernie reports, I'd suggest that it's because it empowers the stupid and/or sanctimonious to abandon all thoughts of lane discipline and drive at 5-10mph less than the limit in any and all lanes, braking further when the next camera actually appears 😀 . I see a lot of drivers tailgating and ranting in these "queues" but then I've only experienced them on short stretches of an otherwise 70 limit motorway and I think Ernie's talking about much longer stretches of the M25, say

It isn't controversial, and I think we all recognise that limiting speed to 20mph would probably reduce serious accidents massively

Thanks for the reductio ad absurdum. I am of course not advocating sticking to 20mph, but maybe enforcing the 60mph limit and trying to stop people doing 80 would save some lives.

I can imagine that most if not all the crashes will be the result of overtaking or pulling back in.

Yes, and if more people are going more slowly there'll be fewer fatalities. It won't catch the crap overtaker, but it will stop the rep in his Merc driving too fast out of habit.

On the A417 they started leaving the smashed up cars by the roadside for a few weeks. Seemed to have a bit of an affect. I think they should also erect a temporary screen with video footage of the crash on a loop.

Although IME average speed cameras do have the effect on speed that Ernie reports, I'd suggest that it's because it empowers the stupid and/or sanctimonious to abandon all thoughts of lane discipline and drive at 5-10mph less than the limit in any and all lanes, braking further when the next camera actually appears . I see a lot of drivers tailgating and ranting in these "queues" but then I've only experienced them on short stretches of an otherwise 70 limit motorway and I think Ernie's talking about much longer stretches of the M25, say

They enable traffic to flow much better for longer for higher volumes through 50mph roadwork sections on normal motorways. Far better than the old 50mph signs plus one or two Gatsos. At a high enough volume, the traffic will always slow down but in any sections I've used regularly, they work very well.

Thanks for the reductio ad absurdum. I am of course not advocating sticking to 20mph, but maybe enforcing the 60mph limit and trying to stop people doing 80 would save some lives.

Yes, and if more people are going more slowly there'll be fewer fatalities. It won't catch the crap overtaker, but it will stop the rep in his Merc driving too fast out of habit.

I am not convinced- I've seen a lot of terrible driving on the A9 and lots of it had nothing to do with speeding. A fair bit had to do with incredibly slow overtakes in fact, which this could make worse, something about average speed cameras seems to compel a lot of drivers to go at exactly the speed limit.

Hopefully I'm wrong but I don't think it'll have a huge positive impact and Ireckon it could well have some negative. I reckon the most useful thing they could do is just add about twice as many "dual carriageway in X miles" signs as there are just now, and possibly some others that say "Don't be a **** in the dual carriageway sections, yes you, the guy who'll use the entire 2 mile stretch to do an overtake while 500 cars are stuck behind"

But I thought you'd just agreed that it was the overtaker (clearly, only the crap ones) who causes the crashes

Nothing of the sort! I did use the words 'crap overtaker' though.

Crashes are caused by all sorts of things, most of which are very hard to stop people doing. However there's one thing common to every single crash - the faster people are going, the more likely they are to die in that crash.

Couple that with speed being very easy to measure, you've got something worth trying.

Just to re-iterate - I'm not saying lower speed prevents crashes. I'm saying that it makes crashes less serious.

I'd rather have signs that said 'relax, take it easy, it's not worth the hassle' along with pictures of tropical islands, beautiful people, horses galloping through fields, couples cuddled up on sofas.. that kind of thing. Maybe pipe some gentle music through loudspeakers.

I guess I should preface my comments by saying that I use the A9 [b]a lot[/b]. For a start, it's actually my commute. By the rules previously established in this thread, I think that makes me the resident expert and therefore my opinion obviously counts more than anyone elses 😆

The A9 is awash with speeding motorists. In fact, I'd say it's a fairly small minority that stay within the limits.

By far the worst offenders are van and HGV drivers. If I take my van (50mph on single carriageways remember - and I drive allowing for speedo error) I'm constantly being caught up by larger trucks, some flashing at me to go faster. I don't see why I should be aiding and abetting criminal behaviour.

The HGV drivers have been pushing to have their speed limit increased to 50mph as it will, apparently, make things safer by reducing convoys. Personally, I'd rather overtake a truck driving at 40mph than one driving at 50mph. The limit [i]is[/i] going to be increased - once the speed cameras are installed. I guess that, otherwise, they'd simply speed up to 60mph (or above).

Now - is speeding the greatest cause of accidents on the A9? I wouldn't say so. Rubbish overtaking seems to come up most often. However, reducing speed [i]will[/i] reduce the severity of many impacts and might, on occasion, even provide enough time to avoid one altogether.

Where is everyone going in such a hurry anyway?

This thread is predictably devoid of facts!

But the facts unquestionably show that average speed cameras reduce KSI numbers in roads like the A9. So it seems a reasonable approach to install the cameras. Every road is unique though so the true test of integrity for the traffic planner will be to remove them if the don't work.

They almost certainly will work though.

molgrips - Member

I'd rather have signs that said 'relax, take it easy, it's not worth the hassle'

Aye. That's also the point of the "dual in 2 miles" signs, they discourage people from overtaking til they get there.

In theory.....

What pisses me off on the A9 is that what should be a safe overtake becomes hazardous because Mr Fangio Important coming the other way is doing 90mph+.

Basically that means there are very few safe places to overtake.

If the average speed cameras slow those characters down it will make the road a safer place.

What pisses me off on the A9 is that what should be a safe overtake becomes hazardous because Mr Fangio Important coming the other way is doing 90mph

Exactly. Most of the pro speeders are only thinking about controlling their own car on the road. They seem oblivious to how their speeding affects other road users.

molgrips - Member

In theory.....

It definitely works. If only on me! But overtaking and general bellendry always seems to reduce before the dual sections.

There will always be some ahole wanting past. Seen it many times, queue of traffic and, said ahole, gunning it past as many cars a possible , always causes a sharp intake of breath waiting on the inevitable, usually driver going other direction flashing headlight and taking avoiding actions. It always seems to be innocent parties that come of worst.

Sooner it's dualled the better.

There will always be some ahole wanting past. Seen it many times, queue of traffic and, said ahole, gunning it past as many cars a possible

Is that cause you're in a rally team ?

Another A9 daily commuter here. There is a lot of self righteous twaddle being written which bears no resemblance to the actuality of driving on the road.
I waste 80mins of each day driving to and from work on the A9. I see spectacular near misses several times a week and have seen the air ambulance land more often than I like. The accidents and misses I see are not due to cars doing 90+. Ever.
As has been pointed out, the evidence shows that high speeds are not the issue. My crap car doesn't do over 70 at the best of times and it's incredibly rare that I'm overtaken by cars doing loads of mph more than me. What does cause the tailbacks and risky overtaking is the HGVs sticking to their speed limit and collecting huge lines of cars which can only pass on the short overtaking lanes and dualled sections. Most lorry drivers drive way above the 40 limit and this is what keeps the flow of the road and stops stupid overtaking. When you get the drivers of heavily limited or monitored vehicles the natural flow goes and the dangers increase. I have yet to see a non snowy incident on a dualled section for the simple reason that the traffic able to flow at it's natural speed.
Average speed cameras will just reinforce the HGV lower speed limit and this is the real problem. If all the traffic was able and allowed to drive at the same average speed there would be not be a problem but different speed limits on the same stretch of road dependent on vehicle type cause the problem. Add in the single lane, overtaking lane, dual carriageway mix to confuse those that don't know the road and you have the recipe for the current problems.
On the section of the road I drive, speed cameras are very likely to increase incidents as the multiple speed limits are enforced.

Likely thought process:
Average speed cameras enforcing 60 limit.
Been stuck behind truck at 45 for 5 mins
Ok to boot it past them!

What does cause the tailbacks and risky overtaking is the HGVs sticking to their speed limit

No. HGVs cause the tailbacks, the drivers are entirely responsible for their own risky driving. Just like cyclists are not responsible for bad passing manoevres.

Very bloody important point.

If all the traffic was able and allowed to drive at the same average speed

Lol. It is! You are perfectly entitled to drive at 40mph in your car, same as the HGVs!

Driving around normally I'll see drivers in front who, I feel, don't want to overtake and maybe don't know how to. They'll often be found at the front of a line of cars, right behind an artic. And I guess when these people drive on the A9, the distance still to go front of them leads them to try. So sometimes they do so badly, with sad results.

Detecting, training, more training, then someone saying 'Sorry, but you ain't up to driving'.

The 50 limit on trucks is going to be interesting.

The 50 limit on trucks is going to be interesting.

Aye. That's also the point of the "dual in 2 miles" signs, they discourage people from overtaking til they get there.

IME it's the supermarket lorries that all stick rigidly to the 40 mph limit. It's strange but sitting at 50 is a lot less frustrating than sitting at 40.

No. HGVs cause the tailbacks, the drivers are entirely responsible for their own risky driving. Just like cyclists are not responsible for bad passing manoevres.

Lol. It is! You are perfectly entitled to drive at 40mph in your car, same as the HGVs!

Aye, and would you be happy to drive at 40 the whole way knowing that it's safe to drive at 60 or 70 instead? If you would be then you've got a lot more patience than anyone else I know.

And of course the drivers are responsible for their own behaviour but if you take out the tailbacks that risky behaviour becomes less common as there's less impetus for it. Much easier to fix that than driver behaviour.

Aye, and would you be happy to drive at 40 the whole way knowing that it's safe to drive at 60 or 70 instead?

If it was choked with HGVs then I'd suck it up and chill out, yes. I overtake where there's a point, but if it's as busy and choked up as everyone says the A9 is, why risk it? It's a lot of hassle for no significant benefit. Life's short enough as it is.

if you take out the tailbacks

How're you going to do that, short of dualling it all? Even at 50mph people get worked up into a homicidal rage, just look at the hatred for caravanners. So there'll still be death defying overtaking.

BigButSlimmerBloke - Member

The other thing I did see a few times, especially southbound, were 3 or 4 cars bunched up behind an HGV not overtaking but with not enough room between them to let someone else pull in, so committing to an overtake meant having to pass all of them and there's very few stretches where that would be possible

And they were ALL Molgrips, waiting for their turn 😉

But yeah, this is a personal hate, bad driving takes many forms- you can guarantee those guys all think they're being really safe by driving slowly and not overtaking. Even the one 10 feet behind the truck who has absolutely no visibility.

Molgrips is of course completely right, it's not the discourteous driving or the 40mph limits that cause bad driving, it's the bad drivers. But, they are contributory, and reducing the triggers should (will, imo) reduce the bad driving.

So you just have to weigh up the negative impacts, frexample if the speed for trucks can be lifted without introducing specific risks (ie, higher speed is inherently bad in a crash but the question is more about the capacity of the road- I've never driven a truck, no idea if it's reasonable to look at 50mph) then it's a good idea.

But, they are contributory, and reducing the triggers should (will, imo) reduce the bad driving.

The problem is, some people seem to expect empty roads, and can't handle it when there's anything in front of them going less than 90mph. People are not rational - most don't think '55mph is fast enough, I'm happy'.

just put up no overtaking signs, and more solid white lines 😉

would certainly make sense if the limit was consistent for all vehicles. but then I've got stuck at 45 behind an italian camper van or truck only to be caught by a truck I'd passed a few mins earlier. so plenty of trucks must be doing 50 when others are doing 40.

and most daredevil overtakers that have had to double pass me and a truck, I've caught up a few minutes down the road when they've got stuck behind the first truck after a dual zone.

most daredevil overtakers that have had to double pass me and a truck, I've caught up a few minutes down the road when they've got stuck behind the first truck after a dual zone.

That's why it's madness. You just can't make significant progress on roads like these without a really fast car and a deathwish, so why bother? Just relax.

molgrips - Member

That's why it's madness. You just can't make significant progress on roads like these without a really fast car and a deathwish, so why bother? Just relax.

Not being funny but, have you driven up there? I don't do it anything like as often as some on here, probably only about 20 times over the last few years so I'll bow to them if they disagree... but my experience is that yes, you often can make considerably better progress, safely, without either a really fast car or a deathwish. And you could do better still if other drivers were more considerate, without taking any risks (*). It's often a road of logjams rather than a road of constant traffic.

There's a lot of different things going on here so you don't have to disagree with everything else for a single point to be valid, but, I think it's basically a given that if safe overtaking is easier, then it reduces the amount of dangerous overtakes.

(* above and beyond the standard risks involved with being on the public highway, anyway)

[img] [/img]run a length of that up there would stop the overtaking

Molgrips, did you say you've never driven this road? It's perfectly possible to make decent progress on it provided you don't get caught in a 50 car tail back. Once one of that size formed you're pretty much stuck so, yes, you should sit back and relax a bit.

The problem is, some people seem to expect empty roads, and can't handle it when there's anything in front of them going less than 90mph. People are not rational - most don't think '55mph is fast enough, I'm happy'.

Nail on the head, you can't fix that. So it must be easier to fix the other problems, the triggers that cause the dangerous overtakes as you've just said you can't fix human behaviour.

How're you going to do that, short of dualling it all? Even at 50mph people get worked up into a homicidal rage, just look at the hatred for caravanners. So there'll still be death defying overtaking.

It is being duelled, though it won't be finished any time soon. 2025 is the target I think.

So what else do we do? Try and encourage caravans lorries to pull over and let some of the traffic past when the queue behind is huge? Increase the HGV limit? Enforce a minimum speed limit?

would certainly make sense if the limit was consistent for all vehicles. but then I've got stuck at 45 behind an italian camper van or truck only to be caught by a truck I'd passed a few mins earlier. so plenty of trucks must be doing 50 when others are doing 40.

The official report on the A9 states that the average speed of trucks on it is already quite a bit higher than the national average or their speed limit in the 40mph bits. Also, despite only making up 7% of the traffic, they're involved in something like 25% of the accidents.

BTW my own personal approach to the A9 is to try and make sure I only drive on it when it's quiet. That means I might leave at 5am for a weekend hillwalking trip in the summer. In those circumstances the road seems very safe, as there are plenty of places to pass the occasional HGV etc.

It's perfectly possible to make decent progress on it provided you don't get caught in a 50 car tail back.

Yes but from what people are saying, there always is a 50 car tailback..? Or is there miles of empty highway with one or two HGVs on it holding people up?

In those circumstances the road seems very safe, as there are plenty of places to pass the occasional HGV etc.

The thing is its actually a pretty safe road. It gets a lot of attention because of the number of accidents along its length but the rate of accidents is actually fairly low (especially between Perth and Inverness)

I never drive the road for anything than going on holiday so I tend to try and break the journey up by stopping at Dunkeld for lunch, Laggan for a ride or Aviemore for a wander.

I'm all for "making progress" but when I join the back of a 30 vehicle convoy I just chill out and wait for the next bit of DC

pretty much the same, but most of the time it's maybe a 7-8 car "tailback" behind a truck or caravan/campervan. By the time they've all peeled off one by one over several miles, and I'm at the front, there'll prolly be a "dual carriageway in 2 miles" sign.
given that my car is LHD, and I can see jack all round the RH side of a truck, I'll chill.
My estimate was probably about 5-10 minutes difference between chilling out on Perth-Aviemore vs driving near the limit most of the way and taking every passing reasonably opportunity swiftly.

i'd much rather get there a few minutes later, than not at all or in the back of an ambulance. what's the typical wait for an ambulance midway between perth and aviemore?

the most demoralising bit is when you get past loads on a dual section, only find a truck has just entered a single lane zone just up ahead.

I took the caravan up near my parents' place at the weekend. Normally takes me 1h35, with the caravan it took 1h45. Even though it feels incredibly slow to do 50mph, it's not.

The other thing I did see a few times, especially southbound, were 3 or 4 cars bunched up behind an HGV not overtaking but with not enough room between them to let someone else pull in, so committing to an overtake meant having to pass all of them and there's very few stretches where that would be possible. Normal A9 behaviour but there seemed to be more than usual.

There appears to be an assumption here that all of those drivers don't want to overtake, and that they're driving badly because they don't leave you room to leap frog them. How do you know what they've already had to wait for, or how many other drivers may have come up behind them like you? Perhaps they're driving defensively so as not to invite you to overtake dangerously or out of turn? Some or all of them could be just as keen as you to overtake, in fact someone having already done so could be why there's no gaps. You really have no idea why people are driving as they are, but just because you perceive it as hindering your progress doesn't necessarily mean they're bad drivers.

Funnily enough, this kind of scenario reminds me of similarly arrogant and presumptious behaviour in XC racing. Yes, mate, track, we're all stuck behind this slower rider from another cat unable to pass, you're not that amazingly fast, afterall we dropped you earlier.

How do you know what they've already had to wait for, or how many other drivers may have come up behind them like you?

I tried making this point once.. I am still suffering the consequences. Good luck, my friend, you will need it.

Well on the subject of arrogant and presumptious
- how do you know how I came up behind them?
- did, at any point I say it was hindering my progress? No, I pointed out bad driving which, funnily enough is how I'd describe a bunch of cars driving nose to tail at 50 directly behind an artic or a bus.
- do you know how long I sat behind any of them before it became apparent that no overtaking was going to happen?
- so please do tell how any overtaking I might have been doing (if indeed I did do any or maybe just waited until the next dual stretch) would have been dangerous or out of turn?

You do know that not everyone who overtakes someone else drives like a nutter, don't you?, and that some of us know how to overtake safely ?

Even though it feels incredibly slow to do 50mph, it's not

i'd much rather get there a few minutes later, than not at all or in the back of an ambulance. what's the typical wait for an ambulance midway between perth and aviemore?

molgrips - Member

I took the caravan up near my parents' place at the weekend. Normally takes me 1h35, with the caravan it took 1h45. Even though it feels incredibly slow to do 50mph, it's not.

25-30 miles? 😛

You do know that not everyone who overtakes someone else drives like a nutter, don't you?, and that some of us know how to overtake safely ?

Yes but we don't know which you are. A lot of people who drive like nutters THINK they are being safe....

Problem I see with making it all dual carriageway is that you'll get what we get on the A1; massive tailbacks with one lorry taking 15 miles to overtake another with a 0.001mph speed differential!

Then you have to make it a 3 lane motorway (much of the A1) or ban lorries from the overtaking lane at peak times (seems a fair bit of this on the North East A1).

As for average speed cameras we had them on the M62 for a while while the managed motorway was constructed. Everyone moaned about the 50mph limit but traffic did seem to flow better resulting in my run from Huddersfield to Castleford (25 miles) actually being faster at busy times.

Also there seems to be better traffic flow with the motorway management, I have not gone to complete standstill for months now.

As for average speed cameras we had them on the M62 for a while while the managed motorway was constructed. Everyone moaned about the 50mph limit but traffic did seem to flow better resulting in my run from Huddersfield to Castleford (25 miles) actually being faster at busy times.

Also there seems to be better traffic flow with the motorway management, I have not gone to complete standstill for months now.

Same thing on the M1 now. I get on at 29 and go south in the morning. Before the roadworks it would come to a standstill every day between 29 and 28. Now almost every morning it travels at a consistent 50mph and is quicker on average.

Thats the thing with average speed cameras; they are very effective at changing driver behaviour since they remove the desireto go faster than all the other cars around you. Drivers are more relaxed. In the whole it's a much more pleasurable experience. Once you get used to not being able to travel a 90 mph.

I doubt I'd feel the same when its 9pm, the motorway is empty and I have to drive from Sheffield to Plymouth. It's perfectly possible to travel safely at 85mph in this situation and makes 45 mins difference to time of arrival.

Variable speed limits controlled by average speed cameras are the answer.

Problem I see with making it all dual carriageway is that you'll get what we get on the A1; massive tailbacks with one lorry taking 15 miles to overtake another with a 0.001mph speed differential!

They just need ban lorries overtaking, like they do in other countries.

molgrips - Member

Yes but we don't know which you are. A lot of people who drive like nutters THINK they are being safe....

But like I said earlier, a lot of slow drivers also think they're being safe, while driving inconsiderately and sometimes unsafely... Or to put it another way, lots of bad drivers think they're good, whether it's bad driving by being a nutter or bad driving by sitting behind a truck at 40mph or whatever.

I remember my uncle intentionally blocking an overtake and smugly banging on about how he was making the roads safer, when he'd actually almost rammed another car for no reason. Idiocy isn't restricted to hero overtakers.

M1/M62/M25 multilane with variable limits or slower limits designed to make all traffic flow in lanes is a little bit different to a single lane A road thru the hills.

But making all traffic flow at 50 limit is surely better than some doing 40, some doing 50, and loads wanting to do 60 but get "held up" doing 40 for extended periods.

Pretty common to have time limited no overtaking by vehicles >3.5ton on 2 lane sections on the continent. Not exactly expensive to install similar signs on A9. Although IME (even if not that regular), I've never seen trucks passing trucks on the dual zones, and even if they did, i'm sure they'd have the decency to let the cars go first.

A couple of questions I have on this.

1. Does driving in average speed camera areas make one concentrate more on their speedo than concentrating on the road ahead?
2. Would driving at a steady pace have a negative impact on one's alertness?

Regardless....I'll be going up the A82 more often then. It's 'generally' quieter and in bad winter weather it's affected less by snow and ice.

In practise (and if you can choose your time of departure) it only adds 15mins to a journey time from NW Glasgow to Inverness. It's also prettier and a better fun road to drive too! (am I allowed to use the words "a fun road to drive"?!)

Despite it's reputation, IMO I believe it's a safer road...if you're patient and don't get wound up by the sometimes slow tourists!

I've lost count of the number of times I've had 'near death experiences' on both roads, some my fault and some others. However, mile for mile, the A82 is arguably safer IMO. When I do have to overtake then the significantly shorter queues, the slower average speed of traffic allows for far safer overtaking.

In saying all that, even if I were the best driver in the world (which I'm far from), I'd still be brown bread if someone else pulls out in front of me on either road.

1. Does driving in average speed camera areas make one concentrate more on their speedo than concentrating on the road ahead?

If you can't concentrate on both you're not fit to drive.

2. Would driving at a steady pace have a negative impact on one's alertness?

See above.

Meanwhile back in the real world, where the roads are full of people of mixed experience, ability, alertness, tiredness, confidence and machinery

1. Does driving in average speed camera areas make one concentrate more on their speedo than concentrating on the road ahead?

Probably, a little, what percentage of people do you think look at their speedos when they approach a fixed speed camera

2. Yes driving a steady speed probably does have an effect on peoples alertness. I think that's one of the reasons people tailgate. They now have to pay close attention to the distance to the car in front. It keeps some drivers alert (I find it stressful to do the whole tailgate, brake, tailgate, brake thing, but its such common behaviour that there must be a reason for it beyond them all being crap drivers)#

FWIW I prefer the A82 as well.

Staying further back, watching the brakelights in front as the ripple heads back down the line keeps me interested, thanks. And helps save a little fuel.

If you can't concentrate on both you're not fit to drive.

That doesn't answer his question. You keep making these sort of big grand statements that just don't work in the real world, no matter how true they may be.