Safe Speed Forums

I bet none of you knew that BBC guidelines expressly forbid the use of large cameras in cars. They are supposed to use dedicated minicams on fixed mounts.

I think the point about the U-turn was that on cue, she slowed down. Ok so she should have slowed a lot earlier.

Also the U-turn, and her piece to camera will have been filmed at different times on entirely different roads.

You're missing the point. In a six second period of driving along a busy city street, her gaze was on the camera for all but about two seconds. At no time did she check her mirrors or quarters and her scan was inadequate for her to be able to discount those areas for hazards. WRT to U-turn, she passed the rear of the manoeuvring vehicle too quickly to stop and with very little clearance even though it was about to reverse the safe thing to do would be to hold short and let the other driver complete the U-turn before herself continuing.

This reporter spouted "speed kills" and critisized other drivers while engaging in the lack of care and attention that is responsible for the vast majority of accidents. If a child had run out in front of her while she was doing her piece to camera, no doubt BRAKE would have shouted "TOO FAST" even though the inattention that would have actually caused the accident was recorded for all to see.

_________________
Will

When BBC inside out filmed me the chap was using a medium/small camera but he was not wearing a belt and changed seats often to get the shots he wanted. there were no camera mounts

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I saw some links and articles about H&S and filming with cars, after Hamsters accident, buggered if I know where, but there were guidelines.
fatboytim.

It would have been a PD150 or a Z1-E, both semi-professional DV/DVCAM camcorders used mostly by producer-directors. Most cameramen hate them.

The camera in that news piece would have been much much bigger, a DVW-700 or DSR-500 most likely. Very heavy, and very very painful flying around inside a car in a collision.

I may have joined the wrong forum. I am new - what is so wrong with people being told to slow down in towns to keep children alive. Surely safe speed is SAFE SPEED.

That's the clever bit; drivers are slowing down to keep children alive.
You should compare the stats of injury vs fatalities, if drivers were not slowing down then the number of fatalities against injuries would be phenomenally higher (~20%).

However, safety policy must take a two pronged approach for it to be truly effective. It is also the parent’s responsibility to ensure their offspring can reliably assess such situations otherwise they must be kept under supervision at all times – that is what a parent is for!

Helping people to slow down when conditions dictate is a bloody good idea. Asking people to slow down without regard for the conditions is a dangerous and needless distraction.

I'm watching you. I suspect you are a stinky troll or a previously banned poster. If so please go and play somewhere else.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

When anyone asks me to think about the children I get suspicious, as it tends to flag up their intellectual bankruptcy.

But, why complain about a road safety campaign aimed at improving road safety. You cannot keep children under control at all times, it is simply impossible.

I have never been here before and I am little surprised at your reaction. I am more than a little confused. Your headline states - the campaign for genuine road safety. I thought that the BBC film achieved this and I would have thought that would gain this forum's support.

Please tell that to certain posters of C+

It may well be aimed, but are certain policies hitting the target? Review of the data available suggest not.



Part of control is education leading to self-control. Supervision is no longer required once awareness and evasion of danger is taught. If it is clear that the education has not taken then supervision is required. This is the basic tenet of a responsible guardian.

Given the recent influx of posters with dishonourable intentions it’s reasonable to be suspicious of new posters at this time (unfortunately).


I bet you think that speed cameras achieve a 40-70% reduction of KSIs too?

I don't believe a word of it, and I'm still watching you.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I suggest you pay attention to the standard of the reporter's driving in the video, and then consider some of the posts in this thread.

So are you saying it is acceptable for people to drive whatever speed they feel is appropriate regardless of the limit, if the road is clear?

You can never plan for every eventuality. Even the best drivers in the world cannot eradicate all risk no matter what speed they are travelling at. It can only be reduced.

Speed limits are set to deliver an 'acceptable' level of risk at what can reasonable be expected to be the worst case scenario. You do not know when that is going to happen, you can only use experience and judgement to reduce the chance of a catastrophe if it does occur.

I find it highly worrying that so many drivers fail to make any effort to operate their vehicles at a speed within the speed limit whatsoever. Why is that? I suggest:

* People feel invulnerable in their cars
* Modern vehicles are so quiet and insulated from the outside world, sensory perception is reduced so much where 50mph feels "slow". Driving a BMW 7 series at 30 is psychologically very different to 30 in a Rover Metro.
* Bad attitudes - "I'll never get caught"
* Time pressures of modery society

With 60% speeding on most road types according to DfT data, and only (5% * 200,000 =) 10,000 crashes each year attributed in part to 'exceeding the speed limit' it is entirely absurd to suggest that 'exceeding the speed limit' in iteslf such carries any measurable risk at all.

10,000 crashes out of how many billions of 'speeding offences'?

And how many of the 10,000 were caused or contributed to by rogue drivers or wild behaviour? (We don't have official data, but I'll wager more than half.) And of the <5,000 remaining, how many of those were haused by 'in a hurry' type behaviour, were normal levels of caution were abandoned?

Clearly the real world is telling us that there's no risk at all in 'routine speeding'.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

So are you saying it is acceptable for people to drive whatever speed they feel is appropriate regardless of the limit, if the road is clear?

The statistics also show (if I remember correctly) that 13% of fatal RTAs had "Exceeding the speed limit" coded as a primary contributor. Why is the 5% figure banded about when this one is far more important?

I'm not saying that it's OK for everyone to drive at whatever speed they feel appropriate. However, I am saying that it is OK for everyone to drive at an appropriate and safe speed for the conditions even where that is in excess of the limit.

This is because speed is a secondary factor of road safety. If you concentrate on your driving, observe your surroundings, anticipate the actions of others and what the road layout etc. suggest might happen, and give yourself enough space and time to deal with hazards before they become problems, you will automatically drive at a safe and appropriate speed. This principle is often condensed to the acronym COAST. Note that speed doesn't figure in that list.

BTW, Happy Christmas to all.

_________________
Will

Eh? You have been around here long enough to be in absolutely no doubt that we're calling for intelligent and appropriate enforcement of all motoring laws and for all drivers to be given as much assistance as possible/reasonable in selecting safe and appropriate speeds.



DfT said 12%. I couldn't agree less that we should be concentrating on the very worst crashes. For a start they are mostly freak crashes in one way or another and we learn little from them. Oh it's be great if you could address parameters from fatal crashes while leaving everything else alone, but of course you can't usually do that. Speed enforcement is a very good example - It affects everyone EXCEPT those causing fatal crashes. (Well, largely.) Crashes are about 1,000 times more common than fatal crashes.

The Health and safety people realised years ago that you HAVE to work on the errors at the lowest level in the (Heinrich) accident triangle. If you expend efforts on the low level errors that lead to crashes the whole accident triangle moves down. And we know that most of the errors that lead to crashes are simple errors of observation and judgement that live in the driver skills domain.

As far as policing is concerned, the greatest gains come from identifying those with shortfalls in the driver attitude domain.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety