Safe Speed Forums

Just read this statement on the CSCP website, thanks to which we can now all proceed more safely....

"The most common cause of accidents is failing to judge the speed and direction of the other vehicle before a manouvre (Callaghan's spelling again ) followed by careless, reckless or in a hurry"

(My bolds)

So failing to judge speed and direction are not classed as "careless"?

Is there still a legal definition of "reckless" - thought it was "dangerous" now?

"In a hurry" - the mind boggles

No mention of exceeding a posted speed limit though

No wonder deaths are up in Cumbria with this sort of nonsense being peddled about

_________________
That's how Nazi Germany started. They'll be burning books next. (Brian Noble, Wigan coach - updated 20/4/06!!).

You missed this little gem:

Now WHY OCTOBER 2003, when they started in March? And despite the drop in the average, MORE people DIED in 2006 than at any other time during their stewardship!

And in a dodgy survey funded by speeding fines:

Which just goes to show that despite 75% of people agreeing that CSCP activities should be SAVING lives, they actually oversaw MORE deaths in 2006.

They must get paid well to be able to sleep at night without that plucking at their consciences.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Now that CSCP's gravy train is gliding to a halt, how long do you reckon we'll have to wait before Callaghan and his cronies get redeployed?

One thing is for sure - it'll be the camera operators on the street who will get their dole cards. Kevin, Steve and JJ will no doubt slide into another cushy number.....

Edited to eliminate the phraseology that may get the board taken off air. Roger, 23-2-07, 12:40

...I hear there are job openings at Road Pricing HQ

Eidted to eliminate offense phrase from quote (which has also been edited from the original). Roger, 23-2-07, 12:40

Gents

I trust you appreciate what - and why - the above posts were edited. Please let me know off group if you have a problem with my actions.

None at all. It would take too long to explain to the new members, and the rest of us know the truth anyway...

No problem whatsoever! I can't even remember what it said previously, and mine was only a facetious throwaway comment!

Much of which is crystalised in this BBC debate, which involved many of the parties. http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2005/09/07/insideout_speedgun_feature.shtml
If Robin wishes to read up, you need to start at the bottom and work your way up... which kind of sets me thinking about the topic we dare not mention! (seabed etc!)

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Anything to do with a submariner being depthcharged and having to sit it out on the bottom ??( PM would be acceptable, in case of poo on feet.)

Page 9 of todays Westmorland Gazette has this months installment of the CSCP tale of woe.



Note that it is able to show the number of KSI's throughout 2007 despite the fact it is only February.
They even manage to pass off the highest number of deaths on our roads since 1999, and second highest since 1993 with a reassurance that seriously injured stats are falling.
They appear to take the credit for this, giving none of the credit to the raft of in-car safety features fitted in todays cars, such as airbags, side impact protection, and seatbelt pre-tensioners.
Reassuringly for somebody in their 40's, they tell us that almost a quarter of those killed were in the 16 - 20 age group, indicating a reduced risk for other age groups?

They certainly dont offer anything to reduce the number of young drivers (and their passengers) killed on our roads!
They do make reference to it being better NOT to drive on Tuesdays, Fridays and Sundays.

What an amazing use to put all those statistics to!
Finally, I have figured out what the background image to the advert represents - it's the truth getting bent!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Number of people killed or injured in Cumbria, 1979–2004

Killed Seriously or slightly injured
1979 66 3,082
1980 95 2,995
1981 62 2,900
1982 65 2,814
1983 64 2,618
1984 62 2,705
1985 53 2,687
1986 52 2,742
1987 72 2,708
1988 67 2,754
1989 60 2,796
1990 88 2,932
1991 75 2,532
1992 64 2,469
1993 61 2,557
1994 46 2,545
1995 54 2,634
1996 48 2,628
1997 52 2,977
1998 48 2,798
1999 62 2,928
2000 55 2,725
2001 47 2,621
2002 49 2,868
2003 54 2,641
2004 57 2,685

Not much difference when you lump seriously injured with slightly injured, instead of lumping the fatals instead!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

CSCP

SCHOOL REPORT

years / avg Killed / Seriously or slightly injured
95-98 51 / 2716
99-02 53 / 2786
03-06 54 / 2563

03-05 killed avg compared to / years / +/- %
52 / 95-98 / 51 / +2%
52 / 99-02 / 53 / -2%

03-06 killed avg compared to / years / +/- %
54 / 95-98 / 51 / +7%
54 / 99-02 / 53 / +2%

03-05 SSI's avg compared to / years / +/- %
2635 / 95-98 / 2759 / -5%
2635 / 99-02 / 2786 / -5%

03-06 SSI's avg compared to / years / +/- %
2563 / 95-98 / 2759 / -8%
2563 / 99-02 / 2786 / -8%

2006 compared to 95-98 99-02 03-05
Killed 61 +20% +14% +17%
SSI 2349 -15% -15% -11%

Last term (06) was a good and bad for the partnership since taking over in this reporting period 03-06.

Whilst we have been able to increase the 5% improvement of the first three terms (03-05) in SSI's by over 50%.

We have unfortunately fallen behind our gains on the number of people killed.

So to conclude. Less people are being reported as having a Serious or Slight injury. But more people are dying.

____________

The way I see the figures being presented. The good news talked up the bad down.

If it was not so serious. The way that the CSCP reported their stats would be laughable.

The lower injury and higher death count fits in with my model of the slightly reduced free travelling speed compounded by the (generally) slightly lower but occasionally very much higher impact speed caused by the distraction of the camera.

I couldn't make that model credible (we've been here before haven't we?).

Have you got it as a spreadsheet or something?

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

Yes, we've been here before. Yes I know you couldn't make the model credible - but it worked for me. I've not done much with the spreadsheet in a few months (or is it years?!). I'll try to resurrect it. IIRR I zipped it up and sent it to you a long while ago. I doubt it's been developed much further. Let me look.....

Looking at the figures, basically apart from 1980 and 1990/1991 which were horrendously worse than surrounding years (any ideas why? Was there a really bad accident in 1980?), there's been very little change in the fatals total over 25 years

Ok traffic volume has increased (doubled?) since 1979, but the early 80's typical vehicle was built of plywood compared to today's average vehicle

All those road improvements as well

I recall IanH mentioning the reduction after 1991 could have been due to increased Traffic Patrols at that time, but in practice it looks just like RTTM?

_________________
That's how Nazi Germany started. They'll be burning books next. (Brian Noble, Wigan coach - updated 20/4/06!!).

I developed the model that predicted this back in Jan 2004. I've just resurrected it. I'm sure it could be improved upon - free to anyone with Excel capability and an inquisitive mind.

The down side is, it is 50MB (but compresses down to 6M with a standard zip).

Briefly, it allows entry of mean and SD of different types of vehicles and different types of road (pre and post scams). I have also estimated likelihood of KSI and death for different speeds and different vehicle types (for newer and older vehicles). All this data can be tweaked as required. Also provided are percentage likelihood of concentration pre and post scams.

I originally assumed a 10% reduction in free travelling speed, and a 1% worse concentration factor for most vehicle types from pre to post scam. These factors are remarkably sensitive.

The model then runs simulation of 1000 accidents, randomly generated (weighted according to a table of probable vehicles/pedestrians hit on given roads) for each of prescam, postscam and younger and older vehicle types, and graphs the comparisons.

Anyone want it to have a play?

Record numbers of fatalities, and CSCP are putting this quote on their site and press releases!

What a sick and twisted logic!!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

But then we all know how sick, twisted and cynical the staff there are.