Safe Speed Forums

I recently enquired as to why GATSO's had been installed on the A65 Between Horsforth and Rawdon. I was querying the requirement for these Cameras. I got this reply.


Thank you for your enquiry to the safety cameras website.

In the monitoring period 1997-2003 prior to installation of cameras,
casualty statistics for the A65 at Rawdon were 90 crashes resulting in 12
fatalities (or near-fatalities) + numerous serious and slight casualties.

The qualifying "threshold" for installation of fixed cameras is

1. At least 4 fatalities and serious injuries per km in the
last 3 years
2. At least 8 personal injury collisions (serious and slight
injuries) per km in the last 3 years
3. Causation factors show that speeding was a contributory
factor in some or all collisions - collision sites that are not speed
related are de-selected
4. At least 20% of drivers are exceeding the speed limit
5. Excess driving speed must be at least 10% above the speed
limit plus 2mph (e.g. 35mph in a 30mph zone) for free-flowing traffic
excluding any rush hour periods.

So you can see that this route more than exceeds these criteria.

Remember, the familiar 'yellow box' speed control safety cameras are only
located on roads with high numbers of speed related crashes in which people
have been killed or seriously injured.
If you see a camera, you are in a casualty danger zone!
If you like I'll add you to the exclusive list of individuals who receive
"insider information" on safety camera developments in West Yorkshire.


Philip J Gwynne MIPR MCIM


I have now replied With the Following.

Hello Philip,

Thank you for your prompt response. I am confused by your reply
however. You
state that for Cameras to be installed there must be 4 fatalities and
serious
injuries Per KM per year. I believe the bench mark is Fatalities not
Injuries or
"Near" fatalities. Using "KSI" is considered to be tweaking the figures
by
adding up injuries that would not normally be counted. Also allowing
for you not
using figures Tweaked I would have these questions.

1. How many of those incidents occurred at speeds below the speed
limit, But at
an inappropriate speed for the conditions?

2. In the case of incidents where the vehicle was above the speed
limit, have
many of the incidents had, as there primary cause another factor. I.E.
Drink
driving, "Joy" riders or inattention on behalf of other road users?

I also find it puzzling that so many GATSO's have been stationed on
this road.
It seems excessive even if all the reasons given were correct. One
appears to be
stationed to catch drivers unaware as they enter a "30" limit".

Please also not that one of the cameras appears to face oncoming
traffic on the
side of the road it is mounted on. This could lead to drivers and
riders being
temporarily blinded if a Vehicle on the other side "triggers" the unit.
Hardly a
"Safe" mode of operation!

I look forward to your reply and would like to included on the list."

_________________
Life in the Air Age isn't all the Brochures Say...

Lies! They put gatsos on new roads, they put them on the motorway when there's roadworks, and then this bloke says that gatso = 'casualty danger zone'? 'Cash generation zone' more like.

_________________
-mike[F]
Caught in the rush of the crowd, lost in a wall of sound..

Confusingly Philip (or his Lacky) answer within My mail.

Hello Philip,

Thank you for your prompt response. I am confused by your reply
however. You

state that for Cameras to be installed there must be 4 fatalities and
serious
injuries Per KM per year. I believe the bench mark is Fatalities not
Injuries or
"Near" fatalities. Using "KSI" is considered to be tweaking the figures
by
adding up injuries that would not normally be counted. Also allowing
for you
not
using figures Tweaked I would have these questions.
The unit of measurement that we are obliged to use is KSI (killed or
seriously injured). This is defined as a person who is pronounced dead
at
the scene, is dead on arrival at hospital, or who succumbs to their
injuries
within 30 days of the crash.

1. How many of those incidents occurred at speeds below the speed
limit, But
at
an inappropriate speed for the conditions?
The causation factors of all crashes are investigated as part of the
case
for installation of cameras. As stated in my previous email causation
factors must show that speeding was a contributory factor in some or
all
collisions - collision sites that are not speed related are
de-selected.

2. In the case of incidents where the vehicle was above the speed
limit,
have
many of the incidents had, as there primary cause another factor. I.E.
Drink

driving, "Joy" riders or inattention on behalf of other road users?
Yes - previous response applies

I also find it puzzling that so many GATSO's have been stationed on
this
road.
It seems excessive even if all the reasons given were correct.
Every casualty "black spot" is surveyed to determine how many cameras
are
required to help keep drivers safe. Factors taken into consideration
include: line of sight, road topography & layout, numbers and nature of
junctions/traffic lights/pedestrian crossings etc, location of
buildings,
intrusion & environmental factors and similar

One appears to be
stationed to catch drivers unaware as they enter a "30" limit".
Drivers are expected to know the speed limits of the road they are on.
Cameras are there to help keep down speed-related casualties, not to
catch
speeding motorists

Please also not that one of the cameras appears to face oncoming
traffic on
the
side of the road it is mounted on. This could lead to drivers and
riders
being
temporarily blinded if a Vehicle on the other side "triggers" the unit.
Hardly a
"Safe" mode of operation!
Unlikely! I think you're clutching at straws here!!

I look forward to your reply and would like to included on the list.
Thank you, consider it done

Jeremy Hunt

I am preparing a reply to posted!.

_________________
Life in the Air Age isn't all the Brochures Say...

Ok I thought about it and sent This reply.

Hello Philip,

Again thanks for your prompt response.

Qouting from the DOT Research Paper dated 11 Feb 2003 Seriously Injured
is

"An Injury For Which The Person is detained In Hospital as an
In-Patient, or any
of the following injuries wheather or not the casualty is detained in
Hospital:fractures, concussion, internal injuries, crushings, severe
cuts and
lacerations, severe general shock requiring medical treatment AND
injuries
causing causing death 30 or more days after the accident."

The Capitals are mine. Not quite what you intimate in your reply, which
for the
sake of clarity should not have its replies embedded within MY mail.

On the 13th of May I passed A GATSO facing towards ME on MY side of the
road at
approx 19:50. Before deriding Me have the unit checked. I don't believe
it is
active as road markings are not in place. I will be checking and if
necessary
taking Digital photos of the unit Myself.

If you misunderstood me I apologise, I am asking for the stats that
justify the
GATSO's, not your explanation that they exist. I require the PROOF that
you have
the stats and are prepared to back them up.

The mere existance of the "yellow" boxes is no longer considered Proof
of a
"Incident" zone. These units have now acquired a reputation and You now
have to
prove they are justified. Just because you have within the name
"Safety" no
longer proves that is the usage to which these units is being put. Not
being a
serving Police Officer with experience of road conditions also
undermines any
authority you attempt to glean from the tenuous link you have with West
Yorks
Police.

I look forward to your reply

Jeremy Hunt

_________________
Life in the Air Age isn't all the Brochures Say...