Home PageFacebookRSS News Feed
PocketGPS
Web
Read the current newsletter! Weekly
Newsletter
SatNav,GPS,Navigation
Get Speed Camera Warnings For SatNavs Get Speed Camera Warnings For Android Get Speed Camera Warnings For iPhone
Helpless Speed Cameras Witness Huge Increase in Speeding


Article by: robert
Date: 15 Aug 2010

pocketgpsworld.comThe Independent has reported that many of Oxford's drivers have reverted to their old habits of speeding now that they think that their local speed cameras have stopped spying on them.

The thing is, two of the cameras haven't actually stopped. For a five-day test period the gatsos were left running just to see whether the widely publicised switch-off gave carte blanche to drivers to start speeding again.

The drivers won't actually face prosecution as the initiative was purely a test - a test that caught 110 drivers travelling at more than 35mph along the 30mph A44 Woodstock Road. That's a whopping 18% more than those caught during an average seven day period.

The recent decommissioning of Oxford's cameras were blamed on government funding cuts. Oxfordshire had to cut 13m from its overall budget.
Comments
Posted by h5djr on Sun Aug 15, 2010 12:13 pm Reply with quote

But were there any more accidents.....

Or was the traffic just going a little faster.


Dave R (h5djr)

TomTom XL + Audi A3 (with navigation)

 
Posted by Wazza_G on Sun Aug 15, 2010 2:07 pm Reply with quote

They can't tell you that... It's commercially sensitive information. Rolling Eyes


Be alert.. This country needs more lerts.

 
Posted by Guivre46 on Sun Aug 15, 2010 4:39 pm Reply with quote

If I can do the maths [not my strong point - see other posts], then they logged 110 drivers exceeding 35 mph, when normally they log 90. In my distant recollection of statistics, I think these numbers lack statistical significance ie too small to draw a firm conclusion.

"Huge increase" seems a bit strong.


Mike R [aka Wyvern46]
Go 530T - unsupported
Go550 Live [not renewed]
Kia In-dash Tomtom

 
Posted by Skippy on Sun Aug 15, 2010 6:03 pm Reply with quote

News Team Wrote:
The drivers won't actually face prosecution as the initiative was purely a test - a test that caught 110 drivers travelling at more than 35mph along the 30mph A44 Woodstock Road. That's a whopping 18% more than those caught during an average seven day period.


Sigh. More lies, damned lies and statistics.

So they have a camera site which clocks 4680 speeding offences per year. That's an average of 90 per week. Some weeks, it might be more, other weeks it might be less. In good weather (Summer), light traffic (during the school holidays), clear visibility you will get more speeders. In the dark, rainy days of winter you will get less speeders.

Taking a 5 day sample and using it to declare that the number of speeders is higher than the average for the whole year is a statistical nonsense unless they can show all the data for the last year including the peaks and troughs in the number of speeders.

Really, all they need to do is keep all the gatsos switched on so they still flash and continue to run cameras in a small number of them. Then people will be playing Russian roulette and the majority of them would still slow down, not knowing if the camera was loaded or not.


Gone fishing!

 
Posted by BigPerk on Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:29 pm Reply with quote

I agree with the sentiment about careless use of statistics, especially in the hands of the ill-informed or ill-intentioned, but I'm not sure of the criticism here. The original quote says

Quote:
... during an average seven day period...
I can't see that this is at all the same as Skippy's quote
Quote:
...average for the whole year...
There may still be a discussion point here, but I don't think it's THIS one!! Laughing


David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360)

 
Posted by M8TJT on Sun Aug 15, 2010 7:52 pm Reply with quote

BigPerk Wrote:
during an average seven day period...
I can't see that this is at all the same as Skippy's quote
Quote:
...average for the whole year...
There may still be a discussion point here, but I don't think it's THIS one!! Laughing[/quote]Although I agree thet the 7 day period that the average is calculated should be the same 7 day test period, the article actually says hat they 'caught' 18% more prople in 5 days that the average 7 day period.
But my overall thoughts are:- Does this 'test' itself pass the 'so what?' test? Have accidents which the cam was put there to reduce, increased? If not, they were put there under false pretences in the first place. Shocked


 
Posted by BigPerk on Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:13 pm Reply with quote

Ahh, I should've gone to specsavers, M8TJT Embarassed (and so should whoever wrote the article in the first place). I reckon that to be an increase of just under 12% per day, a bit different from the 18% originally quoted. So Skippy's certainly right about 'damned lies and statistics...' Laughing (especially in the hands of journalists, who usually qualify as both ill-informed AND ill-intentioned! Twisted Evil)


David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360)

 
Posted by M8TJT on Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:43 pm Reply with quote

Pardon? They caught 110 people in 5 days (22/day) where they caught 90 people in a 7 day period 12.85/day). That's an increase of a little over 71% (if my maths is correct). Why didn't they junp on this rather more sensational figure? Perhaps they also thought that it did not pass the 'SO WHAT?' test.


 
Posted by Guivre46 on Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:25 pm Reply with quote

Over such a short period the numbers are not a good statistical sample. I'd suggest they take Sept/Oct/Nov number and compare it to the same period last year. Also the spread of speeds clocked would be interesting, and any accident information, such as day of week time of day, and whether vehicular, pedestrian, motorcycle, pedal cycle etc.

As has been said "instant' news drives stories, real information takes too long.


Mike R [aka Wyvern46]
Go 530T - unsupported
Go550 Live [not renewed]
Kia In-dash Tomtom

 
Posted by M8TJT on Sun Aug 15, 2010 9:37 pm Reply with quote

Guivre46 Wrote:
and whether ....., pedestrian, ....., pedal cycle etc..
Pedestrians and push bikes faster than 35mph Shocked Very Happy


 
Posted by DennisN on Sun Aug 15, 2010 11:22 pm Reply with quote

Skippy Wrote:
Really, all they need to do is keep all the gatsos switched on so they still flash and continue to run cameras in a small number of them. Then people will be playing Russian roulette and the majority of them would still slow down, not knowing if the camera was loaded or not.
It has always been the case that there are more camera boxes than there are cameras, so it always was Russian Roulette - when I was young, I paid the bills for putting up the first ones in Avon and I can't remember the numbers but it must have been something like one camera to four boxes.


Dennis

Where there's a will .... there's a wake.

 
Click here to view more comments...
Reply to topic

CamerAlert Apps



iOS QR Code






Android QR Code







Terms & Privacy

GPS Shopping