New SPECS install on notorious stretch but why no barriers

[Darren]

Peterborough Today report that work on a new SPECS installation has begun along a stretch of the notorious Forty Foot Bank Road between Ramsey and Chetteris in Cambridgeshire where six lives have been lost in the past three years.

A perfectly sensible use of the technology you would be forgiven for thinking until you discover that this road runs directly alongside a river and there is no barrier between the carriageway and the river itself. And the lives lost have been a result of vehicles entering the river, often in the dark or as a result of heavy fog.

So instead of installing crash barriers that would prevent vehicles from leaving the road they instead choose to install a SPECS system that will be less effective but will of course raise revenue.

Other sections of this road are protected by barriers so why has SPECS been chosen to protect this section?
_________________
Darren Griffin

[gingercat]

The reason would be because this is a popular boy-racer stretch... People drive like complete nutters along it.

[MikeB]

This is actually a common theme, and if you think about it makes perfect sense from a pen-pusher accountant's point of view.

When you look at a lot of places that speed cameras have been installed, you will see obvious defects in road planning or maintenance. It is far cheaper to install a £300,000 speed camera system and reduce the speed limit than to tackle the real issues of poor planning, design and bad maintenance.
_________________
Mike Barrett

[Darren]

And it still won't prevent cars ending up in the river.
_________________
Darren Griffin

[MaFt]

[pcaouolte]

Barriers are not likely to be effective on this stretch of road unless they are installed on very deep concrete piles at enormous expense. The road runs very close to the edge of the river, normal barrier support posts would just be pushed into the river when struck by a vehicle.

The safest solution would be to move the road away from the river but this would also be prohibitively expensive.

If the cameras cause drivers to lower vehicle speeds then small driving mistakes will be less likely to result in vehicles entering the water.

I am not a fan of cameras but I can see that they may provide the cheapest solution in this case.
_________________
Paul

[GerryC]

Also, the LACK of barriers puts more responsibility on the driver to be careful driving. If there are barriers, the driver can think "it's OK the barrier will stop me" when it won't necessarily.

Are there any of those "x accidents here" signs up saying how many have driven into the river?

Is there an extra road on any satnavs there - you know "my satnav told me to turn there"?
_________________
Gerry
TomTom730T
Cameralert for Android
Brodit ProClip mount

[M8TJT]

[kensaunders]

I for one absolutely hate unnecessary cameras; HOWEVER as up to last year I had to travel on this stretch of road daily to work for 4 years.

I am not a slowcoach, however people who travel on this stretch would appreciate, that the only safe speed in good conditions is aprox 60mph.

The usual thing that happens is that some nutters fly past at 80-90, not 70 but 80-90 and they seem to relish the challenge of beating you to the next corner.

This is in my honest view the only way ahead, being average speed cameras is better and more efficient then static ones.

It will not stop the accidents in thick fog, but what would?

[Darren]

I've said previously that I am generally in favour of average speed cams whereas I'm wholly against the other types.

But whilst in this case I accept it may help, there is no substitute for a decent barrier to keep cars on the carriageway should the inevitable occur.
_________________
Darren Griffin

[MikeB]

[Darren]

[MaFt]

[W90BHP]

Barriers are meant to protect other surrounding things (property or vehicles on the opposite side in the case of a dual carriageway) rather than to keep a vehicle on the road. Keeping a vehicle on a carriageway inevitably involves barrier bounceback resulting in striking other traffic. Better to let a single vehicle leave the carriageway than "take out" a number of other vehicles too. That may be harsh when a river is next to the road but it's a risk that every driver using the road should assess and therefore manage their driving behaviour accordingly.

There are even sections of motorway where this is true, eg the M62 where the carriageways part around Stott Hall Farm on top of the Pennines. There is no barrier between lane 3 and the fields between the carriageways, except where there would be a risk of third party property damage (eg above the access underpass). Vehicles leaving the carriageway skate to a gentle stop down a grass banking rather than striking a barrier and potentially causing greater injury.

Martin
_________________
LG G4: Android 6 : Viewranger : CoPilot : Waze
TomTom Go 730T : Traffic subscription long expired
Nokia E61 : Nokia GPS : TomTom Navigator 6 : Retired from duty
iPAQ 3970 : Navman Sleeve : CoPilot 4 : Somewhere in the loft

[bogbody]

I travel on the relevant section of the 40ft almost every day.
Barriers wont help because there is no foundation available to fix them securely in place.
The bank is so weak that part of it collapsed into the river.
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/Forty-Foot-closed-and-flood.3676142.jp
Excess speed has been the cause of fatalities (according to the Police report 80mph in thick fog allegedly). It's one of the few roads where SLOW DOWN really does apply.
You don't have to use the 40ft, there is an alternative route via Benwick if you want to speed.
The message is quite simple, use the Forty Foot SLOWLY.

We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?.
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!