Eater Sundae Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 As I understand it cameras are installed when a particular stretch of road has had a certain number of KSIs in the preceeding 3 (maybe 4) years..it is possible that just one accident has caused this (not even forced to be speed related)..prior to this event the road may have seen no KSIs.. because the KSI threshold has been reached,a camera is installed...in the next couple of years the road goes back to it's old benign self...hey presto the camera has reduced KSIs...no one is "fiddling" stats but I'm not sure they're giving the full picture.. Yes, I understand what you mean. You say this could happen, but does it? When organisations such as TRL use crash data for their statistical analysis, I wondered whether anyone challenged the pro camera stats. If there truly is faulty analysis, I would have expected some groups with opposing views to have tried to highlight these faults. ---------- Post added 24-01-2013 at 14:51 ---------- As I understand it cameras are installed when a particular stretch of road has had a certain number of KSIs in the preceeding 3 (maybe 4) years..it is possible that just one accident has caused this (not even forced to be speed related)..prior to this event the road may have seen no KSIs.. because the KSI threshold has been reached,a camera is installed...in the next couple of years the road goes back to it's old benign self...hey presto the camera has reduced KSIs...no one is "fiddling" stats but I'm not sure they're giving the full picture..there's a road near home,,used to be a 60mph limit..no accidents for years...a couple of years ago a drunk driver went off a bend at stupi o'clock in the morning and killed his passenger..subsequently the limit was reduced to 40mph..no more accidents..County Council say "Look lower speed limit means fewer accidents" ignoring the fact that there weren't any previously and that if there's been a 10mph limit it wouldn't have prevented the one that did happen...sorry for the ramble... Now seen the rest of your post. Yes I can see how that MIGHT skew the opinion that the camera and the speed limit change has actually improved the apparent stats. It depends how much the data is used to justify calling it an improvement. I'm curious if anyone is actually able to show that any particular conclusions are not valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 Yes, I understand what you mean. You say this could happen, but does it? When organisations such as TRL use crash data for their statistical analysis, I wondered whether anyone challenged the pro camera stats. If there truly is faulty analysis, I would have expected some groups with opposing views to have tried to highlight these faults. ---------- Post added 24-01-2013 at 14:51 ---------- Now seen the rest of your post. Yes I can see how that MIGHT skew the opinion that the camera and the speed limit change has actually improved the apparent stats. It depends how much the data is used to justify calling it an improvement. I'm curious if anyone is actually able to show that any particular conclusions are not valid. If you have half an hour have a read here.. http://speedcamerareport.co.uk/index.html I'd prefer to be given the whole truth,just like yourself...it's wrong to fudge things to suit..that goes for both sides of this argument really.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 If you have half an hour have a read here.. http://speedcamerareport.co.uk/index.html I'd prefer to be given the whole truth,just like yourself...it's wrong to fudge things to suit..that goes for both sides of this argument really.. Thanks, I'll take a look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xt500 Posted January 24, 2013 Share Posted January 24, 2013 What has your anecdote (not facts) about a driver got anything to do with speed cameras? Nothing, you're just clutching at straws, just like with the name calling. Like has been already said, you're nothing more than an armchair expert with an opinion. You don't have any facts behind you, nor any industry knowledge. Have you considered all the other factors in deciding a road's speed limit - road noise impacting on houses for one, road material for another? Nope, thought not. When you say facts do you mean i need to copy and paste something from a goverment web site? What makes you think im an armchair expert? You have no clue who i am or what i know but this is certain,i know alot more than you do about what goes on on our roads.If that wasnt the case then your posts would even occasionally carry some substance but they never ever do. Im not sure doing 70,000-120,000 miles a year on our roads makes me an armchair expert but it does make me aware of exactly what i see every day and if you cant judge by someone who has vast experience and qualification then who can you judge by.Someone like you with posts that exactly mimic someone elses web site? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gym_rat Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Give us some proper facts to go on please then we can properly judge. tell you what, why don`t you go first and post some facts, any thread will do. ---------- Post added 25-01-2013 at 07:29 ---------- Then of course you get pointless posts like this Im sure everyone above the age of 10 knows what they do but the real issue is wether as a one trick pony of road safety do they work? I say no far from it and actually have had a serious negeative effect of some drivers attitudes which in turn is causing more serious accidents. One example is the drivers who while judging others speeds take it upon them selfs to accelerate while another driver was doing a perfectly safe overtake quickly turning it from a safe pass to very very dangerous one without any thought for the safety of those undertaking the pass and of the oncoming traffic who are put unnessercerily at risk.Head ons are the accidents which are most likley to kill out of most of the accident senarios but it is happening and many many drivers have experienced this. So while your bleating about a few MPH over the speed limit which is a danger to nobody your assisiting the idiots into the frame of mind that puts the rest of us seriously at risk. I know you only see things in a simple way but that doesnt mean things are simple! okay - so your saying having a device that detects people breaking the law driving over the speed limit makes us all drive over the speed limit but when someone tries to overtake us it`s our fault the other driver will die as a result. and you say the rest of the worlds mad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 When you say facts do you mean i need to copy and paste something from a goverment web site? What makes you think im an armchair expert? You have no clue who i am or what i know but this is certain,i know alot more than you do about what goes on on our roads.If that wasnt the case then your posts would even occasionally carry some substance but they never ever do. Im not sure doing 70,000-120,000 miles a year on our roads makes me an armchair expert but it does make me aware of exactly what i see every day and if you cant judge by someone who has vast experience and qualification then who can you judge by.Someone like you with posts that exactly mimic someone elses web site? That's all very nice, but once again you're missing the point. Go back to the very first post. Its about doing 39 in a built up area with a 30 mph limit in Renishaw. Try and justify that if you can rather than going off on a tangent and boasting about how many miles you did last year. Incidentally I used to drive around the country for a living and did similar mileage but don't feel the need to boast about it or use it as some kind of "I drive more than you so I must be better than you" excuse. I see taxi drivers every day who must do several tens of thousands of miles yet they still do unannounced U turns and don't bother indicating, so you can't equate lots of driving with good, courteous driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 120,000 miles a year? 328 miles a day, every day. Pretty impressive. Every single day, no weekends off or anything. Assuming motorway speeds that's a minimum of 5 hours, every day, 7 days a week. Maybe someone is fibbing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Every single day, no weekends off or anything. Assuming motorway speeds that's a minimum of 5 hours, every day, 7 days a week. Maybe someone is fibbing. His fuel bill must be horrendous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Ralge Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 And when you account for the regression to the mean effect? I was only saying to my mate last night in the pub that "regression to mean" is really over-rated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 26, 2013 Share Posted January 26, 2013 I was only saying to my mate last night in the pub that "regression to mean" is really over-rated. Hmmm, I suspect that not many people really understand what it means. Which is necessary first to be able to 'rate' it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.