Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Speed camera on Woolwich Road

Crusty54
Crusty54 Posts: 3,276
in Not Sports Related
Just walked past the McDonalds heading towards Charlton. 

The Police were using one of their new high tech speed cameras that has video that can be used in court. Tickets to anyone speeding are sent out automatically. 

The Mayor paid for the new cameras. 

Worth remembering that much of the road in the area has a 20mph speed limited. 
«134

Comments

  • boggzy
    boggzy Posts: 3,636
    Yep just past it - I was going the opposite way (towards Town).. easy to forget it's 20 there, they'll make a mint.
  • Crusty54
    Crusty54 Posts: 3,276
    cafcfan said:
    20 mph limits on main roads are crazy. Here's why. Let's assume the section of road is one mile long to make the maths easy. At 20mph it will take three minutes to complete the mile. At the old speed of 30mph it would have been 2 minutes. So, as long as the traffic volumes stay the same, there will be 50% more vehicles in the same length of road at any given time. This means the traffic will be heavier, congestion will be worse, getting out of side roads will be more difficult, pedestrians will have more problems crossing the road, cars will be using more fuel because they are in a lower gear and pollution will be worse.
    All of which kind of demonstrates that all the mayor is really interested in is making money from motorists.
    It's about reducing the number of deaths when pedestrians are hit by cars.
  • rananegra
    rananegra Posts: 3,717
    There's a 20 limit on Rushey Green outside Lewisham Hospital, with speed cameras. Still get idiots trying to race you along there but most people seem to have got the message. Oddly enough all back streets in Lewisham borough are meant to be 20mph. There are no speed cameras, I live on a hill people regularly do 40 up or down it. If they were really interested in making a mint they could stick some cameras up on the back roads. 
  • MrLargo
    MrLargo Posts: 8,015
    Crusty54 said:
    cafcfan said:
    20 mph limits on main roads are crazy. Here's why. Let's assume the section of road is one mile long to make the maths easy. At 20mph it will take three minutes to complete the mile. At the old speed of 30mph it would have been 2 minutes. So, as long as the traffic volumes stay the same, there will be 50% more vehicles in the same length of road at any given time. This means the traffic will be heavier, congestion will be worse, getting out of side roads will be more difficult, pedestrians will have more problems crossing the road, cars will be using more fuel because they are in a lower gear and pollution will be worse.
    All of which kind of demonstrates that all the mayor is really interested in is making money from motorists.
    It's about reducing the number of deaths when pedestrians are hit by cars.
    Can't find a single news report of a pedestrian being hit by a car on that stretch of road. It's certainly not an accident blackspot.

    I think it's about making money.
  • AddicksAddict
    AddicksAddict Posts: 15,958
    MrLargo said:
    Crusty54 said:
    cafcfan said:
    20 mph limits on main roads are crazy. Here's why. Let's assume the section of road is one mile long to make the maths easy. At 20mph it will take three minutes to complete the mile. At the old speed of 30mph it would have been 2 minutes. So, as long as the traffic volumes stay the same, there will be 50% more vehicles in the same length of road at any given time. This means the traffic will be heavier, congestion will be worse, getting out of side roads will be more difficult, pedestrians will have more problems crossing the road, cars will be using more fuel because they are in a lower gear and pollution will be worse.
    All of which kind of demonstrates that all the mayor is really interested in is making money from motorists.
    It's about reducing the number of deaths when pedestrians are hit by cars.
    Can't find a single news report of a pedestrian being hit by a car on that stretch of road. It's certainly not an accident blackspot.

    I think it's about making money.
    Stick to the limit, deny that greedy, grasping Mayor his pocket money. Can’t stick to the limit, not aware of it?  What the feck are you doing on the road?
  • Leuth
    Leuth Posts: 23,501
    Sadiq Khan gets an awful lot of disrespect for someone who's cleaned up London more than probably any other individual ever 
  • cafc999
    cafc999 Posts: 4,991
    He wants congestion so that he can increase the congestion charge in the future

  • cafc4life
    cafc4life Posts: 4,670
    Leuth said:
    Sadiq Khan gets an awful lot of disrespect for someone who's cleaned up London more than probably any other individual ever 
    He is a bellend though
  • boggzy
    boggzy Posts: 3,636
    cafcfan said:
    20 mph limits on main roads are crazy. Here's why. Let's assume the section of road is one mile long to make the maths easy. At 20mph it will take three minutes to complete the mile. At the old speed of 30mph it would have been 2 minutes. So, as long as the traffic volumes stay the same, there will be 50% more vehicles in the same length of road at any given time. This means the traffic will be heavier, congestion will be worse, getting out of side roads will be more difficult, pedestrians will have more problems crossing the road, cars will be using more fuel because they are in a lower gear and pollution will be worse.
    All of which kind of demonstrates that all the mayor is really interested in is making money from motorists.
    Absolutely right. The 20mph thing is ridiculous, and *completely* about making money.

  • Sponsored links:



  • cafc999
    cafc999 Posts: 4,991
    Leuth said:
    Sadiq Khan gets an awful lot of disrespect for someone who's cleaned up London more than probably any other individual ever 
    A few things to ask before people champion Sadiq

    1. How many Mayors have London had before he came into office? 
    2. Is he performing better than the previous Mayors eg crime rates, TFL, etc etc ?
    3. How many of these Mayors tried to clean up the air?
    I know he has had covid and Crossrail to deal with, but I do think spends money recklessly = the new London Assembly for instance and the many cycle lanes that get rarely used (Molesworth St in Lewisham a prime example where he converted a lane of traffic into a cycle lane despite that road already having two cycle lanes)
  • boggzy
    boggzy Posts: 3,636
    Leuth said:
    Sadiq Khan gets an awful lot of disrespect for someone who's cleaned up London more than probably any other individual ever 
    He's cleaned up, alright.

    As to cleaning up the air:

    Long queues of vehicles now in single-file gridlock next to empty (out of peak-hours) cycle lanes:  Tower Hill - Westminster, Blackfriars Bridge etc all stuck in queues idling.

    Never-ending rows of Taxis waiting around Victoria exempt from any charge all with their engines on spewing out diesel.

    Vehicles in 20mph areas having to put on more revs in lower gears, hence more pollution and congestion as mentioned earlier. 

    Cleaner air indeed...
  • Chizz
    Chizz Posts: 28,464
    edited March 2022
    cafc999 said:
    Leuth said:
    Sadiq Khan gets an awful lot of disrespect for someone who's cleaned up London more than probably any other individual ever 
    A few things to ask before people champion Sadiq

    1. How many Mayors have London had before he came into office? 
    2. Is he performing better than the previous Mayors eg crime rates, TFL, etc etc ?
    3. How many of these Mayors tried to clean up the air?
    I know he has had covid and Crossrail to deal with, but I do think spends money recklessly = the new London Assembly for instance and the many cycle lanes that get rarely used (Molesworth St in Lewisham a prime example where he converted a lane of traffic into a cycle lane despite that road already having two cycle lanes)
    If you want to find fault with someone, don't compare them to a list of previous holders of their role which comprises Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson.  

    He's better in every respect than everyone else who has ever done the job.  That is not controversial.  But neither is it a definitive lauding of his achievements.  

    He's by far the best of a very, very bad group of London Mayors. 
  • Valiantphil
    Valiantphil Posts: 6,427
    Not forgetting that the emissions from the edge of the ULEZ probably just blow and fall out in the same pace they did anyway. 

    SK is just interested in getting money from drivers to spend on nonsense vanity projects. 
  • cafc999
    cafc999 Posts: 4,991
    Chizz said:
    cafc999 said:
    Leuth said:
    Sadiq Khan gets an awful lot of disrespect for someone who's cleaned up London more than probably any other individual ever 
    A few things to ask before people champion Sadiq

    1. How many Mayors have London had before he came into office? 
    2. Is he performing better than the previous Mayors eg crime rates, TFL, etc etc ?
    3. How many of these Mayors tried to clean up the air?
    I know he has had covid and Crossrail to deal with, but I do think spends money recklessly = the new London Assembly for instance and the many cycle lanes that get rarely used (Molesworth St in Lewisham a prime example where he converted a lane of traffic into a cycle lane despite that road already having two cycle lanes)
    If you want to find fault with someone, don't compare them to a list of previous holders of their role which comprises Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson.  

    He's better in every respect than everyone else who has ever done the job.  That is neither controversial.  But neither is it a definitive lauding of his achievements.  

    He's by far the best of a very, very bad group of London Mayors. 
    You are right - it is very easy to find fault and it's there on all three Mayors IMO.

    I honestly thought that Sadiq would be a breath of fresh air but for me, he has just been the same as the previous versions - rubbish. 

    For the record - the new London Assembly Building has still yet to be finished and there is no date set either, which means that is eating in to his £60m+ savings over five years claim. He never says that though?
  • soapy_jones
    soapy_jones Posts: 21,452
    His latest charge for mandatory tin foil hats to scatter moonbeams will cause a few eyebrows to be raised.
  • Leuth
    Leuth Posts: 23,501
    So anyway I've visited 'the scene'. It's clearly signposted, and 30, not 20. Facts shouldn't get in the way of a good story though!



  • stevexreeve
    stevexreeve Posts: 1,407
    cafcfan said:
    20 mph limits on main roads are crazy. Here's why. Let's assume the section of road is one mile long to make the maths easy. At 20mph it will take three minutes to complete the mile. At the old speed of 30mph it would have been 2 minutes. So, as long as the traffic volumes stay the same, there will be 50% more vehicles in the same length of road at any given time. This means the traffic will be heavier, congestion will be worse, getting out of side roads will be more difficult, pedestrians will have more problems crossing the road, cars will be using more fuel because they are in a lower gear and pollution will be worse.
    All of which kind of demonstrates that all the mayor is really interested in is making money from motorists.
    I have thought about this and I don't think it's true!

    If cars enter the new section of road with an average distance of 10 metres between them and slow down to 20mph there will still be an average of 10 metres between each car. 

    If there is an average distance of 10 metres between each car it doesn't matter how fast they are travelling. You've got exactly the same number of cars!

    The number of cars will in the section would only increase cars are forced to stop or constantly vary their speed for some reason.
  • Leeds_Addick
    Leeds_Addick Posts: 4,735
    cafc999 said:
    Chizz said:
    cafc999 said:
    Leuth said:
    Sadiq Khan gets an awful lot of disrespect for someone who's cleaned up London more than probably any other individual ever 
    A few things to ask before people champion Sadiq

    1. How many Mayors have London had before he came into office? 
    2. Is he performing better than the previous Mayors eg crime rates, TFL, etc etc ?
    3. How many of these Mayors tried to clean up the air?
    I know he has had covid and Crossrail to deal with, but I do think spends money recklessly = the new London Assembly for instance and the many cycle lanes that get rarely used (Molesworth St in Lewisham a prime example where he converted a lane of traffic into a cycle lane despite that road already having two cycle lanes)
    If you want to find fault with someone, don't compare them to a list of previous holders of their role which comprises Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson.  

    He's better in every respect than everyone else who has ever done the job.  That is neither controversial.  But neither is it a definitive lauding of his achievements.  

    He's by far the best of a very, very bad group of London Mayors. 
    You are right - it is very easy to find fault and it's there on all three Mayors IMO.

    I honestly thought that Sadiq would be a breath of fresh air but for me, he has just been the same as the previous versions - rubbish. 

    For the record - the new London Assembly Building has still yet to be finished and there is no date set either, which means that is eating in to his £60m+ savings over five years claim. He never says that though?
    Personally speaking the cycle lanes he’s put in have made a bigger positive impact on my life than anything else I can remember. They’ve transformed the way I travel around the city.
  • shirty5
    shirty5 Posts: 19,425
    Leuth said:
    So anyway I've visited 'the scene'. It's clearly signposted, and 30, not 20. Facts shouldn't get in the way of a good story though!



    Further down by the White Horse pub you will find 

  • Sponsored links:



  • sam3110
    sam3110 Posts: 21,615
    They've completely fucked that entire stretch of road from Deptford High Street to Woolwich ferry. Since putting in the cycle superhighway and the ULEZ, the traffic in the area, especially places like the Angerstein Roundabout, has been significantly worse. 
  • MrLargo
    MrLargo Posts: 8,015
    Leuth said:
    So anyway I've visited 'the scene'. It's clearly signposted, and 30, not 20. Facts shouldn't get in the way of a good story though!



    Fairly certain that's nowhere near the McDonalds on Woolwich Road. 
  • cafcfan
    cafcfan Posts: 11,234
    stevexreeve said:
    cafcfan said:
    20 mph limits on main roads are crazy. Here's why. Let's assume the section of road is one mile long to make the maths easy. At 20mph it will take three minutes to complete the mile. At the old speed of 30mph it would have been 2 minutes. So, as long as the traffic volumes stay the same, there will be 50% more vehicles in the same length of road at any given time. This means the traffic will be heavier, congestion will be worse, getting out of side roads will be more difficult, pedestrians will have more problems crossing the road, cars will be using more fuel because they are in a lower gear and pollution will be worse.
    All of which kind of demonstrates that all the mayor is really interested in is making money from motorists.
    I have thought about this and I don't think it's true!

    If cars enter the new section of road with an average distance of 10 metres between them and slow down to 20mph there will still be an average of 10 metres between each car. 

    If there is an average distance of 10 metres between each car it doesn't matter how fast they are travelling. You've got exactly the same number of cars!

    The number of cars will in the section would only increase cars are forced to stop or constantly vary their speed for some reason.
    I see what you are saying but I think you are wrong. First as vehicles slow down to twenty they will bunch up. The distance between vehicles will reduce a lot. They won't need the braking distance. The same way vehicle gaps diminish as they approach a red traffic light. Second, you need to factor in times when the road is less busy. The natural flow of traffic will just not happen any more.
  • Leuth
    Leuth Posts: 23,501
    MrLargo said:
    Leuth said:
    So anyway I've visited 'the scene'. It's clearly signposted, and 30, not 20. Facts shouldn't get in the way of a good story though!



    Fairly certain that's nowhere near the McDonalds on Woolwich Road. 
    If they removed the lamp-post with the speed sign on it, you'd be able to see the McDonalds 
  • Leuth
    Leuth Posts: 23,501
    Okay it does go to 20 outside the White Horse, but I don't see the speed trap? 


  • cafcfan
    cafcfan Posts: 11,234
    Crusty54 said:
    cafcfan said:
    20 mph limits on main roads are crazy. Here's why. Let's assume the section of road is one mile long to make the maths easy. At 20mph it will take three minutes to complete the mile. At the old speed of 30mph it would have been 2 minutes. So, as long as the traffic volumes stay the same, there will be 50% more vehicles in the same length of road at any given time. This means the traffic will be heavier, congestion will be worse, getting out of side roads will be more difficult, pedestrians will have more problems crossing the road, cars will be using more fuel because they are in a lower gear and pollution will be worse.
    All of which kind of demonstrates that all the mayor is really interested in is making money from motorists.
    It's about reducing the number of deaths when pedestrians are hit by cars.
    This is an interesting site with all the data for London. https://visionzerolondon.wordpress.com/latest-pedestrians-and-cyclists-deaths-in-london/

    You'll see from the map that there seems to have been one KSI (a death) on Woolwich Road since 2017. There have been no KSIs on the Woolwich Road since 2018. It would be easy to assume that the lower London-wide figures for 2020 and 2021 would indicate that the madness of 20mph areas is having a positive impact. But the truth would be the fewer number of pedestrians and indeed, vehicles, because of lockdown.

    There's an interesting thing about speed cameras too. A  section of road is used happily with very low KSIs. Then there's a bad one or two accidents that prompt the installation of a camera. The following year the accident rate goes down again and the speed camera partnerships hail the camera(s) a success. In fact all that has happened is that there has been a regression towards the mean.

    This is also an interesting read debunking 20mph limits. https://www.abd.org.uk/factual-background-on-20mph-limits/ I know they have a bias, but even so.
  • Comeonyoureds
    Comeonyoureds Posts: 176
    Chizz said:
    cafc999 said:
    Leuth said:
    Sadiq Khan gets an awful lot of disrespect for someone who's cleaned up London more than probably any other individual ever 
    A few things to ask before people champion Sadiq

    1. How many Mayors have London had before he came into office? 
    2. Is he performing better than the previous Mayors eg crime rates, TFL, etc etc ?
    3. How many of these Mayors tried to clean up the air?
    I know he has had covid and Crossrail to deal with, but I do think spends money recklessly = the new London Assembly for instance and the many cycle lanes that get rarely used (Molesworth St in Lewisham a prime example where he converted a lane of traffic into a cycle lane despite that road already having two cycle lanes)
    If you want to find fault with someone, don't compare them to a list of previous holders of their role which comprises Ken Livingstone and Boris Johnson.  

    He's better in every respect than everyone else who has ever done the job.  That is neither controversial.  But neither is it a definitive lauding of his achievements.  

    He's by far the best of a very, very bad group of London Mayors. 
    During his term TFL have been hemorrhaging money, and he has relentlessly taxed people to pay for it, I'm not surprised he is not well liked.
    I understand many of the issues related to the hemorrhaging of money, aren't down to him but he is certainly pricing people out of London, finding any way possible to nick money out of people's pockets. 
  • guinnessaddick
    guinnessaddick Posts: 29,100
    Leuth said:
    Okay it does go to 20 outside the White Horse, but I don't see the speed trap? 


    A few months ago, I was travelling along that road back to towards Woolwich, a van rocketed last in the bus lane doing about 40, only to get stopped the the traffic cop with the speed gun by the roundabout. 😂😂😂
  • stevexreeve
    stevexreeve Posts: 1,407
    cafcfan said:
    stevexreeve said:
    cafcfan said:
    20 mph limits on main roads are crazy. Here's why. Let's assume the section of road is one mile long to make the maths easy. At 20mph it will take three minutes to complete the mile. At the old speed of 30mph it would have been 2 minutes. So, as long as the traffic volumes stay the same, there will be 50% more vehicles in the same length of road at any given time. This means the traffic will be heavier, congestion will be worse, getting out of side roads will be more difficult, pedestrians will have more problems crossing the road, cars will be using more fuel because they are in a lower gear and pollution will be worse.
    All of which kind of demonstrates that all the mayor is really interested in is making money from motorists.
    I have thought about this and I don't think it's true!

    If cars enter the new section of road with an average distance of 10 metres between them and slow down to 20mph there will still be an average of 10 metres between each car. 

    If there is an average distance of 10 metres between each car it doesn't matter how fast they are travelling. You've got exactly the same number of cars!

    The number of cars will in the section would only increase cars are forced to stop or constantly vary their speed for some reason.
    I see what you are saying but I think you are wrong. First as vehicles slow down to twenty they will bunch up. The distance between vehicles will reduce a lot. They won't need the braking distance. The same way vehicle gaps diminish as they approach a red traffic light. Second, you need to factor in times when the road is less busy. The natural flow of traffic will just not happen any more.
    You're probably right!
  • Leuth
    Leuth Posts: 23,501
    Oh they have mobile police traps 

    In which case, perhaps the OP mistook this for one such?

    Anyway I don't care really, the traffic seems happy enough, another lovely day in Charlton, unless of course you need to find things to complain about 


Categories

“Marketplace”