Friday, 25th July 2008
Watch your speed; it may be wrong
If Lino Spiteri (Talking Point, July 21) was "done" for allegedly travelling at 62 km/h in an area limited to 60 km/h, then he should contest this.
There is probably no vehicle speedometer that is capable of reading to this degree of accuracy (3.2 per cent).
Anyone who has the slightest idea as to how speed measurement is taken by a vehicle and how such a measurement is then converted by the speedometer into the human-readable position of a needle on a dial will understand why such a degree of accuracy is just not realistically possible for each and every vehicle that leaves the production line. Even the innocent act of replacing one's tyres will affect this reading.
So much so that in other countries where speed cameras are in use, due to this fact it is customary to allow a 10 per cent margin of error in the driver's favour.
Further reinforcement of the inaccuracy of speedometers, when a vehicle's performance is being tested, the car's instruments are never used. Previously, a "fifth wheel" contraption linked to accurately calibrated instruments was commonly employed; latterly, GPS satellite measurement is used.
Therefore, allowing for the maximum 10 per cent in the driver's favour, Mr Spiteri could very well have had a reading of just over 56 km/h on his speedo while he was "nicked" for doing 62 km/h.
Then again, this incident is proof, if ever any were needed, that speed cameras as set up are money-making machines first, safety devices second. Quite unsurprising when considering that the organisations responsible for the running of these devices partake in profits from their use.
RSS
Comments
Mistakes by people, badly designed roads, roads in bad condition, cars in bad condition kills!
If the Govermnet is really committed to reduce the our fatal accidents, I suggest the following:
Reduce car tax so people can buy new, better well equipped, safe, effecient cars!
Build better designed roads instead the single lane death traps which is now the trend which promote bottle necks traffic, road rage, abuse, unsafe overtaking to roads that we can overtake safely, make our roads less strees free and free flowing!
@ Camilleri Your right mate and i totally accept your 'engine cant go at less that 15kmph' excuse.... your car sure must be a beauty considering it goes from 0 - 15kmph in....well in 0.00 seconds apparantly....can it levitate too? ;)
You summed it up beautifully at the end though, accidents have gone drastically down, and not the excuses in the world could win this argument and the bottom line is that speed cameras cut accidents....end of story.
Whilst I fully agree with you that if people (Pedestrians & Drivers) abide by the law, we would have much less accidents than we currently have, I'm sorry but I don't see you always abiding by the law.
First of all, half the speed limit signs are hidden behind trees and have all sort of obstacles in front of them and are not that noticable. Secondly... do you manage to drive under 15kmph in certain places? I have an 800cc engine and the car does not manage that speed if not on 1st gear.
Apart from all, certain speeds in certain streets is ridiculous. Having 50kmph in Attard By-Pass (with people slowing to 30kmph) in rush hour is a total mess. Accidents have stopped but people tend to brake hard - causing accidents.
However we have to admit that accidents have gone drastically down in certain roads where a speed camera was installed.
I have never had a speeding (or any other JUSTIFIED ticket either) - the whole point of my contribution was that a driver can only depend on the instruments he was supplied with, and if these are likely to be inaccurate then reasonableness would dictate that allowance be made for this. However reasonableness there is none, if one gets penalised for driving just 2kph (walking pace) over the limit, totally irrelevant for safety considerations, and which is a limit more than low enough for the particular stretch of road.
You yourself state that "...Well i see a sign which says that X is the sped limit and i drive at or less than X,.." - that is the point, maybe you THINK you are complying with the regulations 100% but in reality through no fault of your own you would not be.
Why have different limits when the Highway Code says that speed limits are 50kph in buildup areas and 80 elsewhere?
Simply to catch unsuspecting drivers and put more cash into the pockets of the conmpany / ies operating the systems.
I used the term drastic since you kind of diverted the concept of the letter above, from an argument related to accuracy of equipment etc to actually killing someone in an accident. That is why i pointed that out.
For your information i never got a ticket neither and never killed anyone whilst driving but it doesn't necessarily prove that i never drove over the limit!!
I hardly think abiding by the law and to the speed limit could be described as 'drastic', perhaps more drastic would be breaking the law and speed don't you think?
What do i do when i drive my car? Well i see a sign which says that X is the sped limit and i drive at or less than X, thats what i was taught for my test and thats what the law is and that might just be the reason why ive never had a ticket/killed anyone and manage to stop in time when children come onto the street without looking....isnt that a coincidence Dingli?
Why do you always have to be so drastic? I guess when you drive your car (if you drive at all) you never go past 40km/h anywhere!
Granted, it is not a dual carriageway but there are other winding roads which are not and have a 70km/hr limit. I respectfully ask the Minister of Transport to please stop this abuse.
No of course not, its more important to dream up convienient excuses and label all attempts to keep speed down as 'money making'.
This lack of a 10% margin of error might explain the dangerous habit that most have here of standing on the brakes just as they approach a speed camera potentially reducing their speed to half the limit, and I'm surprised that we don't have more accidents at these locations.