" gurgled
happily, sounding much like they were saying:

During trials with the cameras we installed the so-called distraction
factor was tested. No matter what speed and how the mirrors were
adjusted, the "flash" was barely discernible.

So the deterrent effect of a live camera is solely that of a letter in
the post a week later? No deterrent there and then at all?

I've attended many similar accidents to
that described, straight roads, no readily available cause, but apart
from one genuine mechanical fault, in every other case the cause was
obvious. Poor driving.

So nothing that a speed camera is going to do anything whatsoever about?

Just today going along the M4 a professional
driver in her artic managed to drive across the hard shoulder and onto
the French Drain sending stones across all three lanes.

Considering HGVs are physically restricted to below the legal speed
limit, and that that limit is below that of cars - and thereby speed
cameras - again, it's nothing that speed cameras can or will do anything
about.

It will take just one accident on the A40 near Barnard Gate, where
excess speed has introduced enough energy to turn a damage only or a
minor injury RTA into a fatal

So should the speed limit be inversely related to the mass of the
vehicle, since that is a key factor in the amount of energy involved in a
collision?

and then "Marksman" is employed to measure actual
speeds to supply data as to how many vehicles are being driven at speeds
considered excessive for the conditions.

Not for the limit, then?

Speed limits are set to take account of those less capable drivers.

Remind me when the default NSL and the default 30 limit were set?

Park up in a big red and white Rover or Granada

THAT long ago, eh?