Congestion charge cheat
 

http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

--
message by Robin May, consumer of liquids
Hello. I'm one of those "roaring fascists of the left wing".

Hacker is to computer as boy racer is to Ford Escort.

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Robin May" wrote in message
...
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

Probably - if they're not aware of it already.

The web site says that the device is not illegal. That's probably one of
these grey areas like radar speed-trap detectors, which are not (as far as I
know) illegal to fit but are illegal if you actually use them to detect
speed traps. I notice also a statement to the effect that because the device
is manufactured in the US, the UK importer doesn't need to charge VAT. I
have a nasty feeling that this is not true: the device should probably have
some form of import tax or VAT paid on it as it comes into the country which
the importer can then choose whether or not to pass onto the customer. But
if the importer isn't paying import tax, that's his worry, not the
customer's.

I'm curious to know how it works - but the web site explains why it has to
be vague about the specifics! I remember seeing number plates on sale at the
Birmingham Motor Show a few years ago which had a highly-relective
background that reproduced as plain yellow if illuminated by a flash gun.
They were aimed at celebrities who didn't want their number plates to
reproduce in paparazzi photos. I wondered at the time about the legality of
them given the introduction of speed cameras at about the same time.

I wouldn't condone the use of anything that allows you to evade the law
(whether speed cameras or congestion charege cameras) but I've got to admit
to a grudging respect for anything that allows you to avoid the congestion
charge.

By the way, what's the rule about the congestion charge? Are you only
charged as you enter the zone, or are you charged also for every day that
you're inside? Suppose you drive in (maybe even with your number plate
masked!) and then never leave again because you only use the car within the
zone - are you still charged?

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Robin May" wrote in message
...
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

The whole thing looks like a scam to me. The best way of fooling the
cameras - which I know but will not reveal, as I support the concept of
congestion charging - requires no power from the battery.

Brian Blandford

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Brian Blandford" wrote in message
...
"Robin May" wrote in message
...
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

The whole thing looks like a scam to me. The best way of fooling the
cameras - which I know but will not reveal, as I support the concept of
congestion charging - requires no power from the battery.

I can certainly think of a way that the cameras could be fooled using a
system that *does* require power - the details given on the web site
together which a "well, fancy that" discovery that I made when using a
CCD-based video camera give the game away. But I won't say any more than
that.

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Paul Weaver" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:24:11 +0000, Martin Underwood wrote:
I can certainly think of a way that the cameras could be fooled using a
system that *does* require power - the details given on the web site
together which a "well, fancy that" discovery that I made when using a
CCD-based video camera give the game away. But I won't say any more than
that.

Infrared is usually picked up by cameras, so a few bright LED's will blind
them.

Easily stopped though with a decent filter.

Exactly - that's what I was thinking of. You only have to point a TV remote
at a still or video camera to see the LED glowing in the camera image. I
*presume* that speed and CC cameras include an IR filter - if not, it
wouldn't be hard to fit one!

So I presume that the system described on the web site uses a different
technique.

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:24:11 +0000, Martin Underwood wrote:
I can certainly think of a way that the cameras could be fooled using a
system that *does* require power - the details given on the web site
together which a "well, fancy that" discovery that I made when using a
CCD-based video camera give the game away. But I won't say any more than
that.

Infrared is usually picked up by cameras, so a few bright LED's will blind
them.

Easilly stopped though with a decent filter

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 10:23:50 +0000, Martin Underwood wrote:
By the way, what's the rule about the congestion charge? Are you only
charged as you enter the zone, or are you charged also for every day that
you're inside? Suppose you drive in (maybe even with your number plate
masked!) and then never leave again because you only use the car within the
zone - are you still charged?

Yes, there are fixed and mobile cameras in teh zone.

Mind you anyone driving in the zone is a stupid idiot anyway.

Congestion charge cheat
 

(Huge) wrote the following in:


Robin May writes:
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

Skipping lightly over the fact that it has sod-all to do with you

Really? As someone who is in central London at least four days a week
(usually more) and who pays the congestion charge on the rare occasions
I drive into or through the congestion charging area, I think it has a
lot to do with me.

and that perhaps you should mind your own business,

I think it is my business.

it can't
possibly work, so I'd get back to interfering in someone elses
life, if I were you.

By living in a city people can't help but interfere with other people's
lives. I don't see what's wrong with wanting to prevent people from
having a negative effect on mine.

--
message by Robin May, consumer of liquids
Hello. I'm one of those "roaring fascists of the left wing".

Hacker is to computer as boy racer is to Ford Escort.

Congestion charge cheat
 

Robin May writes:

Should this be reported to someone?

Given that the domain has been registered with false details, I don't
expect they'll be around for long. I certainly wouldn't be giving my
credit card number to them.

Congestion charge cheat
 

On 18 Oct 2003 09:55:49 GMT, Robin May
wrote in :
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

As a rip-off? Yes. Fraud squad?

--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Room 40-1-B12, CERN
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

Congestion charge cheat
 

Robin May wrote:
(Huge) wrote the following in:


Robin May writes:
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

Not sure it's worth it ... there can only be a couple more years of
numberplate recognition left before all these schemes switch to
transponder-based vehicle recognition systems, which will be much harder to
fake. Way too many people sticking false or foreign number plates on their
cars, or otherwise obscuring them. The government won't let this continue
for long ...

--
CITIBANK ONLINE BANKING CUSTOMERS - check your statements.
Some online bill payments appear to have been made to the
wrong places around 6/Oct/03 - verify you were not affected.

Congestion charge cheat
 

jasonr (Jason Rumney) @ f2s.com wrote in message

Robin May writes:

Should this be reported to someone?

Given that the domain has been registered with false details, I don't
expect they'll be around for long. I certainly wouldn't be giving my
credit card number to them.

It's a poor site, too. Loads of typos and displays very badly. Certainly
doesn't look remotely professional.

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 10:23:50 GMT, "Martin Underwood" wrote:


"Robin May" wrote in message
...
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

Probably - if they're not aware of it already.

The web site says that the device is not illegal. That's probably one of
these grey areas like radar speed-trap detectors, which are not (as far as I
know) illegal to fit but are illegal if you actually use them to detect
speed traps. I notice also a statement to the effect that because the device
is manufactured in the US, the UK importer doesn't need to charge VAT. I
have a nasty feeling that this is not true: the device should probably have
some form of import tax or VAT paid on it as it comes into the country which
the importer can then choose whether or not to pass onto the customer. But
if the importer isn't paying import tax, that's his worry, not the
customer's.

I'm curious to know how it works - but the web site explains why it has to
be vague about the specifics! I remember seeing number plates on sale at the
Birmingham Motor Show a few years ago which had a highly-relective
background that reproduced as plain yellow if illuminated by a flash gun.
They were aimed at celebrities who didn't want their number plates to
reproduce in paparazzi photos. I wondered at the time about the legality of
them given the introduction of speed cameras at about the same time.

I wouldn't condone the use of anything that allows you to evade the law
(whether speed cameras or congestion charege cameras) but I've got to admit
to a grudging respect for anything that allows you to avoid the congestion
charge.

By the way, what's the rule about the congestion charge? Are you only
charged as you enter the zone, or are you charged also for every day that
you're inside? Suppose you drive in (maybe even with your number plate
masked!) and then never leave again because you only use the car within the
zone - are you still charged?


I would imagine a few suitably placed infra-red LEDs would make a plate much harder to read, and 200
quid would buy an awful lot of ( or a few awfully powerful) IR LEDs!!!
I think the CC systems uses high res, limited field-of-view mono cameras for recognition and a
colour camera to capture the overall scene. I would think only the colour one would have an IR cut
filter, and it may be possible for them to manually get reg details from this.
I would imagine the mono cameras have good IR response to help extract details in low light (maybe
the cameras even have IR lights ?)

Now if you want to do it properly.....
Make up a plate where the black areas are actually cutouts with an IR pass filter behind, with a
pattern of IR LEDs behind them. This type of filter looks jet black to the eye but like clear glass
at IR.

Anything that stuffs up Mad Kenny's Con tax has to be a good thing, but I think these people are
rip-off merchants. Everything is far too vague to be trusted. .
And I've also heard reports of Kenny's people going round on foot writing numbers down, although
this may have only been before they got their mobile snoop-wagons running.

Congestion charge cheat
 

In article , Huge wrote:
Skipping lightly over the fact that it has sod-all to do with
you

It has to do with everyone who lives in Greater London: if the CC
makes more money less comes from the rest of us and vice versa.

--
Tony Bryer

Congestion charge cheat
 

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Martin Underwood" wrote in message
s.com...


By the way, what's the rule about the congestion charge? Are you only
charged as you enter the zone, or are you charged also for every day that
you're inside?

the charge is for "driving in the zone or being parked on road other than
in a resident's parking place".

The charge is mainly enforced by taking the number of all cars that enter
or exit the zone (as this is the easiest thing to do, but this is not what the
charge is for) and by a gang of people who wander around randomly
taking the details of cars moving/parked in the zone. I suspect that
whatever this 'magic' box is it does little to stop a traffic warden writing
your number down in his notebook

Of course the chances of being spotted just by the latter is somewhat
small and you will likely get away with it most days, hence the 'fine' for
not making a payment voluntarily.

tim


Suppose you drive in (maybe even with your number plate
masked!) and then never leave again because you only use the car within the
zone - are you still charged?

Congestion charge cheat
 

"I@n" -uk wrote in message
...
Robin May wrote:
(Huge) wrote the following in:


Robin May writes:
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

Not sure it's worth it ... there can only be a couple more years of
numberplate recognition left before all these schemes switch to
transponder-based vehicle recognition systems, which will be much harder
to
fake. Way too many people sticking false or foreign number plates on their
cars, or otherwise obscuring them. The government won't let this continue
for long ...

Here in Toronto you can buy a transponder for 20 dollars and are then billed
for a lesser amount than the pay-as-you-go fee. The only problem seems to be
that there's only one place to get the transponder and the registered owner
of the car has to go in person to get it. There is only one toll road and
I've been told that it's not much used.
Similarly, it's not that easy to get a Metropass (monthly travelcard) once
the month has started and if you want to use card rather than cash.not all
stations will accept it.
There is only one station in the whole city where you can get the necessary
photcard made too.


--
Kat in Downtown Toronto

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Tony Bryer" wrote in message
...
In article , Huge wrote:
Skipping lightly over the fact that it has sod-all to do with
you

It has to do with everyone who lives in Greater London: if the CC
makes more money less comes from the rest of us and vice versa.

Just like in real life

S R

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 11:24:11 GMT, Martin Underwood
wrote in m:

I can certainly think of a way that the cameras could be fooled using a
system that *does* require power - the details given on the web site
together which a "well, fancy that" discovery that I made when using a
CCD-based video camera give the game away. But I won't say any more than
that.

IR overload? Try pointing an active remote control device at
a digital camera...

--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Room 40-1-B12, CERN
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

Congestion charge cheat
 

In article , Robin May
writes
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

No. There are instructions on how to build a nuclear bomb on the web
too.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

Congestion charge cheat
 

"I@n" -uk wrote in message
...
Robin May wrote:
(Huge) wrote the following in:


Robin May writes:
http://www.chargenomore.com/index.shtml

Should this be reported to someone?

Not sure it's worth it ... there can only be a couple more years of
numberplate recognition left before all these schemes switch to
transponder-based vehicle recognition systems, which will be much harder
to
fake. Way too many people sticking false or foreign number plates on their
cars, or otherwise obscuring them. The government won't let this continue
for long ...

How will a transponder-based system work for a one-off visitor to London?
Will he need to plan his visit in advance and obtain a transponder before
the day of his visit? Or will there be a no-penalty system (ie congestion
charge but no more than that) for people who do not have a transponder?

Anything which requires a permit to enter to be bought in advance will be a
real pain - like having to buy train tickets in advance to get discounted
rates. What is needed is a system which bills people after the event, not
one that requires them to buy a permit in advance.

Congestion charge cheat
 

In article m, Martin
Underwood writes
areas like radar speed-trap detectors, which are not (as far as I
know) illegal to fit but are illegal if you actually use them to detect
speed traps. I

The law was tested on this point a couple of years ago and the Police
and CPS lost. The radar detector is used to detect the signal is there,
not to listen to the contents of that signal. There was a landmark
ruling on this and the judge rules that is was legal to use one of these
detectors.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
...
In article m, Martin
Underwood writes
areas like radar speed-trap detectors, which are not (as far as I
know) illegal to fit but are illegal if you actually use them to detect
speed traps. I

The law was tested on this point a couple of years ago and the Police
and CPS lost. The radar detector is used to detect the signal is there,
not to listen to the contents of that signal. There was a landmark
ruling on this and the judge rules that is was legal to use one of these
detectors.

I didn't know this. I suppose it fits in with the modern ruling that speed
cameras should be made highly visible so they act as a deterrent, on the
lines that it's better to slow cars down than simply to penalise the drivers
after the event for speeding.

Congestion charge cheat
 

Martin Underwood wrote:
I didn't know this. I suppose it fits in with the modern ruling that speed
cameras should be made highly visible so they act as a deterrent, on the
lines that it's better to slow cars down than simply to penalise the drivers
after the event for speeding.

An argument which is of course complete drivel.

Colin McKenzie

Congestion charge cheat
 

It has to do with everyone who lives in Greater London: if the CC
makes more money less comes from the rest of us and vice versa.

Yeah, right. Wanna buy a bridge?

Now there's a good money-spinner.

Peter

Congestion charge cheat
 

In article , Colin McKenzie
writes
Martin Underwood wrote:
I didn't know this. I suppose it fits in with the modern ruling that speed
cameras should be made highly visible so they act as a deterrent, on the
lines that it's better to slow cars down than simply to penalise the drivers
after the event for speeding.

An argument which is of course complete drivel.

Colin McKenzie

Oh dear. Colin, are you one of these 'speed kills' and 'speeders are as
bad as child molesters' idiots?
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sat, 18 Oct 2003 20:59:34 GMT, "Martin Underwood"
wrote:

Anything which requires a permit to enter to be bought in advance will be a
real pain - like having to buy train tickets in advance to get discounted
rates. What is needed is a system which bills people after the event, not
one that requires them to buy a permit in advance.

Or season ticket/subscription rates. However, the CC is *designed* to
be inconvenient, and further put people off driving in the zone.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
is a valid email address, but is sent to /dev/null.
Try my first name at the above domain instead if you want to e-mail me.

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
...
Martin Underwood wrote:
I didn't know this. I suppose it fits in with the modern ruling that speed
cameras should be made highly visible so they act as a deterrent, on the
lines that it's better to slow cars down than simply to penalise the drivers
after the event for speeding.

An argument which is of course complete drivel.

eh? surely this is always the case. Lets replace speed with murder.

Do you think that it is drivel to say:

It is better to discourage murder than to simply peanilise the murderer?

I would hope not, now why does the statement become , not just
less reasonable but completely untrue if I change the crime?

tim



Colin McKenzie

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
...
Martin Underwood wrote:
I didn't know this. I suppose it fits in with the modern ruling that
speed
cameras should be made highly visible so they act as a deterrent, on the
lines that it's better to slow cars down than simply to penalise the
drivers
after the event for speeding.

An argument which is of course complete drivel.

Really? So you'd prefer to let drivers speed and then penalise them
afterwards, rather than give them every incentive and reminder not to speed
in the first place? Yes, I know you shouldn't speed, but there are some 30
mph limits which are so out of proportion with the conditions of the road
and the absence of hazards that you need a constant reminder. When I was
learning to drive, my instructor, an ex police Class 1 driver, said that he
(and certain other police drivers) had a piece of card that they stuck to
the centre of the steering wheel whenever they were in a 30 zone to remind
them of the fact.

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 10:12:56 +0100, Andrew P Smith
wrote:

In article , Colin McKenzie
writes
Martin Underwood wrote:
I didn't know this. I suppose it fits in with the modern ruling that speed
cameras should be made highly visible so they act as a deterrent, on the
lines that it's better to slow cars down than simply to penalise the drivers
after the event for speeding.

An argument which is of course complete drivel.

Colin McKenzie

Oh dear. Colin, are you one of these 'speed kills' and 'speeders are as
bad as child molesters' idiots?

That ruling was made by that idiot minister John Spellar, buckling
under the

"I want to drive my car as fast as possible, wherever possible" lobby.

Speed does kill. You don;t have to be a genius to understand that the
faster the speed of a vehicle, the longer it takes to stop. And the
faster it hits something else the greater the damage.

Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 10:43:04 GMT, "Martin Underwood"
wrote:

Really? So you'd prefer to let drivers speed and then penalise them
afterwards, rather than give them every incentive and reminder not to speed
in the first place?snip

This is not the intention of covert cameras. The intention is that
they are hidden, so to avoid a fine the driver would obey the limit at
all times, rather than emergency brake on seeing a camera (*very*
dangerous and liable to cause accidents[1]) as at present.

The standard of driving through 50 limits on motorways has, in my
mind, increased substantially since SPECS cameras started to replace
Gatsos, stopping this accelerate-brake business. On a motorway, it
also reduces the number of jams caused by the brake-light effect.

Of course, this kind of thing should be accompanied with increases in
the speed limit where appropriate. The speed limit should be such
that it is the maximum safe speed for that location (with certain
assumptions about the vehicle concerned). It should not be
ridiculously low as it is in places.

[1] Yes, I know, you should drive such that if the car in front
stopped dead (e.g. by hitting an obstacle) you would be able to as
well. However, there are too many people who drive so close that
*touching* the brakes would result in a rear-ending. Of course, it'd
be the rear-ender who paid the bill (assuming they were insured), but
it's still not worth the hassle...

Neil

--
Neil Williams
is a valid email address, but is sent to /dev/null.
Try my first name at the above domain instead if you want to e-mail me.

Congestion charge cheat
 

tim wrote:
"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
Martin Underwood wrote:
I didn't know this. I suppose it fits in with the modern ruling that speed
cameras should be made highly visible so they act as a deterrent, on the
lines that it's better to slow cars down than simply to penalise the drivers
after the event for speeding.

An argument which is of course complete drivel.

eh? surely this is always the case. Lets replace speed with murder.

Do you think that it is drivel to say:
It is better to discourage murder than to simply peanilise the murderer?

No, the fallacy lies elsewhere.

"We don't want you to speed here, so we'll put up numbers in big round
signs."

"But we REALLY don't want you to speed here, so we'll put up a big
yellow camera."

Prevention of law-breaking is best achieved if potential law-breakers
believe there's a real chance of being caught - whatever the crime and
wherever it's committed.

And for one of the other responders to my comment, the argument about
setting appropriate speed limits is completely separate from the
argument about enforcing the limits set.

Colin McKenzie

Congestion charge cheat
 

In article , Robert Woolley
writes

Speed does kill. You don;t have to be a genius to understand that the
faster the speed of a vehicle, the longer it takes to stop. And the
faster it hits something else the greater the damage.

No. Bad driving kills. The driver selects what speed they drive at. If
that speed is inappropriate then it's bad driving. Nothing else.

I'm a former member of the Institute of Advanced Motorists. Are you?
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

Congestion charge cheat
 

In article , Colin McKenzie
writes

And for one of the other responders to my comment, the argument about
setting appropriate speed limits is completely separate from the
argument about enforcing the limits set.

No it isn't. The 2 go hand in hand. The straight bit of road through
Penn near where I live has virtually no houses on it. Just a pub and a
couple of mansions. The limit is 30MPH.

The stretch of road before that has a 40MPH limit and is all twists and
turns and has 'Ice' warning signs present in the winter. It's not
possible to get up to 40MPH on that bit of road without leaving the
carriageway but the straight and clear road has a lower limit.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
...
In article , Colin McKenzie
writes

And for one of the other responders to my comment, the argument about
setting appropriate speed limits is completely separate from the
argument about enforcing the limits set.

No it isn't. The 2 go hand in hand. The straight bit of road through
Penn near where I live has virtually no houses on it. Just a pub and a
couple of mansions. The limit is 30MPH.

The stretch of road before that has a 40MPH limit and is all twists and
turns and has 'Ice' warning signs present in the winter. It's not
possible to get up to 40MPH on that bit of road without leaving the
carriageway but the straight and clear road has a lower limit.

Precisely: there are some speed limits, like the one that you describe, that
are less worthy of being enforced than others. Sadly, reducing speed limits
is seen as the easy no-brainer solution to accidents, somewhat akin to a
schoolteacher keeping everyone in detention because someone has written a
"naughty" word on the toilet wall. A better solution is one that targets the
specific offenders without penalising everyone.

It is not speed that kills - it is the inappropriate use of speed for the
circumstances as they exist at the precise time. In other words, a road that
carries a 40 mph speed limit may require drivers to slow down to 20 mph or
less if there is a mother and child walking along the pavement and the child
is pulling away from its mother to look at "that nice little doggy" on the
other side of the road. Likewise if the road is icy or visibility is reduced
by fog.

It is a great shame that the IAM seems content to abide by whatever speed
limit or other restriction has been set, rather than campaigning to get
absurd limits raised or excessively restricting junctions re-designed. As an
IAM member myself, I sometimes despair of their hands-off
we-don't-want-to-get-involved attitude.

When I was preparing for my IAM test, my "observer" (instructor) criticised
me for indicating too much, on the grounds that if I indicated at junctions
where there was no-one to see my signal, it showed that I hadn't read the
road correctly. He seemed to be incapable of appreciating the concept of
"fail-safe" - get into the habit of always doing it and you are less likely
to forget when it *does* matter. Sometimes a pedestrian or another car will
be able to see me (and my indicator) long before I can see him, and the
earlier he knows my intentions, the better prepared he is. If I delay
signalling until I eventually see the other car, it may be too late. Like
many experts, you need to decide which bits of their advice to accept and
which to quietly ignore.

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 17:18:43 +0100, Andrew P Smith
wrote:

In article , Robert Woolley
writes

Speed does kill. You don;t have to be a genius to understand that the
faster the speed of a vehicle, the longer it takes to stop. And the
faster it hits something else the greater the damage.

No. Bad driving kills. The driver selects what speed they drive at. If
that speed is inappropriate then it's bad driving. Nothing else.

I'm a former member of the Institute of Advanced Motorists. Are you?

Nope.

But I hold a PSV licence, gained after comprehensive training. I also
hold a RoSPA road safety engineering certficate, a BSc in Transport
Management and Planning, Chartered Membership of the Chartered
Institute of Logistics and Transport, plus Corporate Membership of the
Institution of Highways and Transportation.


Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

Congestion charge cheat
 

"Robert Woolley" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 17:18:43 +0100, Andrew P Smith
wrote:

In article , Robert Woolley
writes

Speed does kill. You don;t have to be a genius to understand that the
faster the speed of a vehicle, the longer it takes to stop. And the
faster it hits something else the greater the damage.

No. Bad driving kills. The driver selects what speed they drive at. If
that speed is inappropriate then it's bad driving. Nothing else.

I'm a former member of the Institute of Advanced Motorists. Are you?

Nope.

But I hold a PSV licence, gained after comprehensive training. I also
hold a RoSPA road safety engineering certficate, a BSc in Transport
Management and Planning, Chartered Membership of the Chartered
Institute of Logistics and Transport, plus Corporate Membership of the
Institution of Highways and Transportation.

OK. Maybe you can answer this question: what are the circumstances under
which a single 4-way roundabout should be replaced by two linked 3-way mini
roundabouts? There's a sod of a junction near me which always gets snarled
up with traffic (junction of Drayton Road, Spring Lane and the two halves of
Ock Street in Abingdon) and it seems to me that it would have a much greater
throughput of traffic if it was converted back to a single larger roundabout
because it would save drivers having to check twice for vehicles from their
right - once on the first roundabout and then again on the second.

Congestion charge cheat
 

On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 17:34:48 GMT, "Martin Underwood"
wrote:


"Robert Woolley" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 17:18:43 +0100, Andrew P Smith
wrote:

In article , Robert Woolley
writes

Speed does kill. You don;t have to be a genius to understand that the
faster the speed of a vehicle, the longer it takes to stop. And the
faster it hits something else the greater the damage.

No. Bad driving kills. The driver selects what speed they drive at. If
that speed is inappropriate then it's bad driving. Nothing else.

I'm a former member of the Institute of Advanced Motorists. Are you?

Nope.

But I hold a PSV licence, gained after comprehensive training. I also
hold a RoSPA road safety engineering certficate, a BSc in Transport
Management and Planning, Chartered Membership of the Chartered
Institute of Logistics and Transport, plus Corporate Membership of the
Institution of Highways and Transportation.

OK. Maybe you can answer this question: what are the circumstances under
which a single 4-way roundabout should be replaced by two linked 3-way mini
roundabouts? There's a sod of a junction near me which always gets snarled
up with traffic (junction of Drayton Road, Spring Lane and the two halves of
Ock Street in Abingdon) and it seems to me that it would have a much greater
throughput of traffic if it was converted back to a single larger roundabout
because it would save drivers having to check twice for vehicles from their
right - once on the first roundabout and then again on the second.

Sounds potentially if signals (traffic lights) might be better.

Roundabouts work best when the flows are reasonably balanced (i.e.
main road has the majority e.g. N-S with few right turners N - W).

I have a junction locally to me in Wembley which has the same problem.
LB Brent have tried all sorts of different approaches and stuck with
the double mini-roundabouts.

Usually you replace a 4 way roundabout with double minis if the
movements are relatively self contained within each mini.

Eg.

OLD:
N
W E
S

NEW:

N
W
^
|
E
S

In this situation, it make sense if W/N and S/E flows are heavy,
because you have independent mini roundabouts.

If N/S flows are heavy, then as you say you get the problem of right
turners.

Of course, any situation whe

a) land is constrained
b) flows are heavy (and the junction is over capacity)

won't be resolved by fiddling around. Either you restrain the traffic
(provide chokes to restrict traffic approaching the junction) or you
undertake demolition and land take.


Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

Congestion charge cheat
 

In article , Robert Woolley
writes

Nope.

But I hold a PSV licence, gained after comprehensive training. I also
hold a RoSPA road safety engineering certficate, a BSc in Transport
Management and Planning, Chartered Membership of the Chartered
Institute of Logistics and Transport, plus Corporate Membership of the
Institution of Highways and Transportation.


Only one of those has any relevance in your ability to drive. The rest
are not applicable in terms of your skill behind the wheel. Go sit the
advanced test, pass it, then come back. Until then, you know what to do.
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.

Congestion charge cheat
 

In article m, Martin
Underwood writes

"Robert Woolley" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 19 Oct 2003 17:18:43 +0100, Andrew P Smith
wrote:

In article , Robert Woolley
writes

Speed does kill. You don;t have to be a genius to understand that the
faster the speed of a vehicle, the longer it takes to stop. And the
faster it hits something else the greater the damage.

No. Bad driving kills. The driver selects what speed they drive at. If
that speed is inappropriate then it's bad driving. Nothing else.

I'm a former member of the Institute of Advanced Motorists. Are you?

Nope.

But I hold a PSV licence, gained after comprehensive training. I also
hold a RoSPA road safety engineering certficate, a BSc in Transport
Management and Planning, Chartered Membership of the Chartered
Institute of Logistics and Transport, plus Corporate Membership of the
Institution of Highways and Transportation.

OK. Maybe you can answer this question: what are the circumstances under
which a single 4-way roundabout should be replaced by two linked 3-way mini
roundabouts? There's a sod of a junction near me which always gets snarled
up with traffic (junction of Drayton Road, Spring Lane and the two halves of
Ock Street in Abingdon) and it seems to me that it would have a much greater
throughput of traffic if it was converted back to a single larger roundabout
because it would save drivers having to check twice for vehicles from their
right - once on the first roundabout and then again on the second.


Martin

I know the junction you mean.

We have an even worse one here in High Wycombe and as for the Magic
Roundabout in Swindon.......
--
Andrew
Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this
communication can not be guaranteed.
Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not
associations or companies I am involved with.