Does anyone else think it’s strange how so many of these events and the accompanying variable limits seem to conveniently take place on sections of motorway covered by gantries.Also the ‘reports’ obviously never seem to mention a specific section of motorway where the offending ‘incidents’ are they generally cover bleedin miles.
Some might think it’s all a scam to bait drivers into big fines and points.
Probably Thatchers fault……
It’s Bull Gates trying to slow us down
Carryfast:
Does anyone else think it’s strange how so many of these events and the accompanying variable limits seem to conveniently take place on sections of motorway covered by gantries…
As opposed to the bits without gantries where they can’t display these messages? Is that what you mean? [emoji2962]
Carryfast:
Some might think it’s all a scam to bait drivers into big fines and points.
Not sure how you can be baited with great big neon signs telling you the new limit
Negan:
Carryfast:
Some might think it’s all a scam to bait drivers into big fines and points.Not sure how you can be baited with great big neon signs telling you the new limit
But it’s not just a limit…
It’s a ‘new limit’ that often covers miles based on the specifically stated excuse of something which by definition can only apply to a short specific section.
Even more often obviously nothing being there with the resulting temptation to then ignore the false alarm.
It defies credibility that in all these cases the supposed ‘report’ obviously never seems to provide a specific location and no location is requested on receipt of the ‘report’ including any specific lane closure information.
So why even provide the reason why not just put up the ‘new’ limit bearing in mind no specific location or the affected lane/s ?.
stu675:
Carryfast:
Does anyone else think it’s strange how so many of these events and the accompanying variable limits seem to conveniently take place on sections of motorway covered by gantries…As opposed to the bits without gantries where they can’t display these messages? Is that what you mean? [emoji2962]
No the point is the ‘coincidence’ that so many newly gantried sections of motorway are then suddenly so often affected by ‘obstructions’ etc and for how far and seemingly without any useful information like which specific lane/s are affected by the ‘obstruction’ in all cases
Carryfast:
Does anyone else think it’s strange how so many of these events and the accompanying variable limits seem to conveniently take place on sections of motorway covered by gantries.Also the ‘reports’ obviously never seem to mention a specific section of motorway where the offending ‘incidents’ are they generally cover bleedin miles.
Some might think it’s all a scam to bait drivers into big fines and points.
So, the m-ways without overhead gantries have fewer displays showing obstructions?
Who would have guessed that!
It does happen.
After all if you had just seen a Lion / panther / Leopard etc you would probably want to tell someone too.
wiltshirelive.co.uk/news/wi … rd-8085084
express.co.uk/news/uk/14538 … ldlife-ont
dorsetecho.co.uk/news/10328 … orchester/
oxfordmail.co.uk/news/15271 … vices-m40/
As I understand it, and Boss Hog if he’s about will be able to tell me I’m right or wrong, but an incident or event or whatever is reported on a stretch, the gantries and such are activated to give warning, a patrol os then sent to the area and will do a manual sweep where a further decision is taken on what happens next.
Now there is a huge issue with “reports” and that’s the reason they are called “reports” in that someone has reported something. The accuracy of this then also determines the response. For instance how many 999 programs where they’ve played the call reporting an accident between J9 and J10 of the M5 (just an example) instead of going its by marker post 149.5 B on the M5? Not many… so already the lack of info means a larger area needs to be covered. And that’s also not forgetting problems that are no longer problems - ie the car driver that swerved because there’s some polystyrene board in the live lane may report that, yet the truck driver a minute behind has already rolled over it and destroyed it, in which case you’ll get signs activated. The car that’s one minute behind the lorry that has smashed the polystyrene board sees nothing at all and wonders what the signs even up for.
There’s a fundamental thing here and that is the driver. In all my years driving, not once have I been done by a variable speed limit, not in the UK, not in many other countries in Europe that have them, because if you just stick to the limit posted then you’ll not succumb to them.
From my mates in Highways control:
Vague warning signs like “reports of obstruction” and a slightly lowered limit e.g. 60/50 are typically automatic by sensors and/or when someone has phoned something in via 999, whilst a human is trying to locate it on CCTV to verify and take further action if needed. Generally if they only get one call about it, they’ll leave the system to do its own automated thing whilst looking for it on CCTV, but if they get a large number of calls and it sounds serious they can take immediate action like lane closures or dropping the limit right down to 40. Generally they prefer to have a nearby highways officer/motorway plod see for themselves first before deciding on things like closures.
So yes, could just be a dodgey sensor playing up, or as already said the person who phoned the obstruction in gave a vague area and theyre still trying to find it and narrow it down, or its already been moved. I’d prefer to believe that option than some kind of malicious scam to make money 
toonsy:
, because if you just stick to the limit posted then you’ll not succumb to them.
That’s easy to say if you’re hourly paid, but if you’re job & knock it’s a different kettle of fish.
stu675:
toonsy:
, because if you just stick to the limit posted then you’ll not succumb to them.That’s easy to say if you’re hourly paid, but if you’re job & knock it’s a different kettle of fish.
Do you want to have a few minutes to reconsider that?
Franglais:
stu675:
toonsy:
, because if you just stick to the limit posted then you’ll not succumb to them.That’s easy to say if you’re hourly paid, but if you’re job & knock it’s a different kettle of fish.
Do you want to have a few minutes to reconsider that?
No thanks.
If you want to say that all speed limits must be complied with AND without grumbling, that’s up to you.
stu675:
Franglais:
stu675:
toonsy:
, because if you just stick to the limit posted then you’ll not succumb to them.That’s easy to say if you’re hourly paid, but if you’re job & knock it’s a different kettle of fish.
Do you want to have a few minutes to reconsider that?
No thanks.
So, sticking to the signed limit to avoid fines, is dependent upon how you are paid?
Being on jobnknock may be a temptation for some to drive faster, but it certainly isn`t a valid reason to do so, nor is it a factor on whether or not fines are imposed.
stu675:
If you want to say that all speed limits must be complied with AND without grumbling, that’s up to you.
If a temp speed limit makes your job take longer, then moan and grumble all you like.
I didnt mention anything at all about that, did I? Please dont make stuff up.
stu675:
toonsy:
, because if you just stick to the limit posted then you’ll not succumb to them.That’s easy to say if you’re hourly paid, but if you’re job & knock it’s a different kettle of fish.
So work faster and when the TM piles more work on , you throw toys out 
stu675:
That’s easy to say if you’re hourly paid, but if you’re job & knock it’s a different kettle of fish.
You’re kidding…
Me right? You’re saying the risk of a £90 ticket and the points is worth hopping the limit by a few miles an hour to gain almost nothing in journey time?
Franglais:
Carryfast:
Does anyone else think it’s strange how so many of these events and the accompanying variable limits seem to conveniently take place on sections of motorway covered by gantries.Also the ‘reports’ obviously never seem to mention a specific section of motorway where the offending ‘incidents’ are they generally cover bleedin miles.
Some might think it’s all a scam to bait drivers into big fines and points.So, the m-ways without overhead gantries have fewer displays showing obstructions?
Who would have guessed that!
So the sections of newly gantried motorways are now suddenly conveniently subjected to numerous ‘reports’ of unspecified ‘obstructions’ and incidents as a pretext for the imposition of miles of low limits.
But obviously the ‘reports’ never include other essential information like exactly where and any affected lanes.Nor obviously is such information requested on receipt of the ‘report’.
Bearing in mind that the supposed obstructions and incidents rarely if ever appear and equally conveniently miraculously never happen outside of the gantried sections, going by the all clear deristriction signs invariably signifying the end of the scam.