Toulouse: “The noise reduction radar is a gadget that costs a crazy dough”
A fine of 135 euros, now it will cost the motorcyclist taken in excess of decibels by the noise reduction radar which is entering its final phase of experimentation. First verbalizations during the year and already the controversy. Pierre Chasseray, General Delegate of the association “40 million motorists”, explains why this radar does not solve the problems.
A fine of 135 euros, now it will cost the motorcyclist taken in excess of decibels by the noise reduction radar which is entering its final phase of experimentation. First verbalizations during the year and already the controversy. Pierre Chasseray, General Delegate of the association “40 million motorists”, explains why this radar does not solve the problems.
First of all, what do you call noise-canceling radar during experimentation?
A noise reduction radar intended to distinguish with a sound detector the two motorized wheels and other motor motors, which exceed the tolerable decibel thresholds because they would have been tampered with as a result. We are talking about a period of experimentation because during the first 6 months, they will not verbalize strictly speaking.
What decibel standards does it meet and when will it be generalized?
This is the fundamental question. Noise reduction radar does not have a “standard” for tolerable decibels. The threshold will be defined by the ministerial decree at the end of the 6-month experimentation period. The government will therefore advance “with a wet finger” to define which threshold is acceptable. The difficulty being that no text defines a regulatory threshold for the moment …
What do you hold against this system?
The government’s desire to attack vehicles whose sound emissions constitute a nuisance for the population are part of a fair finding, but as often, we seek to respond to the problem with the wrong solution. The radar measures and sanctions in a specific place. If the excessive noise of certain engines is a real scourge for residents, this radar is not the solution and will only shift the problem onto parallel streets. A vehicle owner emitting a deafening noise of evacuation will therefore walk a few streets to pass between the drops. In fact, this very expensive system will not be profitable economically. It is a measure of facade, a gadget without effect that costs more than a “crazy dough”! On the other hand, if we look at a more general framework, you should know that between 25 and 40 km / h, 35% of the noise emitted by vehicles comes from tire / road friction. And to reduce the resulting noise pollution, there are special road surfaces, known as “sound mixes” or “noise reduction”, already present on several roads in Ile-de-France and which give excellent acoustic results.
What do you recommend to reduce noise pollution?
If the vehicles are on the road, we must give the means to the police to be able to stop them. But the police and the gendarmerie obviously lack the means which make this mission impossible. Trafficked jars are a reality and are particularly intolerable, but a priori they only concern a small minority of users. We are more in favor of a strengthening of controls by the police than of the implementation of automated control by radar.
In the long term, do we have to restrict motorcycle exhausts?
Before any reinforcement of repressive measures, let us content ourselves with ensuring that the current rules are respected. It should not be forgotten that this measure intervenes only because the State did not have the courage to make apply the European measure of technical control on the two motorized wheels. France has thus played on the text of the European Union which makes roadworthiness tests compulsory for two-wheelers in the European Union by making use of a derogation from the text: that of putting in place alternative measures making it possible to control possible unclamping in particular of the two wheels.
Video-verbalization arrives in Toulouse, what do you think?
Watch out for all these excess verbalizations. The context in France is particularly tense and particularly in Toulouse where the mobility policy seems to exclude peri-urban residents from the heart of the city. The arrival of low-emission zones could play the role of spark which will set up the fire in the powders. In this context, motorists need a truce, a lull in verbalizations. I can only advise Jean-Luc Moudenc, whom I had the opportunity to meet before he became mayor of Toulouse, to think above all of a real campaign to verbalize cyclists who feel they have all the rights in the Toulouse heart. Non-compliance with red traffic lights, headphones in the ears, anarchic parking … compliance with the Highway Code is not just reserved for motorists …