Now, since I've spent half an hour talking to the general manager of RMS traffic management, Craig Moran, I know what's behind those three observations and a good deal more. Most of the traffic lights in the Lower Hunter are co-ordinated, Mr Moran tells me, and that means that they work in sequence to give green lights to what he describes as a platoon of traffic. The system is known as SCATS (Sydney Co-ordinated Adaptive Traffic System), and it has, of course, been adapted many times to new technology since it was developed by the Department of Main Roads many years ago.

Speed and you'll arrive too soon for the green, and SCATS recognises, too, that heavy traffic travels at less than the speed limit and adapts the sequence accordingly. So travelling faster than the platoon, even within the speed limit, will see you waiting at the next lights.

SCATS measures the gap between vehicles to assess traffic density, and it interprets reducing density as reducing demand for a green. So when the woman in front leaves a big gap SCATS switches the green to amber, so she gets through and we don't. Particularly frustrating about this is that she can't hear your corrective protests.

It is largely traffic density that determines the duration of reds and greens at an intersection, not, as I had thought, the time and the day. The RMS, which used to be the RTA, sets parameters for a cycle, so that, for example, a particular set of lights must give a green to every demand within, say, 180 seconds, but SCATS uses density assessments within those parameters. The highest maximum used is 240 seconds.

Mr Moran said the RMS is reviewing those parameters at lights at Belmont and the co-ordinated series between Newcastle and Charlestown as a result of complaints about waiting times, and I took the opportunity to protest about the lengthy wait at the point where Brunker Road meets the old Pacific Highway.

Does any particular set of traffic lights create a problem for you?