thunderace
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 08:09 PM |
|
|
what can pick up the light from a average speed camera
i want to know if they are working or not.
i could just go fast to see if i get a fine ,lol..
i know a mobile phone camara can be used to see if a remote is working.
|
|
|
|
|
dhutch
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 08:22 PM |
|
|
I think there just cameras, no light output.
|
|
|
mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 08:44 PM |
|
|
They have infrared illuminators
|
|
|
iank
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 08:56 PM |
|
|
Gatso use radar to detect the speed and a flash bulb when it's too late.
Other speed camera's use different technology to measure speed and forward facing ones have to use infra-red to illuminate to prevent blinding
the victim.
--
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience.
Anonymous
|
|
|
thunderace
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 09:24 PM |
|
|
now i need to drive past with my mobile phone camara on to see if there on or not(i will get my mate to do the filming).
i dont want to drive fast ,its only what if i forget as i have drove the road for 20 years at 60mph
(i could not see any power going to them so i thought they were fake,they sprung up over night)
|
|
|
loggyboy
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 09:33 PM |
|
|
night vision googles?
Or an average sony handycam with nightshot.
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 10:57 PM |
|
|
Ive got a question;
How do they actually prosecute you by using cameras that have no markings on the road, beside the road or anywhere else? Surely this defeats the
Speed = Distance / time equasion?
How do they manage to provide evidence other than vidoe footage showing a rough speed without markers?
Has anyone heard of anyone being done by an average speed camera? - I havent.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 11:02 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Ive got a question;
How do they actually prosecute you by using cameras that have no markings on the road, beside the road or anywhere else? Surely this defeats the
Speed = Distance / time equasion?
How do they manage to provide evidence other than vidoe footage showing a rough speed without markers?
Has anyone heard of anyone being done by an average speed camera? - I havent.
They work by timing your vehicle between one camera and the next and so they don't require road markings. They work in pairs which are not
necessarily neighbouring pairs although in practice I think they usually work with neighbouring pairs because they are connected using cables
currently.
However, the new version of SPECS (v3 I think) is going to work using wireless communications so they can link up all the cameras in an area to
provide speed detection across a large area. Tickets will be issued electronically as well whereas at present I understand they have to collect ticket
data from the camera control boxes next to them.
Plenty of info on the web if you search for it.
Cheers,
Craig.
Here's a link:
http://www.speedcheck.co.uk/specs.htm
[Edited on 10/11/2009 by craig1410]
|
|
|
A1
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 11:54 PM |
|
|
why not go down and paint extra lines on the road? thatd mean they couldnt prosecute anyone.
the gatso scameras go on the basis that each line is equal to 10mph, so you paint in lots of extras and theyll deduct you were doing 320mph (which is
just silly)
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 10/11/09 at 11:58 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by A1
why not go down and paint extra lines on the road? thatd mean they couldnt prosecute anyone.
the gatso scameras go on the basis that each line is equal to 10mph, so you paint in lots of extras and theyll deduct you were doing 320mph (which is
just silly)
Yes but these are average speed cameras which don't need white lines. They do a distance / time calculation for your vehicle between two linked
cameras. They use automatic numberplate recognition to identify your vehicle (and all the other vehicles around you) and time each and every one of
you between camera sites.
|
|
|
A1
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 12:07 AM |
|
|
aye, fair point...paintball gun and a good aim...
slightly off topic, but got looking and came across this rather interesting article...
http://www.grumpyoldsod.com/speed%20dont%20kill.asp
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 07:55 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by craig1410
quote:
Originally posted by A1
why not go down and paint extra lines on the road? thatd mean they couldnt prosecute anyone.
the gatso scameras go on the basis that each line is equal to 10mph, so you paint in lots of extras and theyll deduct you were doing 320mph (which is
just silly)
Yes but these are average speed cameras which don't need white lines. They do a distance / time calculation for your vehicle between two linked
cameras. They use automatic numberplate recognition to identify your vehicle (and all the other vehicles around you) and time each and every one of
you between camera sites.
I hear what youre saying Craig, but i dont see how they can prosecute anyone without markings. The Field of View of the camera will be so wide, it
would be impossible to tell the speed accurately.
Im not convinced that it would stand up in court, which is why i asked if anyone knows anyone that has been done by one.
I know there is loads of info about this system on the net, but then all the government need to do is release an "Official" spec for the
equipment, and all the driver forums publish it for them and discuss it.
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 08:14 AM |
|
|
Having for a few years regularly traveled on a road where average speed cameras are in use I can tell you they are nothing to be frightened of,
traffic speed is usually just below the true speed limit -- ie bang on the limit as indicated by a typical car speedo which generally read about 7%
fast.
The number of drivers caught with this type of camera is much smaller than with GATSOs but they are very effective at reducing average traffic speed
on dual carriageways. The big problem is the cause serious traffic bunching particularly if you get a driver who is over wary of the cameras and
drives at say 5mph below the limit as indicated on his or her speedo.
|
|
|
britishtrident
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 08:21 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
I hear what youre saying Craig, but i dont see how they can prosecute anyone without markings. The Field of View of the camera will be so wide, it
would be impossible to tell the speed accurately.
Im not convinced that it would stand up in court, which is why i asked if anyone knows anyone that has been done by one.
I know there is loads of info about this system on the net, but then all the government need to do is release an "Official" spec for the
equipment, and all the driver forums publish it for them and discuss it.
The cameras are in practice set a couple of km apart so for example 5 meters error would give only 0.25% error and margin of X mph above the speed
limit before the camera is triggered is large enough to make the error insignificant.
[I] “ What use our work, Bennet, if we cannot care for those we love? .”
― From BBC TV/Amazon's Ripper Street.
[/I]
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 11:59 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by britishtrident
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
I hear what youre saying Craig, but i dont see how they can prosecute anyone without markings. The Field of View of the camera will be so wide, it
would be impossible to tell the speed accurately.
Im not convinced that it would stand up in court, which is why i asked if anyone knows anyone that has been done by one.
I know there is loads of info about this system on the net, but then all the government need to do is release an "Official" spec for the
equipment, and all the driver forums publish it for them and discuss it.
The cameras are in practice set a couple of km apart so for example 5 meters error would give only 0.25% error and margin of X mph above the speed
limit before the camera is triggered is large enough to make the error insignificant.
So what youre saying is;
Im travelling at 70mph.
Margin of error is 10% - Max velocity is 77mph.
Margin of error over the distance of 1m is 0.25% or 1/4%.
77mph X 0.25% = 38.5mph.
38.5mph / 77 = 0.5mph per mile
Therefore maximum velocity over 1m would be 77.5mph.
This 0.5mph could be the difference between a ticket or not.
Id fight this in court, but then im an argumentative bugger!
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 12:35 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Therefore maximum velocity over 1m would be 77.5mph.
This 0.5mph could be the difference between a ticket or not.
Id fight this in court, but then im an argumentative bugger!
You'd go to court to argue you were breaking the speed limit by 7mph instead of 7.5mph?  Don't think you'd get too far with that
tbh...
|
|
|
greggors84
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 01:22 PM |
|
|
Just for info 2 people from work have been caught by average speed cameras.
A japanese lad working for us was caught at 65mph in the roadworks around nottingham as he didnt realise they were average cameras. He was back in
Japan by the time the ticket came through so nothing could be done.
Also another lad was done at about 60 on the way down to wales, unfourtunately escaping to Japan was more expensive than taking the ticket and 3
points.
Chris
The Magnificent 7!
|
|
|
MakeEverything
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 05:45 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Therefore maximum velocity over 1m would be 77.5mph.
This 0.5mph could be the difference between a ticket or not.
Id fight this in court, but then im an argumentative bugger!
You'd go to court to argue you were breaking the speed limit by 7mph instead of 7.5mph? Don't think you'd get too far with that
tbh...
No, theres a 10% permitted tolerance for speedos IIRC, as issued by the fuzz governing body?
Kindest Regards,
Richard.
...You can make it foolProof, but youll never make it Idiot Proof!...
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 07:54 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
Therefore maximum velocity over 1m would be 77.5mph.
This 0.5mph could be the difference between a ticket or not.
Id fight this in court, but then im an argumentative bugger!
You'd go to court to argue you were breaking the speed limit by 7mph instead of 7.5mph? Don't think you'd get too far with that
tbh...
No, theres a 10% permitted tolerance for speedos IIRC, as issued by the fuzz governing body?
Speedo's by law cannot underestimate speed but can overestimate by up to 10%. So if your speedo reads 70MPH then you might be doing 70MPH
exactly or more likely you will be doing something like 65MPH or as low as 63.63MPH (70/1.1)
If you then consider that there are ACPO guidelines on speeding which recommend that prosecutions are not pursued unless the driver is doing more than
10% + 2 MPH over the limit then you have a pretty wide tolerance.
So, taking worst case, with a speedo which is 10% overestimating you would need to be driving at an INDICATED 86.9 MPH in a 70MPH zone to get a
ticket. I get that from the ACPO guideline of 79MPH for prosecution and then multiply by 1.1 to get the 10% overestimated speed.
If you are doing 86.9MPH in a 70 limit you deserve a fine in my opinion!
I hope this helps to clarify how this all works.
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 08:13 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
No, theres a 10% permitted tolerance for speedos IIRC, as issued by the fuzz governing body?
Speeding is an absolute offence; if your speed could be measured accurately enough by a camera or speed gun there is nothing in law to stop you being
prosecuted for 1mph over the limit.
The ACPO Code Of Practice sets a recommended threshold for prosecution, but that is not a legally binding document and does not make you immune from
prosecution at speeds below this threshold (and above the limit).
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 08:20 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MikeRJ
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
No, theres a 10% permitted tolerance for speedos IIRC, as issued by the fuzz governing body?
Speeding is an absolute offence; if your speed could be measured accurately enough by a camera or speed gun there is nothing in law to stop you being
prosecuted for 1mph over the limit.
The ACPO Code Of Practice sets a recommended threshold for prosecution, but that is not a legally binding document and does not make you immune from
prosecution at speeds below this threshold (and above the limit).
Yes but I think you will find that convictions at speeds below the ACPO guideline figures will only be pursued when the offence was witnessed by a
policeman/policewoman and where there were other factors such as poor weather, poor driving style, proximity to a school or pedestrian crossing
etc.
For automated systems such as Gatso's an SPECS cameras the ACPO guidelines are usually the minimum threshold at which offences will be
recorded.
As you say, 1MPH over the limit is an offence so don't anyone come complaining to me if you get caught doing 31 in a 3 zone. I don't think
the, "Craig told me that..." defence will help! 
|
|
|
Liam
|
| posted on 11/11/09 at 11:42 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
No, theres a 10% permitted tolerance for speedos IIRC, as issued by the fuzz governing body?
The point is that the camera system will be set up so that the point at which it triggers takes into account the worst case of permitted speedo error,
and also measurement error of the camera system itself. In other words it's not possible for a camera to issue a ticket to somebody who was not
actually speeding and who's legal speedo was reading the limit or below. If you get a ticket there's no question you were speeding - the
only thing up for argument is by how much you were breaking the law.
Liam
[Edited on 11/11/09 by Liam]
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 14/11/09 at 11:45 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Liam
quote:
Originally posted by MakeEverything
No, theres a 10% permitted tolerance for speedos IIRC, as issued by the fuzz governing body?
The point is that the camera system will be set up so that the point at which it triggers takes into account the worst case of permitted speedo error,
and also measurement error of the camera system itself. In other words it's not possible for a camera to issue a ticket to somebody who was not
actually speeding and who's legal speedo was reading the limit or below. If you get a ticket there's no question you were speeding - the
only thing up for argument is by how much you were breaking the law.
Liam
[Edited on 11/11/09 by Liam]
Does this mean they've fixed the problem that caused a tractor to be caught doing 120mph by average speed cameras?
|
|
|
