No escape, no surrender

[Gef]

Been getting spammed with messages about speed cameras all morning, which is odd because I dont have a car. But for people who drive on motorways lots, well, your screwed

If you speed that is, which i'm sure nobody on motorways ever does!

--------

You know those new electronic signs on the M4? Well they were switched on by some transport minister on Tuesday. Now the bad news, they are rigged with the SPECS speed cameras.

SPECS is a camera based system. As you go past a camera software detects and reads your number plate. When you go past the next camera, it detects and reads your number plate again. It knows how far apart the cameras are so it can work out your average speed between the two cameras.

The system is fully automatic and will automatically issue a ticket without any form of human intervention. It does this for every single vehicle that passes a camera! You will not know you've been nicked as the cameras don't flash. There's no film in them either, they're digital. Images of you in your car, together with the date and time are stored on disc (I assume they only keep them if you've been nicked).

It works 24/7, 365 days a year, and theoretically, there's absolutely no limit on the number of tickets that it can issue.

The whole section of the M4 between Theale (J12) and Membury Services (between 14 and 15) is wired, both ways. It is believed that the system is set to trigger a ticket at 78 mph.

The bad news gets even worse. For those who've got radar detectors, they won't work. SPECS is entirely passive, there's no radar or laser beam to pick up.

-------

 

[Ch3tan]

If they don't flash how are they going to pick up an image at night, especially one of a moving object.

 

[leggy]

infra red

 

[Deadmanwalking]

infra red to see a number ?

Nightvision surely?

That or the motor way lights

 

[leggy]

Originally posted by Deadmanwalking
infra red to see a number ?

Nightvision surely?

How do you think night vision works?

Dumass.

 

[xane]

If they are digital then the image can be processed for low light techniques. You aren't trying to get colour balance, just the definition of a number plate.

I'm a little bit suspect of this as you don't normally find speed detectors on motorways, although I do know of one myself which is just before the motorway finishes.

 

[Rubber Bullets]

So in other words the only safe time to speed is in really thick fog.

Speed cameras really need to be seen as improving safety on the roads. If they are placed at accident blackspots and are fully visible, with warning signs, then most people don't have a problem with them.

When they are seen as a money making scheme then there is a great deal of bad public feeling created.

I don't use the M4 much, and don't know that strech offhand, but in general terms motorways are amongst the safest roads in the country with most accidents occuring in very bad weather, or in contra flows. Churning out thousands of speeding tickets on a safe bit of motorway will cause really bad press.

Apart from that I thought that it was now law that speed cameras be made as visible as possible, hence the yellow/red reflective stripes they all have on them now.

RB

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Originally posted by leggy
How do you think night vision works?

Dumass.

Nightvision in terms of low light digital image, rather then heat.

 

[Any]

Originally posted by Deadmanwalking


Nightvision in terms of low light digital image, rather then heat.

Both types of night vison use infrared. Just different parts of the spectrum.
Either leggy doesnt know this or he wants to appear smart.


Edit: I thought speed cameras had to be sign posted/visable by law?

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Originally posted by Any
Both types of night vison use infrared. Just different parts of the spectrum.
Either leggy doesnt know this or he wants to appear smart.


Edit: I thought speed cameras had to be sign posted/visable by law?

Maybe he is smart? or just happened to know this?

 

[Any]

Its just the way i read his post i guess.

 

[WPKenny]

I don't know if there's an actual law on the cameras being visible, more like guidelines.

 

[(Shovel)]

Originally posted by WPKenny
I don't know if there's an actual law on the cameras being visible, more like guidelines.

I believe it came about when someone - defending themself in court against a speeding fine - claimed that not sign posting them, and not making them obvious was some kind of breech of privacy. He/She one and as a result they had to go painting them all yellow sharpish. He also got off his fine.

It seems a bit stupid how it came about, but as regards their actually effectiveness of making people slow down, it's got to be preferable.

 

[whipped]

There's an easy way to fool the cameras. Get some number plates from James Bond Inc. that swivel around. As you enter the M4 you changed your number plates and as you leave you change them back. Never get caught

 

[Deadmanwalking]

Or that stuff that taxis use to make the number plates all shining and reflective. Like looking at a watch underwater at an angle

 

[xane]

Hey ! How's this for a great idea - dont go so fecking fast !!!

 

[Tom]

So far as I know, your number plate is only logged if you pass a camera travelling faster than the speed limit. So in theory, so long as you know where the cameras are, you can drive normally underneath them, and speed up for the section inbetween. I don't know this for certain though, so I'd be happy for somebody to prove me wrong.

Another thing is that each pair of cameras can only cover one lane. So on any particular stretch of motorway, to cover all three lanes, you need a minimum of 6 cameras. On the roadworks I have seen (for instance, the M6 through Birmingham had a 40mph limit for ages), they only had enough cameras to cover 1 lane at a time (although they were spaced out over a few miles), so in theory you could blast past them all by simply changing lanes before you hit one. I wouldn't put it past the buggers to make a camera appear to be pointing at a particular lane, while in reality it would be pointing at the lane next to that one. Also, I would imagine that each pair of cameras would not be operating independantly of the other pairs, so your best bet really, is to drive more slowly.

Anyway, its down south, so I couldn't give a fuck, they're all ****s down there.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by Tom
So far as I know, your number plate is only logged if you pass a camera travelling faster than the speed limit. So in theory, so long as you know where the cameras are, you can drive normally underneath them, and speed up for the section inbetween. I don't know this for certain though, so I'd be happy for somebody to prove me wrong.

No, the SPECS works by taking a digital picture of every single car that passes both cameras, it then scans for the number plate and pairs them up and then uses the time lapse and the known distance between cameras to calculate average speed, only those pictures taken against speeding cars will be retained.

There is no radar, no flash, and the camera image is of the front so that the person driiving can be seen too.

Actually there is probably no "picture" as such, the whole thing is conceivably done on a moving image using fast processors, a snapshot is only taken once an offender is found.

 

[icemaiden]

I'm sure i read about a scheme like that operating in some european country (France maybes), where basically all along the road at certain intervals there are tolls with sensors on em and it works out if you've been speeding from the time taken to get from one sensor to the next. All sounds a bit poo to me.
Right now there are new speed cameras being set up on the M9 just outside livingston, basically my road to work.. yey!
The worst area i've driven in for speed cameras so far is carlisle/lancs area of motorway, theres millions of em down there.

 

[Jupitus]

The traffic master network already uses this technology to gague the relative congestion levels on the road network. They are already scanning your number plate and then matching it at another location to calculate your speed over that section, which allows them to build an overall image of where the slow points are to warn their users.

As far as I know, none of this technology has been used yet to catch speeders, and I think that the 'visibility' situation is one of the reasons. However, it's perfectly possible that this might be the introduction of such a scheme which is worrying, in my view.

Is the quote taken from some email then, or is it anywhere in the news itself? Looks to me like some scare mongering to be honest.

 

[leggy]

Originally posted by Any
Both types of night vison use infrared. Just different parts of the spectrum.
Either leggy doesnt know this or he wants to appear smart.

I was purposly slagging DMW off because he deserves it and he knows I'm joking

Try harder to reserve judgment on people in future.

Btw, I am smart. Put on my new tin flute this morning.

 

[WPKenny]

Originally posted by icemaiden
I'm sure i read about a scheme like that operating in some european country (France maybes), where basically all along the road at certain intervals there are tolls with sensors on em and it works out if you've been speeding from the time taken to get from one sensor to the next. All sounds a bit poo to me.
Right now there are new speed cameras being set up on the M9 just outside livingston, basically my road to work.. yey!
The worst area i've driven in for speed cameras so far is carlisle/lancs area of motorway, theres millions of em down there.

I think this is true about the toll booths in France actually working out if you've been speeding from one toll booth to the next.

 

[Embattle]

Originally posted by (Shovel)
I believe it came about when someone - defending themself in court against a speeding fine - claimed that not sign posting them, and not making them obvious was some kind of breech of privacy. He/She one and as a result they had to go painting them all yellow sharpish. He also got off his fine.

It seems a bit stupid how it came about, but as regards their actually effectiveness of making people slow down, it's got to be preferable.

There was another case where the Camera warning sign was done wrong and thus the driver won in court.

 

[Jupitus]

Originally posted by WPKenny
I think this is true about the toll booths in France actually working out if you've been speeding from one toll booth to the next.

Well if that's true I'm expecting one very heavy fucking bill to land through my door soon.

I averaged a speed in excess of 80 MPH from Calais to about 400 miles away over those toll roads.

(Before you all bitch at me the roads are excellently signed and maintained and the traffic was quite light... I am a very safe driver, if a little hevay with the right foot 18 years, 0 accidents)

 

[Tom]

I wouldn't worry about it, I've done the same and nobody in France gives a fuck.

 

[Jonaldo]

Just drive within the speed limit. That's what the limit is for, it saves lives in the long run no matter what people say and it'll save you money in fines.

Pretty easy solution really, suprised so few people manage to work that one out.

 

[xane]

For me, the speed cameras are less about saving lives and more about traffic flow and preventing any sort of accident that can lead to a serious congestion problem. Where I live and travel, in East London and around Docklands, where the A12 and A13 enter the city, you can get one accident and it will send the entire area into a giant gridlock.

Most speed restrictions are there because of the way the road is, for example, where a three lane highway narrows into two lanes, you simply cannot have people hammering along into it at 60 mph as the narrowing would not cope and it is fact highly dangerous. The motorway speed camera I mentioned before is where the M11 (70 mph, three lanes) leads into the A406 (40 mph, two lanes). It is so obvious you need to slow down everyone well in advance.

I'm often waiting in a queue at the lights, watching the usual suspects nip into the bus lane to cut back in further up, blissfully unaware that the reason we are in a queue in the first place is all the previous queue jumpers clogging up the road ahead, it is obvious to me there are a lot of drivers who really couldn't give shit about other road users.

If _everyone_ travelled at the "right" speed we'd _all_ get there quicker, unfortunately some selfish bastage decides his need is greater and decides to screw it all up for everyone else, invariably causing a domino effect of drivers who, not wishing to get caught out, start to panic and copy him, and the logjam ensues. If the speed cameras can start penalising the stupid inconsiderate drivers who are not willing to pay care and attention to traffic congestion, then I am all for it.

The major problem is that often save and considerate speed limits apply to different times of the day. A perfectly clear motorway is fine for 90-100 mph in the outer lane with no other traffic, but thats simply not acceptable at 9am on the M25. Hopefully, as speed cameras become more advanced, they'll be coupled with electronic speed limit signs and variable speed limits can be enforced.

 

[Cdr]

Originally posted by Jonaldo
Just drive within the speed limit. That's what the limit is for, it saves lives in the long run no matter what people say and it'll save you money in fines.

Pretty easy solution really, suprised so few people manage to work that one out.

Do you drive?

 

[DaGaffer]

Clearly not...

 

[Jonaldo]

Originally posted by Cdr
Do you drive?

heh no

Now I get the whole psyche of a driver lecture that obviously I've never heard 32,000 times before from other people telling me I don't know what I'm talking about.

I'll just leave it with drive as fast as you want then I'm no driver so you don't affect me at the moment.

Laws are put in place to protect people
Speed cameras and traffic police are put in place to enforce those laws.
People intentionally break these laws because they want to get from A to B X minutes quicker.
When they get fined, caught, arrested or whatever because they broke the laws they cry like babies or whine because it's not fair they did have big fuck off neon signs saying "SLOW DOWN FOR 30 SECONDS WHILE YOU DRIVE PAST THIS CAMERA".

Bollocks I say, just because I'm not a driver doesn't mean I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm not a professional decorator but still know when someones house looks like shit, I'm not a photographer but can still spot a shit picture, I'm not a footballer but can still see when there's a crap player.

Basically if you don't like the fact you might get caught speeding then don't drive like me. Don't try and take the piss just because I don't drive.