Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Mobile speed camera accuracy??

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by nearlyempty, Aug 4, 2005.

  1. Just catching up on my reading and found this in last weeks mcn, relating to mobile speed cameras (I have edited it to remove much of the journalistic frill).

    Again, this is UK related and I am not entirely sure how relevant this is to Oz (if police here are using a similar detector here then I suppose we can safely assume some relevance).


    The type of cameras they are referring to are called Lastec Local Video Capture. These are a laser speed detector, which is connected to a video recorder. The laser, the LTI 20.20, fires signals at a target object, then measures the time it takes for these to bounce back. That time tells it how far away the object is, and the change in the object’s distance over time give the speed.

    The trouble is, they are innacurate when used to detect speeding bikes.



    The chairman of the European Standards Committee on Vehicle Detectors, Dr Michael Hall, has said these devices don’t work as well on bikes, and at least 10% of readings are incorrect.

    The trouble is, it's accuracy depends on the signal hitting the object accurately. Hall, whose expert testimony has helped destroy six speeding
    court cases in the UK, maintains that’s more difficult with bikes.
    He said: “Often when police aim at a bike, half the signal is bouncing off
    the tarmac. When the laser is pointed at two different objects, it thinks it’s a single object that’s moved, which creates incorrect readings.

    “Any reading from the front is very dodgy. The headlight and windshield
    are reflective, and don’t return good signals. If a rider’s leathers are black, it also causes problems.”
    To get any sort of accuracy they should be aimed at “the area around the
    registration plate.” On bikes this means readings should only be taken from the back.

    The article goes on to say that Frank Garrett, MD of Tele-Traffic, which
    supplies the speeds traps, claimed they had been tested on bikes, but refused to supply us with the test results. He said: “I don’t need to justify myself.”
     
     Top
  2. My heart bleeds for them, all they want to do is raise revenue in a streamlined and efficient fashion. I think a ban on shiny objects is imminent.
     
     Top
  3. perhaps i could of got my fine lowered :(
     
     Top
  4. I know a bloke who's job it was to calibrate the cameras for the coppers at one stage, he reckons they get done about once a year but should be done every 3 months, and almost all when getting re-calibrated are well over 10% out.
     
     Top
  5. Kinda makes defending yourself against a speeding ticket difficult when the police won't release details as to what constitutes an invalid reading doesn't it.
     
     Top
  6. I had to laugh at the Herald-Sun's lame excuse for not publishing the details from this manual. "for safety reasons". OK, Mr. Editor, detail those reasons.

    Thing is, for such methods of speed enforcement to be accepted by the community which ultimately is the approver of them, then they need to be open and transparent. Otherwise, we get into the areas of allegations of police state mentality and so on.

    I wish that whoever got a copy of this manual would scan in the juicier bits and post them on some anonymous website. It'd probably receive more hits than Paris Hilton's home video sites....
     
     Top
  7.  Top
  8. Imagine if they'd done all of this overnight.. the community wouldn't have a bar of it. But they've done it very slowly and carefully, constantly pointing to a stagnant road toll as justfication, even today. We're beyond the point of questioning it, we need push back at the ballot box I reckon.
     
     Top
  9. I haven't got a copy in front of me now, but didn't it say there was a section, outlining a method of either screwing up or invalidating the readings, that they chose not to publish "for safety reasons"?
    If so, expect to see the full details of THAT on various sites by, oh, tonight ? :)

    And yet, in The Age:
    "... But Assistant Commissioner (Traffic) Bob Hastings said a so-called secret report, featured in the Herald Sun, was not secret at all.

    "That document's been in existence ever since the traffic camera program started some 14 years ago, so there's no secret to it," he told theage.com.au.

    Not only do the d1ckheads not know whether the cameras are accurate, they don't even know which information they are supposed to release to the public!
     
     Top
  10. Nah mate, both major parties (and most of the minors) support this bullsh1t policy, even if a large percentage of the public don't.
    The trick is going to be to publicly discredit the anti-transport idealogues in the Vicroads and TAC bureaucracies (that guide MUARC on its appointed mission).
    Strangely, that seems to be what the newspapers (and current affairs shows) are sometimes doing :?
     
     Top
  11. I agree with titus . All major parties agree with this because it rakes in so much money . My problem is the location of thses greed camera's . :evil:
     
     Top
  12. Here it is from the online version of the H-S;

    "The 50-page Speed Camera Policy and Operations Manual also identifies a major operational weakness in the cameras, which monitor multi-lane roads.

    "But for road safety reasons the Herald Sun has chosen not to give details of this gap. "
     
     Top
  13. multi-lane roads?

    probably refering to the fact that if someone else is in the photo you dont get a fine. Travelling 2 abrest is the easiest way to avoid multinova fines
     
     Top
  14. I think that they've stuffed up the website links or something. It seems to be reporting the issue about the secret policeman's business, rather than the case itself. Hopefully it will be correct for the Friday's edition, or that the H-S will have the case in its Friday edition.

    That heading is ambiguous. Did it throw out the cop's case or the challenge of the motorist?
     
     Top
  15. I can't believe Glen has not jumped on here to say this :shock: :LOL: so I will say it too still his thunder...........Don't speed and it won't be a problem :p :p :p

    Cheers 8)
     
     Top