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.

Roadside Speed Cameras

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by GOOSH, May 27, 2006.

  1. hey guys, just want to know, does anyone know how the roadside speed cameras work. was riding along beach road this evening when i saw a flash go off. but i dont know if it was the car who set it off or me. we were both travelling at the same speed but the car was infront of me. Does the camera take a photo of the vehicle speeding and have the speed showing or all vehicles in site and each vehicle. so what i am trying to say is that does it need to flash twice to get 2 people or can the one photo get two people. thanks

  2. hmm , if the car was in front of you i would have to assume it got him
    this has happened to me before , it got the other guy and im thinking it cant get 2 people at once
    also , do you have a front number plate ?
  3. no i dont have a front numberplate on my bike. it was the one of the hyundai santa fe parked on the side of the road which takes rear plates. so it has either gotten the car, me, or me and the car. and to add matters worse, another rider was behind me. so therefore could get 3 people on the photo
  4. if more than one vehicle is in a photo, can't be proved who was speeding. I'd be happy. If any hassles swear black + blue you was being under the limit

    ENJOY :D
  5. I am with undii, if there is more than 1 car/bike in the photo, you can always argue that it was thge other person in the photo that was speeding and he just overtook you or something. That is a good point to argue in court if they try and give you a fine or take points or whatever. You can ask for a copy of the photo to be mailed to you, and they will. If there is another car in the photo, just say it was him speeding. They will usually let it off, it has happened to me before and they let it go.
  6. It may only be urban myth about the 'single vehicle only' picture, guys. A couple of years ago there was a case in court here in Sydney and the photo evidence was tendered showing several cars in the frame, and the guy (who was one of them)lost the case.... {there may have been other factors in that case, of course}
  7. I was on the other bike :cry:

    I hope the car gets the fine... will have to wait by the mailbox (probably in 3-6months time coz they're so prompt in letting u know that you got done :evil: ) and see what happens :?

    There was only one flash, but like Goosh said, the car and us were all relatively close and doing the same speed...
  8. I suspect, then, as sad as this sounds, that they got three for the price of one .... :cry:

    I must say, every time I read these stories It makes me glad I live in NSW; you guys are really in a police state when it comes to tolerance on speed :evil:
  9. Usually, they arrive in your mailbox in the same week - at least, with me, they have...

    On another note, do you think that you were speeding?

    I'm told that when a camera takes a photo, it's usually the vehicle that is in line with the camera's aiming point, usually set diagonally across the road.

    Two vehicles may be together, but because of the angle of the radar beam, only one of them will be targeted at that particular point. The other vehicle would be targeted, either a few metres earlier or a few metres later, depending on his position. (Left lane, earlier, right lane, later if the camera's position on the left side of the road.)

    Presumably, the vehicle that is in the centre of the photo would be the culprit.

    As others have suggested, if you have been pinged, best to pay the 10 bux or whatever it costs to get a copy of the photo. And make sure that it's not been trimmed. I heard of one incident where a fellow got half an A4 sized photo of him. There apparently was another vehicle in the frame. Can't remember what happened there. Fellow might's challenged it.
  10. FWIW my ''64 in a 60 zone'' arrived last week, two weeks after the ''offence'', which ws commited on Bell St on the approach to the freeway on-ramp. No excuses, I was careless and got caught by the pricks.
  11. Wha!!!...64 in a 60 zone!..Cheesus!...
    Ah well...I guess people can all sleep more soundly now with the knowledge that another wreckless, life-threatening nutcase speeder, has been dealt with, eh. (coff)
  12. Yes, it's sort of urban myth. Multiple vehicles can be in a photo, but only one vehicle per photo can be the offender. The roadside camera's are aligned with a focal point on the opposite side of the road. It could be a power pole, a tree trunk, telephone box etc. The vehicle that sets off the photo and speed detection (and thus receives the fine) will be the vehicle that has it's front bumper touching the invisible line between the camera and that focal point. The camera operator records what the focal point is for that location so that it can be used for any fine contestments.

    So to answer your question, it could have been you or the other car that set off the camera, and which ever one of you it was will get the fine.
  13. ALWAYS get the photo. Even if you know it was you. ALWAYS look for yourself. You can view the photo for free i the city or pay $7 and have it sent to you.
  14. That's why there are always 2 flashes; so they can get 2 photos.
  15. Just thought of something. How do they do it with the newer cameras that are affixed to the front bumper of the vehicle? They all seem to be parked parallel to the road, whenever I've spotted them.
  16. I believe there is a requirement that no other metal surfaces be in the line of fire as it can give inacurrate readings. Given that a roller door in the background will render the photo void, perhaps it's worth arguing the same point if there is another car there.?.?
  17. The 'Multiple Vehicles in Picture' defense has been sucessfully used in court, at least in WA and NSW, and I myself have had a ticket dropped by challenging it at the viewing stage for this very reason.. It is plausible with any radar device because the radar produces a radiating signal that is not a tight beam. Vehicles in close proximity are all 'painted' by the radar and this is further complicated by reflection and refraction of the beam by the vehicles themselves. This will not work with a lazer device which has a coherent beam. The idea of crossing a "line" between two points sounds great, but electromagnetic radiation just doesn't work like that.
  18. Seem to remember this Paul, think it was on a Freeway??? The cameras on most freeways are lane specific so even if the get a photo with 4 cars in it, it will say "lane 3, speed 198kph" or whatever the case may be. :wink:

  19. The defense will only work if the vehicles are in close proximity, i.e so close that they are side by side, or are overlapping front to rear.
  20. it was my understanding that fixed speed cameras in NSW are not radar, every speed camera i go past has sensors in the road, 3 lines across each lane and when there are multiple lanes the sensors are staggered.