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.

[Vic] more dodgy cameras on Eastlink

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by TonyE, Sep 13, 2010.

  1. The Herald Sun can reveal EastLink speed cameras took images they weren't supposed to, contained corrupt data and had communication blackouts.

    Officials were forced to replace a Wellington Rd camera after it went haywire, shooting images it wasn't supposed to...

    Full story at http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/vi...amers-go-haywire/story-e6frf7kx-1225919895952

  2. suprised much? No, not really.

    If you asked them for a coffee you'd definitely get tea.
  3. Bugger .......... I reckon I may have donated to that bloody Wellington Rd camera..
  4. How do vic speed camera's work? Is it via induction loop in the ground? If so then technically the police could be correct, there is nothing wrong with the camera in itself, the issue could be with the sensors.

    Didn't victoria have a massive issue with dodgy cameras a while back (few years)?
  5. Richard Brown of Rosebud, I love you.

    "And the bureaucracy continues to ignore the mass of complaints about faulty cameras. As the victim of a false speeding fine 4 years ago, with no recourse because I couldn't find any then, I am not surprised that the reliance on speed camera revenue has made our authorities like drug addicts. They can't stop and they are in denial. I wrote a letter to the Police Minister earlier this year when I got another one for 5kms over asking why the cars photo isn't on the fine like other jurisdictions. Given our so called technical ability to take a photo, why can't it be on the fine instead of having to apply and pay for it? I got no reply and the reason is simple; most people will pay the fine without checking. Mark Skaife was right on most things he said and the authorities directed their focus on the 140kph comment to shut the discussion down. Driver education is the problem, not minor speed infractions. Ask yourself the question, when was the last time your driving skills were checked? "
  6. The radio interview with the woman in charge of the department that check the system explained that they have both radar and induction loops, and they both have to agree before the ticket is issued. She sounded a bit flakey to me, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if hers was another PR spin/con-job.

    A more interesting point that came out was that the bridge on which the cameras are mounted is proven to move, and affect the cameras. Strangely that was glossed over, and hasn't appeared in the media: but it has to be an issue, surely?
  7. If that's his real name, he's living in paradise.
  8. It has been discussed and reported on (the bridge movement). They say that all it does is to produce a slightly blurry photo.

    Someone further up this page asked about a speed camera fiasco from a few years back. Yes, the Western Ring Road cameras were proven to be faulty. It was highlighted when a woman was fined for doing some really high speed that her car, a Datsun 120Y or similar was not capable of achieving.

    She was put through the wringer, was told to stop whinging and to stop trying to avoid her "responsibilities" and shut the Far Cup and pay the fine.

    So, when everyone came out of the woodwork to object to their fines, the government was forced to act.

    The Eastlink Wellington Rd bridge camera has been in the news in the past, with the same story. People who use the road getting "pinged" at only this point. Nowhere else, just under this bridge.

    I've driven on Eastlink 4 times now. Each time I tap the cruise off and slow to 90 kays about 200m before the bridge. So far, I've not been booked. Last time was 2 weeks ago. So far, no nasty letters in the mail.

    When people started complaining about this particular speed camera, a professor from MUARC was interviewed. I can't find the link now. It was in either Herald-Sun's or The Age's websites. But he said that motorists doing 5 kays or so over were not the problem, particularly on freeways or tollways (Eastlink is a magnificent example of road engineering - 100 kays is far too low a limit). Rather, the problem lies with excessive speeding. Say, doing 100 in the fog, or in really crappy conditions, or if the rest of the traffic's doing 80 and you're doing 100. That sort of thing.
  9. See, mathematically this doesn't make sense, and here's why. Bridges have a tendency to "bounce". There are a number of overpasses in Melbourne that I've been in the middle of, while waiting to turn onto the freeway, and you can definitely feel the bridge bouncing. At times it is quite pronounced, a bit like being in an old elevator that does its jostling up and down when aligning with a floor.

    If the camera unit is also employing a radar, that radar unit is mounted up on the bridge, and is also bouncing up and down. Normally up and down would be okay, but the radar is going to be operating at an angle to the vehicle travelling underneath. From what I've seen of various photos, it looks like the angle is about 30 degrees or so. This would cause a "cosine error" because the vehicle isn't moving directly away from the camera, but away from the camera at an angle. What this means is that the vehicle appears to be moving away from the camera (or towards it) at cos(30) of its actual speed, of approx. 87% of its actual speed.

    The camera installers will be aware of the cosine error, and will have factored that in. ie. Divide the measured speed by 0.87 to arrive at the actual speed.

    This is where "bounce" comes in. If the bridge is bouncing vertically at 20kph at the highest speed of its bounce stroke, then it will introduce a "bounce error" proportional to the sine of the measurement angle multiplied by the bounce velocity. sin(30) = 0.5, so if the radar is measuring an oncoming car while the bridge is at the middle of its downwards bounce stroke, the vehicle will appear to be coming towards the camera at 10kph faster than it actually is. However, given that the camera is also applying the cosine correction factor, it will actually measure the car as travelling at 11.5kph faster. Vice-versa if the camera/radar is operating from behind, and the vehicle is moving away, and the bridge is on the upward part of its bounce stroke.

    Factoring all that in, even if as the TAC mouth says that the camera and the induction loop need to be in agreement (or more likely - within a certain margin of error), if there is an induction loop error and the bridge is bouncing, it's quite possible that the two error will work to agree on a false speed.

    Mind you, it is just as likely that you can get away with speeding and have the bridge and loop give you a false lower speed, as it is that you if you're not speeding that the two will agree to read your speed as higher. It's all a matter of being fortunate or unfortunate with your timing.

    Given that a vast number of these Wellington Rd camera readings are all around the 107-108kph range (as has been reported) it would appear that there is a systemic induction loop error, which is being occasionally agreed to by the bridge camera radar by way of the bridge bouncing. This induction loop error is also quite likely to be specific to certain makes and models of vehicles, which will explain why some people say that they never get a ticket there.
  10. Imagine the amount of people that would turn up to protest if motorcycle AND car drivers joined forces. I suggest you do something about it. 4km/h over the speed limit is such an insult I don't know how people just put up with it.
  11. sorry mate, simpsons is on tv.
  12. staying within 4km/h of the speed limit on my motorbike in near impossible one minute you have an apposing wind then no wind fighting you and my speed changes very quickly.
  13. How much does your bike weigh?
  14. 214kg and talking at highway speed not around town
  15. 214 kg + rider is a fair bit of mass to keep the bike rolling. Shouldn't be a huge variation unless your riding a 1250 bandit or similar. the lightest supersports and sportsbikes would have more trouble i think.
  16. not huge but more then 4km/h