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.

Who said police radars arent accurate????

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by Trumpster, Sep 26, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. I was reading a discussion recently on radar detectors,radars and their questionable accuracy then come across this today which gave me a chuckle.

    Two Hunter traffic patrol officers from Newcastle LAC were involved in an unusual incident while checking for speeding motorists on the F3 Freeway. One of the officers used a hand-held radar device to check the speed of a vehicle approaching over the crest of a hill, and was surprised when the speed was recorded at over 800Kph. Their radar suddenly stopped working and the officers were not able to reset it.

    Just then a deafening roar over the treetops revealed that the radar had in fact latched on to a Williamtown FA-18 fighter jet which was engaged in a low-flying exercise over Wyong, approaching from the ocean.

    Back at police headquarters the Local Area Commander fired off a stiff complaint to the RAAF Liaison officer at Williamtown.

    Back came the reply in true laconic RAAF style:

    'Thank you for your message, which allows us to complete the file on this incident. You may be interested to know that the tactical computer in the Hornet had detected the presence of, and subsequently locked onto, your hostile radar equipment and automatically sent a jamming signal back to it. Furthermore, an air-to-ground missile aboard the fully-armed aircraft had also automatically locked onto your equipment.

    Fortunately the pilot flying the Hornet recognised the situation for what it was, quickly responded to the missile systems alert status, and was able to override the automated defence system before the missile was launched and your hostile radar installation was destroyed.

    Thank you for your enquiry.

    I like it........... :) :) :) :)
  2. Great story, but its also an urban myth.
  3. :LOL:

    yeah heard it before, good laugh tho even if it would never happen.

  4. [​IMG]
    Old news and never happened but still a giggle producing story.

    When you think about it, could you really imagion not taking a shot of you saw a speed trap while in control of a fighter plane. :wink:
  5. Yeah, one of those apocryphal stories that ought to be true, but almost certainly isn't.

    Of course, each generation has its own version. Fifty years ago in the UK, I gather that the favourite was one about the military testing some radar gear by tracking cars on a fast, dual carriageway section of the A1 (then the UK's nearest equivalent to the Eyre :shock: ) and picking up a blip moving far too fast for anything on land but too low for a plane. Turned out to be a Vincent on test, ridden by Phil himself and doing well over a real 150 in the old money.

    Of course, being an impressionable 13 year old and being told the story by my dad who was both an army officer in approximately the right era and area and a fully paid up member of the Vincent fan club, I swallowed it hook line and sinker.........
  6. I would be more surprised that they were calibrated to read that high in the first place.

    More concerned with legislation that makes speedos read 10% out, and then makes you responsible for not travelling at the correct speed.
  7. i keep telling people Hornets are fast!
  8. OMFG :shock: how many times does this have to be posted... and in general discussion :roll: please?!

    This was only posted a month ago or so, in another area...
  9. I just can't wait for the posts on 'squid season' to come back with avengance :roll:
  10. I laughed. Same tone as the light house joke.
  11. You me and everyone else knows squiding threads will never come close to the amoutn of "why didn't he nod at me" threads!
  12. Making something useful out of the thread...

    I got a fine recently for 75 in a 60. The category is 'more than 13 km/h over the limit', and is 3 points instead of 1 point for less than 13 over.

    Anyone think it's worth taking it to court? I mean, I'd happily cop to the 73, but given I'm just outside and given the inaccuracy of speedos...

    I'm just not sure whether I'd need actual evidence that my speedo reads low, or whether just stating that I'm within experimental error and requesting that it be reduced might work.

    Any relevant experience?
  13. You'd have to prove that it reads slow, and that you weren't already aware of it enough to make the corrections... would be a toughie...
  14. Yeah, that's what I thought - might as well just suck it up, I guess. It's still bullshit.
  15. And what the heck, a rantette to further redeem the thread:


    (copied and pasted here from my blog for your convenience)

    The Indiscretion of Speed Cameras

    If a human cop detects someone speeding, using a hand-held or car-mounted radar, he or she has some discretion about what to do. A judgement is made about whether the speeding is dangerous enough to pursue, about whether to issue a fine or a caution, about any mitigating circumstances, and so on.

    A speed camera has none of that discretion: if it detects you exceeding the speed limit, you get the fine.

    Some people would suggest that that’s fairer - it’s pure and objective, and doesn’t rely on whether the police officer had a fight with his partner over breakfast, or had a great night last night.

    But in other ways it’s a scam: you have the option of just paying the fine or of going to court. Going to court is going to cost you work time and hassle, and have the risk of getting costs recorded against you in addition to the original fine. So most people just have to cop it sweet and pay the fine - and by doing so, automatically agree that they were speeding and to that going on their record. It’s just too hard to contest it. So even if there were factors in mitigation, you end up just paying the fine because it’s too much hassle to do otherwise.

    (Incidentally, this is how a lot of ‘or your money back’ scams work: you buy the thing, find out it’s crap, but it’s just too much hassle to fight about it so you just take the loss and the scumbags get to keep your money.)

    Of course, everyone should obey the speed limit everywhere, all the time. But…

    The speed limit is there to increase safety, right? That’s its purpose. It’s not put there for revenue raising, or arbitrarily. Its job is to reduce the number and severity of crashes.

    So when overtaking, is it safer to whip around fairly quickly and get back onto the safe side of the road, even if in doing so your speed briefly spikes above the limit? Or is it safer to sit for ages in the on-coming traffic lane when overtaking, in order to avoid going over the limit?

    See, a human officer can understand that logic. S/he may or may not agree with it, and may still issue the fine, but the thought process is there. That’s what we lose when we give up our road safety to speed cameras.

    Well, that plus the ability to detect all sorts of other offences. A speed camera can only catch speeders. But it’s not speeding that causes the vast majority of accidents, it’s other things like failing to look, failing to indicate, driving while distracted by the phone or something else, drink driving and a heap of other things. A patrol officer can attend to all of those things. A speed camera can’t.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.