Didn't Realise Specs Cameras On Separate Roads Are Linked!
Discussion
speedking31 said:
As implied by several posters, if the limits vary within the monitored zone, as implied by speedcheck's website, then the SCP won't know which limit you have exceeded but just that your time was below the minimum legal time. The upside is that it is virtually impossible for you to check whether the ticket is valid 
I don't think it really matters if the reported average speed on the NIP is high enough. As with all excessive speeding, the accused usually knows if they were going a bit too fast. If not, they were not paying attention or just don't care about their licence. As long as all locations of the cameras and the various speed limit zones have been accurately measured and entered into the system, the rest is done automatically by a central computer and it will be able to calculate the maximum legal average speed between any two cameras even if they cover several speed limits.
I recall It's possible to safely clear both sets of lights on the roundabout at that time of night if you enter from the A127 down slip towards the end of the green phase. This means you can carry momentum into the A130 sb entry; a quick car could average a decent speed without trouble however I would love to know what the system thinks the average speed should be.
Because of the offset of the lights most would hit or be slowed by a red signal momentarily on the southbound internal which would skew any average speed profile downwards. Let's hope the system isn't using this profile +x% let alone data from a congested peak period where speeds will be lower.
Because of the offset of the lights most would hit or be slowed by a red signal momentarily on the southbound internal which would skew any average speed profile downwards. Let's hope the system isn't using this profile +x% let alone data from a congested peak period where speeds will be lower.
Time for fun guys !! Two mates, identical cars. Temporarily put the same reg number on one of them, trip the first specs camera, the other car goes through another specs camera a short time later. Speed recorded as +1000mph! Plead not guilty, and goto court. Deny any knowledge of cloned cars.
FurtiveFreddy said:
speedking31 said:
As implied by several posters, if the limits vary within the monitored zone, as implied by speedcheck's website, then the SCP won't know which limit you have exceeded but just that your time was below the minimum legal time.
I don't think it really matters if the reported average speed on the NIP is high enough.FurtiveFreddy said:
As long as all locations of the cameras and the various speed limit zones have been accurately measured and entered into the system, the rest is done automatically by a central computer and it will be able to calculate the maximum legal average speed between any two cameras even if they cover several speed limits.
But the bigger the net the more opportunity for road improvements, alternative routes due to roadworks, change of direction for a one-way street etc. Sometimes these may be beneficial to the casual speeder, but sometimes they won't. My satnav can't keep on top of these with quarterly updates so what chance do Speedcheck have?And what if I go the wrong way up a one-way street, or down a buses only route. I could be charged for speeding which is the wrong offence.
robinessex said:
Time for fun guys !! Two mates, identical cars. Temporarily put the same reg number on one of them, trip the first specs camera, the other car goes through another specs camera a short time later. Speed recorded as +1000mph! Plead not guilty, and goto court. Deny any knowledge of cloned cars.
speedking31 said:
Agreed if it says 75 mph there is no defence. But what if it says 54 mph and there is a section of NSL dual carriageway included? And what about different limits applied to different vehicle types?
Then I would suggest they wouldn't issue a NIP. I believe they are only going after the big numbers with this type of nab. They don't want to risk losing in Court if it's marginal in any way. If the average speed between two cameras is over 95mph, there is no doubt someone has broken the limit, assuming the technology is working correctly.speedking31 said:
But the bigger the net the more opportunity for road improvements, alternative routes due to roadworks, change of direction for a one-way street etc. Sometimes these may be beneficial to the casual speeder, but sometimes they won't. My satnav can't keep on top of these with quarterly updates so what chance do Speedcheck have?
And what if I go the wrong way up a one-way street, or down a buses only route. I could be charged for speeding which is the wrong offence.
When they configure the system, they can take all of that into account. As has already been said, that particular area is notorious for speeders and I suspect they have programmed those particular two speed cameras as 'entry' and 'exit' points deliberately.And what if I go the wrong way up a one-way street, or down a buses only route. I could be charged for speeding which is the wrong offence.
You are also forgetting that you always have the right to defend yourself in Court if you believe the average speed has been wrongly calculated.
If you got a NIP for a wrong av. speed as a result of you driving the wrong way down a one way street and you are prepared to stand up in Court and use that as your defence, then good luck to you
Your defence is that the SPECS cameras are faulty/improperly configured/otherwise not as per approval and therefore evidence cannot be relied upon. The prosecution wheel out Steve Emma-Pitmansboots who is regarded as an expert witness and the magistrates look at you, "I didn't do it guv", and him, "I'm a some-time engineer what knows me speed c'ameras M'Lord", and they're going to do two things; 1. find you guilty and 2. hand down some eye watering costs.
The maths is simple, the computers are powerful, but there is still the human interface element. Say for example a limit on the shortest route is raised from 30 to 40 mph (unlikely I know), or a bus restriction is lifted because of roadworks. If those things are not programmed into the net calculation immediately you may legitimately be beating the minimum time. The automated system sends out thousands of letters. There is a sudden spike in NIPs issued.
Is the council likely to say a) whoops we've made a mistake, better write to everyone cancelling the NIP, or b) whoops we've sent out a load of requests for money let's wait and see how many people pay without question.
My defence is "Yes I was in the area a fortnight ago, I'm pretty sure that I stuck to the posted limits so I can't understand how I exceeded the speed limit between points A and B." What other evidence can I give?
It invokes the same fear as managed motorways. Computer says you exceeded a limit displayed on a gantry 2 weeks ago, but you have no way of showing that you didn't, or realistically remembering what all the limits were.
Is the council likely to say a) whoops we've made a mistake, better write to everyone cancelling the NIP, or b) whoops we've sent out a load of requests for money let's wait and see how many people pay without question.
My defence is "Yes I was in the area a fortnight ago, I'm pretty sure that I stuck to the posted limits so I can't understand how I exceeded the speed limit between points A and B." What other evidence can I give?
It invokes the same fear as managed motorways. Computer says you exceeded a limit displayed on a gantry 2 weeks ago, but you have no way of showing that you didn't, or realistically remembering what all the limits were.
speedking31 said:
The maths is simple, the computers are powerful, but there is still the human interface element. Say for example a limit on the shortest route is raised from 30 to 40 mph (unlikely I know), or a bus restriction is lifted because of roadworks. If those things are not programmed into the net calculation immediately you may legitimately be beating the minimum time. The automated system sends out thousands of letters. There is a sudden spike in NIPs issued.
Is the council likely to say a) whoops we've made a mistake, better write to everyone cancelling the NIP, or b) whoops we've sent out a load of requests for money let's wait and see how many people pay without question.
My defence is "Yes I was in the area a fortnight ago, I'm pretty sure that I stuck to the posted limits so I can't understand how I exceeded the speed limit between points A and B." What other evidence can I give?
It invokes the same fear as managed motorways. Computer says you exceeded a limit displayed on a gantry 2 weeks ago, but you have no way of showing that you didn't, or realistically remembering what all the limits were.
You're being deliberately obtuse as the situation you describe rarely happens in real life but if it did speed limit changes are documented just like all other alterations and works carried out by the authorities. If you were sure you were in the right, you'd need to investigate and research your defence and present the evidence in Court, just like everyone else.Is the council likely to say a) whoops we've made a mistake, better write to everyone cancelling the NIP, or b) whoops we've sent out a load of requests for money let's wait and see how many people pay without question.
My defence is "Yes I was in the area a fortnight ago, I'm pretty sure that I stuck to the posted limits so I can't understand how I exceeded the speed limit between points A and B." What other evidence can I give?
It invokes the same fear as managed motorways. Computer says you exceeded a limit displayed on a gantry 2 weeks ago, but you have no way of showing that you didn't, or realistically remembering what all the limits were.
In reality, there's no shortage of people who pop up claiming "I wasn't going that fast" or "your camera's not calibrated" but the reality is they usually are going that fast and the cameras usually are calibrated fine. Being 'pretty sure' you stuck to the limit isn't going to help you in Court. You need to put a bit more effort into challenging these things if you want to prove your innocence and there's plenty of ways to do it if you use the law and resources at your disposal.
If you are so worried about accidentally exceeding speed limits or the limits being sneakily changed when you weren't looking, I'd advise investing in a dashboard camera or data logger so you have some proof if and when you are mistakenly send a NIP.
FurtiveFreddy said:
jesta1865 said:
you are probably right, but unless this was about 4am i doubt there was that little traffic that he would get away with driving the way he would have to. the roads are quite heavily used.
i don't know if you know the roads, but i certainly would not try and do much over 30 round it if that, and i would suspect i would be on the ragged edge going much faster. unless you have a serious set-up suspension wise.
your speeds you suggested would also explain why he would get a ticket with so many speed changes, 50, 30, 70, 30, 50 between the cameras.
Well we don't know what time it was but maybe early on a Sunday morning there would be an opportunity to get above 30 on those roads?i don't know if you know the roads, but i certainly would not try and do much over 30 round it if that, and i would suspect i would be on the ragged edge going much faster. unless you have a serious set-up suspension wise.
your speeds you suggested would also explain why he would get a ticket with so many speed changes, 50, 30, 70, 30, 50 between the cameras.
I don't see how it would be on a ragged edge personally and the limits I see on Google Maps are mainly NSL with a couple of shortish stretches of 50mph. Taking that into account, maybe the trigger speed for a NIP was set to something like 25mph above the average maximum legal speed between the two cameras?
it would still necessitate driving a stretch of road i know well far faster than i feel comfortable with.
no i am not going to pinch the wifes car and have a go.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff