LTI 20-20 UltraLyte 100 Calibration checks
Discussion
TOPTON said:
HantsRat said:
Still makes me laugh the amount of people that think we have targets to meet. Utter rubbish!
If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
I think you must live in a different world to most of us, or probably in a world where we'd like to live. Even some tv cop shows in the past have admitted to having targets to meet. Flashing lights, well that's 3 points for obstructing an officer from carrying out his duty. If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
The police around here in Cumbria that I see are purely out to catch. I've seen them hiding behind a wall, standing up or leaning out whenever they hear a car. None of this guideline stuff of assessing speed first and then checking with the gun. Every single car is pointed at with the gun. I've sat and watched them do it.
As far as I am aware there is none that says that; what guidance have you got that says that?
tapereel said:
TOPTON said:
HantsRat said:
Still makes me laugh the amount of people that think we have targets to meet. Utter rubbish!
If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
I think you must live in a different world to most of us, or probably in a world where we'd like to live. Even some tv cop shows in the past have admitted to having targets to meet. Flashing lights, well that's 3 points for obstructing an officer from carrying out his duty. If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
The police around here in Cumbria that I see are purely out to catch. I've seen them hiding behind a wall, standing up or leaning out whenever they hear a car. None of this guideline stuff of assessing speed first and then checking with the gun. Every single car is pointed at with the gun. I've sat and watched them do it.
As far as I am aware there is none that says that; what guidance have you got that says that?
Edited by Bigends on Thursday 27th August 20:53
Bigends said:
tapereel said:
TOPTON said:
HantsRat said:
Still makes me laugh the amount of people that think we have targets to meet. Utter rubbish!
If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
I think you must live in a different world to most of us, or probably in a world where we'd like to live. Even some tv cop shows in the past have admitted to having targets to meet. Flashing lights, well that's 3 points for obstructing an officer from carrying out his duty. If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
The police around here in Cumbria that I see are purely out to catch. I've seen them hiding behind a wall, standing up or leaning out whenever they hear a car. None of this guideline stuff of assessing speed first and then checking with the gun. Every single car is pointed at with the gun. I've sat and watched them do it.
As far as I am aware there is none that says that; what guidance have you got that says that?
tapereel said:
Bigends said:
tapereel said:
TOPTON said:
HantsRat said:
Still makes me laugh the amount of people that think we have targets to meet. Utter rubbish!
If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
I think you must live in a different world to most of us, or probably in a world where we'd like to live. Even some tv cop shows in the past have admitted to having targets to meet. Flashing lights, well that's 3 points for obstructing an officer from carrying out his duty. If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
The police around here in Cumbria that I see are purely out to catch. I've seen them hiding behind a wall, standing up or leaning out whenever they hear a car. None of this guideline stuff of assessing speed first and then checking with the gun. Every single car is pointed at with the gun. I've sat and watched them do it.
As far as I am aware there is none that says that; what guidance have you got that says that?
Edited by Bigends on Thursday 27th August 21:21
Bigends said:
tapereel said:
Bigends said:
tapereel said:
TOPTON said:
HantsRat said:
Still makes me laugh the amount of people that think we have targets to meet. Utter rubbish!
If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
I think you must live in a different world to most of us, or probably in a world where we'd like to live. Even some tv cop shows in the past have admitted to having targets to meet. Flashing lights, well that's 3 points for obstructing an officer from carrying out his duty. If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
The police around here in Cumbria that I see are purely out to catch. I've seen them hiding behind a wall, standing up or leaning out whenever they hear a car. None of this guideline stuff of assessing speed first and then checking with the gun. Every single car is pointed at with the gun. I've sat and watched them do it.
As far as I am aware there is none that says that; what guidance have you got that says that?
'When I laser, I look through the viewfinder until I see a vehicle which in my opinion is speeding, I then squeeze the trigger to get a speed reading. That's what we are trained to do.'
Edited by Bigends on Thursday 27th August 21:21
Bigends said:
Bigends said:
tapereel said:
Bigends said:
tapereel said:
TOPTON said:
HantsRat said:
Still makes me laugh the amount of people that think we have targets to meet. Utter rubbish!
If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
I think you must live in a different world to most of us, or probably in a world where we'd like to live. Even some tv cop shows in the past have admitted to having targets to meet. Flashing lights, well that's 3 points for obstructing an officer from carrying out his duty. If I'm out with the laser and get no one speeding then I've done my job. Even if other drivers are flashing etc, it meets the overall objective to slow vehicles down.
Maybe when they return to the area in the future they will keep the speed down.
The police around here in Cumbria that I see are purely out to catch. I've seen them hiding behind a wall, standing up or leaning out whenever they hear a car. None of this guideline stuff of assessing speed first and then checking with the gun. Every single car is pointed at with the gun. I've sat and watched them do it.
As far as I am aware there is none that says that; what guidance have you got that says that?
'When I laser, I look through the viewfinder until I see a vehicle which in my opinion is speeding, I then squeeze the trigger to get a speed reading. That's what we are trained to do.'
Edited by Bigends on Thursday 27th August 21:21
Just to clear things up.
We are trained to form a prior opinion of speed. We simply look down the view finder at cars, if a vehicle looks to be speeding, you get a reading. It takes 1/4 of a second. It's easy after 3 mins to see which cars are speeding and which aren't using the naked eye.
This is just 'best practise' we don't HAVE to form a prior opinion of speed. It's just wrote down in the guidelines. It has no legal backing or standing. So would be useless trying to use that as a defence.
It's the same way Roadcraft and various other driving guidelines state you should have both hands on the wheel at 10 to 2 all the time. I certainly don't and it's not illegal if you don't.
We are trained to form a prior opinion of speed. We simply look down the view finder at cars, if a vehicle looks to be speeding, you get a reading. It takes 1/4 of a second. It's easy after 3 mins to see which cars are speeding and which aren't using the naked eye.
This is just 'best practise' we don't HAVE to form a prior opinion of speed. It's just wrote down in the guidelines. It has no legal backing or standing. So would be useless trying to use that as a defence.
It's the same way Roadcraft and various other driving guidelines state you should have both hands on the wheel at 10 to 2 all the time. I certainly don't and it's not illegal if you don't.
HantsRat, you imply above that if someone flashes an approaching vehicle to warn them of a "speed trap" (for want of a better word), that would be OK in your book. Is that a correct interpretation?
This isn't a baiting post, but is that the general feeling, as far as you're aware? We're all heard the anecdotes about people being tugged for doing it, for PCoJ or some such, but is that just mainly urban rumour and internet myth?
Interesting to hear from the guy that holds the camera.
This isn't a baiting post, but is that the general feeling, as far as you're aware? We're all heard the anecdotes about people being tugged for doing it, for PCoJ or some such, but is that just mainly urban rumour and internet myth?
Interesting to hear from the guy that holds the camera.
OpulentBob said:
HantsRat, you imply above that if someone flashes an approaching vehicle to warn them of a "speed trap" (for want of a better word), that would be OK in your book. Is that a correct interpretation?
This isn't a baiting post, but is that the general feeling, as far as you're aware? We're all heard the anecdotes about people being tugged for doing it, for PCoJ or some such, but is that just mainly urban rumour and internet myth?
Interesting to hear from the guy that holds the camera.
Doesn't bother me in the slightest. It will happen every single time. I would never stop anyone for flashing (unless it caused undue dazzle) This isn't a baiting post, but is that the general feeling, as far as you're aware? We're all heard the anecdotes about people being tugged for doing it, for PCoJ or some such, but is that just mainly urban rumour and internet myth?
Interesting to hear from the guy that holds the camera.
HantsRat said:
OpulentBob said:
HantsRat, you imply above that if someone flashes an approaching vehicle to warn them of a "speed trap" (for want of a better word), that would be OK in your book. Is that a correct interpretation?
This isn't a baiting post, but is that the general feeling, as far as you're aware? We're all heard the anecdotes about people being tugged for doing it, for PCoJ or some such, but is that just mainly urban rumour and internet myth?
Interesting to hear from the guy that holds the camera.
Doesn't bother me in the slightest. It will happen every single time. I would never stop anyone for flashing (unless it caused undue dazzle) This isn't a baiting post, but is that the general feeling, as far as you're aware? We're all heard the anecdotes about people being tugged for doing it, for PCoJ or some such, but is that just mainly urban rumour and internet myth?
Interesting to hear from the guy that holds the camera.
Thanks.
OpulentBob said:
HantsRat, you imply above that if someone flashes an approaching vehicle to warn them of a "speed trap" (for want of a better word), that would be OK in your book. Is that a correct interpretation?
This isn't a baiting post, but is that the general feeling, as far as you're aware? We're all heard the anecdotes about people being tugged for doing it, for PCoJ or some such, but is that just mainly urban rumour and internet myth?
Interesting to hear from the guy that holds the camera.
It does bother some people. I work with a few people who do stop those that flash or warn of the speed site.This isn't a baiting post, but is that the general feeling, as far as you're aware? We're all heard the anecdotes about people being tugged for doing it, for PCoJ or some such, but is that just mainly urban rumour and internet myth?
Interesting to hear from the guy that holds the camera.
I couldn't care less myself, I hate doing speed enforcement and would much rather be doing something else.....however, until people stop speeding, its not going away
HantsRat said:
I use this device daily.
They are calibrated each year by an external company, usually Tele-Traffic.
Am I reading this correctly? If the machine develops a fault the day after it's calibrated, it will be used for 364 days before the fault is identified?They are calibrated each year by an external company, usually Tele-Traffic.
If so, how many drivers would have been done in that period?
mybrainhurts said:
HantsRat said:
I use this device daily.
They are calibrated each year by an external company, usually Tele-Traffic.
Am I reading this correctly? If the machine develops a fault the day after it's calibrated, it will be used for 364 days before the fault is identified?They are calibrated each year by an external company, usually Tele-Traffic.
If so, how many drivers would have been done in that period?
mybrainhurts said:
Am I reading this correctly? If the machine develops a fault the day after it's calibrated, it will be used for 364 days before the fault is identified?
If so, how many drivers would have been done in that period?
Hence the daily checks. If something is wrong, it gets sent back to the supplier and fixed/calibrates again. The yearly checks are just to get the yearly calibration certificate. If so, how many drivers would have been done in that period?
Durzel said:
Wouldn't the daily check expose a fault? I presume the yearly check is to guarantee that the device still operates within type approval tolerances at various speeds, whereas the daily checks confirm the basics of operation.
The annual check is ensuring that the device measures the distance of a static board correctly at 25, 50, 75 and 100 metres.IIRC there a check on the laser as well.
It's not calibrated to an actual moving object, nor is it tested above 100m. You can still be zapped 1000m away though.
The daily checks are necessary as like a rifle, the sight can get knocked and thus the laser may not be actually hitting where the sights suggest it will be.
The idea is that if the operator checks the sights in both planes at the start of the use he knows that they are correct before he starts gathering evidence. Then, when he checks at the end of the day, he can ensure that the sights are still good and thus the device was fine during that day, or, alternatively, if there is a problem he can disregard that day's evidence.
However of course, as happened in my case if those checks aren't done, no-one knows.
Indeed, as years went on, and officers were held to task about those fundamental checks in court those checks which were supposed to ensure the integrity of the evidence gained became 'only guidelines' and a seemingly purely optional set of procedures.
It does seem somewhat of a paradox that the Home Office scientists will spend considerable time and money producing the handbook if indeed it doesn't need to be followed, but that's the status quo.
HantsRat said:
mybrainhurts said:
Am I reading this correctly? If the machine develops a fault the day after it's calibrated, it will be used for 364 days before the fault is identified?
If so, how many drivers would have been done in that period?
Hence the daily checks. If something is wrong, it gets sent back to the supplier and fixed/calibrates again. The yearly checks are just to get the yearly calibration certificate. If so, how many drivers would have been done in that period?
If something is wrong with the calibration on the day after the annual check, your daily check for a 0mph reading against a brick wall doesn't mean it will accurately read a speed of 70mph.
Please convince me there isn't a potentially serious problem here.
mybrainhurts said:
WTF?
If something is wrong with the calibration on the day after the annual check, your daily check for a 0mph reading against a brick wall doesn't mean it will accurately read a speed of 70mph.
Please convince me there isn't a potentially serious problem here.
Not even the annual calibration involves testing against a moving object, or anything more than 100m away - I wouldn't worry!If something is wrong with the calibration on the day after the annual check, your daily check for a 0mph reading against a brick wall doesn't mean it will accurately read a speed of 70mph.
Please convince me there isn't a potentially serious problem here.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff