RE: Mobile speed camera numbers rocket
RE: Mobile speed camera numbers rocket
Tuesday 8th February 2005

Mobile speed camera numbers rocket

Scamera van numbers up by 34.5 per cent


The number of working mobile road speed cameras rose by 34.5 per cent compared to the previous 12 months, according to data released by Cyclops, maker of a GPS-based driver alert system. The report follows PistonHeads's story last Thursday about the £20 million raised by speed cameras last year -- a seven-fold increase (see link below).

The largest concentration of mobile sites, those patrolled by radar or laser operated speed cameras, are to be found in the south-east (including Metropolitan, Sussex, Thames Valley and police forces of the home counties) with 17.6 per cent of the national total. The south west region, including Avon & Somerset and Devon & Cornwall, currently has the second highest with 16.6 percent. The lowest numbers are to be found in Scotland with 8.7 per cent of the national total.

"Although there was a marked slowdown in the appearance of new fixed Gatso, Truvelo and SPECS camera sites over the past twelve months, the opposite has been true of mobile patrols operated by Road Safety Partnerships," said Cyclops director Steve Wreford.

Updated daily by a nationwide network of engineers, the Cyclops database contains details of every fixed, temporary and mobile speed camera site in the UK. As the driver nears a site, they automatically receive an audible and visual warning from a dashboard-mounted unit. This alert can be up to 800 metres before the controlled zone allowing drivers to safely adjust their speed as they approach.

Under the rules governing the positioning of mobile locations, proposed sites of between 0.4km to 5km in length, must have recorded at least 2 KSI (Killed or Serious Injury) collisions per kilometre within a monitored 36-month period where speed was a contributory factor or sufficient PIC’s (Personal Injury Collisions) to warrant avoiding a possible future KSI. Criteria for fixed cameras are doubled whereby each site must record at least 4 KSI’s over the same ‘baseline period’.

Wreford warns: "At the current rate of growth, we could have as many mobile camera locations as fixed sites by the end of 2005." 

Ever felt like you're being persecuted?

www.cyclops-uk.com

www.pistonheads.com/speed/default.asp?storyId=9828

Author
Discussion

jamiet

Original Poster:

1,536 posts

282 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
Arrrrrrgggggghhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This is getting so frustrating. Especially as I live in Somerset. I have the two same as objections as always:

1) The statistics are often recorded in such a way that speed is listed as a contributory factor when in fact it was not. This is fact. Thus scamera units are being placed in locations purely to make money.

2) How can the scamera partnership even attempt to claimn that mobile units prevent KSI's when no one knows it is there! Even if they were right (but they are not) and speed does kill, then what difference will a mobile unit make? It wont make you slow down if you have no warning of it and if you happen to kill someone I suppose it doesnt matter so long as they can prosecute you and get a nice hefty fine

WHAT A ED UP PIECE OF SELF-FINANCING ROAD SAFETY POLICY.

>>> Edited by jamiet on Tuesday 8th February 09:58

apache

39,731 posts

314 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
Just listen to local radio

White_van_man

3,848 posts

279 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
nice!!! just as they are trying to make laser detecters illegal they spend all the £20m on more vans that they can hide round corners to catch us out!!!! and then next year they can make £40m proffit and buy even more vans etc etc

hendry

1,945 posts

312 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all

I haven't seen many of these: are they manned by civvies? Is there a police office present?

If not, what it is to stop you or I pulling up behind them and opening our tailgates to obstruct their view? This wouldn't be a crime if the staff operating the equipment are not police officers.

nel

4,830 posts

271 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
Given that the vans can't be taken out without risking hurting the operator (unless you know where they're parked at night!), there may be some benefit in giving young thugs a fiver and a handful of chipboard screws to put under their tyres as they sit lasering all and sundry.

jamiet

Original Poster:

1,536 posts

282 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
Listening to local radio is ok, but if you travel from region to region in one journey its not so easy. Ok, so some partnerships have websites with the locations but quite frankly I dont think I should have to go to such lengths to avoid unneccessary persecution and criminalisation!

Are the scamera partnerships included under the freedom of information act? I'd love to see the actual evidence they use for determining scamera locations.

Gooby

9,269 posts

264 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
It all makes perfect (revenue earning) sense . Strong dislike towards static cameras, so the next move is to ban radar/ detectors. "Doctor" the stats to justify putting a scamera anyware you like. Then you sneak in more and more mobile vans that you can not detect.

We can see motive, we can see the method and we are all victims.

Nothing will seperate me from my radar/ laser detectors and diffusers.

Millerman

817 posts

268 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
We all know what they are ....... just money generators.

It nothing to do with law enforcement (which is support by the fact that civvies operate the Scameras)

When they hide, it really takes the wind out of the goverments agrument that they are for safety. Clearly , they are hiding to catch us out.

They are happy to extract the money from Drivers pockets, but when our Cars ar broken into or stolen (real crimes)they don't even bother comming out, if your lucky you get a crime number.

In summary........*$*####$

apache

39,731 posts

314 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
jamiet said:
Listening to local radio is ok, but if you travel from region to region in one journey its not so easy. Ok, so some partnerships have websites with the locations but quite frankly I dont think I should have to go to such lengths to avoid unneccessary persecution and criminalisation!

Are the scamera partnerships included under the freedom of information act? I'd love to see the actual evidence they use for determining scamera locations.



Couldn't agree more but, having taken these vile organisations head on I can assure you the only way to beat them is at their own game. Unfortunately they have vast resources (paid for by motorists) with which to spin the media and, regretably the police are 'on side'

Reason, facts and debate are not on the radar as far as they are concerned, I nearly had a fit trying to communicate with them and have now reverted to stealth mode.

They are without doubt one of the most immoral, corrupt and dangerous manifestations of modern politics

>> Edited by apache on Tuesday 8th February 10:53

GKP

15,099 posts

271 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
Autocar today, page 17..."The number of mobile speed camera sites rose by more than a third last year, although just over half are placed in 30mph zones where two-thirds of fatalities occur, according to camera detector maker Cyclops."


crankedup

25,764 posts

273 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
What makes me seeth with frustration is when you phone for police assistance, say after your home is broken into, the response is something like this,

Are they still in your home?
NO
In that case we will be round as soon as possible!!!

Three days later your still waiting to see a officer.

Speed and your a criminal, have your home broken into - tough.

nonegreen

7,803 posts

300 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
GKP said:
Autocar today, page 17..."The number of mobile speed camera sites rose by more than a third last year, although just over half are placed in 30mph zones where two-thirds of fatalities occur, according to camera detector maker Cyclops."




Is it not time to do a Huntingdon life sciences to cyclops?

GreenV8S

31,018 posts

314 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
nonegreen said:

Is it not time to do a Huntingdon life sciences to cyclops?

Shouldn't you be encouraging them?

_VTEC_

2,459 posts

275 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
Not that I agree with scameras, but you have to say it's a smart move my the revenue scavengers. What with the rise of downed fixed sites at the moment.

Streetcop

5,907 posts

268 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
This is Norfolk Constabulary's latest baby;

gooby

9,269 posts

264 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
This is from the camera partnership web site for dorset.

Visibility and Signage
Fixed Safety Cameras
Colour Must be painted yellow.
Signage Warning signs and/or speed limit reminder signs within 1.5km of the camera.

Mobile Safety Cameras
Colour All Partnerships use mobile cameras that are in the manufactured colour.
Signage Warning signs and /or speed limit reminder signs within 1.5km of the camera are only required where mobile sites fall into the 85% of locations where sites are visited on more than two occasions in a two month period. The other 15% of locations allow the DSCP to work with communities where a speed problem exists. These sites do not require advanced warning signage.
Vehicles
The vans used by the Partnerships are not covered by the DfT guidelines. The DSCP however has taken the decision to have high-visibility vehicles for use in the transportation of equipment to and from all fixed and mobile sites. There is no requirement for these vans to be visible, however the DSCP operates a policy that wherever possible the van will be visible to passing motorists. Consideration has to be given to the personal safety of the operatives and that the location permits lawful parking of the van in the vicinity of the camera.
Operatives
Our camera operatives wear high-visibility jackets and are not required to stand by the camera, but they must be able to give evidence of opinion with regard to the speed of passing vehicles.
Equipment Validity
All cameras used by the DSCP are properly serviced, maintained and calibrated every 12 months as required by the Home Office. Furthermore, the calibration of the camera is checked by a camera operative before and after each period of mobile enforcement.
Continuous Assessment
Camera sites are continually reviewed to ensure they meet the visibility criteria.

gooby

9,269 posts

264 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
Just a thought. If a permanent camera is erected, doesn't it need planning permission. If it requires planning (i cant see why not) you can object. Is there any strength to this arguement?

jesusbuiltmycar

5,130 posts

284 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
gooby said:
This is from the camera partnership web site for dorset.

Vehicles
The vans used by the Partnerships are not covered by the DfT guidelines. The DSCP however has taken the decision to have high-visibility vehicles for use in the transportation of equipment to and from all fixed and mobile sites. There is no requirement for these vans to be visible, however the DSCP operates a policy that wherever possible the van will be visible to passing motorists. Consideration has to be given to the personal safety of the operatives and that the location permits lawful parking of the van in the vicinity of the camera.




So that'll be why, when they setup in Littledown Avenue in Bournemouth, at a site where the only crash I know of was when a BIB decided to park his panda car on it's roof in someones front garden, they cunningly park the vehicle down a side road well out of site. Even though there are no parking restrictions in force on Littledown avenue.

So more lies and bullsh*t....

philbob

49 posts

261 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all

medicineman

1,822 posts

267 months

Tuesday 8th February 2005
quotequote all
Sheffield, Rivelin Valley Road. A few nasty accidents due to a very poor T junction (vision obstructed by trees on way and a gentle bend the other). A 40 limit that was widely abused. It is the site of the only known (to me) sensibly erected speed camera in the world (slows people down before the junction.) Despite the other camera on this road and frequent visits from both the scamera van and a motorcycle officer with a hand held flowers still appear in the 40 bit. So the scamera sits in the 30, around a bend.