Discussion
fatboy b said:
So ANPR will ring alarm bells in a Poilice car/van to tell the BiB that the vehicle/driver that just passed is illegal in some way. But can it work in reverse? i.e. can someone type in a reg number into the controlling computer, and it would give the last location of that vehicle?
Theoretically, yes, but practically no. I did some work with PIPS last year, and the way the system is designed, it is flushed at the end of an operation, and actionable images are manually marked for retention, while the rest are ditched.Of course, like the flushing of the Kengestion Charge data at the end of the day, there are no guarantees that the entirety of the data isnt slid sideways for overall archiving elsewhere. Bear in mind that these would be huge feeds, and managing that much data in a realistic manner is expensive, but the paint on black helicopters is getting cheaper, so there are budgets slushing about
randlemarcus said:
fatboy b said:
So ANPR will ring alarm bells in a Poilice car/van to tell the BiB that the vehicle/driver that just passed is illegal in some way. But can it work in reverse? i.e. can someone type in a reg number into the controlling computer, and it would give the last location of that vehicle?
Theoretically, yes, but practically no. I did some work with PIPS last year, and the way the system is designed, it is flushed at the end of an operation, and actionable images are manually marked for retention, while the rest are ditched.Of course, like the flushing of the Kengestion Charge data at the end of the day, there are no guarantees that the entirety of the data isnt slid sideways for overall archiving elsewhere. Bear in mind that these would be huge feeds, and managing that much data in a realistic manner is expensive, but the paint on black helicopters is getting cheaper, so there are budgets slushing about
As S2ART says, for the static cameras if they query PNC in real time a 'Transaction Enquiry' can be carried out to see who has PNC'd the vehicle, and the camera has a unique id for a check. I think locally we can do it for up to 3 years, but if it were really needed we can have it done at PNC HQ (at Hendon I think) at great expensive for as long as 6 years. This is true of any PNC check.
I know my force's static ANPR system archives results and the records as a whole can be checked for up to a month afterwards (might even be two now) - including the image taken of the vehicle at the time (handy for seeing driver's, etc.). However, it takes an authorisation by an ACPO rank to do such a check, and is only authorised for major crime/operations (murder, armed robbery, prolific/aggravated burglaries, high-risk missing persons such as those where a child is missing). They routinely say no to such requests unless they're convinced it really is essential.
Far more useful in real time results. Our local trouble town now has static ANPR on all main routes in. In the last month we've recovered at least 5 stolen vehicles and tens of thousands worth of class A and B drugs as a result of hits from the cameras. Also plenty of uninsured drivers when on operations with the cameras - and no, we don't seize vehicles just because computer says no. Quite rightly, a driver has to admit to being uninsured before we seize a vehicle, otherwise they get a producer and a warning that if they are uninsured and drive off from us they will be taken to court for two counts of driving while uninsured. Most are quite honest if they're uninsured.
I know my force's static ANPR system archives results and the records as a whole can be checked for up to a month afterwards (might even be two now) - including the image taken of the vehicle at the time (handy for seeing driver's, etc.). However, it takes an authorisation by an ACPO rank to do such a check, and is only authorised for major crime/operations (murder, armed robbery, prolific/aggravated burglaries, high-risk missing persons such as those where a child is missing). They routinely say no to such requests unless they're convinced it really is essential.
Far more useful in real time results. Our local trouble town now has static ANPR on all main routes in. In the last month we've recovered at least 5 stolen vehicles and tens of thousands worth of class A and B drugs as a result of hits from the cameras. Also plenty of uninsured drivers when on operations with the cameras - and no, we don't seize vehicles just because computer says no. Quite rightly, a driver has to admit to being uninsured before we seize a vehicle, otherwise they get a producer and a warning that if they are uninsured and drive off from us they will be taken to court for two counts of driving while uninsured. Most are quite honest if they're uninsured.
susser said:
Well what happens if a car gets spotted by ANPR and it's got an unreadable number due to spacing/ font etc, or no plate altogether.
Reason I ask is that surely, no one can now drive around with a deceptive plate without gatting a bust?
ANPR cant read every numberplate, it has a failure rate. ANPR will not flag unreadable cars so yes you could drive around with a deceptive plate until a Trafpol sees it.Reason I ask is that surely, no one can now drive around with a deceptive plate without gatting a bust?
Yes, it has a failure rate but - particularly for the static cameras where conditions are quite controlled and it is properly set up - this rate seems to be very low where the no. plate conforms. We routinely run operations on our 'training days' with the static cameras where an officer sits in front of a terminal calling them out to the 5 or 6 vehicles on the op. The flags can be fine-tuned to whatever they want, so for operations unreadable plates are flagged. Officer reads plate and calls it out if its misread due to non-conforming plate or simply a filthy plate. For the latter, we have a bucket and sponge ready for them to clean it there and then! If its misread due to some failure of the system they're logged for review to try to improve it.
AndyRw said:
Yes, it has a failure rate but - particularly for the static cameras where conditions are quite controlled and it is properly set up - this rate seems to be very low where the no. plate conforms. We routinely run operations on our 'training days' with the static cameras where an officer sits in front of a terminal calling them out to the 5 or 6 vehicles on the op. The flags can be fine-tuned to whatever they want, so for operations unreadable plates are flagged. Officer reads plate and calls it out if its misread due to non-conforming plate or simply a filthy plate. For the latter, we have a bucket and sponge ready for them to clean it there and then! If its misread due to some failure of the system they're logged for review to try to improve it.
This only applicable to the low volume stuff though isnt it? I didnt think the high throughput ANPR systems bothered, mainly because its not clear until well after the fact that a misread has occured. When left to look after itself, the alerts are set to a different level - no insurance and crime markers usually. These go to comms who request units/give an 'attention drawn'. It is certainly possible to have it store misread plates automatically for review by the provider so they can figure out why it is misreading a particular plate. But as I understand it, its reached the accuracy where the vast majority are because of non-conforming and dirty plates, hence traffic and response units are slowly picking up the pace of dealing with those issues day to day. They are also getting very strict on deliberately misleading plates - I know a traffic officer is intending to deal with a plate that has been intentionally made to look German (even the D) with a perverting the course of justice charge as the only purpose can be to attempt to mislead automatic systems and human review to avoid prosecution for offences.
When overseen by an officer, the throughput is fairly high (hence we have 5 or 6 vehicles attached to a specific operation) but the person can cope with the number of hits and misreads.
Edit to add, the system usually knows if it outright cannot read a plate, and also has an probability of accuracy too. Below a threshold that can be chosen, it can be stored as a 'misread'.
When overseen by an officer, the throughput is fairly high (hence we have 5 or 6 vehicles attached to a specific operation) but the person can cope with the number of hits and misreads.
Edit to add, the system usually knows if it outright cannot read a plate, and also has an probability of accuracy too. Below a threshold that can be chosen, it can be stored as a 'misread'.
Edited by AndyRw on Thursday 14th June 19:41
susser said:
I disagree with the above;
If it gives the BIB an advantage over the filthy scum sucking pikey lawbreaking drug pushing looney driving tax dodging theiving gits that I have to support, then I'm all for it.
So there.
If you don't want to subsidise drug dealers, legalise and VAT register them.If it gives the BIB an advantage over the filthy scum sucking pikey lawbreaking drug pushing looney driving tax dodging theiving gits that I have to support, then I'm all for it.
So there.
Don't surrender your rights and freedoms.
AndyRw said:
But as I understand it, its reached the accuracy where the vast majority are because of non-conforming and dirty plates, hence traffic and response units are slowly picking up the pace of dealing with those issues day to day.
I heard driving down the white line (on a motorway etc) causes problems as they are looking for a plate within the centre of the laneForums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff