Can someone tell me the secret?
Discussion
M1 motorway roadworks, from J26 upwards.
Signs say 50mph limit and average speed cameras.
At the first overhead yellow gantry with cameras I set my cruise-control to exactly 50mph (and I accept that this is not completely accurate), and did not remove it until after the last overhead gantry.
Lots of cars passed me - some moving much (i.e. 10mph plus) quicker.
I did not catch them up by the end of the roadworks so therefore their average speed must be greater than 50mph.
Which leads to two conclusions, firstly they have tickets in the post, or secondly the cameras are inactive/set to a higher speed.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
Signs say 50mph limit and average speed cameras.
At the first overhead yellow gantry with cameras I set my cruise-control to exactly 50mph (and I accept that this is not completely accurate), and did not remove it until after the last overhead gantry.
Lots of cars passed me - some moving much (i.e. 10mph plus) quicker.
I did not catch them up by the end of the roadworks so therefore their average speed must be greater than 50mph.
Which leads to two conclusions, firstly they have tickets in the post, or secondly the cameras are inactive/set to a higher speed.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this?
I accidentally did when a lorry nearly ran me off the road I accelerated to get out of the way, then remembered the reason I was nearly sandwhiched in the first place was due to "safety" cameras ensuring we were all running at roughly the same speed and a lorry merging in the lane to my left whilst a lorry was going past me, very slowly...
I changed lanes and didn't get a ticket, so I assume I was safe - of course, it could be that my speed was only raised for a short enough period to ensure my average speed was not high enough to get nicked, I don't know.
I changed lanes and didn't get a ticket, so I assume I was safe - of course, it could be that my speed was only raised for a short enough period to ensure my average speed was not high enough to get nicked, I don't know.
Hooli said:
'same lane' in the type approval doesnt mean 'same lane' on the road as far as im aware. i seem to remember in another thread on here it was stated that they can set L1 on the 1st camera then L2 on the 2nd & thats a 'lane' sounded odd to me - anyone clarify?
In this case they'd only get the ones that did swap lanes? From what I've seen it's only a small minority of people who lane-hop...Having had "cruise control" for best part of 10 years now, I know how easy it is to set, and let the car do the rest, I personally would sit at 50 knowing smugly that you cannot possible be done for speeding.
Let the others go faster, they might need the few minutes they save for an important meeting or something else much more important than your trip.
Let the others go faster, they might need the few minutes they save for an important meeting or something else much more important than your trip.
I think all this lane hopping or slamming on brakes is far more dangerous and causes more traffic problems than a free flowing 60-70mph. These roadworks are clear, well lit and there are substantial barriers protecting the work force and the lanes arn't even narrow. I don't know why it should be 50 limit.
Average speed cameras make the idiots on the road drive even worse and more unpredictably than ever, they are a menace.
Rant over, now relax
Average speed cameras make the idiots on the road drive even worse and more unpredictably than ever, they are a menace.
Rant over, now relax
I was at 24 to 25 today and saw the signs but there were no specs. Just a yellow effing MOTOROLA gantry northbound without a camera on it so I drove at my normal speed. A single camera on a temp stand is usually to spot breakdowns, congestion etc so I ignore them. Specs are pretty obvious and lane changing, tailgating seems to be 'the fix' if it's to late or dangerous to slow down
Maybe faster cars are local traffic or aware drivers who know what to look out for?
Maybe faster cars are local traffic or aware drivers who know what to look out for?
x5x3 said:
I did not catch them up by the end of the roadworks so therefore their average speed must be greater than 50mph.
Which leads to two conclusions, firstly they have tickets in the post, or secondly the cameras are inactive/set to a higher speed.
They will probably be set to detect a minimum ACPO limit of 110% +2mph i.e. 57mph in any event!Which leads to two conclusions, firstly they have tickets in the post, or secondly the cameras are inactive/set to a higher speed.
i don't get the type approval thing - somewhere on the a\m27 (round portsmouth way, i think) theres average gantrys covering some roadworks, normal thing, but one of them is on the sliproad off the m\way - perfect sense, except you can't have been in that lane on the previous camera, as it didn't exist!! so whats going on?
streaky said:
Type Approval is for the same lane operation and for the lane under the camera OR the lane next to it. A camera over lane 1 cannot monitor lane 3, a camera over the hard shoulder cannot monitor lane 2 - Streaky
Here you go (from my post in M27 SPECs thread):streaky said:
The type approval for SVDD (the core of SPECS) states:
In a letter on the Cheshire Safety Camera Partnership (which is no longer at the URL I have and which a search of the site does not turn up), it was stated that a SPECs camera on the M6 was: "under the type approval issued by the Home Office, ... approved to monitor 'only one traffic lane – either immediately below or the neighbouring lane'." Note that 'or', not 'and'.
On that basis, two SPECS cameras on a single gantry can monitor only two lanes, not three. Additionally, they can only monitor either the lane under the camera or the adjacent lane ... so, if placed over the hard shoulder and lane one (typical), they can only monitor the hard shoulder and lane one, or the hard shoulder and lane two, or lane one and lane two.
Whether the lane monitored by a camera can be changed dynamically, or is allowed to be changed (by type approval), I don't know, but I would think it unlikely.
Clearly, if one wished to challenge a NOIP for speeding detected by SPECS, one would want to see both photographs and be informed which pair of cameras were used (if not obvious from the angle of the photographs) and see the 'order' which sets out (I imagine) which lanes will be monitored.
ETA: A Guide to Type-Approval Procedures for Automatic Distance/Time Speedmeters used for Road Traffic Law Enforcement in Great Britain by Dr SR Lewis states: "6.1.3 When image detectors are used, both shall be positioned to use the same angle of view to the same registration plate of vehicles passing the measurement datum points."
Which pretty much means that the pairs of cameras must monitor the same lane.
StreakyHome Office said:
The Distance Over Time Speed Measuring Device Approval 1999
The Secretary of State, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by section 20(4) and (5) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (a) (Speeding offences etc: admissibility of certain evidence) and having prescribed for the purposes of that section a device designed or adapted for recording a measurement of the speed of motor vehicles by means of unattended cameras capturing images of a vehicle at each of two pre-determined positions on the road and by recording the time at each position and calculating the average speed over that distance (b), hereby approves as from 1st April 1999 for the purpose of detection of offences specified in section 20(2)(a), (b), (c) or (d) the type of such device known as the Speed Violation Detection Deterrent (SVDD), manufactured by Symonds Group Ltd.
It is my highlighted text that is interpreted as meaning that only one lane can be monitored by one camera ... provided the pairs of cameras are set up covering the same lane (see below).The Secretary of State, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by section 20(4) and (5) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 (a) (Speeding offences etc: admissibility of certain evidence) and having prescribed for the purposes of that section a device designed or adapted for recording a measurement of the speed of motor vehicles by means of unattended cameras capturing images of a vehicle at each of two pre-determined positions on the road and by recording the time at each position and calculating the average speed over that distance (b), hereby approves as from 1st April 1999 for the purpose of detection of offences specified in section 20(2)(a), (b), (c) or (d) the type of such device known as the Speed Violation Detection Deterrent (SVDD), manufactured by Symonds Group Ltd.
In a letter on the Cheshire Safety Camera Partnership (which is no longer at the URL I have and which a search of the site does not turn up), it was stated that a SPECs camera on the M6 was: "under the type approval issued by the Home Office, ... approved to monitor 'only one traffic lane – either immediately below or the neighbouring lane'." Note that 'or', not 'and'.
On that basis, two SPECS cameras on a single gantry can monitor only two lanes, not three. Additionally, they can only monitor either the lane under the camera or the adjacent lane ... so, if placed over the hard shoulder and lane one (typical), they can only monitor the hard shoulder and lane one, or the hard shoulder and lane two, or lane one and lane two.
Whether the lane monitored by a camera can be changed dynamically, or is allowed to be changed (by type approval), I don't know, but I would think it unlikely.
Clearly, if one wished to challenge a NOIP for speeding detected by SPECS, one would want to see both photographs and be informed which pair of cameras were used (if not obvious from the angle of the photographs) and see the 'order' which sets out (I imagine) which lanes will be monitored.
ETA: A Guide to Type-Approval Procedures for Automatic Distance/Time Speedmeters used for Road Traffic Law Enforcement in Great Britain by Dr SR Lewis states: "6.1.3 When image detectors are used, both shall be positioned to use the same angle of view to the same registration plate of vehicles passing the measurement datum points."
Which pretty much means that the pairs of cameras must monitor the same lane.
monkey11477 said:
I think all this lane hopping or slamming on brakes is far more dangerous and causes more traffic problems than a free flowing 60-70mph. These roadworks are clear, well lit and there are substantial barriers protecting the work force and the lanes arn't even narrow. I don't know why it should be 50 limit.
Average speed cameras make the idiots on the road drive even worse and more unpredictably than ever, they are a menace.
Rant over, now relax
So, it's not the cameras that are the problem, but the idiots who can't drive properlyAverage speed cameras make the idiots on the road drive even worse and more unpredictably than ever, they are a menace.
Rant over, now relax
Why do people blame cameras for "forcing" people to drive like idiots? It's not the cameras fault that somebody can't drive correctly, why blame the camera for peoples reactions to it? it's people who are at fault not cameras if they have an accident while trying to adjust their speed so as to not get caught... stop blaming an object and blame the real reasons....PEOPLE
Edited by GruntHead on Thursday 21st February 15:31
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff