Detection and picture range of camera vans?
Discussion
Thanks everyone, feeling much better about this. I am a careful driver and take pride in my skills and observance of restricted limits. I just wish there was a way to enjoy driving in this country. I do regular trackdays, but sometimes its nice to enjoy life and have a blast on the open (safe) roads.
Anyway will know in 13 days time I guess.
I'll be at the Nurburgring then, so will not be worrying about it too much!
7db said:
At least he's aiming at traffic that...is heading towards him and can see him. IF he was being sneaky he'd be lying down pointing under the bush...
Yes, traffic from one direction can see, the other cannot see the enforcement. Wonder which was given the treatment...
Kerching.
7db said:i) measured in centimetres? ii) depth of field makes it trickier to estimate spacings, looks 30 could be 40, no repeaters (visible)...assuming so, there are 30s and there are 30s as we both know, this one has trees left, no houses with gardens near the road, no busy shops, no parked cars, not a lot going on, good visibility when the tree line stops, a bus stop ahead and what looks like a left into a car park (commercial?) and broken white lines, so this doesn't look - from the evidence available - like it's a ring puckering drive, or walk, or ride, for anyone.
i) Looks to me like he's visible to traffic prior ot entering his detection zone.
ii) Furthermore looks like a 30 limit - do you think there ought to be a lot leeway for speeding in 30 limits?
turbobloke said:
i) Looks to me like he's visible to traffic prior ot entering his detection zone.
ii) Furthermore looks like a 30 limit - do you think there ought to be a lot leeway for speeding in 30 limits?
Well over a thousand. More like two or three thousand, I should think.
turbobloke said:
ii) depth of field makes it trickier to estimate spacings, looks 30 could be 40, no repeaters (visible)...assuming so, there are 30s and there are 30s as we both know, this one has trees left, no houses with gardens near the road, no busy shops, no parked cars, not a lot going on, good visibility when the tree line stops, a bus stop ahead and what looks like a left into a car park (commercial?) and broken white lines, so this doesn't look - from the evidence available - like it's a ring puckering drive, or walk, or ride, for anyone.
If there is good visibility, what is the complaint about the speed enforcement chap?
It's true, it does look from that view as if its a 30 with few hazards. Probably little advantage to be gained in going over 30, so why not stick to the limit, using the classic cost-benefit view of the world?
7db said:Ho hum! The visibility is good, but that refers to lack of mist or fog, decent sight lines, lack of immediate sharp bends, lack of parked cars, good road width, wide open space after trees, low traffic density, and so on. It does not imply that motorists can see the scammer through the bl00dy trees
If there is good visibility, what is the complaint about the speed enforcement chap?
7db said:I don't know the location or the type of road, but there's probably little advantage in terms of safety benefit in having the 30 or 40 limit, more justifiable imo to have a 30 starting before the T-left up ahead - there seems to be a less rural and more commercial or residential nature to the road after that point and the expectation of a higher hazard density.
It's true, it does look from that view as if its a 30 with few hazards. Probably little advantage to be gained in going over 30, so why not stick to the limit, using the classic cost-benefit view of the world?
Is now the right time to mention is could be a child running out from behind those trees?
Aren't you curious when you come across locations of lost vision like that? Positioning out to see into them, edging off speed, checking clear.
The enforcement chap is in a great location, I'm sure you'd agree, to be seen by the attentive motorist.
Aren't you curious when you come across locations of lost vision like that? Positioning out to see into them, edging off speed, checking clear.
The enforcement chap is in a great location, I'm sure you'd agree, to be seen by the attentive motorist.
7db said:Escaping from one of the deportable paedophiles released from under the Home Secretary's nose? Even so - no, not the time. Anything running out from the trees will either be another fugitive from captivity but with a prehensile tail, or lose one of its nine lives. There is more chance of BLiar being a straight kinda guy than a rugrat emerging from those trees, and if they did emerge they'd have a job running - that's a thick thicket, have you done much ferreting about in trees?
Is now the right time to mention is could be a child running out from behind those trees?
And do you check the door is locked eleventy times whenever you go out?
7db said:Lost vision? Nah it's over there.
Aren't you curious when you come across locations of lost vision like that? Positioning out to see into them, edging off speed, checking clear.
7db said:I'm sure I disagree strongly, I suspect he's well hidden from approaching traffic and pinging drivers up the chuff while raking in a goodly dose of speed tax.
The enforcement chap is in a great location, I'm sure you'd agree, to be seen by the attentive motorist.
Why not set up a few yards further away from the trees along the road, adjacent to the road sign?
bryan35 said:
Well, he'd first have to see you and 'form an opinion'
Then he'd have to swing his scam gear round to point at you and zoom in - a lot, and focus, and hold you VERY steady in his sights, then try to get a reading at that range.
at 1.5 miles you're looking at a beam width of about 4m, which is blatting everything around you, so readings are not easy to come by.
Trying to think of what optics you would need to get a good numberplate shot.
root 2 llambda distance over lens diameter, which is roughly.........
root 2 llambda is about 1000nm X distance (2000m)= 2mm/lens diameter. Lets say lens diameter is 2 inch = .05cm so thats 2mm / .05 = 4cm. So, the ABSOLUTE HIGHEST resolution from a 2inch lens at 1.5 miles is 4cm, lenses don't get anywhere near this, and 4cm isn't nearly good enough to read a number plate.
you would need AT LEAST to have a resolution down to 1cm for the characters on a plate to be a recognisable blur, and for this you would need AT LEAST an 8 inch lens, bit like what they have at football matches, but you've have to be pretty damn good to keep it in focus - depth of field and all that!
<someones going to tell me I've got the maths wrong here!! :-) >
Good maths. However this is based on the assumption that each and every time someone is zapped the user carefully watches an approaching vehicle for long enough to give evidence in court of an estimate of their speed, decides this is over the limit, picks up their device aims it and zooms in before pulling the trigger.
If it *were* true that the proper procedure was followed then it would mean that assessments of speed would have to be taken for evidential purposes with the naked eye at half a mile which is a nonsense. The operator would then have a few seconds to hit a target the size of a tonka car at ten metres away. Oh yes, and make sure they hit the numberplate and ensure that the beam is held on that same point for a third of a second...
We all know it is aimed at the limit of the view and largest distance possible with the zoom also set ready at this distance. It is aimed at the same 'killing zone' until a car comes through and they are zapped. Simple as that.
turbobloke said:
I'm sure I disagree strongly, I suspect he's well hidden from approaching traffic and pinging drivers up the chuff while raking in a goodly dose of speed tax.
Why not set up a few yards further away from the trees along the road, adjacent to the road sign?
Deep down you know that it's the trees that are in on the conspiracy. They were planted there long ago to make this kind of revenue collection possible.
Or is it just the case that in 30 limits you simply shouldn't be speeding and that covert enforcement is a good thing?
rs666 said:
That's the spot. Not listed on their site heh, that's a bit naughty.
Thats Arrive Alive for you. Appear to be reasonable and truthful, but systematic lying is the culture.
Arrive Alive's schedule bears no realtion to reality. After a survey a few friends an I undertook in Flintshire for a months we concluded that if they had put 22 pins in the schedule at random they would be more truthdful than the published schedule.
I emailed their spokesliar about and she came out with a great story about how when a van was spotted at about 08:00 in an unpublished spot it was because the operator had been scheduled for training but it had been cancelled and he was redeployed. Strange he had received notice of cancellation, been 'redeployed' driven 14 miles from Wrexham and set up in a covert location all by an hour before office opening time.
turbobloke said:I've seen that photo before.. IIRC, its outside the entrance to St Mary's Hospital, Newport, Isle of Wight.
I don't know the location or the type of road, but there's probably little advantage in terms of safety benefit in having the 30 or 40 limit, more justifiable imo to have a 30 starting before the T-left up ahead - there seems to be a less rural and more commercial or residential nature to the road after that point and the expectation of a higher hazard density.
hyena said:
I used to travel into Wales quite a bit and often seemed to pass Scameras just inside the border. I'm sure they're deliberately targeting 'foreigners'.
If you're on the A5, they hide out all the way down to Shrewsbury. So it's not just the Welsh who do it. The English do too.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff