Floodlights in average speed cam roadworks.

[F i F]

Presumably as they illuminate just the section of road where the timing marks are, why are they full in the driver's face?

Surely this is stupid and increasing the hazards that are present already?

Why not have them illuminating the rear of the vehicle?

[orangesrule]

wow, that seems mega stupid, surely they should be using Infra red floodlighting.

[Ozzie Osmond]

They don't need road markings for average cameras.

The lighting is to illuminate registration plates, enable driver identification etc.

[XG332]

Ozzie Osmond said:

They don't need road markings for average cameras.

The lighting is to illuminate registration plates, enable driver identification etc.

This. As they dont work at night

[Flibble]

Eh? SPECS use infrared cameras - they don't need floodlights. Someone probably left the working lights on.

[devnull]

Actually, I've seen this a lot on the M4 average speed camera setups. Granted SPECS is infrared, but i've seen it a lot.

Floodlights are right in front of SPECs cameras, at the point where the camera will get the numberplate. Usually helped along by a temporary rattle can marking in the road also.

[kiteless]

Flibble said:

Eh? SPECS use infrared cameras - they don't need floodlights. Someone probably left the working lights on.

AIUI, SPECS uses cameras to time cars between two fixed points using number plate recognition. How can IR cameras read a number plate in the dark?

[sebhaque]

kiteless said:

How can IR cameras read a number plate in the dark?

IR is beyond the visible light spectrum. The same way that night vision camcorder modes work - it's what that little red light you see on the SPECS at night is.

[carl_w]

sebhaque said:

IR is beyond the visible light spectrum. The same way that night vision camcorder modes work - it's what that little red light you see on the SPECS at night is.

We know that part. What's the difference between the black and white (or yellow) parts of your number plate under IR illumination? Is the reflective bit even designed to be IR-reflective?

[F i F]

Ozzie Osmond said:

They don't need road markings for average cameras.

The lighting is to illuminate registration plates, enable driver identification etc.

I think you are correct with this. There is a short set went through on Saturday night, possibly A42/M42 round about Ashby-de-la-Zouch (ish)

Heading south the first bank of average cams just have the IR lights, the second which are right in the bit of the works where the most is going on have a humongous bank of lights that completely destroy any night vision you have on the approach and then are uncomfortably bright when you pass through the lit zone.

This brightly lit area is where there are some short marker lines in the middle of each lane which I believe are part of the evidential information, ie precise timing of when you pass over that bit of road.

The only option is to either shut ones eyes for a fraction, which is not at all clever, lower the visor to try and block the worst of it, but your night vision is still buggered. At which point you plunge into darkness but still in the roadworks.

Really clever... Not.


At this point no doubt we will get Callaghan on spouting some of his usual trolling smartarse rubbish from one of his multiple identities.

[Fabric]

F i F said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

They don't need road markings for average cameras.

The lighting is to illuminate registration plates, enable driver identification etc.

I think you are correct with this. There is a short set went through on Saturday night, possibly A42/M42 round about Ashby-de-la-Zouch (ish)

The floodlights are nothing to do with operation of the cameras whatsoever. They're likely some 'elf and safety requirement for the workforce (which, if anything like the SPECS "roadworks" areas I've encountered, are nowhere to be seen).



The two housings each side of the camera act as the cameras own floodlights albeit projecting non visible IR light. As far as the IR camera can tell, everything will be bathed in a strong light - even if it's completely invisible to the naked eye, allowing them to work perfectly in pitch dark conditions.

carl_w said:

Is the reflective bit even designed to be IR-reflective?

You've pretty much answered that yourself. Shiny reflective surfaces also reflect IR light, funnily enough!

[jhfozzy]

I've done a lot more than normal M4 travelling this month and I'm truely amazed at the amount of drivers that fly down the 50 limit, slam on for the cameras and then promptly speed up again just afterwards.

Do they not understand the meaning of "Average" speed cameras?

[KMud]

Fabric said:

You've pretty much answered that yourself. Shiny reflective surfaces also reflect IR light, funnily enough!

It's not as daft a question as you infer; things tend to get more reflective as you head into the IR spectrum and the written part of the plate may become shiny to the point that there's no contrast between the text and yellow/white background. Pragmatically, as the IR used is only just outside visible light and the cameras assumedly do work, you're almost certainly right though! If it went far enough into IR the clear coat on the plate would probably go opaque.

[F i F]

Fabric said:

F i F said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

They don't need road markings for average cameras.

The lighting is to illuminate registration plates, enable driver identification etc.

I think you are correct with this. There is a short set went through on Saturday night, possibly A42/M42 round about Ashby-de-la-Zouch (ish)

The floodlights are nothing to do with operation of the cameras whatsoever. They're likely some 'elf and safety requirement for the workforce (which, if anything like the SPECS "roadworks" areas I've encountered, are nowhere to be seen).

So in that case why are they illuminating not the work areas? but just the 15-20 yds max of the road across the live lanes exactly where the supposed camera marks are?

Plus if it's just a case that the tin foil hat mode is incorrect and they are just for Elf'n'safety then it's even more stupid that they are positioned just to "dazzle" drivers right in the place where this supposed danger to the non-existant workers is so great that extra illumination is needed.

My mind is made up, the people who operate and install these systems are self serving morons of the first order. I have absolutely no problem in slowing down and giving respect to road workers, whether present or not, but this situation just takes the biscuit and is afaic indefensible.