Scamera Van on D/carriageway
Discussion
Driving on the A417 yesterday, a Scamera Van was in the layby before the Cirencester turning.
I was in the nearside lane & not speeding at approx. 60mph, I think it's a 70mph limit, due to terrible weather conditions & a friend had previously phoned to warn me it was on that road!
A Vectra full of lads had been checking out the HSV & was overtaking me to get a better look, I would guess they were just over 70mph.
We both saw the van @ the same time as it came into our vision. Even though I wasn't speeding, I instinctively braked hard which is of course a potentially dangerous thing to do with AP Racing brakes if anyone had been to close behind me, but these "Safety" Vans know best.
I was wondering afterwards, if I had been speeding, would the Scamera operator have been able to get both cars.
Assuming the operator would target the car in the outside lane first, how long does it take to record that car before they could switch to record the car in the nearside lane?
I have heard (maybe incorrectly) that they have to get more than one speed reading to convict? If this is the case, the car in the nearside lane should have at least 3 secs. to slow down.
Interested to hear the views of others on this, as presumably on motorways, theoretically all 3/4 cars travelling side by side in seperate lanes could be speeding.
>> Edited by A57 HSV on Thursday 20th October 16:22
I was in the nearside lane & not speeding at approx. 60mph, I think it's a 70mph limit, due to terrible weather conditions & a friend had previously phoned to warn me it was on that road!
A Vectra full of lads had been checking out the HSV & was overtaking me to get a better look, I would guess they were just over 70mph.
We both saw the van @ the same time as it came into our vision. Even though I wasn't speeding, I instinctively braked hard which is of course a potentially dangerous thing to do with AP Racing brakes if anyone had been to close behind me, but these "Safety" Vans know best.
I was wondering afterwards, if I had been speeding, would the Scamera operator have been able to get both cars.
Assuming the operator would target the car in the outside lane first, how long does it take to record that car before they could switch to record the car in the nearside lane?
I have heard (maybe incorrectly) that they have to get more than one speed reading to convict? If this is the case, the car in the nearside lane should have at least 3 secs. to slow down.
Interested to hear the views of others on this, as presumably on motorways, theoretically all 3/4 cars travelling side by side in seperate lanes could be speeding.
>> Edited by A57 HSV on Thursday 20th October 16:22
AIUI, it takes 0.3 seconds for a laser-camera to check and record the speed. Another vehicle alongside is no problem as they focus on the centre of the number plate.
The time to re-focus on the vehicle alongside, after getting a reading from vehicle 1 is open to conjecture, but one might guess at 1.5 seconds to 2 seconds or thereabouts.
The time to re-focus on the vehicle alongside, after getting a reading from vehicle 1 is open to conjecture, but one might guess at 1.5 seconds to 2 seconds or thereabouts.
Cooperman said:
Another vehicle alongside is no problem as they focus on the centre of the number plate.
I believe that the divergence of the beam is 30cm at 100m and increases by the same proportions the further the target is away.
There are also reports that the LTI2020 actually fires three horizontal beams, thus making the spread even wider.
It is important to say that there is no 'focus' of the beam. If the device is aligned correctly, the centre of the beam(s) should be where the crosshairs on the viewfinder of the device are. Although the number plate might be 'aimed at' the number plate, the reality of what was hit is unknown. If you can hit a number plate from 100-400 metres with any kind of aiming device, you are a better man than I will ever be.
In practice, the operator aims this in your general direction, and presses the trigger. If there are any errors the device will say so and not give a speed (ahem...). The operator will check the speed confirms his 'prior opinion' that you were speeding (ahem....) and that is it. £60 please sir.
If you were under the limit you should be safe though.
>> Edited by justinp1 on Thursday 20th October 17:08
A57 HSV said:
Is the limit 70mph on a dual carriageway with a central barrier & no speed signs?
Numpty question I know, but I could have been doing early 60's, reckon I saw the van pretty much as we came into vision, but now I'm getting paranoid.
I think so, it would certainly be implied I think unless there were signs otherwise. Even if it were 60, they probably woulnd be bothered to press anything unless you were doing 10% plus 2 over the limit.
Dual Carriageway, no repeater, speed limit is either 70 or 30, depending on whether you were in a 30mph zone or NSL.
The operator should form an opinion of speed, record the speed, then continue recording the vehicle as it closes to get an image of the driver.
If a group of cars are running together, he might decide to sacrifice the ID evidence to record the speed of the group. From my own experience it'd take about 2 seconds per car (recording speed, moving to next car, recording speed, etc.) Initial opinion would have to be that all the cars in the group were speeding.
A57 HSV said:
Anyone else have any info. on the amount of time a Scamera operator spends recording a car before he/she moves on to another
The operator should form an opinion of speed, record the speed, then continue recording the vehicle as it closes to get an image of the driver.
If a group of cars are running together, he might decide to sacrifice the ID evidence to record the speed of the group. From my own experience it'd take about 2 seconds per car (recording speed, moving to next car, recording speed, etc.) Initial opinion would have to be that all the cars in the group were speeding.
A57 HSV said:
Definitely was not doing 70mph so that's O.K.
Interesting what you said about sacrifising I.D evidence.
Not sure why but I logged in yesterday as SøS, an ID I forgot I had on this site, but I have used elsewhere.
I have previously operated speed cameras, and it is almost impossible to record two vehicles or more in view AND follow in for a decent ID shot.
Usually you would have one aggressive speeder in a bunch, tailgating etc. For me he was always the one to go for.
[quote=IaHa-SøS]Dual Carriageway, no repeater, speed limit is either 70 or 30, depending on whether you were in a 30mph zone or NSL.[/quote]
If there are streetlights* and no repeaters, then it is 30. NSL requires repeaters where there are streetlights.
If it is not properly signed, then no enforcement of the prevailing limit is possible. Unless it's a restricted road.
* a system of streetlighting no more than 200yrds apart.
If there are streetlights* and no repeaters, then it is 30. NSL requires repeaters where there are streetlights.
If it is not properly signed, then no enforcement of the prevailing limit is possible. Unless it's a restricted road.
* a system of streetlighting no more than 200yrds apart.
IaHa said:
Definitely was not doing 70mph so that's O.K.
Interesting what you said about sacrifising I.D evidence.
Not sure why but I logged in yesterday as SøS, an ID I forgot I had on this site, but I have used elsewhere.
I have previously operated speed cameras, and it is almost impossible to record two vehicles or more in view AND follow in for a decent ID shot.
Usually you would have one aggressive speeder in a bunch, tailgating etc. For me he was always the one to go for.
Thanks, I suspect the overtaking Vectra will get a ticket!
Do you have to get an I.D shot for a conviction?
The national speed limit on a dual carriageway with a central reservation or divider is 70. That scamera van is regularly parked in that lay by on the 417/419, if as I think you mean, you are referring to the lay by on the South bound carriageway just before the junction with the A435.
We're making some assumptions here...that the dodgy scope has recorded the speed accurately and hasn't added 30 or so mph or even thrown up an error code and not recorded any speed at all. It may even have recorded the speed of another car - the car alongside you even while pointing at you.
A57 HSV said:
A57 HSV said:
Definitely was not doing 70mph so that's O.K.
Interesting what you said about sacrifising I.D evidence.
Not sure why but I logged in yesterday as SøS, an ID I forgot I had on this site, but I have used elsewhere.
I have previously operated speed cameras, and it is almost impossible to record two vehicles or more in view AND follow in for a decent ID shot.
Usually you would have one aggressive speeder in a bunch, tailgating etc. For me he was always the one to go for.
Thanks, I suspect the overtaking Vectra will get a ticket!
Do you have to get an I.D shot for a conviction?
No, you can photograph from the rear, but obviously it would be best evidence to ID the driver.
The 'ID' shot is not normally a problem since the video runs constantly and can easily pickup all passing traffic in both directions. Usually there will be enough continuity of picture to justify a claim that the car with the tiny unreadable plate having its speed measured 300 or 400 meters away is the same one seen about 80 meters away (where the plate can be read) some few seconds later.
I reckon the typical time between scams in normal to heavy traffic can be as little as 1 second but may be more like 2 seconds most of the time. Prior opinions of speeding may have taken much less time and probably occurred some months before the event when the operator was trained to use the equipment.
I reckon the typical time between scams in normal to heavy traffic can be as little as 1 second but may be more like 2 seconds most of the time. Prior opinions of speeding may have taken much less time and probably occurred some months before the event when the operator was trained to use the equipment.
GKP said:
So, in theory, what's to stop a camera operator having a vindictive streak and adding an extra 10 mph to the speed they record in their notebooks?
As a driver protesting their innocence in court they'd be explaining themselves to a Beak that's heard it all before.
There is nothing with any of the devices. With the lasermeters all is shown on the device is a distance and a speed. There is no indication whatsoever of when the reading was taken, or which car (or stationary object) was recorded at that speed.
Thus, we must trust the PC on top of the bridge waiting for a pursuit not to spend a while getting a 'good' ie fast speed reading, then waiting for a suitably 'fun' car to practice their pursuit training following.
I am in no way implying that all officers do this, but it is theoretically possible. And can someone tell me with the fact that the evidence could never be challenged otherwise, it has *never* happened?
GKP said:
So, in theory, what's to stop a camera operator having a vindictive streak and adding an extra 10 mph to the speed they record in their notebooks?
As a driver protesting their innocence in court they'd be explaining themselves to a Beak that's heard it all before.
Because the speed noted in pocket books would be directly at odds with the speed recorded on the video, which is from where the admin staff would generate the paperwork.
LongQ said:
The 'ID' shot is not normally a problem since the video runs constantly and can easily pickup all passing traffic in both directions. Usually there will be enough continuity of picture to justify a claim that the car with the tiny unreadable plate having its speed measured 300 or 400 meters away is the same one seen about 80 meters away (where the plate can be read) some few seconds later.
I reckon the typical time between scams in normal to heavy traffic can be as little as 1 second but may be more like 2 seconds most of the time. Prior opinions of speeding may have taken much less time and probably occurred some months before the event when the operator was trained to use the equipment.
I don't recognise your analysis, but I understand the frustrations with the system which would prompt you to post this. It doesn't relate in the slightest to my own experiences.
I don't believe there is any difficulty in 'bagging' enough speeders to make the system pay for itself, therefore there is really not the need to be as obtuse as you suggest.
The difficulty is in translating the concept of remote speed enforcement to any real tangible benefit.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff