Speed camera mega-thread ***Read first post before posting***

pa990

JamesBond2010 wrote: »

(Electrical Components)
dont forget they are only cailibtrated from 0c to 70c (so cannot be proven to work below freezing):)

operating temp -25ºc to +60ºc

as for the calibration... and accuracy of such, I cant comment on.

pa990

JamesBond2010 wrote: »

............
Here is some Technical/backround Info. on the Gatso's
'that Gatso's can allegedly give false readings when the temperature is below 0c because the timing circuitry can be slowed down.

This means that as you pass the camera, the normal half second pause between the two flashes can be delayed.
So it gives the impression that your car or bike has travelled further over the guide lines painted on the road, which are used to calculate the distance you travelled in the half second...
...thus giving a higher speed reading.'

GoSafe Vans don't use Gatso equipment, neither do the Garda Vans.

The only Gatso equipment in use are the static Grey cameras
(the old garda vans were gatso's but they have been decommissioned)


GoSafe use ADG 340 radar unit and the Garda Vans use ROBOT, which is a multanova k band unit

JamesBond2010

tnx i was mixing things up there between the uk and the irish ones

I.S.T.

kbannon wrote: »

May I remind you of section 81 of the Road Traffic Act, 2010 drawing your attention in particular to the part that states:

It is not necessary to prove that the electronic or other apparatus was accurate or in good working order.

Wow, that is absolutely crazy :mad:

Our man in Havana

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

Wow, that is absolutely crazy :mad:

Another one for the Supreme Court to rule on.

ironclaw

Gatso's can allegedly give false readings when the temperature is below 0c

Would be sort of worried if the designers left the circuitry get that cold. Any moisture present would crack the board or worse. Pretty sure Gatso was designed in the Netherlands in the late 50's and given their climate is fairly similar to ours, if not colder, adding a heating circuit would sort of be a given I would have thought. Even electric gates have heating coils in the control panels these days.

Either way, it would be a mute point in the case of a van (IF it was Gatso, which it isn't) seeing as if its 0 degree's inside, on the circuit board, it would be substantially colder for the operator.

thats not gone well

Would be sort of worried if the designers left the circuitry get that cold. Any moisture present would crack the board or worse. Pretty sure Gatso was designed in the Netherlands in the late 50's and given their climate is fairly similar to ours, if not colder, adding a heating circuit would sort of be a given I would have thought. Even electric gates have heating coils in the control panels these days.

generally, nearly all integrated circuits (ic's) and microchips are tested from -70c to +240c in oil baths before they are dispatched. all part of the internal QC process by whoever manufactures the ic, so there is no reason to belive why the cold would effect these cameras more than your ECU, mobile phone etc etc

JamesBond2010

Our man in Havana wrote: »

Another one for the Supreme Court to rule on.

Ya this is Ireland Corrupt as hell!!!

ironclaw

JamesBond2010 wrote: »

Ya this is Ireland Corrupt as hell!!!

Hardly corrupt. I'm pretty sure its the same case in England and the US. Imagine the overhead, and thus cost, of having to calibrate and prove every Lidar gun in the country was working correctly. Maybe for GoSafe, Garda and Radar units, but certainly not Lidar.

Our man in Havana

They will actually produce proof as standard. Same in the UK.

Only in the banana republic is it different.

JamesBond2010

ironclaw wrote: »

Hardly corrupt. I'm pretty sure its the same case in England and the US. Imagine the overhead, and thus cost, of having to calibrate and prove every Lidar gun in the country was working correctly. Maybe for GoSafe, Garda and Radar units, but certainly not Lidar.

Only Cailbrate them once or twice a year then keeps records of them for/ if instances like this
(they have to be calibrated every so often anyway yr or so)

& it is not that hard anyway to cailbrate them.

dr.fuzzenstein

kbannon wrote: »

May I remind you of section 81 of the Road Traffic Act, 2010 drawing your attention in particular to the part that states:

It's even worse in Austria.
A member of the police force can estimate your speed without the aid of any apparatus, so if they think you where speeding, they can have you.
Been over there a few times and the Austrians see catching out people, especially foreign drivers, as some form of national sport and a handy stream of income.
My parents, who where both in their 60's when this happened and are by no means racing drivers, exited a village where the speed limit was 50k.
The limit then went to 60, 100 and then, for about 100 meters, back to 60k again.
The coppers where hiding a bit down the road and just waving people into a big car park, where another officer would issue the fines.
There was quite a number of cars parked there, being fleeced.
The cops where hiding completely out of sight, on guy would take down the speed, the other would radio the reg and speed to his colleagues, one guy would wave in the cars and another few would go around taking money.
Another Austrian favourite is to hide rear-facing speed cameras in bins that you don't see at all.
Compared to that, Ireland is downright civilised when it comes to speed cameras.

cyclopath2001

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

.
Another Austrian favourite is to hide rear-facing speed cameras in bins that you don't see at all.

But if they did not hide, people would jump on their brakes and cause crashes?

JamesBond2010

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Another Austrian favourite is to hide rear-facing speed cameras in bins that you don't see at all.
.

Aim for the Bins then!!!:p:p:p:D:D. evidence gone LOL

(like the bit in the Green Hornet)

dr.fuzzenstein

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

But if they did not hide, people would jump on their brakes and cause crashes?

That's not what it is about there.
You will often see the speedlimit changing from 100 to 60 and back to 100 again for literally 100-200 meters at random points.
This is usually located near a convenient cortyard, so cars can be waved in out of sight.
The locals know what the cops are up to and don't get caught.
But tourists who don't know get fleeced.
It has nothing to do with safety, it's a revenue stream to them.
It's a bit like crossing a border in Africa, where all of a sudden a random tax gets hastily invented on the spot because they don't want to call it a bribe.
The only difference is that in Banana countries it is the official who is raking the money in for himself and in Austria it is state sanctioned robbery.
Now to show you how that works for safety:
I can speed and not get caught because I know where and how they catch you.
My parents don't speed but they do get caught because they are unaware. Purely by RSA standards they are far safer drivers than me. In their 60's and drive everywhere slowly. The two sole criteria for safe driving in Ireland, according to the powers that be.
Yeah, real safe.

ironclaw

JamesBond2010 wrote: »

Only Cailbrate them once or twice a year then keeps records of them for/ if instances like this
(they have to be calibrated every so often anyway yr or so)

& it is not that hard anyway to cailbrate them.

They are supposed to be calibrated every day from my reading of the manual and manufactures instructions. But the problem is, like any laser system, a small knock or kick and you could probably claim the calibration would be thrown off.

I'd be for a daily calibration and the serial number of the equipment issued with the ticket.

nice_guy80

since when have they been deploying unmarked speed camera vans??

I got caught 2 weeks ago.
It was well hidden
Parked in between two parked haulage trucks on the side of the road
how ridiculous is that??

I was sure that all the vans were to be marked with High Vis markings????

cyclopath2001

nice_guy80 wrote: »

since when have they been deploying unmarked speed camera vans??...I was sure that all the vans were to be marked with High Vis markings????

I think they'd be Gardai or speed survey. The out sourced ones are clearly marked, I saw one Saturday near a dangerous bend on the Ashbourne to Swords road.

Problem is that if the vans are marked, people slow down suddenly, even if they're not speeding. There have been reports in the UK of accidents caused by this. IrishSpeedTraps published some links about this problem, a while back.

Unmarked vans are safer and are more likely to catch deliberate law breakers who speed when they think they can get away with it.

JamesBond2010

nice_guy80 wrote: »

since when have they been deploying unmarked speed camera vans??

I got caught 2 weeks ago.
It was well hidden
Parked in between two parked haulage trucks on the side of the road
how ridiculous is that??

I was sure that all the vans were to be marked with High Vis markings????

Ongoing surveys will be conducted to ensure that these sections of roads continue to represent locations where speeding is happening. The map will be updated accordingly.

These sections of the road network will be where An Garda Síochána will be primarily focussing our enforcement. We will use a range of equipment such as:

• Handheld and tripod mounted laser guns;
• Vehicle mounted Puma speed detection equipment, (both marked and unmarked vehicles);
• Van mounted automatic speed detection radars (Garda operated);
• Van mounted Go-Safe vans (civilian operated).

An Garda Síochána appeals to all road users, in particular motorists, to familiarise themselves with these sections of the road network.


garda website:cool::cool::cool:

-Corkie-

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

I think they'd be Gardai or speed survey. The out sourced ones are clearly marked, I saw one Saturday near a dangerous bend on the Ashbourne to Swords road.

Problem is that if the vans are marked, people slow down suddenly, even if they're not speeding. There have been reports in the UK of accidents caused by this. IrishSpeedTraps published some links about this problem, a while back.

Unmarked vans are safer and are more likely to catch deliberate law breakers who speed when they think they can get away with it.

I passed an unmarked go safe van on saturday where the normal go safe vans park when doing speed checks. Why would he be carrying out a survey when its a designated check area. Me thinks he was carrying out speed checks like the rest of them..

Atomic Pineapple

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Unmarked vans are safer and are more likely to catch deliberate law breakers who speed when they think they can get away with it.

Also more likely to catch someone safely travelling slightly over a posted limit and be accused of being a revenue stream though.

cyclopath2001

draffodx wrote: »

Also more likely to catch someone safely travelling slightly over a posted limit

You're either breaking the law or you're not.

The 'revenue stream' argument is totally bogus and a red herring.

savagecabbages

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You're either breaking the law or you're not.

The 'revenue stream' argument is totally bogus and a red herring.

Exactly. The speed limits are in black and white on big signs all over the country. Anyone who speeds and gets caught really only has themselves to blame. I'm often quite liberal when it comes to speed limits, but I know what the limits are from all the massive signs around the roads, so understand how much I'm over them by when I am speeding. If/when I get caught, I'll have been the one driving and while annoyed, I'll have been the one pressing the accelerator pedal...

I suppose the RSA and Gardai could avoid the all these supposed dangerous situations caused by jamming on of brakes at speed checks by switching fully to an unmarked approach, but then everyone would be up in arms over them being sneaky.

As for the revenue stream argument, if everyone hates giving the government money over this, why make a serious point and by not speeding not give them a single cent!!

I.S.T.

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

You're either breaking the law or you're not.

The 'revenue stream' argument is totally bogus and a red herring.

If you accept that reasons other than improving road safety (revenue, PR stunts) infulence the location of these cameras then it is a serious issue, and not "bogus" or a "red herring". This will directly impact on the safety of road users and could result in missed opportunities to prevent crashes and therefore deaths and serious injuries.

JamesBond2010

savagecabbages wrote: »

As for the revenue stream argument, if everyone hates giving the government money over this, why make a serious point and by not speeding not give them a single cent!!

Are u for Real ??

the goverment is corrupt is as hell, so are other professions, eg(NCT) they think of some other ways of screwing u anyway with tax and other stupid charges.

never on roads that people are killed on. (goSafe) always on roads where it is easy to make a few euro. & illegally parked outside peoples house then.
exclude dublin area. When have u ever seen a cop(maybe gosafe) on a 100km/120km road...

-Chris-

JamesBond2010 wrote: »

Are u for Real ??

It's a fair point - if you didn't exceed the limit, you'd never be caught for speeding. :pac:

JamesBond2010 wrote: »

the goverment is corrupt is as hell, so are other professions, eg(NCT) they think of some other ways of screwing u anyway with tax and other stupid charges.

I see where you're coming from, but we're better off concentrating on Motoring issues here.

JamesBond2010 wrote: »

never on roads that people are killed on. (goSafe) always on roads where it is easy to make a few euro. & illegally parked outside peoples house then.
exclude dublin area. When have u ever seen a cop(maybe gosafe) on a 100km/120km road...

I've seen Gardai pull people over on motorways, and have seen them with speedguns on motorway overpasses.
I'm not sure if that proves or disproves your point though...

Sobanek

They shouldn't be unmarked - what's the point, the guy gets caught again and again where-as if he sees a white van with CLEAR LABELLING he slows down...
Look up Top Gear and Speed Cameras, they did a survey in which the number of accidents didn't go down when they turned the speed cameras off.

Reg'stoy

Sobanek wrote: »

They shouldn't be unmarked - what's the point, the guy gets caught again and again where-as if he sees a white van with CLEAR LABELLING he slows down...passes van and speeds back up

FYP

Also if he gets caught again and again as you say, he will at some point cop on and slow down or lose his licence. As I have said elsewhere these days it's very hard to give out when you get caught speeding, when it's very easy to find out where vans could be or are located.

JamesBond2010

-Chris- wrote: »

It's a fair point - if you didn't exceed the limit, you'd never be caught for speeding. :pac:

i meant the end part of the thing:D:D


I see where you're coming from, but we're better off concentrating on Motoring issues here.

i know that i was trying to tie it in.... I said Nct though:D:P:P motoring no:P:P:D:D:D


I've seen Gardai pull people over on motorways, and have seen them with speedguns on motorway overpasses.
I'm not sure if that proves or disproves your point though...

Outside the Dublin (better roads more guards Etc in dublin)area??

Rarely see any only towards the end of the month when the quotas need to be meet& they are usually around. although i do work unsocialable hours. that maybe a reason as well.

-Chris-

JamesBond2010 wrote: »

Outside the Dublin (better roads more guards Etc in dublin)area??

Both