Speed cameras in Ireland - a guide

pa990

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't mind the Garda cars hiding on the bridge or on the on-ramps, but those vans are feckin' lethal to have on the motorway. I nearly had a crash on Wednesday when traffic went from a smooth 120 to a grinding halt (i believe we were at 40km going past the van!).

It wasn't even on our side of the road! Will absolutely cause a crash.


Do we still not know the tolerance for the vans? (ie how much over you can be and still 'get away with it'?) Surely it must have been leaked or said by someone by now?

up to 8km/hr and youre safe.. do 9km/hr over and you get a present in the post

ironclaw

Deleted User wrote: »

Do we still not know the tolerance for the vans? (ie how much over you can be and still 'get away with it'?) Surely it must have been leaked or said by someone by now?

Its on this thread, and many more like it on Boards.ie.

Seth Brundle

pa990 wrote: »

up to 8km/hr and youre safe.. do 9km/hr over and you get a present in the post

Does this apply to all speed limit zones?
Where is this defined or is this just anecdotal?

pa990

kbannon wrote: »

Does this apply to all speed limit zones?
Where is this defined or is this just anecdotal?

I was told directly from a source working in the system. I also have anecdotal evidence. (which i cant disclose on a public forum)

pa990

pa990 wrote: »

up to 8km/hr and youre safe.. do 9km/hr over and you get a present in the post

Ah that seems okay (for me, as I use cruise control and set it at 130, which is generally 127 in 'actual' speed).


That said, you'd easily (without cruise control) on the motorway get up to 130-140 without even noticing it. Seems a tight/low tolerance. Always thought it was around that but had hoped it'd be higher for the sake of people making genuine errors (you'd do 60 in a 50 without noticing it, but getting up to 70, etc. and you'd likely twig you're speeding without having to look at the speedometer).


Thankfully, through a combination of luck, other people's courtesy to flash, and a general attitude of 'always speeding, but rarely by much', I've managed to evade any points on my license.

Galway12345

Just after passing a n undercover speed van on the way to work, it was sitting right on the edge of a 50 zone facing out into a 100 zone about 30m away.

What speed was it taking? The 50 or the 100?

Also it was backed right up against a tree (very sneakily done) what side of the van is the camera on? The tree was right in the middle of the van.

Did not see the van and started decelerating just at end of 100 zone but was at about 60 by the time I saw the van.

Effects

Galway12345 wrote: »

What speed was it taking? The 50 or the 100?

Probably set up to catch you speeding in the 50 zone just after you leave the 100 zone.

Galway12345

Is there not an allowance to decelerate into the zone?

Seth Brundle

Galway12345 wrote: »

Is there not an allowance to decelerate into the zone?

According to the law, you are not allowed exceed the posted limit so to answer your question, no.

However, if the van is within the 100km/h zone and taking pictures of cars within the 100km/h zone then they surely can't nab someone for driving within that limit - a good barrister could show that they were within the 100km/h limit when the picture was taken (and when they are claiming the driver was speeding).
The fact that they may have been speeding within the 50km/h limit is irrelevant as that is not where the van is checking.

Galway12345

Ok thanks, how far away would he be reading? Would it be possible to be reading speed very close to the van? Even though by the way the van was positioned against the tree it was either very close or very far as the tree was blocking the medium range.

blackis200

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't mind the Garda cars hiding on the bridge or on the on-ramps, but those vans are feckin' lethal to have on the motorway. I nearly had a crash on Wednesday when traffic went from a smooth 120 to a grinding halt (i believe we were at 40km going past the van!).

It wasn't even on our side of the road! Will absolutely cause a crash.


Do we still not know the tolerance for the vans? (ie how much over you can be and still 'get away with it'?) Surely it must have been leaked or said by someone by now?

I just got a ticket for speeding on a motorway in Australia.
I was said to be doing 119 in a 110 zone and they deemed my speed to be 116 after allowances. In their calculation, I was 6 over in 110.
Doesn't matter. I won't be paying the €197.

ironclaw

Galway12345 wrote: »

Also it was backed right up against a tree (very sneakily done) what side of the van is the camera on? The tree was right in the middle of the van..

I'd wager it wasn't a Garda van to be honest. What make, model and reg was it? Having an obstacle that close to the rear would be against operating procedure. You need a fairly unobstructed view, even a closely parked car would be a problem as you not only have issues taking the photo, your radar scatter would be immense.

Galway12345

ironclaw wrote: »

I'd wager it wasn't a Garda van to be honest. What make, model and reg was it? Having an obstacle that close to the rear would be against operating procedure. You need a fairly unobstructed view, even a closely parked car would be a problem as you not only have issues taking the photo, your radar scatter would be immense.

That's what I was also thinking 🀔 Only saw the van at the last second so didn't get reg but looked very like one with the windows at the back, but I hope you're right!!

ironclaw

Galway12345 wrote: »

That's what I was also thinking 🀔 Only saw the van at the last second so didn't get reg but looked very like one with the windows at the back, but I hope you're right!!

I'd confidentially wager if its as you described, as in wedge to a tree, then its not a Garda or GoSafe van.

Effects

ironclaw wrote: »

Having an obstacle that close to the rear would be against operating procedure. You need a fairly unobstructed view.

I've seen them use trees as cover to prevent being spotted easier.

A trunk on the centre of the rear wouldn't be a problem when the camera is pointing out the rear driver's side window.

They are hardly going to park up so as to obscure correct detection of speeding cars. What would be the point of that?

Galway12345

Effects wrote: »

I've seen them use trees as cover to prevent being spotted easier.

A trunk on the centre of the rear wouldn't be a problem when the camera is pointing out the rear driver's side window.

They are hardly going to park up so as to obscure correct detection of speeding cars. What would be the point of that?

Yes I think it looked like this was the case as it was very hard to spot, someone is trying too hard to catch people!!

Effects

It's more about boosting revenue than catching people speeding.

mikeecho

Effects wrote: »

It's more about boosting revenue than catching people speeding.

If it's about revenue, they're doing a bad job

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/consortium-operating-speed-camera-vans-turns-profit-of-48k-per-week-237406.html

in Nov 2010. On average, the Go Safe vans detect one speeding motorist per hour, or 72,000 detections per year as the consortium is contracted to provide 6,000 hours per month.

Effects

mikeecho wrote: »

If it's about revenue, they're doing a bad job

€50,000 profit a week is a bad job to you?

mikeecho

Effects wrote: »

€50,000 profit a week is a bad job to you?

But not for the state.

It's making money for a private company whether or not they catch anyone.

It's costing taxpayers a fortune.

Effects

One motorist an hour sounds pretty poor. Hard to believe it's that low a target that they hit.

Zatoichi

FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

Falcon L

Now there's a good reason to drive in the left lane. The leftmost lane gets detected last, giving you more time to get legal.

ironclaw

@Zatoichi, where is that? Its there in my head but I can't quite get it.

blackwhite

ironclaw wrote: »

@Zatoichi, where is that? Its there in my head but I can't quite get it.

Looks like Liffey Valley approaching M50

Zatoichi

Yeah, N4 Liffey Valley. I was taking the M50 exit.

Effects

Falcon L wrote: »

Now there's a good reason to drive in the left lane. The leftmost lane gets detected last, giving you more time to get legal.

What's the reason for this? Do they cover all lanes in a diagonal spread?

Seth Brundle

Effects wrote: »

What's the reason for this? Do they cover all lanes in a diagonal spread?

Simple angles!

Effects

kbannon wrote: »

Simple angles!

So does that mean they monitor multiple lanes?

Falcon L

Effects wrote: »

So does that mean they monitor multiple lanes?

Yes. And both directions.