View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
jonstatt Regular Visitor

Joined: Jul 19, 2005 Posts: 140
|
Posted: Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:31 pm Post subject: x40 - Safety cameras 60% rule - safety agreement |
|
|
I had been having problems with no cameras showing up and there has been some discussion on here about it.
I had docked with TomTom Home and saw it download the cameras. As with previous TomToms that was sufficient to activate their presence on the device. However, I wasn't seeing any on my travels.
Today, I actually went into the safety camera option on the TomTom menus, and it asked me to accept an safety camera agreement of some sort. I didn't read it carefully , but after doing so, and a subsequent trip to central London, it has displayed every single speed and traffic camera correctly!
TomTom also advised me, that in the most recent NavCore updates, it only warns you about safety cameras if you are above 60% of the speed limit or above it.
Finally, I tried to "update fixed cameras" and "update mobile cameras". For mobile, it updated. For fixed, it said I couldn't do it on the device and had to do it via Home. Do others find the same? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
EricWB Frequent Visitor

Joined: Jan 31, 2007 Posts: 310
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
If I understand the details correctly the safety camera data for the X40 series is provided by Road Angel and not TT themselves, or do TT own a substantial share in Road Angel?
Ownership aside there must be a reason for the change to the Road Angel data and perhaps it is because their system only warns you when travelling at 60% or more of the speed limit e.g. 30mph = 19mph or 40mph = 24mph. This would mean you don't keep getting warnings when because of traffic conditions it would be almost impossible for you to exceed the limit so not a bad thing.
But it could mean you don't learn where the speed cameras are for when the TT is turned off and you may then get flashed, but of course I forgot we never exceed the speed limits anyway do we? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Darren Frequent Visitor

Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:10 am Post subject: Re: x40 - Safety cameras 60% rule - safety agreement |
|
|
jonstatt wrote: | TomTom also advised me, that in the most recent NavCore updates, it only warns you about safety cameras if you are above 60% of the speed limit or above it. |
Interesting, strange that a Demo route at the correct speeds triggers cameras alerts but it could well explain the problems being reported. I'll seek clarification from TT on that.
Quote: | Finally, I tried to "update fixed cameras" and "update mobile cameras". For mobile, it updated. For fixed, it said I couldn't do it on the device and had to do it via Home. Do others find the same? |
That is correct though an odd system, only Mobile sites can be updated OTA, fixed cameras are updated via HOME. _________________ Darren Griffin
Last edited by Darren on Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:19 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Darren Frequent Visitor

Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
EricWB wrote: | If I understand the details correctly the safety camera data for the X40 series is provided by Road Angel and not TT themselves, or do TT own a substantial share in Road Angel? |
No, they have licensed the data from RoadAngel
Quote: | Ownership aside there must be a reason for the change to the Road Angel data |
We were told TomTom had uniquely licensed 3rd party data in the UK for two reasons, firstly we have a much greater density of cameras than anywhere else in the EU and secondly they recognised there own data was poor! _________________ Darren Griffin |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
M8TJT The Other Tired Old Man


Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
Darren. From where do Road Angel get their data? I saw elsewhere that you were encouraging PGPSW readers to inform them of missing cams etc. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Darren Frequent Visitor

Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
M8TJT wrote: | Darren. From where do Road Angel get their data? I saw elsewhere that you were encouraging PGPSW readers to inform them of missing cams etc. |
Uh no! I merely asked that anyone who had issues with RoadAngel's data on the x40 should email them. They appear to have an issue with implementation rather than the data. We have no desire to do their job for them but it was a conciliatory gesture only having removed a post from them asking for feedback in our forums, a step we thought was one too far for a competitor.
As to where they get their data, I have no idea, they do not discuss or disclose their sources. They also have no forum, yet another reason why an open service like ours is IMHO a better option. _________________ Darren Griffin |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
MrT Frequent Visitor

Joined: Nov 14, 2003 Posts: 2146 Location: Surrounded by A1, M1 & M25
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
I have also noticed that the warnings for the TomTom cameras are set in seconds from the camera yet for POI warnings these are set in distance (yards). Shame there was not a time setting for the POI warnings. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mikealder Pocket GPS Moderator


Joined: Jan 14, 2005 Posts: 19638 Location: Blackpool , Lancs
|
Posted: Sun Nov 09, 2008 12:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Having used the 940 for a few months I have never noticed this 60% trigger for the premium camera warnings, that said it was best tested before dismissing it out of hand.
Blackpool is a great place to test camera warnings as there must be more cameras per square mile than anywhere else! Even the RDS-TMC was receiving this morning just to prove it does work with the 940 when coupled to the device with the correct mount.
At 25MPH the warning is triggered.
The same camera approached at 15MPH (below the supposed 60% threshold) you still get a warning.
Another camera at 12MPH and I still got the warning (Audio and visual)
Another camera at 4MPH and I got the visual alert but no audio, the audio seems to only alert above 12MPH which is 40% not 60%
To be honest I was very dubious about this 60% trigger point for warnings, and having been out to specifically test it I would now dismiss the idea completely and suggest it is yet another example of Customer Support issuing poor information.
If you are going to trial the warnings by driving around at very slow speed please be considerate to other motorists, this takes longer than you think trying to avoid holding up the traffic flow when driving at 4MPH! - Mike |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
jonstatt Regular Visitor

Joined: Jul 19, 2005 Posts: 140
|
Posted: Mon Nov 10, 2008 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well...thank you very much for doing a comprehensive experiment.
I can't think why the TomTom support rep would make up something like this! How crazy is that?
Whatever the case, even if your speed was 40% or below, it still shows visually...just without the beeping.
I can see some potential problems with an implementation like this anyway. M25 has variable speed cameras, yet you can only tag them as one speed in the camera database. So 40% of 70...but this may be not be correct if the variable speed zone is 40mph at the time. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
gblades Occasional Visitor

Joined: 25/05/2003 13:28:04 Posts: 52 Location: United Kingdom
|
Posted: Fri Nov 14, 2008 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
My experience is that it does work although I think the trigger point is a bit below 60% and perhaps more like 50%. Certenly around the M25 where the limit is 70mph if I am traveling over 35mph it alerts but below 30mph it certenly doesnt. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|