| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
trevor.dowle
Lifetime Member
Joined: 16/06/2003 05:22:14
Posts: 412
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 6:37 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| nivek22 wrote: | | Aren't there 'stay in lane signs' on this stretch of Motorway? |
Yes, and I thought it was for reasons of safety. Perhaps there's another reason.....................
_________________
Regards
Trev Dowle
TomTom 730 T |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Skippy
Pocket GPS Verifier
Joined: 24/06/2003 00:22:12
Posts: 2946
Location: Escaped to the Antipodies! 36.83°S 174.75°E
|
| Posted: Tue Oct 17, 2006 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sallyann wrote: | | You missed the significant point. I started off by saying "Changing lanes on a straight road..." |
Ah, sorry I read it too quick and only saw "the error always is in your favour". So we all agree that if the road isn't straight then the error may not be in your favour.
Perhaps that is why the Home Office decreed that the speed could only be measured on a per lane basis. Even then though, a driver could enter the timed area change lanes several times and then leave the area in the same lane and it would be recorded as a valid speed measurement. 
_________________
Gone fishing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hcl
Occasional Visitor
Joined: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 19
Location: S Wales
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 18, 2006 7:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
But surely then one could argue (in court that) they would have to prove that you remained in the same lane all the time?
(as a corollary, they could dig out the photies from ALL lanes and 'match them' against each other, calculate the resultant speed and re-charge you anyway)
_________________
hcl
(Dim Panicio)
[Garmin Nuvii 1300T; from Garmin 'XT/iPAQ914; from 'c310'; from 'i3'; from 'Clie/Digimap/Emtac BT Rxr'; from Magellan 305] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Privateer
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: 30/12/2002 17:36:20
Posts: 4912
Location: Oxfordshire, England, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 1:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hmm, this may or may not be true and I have no evidence either way. However I would have thought that if an organisation has the ability to design, install, and run a SPECS system, they would be in a position to readily add additional hardware and make software changes to cope with lane changers IF the current system couldn’t already cope with that event. This is an interesting discussion, however:
1. I would not risk my driving licence by speeding in a section camera area.
2. Fortunately I don’t use many roads that have SPECS, but if I did I’d be concerned abut people changing lanes with no warning whilst in a section camera area.
Regards,
_________________
Robert.
iPhone 6s Plus, iOS 14.0.1: iOS CamerAlert v2.0.7
TomTom GO Mobile iOS 2.3.1; TomTom (UK & ROI and Europe) iOS apps v1.29
Garmin Camper 770 LMT-D |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skippy
Pocket GPS Verifier
Joined: 24/06/2003 00:22:12
Posts: 2946
Location: Escaped to the Antipodies! 36.83°S 174.75°E
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2006 2:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Privateer wrote: | | if an organisation has the ability to design, install, and run a SPECS system, they would be in a position to readily add additional hardware and make software changes to cope with lane changers |
You are quite right that the system software could be updated to check the speed of vehicles which have changed lanes but the interesting thing is that The Daily Mail claims that the Home Office Type Approval stipulates that they can only check the speed of a vehicle if it enters and exits the zone in the same lane.
So the limitation is a political one relating to the Type Approval setting out how SPECS is allowed to be used, not a technical one relating what SPECS is actually capable of doing.
They could get the Type Approval changed, but I don't think this is a trivial task....
_________________
Gone fishing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
korndog
Lifetime Member
Joined: Jan 29, 2005
Posts: 236
Location: yorkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 11:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why are you trying to find ways to beat the system. The speedlimits are there for a very good reason.
Dont get me wrong, I like to go fast myself but in roadworks it's very dangerous to speed.
I always drive at a safe distance from the car in front but there's always some selfish ba****d that WILL get in front either by bullying me into pulling over or by undertaking and then cutting in front of me.
This and driving too close surely are the major factors in motorway accidents.
_________________
Paul
TomTom Go 600 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gee-Pee
Lifetime Member
Joined: Feb 10, 2005
Posts: 1951
Location: Mostly somewhere in Essex
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Why are you trying to find ways to beat the system. The speedlimits are there for a very good reason. |
I had not got the impression from reading this thread that anyone was trying to beat the system - it is an interesting academic discussion based upon a newspaper article which, if I remember correctly, indicated the current legal shortcomings of the SPECS cameras. (And, I assume you (singular) refers to you (plural) ). 
Anyway, I do agree with you that speed limits are there for a very good reason but which one of us has not exceeded them at some time or another 
_________________
Gee-Pee
Lifetime member PGPSW - time rapidly decreasing |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 7:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| korndog wrote: | | Why are you trying to find ways to beat the system. The speedlimits are there for a very good reason. |
Could you possibly explain what the good reason is in this example?
Deserted motorway, 3am, no workforce, three lanes reduced to two. 40mph SPECS in operation.
How is this different from a normal two lane motorway working at 70mph? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sallyann
Lifetime Member
Joined: Jun 23, 2006
Posts: 768
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andy_P2002 wrote: |
Could you possibly explain what the good reason is in this example?
Deserted motorway, 3am, no workforce, three lanes reduced to two. 40mph SPECS in operation.
How is this different from a normal two lane motorway working at 70mph? |
Try this:
With an ordinary 2-lane motorway you have every expection of it being clear of obstructions.
With work in progress on a parallel lane, there is a possibility of traffic cones, building materials etc being scattered onto the remaining lanes.
Sal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
korndog
Lifetime Member
Joined: Jan 29, 2005
Posts: 236
Location: yorkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andy_P2002 wrote: | | korndog wrote: | | Why are you trying to find ways to beat the system. The speedlimits are there for a very good reason. |
Could you possibly explain what the good reason is in this example?
Deserted motorway, 3am, no workforce, three lanes reduced to two. 40mph SPECS in operation.
|
I know it can be frustrating but the roadworks are usually only 3 or 4 miles at most. So you've lost maybe 2 or 3 minutes of your life. Then you can put your foot down to get them back 8)
_________________
Paul
TomTom Go 600 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 3:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fair enough, good points both of you. (You can tell I'd just been chugging slowly through some when I wrote!)
Incidently, the two sections I went through over the weekend were both two lanes wide and only had a single camera covering them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
korndog
Lifetime Member
Joined: Jan 29, 2005
Posts: 236
Location: yorkshire
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 11:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Andy_P2002 wrote: | Fair enough, good points both of you. (You can tell I'd just been chugging slowly through some when I wrote!)
Incidently, the two sections I went through over the weekend were both two lanes wide and only had a single camera covering them. |
Yeah I noticed that somewhere, could have been the M56 near Runcorn. It must be when they alter the roadworks but forget about the cameras.
_________________
Paul
TomTom Go 600 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Naomi
Occasional Visitor
Joined: Dec 07, 2005
Posts: 49
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 1:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I certainly won't be betting my well earned cash on whether this is correct or not. If I really wanted to speed I would only do so in areas where the database says there are no cameras at all.
A question: often there are more than 2 specs cameras in a monitored section: Do specs infringements work between any pair, or just between adjacent pairs of cameras?
If the first applies then lane changing may not get you out of trouble.
_________________
Too many people "search for the zero inside themselves". Sadly, many fail to find even that.
Nao |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TuppyTrucker
Lifetime Member
Joined: Sep 19, 2006
Posts: 44
Location: Mandeville en Bessin, 5km from OMAHA beach, Nomandie, France
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 26, 2006 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Sallyann wrote: | | Andy_P2002 wrote: |
Could you possibly explain what the good reason is in this example?
Deserted motorway, 3am, no workforce, three lanes reduced to two. 40mph SPECS in operation.
How is this different from a normal two lane motorway working at 70mph? |
Try this:
With an ordinary 2-lane motorway you have every expection of it being clear of obstructions.
With work in progress on a parallel lane, there is a possibility of traffic cones, building materials etc being scattered onto the remaining lanes.
Sal |
How about a 3 lane motorway, reduced to 2 lanes for roadworks with a specs enforced 40mph limit, and a 3 lane motorway, reduced to 2 lanes for roadworks with a specs enforced 50mph limit.
Why the difference?
M1 6a to 9 and M40 8 to 9 if you're interested.
The M1 northbound after 9 is 4 lanes with hard shoulder, reduced to 4 lanes without hard shoulder, and still a 40 mph!
Most non GPS equipped drivers go at 35mph because their speedos are so inaccurate. Trying to make even 40 mph (gps indicated) is rarely possible , let alone the 44 you can get away with.
BTW has any body ever come across a genuine conviction for a specs enforced offence?
I never have, and I've asked loads of drivers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Skippy
Pocket GPS Verifier
Joined: 24/06/2003 00:22:12
Posts: 2946
Location: Escaped to the Antipodies! 36.83°S 174.75°E
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 27, 2006 12:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TuppyTrucker wrote: | | BTW has any body ever come across a genuine conviction for a specs enforced offence? |
I don't know of any convictions in court but I do personally know a few of people who have been given a conditional offer (£60/3 points) after being caught by the Tower Bridge 20 MPH specs cameras.
As an aside, I was looking at the Tower Bridge cameras and there are two cameras at the entry point but only one at the exit of the controlled zone. How does that work (given the allegations made by The Mirror et al)?
Is this an exception because the road merges from two lanes into a single lane at the end of the SPECS control zone?
_________________
Gone fishing! |
|
| 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 |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
