Home PageFacebookRSS News Feed
PocketGPS
Web
SatNav,GPS,Navigation
Pocket GPS World - SatNavs | GPS | Speed Cameras: Forums

Pocket GPS World :: View topic - REDUCTION IN SPEED CAMERA DATABASE THIS MONTH
 Forum FAQForum FAQ   SearchSearch   UsergroupsUsergroups   ProfileProfile   Log in for private messagesLog in for private messages   Log inLog in 

REDUCTION IN SPEED CAMERA DATABASE THIS MONTH
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14 ... 17, 18, 19  Next
 
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> PocketGPSWorld Speed Camera Database
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
classy56
Frequent Visitor


Joined: Sep 08, 2006
Posts: 441
Location: Dorset

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bmuskett wrote:
I should probably stay away from classy56, but I can't let this one pass.




mikealder wrote:
So consider this a Yellow card, next its thread locked, get it on topic



Does the yellow card warning just apply to me?
_________________
Tomtom Go730T
App 8.300
Map v815.2003


To old to die young.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Border_Collie
Pocket GPS Verifier
Pocket GPS Verifier


Joined: Feb 01, 2006
Posts: 2543
Location: Rainham, Kent. England.

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I've said before I'm not really bothered if the requested addition to the database is given or not but it gets me thinking, what did people do before they owned a Sat. Nav? What did people do before the safety camera database was available? What do those without either do?

Before Sat. Nav. we used paper maps, before the camera database we observed the speed limit signs and camera warning signs.

Thinking about it some more, what is the difference in seeing a camera warning sign and getting a warning on the Sat. Nav. or not? Surely the reaction would be to slow down if the speed limit was being exceeded.

TomTom and others may not be perfect and the camera database not 100%, use them both as an 'aid' and just be happy we are better off than we were without them.
_________________
Formerly known as Lost_Property
And NO that's NOT me in the Avatar.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Border_Collie
Pocket GPS Verifier
Pocket GPS Verifier


Joined: Feb 01, 2006
Posts: 2543
Location: Rainham, Kent. England.

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 1:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My Grandmother showed me this when I reached my teens. Worth a read for those who haven't seen it before.

[IF]

If you can keep your head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,
If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you
But make allowance for their doubting too,
If you can wait and not be tired by waiting,
Or being lied about, don't deal in lies,
Or being hated, don't give way to hating,
And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise:

If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same;
If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken
Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools,
Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken,
And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:

If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings
And never breath a word about your loss;
If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"

If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue,
Or walk with kings--nor lose the common touch,
If neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you;
If all men count with you, but none too much,
If you can fill the unforgiving minute
With sixty seconds' worth of distance run,
Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it,
And--which is more--you'll be a Man, my son!


--Rudyard Kipling
_________________
Formerly known as Lost_Property
And NO that's NOT me in the Avatar.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mikealder
Pocket GPS Moderator
Pocket GPS Moderator


Joined: Jan 14, 2005
Posts: 19638
Location: Blackpool , Lancs

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

classy56 wrote:
mikealder wrote:
So consider this a Yellow card, next its thread locked, get it on topic



Does the yellow card warning just apply to me?
Not just you but anyone considering posting on the forum, I suggest the rules are read it would appear they are not being adhered to within this thread.

General Rules wrote:
While debate and discussion is to be welcomed, we will not tolerate rude or insulting posts, personal attacks, unnecessarily inflammatory posts or posts of a sexual nature. Our decision is final in these matters.

That extract isn't difficult to miss, its right at the top of THIS Page - Mike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
colinm345
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Jan 10, 2007
Posts: 24

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lost_Property wrote:
I've said before I'm not really bothered if the requested addition to the database is given or not but it gets me thinking, what did people do before they owned a Sat. Nav? What did people do before the safety camera database was available? What do those without either do?

Before Sat. Nav. we used paper maps, before the camera database we observed the speed limit signs and camera warning signs.

Thinking about it some more, what is the difference in seeing a camera warning sign and getting a warning on the Sat. Nav. or not? Surely the reaction would be to slow down if the speed limit was being exceeded.

TomTom and others may not be perfect and the camera database not 100%, use them both as an 'aid' and just be happy we are better off than we were without them.


i for one will second that a Sat Nav or camera database is a great help but it needs a modicum of common sense to accompany it Smile Smile Smile Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Tired Old Man


Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14893
Location: Keynsham

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

May I repeat (part of) my post of 30th January please - doesn't seem as though many people noticed it in all the flying dirt. I have now reddened a very significant part of it.
DennisN wrote:
I knew that I knew unverified mobile sites were getting into the DB from quite a few months ago. It has taken me some time to find something, but here is a quote from a post dated 4th May 2006 ...

"I read in another post that for some reason they have included a whole load of un-verified mobile sites in the recent database versions. Anyone know why?"

So from at least "recent versions" (plural) as far back as nine months ago, unchecked mobile cameras were already going into the database and building up a situation of gross inaccuracy (only gross because of the numbers).

In the course of this thread we've seen an example
Quote:
about the camera in question that you submitted twice (both with quite varied co-ordinates)
which would be difficult - if anybody has old copies of downloads (30th Nov 2006), you can see these two submissions are something like 400 yards apart, but apparently for only one camera.
Quote:
the description you gave in this forum does not match that of the co-ordinates you submitted so the verifier in question did not believe it could be possible there.
so both mobiles were unconfirmed and taken out. Personally, from what Lola said in the original post, I'm entirely convinced a camera site exists in that area. Just unfortunately memory served false about exactly where - that happens to all of us - I've just had to resubmit a spec camera on the M4 which I "remembered" in the wrong place first time I submitted it - the point is my first one was false, quite unintentionally, but a member of the verifier team would have simply had to say it wasn't there. If I'd been reporting a mobile last year, it would have gone into the DB, then my second would have also - 50% inaccuracy, so if one is subsequently taken out "suddenly half the database is removed, what's going on?" Yes, I know that's a silly extreme figure, but we are talking here about PGPSW correcting a situation that has been building up for at least 9 months. In Lola's case, when the correct location is added to the previous two, there'd be three warnings for one camera site. I humbly suggest that would not be good.
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lola
Lifetime Member


Joined: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DennisN wrote:

In the course of this thread we've seen an example
Quote:
about the camera in question that you submitted twice (both with quite varied co-ordinates)
which would be difficult - if anybody has old copies of downloads (30th Nov 2006), you can see these two submissions are something like 400 yards apart, but apparently for only one camera.
Quote:
the description you gave in this forum does not match that of the co-ordinates you submitted so the verifier in question did not believe it could be possible there.
so both mobiles were unconfirmed and taken out.


If you paste the co-ordinates supplied above by MaFt into Autoroute then you will see that the two sites are +-70 yards (150 yards total) so a camera in the middle would do - but no - lets not put any camera in the database at all.

BTW - on the way up the A46 today I noted that 3 mobile sites north of Beckford were all inaccurate by at least 100 yards each. Also there are 3 mobile sites in Beckford - funny enough though - none were positioned where the camera van was sitting at lunch today. Cant be bothered to submit a 4th camera position for Beckford (A46) - and I wasnt the one who submitted any of the other 3. Maybe the 3 in the database are false and my sighting real - or maybe the van is, er, mobile.

Still - MaFt - thanks for the offer - the database belongs to PGPS and is yours to do with what you wish. I am not going to get into discussion with PGPS or others about whether a mobile was 100 yards further along the road. I set my unit to warn me about 400 yards before the position to give advance notice to slow down and allow for slight position errors.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Tired Old Man


Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14893
Location: Keynsham

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Laughing Out Louda wrote:
If you paste the co-ordinates supplied above by MaFt into Autoroute then you will see that the two sites are +-70 yards (150 yards total) so a camera in the middle would do - but no - lets not put any camera in the database at all.

Lola PLEASE don't get uptight about this. My apologies, you are right with 150 yards as against my guess of 400 - I've just navigated a route from one to the other and Autoroute says 153 yards. I had imported them (CSV file) into Autoroute to look at them and didn't look at my scale properly. Nevertheless, one of the locations is outside the 30mph zone. A lot of us use the speed zoned version of the database and get warning not only of the camera, but of the speed limit applicable. A 30mph warning outside the 30mph zone shakes the database.

But my post was NOT about your camera, it was about getting the DB right and credible. I merely used an innocent example which we could all see from previous posts - that due to the previous unverified entry policy, two cameras got into the DB when only one should have (ignore whether they were showing the right location) - you honestly didn't intend two cameras there, did you? (not that you wanted NO cameras there either! Confused ) Three weeks ago coming home through Wales, I got SIX mobile warnings in a nine mile stretch of road and all six of them warned me of a camera with "Speed Limit Unknown", the seventh such warning showed a camera in the middle of a vicious Z bend and I didn't believe any of them! I only reported the Z bend one, couldn't memory place the others after the end of a 10-hour 475-mile driving day. You've just said it seems inaccurate at Beckford, doesn't that make the point? I really wish you WOULD tell PGPSW about what you found, not least because I shall soon be visiting my brother's nursing home via the A46 at Beckford!
_________________
Dennis

If it tastes good - it's fattening.

Two of them are obesiting!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Pocket GPS Moderator


Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quoted from the board FAQs:
Quote:
I keep getting unwanted private messages!
In the future we will be adding an ignore list to the private messaging system. For now though if you keep receiving unwanted private messages from someone inform the board admin, they have the power to prevent a user from sending private messages at all.


Is it time this was implemented?

And my final say on this matter:
If anyone thinks that the database admin are failing in their duty to individually sort out/decide between/average out, all your multiple inaccurate submissions, I'm sure they would appreciate your offer to take over from them.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Skippy
Pocket GPS Verifier
Pocket GPS Verifier


Joined: 24/06/2003 00:22:12
Posts: 2946
Location: Escaped to the Antipodies! 36.83°S 174.75°E

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lost_Property wrote:
What did people do before the safety camera database was available?


I used a RADAR detector.... Twisted Evil

(Shuffles off to put his asbestos suit on)
_________________
Gone fishing!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lola
Lifetime Member


Joined: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 9:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No worries - the problem that I see is the camera van doesnt always use the same site within a certain location (maybe depends who is driving etc) hence Beckford has 3 mobile sites all of which are real - deleting and adding a new one only corrects that database for what I saw today - however - will it be right tomorrow - I doubt it. So you might as well have a warning at either end of villages or one in the middle and advise users to set their warning distance to 500 yards. Neither of these are optimimum solutions though. An alternative is to add 3 locations for Beckford and users to set the warning to 100 yards - but this misses the fourth location I saw today.

I am fairly certain that the camera van operators are told where the PGPS warnings are and so sit along the road from them and consequently is the proliferation of cameras on the PGPS database doomed to continued expansion?

I admit my submissions for Long Newton varied by +-70 yards and so I expect other submissions vary by as much or more.

With regard Beckford (and all similar) - is there any point in adding a 4th position or delete the middle camera? Didnt matter anyway - the trafffic had slowed to 34mph in the 50 limit - so we could all say cheese.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Border_Collie
Pocket GPS Verifier
Pocket GPS Verifier


Joined: Feb 01, 2006
Posts: 2543
Location: Rainham, Kent. England.

PostPosted: Sat Feb 03, 2007 10:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I used a RADAR detector....


From the top of your column I guess you got multiple warnings. :P
_________________
Formerly known as Lost_Property
And NO that's NOT me in the Avatar.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chris_UK
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Apr 23, 2006
Posts: 35

PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 1:30 pm    Post subject: Mobile Cameras Reply with quote

As with mobile cameras, they can scan your speed for a longer distance, maybe its worthwhile having extra warning. Some roads are difficult to see speed changes with junctions particularly when it's changing from 40, 50, 30, 50, 60, 40, etc. So sometimes its helpful to bring attention to the speed. What would be idea would be a camera database with every speed limit listed as you change from 50 to 30 - surely some other people use the database as a speed reminder too?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Hands0n
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Feb 04, 2007
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 11:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well, that was an "interesting" read, all 13 pages of it!

I'm new to the Pocket GPS Speed Camera Database having loaded it up today and taken it out for a run around North Kent. It is accurate enough for all purposes that such a facility should be use for. That being to be given at least a hint of the presence of a potential or actual speed camera site.

I would like the database to be 100% accurate and include 100% of all cameras and sites in the UK. But is that an entirely realistic expecation?

I regard the database a continual work in progress, something that will develop and change indefintely. And for £19 a year ..... blimey! who can argue at that price, really?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
duggie1982
Occasional Visitor


Joined: Apr 10, 2006
Posts: 1
Location: Glasgow, Scotland (UK)

PostPosted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I second that one. At the end of the day if I come across a speed camera that I have noticed not to be on the list I will submit it, thats all I can do.

bmuskett wrote:
Laughing Out Louda wrote:

If I report a mobile - it gets ignored. I dont know it is unconfirmed because it isnt on the database - so I cant be bothered reporting it - because reporting hasnt worked for me...catch 22 anyone?


I think we just have to report cameras or errors that we find and trust in the verification process, otherwise the database won't improve. Just because it appears to have failed for you in this case doesn't mean it always will.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger







Posted: Today    Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Pocket GPS World Forum Index -> PocketGPSWorld Speed Camera Database All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12, 13, 14 ... 17, 18, 19  Next
Page 13 of 19

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Make a Donation



CamerAlert Database

Click here for the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database

Download Speed Camera Database
22.053 (15 May 24)



WORLDWIDE SPEED CAMERA SPOTTERS WANTED!

Click here to submit camera positions to the PocketGPSWorld.com Speed Camera Database


12mth Subscriber memberships awarded every week for verified new camera reports!

Submit Speed Camera Locations Now


CamerAlert Apps



iOS QR Code






Android QR Code







© Terms & Privacy


GPS Shopping