| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SteveMPS
Occasional Visitor
Joined: Jan 30, 2010
Posts: 57
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 1:37 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Sounds wise spook51
I only regged up here to help rather than just moan about the idiot warnings the InfoRad gives from this site's database.
So far I'm thinking why did I bother. I've submitted two corrections of cameras and I get an auto response saying "thanks for the addition". There is seemingly no mechanism to correct cameras, there is seemingly a policy to enter error 0mph values for Variables and now we have an argument about whether those inactive QE2 bridge cams are inactive or not. |
|
| 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: Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I know it's a matter of much debate, but I would much rather have the occasional false warning (mobile warnings anyone?) for a dummy camera than to suddenly come across what looks like an enforcement camera where I wasn't expecting one.
Sorry guys, but I'm NOT going to take your word for it that a particular camera is on test or not in use. I want to be warned for ANY camera that could be used for enforcement and I'll make up my own mind thank you very much. 
_________________
Gone fishing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigPerk
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Sep 06, 2006
Posts: 1618
Location: East Hertfordshire
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 2:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm sure if anyone comes up with some practical ways of synchronising the camera database with the real world in real time, Darren and the staff would be delighted. For instance, now variables get dragged in - if they are not set to 0mph how can you set them - have someone standing in the middle of the M25 phoning Darren everytime the advisory limit changes because of traffic conditions   ?
Please, Let's Stay Real.
_________________
David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SteveMPS wrote: | | there is seemingly a policy to enter error 0mph values for Variables ....... |
| BigPerk wrote: | | For instance, now variables get dragged in - if they are not set to 0mph how can you set them |
Perhaps it would be better to have the variables set to 70MPH to warn the driver of the presence of a cam, but not to give a possible continuous overspeed warning on some systems, after all, the variable speed limit signs are a littile difficult to miss. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SteveMPS wrote: | | There is seemingly no mechanism to correct cameras,. |
 Yes there is. It's on the submission page in the 'Action' drop down box and is called 'Change Existing Camera'  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SteveMPS
Occasional Visitor
Joined: Jan 30, 2010
Posts: 57
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
thanks, didn't spot that  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 6:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@SteveMPS.
Please don't let the bickering of the more long in the tooth members put you off. We really do appreciate ALL submissions, (even though sometimes it does not look like it) and remember that you can pick up a lifetime membership by submitting a new cam (subject to conditions) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigPerk
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Sep 06, 2006
Posts: 1618
Location: East Hertfordshire
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have to say I haven't noticed any bickering TBH. This is quite important because of quite strong views of both those who don't want 'superfluous' warnings and those who would rather be 'safe than sorry'. What's put in or left out is a crucial point of the database and PGPSW has to do its best to get the balance right, as it does try to do (IMHO). I too hope SteveMPS finds the cameras useful enough at least generally.
M8TJT - I take it from what you say that people who I presume may not necessarily subscribe (financially) directly to the site but have the database through a 3rd party (Inforad in this case) also qualify for free membership? How does that work?
_________________
David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 9:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigPerk wrote: | | I have to say I haven't noticed any bickering TBH. This is quite important because of quite strong views of both those who don't want 'superfluous' warnings and those who would rather be 'safe than sorry'. I too hope SteveMPS finds the cameras useful enough at least generally. |
Perhaps "quite strong views" is a better expression.
| BigPerk wrote: | | M8TJT - I take it from what you say that people who I presume may not necessarily subscribe (financially) directly to the site but have the database through a 3rd party (Inforad in this case) also qualify for free membership? How does that work? |
I don't know I hadn't thought of that What I understand of the Inforad is that it continually beeps on an overspeed, so, if this is the case, I can understand SteveMPS's concerns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SteveMPS
Occasional Visitor
Joined: Jan 30, 2010
Posts: 57
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 10:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No the bickering (if that's what it was) is OK. I'm no shrinking violet.
Can I suggest someone with the posting rights starts two polls:
- What should the database default be for known long term inactive cameras?
and
- What should be the database default entries for variables?
FWIW I'd go for "set as mobile" and "set as default speed limit" respectively as they seem to be the most logically correct entries. However there are thousands of users out there with established expectations of the database. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 15137
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| M8TJT wrote: | | Perhaps it would be better to have the variables set to 70MPH to warn the driver of the presence of a cam |
but then cameras in school zones (20mph thru day and 30mph after etc) would be flagged as 70mph... which is just silly.
| BigPerk wrote: | | I take it from what you say that people who I presume may not necessarily subscribe (financially) directly to the site but have the database through a 3rd party (Inforad in this case) also qualify for free membership? |
no. to qualify you need to be a paid subscriber to pgpsw at the time of submission.
| SteveMPS wrote: | | FWIW I'd go for "set as mobile" and "set as default speed limit" |
but it doesn't move, so it's not mobile! and what do you mean the 'default speed limit'?
MaFt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT
The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006
Posts: 10118
Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MaFt wrote: | | M8TJT wrote: | | Perhaps it would be better to have the variables set to 70MPH to warn the driver of the presence of a cam |
but then cameras in school zones (20mph thru day and 30mph after etc) would be flagged as 70mph... which is just silly. |
Yes I agree. A setting 70MPH in the school etc. scenario would be rediculous. I was considering only motorway variables. What I perhaps should have said, like SteveMPS said, set them to the default speed limit, i.e. the normal limit when no other restrictions apply. In your example of the school zone, 30MPH and in my example of a motorway, 70MPH.
Edit. And I think that SteveMPS's point is that sometimes they will get you and sometimes they won't, just like mobiles.
Edit2. Don't forget that the management's decision is final. |
|
| 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: Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| M8TJT wrote: | | What I understand of the Inforad is that it continually beeps on an overspeed, so, if this is the case, I can understand SteveMPS's concerns. |
That sounds like a design deficiency in the speed camera warning unit rather than a problem with the database... 
_________________
Gone fishing! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigPerk
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Sep 06, 2006
Posts: 1618
Location: East Hertfordshire
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think SteveMPS and M8TJT do provide a starting point at least to how to deal with these awkward points.
For specs MaFt says | Quote: | | but it doesn't move, so it's not mobile! |
True literally, but that's surely just what you decide to call the category - sets have been merged before, quite recently in fact. And what I suggested earlier was that they be handled in a similar way to mobiles, which amounts to the same sort of idea. They are very similar in being 'now they work, now they don't' types of cameras.
For variables | Quote: | | the 'default speed limit'? |
would be as M8TJT suggests, the road-class-maximum (or, if you can tell them apart, leave those in sub-40 areas alone and just set the higher ones to the default speed limit). As suggested, approach warnings would still be given but not the continuous overspeed ones, which seem to be the irritants.
If the 'management' see any merit in the points being made, they will no doubt come up with a better solution. If they decide it's not an issue worth bothering about, then I can't say it's going to phase me at all. We are just talking ideas here after all, not criticisms.
Skippy - I thought Garmin gave overspeed warnings as well??
_________________
David
(Navigon 70 Live, Nuvi 360) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SteveMPS
Occasional Visitor
Joined: Jan 30, 2010
Posts: 57
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Skippy wrote: | . . .
That sounds like a design deficiency in the speed camera warning unit rather than a problem with the database... |
If I was Mr/Ms InfoRad I'd say it was t'other way round. From their point of view they have bought a licence to the database in good faith and implemented a valid algorithm that sounds the alert if the actual speed exceeds the reference speed. Why should they have to do different? |
|
| 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
