Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make 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!
Wow, there are a lot of cams on that road aren't there.
Here you go, a rambling answer that addresses some of your points above.
Firstly, nearly all the fixed cams on the A68 in our database are single direction. CA will only alert if you are travelling in the direction that the cam is trapping. If you are travelling in the opposite direction, CA does not alert. If you find one that is actually trapping in your direction of travel that does not alert, please report it so that the database direction can be updated.
Secondly, nearly all of the mobile camera sites on the A68 have good descriptions of their locations, (as opposed to a CA report with no notes) and the sites have been verified. Mobiles that haven't been 'seen again' for the last year are removed from the database so it's also reasonable to assume that they have been active in the last twelve months. Mobile cams are also 'directional' (as above) in CA.
Thirdly, The warnings distances given in CA are entirely dependent on the warning time (not distance) that you set in CA. There is no connection between the alerts in CA and co-pilot, so I suspect that your impression of shorter alert time when not running co-pilot are just that, an impression.
Yep - must be a good earner as van can be seen daily - there is also a lot of insane driving on this stretch too, so works both ways!
re Mobiles - I've reported/confirmed many of them on this stretch over the years but always thought of mobiles as not being directional but reversible so shouldn't CA give an alert regardless?
re Distances. You're right of course I'll try to do more research to see if that is the case or not as it was certainly a very strong impression.
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
Posted: Sat Dec 08, 2012 3:28 pm Post subject:
adamwolfe wrote:
re Mobiles - I've reported/confirmed many of them on this stretch over the years but always thought of mobiles as not being directional but reversible so shouldn't CA give an alert regardless?
If the mobile has been reported as facing one direction, it is put into the database as that direction unless the submitter and/or the verifier suggests that it should be reversible. Frequently, if it's a van, they tend to park facing one way, but of course a hand held can easily be two way.
As an example:The notes for Mobile 58434 north of Pathead read "Fully badged up Camera Van Transit type. Sitting in layby just south of GATSO:67@60. I would assume this would be for those who have speeded up after passing the Gatso heading south."
So it's in the database as a one way southbound. The three mobile sites in the villiage are all reversible, (as are most of the rest on the A68), even though there is no definite indication in the submitter's comments to indicate this. For the one just south of the villiage, the submitter suggests that it was trapping northbound but also suggests that it could be used both ways so is shown as reversible.
The heading of Mobile 110759 is way out and might not alert on CA at all. It's heading should be 312 degrees.
re Mobiles - I've reported/confirmed many of them on this stretch over the years but always thought of mobiles as not being directional but reversible so shouldn't CA give an alert regardless?
If the mobile has been reported as facing one direction, it is put into the database as that direction unless the submitter and/or the verifier suggests that it should be reversible. Frequently, if it's a van, they tend to park facing one way, but of course a hand held can easily be two way.
As an example:The notes for Mobile 58434 north of Pathead read "Fully badged up Camera Van Transit type. Sitting in layby just south of GATSO:67@60. I would assume this would be for those who have speeded up after passing the Gatso heading south."
So it's in the database as a one way southbound. The three mobile sites in the villiage are all reversible, (as are most of the rest on the A68), even though there is no definite indication in the submitter's comments to indicate this. For the one just south of the villiage, the submitter suggests that it was trapping northbound but also suggests that it could be used both ways so is shown as reversible.
The heading of Mobile 110759 is way out and might not alert on CA at all. It's heading should be 312 degrees.
@ MaFt Please change hdg of 110759 to 312
Thanks for the explanation - makes sense.
I know the camera you mention as I have reported it a few times.
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!
All times are GMT + 1 Hour Goto page Previous1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5
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
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make 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!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
I'll try to do more research to see if that is the case or not as it was certainly a very strong impression.
