mogley

So I've been driving up and down the Hume Highway stretch near Bankstown again after returning from overseas and noticed a cute little school zone variable speed camera that wasn't there before I left.

It shoots in both directions as far as I am aware but want to know if the cameras emit a flash or whether they are of the new variety that appears to be popping up all over the place in Sydney.

I have a sneaking suspicion I got snapped westbound 'cause its hard to stick to 60km/h on dual or triple carriage (can't remember) road at 3am in the morning.

I didn't get flashed though but I have a friend who has lost his licence getting snapped back and forth on one of these new babies on Castle Hill Road, at night without the flash to let him know a new camera was there.

What's the technology behind these things? Google doesn't really turn up anything except that I'm glad I don't live in Victoria.

Revolver

It's very simple - do not speed on main roads. That's where most cameras are found.

TypeG

hume hwy? they will not flash at all. they capture the reg of the car and calculate how fast u drive till the other camara in the front.

takahashi

I still puzzle how can they take a clear well lit picture of a moving object at 100kmh, in the dark, with no flash.

Those camera must have lens bigger than your legs. Break one and see what the repair bill is.

If one for the sports photographer - they have f1.8 zoom lens at 10mp. Their package is over $10K. Try with your ordinary SLR with your best lens at 5am taking a car's rego on the freeway, it is prob hard to read the number off it.

RXP33D

Travelling from/to City via Liverpool, try not to use the Hume Hwy. There's a total of 8 speed cameras. When you've got a road that links Bankstown, Liverpool and Fairfield, it all makes sense.

M5's $2.20/3.30 toll is exceptional value.

lordjay

Its lucky for me that the Northern Beaches is one of the last untouched places in Sydney without many speed cameras.

Revolver

LJ, we've really got to talk about the secrets you keep giving away!!!

lordjay

Wooops sorry mate! lol

WhiteRain

I got snapped by that camera twice in one day. Stupid speed camera. Those evil bastards aimed it directly at a bend in the road..which are usually the only spots where I speed up! 60k on a main road with 3 lanes is ridiculous.

RXP33D

Its a highway fgs.

I second that WR.

Ottog

You could always get yourself a tomtom or Destinator navigation device and install the latest fixed red light and speed camera database. I use Destinator and it has paid for itself many times.

A secondary benefit is that you'll never get lost again.

Oh, and to answer the original question. The flashless cameras aren't really flashless. They use an infrared flash.


Cheers..... Otto

Revolver

Hey Otto, we're doing a quick cruise this Sunday - you around?

RXP33D

Hey otto, do you know if the tomtom one XL has the red light camera database?

OT: Whiterain, Trish, Mogley...There's a cruise on. LOL

https://www.rx8club.com/australia-new-zealand-forum-37/%5Bnsw%5D-cruise-sunday-9-september-125971/

mogley

That was the day I saw you on the way to Cabra according to my gf lol.

I'm running out of demerit points god damn.

Cromax

WR, if you think it's so ridiculous why not argue it? The argument you should put forward is they shouldn't have speed cameras on corners for the reason that people need to accelerate around them to maintain sufficient control of a vehicle in certain conditions and circumstances. If you got flashed at the same speed by the same camera more than once (providing you're only a little bit over) you could argue that it's a calibration issue between your car (presuming it's unmodified) and the speed the camera records you at, or someone stopped suddenly in front of you and you had to swerve and had to accelerate to maintain control, or you were trying to merge and the guy in the lane you wanted to be in kept inching up on your rear quarter ...

... the problem with speed is it can't be measured accurately from earth ... the only way it can be guaged as accurately as possible is to use a satellite and take the average speed between two points on earth (I think that's what they do with the average speed safety cameras). Normal fixed speed cameras will still have a variance of between 5-10% no matter what.

If you get caught running a red, unless you were turning right and waiting for oncoming traffic, or turning left and waiting for pedestrians ... you have no excuse and you deserve the fine for driving with no consideration for other road users. One day you may learn your lesson and stop doing it!

Cromax

It depends on the situation. In Victoria we require an untouched exposure from an analogue camera in order for the state to be able to argue their case in court. The argument is digital photos can be manipulated which increases the chance of mistake. But that's beside the point ...

... the point is in NSW they may not require picture evidence.

Drewboy should know ... where is he?

enforcer

We're a bit behind you guys in NSW and Victoria. The Government is talking about installing its first fixed speed cameras on the M1...and if you ask for my opinion, any initiative which is designed to save lives is a good one.

The great unknown is where, when and how but I'm sure the day it happens we'll all hear about it!!!

DMRH

Well. You all know the saying. "If its not on then its not on"

Get some protection so you can enjoy yourself without the fear of what may hapen down the track.

http://www.radarbusters.com/photo-radar/6524+6528.cfm

I'm protected. Are you....??


REgards

Gomez

I agree.

DSC, ABS, SRS, EBFD, TCS....all designed to save lives.

Speed cameras do not fit into the "saving lives" category. If the various governments were serious about saving lives, they'd make driver training mandatory prior to P plate license issue.

Revolver

You're on the money there Gomez.

The stats (as reported on by various publications, etc) reveal that speed cameras are not saving lives - they're just increasing revenue.

I really do not understand the lack of political will to make better driver training mandatory. Repeat offending shows that suspension of licences, etc does nothing as a deterrent. We need to train kids before they get their blacks - not just punish them later.

enforcer

Here we go again....this subject just keeps coming up so I'll post some points you might want you to consider.

1. Speed cameras are just part of the solution to saving lives, safety features on our vehicles, compulsory wearing of seat belts and the lowering of alcohol limits have also played an equally important role.

2. Preliminary results from an independent evaluation of 28 speed camera sites commissioned by the RTA found deaths have been reduced from 21 (over the three years leading up to camera installation) to 1 (in two years with the cameras operating).

3. If the government changes the fines from $100 to $1000 it won't matter, if you don't speed you have nothing to worry about. I think a more convincing deterrent is to increase the demerit points system involved rather than the money. I'm sure demerit point means more to us drivers than the money.

4. Speed limits are not arbitary numbers. If the sign says 60 then it means that your maximum speed should not exceed that limit - not 61, 63 or 65. Why is that concept so hard to grasp? The speed limit does not say "approximately 60 km/h max, give or take a little". It's not open to interpretation. If you don't speed then you won't get fined. How simple is that?

Like all of us I have sped in the past, and if I got caught I didn't have a cry... it was my fault and I just paid the fine.

5. If governments are relying on the revenue from speed cameras and other traffic infringements then surely the driving population has the option to starve them of this income by not breaking the law?

6. We all hate speed cameras, maybe it's because of the secrecy used by authorities . If the government had a transparent system like France by posting speed camera locations on the web, maybe the concept would be more accepted by the public.

7. Another simple solution, make the tests for driving licenses MUCH harder and get all the idiots with low reflexes and IQ's on par and off the road...then we wont worry so much about speed limits!!!

8. I dont think its a right to drive, but a privilage. Theres a big difference...

Revolver

Spare me the patronising, 'I'm so tired of having to explain things to you kids' attitude Trevor. We're not fools and some of us have read widely on road safety.

Some responses to your points (using your numbering):

1. While the measures you refer to are all worthwhile and I agree speed cameras have their place in genuine black spots, the major thing missing from your 'solution' is driver education and training. This is reflective of the blind spot authorities in Australia presently have on the issue, which is all the more glaring when you see what is happening in other countries around the world. Instead, the authorities hide behind the bullshit argument that giving young drivers skills leads to over-confidence and the abuse of those skills.

2. I probably know better than most that there is no such thing as an 'independent evaluation' and I wouldn't trust the RTA to speak my weight if it was a set of scales. The RTA has an agenda, just like most govt depts and is adept at trotting out the line it wants the public to believe. For example, what are the locations in question? How were they chosen for the evaluation? What is the criteria for outcomes in relation to the location of the cameras? These cutesy-pie evaluations are always a Yes Minister exercise in my experience of dealing with such evidence - it rarely survives the acid test of forensic enquiry into methodology. What you cannot deny is that despite the increasing proliferation of cameras around our fair country, the road toll has plateaued on a per capita measure. Now, if speed cameras are effective at reducing deaths, why would that be do you think???

3. I quite agree that demerit points are a better deterrent than the size of the fine, given how cashed up in general society is these days. However, wouldn't it be better to have a road system that would reduce the tyranny of distance in our sparsely populated land by allowing higher safe speeds? The feds are so drowning in revenue it's not funny - why can't more of our taxes go into a decent freeway system instead of the stop-gap patchup work that is endemic at all levels of govt from local to fed?

4. Sorry but speed limits are arbitrary numbers. It's been shown time and time again that the RTA, who you are so happy to trust, ignore their own criteria for setting limits. There are also numerous examples of limits changing several times over a given stretch of roadway despite the criteria not requiring same. THAT is what pisses the average law abiding motorist off and leads to cruising speeds that exceed the posted limit.

5. That is the worst kind of bullshit govt sponsored argument. The same line goes out about smoking, drinking, gambling and anything else people enjoy that the govt has decided to tax. The govt KNOWS that human behaviour renders such a bluff nugatory in its threat to revenue and throws the blame back on the public instead of allowing better enquiry into why this behaviour is being taxed in the first place and of course, why SO many people speed, drink, smoke, gamble, etc. Fact is, it's easier to paint speeding and those other activities as akin to child molestation because that preserves the asset base - the public will cop the taxing of a 'bad' habit rather than questioning why we're all lumped into the worst case category of behaviour when many motorists drive sensibly according to conditions, whatever some signpost may say.

6. On this we agree. Putting some more police cars on the road instead of buying more cameras would also help. You should know better than most here that visible policing works! However, the govt and the RTA has worked out that it's cheaper to put in a camera, which pays for itself many times over, than pay two coppers to patrol known haunts of hoons, etc.

7. Well, this was a fair way down your list don't you think? Education should be the STARTING POINT, not some afterthought behind policing and revenue raising. If every P-plater went through a dedicated driver training program that focused as much on car control as it did on road rules and learning how to do a reverse park or a hill start, I'm happy to bet whatever you like that the road toll would come down. Getting that licence and keeping it should not be easy. I'm not a fan of making it stupidly hard either though, given our society's dependence on the car as a form of transport - you can't exclude everyone that doesn't have Schumacher's reflexes.

8. Agreed.

Well, that lot should start the hares running, lol...

enforcer

I agree with your points Dave and I'm sorry if my points in dicussion have offended anyone but heres why...

1. The mindless number of mangled wrecks I've had to attend to over the years, and the significant costs to the community in terms of loss of life and safety and real costs which wear a bit thin after a while.

2. The other is the second most dangerous decision a police officer has to make other than pulling the trigger...pressing the accelerator when we need to intercept one of those 'bloody idiots.

Whilst there may be some 'opposing' views on both sides of the fence there will always be one thing in common (which you quite rightly pointed out)...education and training...

mogley

I always thought it would be a novel idea if the government paid me $$ for good driving behaviour.

Free Mazdaspeed bodykit for drivers who don't speed this Easter long weekend.

hah far more effective.

lordjay

I agree with the points you and Revolver have put out, but as a Red P Plater, I believe there is a need for Compulsory Driver Education Courses, both Theoritical and Practical. Even though I passed my P's First go, I personally thought it was too easy and they test you on B-S which won't help you in a Life/Death Defensive Driving situation in which skills obtained in a Drivers Course could possibly help.

Speed Cameras in my opinion will only deter crazy drivers from speeding on roads which has them, and if those drivers get desperate, they'll only get pushed onto roads which lie in streets in suburbia which are far more dangerous to speed on and therefore endangering both the drivers and people on the street. I personally think they're (as Revolver said) only a revenue raising machine for the coffers of State Govts around Australia and they don't address the underlying problems of ignorant drivers doing stupid things in these weapons.