OnePlus 5 review
Just read this click here I had heard about people changing lanes on motorways to avoid speeding tickets but thought it was just wishful on their part, seems it is correct.
Now I don't want any body to flout the law because as the camera manufacturers have said
"The camera's manufacturers - Speed Check Services (SCS) - confirmed that drivers could escape prosecution by lane-hopping but discouraged it on 'safety' grounds."
So with that news and also the news that Mr Hammond The Tory Cabinet minister stressed the coalition government would abide by a Tory manifesto promise not to fund any more fixed-position speed cameras and that Councils could fund them if they had the money and could justify their use - but the money raised would go to the Treasury.
I just wonder how many councils are prepared to spend your money to trap you with a speed camera when they are claiming poverty.
And yet it's dated 25/5/10.
They can't "trap you" if you're not speeding, of course, no matter how much they spend.
All ANPR cameras simply read the number plate and log it with date & time.
A speed camera also includes either a laser or radar speed detector which includes an ANPR camera to photograph offenders.
For average speed cameras there is no such speed detector but a log of number plates with times against them. If it takes 2 minutes to pass 2 cameras at 70mph, any number plate records less than two minutes apart must have been speeding.
Older systems will use a database log per lane, so unless they do a manual export to compare the logs, anyone changing lanes would escape. Additionally, there is a danger of time discrepancies between logs if the cameras aren't synchronised fully.
Newer systems now use a central database, so you can weave between lanes to your hearts content and still get away with it.
Or, as Jeremy Clarkson said, drive through the first camera at normal pace, pull over onto the shoulder, wait a couple of minutes, then drive through the second camera at 150mph...
Were simply Empty box's with suitable notices indicating any checking procedure- thus making those drivers who are anxious bout their behavior on the road - to behave.
Of course they fact the camera's are dummies is not made known.
I don't think you have read it properly,
"The Home Office admitted yesterday that the hi-tech SPECS cameras - produced by Camberley-based Speed Check Services - are only approved to be used one lane at a time.
That means a three-lane motorway would require three separate sets of cameras - one for each lane. If drivers leave the speed-camera zone via a different lane to the one they entered in, they cannot normally be prosecuted."
Taken from that link, so if you change lanes the cameras cannot by law check your speed because you are now in a different control zone.
That is just the banner with todays date.
The story is 4 years old and the original issue with the average speed cameras was 'fixed' almost immediately in 2006.
I can tell you for sure that there are locations where these cameras do not work at all.
They have, however, had the effect of reducing speed on the routes on which they are installed and maybe that is what matters rather than prosecutions.
A probably true aspect...
A colleague of mine actually installs these cameras for the Highways Agency. It would appear that on many stretches of roadworks where the SPECS cameras are installed, alternate gantries have no cameras in them! But, as the cameras are quite frequent and averages are taken over longer distances than many people realise, this lack of cameras does not have an overall effect.
But, and a very big but, the system design is such that lane hopping will not work any more. He didn't expand on the methodology, though. Because that earlier systems did have that 'loophole' the latest systems have overcome it. Personally, I would imagine that the database of registrations passing through was modified to make lane comparisons.
Certainly, I would imagine a sensible database designer could make a system that needs less cameras, can cope with lane changing, deal with short distances and overall distances. It wouldn't bee rocket science.
Now how much is urban legend and fact, I don't know; but the limit is there for a reason - so stick to it.
I use the M4 past Newport and Cardiff quite frequently. It can get quite busy! I have watched some of the more 'assertive' motorists trying to lane-hop and do all they can to go a bit faster - usually to no avail! It gets busy and it is usually three fairly busy lanes of traffic, one at 45mph, one at 47mph (driving to their speedo reading of 50mph) and one at 50mph measured on their sat nav. The lane hoppers do not really get to the other end any quicker; they may, if they're lucky, gain five or six car lengths. So why bother?
I have regularly seen motorists whizz past at high speed only for me to catch them up further along the road as their progress is hindered by traffic/traffic lights and so forth.I often wonder whether these high speed motorists actually have any real intelligence as many times,they hurtle past then pull into a services stop or roadside cafe.
"Certainly, I would imagine a sensible database designer could make a system that needs less cameras"
Of course they would, but seeing as the software licences are sold on a per camera basis, and the licence fees are simply astronomical (over £1,000 per camera at trade for the software I sell, and that doesn't include the annual support licence at 18% of retail cost), then a sensible database designer will make the software use as many cameras as possible...
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.