You are not logged in.

#1 Monday 9th June 2014 21:36:45

christhedrummer
Verified Member
Registered: Wednesday 18th October 2006
Posts: 1,163
Website

Endorsable or not?

It's road resurfacing time around here so plenty of roads with no markings on, including the speed camera markings.

If someone gets flashed by the camera, as there are no road markings to confirm the speed against, is the offence endorsable?

Offline

Monday 9th June 2014 21:36:45

AdBot
Google AdSense Posting Bot

Re: Endorsable or not?



#2 Monday 9th June 2014 22:11:49

MGM
Verified Member
From: Surrey
Registered: Monday 24th October 2011
Posts: 861

Re: Endorsable or not?

AFAIK yes, the lines are just a secondary check.

Think about all those mobile cameras - they don't paint lines on the road but they still prosecute successfully!

Offline

#3 Monday 9th June 2014 23:11:18

trunkmonkey
Member
Registered: Thursday 5th March 2009
Posts: 754

Re: Endorsable or not?

christhedrummer wrote:

It's road resurfacing time around here so plenty of roads with no markings on, including the speed camera markings.

If someone gets flashed by the camera, as there are no road markings to confirm the speed against, is the offence endorsable?

Is it the road markings after a fixed camera?

Offline

#4 Monday 9th June 2014 23:14:39

whodareswins
Verified Member
From: S.E.England
Registered: Wednesday 12th April 2006
Posts: 550

Re: Endorsable or not?

Mobile cameras user radar to establish the vehicle speed and do not rely on road markings. Fixed cameras (Gatso) require the speed to be established by measuring the distance travelled between the 2 camera flashes. If the lines on the road have been covered up, there is no way the speed of the vehicle van be determined. Truvelo cameras utilize an inductive loop to measure speed and do not require road (distance) markings.

Last edited by whodareswins (Monday 9th June 2014 23:17:00)


Grade 6 ADI/Fleet Trainer, SAFED Registered Trainer, Qualified BTEC Assessor

Offline

#5 Monday 9th June 2014 23:55:37

trunkmonkey
Member
Registered: Thursday 5th March 2009
Posts: 754

Re: Endorsable or not?

Which is why I asked.
The GATSO marks are required as part of the calibration and in support of the photographs.
They are 5' apart with the longer lines every 25'
The camera will fire off two shots between 0.5 and 0.7 of a second. The distance the car covers between the shots is caught and measured. That determines the speed.
No markings = no corroboration

As an example a car travelling at 30 mph covers 44fps. As the speed rises the fps rise exponentially (?)  60mph is 88fps. The ratio is 1.46667

A camera detects a speeding car and the first flash occurs. the car travels over 6 markings and the second flash occurs

6 x 5' or 30' in 0.5secs  or to make it easier 60fps

60fps divided by 1.46667  = 40.9mph

Offline

#6 Thursday 12th June 2014 16:46:30

ratty
Member
Registered: Saturday 5th February 2011
Posts: 471

Re: Endorsable or not?

Well this is the first time for years I have heard anyone suggest that these marks are a requirement!

I thought it was accepted that with modern camera technology the lines were not required at all for calibration. There is a technical name for the way the two pictures can now be overlaid to calibrate the distance which I understood negated the requirement for the lines.

You live and learn!

Offline

#7 Thursday 12th June 2014 19:59:36

MGM
Verified Member
From: Surrey
Registered: Monday 24th October 2011
Posts: 861

Re: Endorsable or not?

whodareswins wrote:

Mobile cameras user radar to establish the vehicle speed and do not rely on road markings. Fixed cameras (Gatso) require the speed to be established by measuring the distance travelled between the 2 camera flashes. If the lines on the road have been covered up, there is no way the speed of the vehicle van be determined. Truvelo cameras utilize an inductive loop to measure speed and do not require road (distance) markings.

No. Gatso cameras do indeed use radar (see www.gatso.com), and are perfectly capable of measuring speed without lines on the road.

The lines are there a secondary measure for corroboration, as indeed they are for Truvelos.

Offline

#8 Friday 13th June 2014 00:01:02

whodareswins
Verified Member
From: S.E.England
Registered: Wednesday 12th April 2006
Posts: 550

Re: Endorsable or not?

Perhaps I shuold have chosen my words more carefully by using "corroberated" instead of "established". I am fully aware that Gatso cameras use radar (interrupted-cw, doppler) to initially measure the speed of a vehicle. However, it is a legal requirement to have a secondary measurement for speed. In the UK, the evidence is only admissible in court if the speed measured by the radar and the speed calculated from the distance travelled between the photographs agrees within 10%. The white lines are there to meet this legal requirement.


Grade 6 ADI/Fleet Trainer, SAFED Registered Trainer, Qualified BTEC Assessor

Offline

#9 Friday 13th June 2014 06:50:47

trunkmonkey
Member
Registered: Thursday 5th March 2009
Posts: 754

Re: Endorsable or not?

And to show how pedantic a Not Guilty plea can be, you produce a certificate to say when the camera was calibrated, another to say when it was checked, a certificate to say when the white lines were put down and then............
how do you know they are EXACTLY 5' apart?
It's done on a template.
Who measured the template?
Is the tape measure accurate?
and so on

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB.