Eastlink speed camera - Page 2

olfella · 05-01-2009, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SVD

Think of it this way, the government will notice a drop in revenue, so if its an error in motorists favor it will be fixed REALLY REALLY QUICK!!! like light speed, although if they see its getting them more money they'll just say "oh motorists still aren't getting the speeding message"

And i bet they have had a nice drop due to the current fuel prices..

olfella · 05-01-2009, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Hey im sure some of you guys lie awake at night shivering under the sheets worried a speed camera is going to jump through the window and attack you!!!

I "get" the whole revenue raising point.. but i don't think its as dramatic as some believe.

My point is if I am going to get done then I like to know straight away. Not that it has happened (to me) but I would not like to have, like one bloke mentioned 8 infringements in a short space of time. If there is a problem then let me fix it (like taking my foot off the go pedal).

SVD · 05-01-2009, 11:05 PM

I just don't see how a GPS unit which would be most likely the most accurate device when it comes to measuring speed can be out and that the governments speed camera's are 100% correct to an exact measure of .000001%! and then they just blame everyone and everything else and say "no we are 100% correct, you're all wrong"

balthazarr · 06-01-2009, 08:57 AM

This is a problem with the government's over-reliance of "safety" cameras... if (when?) they do start failing, how is the motorist supposed to prove it? The system is stacked against the motorist - they can't allow even one camera to become suspect, because then ALL cameras are suspect.

star11 · 06-01-2009, 09:46 AM

I have called the traffic camera office. Their word was that GPS and speed alert's in vehicles cannot be used as speed measuring devices at all as they are not accurate. They also said they would not be withdrawing any of the fines from Eastlink because they are sure the cameras aren't faulty.

balthazarr · 06-01-2009, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by star11

I have called the traffic camera office. Their word was that GPS and speed alert's in vehicles cannot be used as speed measuring devices at all as they are not accurate. They also said they would not be withdrawing any of the fines from Eastlink because they are sure the cameras aren't faulty.

And yet a copper can follow you in their car, and book you for speeding based on their speedo?

:

XR8GRL · 06-01-2009, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by balthazarr

And yet a copper can follow you in their car, and book you for speeding based on their speedo?

:

One rule for you and one rule for them, gotta love'em. :rolleyes:

SVD · 06-01-2009, 11:23 AM

Any government body that budgets to get $Xmillion in speeding fines is revenue raising i don't care what anyone says, ill trust my GPS and Speed alert and cruise control before i ever let some money snatcher tell me im speeding.

balthazarr · 06-01-2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SVD

Any government body that budgets to get $Xmillion in speeding fines is revenue raising i don't care what anyone says, ill trust my GPS and Speed alert and cruise control before i ever let some money snatcher tell me im speeding.

See that's the rub... the "money snatcher"s, and their devices, are the ones that determine whether or not you were speeding, not your speedo or GPS device... and trying to get information out of them is like trying to squeeze blood from a stone.

As I said above... they can't afford to let any suspicion fall on any camera/lidar/radar device, because then all devices will be suspect.

How many millions of dollars in lost revenue did the Vic government have to wear because they were forced to admit their cameras were unreliable and subsequently switched them off?

olfella · 06-01-2009, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by balthazarr

And yet a copper can follow you in their car, and book you for speeding based on their speedo?

:

That is my point. I think you will find those speedos are calibrated regularly and have certificates issued for accuracy.

Spanrz · 06-01-2009, 01:16 PM

As I said before, do a distance - time check yourself.
Not even a court of law can rule against proven mathematics.

Though with the GPS, there is levels of GPS measurements. I think the car ones are only legible around 10-20 metres.
But commerical grade GPS (surveyor's GPS unit) are within a tolerance of under 50mm (approx).
That's why the car units are probably not admissible in court.

SVD · 06-01-2009, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanrz

As I said before, do a distance - time check yourself.
Not even a court of law can rule against proven mathematics.

Though with the GPS, there is levels of GPS measurements. I think the car ones are only legible around 10-20 metres.
But commerical grade GPS (surveyor's GPS unit) are within a tolerance of under 50mm (approx).
That's why the car units are probably not admissible in court.

I wouldn't be surprised if they did, especially if it was some of the people i know, they've been caught once or twice doing a little over the speed limit and are P platers, ive got a good feeling they would still rule against them.

olfella · 06-01-2009, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanrz

As I said before, do a distance - time check yourself.
Not even a court of law can rule against proven mathematics.

Though with the GPS, there is levels of GPS measurements. I think the car ones are only legible around 10-20 metres.
But commerical grade GPS (surveyor's GPS unit) are within a tolerance of under 50mm (approx).
That's why the car units are probably not admissible in court.

From memory, I think GPS units that have a down loadable breadcrumb trails that give time and distance are permissible, probably because it goes back to your point of proven maths. For us interstaters this may be the way to go as measuring as you describe is hard if you have returned home and get a 'surprise' in the mail a week or two later.

vztrt · 06-01-2009, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanrz

As I said before, do a distance - time check yourself.
Not even a court of law can rule against proven mathematics.

Though with the GPS, there is levels of GPS measurements. I think the car ones are only legible around 10-20 metres.
But commerical grade GPS (surveyor's GPS unit) are within a tolerance of under 50mm (approx).
That's why the car units are probably not admissible in court.

It use to be but then GPS should read within 1-2m. As for the speed calc on these things it would depend on the programminig. But used one of them against my speedo and was 1km out (lower) by using the trip computer. Seemed to have worked up till now.

ltd_on20s · 06-01-2009, 02:48 PM

http://www.trafficlaw.com.au/speedos.html

http://rvcs-prodweb.dot.gov.au/files/ADR%201803.pdf

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/Legislation/LegislativeInstrumentCompilation1.nsf/0/F3E9920BE1FC56A5CA257257001E1849/$file/ADR1800comp1FINALFRLI.pdf

rule 18.5.1.1.2
"Indicate the actual speed of the vehicle for all speeds above 40km/h to an accuracy of + or - 10 %"

rule 18.5.2.1.2
"indicate the distance travelled by the vehicle to an accuracy of + or - 4%"

read and weep people

we are getting shafted by govt who set the tolerance for speeding lower then the actual design rule permits for speedo inaccuracy from the factory

Surely this must be illegal?

FalconXR6 · 06-01-2009, 03:21 PM

My thoughts exaclty.
If I had the cash I would take my next speeding fine to court on this basis just to "test the water".

As for this "eastlink", I don't know where it is, but is their a "back road" or alternative way to reach your destination besides using this piece of road?
If so, I'd be taking the back road each and every time!

SVD · 06-01-2009, 03:46 PM

Yeh its this giant freeway that was supposed to be free till the government everyone up the *** and said ah no sorry, tolls but we'll put a load of cameras on it too! there are ways around it but the time saved is actually really good, because no one uses it because its a rip off and is camera infested and they are most likely highly defective.

vztrt · 06-01-2009, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SVD

Yeh its this giant freeway that was supposed to be free till the government everyone up the *** and said ah no sorry, tolls but we'll put a load of cameras on it too! there are ways around it but the time saved is actually really good, because no one uses it because its a rip off and is camera infested and they are most likely highly defective.

I'd make the point that the toll can cost about $4.50 for cars and about $13.50 for trucks one way.

SVD · 06-01-2009, 04:10 PM

its still a rip off considering it was meant to be free though.

Daymoe · 06-01-2009, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XR8GRL

One rule for you and one rule for them, gotta love'em. :rolleyes:

If you can't beat em, join em!

balthazarr · 06-01-2009, 05:45 PM

An interesting read: http://www.police.vic.gov.au/content...ument_ID=18289

SVD · 06-01-2009, 05:55 PM

"Some members of the public have also queried the percentage of ‘low-level’ speeding fines (below 10km/h over the posted limit) and the number of infringements issued at particular speeds. Victoria Police and the Department of Justice have reviewed the figures for Eastlink and detection figures for ‘low level’ speeds are in line with other roadway sites such as Geelong Road and Citylink (see graph for further details). There is also no overrepresentation in the Wellington Road figures compared to the other Eastlink roadway sites or for any detections at particular speeds eg. 108km/h."

Funny how they point out 108km/h...

as for the gps being legible upto so many meters, if i set my cars cruise to the gps' 100km/h or just under doesn't that mean i am then accurate after those x amount of meters???

Bobman · 06-01-2009, 05:58 PM

Wouldn't trust any speed camera.

Western Ring Road? Even though Police love to say this was "so long ago". The point is that the Government and Police themselves said the public were wrong and the cameras were "working correctly and in line with bla bla". Usual spin rubbish.

The amount of infringements from the Wellington Road bridge and the detected speeds raises concern.

Should check out some of the other info on Cameras Cut Crashes.

Spanrz · 06-01-2009, 07:08 PM

Ok, got a silly thing to ask... Why is it, the Welly road camera is the issue? And not the Greens Road one???

I still say that both cameras are set at the same speed. As I have never had an issue (speeding fine) doing an actual 100k's on the money (speedo says 107k's).

The key issue, is that everyone is actually over the tolerance whatever it maybe. Unfortunately they have felt the wrath of a fine.

Though what's interesting, on my previous post (with the link attached), the OP never responded if he was in the right??
So me thinks that he was actually speeding and not wanting to own up to it.

4Vman · 06-01-2009, 07:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanrz

Ok, got a silly thing to ask... Why is it, the Welly road camera is the issue? And not the Greens Road one???

I still say that both cameras are set at the same speed. As I have never had an issue (speeding fine) doing an actual 100k's on the money (speedo says 107k's).

The key issue, is that everyone is actually over the tolerance whatever it maybe. Unfortunately they have felt the wrath of a fine.

Though what's interesting, on my previous post (with the link attached), the OP never responded if he was in the right??
So me thinks that he was actually speeding and not wanting to own up to it.

Shhh....making sense will get you no where....