Safe Speed Forums

I'm having a little trouble understanding the operation of the Redspeed camera. GS's post about is not exactly clear so I am paraphrasing it here for others to correct if required.

There are two speed checks: primary and secondary.
The primary check is a radar/laser which determines if a vehicle is above the enforcement threshold. (Presumably this is a calibrated device)
The secondary check is performed by two photographs of the vehicle being taken typically at 10m apart (but this is not a precise distance).
The distance travelled between the photographs is measured from the road markings.
The time between the photographs is known from a calibrated source but is not a constant.
The secondary speed is calculated from time and distance travelled.

Not really no.
I don't recall saying one existed; what I did say was that there is no lawful reason why the prosecution could not be made. It was other contributors that insisted on adding "has it been done" into the mix.

I am not entering into that discussion again as it was quite pointless.

It is different in about 99.9% of cases. As long as it does not differ by more than 10% either way that's fine.

The primary speed is what counts and is used in evidence, the secondary check is....well.......secondary.

The primary speed is what counts and is used in evidence, the secondary check is....well.......secondary.

Stands by for another interpretation of the point so mine can be shown to be incorrect or not answering your very clear question

Are you sure? I thought the lower of the two readings was used as evidence?

You can think what you like but that is wrong. The primary speed is always the speed used for prosecutions, the secondary speed is not used for that purpose.

The secondary speed can be used in some circumstances but that is determined by the defence...usually.

When complex challenges are made the Type Approval is largely an irrelevance but can be used to show reliability.

You chaps have a lot to learn about the law and the significance about the technical and legal aspects of Type Approval; so far you are miles away from understanding how the 2 relate.

God luck and carry on!

TOP COP CAUGHT BY FLASH-HAPPY CAMERA
SMurphy
Published at 00:00, Friday, 23 March 2007

A TOP cop, a funeral cortege and a man on a pushbike were clocked by a flash-happy speed camera.

But they need not worry, the rogue camera — on Barrow’s Salthouse Road— was faulty and no-one will get a ticket.

Cumbria Safety Cameras says the speed trap went wonky on Wednesday and was still misbehaving yesterday. Spokesman Andy James confirmed: “No-one will be prosecuted during the time the cameras are faulty.”

The camera, he said, should be fixed today.

But dozens of motorists were left shocked as they were convinced they had been caught speeding, despite driving at well below the limit.
Many were expecting a £60 fine and three penalty points slapped on their licences.

The problem started on Wednesday when drivers noticed they were being flashed.

A spokesman for Cumbria Safety Cameras said at the time they were checking the “clarity of the images”.

But complaints flooded in again yesterday — and the safety team admit the camera was now faulty.

Inspector Malcolm Woodhouse, of Barrow police, said he contacted police HQ at Penrith yesterday after he was clocked doing 20mph.

He said: “It was flashing at everyone, including an inspector going to work — me. I was in a line of traffic early and it was flashing at everyone going past it.
“We have had a lot of calls from motorists who are worried they are going to be fined, despite the fact they weren’t speeding.”

BAE Systems manager Nick Freeman, 36, of Roa Island, said he saw a cyclist clocked by the camera as he headed to work yesterday.

He said: “I was coming through at 27mph and the camera flashed me and a pushbike in front. I then saw six cars behind me flashed.
“People were turning up for work really upset thinking they are going to be fined.”

A spokesman for the camera team said: “We were just checking it was working properly on Wednesday.”

You chaps have a lot to learn about the law and the...technical

...prosecutions have resulted from the evidence of CSW volunteers...

...I look forward to considering your submissions on this but please restrict them to fact rather than your own opinions...

...prosecutions have resulted from the evidence of CSW volunteers...

The secondary check is to confirm that the primary reading is correct, and the camera is not faulty - as happened in Barrow and elsewhere on more than one occasion!
http://www.nwemail.co.uk/news/barrow/top_cop_caught_by_flash_happy_camera_1_142239?referrerPath=/2.3207



So was it FAULTY, or were they checking the “clarity of the images”? If you cannot remember, just make something up!

As for the type approval "can be used to show reliability" - you should stick with the first part of that sentence - " Type Approval is largely an irrelevance" as it and the calibration have no more guarantee of reliability than an MoT guarantees a vehicle is roadworthy for twelve months after it is issued.

The primary speed is always the speed used for prosecutions, the secondary speed is not used for that purpose.