b€€jay wrote:
Bombus
You first and last post seem to contradict each other. Either cameras cover one lane or they don't!
This is what I said in my first post:
bombus wrote:
SPECS are only type-approved for single-lane enforcement
Each camera covers one lane, and I never said otherwise. Each camera point (consisting of one or more cameras) can of course cover more than one lane in total, but that doesn't contradict anything else that I've written. All it means is that more than one camera is used in any one place; each single camera can still only be paired with one other camera.
And by "paired" I don't mean two cameras at the same point somehow being linked together, I just mean two single cameras at different points which together do single-lane enforcement. So if Camera A is paired with Camera B a mile later, and they are both covering L1, a driver passing under Camera A and Camera B (and staying in L1) would have their average speed between the two cameras taken. That's all I ever meant by "paired". SPECS is a surprisingly crude and simple system considering how much it costs.
b€€jay wrote:
The cameras read the numberplate. The information is stored until the number plate is read again when the time is computed against the (known) distance giving the speed. It doesn't matter which camera of the one, two or three on a column records the number, the computation is not carried out in the cameras but at a single source linked to all the cameras. Do you really think that lane switching would not be taken into consideration?
Yes, I do. I am absolutely certain of it, and
anyone reading this topic should be absolutely clear that lane-changing works. The Home Office and the SPECS manufacturer have even confirmed that it works in news stories (like
this one and
this one), and asked drivers not to do it (maybe drivers would be a bit happier to oblige if they hadn't been systematically bullied and scammed by SCPs for the last 8 years or so, but anyway). It could be a massive, very organised conspiracy to lie to us and catch us out, but it would have to be very organised indeed, implausibly so, and besides, what of my friend who has successfully applied the lane-changing technique to at least two separate SPECS systems? (Oh, and of course the Home Office would never lie to us....

)
Like PeterE, I would like a source for your information, as I have never heard anything like it from anywhere reliable before. In fact, I don't mean to be rude or to stop you posting here, but you are most definitely wrong, and you may well have been told what you think by some camera supporter who wishes to spread disinformation in an effort to confuse and distract motorists (thereby showing how much they really care about road safety, but we knew that already).
_________________
Paul Smith: a legend.
"The freedom provided by the motor vehicle is not universally applauded, however: there are those who resent the loss of state control over individual choice that the car represents. Such people rarely admit their prejudices openly; instead, they make false or exaggerated claims about the adverse effects of road transport in order to justify calls for higher taxation or restrictions on mobility." (
Conservative Way Forward:
Stop The War Against Drivers)