Safe Speed Forums

Just been flashed by a static camera. I was on the other side of the road,heading towards the camera. Im sure their are no lines on this side of the road, was I caught ? what do you think

It depends on the camera - the standard Gatso does not (grey pole big yellow box on top) but I believe others can.

Why not have a browse through this site

http://www.ukspeedcameras.co.uk/guide.htm

and see if you recognise the camera? Let us know what you find.

Welcome BTW!

Cheers

Paul

_________________
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair

If it was a Gatso and a single flash you will be OK, its on alert mode.

If its a Truvelo, you are nicked.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

I thought they weren't allowed to flash you from the front to prevent accidents caused by dazzling?

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

What? Actually consider the consequences of flashing lights in drivers eyes?

If they actually considered the consequences of flashing lights to be a hazard, then Gatsos would never have been approved, because they will always flash into the eyes of oncoming traffic, no matter who triggered the thing.

But it has never really been about safety has it?

I’m not so sure about this. I travel down the A41 to work. Just after Whitchurch, and in the middle of nowhere they have placed a camera at the very beginning (or end depending on which way you're travelling) of a dual carriageway. There is only one camera (grey pole big yellow box on top) and yet there are marking on both sides of the road. Don’t get me wrong it might be a ploy, but I wouldn’t like to try it to find out.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

Truvelos use an infrared flash, which is barely visible - at least during the day.

Apart from the obvious differences in appearance (see earlier pics), the thing to look for is three closely spaced lines across the road just before the camera. They trigger the camera before you reach it - and therefore they take a picture of the driver, so don't claim your girl friend was driving. Bikers have nothing to worry about though, as there is no numberplate for them to photograph.

Beware some sneaky partnerships which have Gatso-like calibration lines after the Truvelos. There are two opposite Buxton station like this. Clearly an administrative error that one.

One other comment. It's quite common for there to be calibration lines on both sides of the road after a Gatso, to catch overtaking traffic. If it's obviously a Gatso and the camera is pointing your way, you have nothing to worry about. Just make sure they haven't hidden another one on your side of the road just before the calibration lines.

Just an interesting asside - I was talking to a bloke in a local bike shop a couple of weeks ago, and he said that he was caught riding at something like 150mph on a NSL road towards a talivan (so they had no numberplate from him at this speed) and then as he slowed to pass it, they took a picture of the back of the bike (he was not speeding by this time) and are trying to prosecute based on the two photos....didn't realise that they COULD take photos from the front AND back of the van...

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Have a look at the MCN article in my post

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewt ... =heartbeat
Never heard if someone had told North Yorks that Bikes don't have front plates or that it's hard to see through a visor.


Jn -can reccommend www.speedcam.co.uk to show you the types of camera and road markings..

Actually they don't, they use a white flash and require a magenta filter for front photography.
I used to think it was infrered but that would be too sensible really, wouldn't it?



From what I have read this is for rear-photography use, when the camera is triggered both directions. The 3 lines are so you can tell which car triggered the device. The car with it's wheels on the lines is "bad car".

For rear-photography the car would get in the way in the photo so you couldn't see if it's front wheels are on the lines or not.
I would have thought it was pretty simple to make it trip on the rear wheels, but maybe not. (too sensible? )

_________________
Andrew.

I was told that once as well and even passed it on to others, but it's totally wrong: Truvelos use a bright magneta flash. I think the infrared myth sprang up owing to confusion with the beam of laser devices like LTIs, which are infrared.

Also as Ziltro says, Truvelos require the 3 lines as a secondary check and to tell which vehicle is the one being recorded.

According to one chap at work - if your'e flashed by a truvello even during the day you know - believe it's a white flash with a magenta filter.
But at least with them you've only got to watch your speed over the pad (in the road) - so the danger area is shorter, no checking mirrors. ( and if you're passing a HGV at the same time - you're invisible.
J_NORRIE - Safest way is to log onto that speedcam site and check out the variations -so you know next time.
Now camera types would be a very good addition to the driving test.
Only true word Mr Blair said -Educate - know your enemy ,know how he works and then you can avoid him.

I understand that one of the big disadvantages? of rear-facing cameras is that if a long vehicle passes one, its back numberplate may not yet be in view at the time the photo is taken.

Cheers
Peter

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Also wonder how the partnership would cope if the rally cars started asking for photos to prove who was driving - wouldn't matter if it was back or front - don't see much through a visor.

I thought the reason they didn't photograph the front of the car was that you may be travelling with someone you weren't supposed to be with (thinking of people having affairs here) and the speeding ticket may cause a marriage breakup.

Personally I don't think that's a good reason, but then I am a little conservative (with a small c) in my opinions of people who have affairs!

Of course it may be a complete urban myth, although I guess it would be interesting to know if anyone has sued the issuing authority under human rights legislation?

_________________
COAST Not just somewhere to keep a beach.

A young loner on a crusade to champion the cause of the innocent, the helpless, the powerless, in a world of criminals who operate above the law.

Urban myth I suspect. Truvelos have always photographed the front of vehicles I believe, and I doubt the BiBs never stopped any extra-marital types in a hurry in the pre-camera days. Talivans can ping from either direction and the last couple aimed at me were both at the front of my car. I'd expect that had I been speeding the images would have been good enough to identify me clearly, and the passenger if I'd had one on those occasions. So no, I don't think there's any rules about not taking photos of the front of vehicles, though I think Gatso cameras only have type approval for photographing the rear.

Besides, anyone having an affair who is also daft enough to get pinged for speeding with a mistress in the car and slow enough to fail to intercept the NIP first deserves everything he gets IMO.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

It maybe an urban myth, but I've definatly heard it, so perhaps there is some truth in it? I don't think photographing the front is prohibited, but there are stricter rules regarding the viewing of the photo itself, or something along them lines! My mind is remembering somehing like "to protect the privacy of the driver who may wish not to have the identity of any passengers revealed".