Safe Speed Forums

Extracted from an article in this week's MCN:

The first of a new type of speed camera called REDSPEED have gone into service in the U.K. in Avon and Somerset, Norfolk, Cumbria and London.
They differ in that the photos taken DO NOT SHOW timeframes or intervals, just the rider and the graduation marks. The camera partnerships rely on the cameras' own processing equipment to do the second-check speed calculation. No-one from any of the partnerships was able to tell MCN how a rider could check his speed from the photos. Cumbria camera manager Steve Callaghan's reply was "They don't have to (check it), do they, they tell us it in court, don't they". He went on to explain that, whereas GATSO photos are half-a-second apart, with REDSPEED the time interval varies but the distance over which the measurement is taken remains constant.
REDSPEED spokesman Mark Haylock refused to comment on how riders could calculate their speed from the photos.

For the record, REDSPEED cameras look a bit like a GATSO but smaller, with two letter-box-type slots mounted one above the other on the business face.

On the same page in MCN, details of the new TRUVELO.
Can be front or rear facing, and take just one photo. System is based on three sensors which are triggered by a passing vehicle, calculate the speed, and tell the camera to take a photo. TRUVELO say a second photo, graduation marks and timeframes aren't necessary as the system is totally accurate- the fact the camera has taken your photo means you WERE doing the speed alleged.

I really wonder about MCN. See the real info for yourself:

http://www.redspeed-int.com/en/products_redspeed.htm

That is mostly correct but certainly not a full description.

For the Truvelo, the trick is in the timing of the photo. The system determines this in real-time by extrapolation of time over the distance from the last sensor strip to the white lines from the speed measured from the sensors (primary measurement). Hence if all goes well, the photo will be taken when the front tyres of the vehicle are between the 1st and 3rd lines (ideally on the 2nd).



More details at www.truvelouk.com

I've had a look, and I can't see anything to persuade me MCN are wrong.

Gatso style graduation marks can clearly be seen in this (live?) setup on the M6

http://www.redspeed-int.com/en/images/cumbria3.jpg

This coupled with the fact that these cameras take multiple images at different times would suggest there is scope for a secondary measurement.

That setup is on the M5 just south of Bristol.

By jove you're right, that's well spotted sir!

I just did some digging, there are/were installations both on the M5 and M6. The Redspeed page:
http://www.redspeed-int.com/en/news_pre ... ses_m6.htm
must have the wrong photo.

If they cannot provide the defendant with information to allow them to varify their speed with the appropriate expertise, then these devices will never secure a conviction that goes to court.

it is a fundamental right of the defendant to be adequately equiped with information to prepare his/her defence.

anyone snapped simply opts for court

I wonder what speeds these camera's will be set to detect, will they have margine for error? or will they be set to go off, if say your doing 31 in a 30.

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.

It would be same as everywhere else: ACPO guidelines at a minimum (+10% +2mph), higher if that is their policy.

Gareth

There's a couple of these up the road, they are also known as Monitron cameras (?) - they are just digital versions of GATSOs and have the same calibration marks.

Don't you just love the way they're placed in front of the only tree in the area

I can confim that the ones now creating a hazard on the A590 are accompanied by GATSO style road markings, so one presumes similar corroboratory evidence would be available.

Interesting to see Mr Callaghan's thoughts on prior disclosure, which presumably reflects the open and helpful management style at CSCP...

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

It's rather worrying that the camera manufacturer wrongly attributes its illustrative photos. One would have thought that in their business, correctly attributing photos was paramount to their integrity.

And that photo - rather resembles the placement of another camera - complete with tree - is this one oak too ?

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

I'm sure the fact its also protected by (apparantly) the only section of guardrail on the nearside in the area is a complete co-incidence.....

ANOTHER interesting fact - this photo:

http://www.redspeed-int.com/en/images/image003_big.jpg

shows the cameras that I drive past every day - they are not showing calibration markings on the road when in real life, they do! I wonder if they doctor the photos?