smile cos . . . .

they can see you even better now

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=14098

[new scameras]

 

Buzby wrote

Food for thought innit eh?

This though:-

"Cash-greedy safety camera partnerships....."

I am having more and more difficulty with.

The story I am being told (by folks) and seeing for my own eyes that
there are a lot of folks now with enough points to make it pretty nigh
essential that they don't get caught again and consequently traffic now
travels at an almost uniform 10%+2. So where are these guys getting
their money from, the potential to harvest is neither as large nor the
herd as willing to be culled as it was?

Or have I missed a trick here?

 

Just make sure you cover up the numberplate on
the front of your bike then.

 

This is partly the problem. People are still getting caught, but
because
it's just a "fill in the form and 'fess up" type of deal, your SO can
easily
take the points, thus providing you with a safety net.

The addition of the 4-lane capability and the face capture means that
they can cover the additional lanes and also get a mugshot of the
driver, to (a) increase the coverage and hence revenue and (2) to
positively identify the crims and get them off the road.

 

But as Steve says, eventually this has to end too - people will do the
speed limit and that point, the revenue will stop - even if they drop
the limits, eventually people will drop to those limits.

So I can see the camera partnerships eventually becoming a drain rather
than an income - but then again, it wouldn't surprise me if somewhere
in G'ment there is a plan that we will all soon be tracked by GPS and
the cameras will be irrelevant anyway. I'm sure they won't lay a single
person off though.

 

Really? I think it's the placement of the cameras which will be the
limiting factor. I'm sure you could potentially drive on roads which
don't have them at all, and thus not be at risk. We all know where
the cameras are in our local area, and that's the limit that most
of us will drive - I certainly drive more carefully in areas I don't
know.

Besides, for every year that drivers are taken off the road, there
are more drivers passing their test. Don't know what the ratio
is, but I'm sure someone could work out given the current rate
of passes compared the the "stock" of driving licences and the
current rate of bans. Also, what length of ban is imposed for a
total of 12 points? 28 days? 3 months? Even if it was to run for
the full 3 years I doubt it would exhaust the supply of licences.

 

Hmm...

<feverishly develops in shed>

Eureka!

A holographic windscreen projector that lays an image of whoever you
want on the glass.

 

I was thinking along the lines of an autodarkening numberplate cover.
Welding helmets go black VERY quickly and the technology cold be used to
make number plates invisible to cameras without it being obvious to the
naked eye

 

bollocks.

 

It's not about banning everyone - it's about everyone eventually
driving around at 30mph.

Should that happen, then where does the revenue come from?

 

By dropping the limit to 25mph, because it's "safer".

 

dwb wrote

Same as what happened when the cod started running out I suppose. Put
limits on the size of the net so the little ones get away and explore
nearby waters in search of other fish to fry.

 

Ah, I see what you mean now.

I honestly don't think it will happen. There will always be
somebody speeding, and the proliferation of cameras will
see that they get caught.

 

Well a camera flash lasts for between 0.05ms and 5ms and scameras give
out quite a flash so my guess is it would be at the longer end of the scale.

A welding helmet darkens in 0.03ms to 0.5ms so it doesn't seem
completely beyond the realms of possibility.

Ok, there would be a fair bit of innovation involved and the tricky bit
would be getting it to go from clear to black/opaque, and be thin
enought to be unobvious, but hey, it's only a flight of fancy so Pppppt

 

Yes. It's already started 'round here, only the next step down is 20mph,
not 25. It began with roads containing schools and old folk's homes
(arguably sensible), then extended to residential roads, and has now
begun infecting larger main roads. These roads don't have speed cameras
on them, yet, although some of them do have those stupid smiley-face
electronic signs which I make a point of driving through above the speed
limit as whenever I deem it's safe to do so.

And when people occasionally get knocked down on 20mph roads (quite
likely, IMHO, because an indicated 20mph is so painfully slow that the
mind can easily wander, and concentration lapse after a while) then the
limits will have to be reduced to a much "safer" 15mph.

 

you've missed out the time to detect the flash.

Which is a fairly important bit.

Oh, and you've conveniently ignored the fact the new cameras mentioned
in the OP in this thread will be video cameras...

 

Have I, how can you tell? I think you'll find that the times I suggested
INCLUDE reaction time.

If a flash goes off and your numberplate becomes obscured, how's a video
camera going to make any difference

 

Nicknoxx wrote:

Why would it need a flash?

 

The video camera wouldn't need a flash (in the daytime) but the camera
in the original post has three digital stills camera and one video
camera. If any camera fired a flash the effect would be the same

 

Chris Cowley wrote

Live in Portsmouth do you?