Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

the amount of people getting cought has risen, because the amount of fixed cameras has risen....

we arent speeding more, just getting cought more..think about it.

i got flashed 2 weeks ago in my work car on anzacs, i was on 61, i always slow down for fixed cameras, even if im not speeding!

id like to see if my company gets an expiation notice for this, i will contest it for sure.

  • Replies 122
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Think the 10% rule has changed here as well, not 100% sure on that...Just came back from Victoria a couple of weekends ago, and my dad's cousin who we spent a fair bit of time with is an ex cop and his wife is a cop and they don't have a % rule its 3km's over the limit thats it pinged...

Thing i don't get is we have an ADR rule that says your speedo must be accurate to within 10% of the nominated speed sign...Now apparently the state governments have decided they rule the roost and they've set their own % for speedo accuracy?? Doesn't sound right does it

yeah I knew it was 3km over in VIC because I got done for 63 in a hire car....the company told me that it was a 5% rule which would then make sense, but if its as you say, 3km period, then at 100km most cars are at least 4 or 5 km out......just not reasonable.

We used to be able to do 69 in a 60 zone awhile ago without fear but last December they apparently lowered the grace amount over the limit and have kept it secret because they know people will drive up to that extra allowable limit otherwise. I'm pretty sure its 10% now and they haven't followed VIC's 3km deal yet but they won't tell you when they do.

Yes it is crap but unfortunately not much we can do about it...

Read this site, very interesting information, basically goes on how speed cameras have done 9/10th's of f**k all to reduce death tolls on our roads...

just becuase THEY Claim they have changed the law doesnt mean they actually have

we all remember the bicycle and thought it was law for us to drive out of them well that was just a council initiative

They alleged i was doing 147 in a 100 zone and i wasn't, so in SA if that went to court and i plead guilty to it that's instant loss of licence but because i knew i was mostly in the right i decided to fight it

it took almost 2 years going in and out of court and $1500 but @ least i kept my license have got one more thing to add to my record (goes platinum soon) and at that time i was driving to the rocking horse to pick my daughter up and hand her over every week

so i proved (with my solicitor and an ex copper that's an expert in the field of lasers and laser guns by that it cost $700 just for his report) that the laser gun wasn't properly calibrated and was too long ago also but funnily enough they have a hand written piece of paper saying it had been calibrated 2 days prior to the alleged offence

so all in all i didn't take it to trial because i couldn't stand on the witness stand and say i was doing 100kph but we got the 147 in a 100 zone dropped to 90 in a 80 zone and $90 fine no loss of demerits and no conviction recorded :banana: i was happy enough with that because deep down i know that's them admitting there wrong

/big ass storey

i agree, it's bullshit i think those cameras are much more sensitive than they used to be. somehow i got done and i didn't even notice......i've even got speed alert on my daily to alert me my damn speed lol!

Edited by DRIV3R

they used to have a 10% tolerance on the camera detection setting, so it would only go off if you were doing 10% over the speed limit, i.e. 66 in a 60 zone.

I think in recent years they changed it to 5% which makes it 63 kph. people still thinking they have 10% up there sleeve are getting caught, hence the increase in number of detections and revenue.

I think the change in the tolerance is simply revenue raising. It is not uncommone for people's speedo to be out by as much as 10%, particularly in older cars, and in some cases even the newer cars.

the error in the speedo is not linear either. so it may be out by 10% at 60 and only 3% at 110. Manufacturers generally try and minimize the error as much as possible, but it is not always the case that it is minimised at 60 or 80 or what not.

EDIT

Have you noticed how the signs placed after the mobile (car) speed cameras now say safety cameras save lives rather than 'Speed' cameras save lives. They are no longer Speed cameras, but safety cameras. :banana::D

Edited by kalel
Yes it is crap but unfortunately not much we can do about it...

Read this site, very interesting information, basically goes on how speed cameras have done 9/10th's of f**k all to reduce death tolls on our roads...

Ahh yes..Take the visual deterent away and introduce hidden deterents...As much as i hate to say it, i'd prefer to see police cars on the road and cop an on the spot fine for speeding then see less police cars on the road and cop a fine 4 weeks later!!

note : When i say more police cars on the road i mean in the essence of catching people speeding/illegal U turns at lights etc etc not more police officers for defect city style stuff

to add to my frustration on this topic... me and kidafa were driving from victa to goolwa lastnight.. a white magna tailgating me all the way threw victa, i was doing exact speed limit in the stag, he pulls off like a shower of Sh&t, over takes n zooms off... next town i caught him again and he proseedes to do 60 in a 100 zone... rb25 flat to the boards... cyaaa mate :) i was doing like 130ish as it was dark etc tryed to get back in asap... he over takes doing atleast 150 160 striat past a shitter slide spec rolla and a cop... and the cop pulls the rolla over probly just to D him for not much :S was fairrrr peaking any way.... end rant :) **spotted delichefs stagea after so it calmed me down :)**

  • 2 weeks later...

Read today's paper anyone?

Headline reads ...

We'll pay to save lives

Basically the government in an "effort" to curb road fatalities will be implementing

* More fixed red light cameras (they forget to mention that they double as speeding cameras)

* and more importantly Point to Point speeding cameras! so if you happen to enter a road then exit a road and the average km/h works out to be more than the limit you get pinged. Problems associated with this are overtaking etc.

Apparently this is not a Money GRAB!!!!! Yeah right. Rann you're out in 2010.

There was a story on NSW's second highest revenue raising camera on today tonight last night. One lady had received 8 fines from the one camera, and most of the fines were appealed in front of a magistrate. The magistrate said as the govt department stated "they do not care if it raises $0 a year, its there to protect lives", that if he had any doubt about the circumstance, he would waive the fine! Bet the NSW Government is spitting chips now.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...