Camera question

np · Post by np » 24 May 2005, 00:53

This is`nt another rant about speed camera`s,as its all been said before.[:D]
But what are these new camera`s that seem to be poping up everywhere?About 3/4 ft taller than the Gatso`s,with a much smaller yellow box on the top.Are they speed camera`s?Around my area they seem to be on bus lanes,traffic lights,high streets,100 yds in front of existing camera`s.Sometimes with the white markers on the roads,sometimes without.
Are they replacing the Gatso`s,or are they for something else?[:)]

Homer · Post by **Homer** » 24 May 2005, 01:26

Sounds like they could be the new digital gatso?
Nobody in their right mind would paint anything bright yellow and stick it on a pole. (note camera pratnerships are not in their right mind [;)])
Trafficmaster repainted all their equipment pale green because it was being mistaken for SPECS when SPECS and trafficmaster used blue poles.

bikeboyz · Post by **bikeboyz** » 24 May 2005, 01:57

http://www.gatso.com/

DervDonkey · Post by **DervDonkey** » 24 May 2005, 02:03

Is it, by any chance, one of these?
http://www.redspeed-int.com/en/products_redspeed.htm
Have a read if you feel the need for a good vomiting session.

np · Post by np » 24 May 2005, 04:04

Thats the ones Dervdonkey,bloody things[:(!].Will have to watch out for them.I presume they are fitted higher up than a normal Gatso to deter people from hanging car tyres around them & ...
Many thanks.[:)]

Forth · Post by **Forth** » 24 May 2005, 04:48

http://www.redspeed-int.com/en/products_redspeed.htm
Have a read if you feel the need for a good vomiting session.
Quite so. But after watching the Despatches documentary tonight on Ch.4, about the deliberate lies, media-manipulation, dirty tricks and deception applied by the government party throughout the recent UK general election -- and putting it together with all their other megalomanic and control-freakish antics -- this added blast of Stazi Statist surveillance comes, alas, as no surprise.

peter1138 · Post by **peter1138** » 24 May 2005, 13:08

Ah, so is digital photography now submissible as evidence in court?

born2die · Post by **born2die** » 24 May 2005, 13:22

Or here
http://www.ukspeedcameras.co.uk/guide.htm#SPECS

turbolag · Post by **turbolag** » 24 May 2005, 20:54

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by peter1138

Ah, so is digital photography now submissible as evidence in court?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">For a summary offence it always has been.

DervDonkey · Post by **DervDonkey** » 24 May 2005, 21:12

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">I presume they are fitted higher up than a normal Gatso to deter people from hanging car tyres around them & ...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
That's about right. They're mind-bogglingly expensive devices, far more so than a conventional Gatso. Around £75K a pop, I think.
I'll come clean - I used to work for the now defunct Monitron International who originally developed these things, although I never had any involvement with the so-called "enforcement" products. Towards the end of my brief time there (the very worst company I've ever worked for, quite apart from the speed cams, they got what they deserved) I was involved in a meeting where certain aspects of the RedSpeed unit relating to HO type approval were discussed. For various reasons I can't reveal that information here, and I don't know if the issue was ever resolved (apparently the new company is just as sloppy as Monitron were, so there's a good chance it wasn't) but if anyone here gets a ticket from one of these babies, well, you know where to find me.
Back to the start - apparently, during the initial trials of RedSpeed, three of these things were installed in Ulster. Two were 'necklaced' in the usual way. The third one apparently 'captured' somebody with access to somewhat more powerful pyrotechnics - to be precise, a small explosive charge attached to a 47Kg propane cylinder strapped to the camera mount. The camera was returned in flatpack kit form, together with a request to develop an armour plated version...

fastandfurryous · Post by **fastandfurryous** » 24 May 2005, 22:17

75K a pop!?!?!? Surely now that means that one camera costs more than the total cost of a traffic officer! That's just plain wrong. All cameras should be binned, and the money put back into patrol officers.

yangreen · Post by **yangreen** » 24 May 2005, 22:21

If they've gone digital, surely they can link up to the DVLA and help track the thousands of insured drivers on our roads? Or non-tax payers?
Personally I still don't understand the "Gatso terrorist" response. Maybe it's just because I don't encounter camera's very often and most of the ones I've seen of late have been in very sensible places (like the approach to a junction on an A road).

Kowalski · Post by **Kowalski** » 24 May 2005, 22:46

I'd have to admit that where I live the cameras are only placed where they are actually needed and aren't just out to make revenue, but its not the same everywhere. Durham Constabulary have no fixed cameras at all, they're the next police force south from where I live (I'm policed by Northumbria Police).
Overall, up here the attitude to speeding is sensible. Some years back Northumbria used to run quite a few unmarked cars and pull over speeding drivers on the A1 but I haven't seen it happen for a few years, not since the cameras were introduced.
If I was cynical I might say that there is no point in trying to catch uninsured drivers because they have no money to pay the fines and can be difficult to track anyway because they aren't always registed correctly.

DervDonkey · Post by **DervDonkey** » 25 May 2005, 00:02

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If they've gone digital, surely they can link up to the DVLA and help track the thousands of insured drivers on our roads? Or non-tax payers?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I'm sure it's being looked at. As of a year ago, these particular cameras did not have any ANPR capability - but they DO have the (fully implemented) capability of streaming live video via ISDN dial-up, and plenty of capacity for additional features. The control gear is in a roadside cabinet rather than the camera head, lots of space.

Forth · Post by **Forth** » 25 May 2005, 06:33

If ubiquitous surveillance is such a good thing, then why don't all the members of cabinet, police chiefs and top civil servants set a good example by getting themselves chip implanted, with each one being followed everywhere by a mini-drone with nightsights. The uncensored results could become a popular unreality tv show.