Hullfox Posted 4 March 2009 Posted 4 March 2009 Just wondered because more and more vehicles seem to fly through them at various locations on my travels. Couldn't help but wonder whether they are just old lamposts painted yellow with Cornflake boxes hung from them.
Unit Posted 4 March 2009 Posted 4 March 2009 Just wondered because more and more vehicles seem to fly through them at various locations on my travels. Couldn't help but wonder whether they are just old lamposts painted yellow with Cornflake boxes hung from them. I think for the average speed camera ones you just have to change lane between the two points. the police even admitted it but said how it would be 'irresponsible' for people to do so....pfff
Tommeh Posted 4 March 2009 Posted 4 March 2009 I just try to pick some guy who looks as if he can do no wrong and stay behind him, they are painfully annoying though, the M1 North of Leicester is currently littered with them and also bewteen Luton and London. Annoying as fook.
AoWW Posted 4 March 2009 Posted 4 March 2009 Just wondered because more and more vehicles seem to fly through them at various locations on my travels. Couldn't help but wonder whether they are just old lamposts painted yellow with Cornflake boxes hung from them. Not me personally (more by luck than judgement) (I reckon I've only survived by having a scanner that bleeps incessantly throughout, thus keeping me marginally more law-abiding) but I do know several people that have. They're evil with the 'limit' too - a friend of mine got nicked on the A14 stretch between Huntingdon and Cambridge, for averaging 78mph at 2am in the morning with virtually no traffic in sight. I think for the average speed camera ones you just have to change lane between the two points. the police even admitted it but said how it would be 'irresponsible' for people to do so....pfff Hmmm, unconvinced. I thought I heard that they'd somehow changed the camera 'wide angle' or some such thing so this was no longer possible.
Maybes Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 They do work. A few of my mates have been done by them.
The People's Hero Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I take no notice and have never been done apart from a short stretch round here somewhere, I just use cruise control and do something even more irresponsible to pass the time, like reading a book, having a wa nk or weaving randomly between lanes with my foggies on.
Munzie Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I think for the average speed camera ones you just have to change lane between the two points. the police even admitted it but said how it would be 'irresponsible' for people to do so....pfff I was caught going 47mph in a 40mph zone just before Christmas. Rather than issuing me the standard 3 points and fine, I was given the opportunity to attend a 'driving awareness session' (at Sixfields Stadium!). During the session, the officer explained that the average speed cameras are mostly restricted to one lane. If you remembered to change lanes in between the cameras, it would be highly unlikely you would get caught for speeding! Also, if you see only one camera hanging, it is normally covering the outside lane only. On the A14 (Huntingdon to Cambridge) there are two cameras covering both lanes. On the A43 (Northampton) there is only one. Therefore you can travel faster in the inside lane without getting caught! This was all discussed openly during the session!! It was done to try and show that the police are not out to get us all the time and that they appreciate that in certain conditions (little or no other road users), controlled speeding would be tolerated. PS: I have yet to put this to the test, so no Munzie law-suits please if you get caught
Katy Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I was caught going 47mph in a 40mph zone just before Christmas. Rather than issuing me the standard 3 points and fine, I was given the opportunity to attend a 'driving awareness session' (at Sixfields Stadium!).During the session, the officer explained that the average speed cameras are mostly restricted to one lane. If you remembered to change lanes in between the cameras, it would be highly unlikely you would get caught for speeding! Also, if you see only one camera hanging, it is normally covering the outside lane only. On the A14 (Huntingdon to Cambridge) there are two cameras covering both lanes. On the A43 (Northampton) there is only one. Therefore you can travel faster in the inside lane without getting caught! This was all discussed openly during the session!! It was done to try and show that the police are not out to get us all the time and that they appreciate that in certain conditions (little or no other road users), controlled speeding would be tolerated. PS: I have yet to put this to the test, so no Munzie law-suits please if you get caught Yeah, I witnessed that mo fo the other day. Fecking things. All speed cameras scare the crap out of me but those hanging down ones give me nightmares
Guest Chocolate Teapot Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I was caught going 47mph in a 40mph zone just before Christmas. Rather than issuing me the standard 3 points and fine, I was given the opportunity to attend a 'driving awareness session' (at Sixfields Stadium!).During the session, the officer explained that the average speed cameras are mostly restricted to one lane. If you remembered to change lanes in between the cameras, it would be highly unlikely you would get caught for speeding! Also, if you see only one camera hanging, it is normally covering the outside lane only. On the A14 (Huntingdon to Cambridge) there are two cameras covering both lanes. On the A43 (Northampton) there is only one. Therefore you can travel faster in the inside lane without getting caught! This was all discussed openly during the session!! It was done to try and show that the police are not out to get us all the time and that they appreciate that in certain conditions (little or no other road users), controlled speeding would be tolerated. PS: I have yet to put this to the test, so no Munzie law-suits please if you get caught A friend of mine went to one of those sessions and his opinion of speed cameras was completely changed after it. He said the police there were quite fair and honest. I would encourage them to do more things like this.
Munzie Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 A friend of mine went to one of those sessions and his opinion of speed cameras was completely changed after it. He said the police there were quite fair and honest. I would encourage them to do more things like this. I quite agree. They are embarrassed about the negative press the cameras receive. The other point raised at my session that I forgot to mention is in relation to fixed safety camera locations. If you see a sign on the road that warns of a fixed camera ahead, if the background sign is yellow there is definitely a camera ahead. If the background is white, there is only a possibility of a camera ahead (possibly a mobile unit location which is not always used)
The People's Hero Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 The times I've been flashed and no fine has come through.
Katy Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 The times I've been flashed and no fine has come through. I'm so scared of being flashed I slow down to about 10 miles below the speed limit. Bloody dangerous and annoying for other people but I can't help it.
Munzie Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I'm so scared of being flashed I slow down to about 10 miles below the speed limit. Bloody dangerous and annoying for other people but I can't help it. My 'road angel' has saved my licence on numerous occasions. Also, it gives a very accurate reading on my speed (satallite tracked). This show that when my car speedo is telling me I'm doing 70, the road angel gives a reading of 64mph. All car speedometers are inaccurate and will always overestimate your actual speed. Speed cameras are also set to give an extra 10% allowance because of inaccurate speedos. This means that you could be indicating 80mph in your car (in a 70mph zone) and not get flashed! This I have tried and it works. I now rely on my road angel for accurate speeds. Sat Nav systems will do the same.
Zingari Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 i like to annoy people by flashing my camera behind the drivers seat , so that he thinks he's been nicked
Thracian Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I've no idea if it makes any difference but I change lanes and try to approach the cameras with a lorry alongside me. If the "average" is measured along a single straight carriageway and you change lanes it won't be accurate. Half the time it's ridiculous anyway. There's no work being done, it's the middle of the night and there's no traffic around. If there are workers around I'm happy to stick to the limit anyway. It's a token gesture mind cos then I simply watch streams of traffic cruising by me regardless.
The People's Hero Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I'm so scared of being flashed I slow down to about 10 miles below the speed limit. Bloody dangerous and annoying for other people but I can't help it. Someone gave me a wan ker sign once and laughed at me for about a mile when I had my convertible and swung out and blasted past him and got flashed. Imagine my mirth when half a mile further on he crashed his pristine Polo in to the back of a bus. How can you hit a bus? They hardly have the sharpest breaks in the world do they? It also happened not long ago on a trip up to Leicester, some idiot in a Golf R32 thing, overtook loads of people about a mile before a junction on the M1 using the hard shoulder, I thought he's going to crash at the junction (didn't know whether he wanted the junction or not). And yep, he crashed, just before the junction though. Presumably he realised his error and had tried to cut back in. Don't piss me off on the road, it tends to end up with you having an accident which has nothing to do with me. More later on the time I wrote off a couple of weeks old Nissan Micra at a petrol station. My boss got caught doing 105 mph recently. He thinks he'll get off without a ban by pleading single parent status. Any thoughts? (He was doing 135mph just before - so he's fortunate in a way).
Munzie Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I've no idea if it makes any difference but I change lanes and try to approach the cameras with a lorry alongside me. If the "average" is measured along a single straight carriageway and you change lanes it won't be accurate.Half the time it's ridiculous anyway. There's no work being done, it's the middle of the night and there's no traffic around. If there are workers around I'm happy to stick to the limit anyway. It's a token gesture mind cos then I simply watch streams of traffic cruising by me regardless. The average speed measurement is taken between any two cameras. According to the officer that took my 'awareness' session, the temporary cameras at roadworks are the biggest generator of fines!!
Sir Fynwy Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 Someone gave me a wan ker sign once and laughed at me for about a mile when I had my convertible and swung out and blasted past him and got flashed.Imagine my mirth when half a mile further on he crashed his pristine Polo in to the back of a bus. How can you hit a bus? They hardly have the sharpest breaks in the world do they? It also happened not long ago on a trip up to Leicester, some idiot in a Golf R32 thing, overtook loads of people about a mile before a junction on the M1 using the hard shoulder, I thought he's going to crash at the junction (didn't know whether he wanted the junction or not). And yep, he crashed, just before the junction though. Presumably he realised his error and had tried to cut back in. Don't piss me off on the road, it tends to end up with you having an accident which has nothing to do with me. More later on the time I wrote off a couple of weeks old Nissan Micra at a petrol station. My boss got caught doing 105 mph recently. He thinks he'll get off without a ban by pleading single parent status. Any thoughts? (He was doing 135mph just before - so he's fortunate in a way). If he's got a clean license and seems genuinely sorry in front of the magistrate he may be OK, I was caught at 103.2mph (slowing down) on the M18 a while back (going to watch City play Newcastle in the Prem so you can guess a few years) and got off with 6 points and no ban, £350 fine was a bit of a pain. A good solicitor could probably find a proceedural error and get him off scot free.
breadandcheese Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 I got caught by an average speed camera doing 69 mph in a 60 zone. It was up near Sheffield/Barnsley as I drove back from Manchester to Leicester. To make matters worse, It was a dual carriageway with the nearest car a good 30 feet away, so it was a safe situation to drive at such speeds. That did not bother the speed camera. I guess those are the breaks.
The People's Hero Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 How fast would you have to drive to be out of shot by the time the camera takes the picture? At a certain speed surely you're therefore better off hitting the gas than the brakes? Discuss.
JoeyB Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 How fast would you have to drive to be out of shot by the time the camera takes the picture?At a certain speed surely you're therefore better off hitting the gas than the brakes? Discuss. Aint it like 178 MPH, sure it was top gear once. Edit: Found it: 171MPH not far out Myth 1: One in five drivers believe you can drive fast enough to beat a speed camera.The reality is that the vehicle would need to be travelling at 171mph or above to technically 'outrun' a standard speed camera; few cars on the road are capable of that kind of speed. Even if you do have such a car, attempting this is a very high risk strategy, as just 1 mph below 171 and… well it’s safe to say that most judges take a very dim view indeed of drivers who drive 100 mph over the limit and you will end up in the clink for quite some time. This is a good read on speed camera's http://cars.uk.msn.com/news/car_news_artic...cumentid=475168
The People's Hero Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 Aint it like 178 MPH, sure it was top gear once.Edit: Found it: My car can't go that fast. It's limited (is it?) to 220km/h. I'm not convinced it could do that anymore anyway. Can't have the BHP it did out of the factory.
Munzie Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 Aint it like 178 MPH, sure it was top gear once.Edit: Found it: 171MPH not far out My bike is capable of 181mph. I'll let you know
Katy Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 My bike is capable of 181mph. I'll let you know Isn't there some daft law that makes speed cameras not detect bikes or something? Or did I dream that?
JoeyB Posted 5 March 2009 Posted 5 March 2009 Isn't there some daft law that makes speed cameras not detect bikes or something? Or did I dream that? Bikes don't have number plates on the front Think that might be it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.