"If you're not speeding, you have nothing to worry about..."

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by Alan D Segal

So they don't need radar? Best let the folks at the airport know then.

They have both as a fail safe of course. The radar aerials you see at airports have the big dish for detecting skin and the narrow rectangular box is for the reception of the IFF signal.

I know this as I was in a previous life a military aircraft controller (not just airspace management type ground control stuff but more exact close quarters maneuvering and airplans along with direct control of aircraft in relation to my ordered heading, speeds, altitudes and weapon selection and firing on my command etc.) with all sorts of experience with various radar systems. Military also uses IFF around airports also by the way, they also have a few extra modes of IFF over and above the civilian modes.

[GasoLane]

I'll see your QLD speed camera fine and raise you a NSW Safe-T-Cam fine.......$1,191 !

The offence? Travel too close to another long vehicle in a Safe-T-Cam zone
(supposed to be at least 60 metres apart, seems that I missed by a little bit)

[Alan D Segal]

Originally Posted by mcnews

They have both as a fail safe of course.

Who'd have thunk it?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Alan D Segal

Do you work in the field or are you a google expert on this too? Anyway I disagree that police enforcement technology would be as poorly developed as what people here seem to suspect - especially considering how much of an earner it is for them.

I am a pilot so therefore have been professionally trained on how the system works, how to operate within it, what can go wrong and how to avoid dangerous situations when it is not operating correctly or there are aircraft without transponders e.g. RAA about.

It is somewhat ironic that you have in your signature

Originally Posted by your sig

Internet forums have taught us that academic fields like literature, economics and science don't exist anymore because of teenagers who say "well that's just your opinion and I disagree".

as it appears there are quite a few here who actually understand how and why this technology works and you are not one of them.

[Alan D Segal]

Originally Posted by flappist

I am a pilot.

So am I. EDIT: Take it to PM if you want to compare notes. Let's not get too far off topic and keep it civil. I'd appreciate if you stop the personal attacks.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

I'll see your QLD speed camera fine and raise you a NSW Safe-T-Cam fine.......$1,191 !

The offence? Travel too close to another long vehicle in a Safe-T-Cam zone
(supposed to be at least 60 metres apart, seems that I missed by a little bit)

For once, I wish we had this sort of camera here. Trucks out here love to come up close behind and sit five to ten meters behind you at 100 to 110...little bit worrying. You are virtually obliged to speed just to stay safe and out of their way.
Such as this quick over-the-shoulder photo I took with my phone in a 110 zone after the clown was monstering me for a while...nice...

I was eventually able to get some distance on him, but it wasn't the most pleasant experience.
A "Safe-T-Cam" like you speak of might give idiots like this pause to think...


See, people accept devices like red light cameras and systems that try to stop tailgating...but they despise a camera sitting on a busy road, especially where a speed limit changes, just to make money.

I could go to court and honestly swear on a stack of bibles that I wasn't speeding in that photo I posted at the start of the thread...the camera van is hardly hidden at that spot, and as I said, everyone expects it to be there as if it were a fixed Gatso. But it doesn't matter...the public just has to sit back, pay up, and be unable to do anything about it. If I'd have been speeding, this post wouldn't even exist...if I've done the wrong thing, I'll wear it. Just don't blame me for something I know damn well I haven't done.

[tezxr8man]

The quality of the photos causes dramas and when it does they still fight it like you're a babykiller. my old man got a fine in the mail last year for doing 140 in a 100 zone at the other end of the country in a truck gear limited to 90kph. He then had too prove it along with proving that, he lost the 150tonne rating on his truck costing thousands and months fighting it only for them to withdraw it

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

A "Safe-T-Cam" like you speak of might give idiots like this pause to think...

Wouldn't do any good. The Safe-T-Cam is only a point to point camera system for Trucks.

[Uncle_Ken]

The cameras I hate in NSW are the dual read light and speed cameras at intersections. I always woory about being in 'no mans land' when the lights just change and you have XXX seconds to decide to stop or go (and hope to hell the person behind you is not to close if you stop)

Uk

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Wouldn't do any good. The Safe-T-Cam is only a point to point camera system for Trucks.

Ah, I see.

On the "quality of the photo" with my infringement notice, there is a notation that says that "These images have been supplied as a courtesy only (gee, thanks for that...). Clearer images are used for processing purposes"

It would literally cost no more money to include the apparently nice clear image they have hidden away somewhere of my vehicle, but instead they include a Box Brownie-quality grainy image like that on your notice, with an image of your licence plate that looks like it was made up by a five year old with a crayon?
So...they are obviously starting with the assumption that an ordinary member of the public, brainwashed into believing speed cameras are absolutely infallible, is just going to automatically take their word for it and pay the fine, without wanting clearer proof that the car is theirs?
Makes sense.


On red light cameras, which I actually support wholeheartedly, there is a notice on the back of my fine where they have an FAQ section saying "my wheels are only just over the line when I stopped, yet I got a ticket", and the answer is that you have to stop at or before the line...cross it even by a little and you're gone.
I had heard that it takes a couple of photos a few seconds apart to ensure you are in fact moving and not just stuck on the intersection...so I don't know about that.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

On the "quality of the photo" with my infringement notice, there is a notation that says that "These images have been supplied as a courtesy only (gee, thanks for that...). Clearer images are used for processing purposes"

Here (NSW) you can see your photo's (Speed & Red light only) online at the SDRO site.

[Xauterus]

I don't think there is any debate on the quality of speed cameras. They have been designed properly to do one job.
Imagine the lawyers goldmine if there were problems with the equipment?

I don't agree on the use of speed cameras. They are not addressing peoples behaviour at that time. The driver may have been excited, intoxicated or under the influence of drugs, legal or otherwise.
Speed camera are a manpower efficient way of enforcing traffic laws. They have become a financial inconvenience more than anything. The last camera fine I received about five years ago was due to fatigue rather than a reckless death spree.

[Matty4]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

...if I've done the wrong thing, I'll wear it. Just don't blame me for something I know damn well I haven't done.

Then do something about it, anything.
Make them damn well earn their money by electing to have the matter heard in a Court of Law.
I strongly suggest having a look at this site.
http://www.aussiespeedingfines.com/
I bought this several years ago and the information contained is vital when it comes to knowing your rights.
I have used some of their info on several occasions (not for a couple of years now, though).
At the very least, you can delay the payment of the fine for up to a year and cost them more money than the fine is worth.
You don't have to go to court to start this process.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Such as this quick over-the-shoulder photo I took with my phone in a 110 zone after the clown was monstering me for a while...nice...

Lucky you werent in a VW!

[jpd80]

Just imagine how upset Rocky drivers are going to be when they start receiving lower threshold speeding infringements..

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

Before you moaners chime in with your obligatory "oh not another speed camera thread", have you considered that the reason these threads keep cropping up is that there is something seriously wrong with the whole system for them to keep coming up?

No. Because the government is the law maker & always speak the truth. Governments don't have agendas. They are there for the people. Not themselves.

[Trump]

Originally Posted by revolver 45

no. Because the government is the law maker & always speak the truth. Governments don't have agendas. They are there for the people. Not themselves.

BANG!!!

[buggerlugs]

At least you saw the van. We have got unmarked Black SS Commodore utes, Lancer VRX and Mazda 3's running around our area. And they have just announced they are going to mount cameras in guard rails !!! I got done at 7.03am going thru a 40kmh "School zone". What friggen kid goes to school at 7.00am FFS............

[buggerlugs]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

I'll see your QLD speed camera fine and raise you a NSW Safe-T-Cam fine.......$1,191 !

The offence? Travel too close to another long vehicle in a Safe-T-Cam zone
(supposed to be at least 60 metres apart, seems that I missed by a little bit)

Good grief

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

BANG!!!

Thank you, I'm here all week, don't forget to tip your waitress.

Originally Posted by fanboi

Not required so edited..

Guys if you have an issue with a moderator please PM an admin, Russ, Galea, Auslandau, Spoolman, etc. don't take it up or comment in the thread.

Anyway, to the OP.

I don't think there is much you can do. Except what one of the above posts mentions in drawing it out so it is not profitable.

Your in a serious conundrum. I honestly believe you weren't speeding. There are sections on the warrego highway & Ipswich parkway that I damn well know are camera & radar hotspots, from previous experience or just common knowledge. It's at these spots that I virtually have my eyes glued to the speedo. I won't take a chance & make sure that I am under the limit. I don't take the chance. I can't afford the fine. Points I'm good on, but its the $$$ that the killer now. I see they have gone up since the last time I got a fine.

Unless you are very well funded & have ALOT sitting in the bank, I don't think there is a way to fight this. As Flappist said earlier, they will fight this tooth & nail. To lose would set a precedent & would open the floodgates & would bring into question EVERY camera fine ever issued. And that is a dangerous thing for the government. That's not a conspiracy theory. It's fact.

Yep it sucks. Yes it's wrong. But if you dont have the backing to fight it, what else is there to do?

Just the way the Cookie crumbles. Though I am happy to be proven wrong.

Actually, someone please, please prove me wrong.

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by buggerlugs

At least you saw the van. We have got unmarked Black SS Commodore utes, Lancer VRX and Mazda 3's running around our area. And they have just announced they are going to mount cameras in guard rails !!! I got done at 7.03am going thru a 40kmh "School zone". What friggen kid goes to school at 7.00am FFS............

Absolutely. I decided to head off early to work the other day. Went past the school at 7:12. Not one kid in sight at either high or primary school, on either Road, and not one car dropping a child off.

But it's still a set time. So I call from 6:50 to 9:15 a 40k zone just to be sure.

[steve.zissou]

if your going to fight it do your research.

The only true defence to a statutory offence is mistake of fact (which you have to prove but its easy enough).

you can do it but its gonna cost you lots of time - i did it - was a great experience and I learned a lot about the law - so many interesting stories and precedents.

[Jastel]

I get a few of these each month from my taxi drivers, all swear they were not speeding funnily enough...

The pictures are sometimes not real clear, some are just 2 headlights, or taillights at night. But after checking my GPS tracking system I can confirm the cars location and speed at that date and time.

I have never got a "dodgy" one, the car was definitely speeding and not by one or two kms over the limit either.

I hate speed cameras too....but just saying in my experience (in Qld) they are not handing out random photos for fun....

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Jastel

I get a few of these each month from my taxi drivers, all swear they were not speeding funnily enough...

The pictures are sometimes not real clear, some are just 2 headlights, or taillights at night. But after checking my GPS tracking system I can confirm the cars location and speed at that date and time.

I have never got a "dodgy" one, the car was definitely speeding and not by one or two kms over the limit either.

I hate speed cameras too....but just saying in my experience (in Qld) they are not handing out random photos for fun....

Yep, I have a feeling that eventually, all fleet operators will have GPS monitoring of vehicles
as well as dash cams too, corporates see it as a way of enforcing policy.

Our company now has a three strike rule on speeding fines regardless of how small,
so it will be interesting to see what happens with infringements form now on.
One thing I can tell you is that most are now avoiding Airport Link and the Clem 7.....

[burnz]

Originally Posted by fanboi

Editing Off topic comments that are not required ..... but read below .

wouldn't occur to you that he is right!

[xtremerus]

Originally Posted by buggerlugs

At least you saw the van. We have got unmarked Black SS Commodore utes, Lancer VRX and Mazda 3's running around our area. And they have just announced they are going to mount cameras in guard rails !!! I got done at 7.03am going thru a 40kmh "School zone". What friggen kid goes to school at 7.00am FFS............

What law says that a driver must have an accurate clock/watch while they are driving? I would really like to know.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by xtremerus

What law says that a driver must have an accurate clock/watch while they are driving? I would really like to know.

If you think it might be close to 7.00 or just after what are you going to do?

You don't have to know the correct time, just be prepared to pay the fine if you get it wrong....

[zilo]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

For once, I wish we had this sort of camera here. Trucks out here love to come up close behind and sit five to ten meters behind you at 100 to 110...little bit worrying. You are virtually obliged to speed just to stay safe and out of their way.
Such as this quick over-the-shoulder photo I took with my phone in a 110 zone after the clown was monstering me for a while...nice...
image

Now you are going to love this...no offence intended ...but...

You would get 4 demerit points and have your wallet lighter a few hundred bucks for taking that photo with your phone in Victoria.


Yep...using mobile phone while driving.

Which is exactly what you are admitting to....yeah?

[Bearman]

It's all about the cash. Easy money for govco. Legislation will have been framed to short circuit any challenges based on technical deficiencies to protect the revenue.

Guilty and never to be proven innocent. Cough up or incur the wrath of the nanny state.

Driving just ain't that enjoyable anymore!!

[FGX-351]

I hate these things with a passion.
A call to Scott Cooper of "Speedfineconsultants" could possibly help.
Otherwise the only other thing I can suggest is to familiarise yourself(whish I suspect you already are familiar with) with the Australian Standards for radar operational proceedures and definitions.