> -----Original Message----- > From: Russell Chapman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 3:47 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Use of cameras > > > Chad Cooper wrote: > > >I think that accuity is difficult to achieve at such high > speeds. It might > >be a interesting math prolem to determine how fast the > shutter must be to > >get a clear picture of a speeder at 70 MPH. > > > Wow - ours were bought from Germany and routinely clock cars > at speeds > in excess of 100mph, even in traffic. They use a combination of radar > and laser, but a conventional film camera. New units coming > on line this > year use digital cameras. All of them can pick which is the > speeding car > in 3 or 4 lanes of oncoming traffic.
That is bad news. It appears that the affordable technology has improved dramatically. Around my neighborhood, they have radar boxes that show you your speed, but no photography capability. It is presumed one would want to slow down if one was aware of how fast they are actually going. It sometimes works. They also have stop light cameras. > > >I know of two facts required for a ticket to be processed. > 1. Direct and > >clear of the driver's face, as well as a direct and clear > image of the > >license. > > > Here the registered owner of the car cops the fine and demerit points > against his licence, unless he provides a signed confession > from someone > else... Companies with fleet vehicles cop a much higher fine, but no > demerit points if they can't produce the driver who should be wearing > the fine and points. > > >You can only imagine what the picture looked like, with a gorilla > >face, waving at the camera. > > > There are photos circulating around Oz showing a motorbike > being ridden > at extremely high speeds (the speed camera photo shows the > speed in an > inset box) with his leg jackknifed around the back and his > boot covering > the licence plate. > > >http://www.autoplates.com/photoshield/laser-shield.htm. > > > Those are SO illegal here - big trouble if you're caught with > them (or > with radar detectors, and they have radar detector > detectors). There is > also a spray-on sold in bottles that goes on a conventional licence > plate cover, but it's not waterproof and fades away. Also > illegal, but > harder to detect. I suspect that it is only a matter of time before it is illegal everywhere in the US. We currently have other problems, and lawmakers are not in the mood to make the common taxpayer mad with this economy. > > The problem in Australia is that they have now set the tolerance on > these cameras down to 3kmh over the limit in some states, so if youre > endangering all around you by travelling on a multi-lane freeway at > 83kmh in an 80k zone, you get busted. Our cars are only > required to have > a speedo with a 5% accuracy, so you may not even be aware > that you are > speeding until you get the notice in the mail... This has to be related to revenue generation to go to such extremes with the 3kmh limit. I suspect that the new machines have a fantastic Return On Investment for the states that use them. > > Cheers > Russell C. > > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l > _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
