Gatso'd: question

I've been caught on camera doing an alleged 37mph. I asked for the
evidence and they've sent it. I passed 4 marker-spacings in 0.5s which
by my maths is 27mph (the markers are 5ft each).

Now I realise that some other speed measurement has registered 37mph and
that one explanation is that I was slowing down between the measurement
and the photos but I wondered if anyone had any idea how it would play
in court if the evidence is apparently contradictory.

steve

 

Have a look here and decide
http://www.pepipoo.com/


--



Robbo
Trophy 1200 1998
BotaFOF #19. E.O.S.M 2001/2002/2003/2004/2005
B.O.S.M 2003, 2004, 2005
FURSWB#1 KotL..YTC449
PM#7
BotM#4
..

 

Lines five feet apart:

| (5 feet) | (5 feet) | (5 feet) |

So you crossed four. Just over 15 feet in half a second. Call it worst
case and you were just coming up to the fifth spacing, so say 20 feet
in half a second. So 40 feet per second (fps).

x60 = 2400 feet per minute. x60 = 144000 feet per hour. Divided by 5280
feet in a mile...

Yup, I make it 27mph as well, and that's worst case.

If you're an AA or RAC member, they supply free lawyers. I'd suggest
you have a very strong case. First, though, it might be an idea to send
the maths to the ticket office - they might just say: "Oops" and cancel
it.

However, the fact that this appears to be a case of a faulty camera
means that, if you contest it in court, others might get their tickets
cancelled too. How public-spirited do you feel? You'd get your costs
back, at any rate.

 

Agreed (assuming that the markings have been checked at 5 feet)

I'd actually take great pleasure in showing up at court and going not guilty
on this one.
--
Alex

Hermes: "We can't afford that! Especially not Zoidberg!"
Zoidberg: "They took away my credit cards!"

www.drzoidberg.co.uk
www.ebayfaq.co.uk

 

Steve said:

The markers for the GATSOS are (IIRC) 5 mile per hour markers and the
photos (IIRC, again) are 0.7s apart. Basically they count how many
markers you have crossed and base the speed on that - eg, 4 markers =
20mph.

Could be wrong, though, this is from watching a program about UK speed
cameras a while ago and the 0.5/0.7 discrepancy could mean I am
spouting bollocks.

 

How fast did your speedo say you were going?

 

The markers for the GATSOS are (IIRC) 5 mile per hour markers and the

While I'm pretty sure the poster is wrong about that (for example the
photos actually state that the interval is 0.5s) it would be possible to
have lines painted X mph apart.

In fact with lines 5 feet apart and a time interval between exposures of
0.5s the lines are 6.82mph apart.

steve

 

I've been caught on camera doing an alleged 37mph. I asked for the

The moment I looked at it, just after the flashes, it was reading just
under 30mph.

steve

 

Go to court with the truth on your side then. And stick it right up the
Scamera partnership.

 

In uk.rec.motorcycles, Steve Rawlinson amazed us all with this pearl of
wisdom:

Right, so by that reckoning, I can blat through the camera at 160mph+
and the lines'll still be 6.82mph apart.

 

In fact with lines 5 feet apart and a time interval between exposures of

Yes. You'd traverse 23 of them between exposures at 160mph.

steve

 

It all depends - four whole lines passed may still mean approx 4.9 x 5 feet.
(ie. snapped just after passing one line and snapped again just before
another with four lines crossed in between). This would be 24.5 feet in 0.5
sec or 49 fps which is just over 33mph. However, even in this worst case
scenario I reckon the disparity between photo and claimed speed would be
enough to get the case thrown out.

 

Two exposures at the correct time interval apart.

 

WC said:

They would be "painted" 5 mph apart because if you were blatting
through at 160mph+ you would cover a shitload more markers in 0.5 (or
0.7) seconds than if going through at 37mph.

 

Yep - you would just cross a lot more of them in the 0.5s between flashes
(somehwere between 23 and 24 if enough are painted on the road)

Tony

 

In uk.rec.motorcycles, Steve Rawlinson amazed us all with this pearl of
wisdom:

Ahhh...

<Penny drops>

Cheers!

 

Camera timer's drifted out of calibration by the looks of it. Well worth
fighting over.

 

IMHO it is always worth arguing the point if you have an angle to play.
I've escaped 3 of them. Don't like clogging up the court system so if
you have a decent case they roll.

'Hog

 

So simplify it to 7 mph and the OP just got the MPH and seconds
(or feet switched.

--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO#003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

 

Wot 'e said. It got my summons withdrawn