New $peed Camera$ are hidden - Which GPS keeps up to date?

Look$ like the tax collector$ are addicted.
First with zero tolerance, now with no recognition of observant riders/drivers . . .
Here are photos of the new hidden systems:

http://www.ceos.com.au/products/tirtl-content.htm

and a thread discussing them:

http://www.aussiev8.com.au/members-lounge/21317-new-disguised-speed-cameras.html

It might be smart to get one of those new fangled GPS gadgets.
I have had a try with them before (Garmin and Pocket PC varieties) but they annoyed me as if they are half baked and as if their designers must never have actually used one - let alone observed a customer trying to use one unaided . . .

Now, not so much worried that they may not be perfect, but perfectly pissed off that they never get fixed via free updates even though they can be connected to a PC and hence the Internet.

But now some years have passed . Have they improved in these regards?

A glass or two of red and an hour on Google soon shows that Garmin are probably the leaders with their Zumo 550 (soon to be replaced by the 660 in UK and USA by the way) but they look very expensive for an oldish unit.

Or perhaps a Pocket PC with OziExplorer
http://www.oziexplorer3.com/ozice/oziexplorerce1.html
(allows us to use our own choice of maps; and many more types to suit country roads and tracks).
[Then add a software set for auto street routing in towns and cities].
..
But it soon gets busy with thoughts of headset connection, phone/cb integration (where the Garmin Zumo apparently does OK?).
..
But me thinks auto updating is a good sign of a where I would want to support an enterprise. Especially as it seems like the tax collectors are on the increase everywhere, and Governments seem addicted to the revenue that they stealthily collect from those of us that let the speedo creep above the limit a tad occasionally because we actually prefer to look out for the kids, roos, doors, and cars instead of staring at the instruments.
..
Is this an appropriate place to discuss such gadgets or has it all been done well elsewhere?
Anyone got a setup that they are really happy with?

Kind regards,

Jim Kelly
Melbourne

 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 21 May 2009 17:13:27 +1000

I don't buy this "have to concentrate really hard on the speedo"
bullshit. If you can't control the bike then get off the bloody
thing!

If you can't manage to include a speedo in your awareness then you
are not fit to hold a licence because that's the minimum standard
required of a learner.

If you are so incapable of observation that you can't check the speedo
with the same frequency you check mirrors, and so poor at bike control
you can't keep at the speed limit if you start at 5km/h below it
then throw out the cornflake packet you got your licence from.

(and if starting at 5kmh below it is too much for your ego then get
over yourself.)

There are many many reasons why draconian speed limit enforcement is a
stupid road safety strategy. Twonks whining that they haven't got the
skills expected of a learner are not amongst them.

(And don't give me that bit about the bike's too powerful either. If
you can't control it in the situation you are riding it in then get
rid of it and get something you can control. )

Zebee

 

Didn't work, sorry (I mostly agree with - but not with your manners).
Got anything useful to add?

Jim



In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 21 May 2009 17:13:27 +1000

I don't buy this "have to concentrate really hard on the speedo"
bullshit. If you can't control the bike then get off the bloody
thing!

If you can't manage to include a speedo in your awareness then you
are not fit to hold a licence because that's the minimum standard
required of a learner.

If you are so incapable of observation that you can't check the speedo
with the same frequency you check mirrors, and so poor at bike control
you can't keep at the speed limit if you start at 5km/h below it
then throw out the cornflake packet you got your licence from.

(and if starting at 5kmh below it is too much for your ego then get
over yourself.)

There are many many reasons why draconian speed limit enforcement is a
stupid road safety strategy. Twonks whining that they haven't got the
skills expected of a learner are not amongst them.

(And don't give me that bit about the bike's too powerful either. If
you can't control it in the situation you are riding it in then get
rid of it and get something you can control. )

Zebee

 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 21 May 2009 18:22:17 +1000

I dunno there's anything I can say you'd consider useful as you want
"Fix it for me" or "Yes you are right and it is dreadful they expect
me to travel at a speed a bit more slowly than I am used to".

As all state level road safety bureaucrats are fixated on speed
cameras because they are cheap and pay for themselves and don't go on
strike or take sick leave or have unions, the chances of anyone
stopping this sort of thing on road safety grounds are nil.

Chances of stopping them on "but but it's too hard, you can't expect me to
manage" grounds are lower than nil really.

So no idea what you think would be a "useful" addition.

Zebee

 

Incitement to use old tyres as a medium of civil recent might be an idea
( they burn so well)

 

I was hoping that some of us have found a GPS gadget that they found useful for navigating . . .

Particularly with respect to ease of use with gloves, water/dust proof, and containing reliable maps beyond the cities.

And, automatically keep themselves up to date as errors are corrected/roads added, etc. This should not be a problem as a trip first planned on a computer requires the gadget to be connected (effectively) to the Internet whilst the route is transferred to the portable GPS.

A side benefit could be a timely warning of a particularly dangerous bit of road ahead - watch your pocket - errr speed. Unlike me, Zebee, you clearly have not been fined for driving below the speed limit as many Victorians have - soon after the tunnel was so equipped.

Jim

..


In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 21 May 2009 18:22:17 +1000

I dunno there's anything I can say you'd consider useful as you want
"Fix it for me" or "Yes you are right and it is dreadful they expect
me to travel at a speed a bit more slowly than I am used to".

As all state level road safety bureaucrats are fixated on speed
cameras because they are cheap and pay for themselves and don't go on
strike or take sick leave or have unions, the chances of anyone
stopping this sort of thing on road safety grounds are nil.

Chances of stopping them on "but but it's too hard, you can't expect me to
manage" grounds are lower than nil really.

So no idea what you think would be a "useful" addition.

Zebee

 

Bollox. Cite the cases of people being fined for driving under the
speed limit please.

I've heard that said so many times, but usually from ignorable gun
toting libertarian Americans.

 

Gee if only I'd read down the page a little...

 

In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 21 May 2009 19:22:24 +1000

As Theo will no doubt say, there are rules in WA about minimum speeds
on roads with high speed limits.

Most states do have an obstructing traffic offence, but I'd want to
see evidence that anyone has been done for that where the speed
differential is less than say doing 30 in a 70 zone.

Zebee

 

Agree - though my self got done in the car last week ..

By a posted camera at a red light that I knew was there -

Allegedly doing 92 in 80 zone

It so happens it is a road I travel rarely and I KNOW I was on cruise
control at 85 (the GPS tells me that is actually about 82) at the time...

But Can I really be bothered fighting this?

The maths is not in my favour. $110 vs who knows how much and how long in
the highly unlikely case I happen to win?

P
Seriously pissed off.

 

And the last RTA documentation I had read explicitly stated that it
wasn't considered obstructing traffic if the vehicle "obstructing" was
not capable of going faster, or the conditions were such that it
wasn't safe to go faster or that the difference was sufficiently
small.

Heck, I only just realised a few days ago that my speeds reads 10km/h
over at 90km/h (honest, gov!). I had been wondering why people had
been overtaking me so rapidly. Doubly so when I was still on my Ls,
doing what I thought was 80km/h (probably more like 73km/h if the
error scales linearly), in a 110km/h zone (remind me again how L
restrictions are meant to make you safer when there's a 37km/h speed
differential between my legal speed and those of other road users?).

--
TimC
VBScript is designed to be a secure programming environment. It
lacks various commands that can be potentially damaging if used in
a malicious manner. This added security is critical in enterprise
solutions. -- support.microsoft.com

 

In aus.motorcycles on Fri, 22 May 2009 00:14:39 +1000

Another example of speed being wrongly handled as a safety issue....

The idea, I presume, is to keep learners at speeds where their
reflexes and abilities won't be too badly taxed if there's a problem.

Problem comes when you can't avoid the higher speed roads, meaning
freeways between places (especially as these days cars are funnelled
towards them) and rural areas.

I dunno there would be enough crashes at L level caused by learner
inability to handle the speed, might be more at P level but then
those who push it at that level n circumstances likely to lead to
problems are probably not put off by the law figuring they won't
get caught...

Zebee

 

Gee if only I'd read down the page a little...
<<<

Guess I'll choose my subject more carefully next time!!

Thanks,

Jim

 

Its a traffic counter, not a speed camera. Unwarrranted
scaremongering.

Nev..

 

The differential being 20km/h on freeways only in WA.

The WA Gov't in it's budget last week assigned $29 million to
additional Speed and Red Light cameras. Unlike Vic and NSW, WA has no
fixed speed cameras. They are all portable and rarely stay in one
place for more than a couple of hours, so no GPS is ever going to tell
you where they are. Because they require an operator they rarely
operate between midnight and dawn.

Theo

 

Its a traffic counter, not a speed camera. Unwarrranted
scaremongering.

Nev..


From the above link:
TIRTL has numerous applications, some of which are as follows:

a.. Advanced traffic detection including vehicle counting, classification and speed measurement
b.. Speed and red-light enforcement (connected to a camera)
c.. Point-to-Point speed and travel time enforcement
d.. . . . ..
The towers in the photo contain a camera for each lane allegedly . . . but they hardly warrant being called 'hidden', but certainly the curbside stuff is.

Jim

 

My point exactly. So WTF did you title this post "new $peed camera$
are hidden" and then contradict yourself?

Nev..

 

My point exactly. So WTF did you title this post "new $peed camera$
are hidden" and then contradict yourself?
Nev..
<<<<

.. . . you didn't read the part of my post that you chose to snip . . .

The brochure clearly talks about speed enforcement and only talks about the hidden curbside gadgets.

Jim