Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Photo Radar
1788 messages, Last post on Nov 14, 2009 at 3:43 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: steve_ (May 11, 2009 9:08 am) Okay here is what they have: ASLD - automatic speed limiting device - like cruise control except the inverse, you activate it and your can can't go any faster than the set speed. This gets a safety point in EU scoring. Speed sign recognition - camera sees speed limit sign and can either automatically or with driver intervention set the ASLD to that speed. Adaptive Cruise Control w/automatic braking - car speeds up and slows down with traffic on the freeway...if speeds get below a certain speed, it drops out and the driver has to take over. ACC w/stop and go - has the ability to stop and start again, based on some criteria that varies between automakers. This won't work for things like stop signs because the system can't "see" if there are other cars waiting for their turn. There are also systems like Volvo's "City Safety" that will brake for you if it thinks you are not paying attention and are at risk for a frontal collision. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (May 11, 2009 9:48 am) Riiiiight. At best, it was a band-aid for poorly designed traffic flow in an urban area. At worst, some neighbor complained to the point they installed a stop sign. There is a stop sign where I grew up that is at the base of someone's driveway. We made it a point in high school to either skid to a stop there or side step the clutch there in an mode of transportation when encountering that stop sign. In Michigan, I can think of several places where there are endless stop signs for no reason. Its because they are cheap and compensate for lack of planning. Things like "traffic calming devices" and "perceptual countermeasures" work much better while not waisting fuel, time or money. The other thing that drives me nuts, as long as I am on a rant. and its tied to red-light cameras a little, is lights that are not timed. You can't just stick traffic lights in willie-nillie. Idiots. Take a class in urban planning. Counties in Michigan should be sued for how much fuel they make their constituents waist every year at lights that should be timed better, or not there in the first place.
|
|
|
Replying to: lilengineerboy (May 11, 2009 6:31 pm) Don't know situation in Mich. But, I have seen in various suburbs around Chicago over the years that the "people" bring it on themselves. This is in residential areas, not commercial. When efforts to "educate" drivers to slow down and not exceed posted 25 or 30 fail, the "residents" along the affected streets petition their govt and get stop signs at every intersection to slow down the speeders. If drivers cannot regulate their behaviour and their vehicle to posted 25 or 30, then traffic "control" devices such as stop signs are implemented. Govt is responding to the safety needs of the residents living along these affected streets to control irresponsible actions of some drivers. |
|
|
Replying to: fintail (May 11, 2009 10:31 am) Don't see it that way. Again, maybe it is an upper left coast thing and competence varies region by region. Actually, from what I have experienced, observed, I would say that the local and county highway/road authorities in my area have shown incredibly more competence than the fools currently in control in DC.
|
|
|
Replying to: xrunner2 (May 12, 2009 5:17 am) Unfortunately, the traffic engineers just don't have enough money to do everything and get all the signals coordinated like that one. They do have cameras on something like 80 or 120 major intersections and they can override the signals remotely if they see traffic flow problems or bottlenecks in an area. Politicians may be idiots, but the bureaucrats keep things running pretty smoothly when the pols keep out of their way. And I think that photo radar isn't something that a traffic engineer decides to implement to calm traffic, but something driven more by revenue. |
|
|
I would say that 80 to 90 percent of stop signs would be better served if changed to either nothing or a Yield sign. A majority of stop signs are incorrectly used where it should be a Yield Sign. When I used to live in Sacramento, CA, they implemented a lot of neighborhood 3 way stop signs I'm sure in an effort to appease blue hairs that own Buicks. As a Teenager, I made a point of disobeying those "NEW" stop signs that were utterly useless except for wasting gas, by simply ignoring them. I didn't even yield, I just ran them at full speed and ignored them. Also, my average speed may have been about 40 before the stop signs (speed limit was 30 or 35 I forget), but after the stop signs, I averaged 50 MPH on that road. So the signs don't work, and have the opposite effect of what was inteneded by the OLD FOLK. I"m a perfect example. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (May 11, 2009 10:39 am) Traffic Court makes a mockery of the justice system, and since most people's only experience with court is from Traffic Infractions (hopefully they are law abiding in other areas), it is there only exposure to the justice system, and it breeds nothing but contempt, disrespect, and a disbelief in law enforcement and the justice system. If you think the OJ trial made the justice system look bad, you are out of touch. Go to traffic court some day and watch the trials; it is a complete joke, and makes a mockery of our constitution. I for one, have no respect for law enforcement officers, and it is due to the very reasons described above. Why just recently, a Santee Sheriff decided to issue me a ticket for not seeing an obscure and unsubstantiated "no u turn symbol sign" at a left turn lane on a divided 6 lane road (3 lanes each way) Why the NO U TURN sign is there I have no idea. I'm upset it was not posted in a very visible spot and can be easily missed. I'm upset 2 motorcycle sheriff's officer's were lying in wait in the parking lot for people to miss that "hard to see" no u turn sign. I'm upset he issued me a ticket for a non-safety related manuever. I demanded the County Seat as my place to appear in court which is the LAW and has a vehicle code requiring the officer provide the County Seat if requested by the citizen. It has been upheld as an ABSOLUTE right by the CA appeals court and is case law/precedent. The officer proceeded to BREAK The law and the VC and deny my request. I noted on the ticket that "Officer REFUSED County Seat Requested" and signed the ticket. The officer became irate and said I defaced the ticket and was impeding his investigation because he might have to write another ticket. He opened my driver side door without my consent and performed an illegal visual search in doing so. He then said , you know what? and walked around my vehicle. Keep in mind I had already signed the ticket, but when he came back a couple minutes lateer, he said I had 2 more violations, one for bald tires with too little tread depth (this was recently so it's almost summer in an area where it almost NEVER rains ie. not a safety issue) and that my radar detector is not allowed in the center of my windshield. He handed me back the citation with now 2 offenses, (he only added the bald tire VC violation) for which I obviously never signed to appear in court. So he committed prosecutorial misconduct, in committing charge STACKING, obviously in retaliation for my exercising and assertion of MY RIGHTS, which now makes this a CIVIL RIGHTS violation on the officer's part, and all this over a SIGN violation ticket? Do you know he actually threatened to take me into jail for defacing the ticket that I did sign (mind you), and threatened I'd be stuck for 3 days in jail before the "too busy" magistrate would see me. I find this to be PAR for the course for most traffic officers out there. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (May 01, 2009 9:50 am) Do you think the "it was just a mistake" defense will hold up in court? Everytime I'm speeding above the speed limit, it was JUST A MISTAKE Officer. I'd love to see that one work. I was mistakenly driving above the underposted speed limit judge! |
|
|
How can this technology be trusted? Of course shills will not have a problem with this technology, but ALL sane individuals should be concerned about the use of technology that CANNOT be made to work reliably, as shown time and again. from: http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/2405820/Cameras-record-incorrect-speed- - s Cameras record incorrect speeds By TIM DONOGHUE - The Dominion Post Last updated 05:00 13/05/2009 Police have been forced to waive speeding tickets losing thousands of dollars in revenue because their new digital speed cameras are clocking motorists at twice their actual speeds. A police spokesman has confirmed the new mobile cameras, which were introduced nationally in January at a cost of $4 million, were wrongly clocking the speeds of larger vehicles. Some tickets were issued for twice the vehicles' true speeds. As a result, police have stopped processing infringement notices for high-sided trucks and buses in effect giving those vehicles temporary immunity from speed camera fines. They have waived at least 133 tickets after complaints, including 10 proven cases of inaccurate readings. Acting national manager of road policing Inspector Peter McKay dismissed suggestions that tickets for normal-sized cars were also being waived, but admitted staff were scrutinising all photos and readings, particularly from large-sided vehicles. "If there appears to be any anomalies, we will not process any infringements," he said. "To ensure no one is disadvantaged, no photos of large flat-sided vehicles typically buses and trucks are being processed at the moment." Lawyer Tony Ellis said police would need to be certain on technical grounds that the Australian-supplied cameras were correctly measuring speeds, otherwise they would "leave themselves open to a challenge by some enterprising motorist or lawyer. They could bring a challenge on the basis that the cameras are incorrectly calibrated". He also questioned the police definition of a large vehicle. "What about a van which is between a large vehicle and a car? There does seem room for querying what is going on." The problems emerged soon after the 43 digital cameras were introduced nationwide in January. National road policing manager Paula Rose said last December that she expected the new cameras to result in more tickets, and motorists would receive their infringement notices more quickly. About $36m was collected in speeding fines last year. Mr McKay refused to say how much was being lost through the waivers. The radar beams from the cameras have been deflected from the sides of large vehicles to nearby metal objects and back doubling the recorded speed. "It appears initially the cameras were set incorrectly and this has resulted in some incorrect [high] readings," Mr McKay said. "We are talking about introducing a fairly sophisticated piece of equipment ... it is reasonable to expect some teething issues." Mr McKay could not say when the problems would be resolved. There were 536,995 speed camera tickets issued in the 15 months to April 15 more than 25,000 fewer than during the period from January 1, 2007, to April 15 last year. Road Transport Forum chief executive officer Tony Friedlander was unaware of the speed camera problems. Bus and Coach Association chief executive Raewyn Bleakley advised her members to be careful if disciplining drivers who had received speeding tickets in recent months because of the uncertainty. Automobile Association spokesman Simon Lambourne said it was imperative that the problem be sorted out quickly. "If people are speeding, they should be caught." CLOCKING UP * $36 million was collected by police and the Justice Department in speeding fines last year. * The 43 new digital cameras, mounted on the roadside in modified people-mover vehicles, were introduced in January, replacing 31 old mobile, wet film cameras. * The decision to expand the speed camera programme was part of an attempt to lower the road toll to less than 300 by 2010. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: andres3 (May 12, 2009 9:36 am) |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Photo Radar
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
