Safe Speed Forums

But how do you know you are always dead on 30 mph? Und it does concern me that you do not mention anticipating hazard und driving below this limit.

Und even if you leave on time.. you do not know where a hold up will occur. I was once delayed when poor old lady collapse on crossing. She trip when walking stick hit pothole in this crossing. Und another time when someone's car broke down und created bottleneck.

Und for the reps... they have employers breathing down their necks. To them time ist money..

Of course it's not right.. und we agreed with Mary when she raised this point about unrealistic workloads, expectations und health und safety at work for these "professional" drivers. Incidentally - firm I work for will only hire drivers who have IAM or willing to do further training.

I think they are correct in this.. it show they are commited to the tredny "investing in people" thing - (which too often ist trendy seagull und pigeon manager speak"




It depend. We have a number of signs und thinking time when brain see hazard und tell foot to move to brake pedal ist about 0.5 to 0.7 seconds for the average competent driver.

But we have a lot of different speed limits und what about the case of the 12 year old who died on M61 in Feb 2004? She play "chicken" She hit by three cars. All drivers are seriously traumatised by this. They all hit the brakes hard per the inquest report in the North West papers (und story appeared in Cumbrian press, Lancashire, Bolton und Manchester press - all reporting the same facts)

Ist not then so clear cut in situation like that one - nicht? Und then ist bloke who blame himself when he hit lady on motorway. She jumped to M1 from Stockwell bye-pass. She was the mother of the woman who had accident on the road with the SPECS which killed the granddaughter on whom she doted. He could not stop in time und he thinks she live if he had not hit her. He feel just awful per the story which appeared in a psychiatirst's journal. (Sorry - I think this belong in that other thread


But I point out - not so clear cut. Und not sure if even COAST could help in above cases. I would like to think I saw her dodge traffic on other side of road und stop und apply hazards to warn of danger. I do not know what else could do if faced with this sort of thing. I think I drift off the topic...




We would hope a would get all of the above. A speed cam could not do so .. und I do not seem to see these people all the time.

As for the speed limits - even Alistair Darling admitted a review was needed.

Some of these limits ... I know one road which ist 30 mph. Has field on one side und houses on the other. The houses are well back from the road und even have a lay-by to get to them. Ist A666 somewhere in Manchester. Und nearby the A6 - narrower und terraced houses close to road.. 40 mph. Same field on one side. ...sisters-in-laws' area.



Some of these limits are then questionable... some roads have limit which I feel set too high und others are just ludicrously too low for the type of road. It all need a full audit und I not bothered about 20 mph in seriously hazardous zones - but not like Ambleside wher ethey just create more danger und even sub-marinated Stevibabes give us contact to complain over this. und from a Speed Finder General - I think this say quite a lot.. If he still lurk - we still in locked furball fight with the village idiot over it. We seem to have reached a "looking into" but not heard much since...



I am sure if you are truly honest with yourself - you will find you blip above as much as the danger ping zone. It can be gradual.. per the gradient und polish on the road surface.

That ist the danger.. und we also aware of traps being set within yards of a limit change. This ist very much the issue as it look like revenue raising und nothing else.



20 mph in Ambleside because of a suicidal cycle lane which the cyclist just cannot ride within .. ist ridiculous. Was a lot safer for driver und cyclist alike before.

There are urban duals which were 40/50 mph und now reduced to 30 mph. There are no built up areas or hazards.. thus ist "ridiculously low" - nicht?

No accident recorded there either. Speed cam erected as it pass the 15% get out clause as drivers see dual carriageway .. no hazard und drive at the 40 mph they associated with the road in the past.



There are a few around here... und in Lancashire und in Cheshire....

Yet people flash lights.... even at us



You say that - but you would not be able to sustain this.

You have not driven the mile or so in Ambleside.. we have und ist not that easy to keep it steady there. We are RoSPA/RoADA gold ... we have never seen anyone able to sustain 20 mph here. Everyone tend to drift above ... und unless you fix one eye on the b2 .. you do not achieve 20 mph .. so please do not post such nonsense like this.



You do not know if your manoeuvre cause accident until it happen. You may even think you are legal ... you do not know what ist before you. So please quit the complacency as no one can ever know.

COAST help diffuse a bad situation




Und what if you cause the crash.. still happy if I were to take my video of a silly mistake you make to the police?

What if you do not look in mirror und change lane? You may do this.. It does happen.

What if you are so mithered by the numpty you saw holding the handy that you fail to see the changed light ahead und hit someone?

It does happen

I hope you do read the instructions on any medication you take too. So many do not...

Cease being so complacent und keen to incriminate others.

Und what happen if person notice you film und happens to be local Mr Big Local Most Horrid Criminal. He may fit you with concrete shoes.

Ist best to then to recruit some nice und let them catch the truly bad guys - nicht?

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

Sorry, I should have made it clear - the picture is cropped from an original which mosis has seen before. My point was the degree of zoom required to resolve details such as a driver, against field of view.
Your Chevy number plate is clearly readable until you zoom in and it fills the frame!
Mosis is clearly going to want lots of compression to fit continuous movie onto solid state memory, so I look forward to seeing the images in court!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

I see your point, however, a quantative estimate isn’t valid unless the quality/characteristics of the example photo is representative of the real thing.
I would be more concerned about clearly capturing the VRM. The S172 ( booo hissss ) will sort out who was driving (ok that doesn’t quite work but it will always be used until someone wins a court battle against them).


A 400% interpolating upsample eliminates that little problem


No need to get hung up on solid state memory; hard drives can hold so much more, can write data at a faster rate (more than enough for uncompressed video) and are cheaper. The next generation ‘perpendicular’ hard drives (already on sale) will blow the old ones out of the water.

Why should a crop from this particular 3MP image not be representative of the sort of quality you could expect from the suggested in-car cameras, if they were also taking 3MP images, and where the rear-view camera was mounted in (near enough) the same position and fitted with a lens of (near enough) the same optical properties? If the in-car camera isn't going to have some nifty automated track/zoom facility that constantly tracks faces, VRNs and other items of interest, in order to maximise their size within the captured frame, then the detail captured in the final image may well be no better than this.



Would you want images to be admissible as evidence if they'd been modified to fill in the details through automated guesswork?




I think both Ernest and myself have primarily been responding to all the rather dodgy stuff mosis has been saying, rather than to the more reasoned and technically sound stuff you've been adding to the debate... However, whilst hard drives would certainly solve the storage space problem, they bring with them a new problem of physical space - mosis is suggesting having a bunch of cameras dotted all around the vehicle to cover all angles, but where will all the associated drives go? Some vehicles are already a bit tight on storage space, and presumably the drives would need to be located somewhere that they could easily be removed for downloading (or will we also be fitting each car with a gigabit ethernet port to suck out all of the data?). There's also the question over reliability - would you trust a hard drive to faithfully record high bitrate streaming video whilst being bumped and jostled driving along the average potholed/speedbumped urban road?

_________________
Chris

The image given by Ernest is clearly low quality, primarily due to the Bayer filter (the image is typical of a imager using one) and compression (I don’t know how many times that image has been compressed but it’s been done at least twice). The actual in car recorder may record true RGB per pixel (giving 3 times more detail for a given number of pixels) and may not visibly suffer from compression (believe me, I have some HD.. footage.. which I would swear my PC is rendering in real time, there’s no artifacting at all)


Thanks the to Bayer cheat, that’s how 99.9% of all consumer digital still cameras work anyway, even when recording in tif/bmp format (which wastes storage space, hence the RAW format). I assume you know that ‘upsampling’ is the same process. It’s a form of zooming which smoothes out the jagged edges. The process cannot add or subtract anything from the picture; it can only highlight what is already there.


Thanks


A rack with 4 HDs (assuming one drive per camera which doesn’t necessarily have to be the case) and a processor/mobo wouldn’t take up too much room in a typical boot.

As for uploading the data, one could upload the data (just the highlights) via the internet or swap the drive(s) for an empty at a police station.


Modern hard drives are quite resilient to knocks (I don’t know about resonant vibration). Hard drives will fair better than CD players, the arm (counterweighted) actuator is very strong and fast. Also, thanks to the ‘fluid bearing’ effect of the heads you don’t have to worry about vertical deflection. Isolation platforms will help (I think overclocker clubs use them)

Can you give me an example of anywhere where driving a few mph under the speed limit would be incredibly dangerous? In what possible way?
I am not a dangerous driver, I don't think I am the only person on the road, and I'm happy to resit my driving test tomorrow, and every year of my life. Are you?

A euphemism for 'I am an aggressive speeder who thinks nobody else matters but me.' Am I getting warm?

Then you're a fool. What do you think road planners do for a living? Do you seriously think you know more about every road in the country, than the hundreds (or thousands, I don't know how many there are) of qualified people who know every gradient and dip, every accident that's happened, etc.etc. for the roads whose speed limits they decide?


Do you seriously think I drive at 60mph in such conditions? One drives UP TO the speed limit as long as road conditions allow - in the case you described, it's a simple matter of the distance you can see ahead, dictating your maximum speed. How does that negate anything I've said? I don't remember claiming that you had to drive dead on the stated speed limit no matter what the conditions, only that you shouldn't go ABOVE it. Does going above it make you safer? Or anybody else, more to the point?



Not an argument.
By what definition am I an 'uneducated driver'? Because I don't think you should be allowed to decide whether you obey speed limits or not?

Will you resit your test tomorrow? You'd fail within ten minutes, for speeding. Why do examiners insist you stay within the posted speed limits? Why do the police stop people for speeding?
What sort of people speed? Am I getting through to you yet?
Do you think that nasty, selfish, aggressive people DON'T speed?
Where do you fit in to this description of drivers?

You speed because you are IMPATIENT and ANGRY, and you FEEL BAD when you drive. Don't try to pretend that there are rational, logical reasons for your lawbreaking - you are so pathetic you can't even feel your bad feelings without having to risk other people's lives in your vain attempts to escape them.

Just give it a few more years, and video of you will be turning up at your local nick, and the boys in blue will be round to have a word with you...
"It's about your driving, sir. We've had seven complaints this week from members of the public who've witnessed you driving dangerously, and we'd like to show you the footage they all took of you. Have you anything to say in your defence?"

"Yes officer - I'm a really important person and I feel 'trapped' when I can't drive really, really fast, so rather than finding out what's wrong with me and fixing the problem, I choose to risk other people's lives, rather than face myself."

Grow up.

I was suggesting using car cams voluntarily, and sending the video by e-mail to the police. I don't agree with your stance on speeding. On motorways, for example, 50mph limits are put up because workmen are only three or four feet away from passing traffic, and many are killed every year by cars that inadvertently crash through bollards, etc. All of these limits are put there for a reason - you may not see any workmen out while you pass through a certain section in the space of three minutes, but you can't expect them to change the speeds back to 70 every time they have a dinner break, etc. Is it really that hard for you to stay within the limit? Why? If there are cameras pointing at you, don't you find it easy?

I just checked back - mosis was not advocating hard drives, he was thinking of solid state as per pen drive or smart media.
I would look for a low cost system, which dumps the last 15 - 30 mns of video to a drive , then overwrites it unless archived by loss of electrics, or impact sensor/driver button.
However, given the difficulty in getting an image accepted in court, then I would see this as a personal tool only, with little legal standing, other than to corroborate the drivers story in the absence of anything else.

I have reported bad driving by (roadside) phone, and seen it go to court, so I dont have a problem with that, yet mosis thought this improbable in his posts.

I take lots of pictures - not for use in court, but to study the detail you might have missed along the way. I guess if mosis played back his video here, we would be commenting on his driving too!
I'm waiting to see if he answers my safe speed / legal speed question!!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Of course, but that doesn’t matter. Your car would stand a good chance of being vandalised if someone sees speed measuring equipment within it (I’ll make sure of it )



The M275 is a class example 70 to 60/50 – no road works, no bollards, nothing; it’s been like that for ~6 months (the order went in before the spate of accidents, one accident even occurred after the reduction)

This has been done to death; that’s not for this thread.

Better than typical webcam, better than ANY webcam I've seen that's under £50, bear in mind this one only cost me £12 from China, including postage. It is NOT that much of a step up to broadcast quality - mine is more than good enough to recognise, for example, somebody's face, at 10 feet. I haven't tried it any further than that because my room isn't any longer!
Do you not agree that year upon year camera technology goes up in resolution and quality, and comes down in price, as it's computer technology?

It's a Dimage Z20. Can you show me example of the 'noise' you seem to think is going to be such a problem? In what way? The output would be infinitely better and more useful in securing a conviction than the low-res CCTV footage we've all seen hundreds of times on TV.

Yes, and conveniently 1.3m pixels is good enough, 5m pixels is overkill, but still more than small enough to fit in a car.


The colour reproduction and contrast would have to be dramatically worse to stop you from using it as a carcam, would they not? And as for the 'blurred' images - I haven't experienced anything like this with my Z20! What are you talking about? Why are you clutching at straws?

The RC vehicle mounted cameras obviously have to be as small and light as possible - in a car I can have a camera as big as a mini DV camcorder and it would still be doable - obviously the cameras I am talking about would only need the lens, not the camcorder part. What resolution and quality would you deem acceptable, because I'm sure it's already available right now for under a few hundred pounds.


But you CAN. You have footage of them screwing up. And OTHER people will also catch them, because I'm after habitual bad drivers, not somebody who makes a mistake. I'm after people who drive dangerously ALL the time - and by the law of averages, they are more likely to p*** off more people, and get videod by more people, than a driver who makes one genuine mistake every so often.


I never thought of that. How many people do you think that covers? Do you think people who change their number plates to avoid the congestion charge should be allowed to get away with it, and continue to drive with false number plates?

I already explained why it's all about Moore's law, and the rise and rise of computing power, and the increase of storage capacity for a given price. Of course it will be a compressed format! Why is that a problem? Haven't you watched a DIVX video of a film, in 600Mb, that's as clear as the DVD version, in 7,000 Mb? I have.


That's because they don't HAVE to resolve that resolution, they are being used as webcams. But when it comes to carcams, the CUSTOMER will demand a product that can resolve whatever detail they feel they need to secure a conviction. You're making this out to be some sort of big problem, when it isn't at all. I only quoted 1.3m pixels because up until now, having tried five or six different webcams that were 0.5m pixels, none of them gave a remotely good picture (I use mine for monitoring my house while I'm out, so I can access it from the internet wherever I am). The new 1.3m pixel webcam I got for £12 produced a stupendously good picture. Next year, it will be an even better picture - the price of the CCD will have gone down, so they can spend that little bit extra on a better lens. It's already more than good enough to secure a conviction, and if you speeders think it isn't, then what are you all so worried about?

To a point. But note how we seem to have reached a bit of a plateau (or at least a marked reduction in the slope gradient) as far as resolution goes - which corresponds with the physical limitations on small sensor designs.




There are several camera review sites which do pretty thorough testing, including noise results. A quick Google search should provide you with plenty of examples. Note that most if not all cameras attempt to reduce noise levels via onboard processing, sometimes to quite a significant level - you'd need to consult an expert in photographic evidence to see how much processing would be allowed before an image was deemed inadmissable, and what impact that would have on the amount of noise remaining in the footage from your in-car system. Also remember that as the level of illumination goes down, the effect of sensor noise goes up.




You probably have, but the amount of blurring is so low as to not be obvious unless you had some way of comparing it against the same image shot with the same sensor using a lens that was perfectly matched to the sensor. Again, some of the review sites include tests for this, which should illustrate the issue more clearly than I can do in words. Alternatively, Google for resolving power.




Again, I'm not. I'm highlighting all the various issues that are present in camera systems, which you seem to conveniently ignore. Taken individually then they might not seem like a big deal, but taken collectively they do represent something of a challenge to be overcome before your idea could ever be implemented.

In any case, this was all in response to your implying that there's no difference in quality between consumer grade camcorders and pro-grade stuff when shooting SDTV resolution footage - the "your TV can't display the extra data" comment.




Ah, but now you're moving the goalposts. When you started this thread you specifically stated "Such a camera would record for several hours, and the lens would be the size of a thumnail, and would also contain the memory, and a USB port." which suggests a somewhat smaller camera than the average MiniDV camcorder, even allowing for just the optical assembly being mounted within the cabin space.




Since I'm not privy to the internal figures of the CC scheme, I wouldn't want to make any sort of guess as to the number of cloned plates in use. Given the number of times cloning has been mentioned in the media since the introduction of the CC scheme however (as compared to the number of times it was mentioned since the introduction of speed cameras), it would appear to be a bit more than a non-issue. And with plans well under way to extend the zone AND raise the daily fee, I don't see cloning becoming any less attractive.

Should they be allowed to get away with it? Yes and no. I'm opposed to the CC idea on the grounds that the majority of people who drive through central London seem to be doing so because they NEED to take their own vehicle there, making the public transport option a non-alternative. London has an excellent PT system, and the sheer volume of regular users shows there's no real need to encourage more people onto PT through artificially loading the costs of private motoring. The congestion is there because of the number of vehicles that NEED to enter the central area (oh, and because of the meddling with traffic light phasing, removal of bus lay-bys, increase in the amount of road space given over to bus lanes, widened pavements, islands etc.), so effectively it's simply an additional taxation on people living/working in the area. In that respect then, I'm all in favour of people getting one over on the system.

On the other hand, I do recognise the serious problems that can arise from a vehicle displaying a false plate - at the low end of the scale you've got the obvious problems of innocent people being hit with demands for payment for charges they didn't incur in the first place, and at the other end of the scale you've got the potential for a cloned vehicle to be involved in a fatal incident with no way of tracing the actual driver. So in that respect I'm all in favour of cloned plate users getting their arses kicked.


Personally I'd like to see valid registrations on all vehicles, AND an end to the various camera-based schemes which have encouraged more average people to see the use of cloned plates as acceptable behaviour. We'll never stop their use entirely amongst the truly lawless who want to remain undetectable at all costs, but there's something well and truly wrong with the system when we're encouraging generally decent people to even consider cloning, let alone having them actually do it.




You'd have to ask a lawyer for a definitive answer. According to the FBI (http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/jan2003/swgitdigital.htm) though, "Be aware that the end use of any image may change over time, and the use of compression may become problematic. Images intended for laboratory analysis should not be compressed using a lossy process.". So lossy schemes might be a no-no, in which case do you know of any lossless video compression schemes that offer a useful level of filesize reduction?




All that proves is that it's possible to recompress already compressed footage using a more efficient compression scheme, without there being any further perceptible loss in detail. What it doesn't show is how much detail was lost in the first place...

_________________
Chris

Mosis, I realise you have missed a few posts. I left a question for you back here, and wondered if you could address it?

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

@Mosis: I also left a question for you up-thread:


You claim that video evidence alone is sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt whether a crime has taken place. So, would you care to answer my question?

_________________
Will

We regularly have driving assessed as RoSPA Goldy standards

But ist complacent of you to say this.. how do you know there are no serious bad habits. You have only your own perception of your driving - und no one else's from the content of your posts. You do not know how others perceive you on the road und if you are being tailgated as often as you say - then perhaps you had better see the IAM und do something about observation und defensive to diffuse und remove the dangers to yourself und others sharing road with you



Have already suggested where some can be set too low.




Personal attacks on people who challenge you point of view are a You cannot say the bloke ist like that as you do not "know" him.




We vary the speeds - but 65mph und no overtakes could fail you on German L-test - you have to demonstrate you are capable of the manoeuvre.

Likewise on the IAM .. you have to demonstrate that you can perform an overtake safely und legally

Even on UK basic L-test - you can fail for not driving to conditions und to speed limit. You can fail for driving below und you ncan also be prosecuted under s3 RTA for inconsiderate driving if youdeliberately drive too slowly as we as too quickly

(That was confirmed to the Vine prog by Cambs police on discussion over tractor drivers )







You really do not know as much as you think you do Liebchen.

Road planners do not decide the speed limits.. ist the County Council - und councillors und they tend to go along with pee-cee policies depending on overrrall political control




Given what I do for a living - I would be most concerned if someone was tailing me und observing me like this. I research medicines.. say no more - there are some right saddos around.



As siad y= you can fail for not driving up to limit of road.. for diving well below it und you can also be done for inconsiderate driving if you hold up traffic deleiberately - not per IG alone - but per Cams police on BBC Radio TWO!

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien!

You really need to get a semi up to date television, or get back to the opticians
While DivX is good, it doesn't even come close to DVD quality and it is quite possible to see artifacts appearing on a decent 5 year old television set when watching a movie that has been compressed in DivX (by decent, I'm not talking your £150 Goodmans shite).


I can, the road outside my youngest sons school.
Barely wide enough to get one car down, yet it is a 30 zone.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

Yes, as I've already said. I know a few 60mph limits where 30mph would be too fast. And many 30mph limits where 20mph should be the absolute max



I'd resit my test any day.



No you're not. And I'd like to know how you drew that conclusion from someone who said they're happy doing 65mph in L1 of a motorway. You really do like to fabricate as many insults as possible don't you?



But that's the problem, a lot are set unrealistically low (and even the govt admitted as much last year). Because of this, when they are correctly set, a lot of inexperienced drivers esp have no respect for them.



Now you're contradicting yourself - you asked for examples of where driving a few mph below the limit would be incredibly dangerous. And besides I don't know if you would or wouldn't - you're that obsessed with speed limits as the be-all and end-all of safety.



Yet more wild accusations - I do not ever tailgate as it's one of the most dangerous things to do on the road. On what basis have you drawn that
conclusion?

So Mosis, you happily stick to any law? Do you fully agree with every single law then, no matter how stupid?



Judging by your need to resort to yet more accusations and name-calling it would appear that you're just uneducated in general. You've made general assumptions about my personality and character which are offensive and unnecessary (I don't believe I am the first person on here that you've done that to either). I am more than happy to debate our differing Points of View but your style of arguing is very aggressive, (isn't that what you accuse me of?).

I'll finish off by saying I do not want to speed. Most of the time in fact I don't. But on occasions a few mph above the limit is more than safe in an unrealistically set limit. And no, the police won't be round as they've been removed from the road in favour of automated speed enforcement. I want more Trafpol on the road, as do most members here.

_________________
Why can't we just use Common Sense?

There are loads of those round here. A lot of the crappest roads on the Island are NSLs while some of the good ones are 30s or 40s.

Maybe some of us could video ourselves at 90mph on the M6 and send it to Mosis to show that it is possible to drive faster than the law allows and not put anyone's "lives on the line" as he put it.

Mosis, you simply sound like someone who doesn't like anyone following you closely waiting to overtake. You like being overtaken even less.

If you had your way EVERYONE would be in prison and you'd be the only working tax payer left paying their keep.

Look at the bigger picture and you might eventually realise that there are better solutions to the world's problems than arresting everyone and jailing them.

If you seriously think the current driving test is a good measure of competance on the roads, then you're every bit as mistaken as you look. Anyone who ranks performing a 3 point turn without touching the kerb above joining a motorway without making a mess of everyone else's course and speed is an idiot.

_________________

If you go to the police that frequently then the chances are you'll either just be ignored as a 'nutter' or done for wasting police time.

_________________
Science won over religion when they started installing lightning rods on churches.

Are you serious? How about at impact with a pedestrian? At 28mph their chance of survival is around 40%.

Make no mistake - any speed at all can be deadly if it is not appropriate for the immediate conditions. That's why we think appropriate speed is far more important to safety than mere speed limit compliance.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety