Safe Speed Forums

Saw this article and wondered if anyone has come across it?

http://driving.timesonline.co.uk/articl ... 26,00.html

www.flashtec.co.uk

There was someone hawking that or similar at one of the car shows I went to recently. Sneaky devil had a polarising filter or something on the camera lense to make the reg disappear as he did a demo with a camera. Someone else took a shot with their camera and the reg was perfectly clear. Gatso flash is far brighter so I'd want to see actual shots from actual gatsos. I think one of the other anti camera sites tested some of these products and found they didn't work.

It's all snake oil at best and perverting the course of justice at worst. The fixed cameras are the easiest ones to avoid so if you get caught by one of those you probably need to visit an optician

Did you see the before/after pictures on the flashtec page? Jeez, how over exposed is the one on the right? Must have been some fun blowing the highlights until the plate couldn't be read, now if only they can persuade the scamera folks to badly over expose all their photos as well. Or maybe a bit of excess spray ended up around the number plate as well as on it... oh, and some on the bumper... and the tailgate, and the C pillars, the rear screen, the roof, the ground, tyres, lights, background greenery...

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

have we had the sprayonmud link yet?

http://www.sprayonmud.com

with the suspicious wording in the FAQ:

Seeing as they're non-endorseable, is it planned by the organiser of the next M4 protest that we all remove / cover our number plates?*











* For the thought-police and other members of the Stazi: I am asking not advocating

Although not having a readable number plate is not endorsable, deliberatly removing it so as not to be identified may be. I am not an expert but I bet there is a law somewhere that they can use. I can just see the pratnerships getting the books out looking for a ancient law now. After all S172 was never designed for camera enforcement, they still use it though.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

They'd probably call it "perverting the course of justice", just like they say about some of these radar jammers, etc....

But I don't think you can pervert the course of just ice if you're not out to break some other law in the process.

Where would they send all the £££££ SIXTY QUID £££££ demands?

A Market Stall Holder was Booted Off His Pitch For Selling The Anti Speed Spray

mega link

I've seen a picture taken from a Gatso on one site showing how it "really works"... Makes you wonder though, if it covered the numberplate how did they get the picture back?!


(In case it disappears, this picture says "The new PhotoBlockerTM spray now defeats Infrared and Laser Cameras")

Ok, so now it reflects all light from a flash back to the camera but can tell the difference between that and laser light which it scatters... wow!

I have been wondering, is there an "easy" way to scatter laser light? ie. something you could cover the car with to scatter or absorb the laser light rather than reflecting it straight back at the sender?

--

Andrew.

Cd coasters?

Yes... I have plenty of those around!
I was thinking of mirrors as they bounce most of the light away quite well (with my visible red laser anyway), slightly better than a CD but a CD is better than the car's paint!
I was wondering if there is anything which could scatter light in the infrared range (which I believe is where the lasers used are) but let all other light pass through. Maybe there's some photographic filters which do this...

And is there anything legally wrong with sticking CDs to the front of your car?

I guess it would increase the chances of bouncing the beam off a road sign and doubling the speed displayed though

--

Andrew.

Not so sure about bouncing the laser away. I mean, if you bounce it back the way it came they'll get a speed reading won't they? Something that blocks/absorbs it on the other hand... some photographic filters maybe, off the top of my head a strong green should be the place to start. But wouldn't covering your car in green glass break Construction & Use regs?

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

Isn't this stealth technology we are talking about? The important thing is not to send any of the signal back to the device sending it, so two things need to be done..

Absorbtion - the more that is absorbed, the less that is reflected

Reflection Management - shape should ensure reflection is to anywhere but where it came from.

Most cars are actually quite good at reflection management, so numberplate is target for laser because for high visibility it has beads in reflective layer that act like mini cats eyes. Where this is not direct we have the problem of reflections that cause the machines to get it wrong.

There are two seperate issues here, and the important distinction is do we a) want to stop the measurement in the first place, or b) who cares what they measure as long as the photo doesn't work.

Given a thick enough layer, the number plate is obscured for everybody which is illegal, but I have seen it done with a delicate spraying of 3 or 4 bikes on the back which did the job fine!

Yes - the numberplate and the headlights are the main reflection sources. Perhaps we could cover them with an IR filter that was fairly transparent to visible light? Sounds possible - there are some very narrow 'band pass' (i.e. colour selection) filters available. Even if we can't stop the reflections with this method, we can sure reduce the sensitivity a bit.

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

My Digital SLR has a very effective IR filter on it in front of the sensor, because it is apparently useless for taking IR photos.

I'd go for stopping the measurement. Okay, say we can fit something to the car that stops the laser working properly. Let's say further that it doesn't make the car look ugly/stupid . Problem is that it's highly unlikely to work on radar as well, and maybe not even all types of laser. That means getting something else fitted to deal with that, and even then it'll only be a matter of time before Gadget X becomes available. So banjaxing the photo might be a better bet, especially if a convincing looking Tony Blair, Joh Prescott or Alaister Darling mask became available - imagine if every NIP got sent back with Tony Blair named as the driver... and the photo didn't really show otherwise. ( Hey, I think I've just spotted a market - mwahahahahahaha )

Seriously, I think the ideal solution is to live with the lasers and radars but in the knowledge that their use will be reasonable. I don't mind them doing laser measurements on my car, or any other method they come up with. And I don't mind being fined if a copper stopped me having measured my speed and showed me exactly how and why I was behaving dangerously. I just object to the pointless exercise of enforcing by the numbers regardless of danger, however it's carried out.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

I think what you need is the countermeasures systems used by the military.

You know some thing that automatically fires a radar seeking missile at radar targeted on the vehicle. And flash bangs and thermal flares when targeted by a laser and off course a missile to take out the offending laser.

Just claim you’re at risk of kidnapping and a little paranoid and I think you may just get away with it.



P.S. I wonder why there aren’t any speed cameras in Texas

Paul -

I don't wish to see a killjoy, but I'm getting a bit uncomfortable with this thread.

One of the main reasons I (and possibly some colleagues on here) feel so comfortable with this site is it avoids the whole "lets stop them" mantra used by Captain Gatso, etc.

The contents of this thread are getting a bit close to conspiracy to pervert the course of justice for my liking

Lets rise above this folks, the best argument the partnerships can use against this site is that it promotes getting round the law rather than getting the law changed!

_________________
Never point a speedmeter at a civil or military aircraft, vessel or armoured vehicle. Many military aircraft, vehicles or vessels have target acquisition detectors, some of which initiate automatic counter measures.
Association of Chief Police Officers

I don't think anyone will be installing anti-radar missiles to their car mate don't worry!
It's a discussion and until someone does pervert the course of justice they are only voicing an opinion and on the whole also somewhat in jest.

I don't believe that anyone here is actually planning to undermine justice. But I take your point. I'll lock the thread to be on the safe side.

Thanks.

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