OzSTOC

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Draco (Heartbreak Kid) on February 19, 2017, 03:40:43 PM

Title: Impossible corner
Post by: Draco (Heartbreak Kid) on February 19, 2017, 03:40:43 PM
 :blu13 On the 29/12/2016 @ 1524 (3:24pm) while on my way from one shift to another (from Lawnton to Buranda) Qld. I was snapped by a speed camera, alleged speed 93kph in a 60kph zone. STrange.....as i was turning right from Wallace street in Gympie Road @ Chermside.
The angle of the bike as I negotiated the turn SOMEHOW does not show that it's possible for me to achieve this speed while negotiating the right hand turn into the middle lane while straightening up. I think I am a reasonably good rider BUT not that good.
 I've posted a few pictures and would appreciate any feedback, Questions or Criticisms. and any answers if this is at all possible or MAYBE the camera was faulty? Thanks
   
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Biggles on February 19, 2017, 04:00:39 PM
I know the corner.  The cameras are near the Remax sign.  Looks like you gunned it into that corner pretty good!
I reckon you've got a good case- it must be an anomaly generated by your angular velocity in relation to the camera. 
In any case, who does 93 on Gympie Road, especially having just completed a right-angled turn?
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Draco (Heartbreak Kid) on February 19, 2017, 04:05:31 PM
 :blu13 The thing IS right angle corners are my weak point I'm more comfortable at Lefties, BUT there's no way i could be doing 93kph at that angle, just after crossing intersection line and still levelling up???  :eek :eek :blu13left
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Brock on February 19, 2017, 04:42:39 PM
Definitely contest the fine.

Write a letter with the info and pics you just posted, and send it in. If it has to go to court, write/email A Current Affair. Make sure you say something to the effect that it isnt possible for you to take a right hand 90deg bend at that speed, you would have to have entered the corner at 100Ks plus
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Draco (Heartbreak Kid) on February 19, 2017, 04:47:31 PM
Thanks Brock, I even spoke to a Motorcycle police officer, he said at that speed going around that corner, I would have ended up on my A**e in the gutter on the other side of the road, BUT he would not accompany me into court saying that :cop >:() :-(((  :-X :-X
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: johnnyYTED on February 19, 2017, 07:39:52 PM
:dred11
looking at the wobbly red line in pic 2 , you must have been going about 0.2 kph to get that much wobble 
Rob I would fight it as what you describe dosent add up to 93 kph , ..  :thumbs
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Marcus on February 20, 2017, 11:12:19 AM
There's no way you'd be doing 93KM around that corner. if you were you'd be scrapping the pegs
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: ppopeye on February 20, 2017, 01:14:44 PM


Quote from: Marcus on February 20, 2017, 12:12:19 PM (http://ozstoc.com/index.php?topic=11788.msg1215229#msg1215229)<blockquote>There's no way you'd be doing 93KM around that corner. if you were you'd be scrapping the pegs


I agree with Marcus. At the angle of the photo you are not going fast at all. Not sure the best way to present that to a court. A friendly mr plod maybe
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Gadget on February 20, 2017, 02:27:18 PM
There would have to be a lot more lean at 93 km/h on that corner.

Cheers,
Gary

Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Gadget on February 20, 2017, 02:28:34 PM
If  one assumed you had done 93 km/h down Gympie Rd, you're  facing the wrong way in the lane.

Cheers,
Gary

Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Kev Murphy on February 20, 2017, 04:39:48 PM
Maybe the camera is dodgy, or has picked up a reflection from some other object which has provided distorted readings?

Check this out, Rob ... first few lines are very interesting.

http://www.boostcruising.com/talk/87588-Secret-Speed-Camera-Tricks.html (http://www.boostcruising.com/talk/87588-Secret-Speed-Camera-Tricks.html)

Of specific info given... Metal bus stop shelters, public telephone booths, Australia Post letter-boxes, sheet metal garage doors, fences, factory walls and closely spaced iron picket fences are all listed as possible reflectors capable of distorting speed readings.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: spanner on February 21, 2017, 09:12:02 AM
........  and there right in front of you is a AUSTRALIA POST BOX.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: spanner on February 21, 2017, 09:15:58 AM
Although I just saw the date of that report ...... 2004!  I think they would have either fixed the issue OR amended the policy.

We need a report that is more current than 2004.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Kev Murphy on February 21, 2017, 10:12:57 AM
There was a report several years back of a radar unit reporting multiple consistently high readings, which were caused by reflection from a farmers windmill in the scanned area.

Radio/Microwave Interference can come in a variety of forms, both natural and man-made, but they have one thing in common - they produce a false or incorrect reading on the radar unit's display. Common sources of electromagnetic interference include airport radar; microwave transmissions; transmissions of CB, ham, VHF/UHF, and cellular two-way radio/ telephones, including police and business radios; faulty sparkplug wires; mercury vapor and neon lights; high-tension power-lines; and high voltage power substations. The radio energy from these sources can overload or confuse the sensitive circuits in a radar gun.

Obviously, radar beam reflection is an inherent ongoing problem that is still being experienced. Below are some of the regs regarding SA and VIC
Both sets of regulations state that the cameras should be set up on a straight section of road with no bends, and preferably no rise or fall or camber of road gradient.


SAPOL regs regarding cameras


To be used as a safety camera site a field assessment is undertaken by the Traffic
Camera Unit. Field assessments confirm the site:

is safe for the operator

is a straight section of roadway

does not have a pronounced super elevation (camber) that would distort an
incident image in the adjudication process

has a consistent speed limit

allows the operator to view vehicles approaching, passing through
and departing the radar beam

is clear of any reflective objects

is free of obstruction allowing sufficient distance in front of the radar to avoid
interference with the camera and radar operation, and the capture of a clear
camera image of the incident

is free of objects that would cause the radar beam to redirect

does not face directly into the sun.
Bends
Mobile safety cameras are only operated on a straight section of roadway.
Gradients
Mobile safety cameras may be operated on a slope, hill or gradient.

Redirection
Mobile safety cameras are radar units. Radar waves can redirect from certain
objects. Radar is highly susceptible to
redirection where there is a flat metal object or a
square vertically ridged metal surface.
In establishing mobile radar system care is taken to
ensure that there are no objects in or near the radar
beam that could cause redirection.
Redirection can be caused by:

Stobie poles

guard rails, either metal or concrete

flat metal signs

flat sided metal industrial bins

flat glassed areas (e.g. plate glass windows)

bus shelters

bridges

vehicles with large flat surfaces
(e.g. buses, semi - trailers)

metal fences with square vertically ridged
surfaces (note this does not include traditional
corrugated galvanised iron fences)
******************************************
Victoria Police Mobile Road Safety
Camera Policy & Operations Manual 
© State of Victoria 2013

A site shall not
 be:
a) On a bend in the road;
b) Within 200 metres of a change to a speed zone,
applicable to the same length of road, Exception
to (b) where a speed zone is defined by signs that;

Indicate a school zone or a school zone with declared school days; or
Contain additional information (e.g. times of operation),

Careful
background
 evaluation of each site shall be
conducted  for  any  sources  of  reflection
located in or near the radar beam position including;
a)
The possibility of vehicles entering or leaving
intersections, or travelling along service roads;
b)
Pole mounted electricity supply transformers;
c)
Mobile road  safety  camera
set-ups should not include sites where there are train lines which
are obscured by dense foliage – such that the
MRSCO is unable to determine whether a train
is present at the time a target vehicle is detected:
d)
Tram and train lines: Other than (c) above, the MRSCO must indicate on the Incident Log of
the Camera Operator’s Set-up notes the times that any images are taken where a tram or train
is within the area of the beam;

e)
Metal signs - house sale / auction signs and similar;
f)
Centre  strip  traffic  signs  such  as  No  U  Turn,
No  Right  /  Left  Turn,  Keep  Left,  posted  speed
limit signs and large advisory cross street signs;
g)
Armco road barriers or chevron signing;
h)
Metal bus stop shelters, public telephone
 booths, Australia Post letterboxes;
i)
Sheet  metal  garage  doors,  fences,  factory  walls
 and fencing structures which comprise of
closely spaced (10cm or less) vertical metal bars.
j)
Brick/Masonry Structures
These structures are divided into two parts;

Masonry structures that are over one metre in height and;

Very tall masonry structures such as factory walls. 

Careful foreground evaluation shall also be conducted of
each site, to ensure that there are
no  sources  of  reflection  (e.g.  traffic  signs  which
are  larger  than  a  street  name,  bus  stop  or
parking restriction sign):
Within 20 metres of the front of the camera vehicle when positioned against the kerb; or
Within 40 metres of the front of the camera vehicle/tripod when positioned off the road;
Within 50 metres of the front of the camera vehicle/tripod where very tall/large vehicles (or
similar  sized  reflective  objects)  are  positioned  in  the  foreground  (this  applies  whether
positioned on or off road).
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Biggles on February 21, 2017, 06:57:30 PM
"Mobile safety cameras are only operated on a straight section of roadway.

That phrase alone should prevent the photo being used since the subject has turned, as is evident from the angle of the bike.  If the adjudicators think otherwise, why wasn't there an infringement for running a red light, since the radar is co-sited with a red light camera?
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Brock on February 21, 2017, 07:07:27 PM
Its not a "Mobile" camera, its a fixed redlight/speed camera at an intersection. Got em over here as well.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Old Steve on February 22, 2017, 12:00:07 PM
There is the option of measuring the radius of the path you followed around the corner

finding a corner out in the country with the same radius

have your photo taken going around that corner at 93 km/hr

comparing the lean of the bike in the two photographs

Your speed around the city corner would be proportional to the angle of lean (or probably to the sine or cosine, but don't confuse things) so half the lean angle would be half the speed.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Biggles on February 22, 2017, 01:26:46 PM
There is the option of measuring the radius of the path you followed around the corner

finding a corner out in the country with the same radius

have your photo taken going around that corner at 93 km/hr

comparing the lean of the bike in the two photographs

Your speed around the city corner would be proportional to the angle of lean (or probably to the sine or cosine, but don't confuse things) so half the lean angle would be half the speed.

That'll set their heads spinning in court.     :crackup

The angle is basically 90o, although it is stepped out 3 lane widths.
I still reckon he'd be cranking it to do 90.  60 would be achievable without being too reckless, but probably the maximum.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Marcus on February 22, 2017, 01:30:52 PM
I demand an update....
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: spanner on February 22, 2017, 01:52:37 PM
 :popcorn
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Brock on February 22, 2017, 05:06:19 PM
Never mind a photo, take a video.

the case wil;l be instantly be dismissed when they watch bike nm rider part company trying to take the corner at 90+
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Draco (Heartbreak Kid) on March 07, 2017, 07:19:35 PM
 :blu13 Thanks for all the support and info guys ++ But I've just decided to pay the fine and wear the "12" points, and have since been issued a GRB (Good Rider Behaviour) or GDB if i was in a car, I just found it too time consuming and waste of my money to fight it :well  :|||| :blu13left
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Brock on March 07, 2017, 07:25:04 PM
Dont do that, just write or call and tell them its impossible. Or wait and go to court, and explain that its not possible.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Skip on March 07, 2017, 07:39:32 PM
Yeah. Don't do it Draco. Have your day in court my friend. 12 points is a high price to pay me thinks. 
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Biggles on March 07, 2017, 08:21:46 PM
Yeah. Don't do it Draco. Have your day in court my friend. 12 points is a high price to pay me thinks. 

Surely it's not 12 points!    :eek
Do you mean 4 points added to the 8 you already have?
Either way, it reads like you've done the deed and now have to ride like a Nanna for a year.    :'(
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Kev Murphy on March 07, 2017, 08:53:16 PM
Meanwhile, without any further investigation, this traffic camera will continue to provide false information regarding other drivers/riders which will lead to more charges.

(Sings-) "Money money money, it's a rich mans world"
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Draco (Heartbreak Kid) on March 08, 2017, 02:49:30 AM
Yeah. Don't do it Draco. Have your day in court my friend. 12 points is a high price to pay me thinks. 

Surely it's not 12 points!    :eek
Do you mean 4 points added to the 8 you already have?
Either way, it reads like you've done the deed and now have to ride like a Nanna for a year.    :'(

 :blu13 because i accumulated "2" speeding fines within 1 year the highest points are doubled so "6" become "12" thus "Nanna" rider for 1 year OR loose it for 5 months, but lose 2 points within that year it becomes 10 months NO LICENCE :eek :eek SAFETY MY A$$ revenue raising is the correct term for this Wot thuh Wot thuh Wot thuh
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: ppopeye on March 08, 2017, 08:07:26 AM
Draco you really need to fight this one.
1. It is grossly wrong and you cannot afford the points, or the fine.
2. You may save many other riders from an incorrect reading.


Its easy for us outsiders to say but any reasonable person can see that the rading is impossible


Cheers
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: DBfive on March 08, 2017, 06:32:56 PM
Draco

Maurice Blackburn Lawyers motto is "we fight for fair".  While they specialise in accident compensation suits, they have a social justice area as well and may be willing to take your case on for "no win, no fee".

I've had no dealings with them apart from picking up a card at a motor show so know nothing about how they'd handle the case or even if they'd take it on.

There could well be other legal firms doing the same stuff but it may be worth a call.

Good luck
Dave B
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Biggles on March 08, 2017, 06:51:44 PM
Draco

Maurice Blackburn Lawyers motto is "we fight for fair".  While they specialise in accident compensation suits, they have a social justice area as well and may be willing to take your case on for "no win, no fee".

I've had no dealings with them apart from picking up a card at a motor show so know nothing about how they'd handle the case or even if they'd take it on.

There could well be other legal firms doing the same stuff but it may be worth a call.

Good luck
Dave B


I think you'd need a pro-bono solicitor.  Maurice Blackburn and the rest of the Ambulance Chasers will only take on cases on a "No Win No Fee" basis where there's money to be won.  There is no prize money for this one.  Only a possible escape from paying money to the gummint.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Brock on March 08, 2017, 07:33:47 PM
They have been doing the Helmet and helmet cam cases for free as i understand it, mind you it does give them great free advertising.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Nigel on March 08, 2017, 08:04:51 PM
Draco you really need to fight this one.
1. It is grossly wrong and you cannot afford the points, or the fine.
2. You may save many other riders from an incorrect reading.


Its easy for us outsiders to say but any reasonable person can see that the reading is impossible.


Cheers


Totally agree. Understand, that the easy way out is go with the flow ,pay the fine and and take the points. Not if you are right though!

I would like to propose that as we all will benefit from the court action,  we make a contribution to support this cause. I am very happy to chip in $100 to a win lose draw fund, to fight this rubbish. If we don`t, we are collectively letting ourselves down. Nigel :wht11
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Biggles on March 08, 2017, 08:08:41 PM
Can you fight a fine if you've paid it?  The payment of the fine is regarded as an admission of guilt,  which is why you don't pay it before going to Court, and why the points aren't applied until the fine is paid.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Nigel on March 08, 2017, 08:28:09 PM
Just the reason it has to go to court, but if a loss occurs the costs are covered > Nigel
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: spanner on March 09, 2017, 10:04:42 AM
I'd pop a couple bucks into the kitty
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Old Steve on March 13, 2017, 06:17:25 AM
I'd have thought that if they won, Maurice Blackburn Lawyers would ask the magistrate to recover their charges from the Police as costs.
Title: Re: Impossible corner
Post by: Biggles on March 13, 2017, 08:37:06 AM
I'd have thought that if they won, Maurice Blackburn Lawyers would ask the magistrate to recover their charges from the Police as costs.

You could well be right.  I try to stay away from lawyers, judges and Courts, so don't know much about any of them.     :crazy