Digital speed cameras to target Queensland motorists

[csv8]

Digital speed cameras to target Queensland motoristst
Michael Crutcher and Kristin Shorten
January 04, 2010 12:00am
QUEENSLAND motorists could be nabbed for going just a little over the speed limit as new digital speed cameras allow police to lower their margin of error.

The Courier-Mail has learnt that the introduction of digital speed cameras, which will replace outdated wet-film models from mid-year, will enable the "tolerance" figure applied in the policing of speed limits to be lowered.

That would result in tens of thousands more motorists being booked without any speed limits being changed. The tolerance, which acts as a legal buffer for inaccuracy, is the difference between the speed limit and the detection trigger on cameras and hand-held radars.


Road toll linked to prosperity
It is understood Queensland's figure cannot be lowered with wet-film cameras because the ageing system cannot process the extra fines that would be generated. But digital cameras would create an advanced fine-processing system.

The Courier-Mail has decided not to publish the tolerance figure for road safety reasons.

Police and the State Government will not publicly acknowledge a tolerance figure.

In 1988, the first full-year speed cameras operated in Queensland, the state's road toll was below 300 – the only time it has been so low since 1955.

Road safety authorities believe that was no coincidence and it has ensured lowering the tolerance will be discussed this year. Other states have gone public with their moves. In 2002, Victorian police lowered the threshold to 3km/h, meaning drivers could be fined for doing 63km/h in a 60 zone.

Victoria's top traffic officer Ken Lay said the reduction and the public debate it created was one of the main factors in that state's road toll dropping by almost 100 in the following two years.

Queensland Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson would not comment on tolerance levels.

"What I'm asking people to do is actually not exceed the speed limit at all," Mr Atkinson said.

Police Minister Neil Roberts said: "The speed limit is the limit, not a guide. One 'k' over the limit is speeding under Queensland law".

Speedos err on safe side
DODGING a speeding fine won't be as simple as blaming a faulty speedometer if snapped by one of Queensland's new digital speeding cameras.

RACQ vehicle technologies manager Steve Spalding said speedo errors were usually on the safe side.

"The actual speed is less than the indicated speed in nearly every instance. It's very rare to see a speedometer where it's inaccurate the other way," Mr Spalding said.

He said it wasn't uncommon for drivers to have their speedometers checked after picking up a speeding fine but confirmation of faulty speedometers was rare.

Mr Spalding said drivers of ageing vehicles could rest assured their speedo was as trustworthy as the newest cars.

"There are no other mechanical reasons why speedometer accuracy should vary during the life of the vehicle," he said.

"But we do advise motorists to get the speedometer checked after buying a new or used car. If it's new they can have it checked under warranty."

It is the owner's responsibility to make sure that a vehicle's speedometer works properly.

[Franco Cozzo]

It sucks doesn't it? I just sit 10km/h below the limit everywhere, makes it easier than watching my speedo all the time (Mind you that cops an instant fail on your license test). I live in Victoria, oh how I love the Hume with its fixed speed cameras that are hidden on bridges under signs where you can't see them or right around a sweeping bend.

[huggiebear]

just seen on the news, the digital speed cameras used in 2 places in brisbane are now going to be put throughout qld, 1kph over and you get snapped. no if's or but's

so if you fit the wrong tyres to your car and your speedo is out, you could be doing 99kph according to your speedo, get snapped and loose 1 point

i think its stupid. every other state apart from QLD have a 3kph tollerance.

they think it will save 150 lives a year.

also at beerwah (near steve urwins zoo) will have point to point cameras, if you travel too quick between them you get a fine...

[Nikked]

if you have a wheel tire combination that effects your speedo read out, its your falt anyway, and technicaly defectable in some states...

[gocruzin]

If your factory tyres are worn It will affect your speedo too just remember that.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by gocruzin

If your factory tyres are worn It will affect your speedo too just remember that.

Yes.... it makes your speedo read higher than you're traveling........

[flappist]

Remember when you vote

[gocruzin]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Yes.... it makes your speedo read higher than you're traveling........

True true but also speedo's from factory are plus or minus 3kph what i am trying to say is that with 1kph limits leavs no room for error and are only enforced for revenue not road safety.
I remember a time when you didn't have to watch your speedo more than the road and the road toll was not affected by people rolling down hills and cruising into speed zones using trailling throttle so slow down instead of the brake It was a much happier time. I also remember when the traffic cops had the final say on how fast the got you and not pollies on the warpath.
Rant over!

[4Vman]

Being an active voter has its advantages....

[huggiebear]

if you sit even 5kph below the speed limit you get abused something shocking.

[SVD]

cars are built with the ADR rule that allows the speedo to be out by +/- 10% of the speed you're traveling!!! how is it legal to say we will give car manufacturers +/- 10% but if the brand new car you purchased is out by 1km/h then you have to pay for it!!! its not fair! that's just crap! it should be illegal!

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by SVD

cars are built with the ADR rule that allows the speedo to be out by +/- 10% of the speed you're traveling!!! how is it legal to say we will give car manufacturers +/- 10% but if the brand new car you purchased is out by 1km/h then you have to pay for it!!! its not fair! that's just crap! it should be illegal!

Cars built after 2006 cannot under estimate your speed: the current Rules disallow under-reading, and permit over-reading by up to 4kmh + 10%.
In other words your speedo is designed to over estimate (not under estimate) your speed if it goes out of calibration....

[GT290]

I have already been commenting on two other threads similar to this one and frankly had enough of this. Its becomming more and more evedent that the government is out to fleese what it can from motorest and unless some sort of stand is taken against this they will continue to walk all over us and brain wash who they can. grrrr

[huggiebear]

so those of us with older cars, are stuffed.. especially if you run a cable driven speedo and its streched

[SVD]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Cars built after 2006 cannot under estimate your speed: the current Rules disallow under-reading, and permit over-reading by up to 4kmh + 10%.
In other words your speedo is designed to over estimate (not under estimate) your speed if it goes out of calibration....

so basically almost all B series are allowed to under estimate speeds... i'd hate for my almost new car to be allowed to do that...

[ED Classic]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Being an active voter has its advantages....

Does it? From my experience there are way way way too little swinging voters...and far too many "they are all the same" so I will just vote for who I always vote for.

[SVD]

Originally Posted by huggiebear

so those of us with older cars, are stuffed.. especially if you run a cable driven speedo and its streched

its always been like that though, i know my speedo is out and i've tried to have it repaired but it can't be done by the three elec shops that do them i know of, and the problem is it isn't just out but a set amount, it changes.

they should just start forgetting about those small amounts of speed! 1km/h over the limit isn't going to cause the most catastrophic accident ever and its the occasional thing that you aren't looking at the speedo and you accidentally go over by 1-2km/h

[Zed7fiddy]

Pretty sure the Point to point is supposed to be ont he Bruce Highway from Caloundra Road to Roys Road, no where near the zoo? But regardless, the new cameras are pure revenue raisers.

[GT290]

I have had a GPS with four different vehicles two that were new and with factory fitted new tyes and rims. So the GT was 4 Klm's slowwer than the GPS and my 08 Nissan Navara is 10 Klm's slower, so when you are diong 90 on the speedo the GPS reads out a slower speed as mentioned.

[schmidty]

Well and truly a joke.

One of the things i enjoy about driving on WA roads since i've moved here 18 months ago is that i get to spend more time watching the road than my speedo for a change. up to 10kph over only scores a $75 fine and no demerit points. So even if you do have a slip up it's a reminder to keep a better look out rather than a heavy handed whack for a minor over sight.

Just spent a week back in Vic on holidays. Did about 2500km, which included a day dragging a B double around again. So many changes in speed zones, so many rubbish drivers in cruise mode now totally oblivious to the world around them because they're off in their own little world 10kmh below the speed limit. All the government has succeeded in doing is brainwashing the dumb ones that the killer on the road is speed alone. Lack of concentration, forward planning, judgment and basic car control skills coupled with bloody phones (iphone users are the worst offenders) cause so much more danger on the roads than an alert, proficient driver traveling 3kph over the posted limit. The amount of people I'd have loved to drag out of the car and bash their iphone straight up their @*$#.......

[flappist]

Remember when you vote

[SLO AU XR8]

Whoops, I have a 3.23 sender with 3.45's, still meets applicable ADR's to my car, how can that be penalised?

[China]

Take Every Fine You Get To Court Most Times You Will Win

[UNR8D]

http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/Home...ad/Statistics/

Think anyone that is slightly interested in debating this arguement should take a read of this, im 52 pages from 87 of the way through, and my mind is boggleing how they SKEW the statistics they must release to the media.

In 2004, 36 pedestrians were involved in fatal crashes, 29 per cent (n=15) less
than in 2003 and 37 per cent (n=21) less than average for the previous nine
years.
• The pedestrian was considered most at fault in 82 per cent (n=27) of the 33 fatal
crashes involving a pedestrian.

Table 1.1 shows fatality rates per capita and per vehicles registered in Queensland since
1974. A fatality rate of 29.0 per 100,000 population was experienced in 1974, compared
with 8.0 per 100,000 population in 2004, a decrease of over 73 per cent. A fatality rate of
6.6 per 10,000 Queensland-registered vehicles was experienced in 1974, compared with
1.1 per 10,000 Queensland-registered vehicles in 2004, a decrease of over 83 per cent.

[ltd_on20s]

Originally Posted by UNR8D

http://www.transport.qld.gov.au/Home...ad/Statistics/

Think anyone that is slightly interested in debating this arguement should take a read of this, im 52 pages from 87 of the way through, and my mind is boggleing how they SKEW the statistics they must release to the media.

if someone had the cash, could they actually sue the government for unfair and misleading information about road deaths? this whole "speed kills" slogan is actually a lie based on those stats....

could you sue them for lying?

[UNR8D]

well technically it does contribute, and 6% or just under of the total amount is directly related to it, its more focusing on excessive' speed rather than ''creeping'' which is what they are targeting this year, which would have a impact so small I wouldn't believe you could even measure it - effect on the road toll.

but hey, its an easy target, and when you choose not to publish your stats in a newspaper and you have to go searching through 87 pages of data to find it then i guess the majority will never know right.

[Wally]

Originally Posted by UNR8D

.....but hey, its an easy target, and when you choose not to publish your stats in a newspaper and you have to go searching through 87 pages of data to find it then i guess the majority will never know right.

I noticed the QLd Govt (aka the Courier Mail) published data on the road deaths along with a timeline of punitive laws, showing how damned effective they were, but I didn't notice any corresponding implementation of car safety features, except seatbelts. They also omitted the survival rate because of better medication and hospitalisation care. Does the 87 pages you refer to have anything on that?

I would guess tow truck numbers would be a good indicator of just how many actual accidents occur?

[prydey]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Cars built after 2006 cannot under estimate your speed: the current Rules disallow under-reading, and permit over-reading by up to 4kmh + 10%.
In other words your speedo is designed to over estimate (not under estimate) your speed if it goes out of calibration....

i thought it was a lot earlier than 2006.

regardless, most magazines when they test the cars usually have a graph showing the indicated speed v road speed, and like the original article states, they are almost always on the safe side.

some people like to whinge for the sake of it - my speedo cable stretched, my tyres are worn, my car is legal even though i've changed my diff gears or gearbox etc etc.

at the end of the day, you (the owner) are responsible for making sure your cars speedo is accurate.

its not hard, i have a speedo corrector in one of my cars and have had the wheel/tyre combo changed in the pcm on the other. both at a very small cost.

[UNR8D]

Originally Posted by Wally

I noticed the QLd Govt (aka the Courier Mail) published data on the road deaths along with a timeline of punitive laws, showing how damned effective they were, but I didn't notice any corresponding implementation of car safety features, except seatbelts. They also omitted the survival rate because of better medication and hospitalisation care. Does the 87 pages you refer to have anything on that?

I would guess tow truck numbers would be a good indicator of just how many actual accidents occur?

in short yes. ill publish data once ive written my letter of concern and recomendations to local members, any media outlet who will listen, RACQ, and bligh... out of all of this I will expect about 2 responses but its worth it.. seems like only people who stand up and winge in australia are the ones they listen to... so figure I make enough noise to be heard I might be able to get a debate happening and a logical outcome... I think my chances of a date with eva mandez is alot greater thou.

[Scott]

Originally Posted by flappist

Remember when you vote

Originally Posted by flappist

Remember when you vote

Remember when you vote

The last time I looked forward to voting so much was in 1996. Waiting until 2011/12 will suck but atleast I get my say at the Federal Election this year.