Submitted: Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 08:00
ThreadID: 110162 Views:3220 Replies:13 FollowUps:15
This Thread has been Archived
NSW are considering using the truck average speed cameras on all motor vehicles.
As the cameras already take photos of all vehicles, they just have to use that info to issue fines.

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Western_Jebs - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 08:34

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 08:34
What a great idea
AnswerID: 541766

Follow Up By: vk1dx - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 13:05

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 13:05
Excellent idea
FollowupID: 827981

Follow Up By: Member - Fab72 (Paradise SA) - Monday, Nov 24, 2014 at 17:49

Monday, Nov 24, 2014 at 17:49
This has been happening in SA for quite a few months now.
We've even had stories of deek heads travelling on the wrong side of the road to avoid detection.
FollowupID: 828390

Reply By: olcoolone - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 08:47

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 08:47
Seeing speed cameras form a good chunk of general revenue in most states; the more they can rack in cheaply the better BUT is it to do with road safety.

I am like many others who think excessive speed is dangerous.... yes excessive speed and not people creeping 5km over the limit but it's a law and it's a law we have to stick to.

What I am against is speed detection whereby the driver of the speeding vehicle is not apprehended and fined there an then..... not 2 weeks on. 2 weeks is a long time for the driver to continue speeding

Spending a bit of time on the road; the driving behavior of many serial speedsters if very obvious, they slow at speed camera intersections and fixed speed cameras and speed up after they have gone through or bypassing speed detection point to point cameras.
AnswerID: 541767

Reply By: Racey - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:03

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:03
Victoria have been doing it for years along the Hume freeway just north of Melbourne.
AnswerID: 541768

Follow Up By: Mick O - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 13:08

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 13:08
Racey, those camera’s are for both point to point and instantaneous speed.

Given the size of them, their location and clear visibility, and the signage around them, you’d have to be bloody unlucky (or a moron) to get picked up by them.


Cheers Mick
''We knew from the experience of well-known travelers that the
trip would doubtless be attended with much hardship.''
Richard Maurice - 1903

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

FollowupID: 827982

Reply By: Member - Alan H (QLD) - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:17

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:17
There is also one operating on the Bruce Hwy north of Brisbane. It gets all vehicles. Has been doing it for a while now.

AnswerID: 541769

Follow Up By: TomH - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 17:02

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 17:02
The one at Burpengary is a speed camera. The one under the bridge to the south is a traffic monitoring camera according to the sign I passed an hour ago.
FollowupID: 827998

Follow Up By: Member - Alan H (QLD) - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 19:31

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 19:31
No it is further north than that.

The start is near Wildhorse mtn and the end is near the Caloundra turnoff. (heading north - I think it only operates northbound)

FollowupID: 828004

Follow Up By: rumpig - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 20:35

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 20:35
correct with the North bound operation only...it's a speed camera where the servo is at Wildhorse Mountain (camera under the bridge aswell as another one on the service road from servo that enters onto highway) aswell as the start of time lapse for the next camera further up near Caloundra that you've mentioned. My GPS warns of the approaching camera and then starts it's time lapse average speed display as i pass by it.
FollowupID: 828013

Reply By: Member - Frank P (NSW) - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:57

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 09:57
I don't have a problem with it.

Point-to-point average speed cameras will detect consistent speedsters, not just the unlucky Mr Average during a moment's inattention or 10kph over during an overtaking manoeuvre.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 541770

Reply By: Member - Silverchrome - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:29

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 10:29
Average speed cameras are a fairer system of policing speed than POC (point of contact) methods. You have to be speeding over a sustained time and distance to get caught. I support their use.
AnswerID: 541771

Reply By: Member - Oldbaz. NSW. - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 14:23

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 14:23
Hardly a substitute for specific point cameras or mobile radar detection. As stated, you
need to exceed the speed limit over the entire distance between cameras before being
eligible for a fine. You could do 30kph over the limit for the total distance...& if you stop for fuel or a rest or whatever...not attract a fine. But, as the data is already
available..why not ?...cheers...oldbaz.
AnswerID: 541784

Follow Up By: vk1dx - Tuesday, Nov 18, 2014 at 07:28

Tuesday, Nov 18, 2014 at 07:28
Very true Baz. We purposely do another few Ks under our normal speed to build up this "buffer" if needed. Much fairer and you don't have to worry about wearing your brakes out on those long downhill parts. You can let the car run over the limit if needed.

Trucks must welcome them. No mongrel sitting (we hope) at the bottom of the hill to raise revenue.

But watch it. They can, and do, still put an on the spot camera in the middle.
FollowupID: 828024

Follow Up By: olcoolone - Tuesday, Nov 18, 2014 at 08:20

Tuesday, Nov 18, 2014 at 08:20
"Trucks must welcome them"..... until they come across a car driver sitting under the speed limit, sitting under the speed limit introduces another range of problems and bring out the impatient drivers who over take in a dangerous area causing accidents.

Seen it to many times.

The point to point cameras do offer a grace on speed, they will not ping you if you averaged 102kph in a 100 zone.
FollowupID: 828026

Reply By: Member - Peter H1 (NSW) - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 19:24

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 19:24
I put this on 5 forums.
This forum has been the most acceptive, well done

AnswerID: 541799

Reply By: Bazooka - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 20:50

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 20:50
Where did you hear that Peter? I'd expect it would have been leaked to the media to test the waters if it was under serious consideration. Here's what Gay said a couple of years ago about tracking cars with p2p cameras:Gay's 2012 comment
AnswerID: 541810

Follow Up By: Member - johnat - Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 21:36

Monday, Nov 17, 2014 at 21:36
My question also!
Seriously doubt the efficacy of the existing network, whenb, on a 100Km (almost) stretch of road between Tamworth and Gunnedah, there are at least 3 such gantries - Duncan Gay has NFI what the Libs want to do, in any case. He's as useful as a hat full of arseh0les!
FollowupID: 828016

Reply By: fisho64 - Tuesday, Nov 18, 2014 at 13:33

Tuesday, Nov 18, 2014 at 13:33
If the authorities intend extending these sort of camera activities then they also need to introduce some sort of Statute of Limitations on it.
Here in WA we have had a camera fine come in 3 months after the date, and taken by a rear camera.
We had NFI which of us was driving and hence as its an offence to accept the fine if it wasnt you I contacted the WAPOL.
The answer was "you are required to have a reasonable record of who is operating your vehicle at any given time".
What a load of fkn bleep -so I asked him, "what happens if I dispute it and it turns out to be me?"
"You may be charged with another offence."
I asked him, "do you keep a record of whether your wife parents or kids are driving your car?"
"Doesnt matter what I do" he said.

Police should spend more time on real policing and not taking the easy options.
AnswerID: 541842

Reply By: The Bantam - Wednesday, Nov 19, 2014 at 00:11

Wednesday, Nov 19, 2014 at 00:11
I think it will be found that there are limitations.

The cameras on the highway north of brisbane are on a single section of plain not quite straight highway and over a realtivly short distance.
Measuring average speed over the distance, with some allowance, is therefor with in the realms of reality.

As soon as you get large distances and complex road situations measuring speed over the distance becomes quite inacurate and pointless.

Most of the heavy transport enforcement cameras are not specifically for speed detection but for driving hours, log book enforcement.

Like so many road safety things, this will be mostly sabre ratling by someone who realy does not understand the limitations.

Like the claims of rediculously narrow margins for speeding fines, that are not supported by either, practicality, achievable accuracy or federal legeslation.

AnswerID: 541859

Reply By: TomH - Wednesday, Nov 19, 2014 at 10:13

Wednesday, Nov 19, 2014 at 10:13
Personally whilst I am not totally against speed cameras they are touted as reducing the road toll.
Rubbish, it is poor and inattentive drivers that do that and speed cameras will never fix the abysmally poor driving standards.

Have recently gone from Brisbane to Coffs and back and have to remember where all the cameras are just in case I was a few K's over. Road is Ok, no problems maintaining the speed limit. But dont dare go more than 3 k over it or look out.

In marked contrast have recently spent 3 months on an extended 8500mile driving trip in the USA and Canada.

The Trans Canada was marvelous 80 MPH most of the way.

Into the USA and a lot of the roads were no better than the Princes highway and yet the speed limit was frequently 70 -75MPH. Didnt seem to be any trouble and traffic flowed fine.

One thing that was noticeable was that drivers didnt hog the fast lane like here.

They got out got past and pulled back in. Made for a far better trip.

Also the traffic was getting along mostly about 7-8mph ABOVE the limit and the cops just sat there. As long as it was flowing and no one was really rocketing along they didnt mind. Only saw one guy get stopped but he was doing over 90 I reckon and soon had the attention of a nice man in uniform.

They do have a lot of accidents but the volume of traffic is many many times what we have here so maybe the % is less.
It does however make them more polite as if you dont learn to merge and let people in you would soon be in trouble.

Rant Over
AnswerID: 541874

Follow Up By: Slow one - Wednesday, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:29

Wednesday, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:29
this may put it into perspective if you look at deaths per 100,000K.

World wide traffic deaths
FollowupID: 828087

Reply By: Kelpie D - Monday, Nov 24, 2014 at 18:44

Monday, Nov 24, 2014 at 18:44
Good...Should be more. If I ever run for PM don't vote for me cos I know exactly how to fix the moronic drop kicks on the road !!!

I was just going to read this thread but when I read some one saying something like "might need to go 10kph over to over take".

If you need to go 10k over the limit to over take, then you don't need to over take, do you?

I was out at Greens Lake a couple of weeks ago. A new arrival pitched camp near me. I advised him to put his seat belt on if going to the loo, cos 2 days earlier a bloke got pulled over for not having a belt on. Yes, the Police patrol Greens Lake. He said the rules do not apply because it's a camping area !!!

In normal driving conditions, there is absolutely no reason to go faster than 95% of the limit. So if the limit is 100kph, there is no reason to be going faster than 95kph. If a 5% window is not enough to over take or pull away from danger or take action, then you are driving to fast and not in control.

All the time Australians have this "it's only illegal if you get caught" attitude, then the roads will remain a death trap.
AnswerID: 542155

Follow Up By: Slow one - Monday, Nov 24, 2014 at 21:50

Monday, Nov 24, 2014 at 21:50
Wow I am going to vote for you with your simple look at overtaking.

I hope you realise how far it takes a vehicle to overtake someone doing 90kph and still stay in the 100kph limit. Guess you don't do much single lane highway driving or you don't have to keep a schedule.

We have the lowest road stats for years and thinking like this will send us back into the 20th century. When most overtake, they want to spend the least time on the wrong side of the road.

FollowupID: 828404

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2014 at 00:53

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2014 at 00:53
pretty sure this must be Kevin Rudd incognito.
Surely there couldn't be 2 people in Australia who have such stupid ideas and prepared to go to such lengths to force them on people?
FollowupID: 828410

Follow Up By: Kelpie D - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2014 at 08:50

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2014 at 08:50
Please don't. I would like to think my voters actually understand the policies ;)

Yes, I do. Do You? To do it safely and legally, the car would need about 200m. The same car doing 110kph would need about 185 meters. Are you saying that you drive to such a close "schedule" that you need to speed to get there 15 meters sooner ??

Are you saying that we have lower road "stats" because people are rev head speeders, ignore the road rules and ignore their obligations?

Peoples attitudes have not changed. It is still "it is only illegal if you get caught". Which, these days, will happen. It is mostly cameras that have kerbed people behaviour and lowed the stats, not their nor your attitude.

If you overtake at 110kph, guess what (you like guessing don't you) there is a very, very good chance you were filmed doing it. People are starting to get the message that they are being filmed. From speed and red light cameras, to safety and radar cameras, to car "black box" cameras, to the kid sitting in the back seat with a smart phone, you are being filmed and recorded. That is what has lowed the stats. You have been caught before you even do the deed.
FollowupID: 828416

Follow Up By: fisho64 - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:13

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2014 at 09:13
Let me guess.
You are over 60
You are retired
You were a mid level public servant maybe
You tow a caravan
You head north in the winter
FollowupID: 828417

Follow Up By: Slow one - Tuesday, Nov 25, 2014 at 18:23

Tuesday, Nov 25, 2014 at 18:23
To start with yes I had to keep schedules and drive long hours.

Now I see you don't do much driving on single lane 100kph roads.

Like I said your reply was very simple, you stick to your 95 and I will stick to my dollar and when I pass I will be spending as little time on the wrong side of the road as possible. I also have had a clean licence for many many years.

Here is a quote and this may change you math calcs. Look at the real distances of a vehicle overtaking a truck. Read it carefully.

Quote "Fact. Trucks travelling at the new open road speed limit of 90 kph will be almost impossible to pass legally. A 90 kph speed limit for heavy trucks and 100 kph for other traffic is practicable.
A car passing a truck travelling at 90 kph will require almost 2 kilometres of clear road ahead if the car observes the rigidly enforced 100 kph limit and the 2 second separation rule before overtaking.

The impact will be that drivers either break the law or effectively the open road speed limit will be reduced to 90 kph.


Based on Truck and 90 kph, 2 sec separation beforehand, 10 metre clearance at end, allowing for oncoming traffic at 100kph + 10% clearance of that:

90 kph = 90,000/3600 = 25 metres/sec.

100 kph = 100,000/3600 = 27.8 metres/sec

Distance to pass = (2 x 25) + (Length of Truck) + 10 + (Length of Car)

Say car is 5 metres, truck is 20 metres, then

Relative distance to pass = 50 + 20 + 10 + 5 = 85 metres

Time to pass = 85 metres / 2.8 metres/sec = 30.4 seconds

Distance travelled to pass = 27.8 * 30.4 = 844 metres

Clear distance required to oncoming traffic = (844 x 2) (+ 10%) = 1688 x 1.1

= 1,856 metres = 1.9 kilometres.

Time on the wrong side of the road is deadly.
FollowupID: 828429

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (11)