NSW Speed camera tolerances reduced to zero

Hi Bruce,
ADR means nothing to the RTA, neither does normal tyre wear.
With only last month the RTA reducing the fines for certain infrigments they must be short in the coffers

I agree with ya mate.
How many times have their cash machines been proved to be not calibrated properly?

So once again we have different laws for different States.

Jon,
push to get rid of pokies, well here is another legal poker machine they can use.

and to all those who say speed kills, yes it does but most of the revenue comes from the accidental speed infringement. Also to all the I never speed or break the law when I am driving people, I say let me follow you for half an hour and I bet I can book you, probably many times over.

Beats me where they are coming from.

Have a good one.

Yeah

You too.

Hi Rockape,
Sorry I'm a bit slow with this follow up but have been a bit busy and just going back through the forums I missed. We have had the zero tolerance in Vic for many years and our biggest argument is that vehicle manufacturers only have to be within a 10% error on their speedo's. I was fined once for doing 61kmh in a 60 zone, reading the fine they clocked me at 64kmh and took 3 off for any discrepancies. I thought I'd done pretty good with the speed as I was in a Nissan that the speedo wasn't working in and I'd just came all the way from Melbourne on the freeway (100 kmh) to Geelong and my fine was within 500 metres of the 60kmh limit.

"Just wondering if I should send my wages directly to the NSW Government and they can give me a weekly allowance..... "
And they'll tax you on that transaction as well.
They wont loose. They'll spend A Million dollars to get one dollar out of your back pocket.

Hi Wim,
You wouldn't be the only one I reckon.
Safe travels mate.

Couldnt agree more, a couple of years ago we took a trip to the far far far north of NSW. Areas around Rocky, Mackay ,Townville, Cairns , Mareeba & in particular Cook Town all are a must see as are all areas in between. LOL

Coppers & speed cameras left us alone, the locals all very friendly. The very distant Northern part of NSW is indeed a very great place to visit & I would imagine a great place to live.

Aah well, live dream & travel!!

The seasons only just got underway and I'm not bitting yet. LOL

Cheers Teza

It is indeed Barry a great place to live and explore, soo much to see.

Teza, Maybe the right hasn't been cast yet LOL.

Yeah jeff I did read that or hear that somewhere.
And they don't do anything other than for the love of money.

I seem to remember a TV story telling us the Mac. Bank spent many millions buying the speed camera rights.

Fred

And they'd know how much not to pay for them with Bob Carr working for them as a consultant, which Labor has offices in Macquarie Tower.
Nice and Handy.

Yes, that is correct.

Redlex Traffic Systems was purchased by Mac Bank for $304,000,000.

Rdflex sold

Also this is a MUST READ regarding Redflex.

The real Redflex

Bruce

Fallbrook USA

Thanks for the links cycad.

$304,000,000 for a business getting sued, losing contracts and court cases ... ??

Just goes to prove that cameras are a money maker ... Not a road safety device.

Sheesh we're a dumb lot for believing the drivel our transport departments roll out .... If we believe it .....

They are the New Pokies.
One coming to a street near you. ;)

"I think whoever thought of this forgot to change hands on 99 :~) "

Funny as Fred. The retired Nirse next door uses that one all the time LOL.

"Everyone who gets done for 1 to 3 k's over needs to take it to court. Many thousands of these cases clogging the courts will get some attention."

Than again Fred it would cost more than the fine to take the day off work and sit outside a damn court house.

I guess it is why the RTA reduced the points for many small speeding fines. Too many people loosing their license, there fore no income. Keep your points therefore they can milk you longer.

Okay by me i work night shift.

I use to work night shift many years ago, Start at 5 pm finished at 6 am, 12 hour shifts. I had to go to court through the day over a matter, I sat outside that court room(9 am) all day until I was needed(4pm). I was late for work that evening, worked all night, and was stuffed for the next week trying to catch up.
Not a pleasant thing. But understand where your coming from.

Remember. You only get the government you deserve. If you don't like the way they run the state don't vote for them.

Thanks for the advice Ray!! But i didnt vote for the last 16 years but i still got the Government i didnt deserve.. !!! Michael

Michael
Gday mate, you have always struck me as an intelligent man, LOL

Do you, or anyone, honestly think that a govt of ANY colour will kill off such a lucrative cash cow, please don't hold your breath waiting mate, cos I will miss you when your gone.

Gotta go now the outback is waiting, 93 days away Woooo Hooo.
Cheers Colin.

Colin!! Thanks for the accolades !! I really think we will get some common sense in govt at last.. Barry O F is 52 and if he does the right thing, he can retire in the job, Hope the weather holds and you both throughly enjoy your trip.. cheers Michael

Ray, I'm with Michael on this one.
Besides, I voted against a four term as well, didn't stop the sheep thinking it was a good thing.
LOL ;)

Hi Vince,
Remember the Transport Minister David Campbell? At the time he said, "Point to point cameras would never be used against motorist, they are installed to monitor heavy vehicles"
ROFLMAO. Well didn't he turn out to be an outstanding citizen?
The problem with these is that it is an average, that average can change.

Hi Wayne,
"no one will ever convince the power's to be as long as there is money to be made from speed cameras."
Dead right.
When speed cameras were introduced in school zones, the RTA said that revenue from these would self fund 'All school zones to have speed cameras installed' Now they say they never intended to do that.

Agree entirely Shaker.......someone has once again successfully cast the bait, got the bites and now this will go to bed.....well at least I hope it does :-)

Shaker,
You have such a way with words mate.
"It is an alarmist thread title"
If you read it as alarmist, well I guess your entitled to so, but it's not.
I have it on very authority that they are gearing up for this. Two very good mates (Ex Coppers) have been asked to put their resumes forward by the end of the month, $38 an hour is the offer. They are finding that very hard to knock back.
Also the article mentions that they will not be notifying the public when this is rolled out.
"So far no date has been announced when this tolerance change will take place – if any announcement will even be made"

So why would Macquarie Bank get involved in this venture if there is nothing in it?
Macquarie Bank does not do thinks for the love of it, except for the love of money. Typical of this Labor government to under sell our assets.

To use the words of a great Aussie fashion model.......'I wouldn't get out of bed for that (well she really said 'for less than $10,000).....but seriously I couldn't do such work no matter how much they paid. And, I couldn't work for such a morally corrupt company.

True, I couldn't do it either, but I guess when you have bills to pay, 3 kids still in high school, 1 in Uni, it is very tempting for no out lay other than to get to work and home.

If only it was that simple Allan, are you sure that the speedo on your car is 100% accurate?
Are you sure that thre is no difference in your speedo when you have new tyres compared to tyres that are almost in need of replacing?
The issue I guess people are saying is that it gives no allowance for ADR rules and tyre wear.
I know for sure that there is a difference of about 8-10km/hr when I compare my Prado with my Hyundai.... how would the every day jo know that if they don't have another vehicle or reliable GPS to check it????

944runner, this is what it is about.
So therefor you tyres can be legal, yet the RTA are saying we'll give no allowance for wear, you were speeding.
Hmmm

Hi 944runner, Yes, I am quite sure of my speedo accuracy. Both vehicles checked using two GP's at points between 60 and 100k/h. I was surprised to find that they were spot-on. I really did not expect it, especially the Troopy. But there it was, unreadable difference, must have been within 1k/h.
Now I'm not saying of course that every speedo is that accurate, I'm just lucky.

As for tyre wear, any error caused by that would result in the speedo registering a higher than actual road speed so that should not cause you to exceed the limit.

ADR 18/03 requires, among other things, that "The speed indicated shall not be less than the true speed of the vehicle." so at the time of manufacture at least, you should not get done if your speedo reads at or below the limit.

In any case, with the new speed cameras, the situation of speedo accuracy considerations has not changed. The only change is that now you may get booked at 1k/h above the posted limit NOT 5 or 10k/h or whatever above the limit.

The issue of your speedo accuracy is, unfortunately, the driver's responsibility just as is all other components of vehicle safety such as brakes. When the new vehicle is delivered the speedo is accurate to within what the law requires. It is up to the owner/driver to maintain and check the vehicle after that. If the "everyday jo" cannot check it then they must employ someone who can. Not saying that it's simple or fair but it is the true case sadly.

Hi Alan,
"When the new vehicle is delivered the speedo is accurate to within what the law requires"
Yes it does. So the vehicle is legal? yet the RTA disregards this.
Hmm all new vehicles will be 100% accurate? I doubt it.
Just for arguments sake ;)
I own a 78 XC Falcon still running the factory specified tyres and the ADR allowed 5% either way from actual road speed to what the speedo reads and the responsibility is on me to have this corrected?

See this is typical of the RTA.

Another factor in this is the accuracy of their cameras, it has been proven time and time again that their cameras are not 100% accurate. Yet they carry on in the quest for more dollars.

Hi Jon, Do not think for one moment that I am defending the RTA, police, government or anyone else. I am just stating the rules as I understand them.

Referring to your Follow Up above................

1. How does the "RTA disregard this"? Or rather, what do they disregard?

2. "all vehicles will be 100% accurate" Who said that?

3. I have no way of confirming what the ADR specified in 1978 but applicable from 1 July 2006/2007 they defined the speedo accuracy requirement as:
"The speed indicated shall not be less than the true speed of the vehicle. At the test
speeds specified in paragraph 5.2.5. above, there shall be the following relationship
between the speed displayed (V1 ) and the true speed (V2).
0 = (V1 - V2) = 0.1 V2 + 4 km/h" You can work it out from that.
Here is the link to the full documentAUSTRALIAN DESIGN RULE 18/03 INSTRUMENTATION

4. The new digital speed cameras are reputed to be very accurate but I am sure the operating police will allow an appropriate margin for error small though it may be.

I do not like the administration of the speed cameras any more than anyone else, but I do face realities.

Ok,
They disregard this by,
From the Article Speed camera tolerances reduced to zero "What happened to the Australian Design Rules (ADR) specifications that allowed a 10 percent margin for error on speedo readouts from the factory? Well, apparently the RTA and the State Debt Recovery Office aren’t interested in manufacturer tolerances either. Luckily, the ADR standards have since changed so that all vehicles from the factory must readout a speed on or above the actual speed of the car."
Fine for newer vehicles, no allowance for older Vehicles.
Do they clock you doing Xkph and say, thats a 2005 model "what ever so therefore we have to allow 5% tolerance" or that's a 1964 Holden, do we allow ?%.
I'm sure you are older enough to remember driving a HQ or similar year model and the speedo would bounce between ten mile an hour either way. I know later cars don't have this problem.
A 78 Xc was used just for an example, this could be any vehicle, I also would gather that speed cameras used in the way they are to day (revenue raising) is different to what they were used for then. `
The speedo accuracy requirement, I have bookmarked the link and I'll look through it later, Cheers.

"4. The new digital speed cameras are reputed to be very accurate but I am sure the operating police will allow an appropriate margin for error small though it may be."
Hmm, see this is where there probably wont be any allowances, a private company will fine you, you will need to take them to court. The Police are kept out of it.
Again from the Article
"A senior police officer even expressed concerns in the Fairfax report, saying that motorists who simply changed their tyres to a larger tread depth – putting off the original speedo calibration – might start getting fined for speeding just a few kilometres over the limit even though the speedo appears to be displaying a legal speed."
By the sound of that the police will have nothing to do with it, it will be contracted.
There was a story in the telly the other night about this, and nobody was prepared to speak on camera about.
I hate giving the Government money as well, that's why I have only been fined the once in 30 years of driving for speeding.
Once for a tail light out, once for not having my license on me and once for Noisy exhaust due to management of vehicle. Not bad considering the hours I have spent on the road as a taxi driver, truck driver and traveling the Pathetic Highway, Sorry the Pacific H/Way. :)

See they have found a loophole,
"Luckily, the ADR standards have since changed so that all vehicles from the factory must readout a speed on or above the actual speed of the car"
Arh, but when did it change.
And this is what they will exploit for financial gain.
The RTA nor do the police what to spend time and resources in the courts, they'll leave that up to a macquarie.

I just feel that there are going to be a lot of people caught out with this.
Cheers

G'Day Allan B ....

Gunna make a little assumpion here based on your post content. Its not intended as derogatory .... just highlighting the ways that people view vehicle speeds.

Firstly tho ...

Vehicle speed is in a constant state of change. Traffic Conditions, Terrain, etc., all determine what a vehicle speed may be at a given point in time.

Now it is possible, by reducing observation/concentration of things like surrounding traffic, pedestrians, school zones, stray dogs etc., ... and staring fixedly at the speedometer ... to always maintain the vehicle speed at the exact same number painted on the prolific, and constantly changing speed signs, encountered on ones journey between point A & point B .... but should one be only staring at the speedo ???

Posted speed limits are effectively a guide ... and should not be applied as a hard and fast rule ... as the variables in motor vehicle control make it impossible to set a fixed speed limit that all motorists/all vehicles will be able to adhere to - in all conditions.

My assumption is this .... Your background is obviously one where "exactness" was common place ... something related to controlled environment, scientific experiments ... or mathmatical equations ... or maybe spelling competitions .....

........ As a person with a practical background understands that using a so-called, govt touted "exact", speed monitoring device to check the speed of vehicles with a throttle control device consisting of bone, muscle, tissue, poorly hinged plastic pedals connected to loose and rattly linkages or stretched cables etc., on a constantly changing road surface ... is impractical ... except for revenue raising purposes.

Again .. just hilighting the "two sides of a coin" approach to looking at a situation.

Now yes ..... we need indicated speed limits for various driving locations ...... and the old 35mph/60mph maximums worked fine ... as everybody understood the need to drive slower if the conditions demanded it.

So whats gone wrong with Aust driving standards if the roadside needs to be littered with distracting signs constantly denoting minute changes of allowable vehicle speeds .... surely it wasnt the change to the metric system ... or was it ????

.... indeed ... whats gone wrong with country for it to be nescessary to micro-manage vehicle speeds ???

What I dont understand is that ... If speed/safety/rort cameras are such a great a road safety initiative ... and better than a physical police presence on the roads ..... why dont the tricky little money boxes take photos of the drunk driver travelling at 15kph less than the posted limit ???? ...

Hi Oztroopy,

No, I don't take your expression as derogatory in any way....... in fact I agree with virtually everything you said.

Firstly, I am unsure of what your expression has to do with anything specific to what I have posted. I do not like all the legal constraints, speed limit signs, warning signs in general for that matter, speed cameras and all the other appurtenances that our bureaucrats have imposed on our society any more than many others. Bringing everyone down to the lowest denominator rather than targeting just those who will not or cannot do the "right thing".
However I accept that other than moving to Outer Mongolia I am unable to change that situation and therefore seek ways to acceptably live within it without raising my blood pressure.

But your assumption about my background is spot-on. My career has been in measurement and control of processes. Oil & Gas, Energy and chemical plants mostly. As a result, whilst I am not besotted with controlling all things precisely, I do like to arrange things to be as automatic as possible and to stay within what I consider to be desirable limits. (That's a long-winded way to say I'm lazy!)

As to keeping within the legal speed limits to avoid being fined, I find that most of the time my judgement of speed when within my own familiar vehicles is pretty good. There are times however when it can drift, usually up, but I do not find it difficult to glance regularly at the speedo unlike some who talk about the problem of driving with "eyes glued to the instrument panel".
However I need to confess to a little gadget I have constructed similar to a cruise control but which leaves me in control of the throttle. Having attained the desired speed I simply press a button which locks in the speed and sounds a beep should I exceed it. It's no trouble to reset it for each of the many speed variations we encounter, just press the button at the new speed. I don't always bother with it but it's there if I want it.

And yes, I would also prefer to have a greater police presence on the road than micro-control by myriad signs and measuring cameras. I have no real axe-to-grind on this subject but you may spot that I do enjoy a bit of argument. LOL

Have a good one mate.

phewwww .... Was a tad worried about my usual treading on toes typing style

I guess the point I was making was that the fixation of "exactness" for a vehicle speed is an exercise in futility in the practical world ... except as means to extract cash from drivers.

I'll try an analogy .....

A vehicle temp gauge that always displays a required engine running temp of say .... 90*
When a digital readout gauge is used ... the temp is constantly varying from 85* to 95* to provide that 90* temperature.

A speedo is no different .... To drive at 100kph on a constantly changing road surface requires the same lo & hi fluctuations.

100kph down the hill means 80kph up the hill ... which means 90kph travel speed .... not including additional, unnescessary brake use down - and excessive fuel use up ...

110kph down the hill means 90kph up the hill ... Which means 100kph travel speed ...

Probably all a little bit dependant on whether you have a pootrol or similiar with an old "proper" motor ... or a new fangled scream and go-boom eco-friendly 4cyl ...

An absolute max 100kph dictated by govt .... means they have lowered actual speed limits to less than 100kph .....

Now Im not big on excessive speeds for driving conditions either .... and with age and reaction times becoming a consideration I certainly dont drive at speeds I used to drive at ....

However a run down the Newell Highway at a max 100kph these days .... is more dangerous than any 160kph trip I ever did as a youngun .... thanks to trucks and caravan towers being unable to use downhill runs to assist with momentum for the uphill sections ... and bumper to bumper highway traffic coz vehicles that cant maintain 100kph in all circumstances cant be safely overtaken coz 101kph or more .... is an illegal speed to travel at for a short distance on a straight stretch.

... and dont the clowns realise that if they allow trucks to be twice as long as they used to be ..... then the max allowed overtaking speed has to be INCREASED - to safely overtake the longer vehicle on same section of straight road as a shorter vehicle ????

Like you .. I have some vehicle gadgets too ... My favourite is the pointy stick the passengers poke me with .... In an attempt to stop me at falling asleep whilst we travel at a constant, sheer mind numbing, boring, droning speed of 99kph ... to avoid adding to the states coffers.



The rules are being changed by those "besotted" with exactness .... and lack your attribute of understanding "desirable limits" .... not to mention their desperate grab for cash mentality and I presume ... lack of real world driving experiences.

OzTroopy, Re "Exactness"...... In our society when it comes to dealings with attached numbers, there is always the element of exactness. If you offer the bank teller (or machine maybe these days) a withdrawal request for $100 then that is what you get.... $100. Not $99 or $101. The Tax dept. does not ask for approximately what you earned, they want to know exactly.

Same with speed legislation. 100k/h does not mean "Oh, something about that mate", it means 100. Anything other would be a shambles.

If the police were to state that they will not book you in a 100 zone until you were over 110 then everyone who can trust their speedo accuracy will drive at 110. Even if this were the case the police obviously cannot confirm it.

So it all runs with as much exactness as can be obtained. If the police have a new speed camera which has an accuracy better than 1k/h then unless you can match it you need to drive sufficiently below the limit within the accuracy of your speedo. Or get a speed indicating device which will match that of our enforcers.

Whilst I used to believe that road speed monitoring measures were for reasons of safety I have come to believe, like many others, that revenue-raising is now the prime motivation.

Oh, and if as you did, spell my name correctly with two"LL's" I am forever grateful! LOL

Geez, I did spell your name wrong.
Sorry Allan.

LOL @ John..... Oops, Jon. LOL again.

:)

Errr, no Bucky. It will not be the "End of story"

The next episode will be a Summons to court!

I will definately not be paying and take it to court as we did with my wifes fine 7 years ago and still havnt heard anything till this day, renewed her licence, rego etc so has had no impact...........

Mate it's been proven that the more you watch your speedo the greater the chance of an accident
What you have described in the change speed linits on one stretch of road it happens.
The Limit changes every K or more, your watching your speedo, BAM you run up the bum of the car in front. RTA comes along and says, " an accident has happen here, we must lower the speed limit and put up a camera'
That will fix it.
These RTA Clowns are Justifying their on existence.

The problem with the red light cameras here in the USA is that Redflex were manipulating the length of the yellow light reducing it by up to 3 seconds in order the catch more people.

How do I know...........

I got caught in one, Missed the red light by .37 of a second, paid the fine and 9 months later received a refund for the full amount.

Be afraid, be very afraid of a Redflex camera coming to a corner near you.

Bruce

Fallbrook CA

Here in Australia it is illegal to 'enter' an intersection on an amber light,

Not quite right Shaker, you can enter an intersection on an amber light providing you didnt have time to stop, eg get to the line and about to cross it on a green and it goes amber you would have no choice except to go through on an amber. if you have time to stop and it goes amber and you go through it, depending on the cops discretion as to wether he thinks you had time to stop or not. If you are before the line say in traffic and the light goes amber and then you take off from an amber then they have the right to ping you without question. Regards Steve
From the rta website......................57 Stopping for a yellow traffic light or arrow

(1) A driver approaching or at traffic lights showing a yellow traffic light must stop:
(a) if there is a stop line at or near the traffic lights and the driver can stop safely before reaching the stop line—as near as practicable to, but before reaching, the stop line, or
(b) if there is no stop line at or near the traffic lights and the driver can stop safely before reaching the traffic lights—as near as practicable to, but before reaching, the nearest or only traffic lights, or
(c) if the traffic lights are at an intersection and the driver cannot stop safely in accordance with paragraph (a) or (b), but can stop safely before entering the intersection—before entering the intersection,
and must not proceed past the stop line or nearest or only traffic lights, or into the intersection (as the case may be), until the traffic lights show a green or flashing yellow traffic light or no traffic light.

OK, it wasn't really worth researching the law to the enth degree, maybe I should have said "deliberately enter".
The fact is most people seem to see the lights as Green, Green, Red.

Hi Tony,
And on the other side of the coin motorists use a local traffic only area through street that passes a school as a 'Rat Run' because it is 200 meters shorter than the main through road and council, the RTA and police will not do anything about it. It is a favorite 200 meter short cut for heavy vehicles(Gravel trucks).

Councils response. 'Council provides roads for all road users, Council can not stop road users that obey the speed and weight limits(there is NO weight limit) from using this road way' Note, the pavement surface has broken up from the frequent use of heavy vehicle traffic. When I brought this to councils attention they shrugged it of by saying that this is Normal wear and tear of a public road.

RTA response, It is Councils responsibility to restrict through traffic in local Traffic Areas, the RTA has no authority in this area.

Police response, This is a matter for High way patrol.
High way Patrol's response, We do not have the resources to patrol this street, please ring us when these vehicles are using this route.

Go figure hey.
Yet their can pull the crap that you mention Tony.
Unbelievable.