Motoring Discussion > Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? Legal Questions
Thread Author: BobbyG Replies: 9

 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - BobbyG

Interesting topic, especially the fact that only 2 cameras can be linked at any one time, I always thought they were all linked together.

Could be fun on the A80 Glasgow to Stirling Road if this is read by many....
 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - smokie
I thought that had been exposed as a myth.

By line dates the story "Last updated at 23:07pm on 15.10.06"

Try it and do remember to let us know how you get on :-)
Last edited by: smokie on Fri 11 Jun 10 at 08:45
 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - Tooslow
Smokie, Doh!! I looked at the date and managed to misread it. There's a lot of ancient history circulating at the top of the BBC "Most read" list (yes I know it's not the BBC) so I always check.

 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - Tooslow
Bobby, this has been an urban legend for years, first time I've seen what appears to be confirmation. I'm amazed. What's this bizarre idea of "linking cameras together"? If I were designing it, a camera would simply record "nbr plate x crossed point a" in a central repository. Subsequent cameras record the same info, it's matched centrally and bingo - you get 3 tickets because you exceed the limit from point a to b, from b to c and maybe one for a to c for good luck. Lane? What's that got to do with it?

This is utterly incompetent design. Or specification.

 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - rtj70
When SPECS cameras first got type approval I believe only two cameras were linked. Technically this was not the limitation but it was how it was tested/approved. They will have reapproved it by now.

And a lot of new 'SPECS' cameras are not SPECS cameras. Things move on. So I would not risk this but if we could have a volunteer :-)
 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - BobbyG
Tooslow, I am aware of the urban "myth" on these but have never wanted to volunteer my services to find out!

But I have always assumed, like you point out, that they would all have been linked in one way or t'other so any speeding, anywhere in the section would be picked up.

But as Rob points out, this seems to have only been approved for 2 cameras initially and has never been revisited.

This could also, in a way, back up my theory that some of the SPECS are either not real or not connected. we have SPECS on M77 and A80 up here and I have never heard of anyone, friend, family, work colleague, other forums etc who has been caught by either of these sets of cameras. I know of at least one colleague who came through the A80 roadworks during the night and did not realise (yes I know thats worrying) that there were cameras and she admits she probably did a flat out 70 through them when limit is 40.
She never heard a peep from the authorities so they are either not connected or she happened to always be in a different lane at each SPEC.
 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - Tooslow
Bobby, I have a distant and ancient relative who insists that these things are switched off on Sundays. Where he got that from I have no idea. Nonetheless, he blasts through and has not been "done". So either he's right or your theory is correct. I think I prefer your theory :-) A few dummys sounds credible After all the Gatsos are sometimes empty boxes.
 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - rtj70
Even GATSO boxes with cameras cannot catch too many because the film runs out... which is why new GATSOs are digital cameras!
 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - Skoda
It just doesn't sit well with that there's this database of date, time, location & registration number somewhere.

What happens when it gets left on a pen drive on the underground? It's easy to analyse for patterns.

Ahhh i see BJ10XXX sets off on his rounds at 8am everyday, never back before 11am, plenty of valuable computer stuff in his house. Lets visit at 8.30am with a big empty British Gas / Transco liveried van.

Simplistic example without much thought, i wouldn't read into the example too much but more the idea of what do we do *when* this goes wrong.

Already people are guilty of believing the damned cameras... ahh it says it read BJ10XXX -- that's taken as fact and only down the line is it verified, and only then do we find the computer program got it wrong.

What happens when the image is deleted (they cost a lot to store compared to the text registration number extracted from the image) now the incorrect reg number will be taken as an irrefutable *fact* even though it's wrong.

As human's we are hopeless at living with computers. We constantly get burned by trusting computers, but we still do it. Whether by bugs in the system or malicious intent, that trust will be abused if someone can gain from doing so.

EDIT: I'm not necessarily arguing against the speed enforcement side of this, just the current implementation which means all this data is recorded. It doesn't have to be implemented that way, you can build the system only to record data of vehicles which it believes have breached the designated speed. You don't need to indefinitely record everyone that passes by the camera, if the purpose is only speed enforcement.

We're opening ourselves up to future problems, can be avoided.
Last edited by: CraigP on Fri 11 Jun 10 at 12:55
 Clarification on SPECS lane changing ? - jc2
Early SPECS were only operating on one lane;modern ones cover all lanes and modern speed cameras are not digital cameras as such but just a camera which sends images to a remote computer and does not need a change of film or chip.
Latest Forum Posts