Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Excellence in Public Sector consulting

Speed Camera between Gungahlin Dr and Ellenborough Street

By c` 23 November 2009 39

Yes, an “I got caught question”.

Is there something wrong with these speed traps? I just received two fines in the mail today for consecutive days (15 and 16 November). The both allege I was doing 90+ on both occasions.

I find this surprising as I take this road every day and the signs pretty clearly indicate that a revenue trap is ahead. My last speeding ticket was 10 years ago and I’ve been driving for nearly 20 years. If it’s true I’ve done those speeds then I will cop it, but twice within 24 hours is a little weird for me.

So I’m just asking whether anyone else has received a surprise in the mail re this speed camera?

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
39 Responses to
Speed Camera between Gungahlin Dr and Ellenborough Street
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
James-T-Kirk 2:22 pm 07 Dec 09

phil m said :

It seems like all speed cameras do to me is teach me to stare more at my speedo than at the road, or the back of the next person’s car, or other far safer things to be monitoring as closely.

I disagree – Speed cameras are a wonderful opportunity to show others that my brake lights are functioning!

Ello Vera 8:20 am 03 Dec 09

Just to balance things out, I have not travelled through those cameras and _have_ received a letter.

They withdrew the fine when I wrote to them saying that at the time I was parked elsewhere and had ~22 witnesses. No explanation for the error. Certainly makes me sceptical about any future notices.

canucksfan 3:16 pm 27 Nov 09

Looking back i wiould have definately travelled through those cameras on the days you mentioned and have not recieved any letters yet which would indicate that i got through there safetly and legally. I do probably sit at the upper end of the limit there so if there was an issue with the cameras pinging all those over 75km/h i would have been done.
My issue with that whole section of the barton Highway (and sorry if writing this hets one of the speed limits lowered) is that there are two sections that are designated 80km/h zones one between federal Highway and 2XX comunity radio and the other between Kuringa Dr and Gundaroo Rd. The area in the middle is deemed safe to drive 100km even though this has no lighting and bushland on the northern side which is definately inhabited by Kangaroos. On the nice safe well lit parts of this dual carriageway we are required to slow down. Go Figure.

el 3:56 pm 25 Nov 09

damien haas said :

in the uk i believe there is a gatso vandalism cult.

http://www.speedcam.co.uk/gatso2.htm

damien haas 2:39 pm 25 Nov 09

in the uk i believe there is a gatso vandalism cult.

c` 12:10 pm 25 Nov 09

GPS & Speedo are pretty much neck and neck after unscientific trials last night. Requesting the photos today.

grump 12:07 pm 25 Nov 09

on a side issue, if as we are often told these are “safety cameras” and not just for raising revenue (cough cough), why are they not painted bright day glow safety yellow…..

Watch out for the red light camera between Gungahlin and Gundaroo Drives. It will book people for touching the lounge, even going near it.

damien haas 8:43 pm 24 Nov 09

outside diameter is usually printed on tyre sidewalls.

Holden Caulfield 3:59 pm 24 Nov 09

phil m said :

I am afraid to report, but I regularly cruise through those cameras at 80 (sometimes 82 or 83 even) and have not received any fines from them…

That would be because it is more than likely that your car came from the factory with a degree of speedo inaccuracy (it’s okay most cars do). So at an indicated 80km/h your real speed may only be 75km/h.

I would guess, but do not know for fact (although I have a reasonable amount of anecdotal evidence behind me, haha), that the cameras used by the ACT Gov also allow a degree of leniency and/or inaccuracy and they may be set to trigger at an actual speed of 85km/h.

All this means, in the vast majority of cars on our roads one could most likely go through the camera zone at an indicated 85km/h (or more) and still be “safe”.

Holden Caulfield 3:53 pm 24 Nov 09

c` said :

…how else do I calculate the rolling circumference? Genuine question.

You cheat -> 2154.4mm according to http://www.1010tires.com/TireSizeCalculator.asp

el 3:50 pm 24 Nov 09

Very Busy said :

caf said :

The difference between old and new tires can definitely be in the ballpark of a 10% difference in indicated speed (with new tires causing the speedo to indicate slower).

The difference in overall circumference between a new tyre and an old tyre is nowhere near 10%. 1% or 2% max could be possible. The original poster has stated that the car is fitted with original spec tyres so speedo error is almost certainly not to blame here. If the speedo is wrong it could only be due to a non factory spec differential or gearbox fitted.

Or, of course, a faulty speedo, nylon speedo gear or dodgy cable 🙂

Very Busy said :

This case is a very good example of my utter disapointment with the pathetic efforts of our authorities regarding law enforcement and road safety. Many will probably shoot me down here, but I would say that it is infinately safer to travel at 90kmh on that stretch of road than it is to travel in any 80kmh zone while talking on a mobile, failing to use indicators, failing to give way etc.

Yep, I’ll agree with this, particularly regarding the camera/s that have pinged the OP.

sloppery 3:30 pm 24 Nov 09

Sidewall height has to be added to wheel radius to calculate the total wheel/tyre radius.

c` 3:13 pm 24 Nov 09

Very Busy said :

c` said :

Tyres are 215 65 r16

16 in diameter rims. Tread Width 215 mm. Sidewall 65% of Tread Width.

Radius is

8in (20cm) + .65 * 21.5 = 34cm

circumference = 106

circumference @ 32.5 = 102

This is around 3.75%.

So my speedo should read 3.75% slower. That’s right, isn’t it?

Anyway, that might be a contributing factor but in the end means little in defence of my situation.

No, treadwidth and sidewall % are irrelevant, but yes it has nothing to do with your predicament.

Unless I’m riding on steel how else do I calculate the rolling circumference? Genuine question.

caf 3:05 pm 24 Nov 09

Very Busy: Circumference is directly proportional to radius, so an X% difference in radius results in an X% difference in circumference. If you can’t see that, I don’t think you have anything useful to contribute to the discussion.

c` 2:50 pm 24 Nov 09

I’m a sofa king. circumference is 2*pi*r. The good thing is the ratios remain the same.

Very Busy 2:48 pm 24 Nov 09

c` said :

Tyres are 215 65 r16

16 in diameter rims. Tread Width 215 mm. Sidewall 65% of Tread Width.

Radius is

8in (20cm) + .65 * 21.5 = 34cm

circumference = 106

circumference @ 32.5 = 102

This is around 3.75%.

So my speedo should read 3.75% slower. That’s right, isn’t it?

Anyway, that might be a contributing factor but in the end means little in defence of my situation.

No, treadwidth and sidewall % are irrelevant, but yes it has nothing to do with your predicament.

Sgt.Bungers 2:45 pm 24 Nov 09

Very Busy said :

This case is a very good example of my utter disapointment with the pathetic efforts of our authorities regarding law enforcement and road safety. Many will probably shoot me down here, but I would say that it is infinately safer to travel at 90kmh on that stretch of road than it is to travel in any 80kmh zone while talking on a mobile, failing to use indicators, failing to give way etc. Yet, what are the stats – How many infringement notices have been handed out for each offence over the last year? I’ll bet that the speeding infringement is 100’s of times more often. After all it doesn’t take much effort to pull in those $ does it? That is why it’s called revenue raising.

Couldn’t agree more. In fact, I’m willing to wager that on that particular stretch of road, a vehicle being driven at 100km/h by an attentive driver, in good conditions, with little to know other vehicles around, is safer than a person doing 50km/h on many of our residential streets. Yet, how many fixed speed cameras are on residential streets? How many mobile cameras can be spotted on residential streets? How many police radaring has anyone spotted on residential streets?

There are so many contradictions in ACT speed limits it is hard to list them all. My favs, the 80km/h limit on the northern end of the Monaro, a favourite for police. Limited access for the majority of it’s length, no U turn bays… vs Yamba drive between the Yarra Glen round about and the hospital… traffic lights everywhere, passing within close proximity to schools, intersections with give way signs… also 80km/h.

GDE between Glenlock and Belco Way, 80km/h, a single carpark exit northbound, otherwise limited access, central barrier, limit widely ignored by many. Turn onto Parks way between Glenlock and Holt, 90km/h zone with traffic lights, 3 intersections with passive traffic control, no central barrier, and indeed no median for a fair chunk of it’s length. How does that make sense?

Very Busy said :

BTW, for the record I have never had an infringement from a red light or speed camera.

Ditto.

c` 2:43 pm 24 Nov 09

Tyres are 215 65 r16

16 in diameter rims. Tread Width 215 mm. Sidewall 65% of Tread Width.

Radius is

8in (20cm) + .65 * 21.5 = 34cm

circumference = 106

circumference @ 32.5 = 102

This is around 3.75%.

So my speedo should read 3.75% slower. That’s right, isn’t it?

Anyway, that might be a contributing factor but in the end means little in defence of my situation.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site