Talk:SPECS (speed camera)

Removed section

I have removed the following section because there are not the facts to back up the claim that these camera are not working. In fact the evidece suggests the contrary: [1][2][3].

Feel free to dispute but please do not revert until you can substantiate the claim.

Road Safety Claims

Despite Claims that SPECS cameras are an effective road safety tool, by both Speed Camera Partnership and the manufacturer, there is no evidence that their use reduces fatalities. Nottingham’s SPECS installation has been live since July 2000, in that time 76,000 fines were issued raising £4.2M (Source). Unfortunately Fatalities in the area actually increased (source)

--TFoxton 23:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, if you extend the argument, there are no credible statistics that prove that any form of speed camera makes the roads safer. There are plenty of statistics that show that the roads are less safe now than they were 5 years ago (after decades of the reverse), but the reason is not claimed to be the adoption of speed cameras but rather the abandonment of virtually all other policies on road safety to cocentrate on speed. 20.133.0.13 (talk) 08:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Operation

Can anyone give a more detailed explanation of how these cameras operate. If they use number plate recognition then is there any way it could incorrectly recognise two similar number plates? How does this type of camera spot a number plate rather than a company Logo, for example. Given that there are perhaps hundreds, if not thousands of vehicles going through the checkpoints, what sort of technology is used to sift through each vehicle and check the average speed. Also, is it legal or can you challenge the result? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnxerri (talk • contribs) 19:21, 21 August 2006

They use Automatic number plate recognition technology to scan and record number plates. I'm sure that errors do occur, but they are likely to be a very small proportion of the total number of plates scanned. And, yes, you can challenge a speeding fine, you are given this opportunity when the fixed penalty notice arrives. --TFoxton 21:50, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Many authorities only permit a challenge if the motorist first registers a 'Not Guilty' plea. Thus the opportunity to pay the fixed penalty is lost if a challenge is made and the evidence reveals a valid allegation. This is particularly the case with many Safety Camera Partnerships who have vested interests in discouraging motorists challenging their allegations. It is claimed that many of them don't actually check the photographs for validity before posting the NIP. 20.133.0.13 (talk) 10:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Locations Section

It should be considered that this section is covered by Wikipedia is not a directory and thus removed. Other road safety camera pages do not list locations. Comments? --TFoxton 21:39, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Agree. Regan123 (talk) 00:11, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 12:58, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Fake cameras on M62?

There's currently a long stretch of the M62 undergoing conversion to a managed motorway. These SPECS cameras are along the full length. I'm convinced many of them are fake. When they were being installed you could clearly see the cantilever strut was a hollow tube with no connecting wires for the cameras. Additionally, many of the camera poles appear to have no cabling at all at their base; some have just been inserted into undisturbed ground and others are placed on concrete plinths with no evidence of any cabling. If some of these devices are fake then it should be mentioned in the article. 86.9.233.162 (talk) 19:32, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on SPECS (speed camera). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061014042052/http://www.speedcheck.co.uk/pdf/05_03_11press_sheet.pdf to http://www.speedcheck.co.uk/pdf/05_03_11press_sheet.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:28, 18 February 2016 (UTC)