A Thread About Censorship In Films Shown...
ChatterBank0 min ago
What was my speed?
17 Answers
I recently got fined £60 with 3 points on my licence for doing 36mph in a 30mph zone. I did ask for the Gatso certificate of calibration, which I received with photos showing the car's position half a second apart.
Now at the time I 'bit the bullet' and paid the fine, but recently I got the photos out again to try and work out the speed for myself.
They show that in half a second the car moved the space of 4 white painted marks plus maybe another one or two feet, but no more than an extra two feet. I used the position of the base of the nearside back tyre, where it touches the road, as my reference points. The space between the white marks are five feet, so I estimate my car travelled 22 feet in that half a second.
I now know that to convert feet per second to mph the figure has to be multiplied by 0.6818. This means that to convert the feet per half second then that figure would need to be multiplied by 1.3636.
These calculations shows my car was travelling at 29.999 mph!
A couple of questions. Do you agree with my answer? If so, what can I do to rectify matters?
I did ring the police where it occurred, only to be told that because I paid the fine, I admitted the alleged offence and there was nothing I could now do, but a solicitor could act on my behalf! It wasn't just the fine that annoys me, there's also the 3 points on my licence, and also the fact for the next 3 years I now have to pay increased car insurance.
Any advice or comments welcome. Thank you.
Now at the time I 'bit the bullet' and paid the fine, but recently I got the photos out again to try and work out the speed for myself.
They show that in half a second the car moved the space of 4 white painted marks plus maybe another one or two feet, but no more than an extra two feet. I used the position of the base of the nearside back tyre, where it touches the road, as my reference points. The space between the white marks are five feet, so I estimate my car travelled 22 feet in that half a second.
I now know that to convert feet per second to mph the figure has to be multiplied by 0.6818. This means that to convert the feet per half second then that figure would need to be multiplied by 1.3636.
These calculations shows my car was travelling at 29.999 mph!
A couple of questions. Do you agree with my answer? If so, what can I do to rectify matters?
I did ring the police where it occurred, only to be told that because I paid the fine, I admitted the alleged offence and there was nothing I could now do, but a solicitor could act on my behalf! It wasn't just the fine that annoys me, there's also the 3 points on my licence, and also the fact for the next 3 years I now have to pay increased car insurance.
Any advice or comments welcome. Thank you.
Answers
1 to 17 of 17
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by wiltsman. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Are you getting the half a second value from what you 've been told the time is or is the time tamp printed on the pictures and if so what is the exact value.
If it's nearer 0.4 than 0.5 that makes a big difference in the calculation.
But I don't think there's much you can do about the case now.
If it's of any consolation if you've an otherwise clean license you'd be unlikely to see much change in your insurance premium.
If it's nearer 0.4 than 0.5 that makes a big difference in the calculation.
But I don't think there's much you can do about the case now.
If it's of any consolation if you've an otherwise clean license you'd be unlikely to see much change in your insurance premium.
Well another view if you do the maths I think you'll see that to be doing 36 he would have had to have travelled 26.4 feet which, if the marks *are* 5 feet apart would definately show up.
And as I say that *is* presuming that the images are .5 and not .4 seconds apart.
A small difference in the time makes a big difference in the speed
And as I say that *is* presuming that the images are .5 and not .4 seconds apart.
A small difference in the time makes a big difference in the speed
Thank for the quick responses.
(Jake) The inset graphics on the picture does show '0.5 sec'
(Another-view) I was just stating what I saw on the photos, a Gatso camera has to be calibrated every year, and even then, more than six months had elapsed from the date of calibration to the date of my allleged offence.
I would say my 'estimate' of the distance travelled was on the cautious side, that's why I said it was no more than twenty two feet.
Anyhow, thank you both for your comments.
(Jake) The inset graphics on the picture does show '0.5 sec'
(Another-view) I was just stating what I saw on the photos, a Gatso camera has to be calibrated every year, and even then, more than six months had elapsed from the date of calibration to the date of my allleged offence.
I would say my 'estimate' of the distance travelled was on the cautious side, that's why I said it was no more than twenty two feet.
Anyhow, thank you both for your comments.
-- answer removed --
Thank you all for your views. Very interesting site Toureman. To Twenty 20, I did say that 22feet was what I saw on the photo to be the maximum distance, so instead of being a gnat's whisker under 30 mph, it could be an elephant's whisker under 30mph!
Jake-the-Peg said, that with a clean licence, which I have, I would be unlikely to see much change in my insurance premium. Well my insurance company wanted to add about £60 to my premium, they took the view that speeding is speeding, whether it was 6mph or 20mph over the limit. Obviously I shopped around, and after declaring my 'offense' I did find one that was more reasonable.
I expect though I shall continue to 'bite the bullet'!
Thank you all for your views.
Jake-the-Peg said, that with a clean licence, which I have, I would be unlikely to see much change in my insurance premium. Well my insurance company wanted to add about £60 to my premium, they took the view that speeding is speeding, whether it was 6mph or 20mph over the limit. Obviously I shopped around, and after declaring my 'offense' I did find one that was more reasonable.
I expect though I shall continue to 'bite the bullet'!
Thank you all for your views.
-- answer removed --
darren - points do stay on your licence for 4 years but for the purpose of 'topping up' they are 'live' for only 3 years. See http://www.direct.gov...ifications/DG_4022550
In some areas, the marks are not five foot apart but are two metres (approx 6.6 foot) apart. That means in your case, the distance would be approximately 26.25 feet or 52.5 ft per second. That equates to 38.5 mph. If the extra distance were one foot rather than the two foot you estimated, the speed would be 50.5 ft per second or 34.4 mph. The speed indicated by the police falls within those two calculations.
This is no help in your case BUT I was driving along Bryn Lupus Road, DEGANWY, CONWY COUNTY in North WALES, close to where I live, I was FULLY AWARE that there was an "ARRIVE ALIVE" van, together with a Speed Camera on board on this particular road, as I had just passed it whilst I wasgoing onto a local etate to visit a friend. On my return journey, STILL fully aware that the Speed Camera Van was still there, I trundled by at about 27 MPH. THREE DAYS LATER I received a letter informing me that I was travelling at 35 MPH & I was given TWO options, either pay a £60 fine & accept 3 points OR Pay £60 & attend a SPEED AWARENESS COURSE, by taking option 2, I would not get any points on my Licence. I really was LIVID as I KNOW that I was innocet, but was informed by the local Constabulary that I could Fight it in Court but I would not win & it would cost me a damn sight more. I bit the bullet & opted for option 2. Since this incident, some 12 months ago, my friend & I have been speaking with a number of persons on his estate, I have now been told by FOUR other persons that they too would swear on a Stack of Bibles that they were travelling past the same van, well UNDER the Speed Limit yet they have received Fines & Points. That is FIVE persons that I know of. I have written a few times to The Chief Constable here BUT he is not interested & will not reply to any more of my correspondence on this matter..Quite obviously a VERY WORTHWHILE "Cash-Cow" for our local Police Force !.
In future Wiltsman, perhaps if you watched your speedo then you'll know exactly what speed you are travelling at any particular time. You must have known you were in a 30mph limit, and presumably your speedo is working, so why were you doing 36? Especially past a camera. The reason the speed limit is there is because you are a very real danger to other people by travelling over the limit. 80% of road accidents are caused through drink and speed and it costs the state billions a year to treat hundreds of thousands of injuries. That's not to mention the trauma suffered by those who are injured, or the families of the thousands killed every year. Then there's the cost of car insurance which continues to skyrocket. All because of excess speed. And you don't get anywhere any faster!
I'm not trying to preach Wiltsman but so many people seem indignant and think they've been unfairly treated when they get caught speeding. Just accept the fact you got caught and stick to the limit.
I'm not trying to preach Wiltsman but so many people seem indignant and think they've been unfairly treated when they get caught speeding. Just accept the fact you got caught and stick to the limit.
Just to add to the above before the predictably indignant comments appear almost insisting that it's everyone's right to speed. Complaining about being caught speeding is the same principle as a burglar grumbling about it being unfair a policeman was watching as he got caught climbing out a window! Yet how many burglars injure or kill innocent victims every year? If there was one such injury or death it would be plastered across the news with calls for tougher laws and sentences. Yet speeding kills thousands and injures tens of thousands of innocent people a year. Do you think that's OK?
1 to 17 of 17
