From: vossaka on 5 Oct 2008 05:21
"Kev" <kevcat(a)optunet.com.au> wrote in message
> vossaka wrote:
>> "the_dawggie" <the_dawggie(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> OzOne wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 3 Oct 2008 00:29:00 -0700 (PDT), v <Vossaka(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Does anybody know anything about this particular revenue rasier?
>>>>> I just got back from a long trip with the wife and kids from Melbourne
>>>>> up to the Gold Coast and I'm greeted by a notice informing me of a
>>>>> $243 fine for doing 15kmh more than the limit. They don't tell me
>>>>> what the limit was but I assume it was 60kmh, going by the Google
>>>>> maps. The notice also says that it was the "B/W Richmond and Sussex
>>>>> Streets". I don't know what the "B/W" means but I was just driving
>>>>> through on the main highway and I did not cross that intersection
>>>>> which is not on the highway according to Google Maps. Its probably
>>>>> one of those areas where the speed limt rapidly drops from 100 to 80
>>>>> then to 60 and you either slam on the brakes or go with the traffic.
>>>>> I'm pretty sure I would go with the traffic which means that they got
>>>>> lots of other poor bastards that day as well.
>>>>> So I'd be grateful if anyone can give me any information about this
>>>>> thing. Do you know anyone who has successfully challenged a speed
>>>>> infringement notice taken from this camera? Can anyone send me a jpg
>>>>> of the intersection so that I can make a basis for a defence?
>>>>> I remember the general area and time as having heavy traffic with lots
>>>>> of road work. I was fully loaded (headed north) with the wife and two
>>>>> kids and camping gear for a 2 week holiday so I certainly wasn't
>>>>> driving dangerously or hooning it, but I it was two weeks ago (23rd
>>>>> September) so I there's no way I can remember exact speed anyway.
>>>> Go online and have a look at the pic.....
>>>> OzOne of the three twins
>>>> I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.
>>> There is absolutely no way to challenge a speed cam
>>> offence in NSW.
>> So if you're in a line of cars and trucks separated by less than 10
>> metres each then there's no chance that the camera has focussed on the
>> wrong numberplate for whatever speed the radar has detected?
> what are you doing driving within 10 metres of other vehicles in the first
I didn't say that I was, just asking a hypothetical and I can't control what
the bloke behind me is doing. It turns out that the fixed cameras get their
speed from road sensors anyway, so the problems with radar doesn't apply.
They claim that the angle of the camera will only photo the car going over
the sensors and of course the RTA wouldn't lie would they?
> the camera doesn't follow vehicle and need to focus on one set of plates
> the camera is focused on one area of the roadway constantly
> vehicle speeding through that one section is the one caught
> if your plates are not visible to the camera due to something obscuring
> them then you wouldn't even need to challenge any offence
From: vossaka on 5 Oct 2008 05:23
"Mot Adv" <mot.adv(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message
> <OzOne> wrote in message
>> On Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:39:00 GMT, Marty
>> <martywoyzak(a)communitymail.com> wrote:
>>>If it is any consolation, that 50km/h section of the Pacific Highway will
>>>be bypassed by a nice dual carriageway motorway within a couple of years.
>>>Work is in progress now, so there is a good chance that the next time you
>>>come up this way you won't get booked by that camera :)
>> He can be doing 110kph with a situationa awareness problem.....Oh
>> Goody :-)
> If situational awareness is bought about by fatigue and boredom, the dual
> carriageway road will help alleviate that:-)
> We will then get him with the new point to point speed camera system that
> is being installed on newly upgraded Pacific Highway sections instead.
That's just going to be for the trucks isn't it? I hope so. Never mind,
next time I go to Queensland I'll take the long way via SA and NT
From: vossaka on 5 Oct 2008 05:29
"D Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message
> Marty wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 13:04:58 +1000, Mot Adv wrote:
>>> We will then get him with the new point to point speed camera system
>>> that is being installed on newly upgraded Pacific Highway sections
>> Grrr. I read in the local rag a couple of years ago that the section of
>> highway Northbound between Clothiers Creek and Chinderah was trialing
>> point to point. According to the article it was piggy backed onto the
>> Safe-T-Cam installation at those two locations. Do you know anything more
>> about it?
> Its actually a conspiracy by the airlines to increase their business:-)
> Who in their right mind would willingly drive long distance when State
> Govts are putting so much effort into making it as unenjoyable as
You're right, but for once I just wanted to show the kids how big this
country is. I wanted to show them Gundagai and the Hawksbury and drive them
over the coathanger and then show them all those beautiful river and beach
towns along the northern NSW coast. We did all that and they loved it, but
taking into account the motels, the petrol and now the fine, it would have
been cheaper to fly and hire a car.
From: Kev on 5 Oct 2008 07:47
> "Mot Adv" <mot.adv(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message
>> <OzOne> wrote in message
>>> On Fri, 03 Oct 2008 09:39:00 GMT, Marty
>>> <martywoyzak(a)communitymail.com> wrote:
>>>> If it is any consolation, that 50km/h section of the Pacific Highway
>>>> be bypassed by a nice dual carriageway motorway within a couple of
>>>> Work is in progress now, so there is a good chance that the next
>>>> time you
>>>> come up this way you won't get booked by that camera :)
>>> He can be doing 110kph with a situationa awareness problem.....Oh
>>> Goody :-)
>> If situational awareness is bought about by fatigue and boredom, the
>> dual carriageway road will help alleviate that:-)
>> We will then get him with the new point to point speed camera system
>> that is being installed on newly upgraded Pacific Highway sections
> That's just going to be for the trucks isn't it? I hope so. Never
> mind, next time I go to Queensland I'll take the long way via SA and NT
No, it already is for trucks and has been for years
they are going to(and have probably always planned to) extend it to cars
From: Kev on 5 Oct 2008 08:44
D Walford wrote:
> That was claimed by business people in the towns on the Hume in Vic that
> are now all by passed, it mainly affected roadhouses but the world
> didn't come to an end as many predicted.
> I know the person who owned roadhouses in Winton and Euroa which are
> both now closed, he wasn't happy and he lost some income but he had
> other sources of income and he's still quite wealthy.
yeah roadhouses are usually the most affected
but it also depends on the size also
There is a Matilda Truckstop/Travel Centre/Coach terminal at Kybong,
Just sth of Gympie, it's begger than the travel centres around Brisbane
it employs almost 300 people directly, they are all Matilda Employees.
But the number of people employed indirectly is much larger as this one
travel centre is the largest customer of most of the food suppliers in
Sure the town of Gympie will survive when the bypass road eventually
gets done, but it will affect quite a large number of people directly
through job losses, 300+ job losses in a town the size of Gympie is a
But on the other hand it will eliminate a high fatality crash zone on
that section of highway(Cooroy Bypass to Nth of Gympie)
Not that the QLD Govt is in much favour with the people of Gympie anyway
with the Traveston Crossing damn going in(affecting less than 100
people, most of whom have taken the money on offer and are now still
living in their same houses for free until the damn is completed)
The other Matilda roadhouse Nth of Gympie will also be affected but most
of their custom is local so the effect will be minimal