|
Mobile speed
guns are gaining
in popularity
with the police |
Mobile speed
cameras are increasingly
being used by the police
to enforce speed limits,
but how accurate are
they?
We look at these
cameras and see if their
claims of accuracy are
themselves accurate.
A recent report by
the RAC shows that
nearly two-thirds of all
drivers admit breaking
the speed limit on a
30mph roads.
It's not surprising
then that the amount of
speeding tickets we are
all getting are on the
increase.
But we discover that
some of the equipment
used by the police may
not be as reliable as
they like to think.
In the last year the
numbers of mobile speed
cameras hidden on
motorcycle, police van
and cars have risen by
more than a third.
That means there are
just under 3,500 mobile
speed units in the
country.
In 2003-4 speeding
fines generated £112
million. Of that, £92
million was ploughed
back into installing and
operating the cameras.
A lot of this revenue
is now created by the
mobile cameras. It is
predicted that by the
end of the year they
will be as many mobile
speed cameras that they
are fixed roadside
cameras.
But are those mobile
cameras as reliable as
the police would like to
think?
Case One: Paul Cox
|
Paul appealed
against his
speeding
conviction and
won |
Paul Cox was driving
towards Plymouth on the
A303 Dual carriageway
when he was stopped for
speeding.
The car he was
driving was fitted with
cruise control, which he
had set to just below
70mph - the speed limit
on that stretch of road.
He passed by a marked
police car that was
carrying out speed
checks and was asked to
pull over.
The police told Paul
that they had clocked
his speed as being in
excess of 90mph.
He was confident that
he had not broken the
speed limit and
contested the case in
court.
Former policeman Paul
Cox appealed against his
conviction – and won.
The court found there
were discrepancies in
the speed gun evidence
used against him.
Paul had the
confidence to contest
his case, but many
simply accept the fines
even though they feel
they are in the right.
Home Office approved
All the speed guns
used by the police and
the camera safety
partnership must first
be approved by the home
office. Several type of
laser devices used in
the UK but they all work
on the same principle.
The devices work by
sending out a beam of
infra red light. Ideally
this should be targeted
at the number plate of a
car, because number
plates have a special
reflective coating which
bounces the beam
straight back to the
machine.
As the car moves the
devices quickly take a
series of distance
readings, and from those
works out the speed of
the vehicle.
However the accuracy
of these devices has
been disputed.
To see how accurate
they are we have invited
Dr Michael Clark, a
leading expert in laser
and traffic control, to
test some of the
government approved
mobile speed guns.
Erroneous distances
|
A wing mirror
and a road sign
doubled the
distance
recorded |
The machine relies on
the laser beam being
reflected back at the
gun.
However Dr Clark
demonstrated what
happens when that beam
of light is deflected
off another object
before returning to the
speed gun.
He set up a situation
where the laser beam was
hitting the wing mirror
of a stationary car. He
explains;
"What's actually
happening is the device
is sending out a laser
beam that is hitting the
wing mirror on the car,
then it is being
reflected onto the
[roadside] sign … it's
then coming back off the
sign, back onto the wing
mirror again and back
into the receiver."
As the devices use a
distance measurements to
work out the speed of a
car, Dr Clark believes
that such reflections
could cause erroneous
speeds readings.
The slip effect
|
If the laser
doesn't focus on
the same area
you can get the
slip |
As the gun calculates
speed by measuring the
changing distance to a
car, if the beam of the
gun is moved along the
car while taking a
reading, this could
affect the results.
As Dr Clark explains;
"This instrument doesn't
know if it [the speed
gun] is moving. So it
started measuring a
little bit further away
down the vehicle, now
it's a bit closer so it
thinks there's a speed
reading".
He then pans the
speed camera down the
side of a stationary car
and clocks it doing
4mph.
"This is of course
very relevant. If a
policeman is pointing at
a vehicle going by and
he moves it across [the
vehicle] then he will
get an increased, or
indeed a decreased,
speed reading."
Dr Clark says that
all laser speed guns
suffers from the same
problem so we thought we
would give it a go on a
wall with one of the
latest guns used by the
police: an LTI 20.20.
|
We clocked a
stationary wall
at 58mph - now
that's motoring |
By aiming at the wall
and pulling the trigger
whilst panning with the
device we managed to get
a reading of 58mph from
the stationary wall -
enough to get three
points and a fine in
urban areas.
Dr Clark has only
been demonstrating the
speed guns on stationary
cars to us, but he says
the problems could be
worse in real-life
situations;
"Because the car
itself is moving they
have to hold it very
very closely on the same
point on the vehicle
otherwise they will get
an erroneous speed
reading."
In theory, this means
that when doing a speed
check, if the operator
lets the measuring laser
move across the side of
a car during the speed
check, then the length
of the car could be
added to the distance
the machine uses to
calculate the car's
speed.
Laser guns typically
take their series of
measurements in about a
third of a second. If a
slip effect adds an
extra couple of metres
onto the distance you
travel in a third of a
second it can increase
the speed registered by
anything from an extra
one to 30 mph.
The manufacturer's
response
|
Frank Garratt
says that his
devices are
accurate |
But Tele-Traffic, the
UK manufacturer of the
LTI 20.20 reject the
possibility of getting
erroneous speed reading
from a moving vehicle.
Frank Garratt,
Managing Director of
Tele-Traffic, says that
his guns are fitted with
a technology which will
detect any slip effect
from a moving vehicle.
If it detects any
slippage it will display
an error message instead
of a speed.
Mr Garratt says the
device "traps out any
panning error."
He insists that on
moving objects errors of
more than 2mph are
highly unlikely. He says
the system could display
speeds out by "no more
than 1mph, if at all,
but in any event 2mph is
well within the target
parameters".
Case Two: Michael
Hall
So far Dr Clark has
been involved has an
expert witness in 5
court procedures, one of
them being his own.
In 4 occasions the
prosecution dropped the
case. Michael Hall who
got clocked by an LTI
20.20 in Southampton was
one of them.
|
Michael Hall
escaped losing
his license when
speed camera
evidence was
withdrawn |
Michael recalls the
events; "I am just
convinced that I was at
the most 30 [mph]
because I checked my
speed.
"When I got the
summons the police said
I was doing 41[mph]".
With Dr Clark's help,
Michael managed to have
the evidence in his case
dismissed.
Michael has his own
view on why this
happened;
"I think they did
that because the video
evidence proves that
their machine wasn't
working properly.
Looking at some bits
of the video there were
clear errors in what the
machine thought what
distances were, and if
it can't work out a
distance it can't work
out a speed".
Video evidence
Inside Out got hold
of one of the very few
police speed check
videos which has been
released.
We showed the
recording from the South
Wales police to Dr
Clark.
He pointed out
instances where the
camera recorded speeds
indicating the vehicle
was travelling in the
opposite direction to
the way it can be seen
going on screen. Dr
Clark explains;
"If there is a minus
sign in front of the
reading that means the
target has been measured
as going away.
"In this case it
wasn't. And that is
typical of the errors
you will get.
"Here we have
negative speeds for
vehicles coming towards
us - It's a nonsense".
Tele-Traffic
commented on the video:
They say that even
though the video does
not represent the event
accurately; the laser
gun itself was always
working properly.
Mr Garratt, the
Managing Director, says;
"In that particular
case there's no doubt in
my mind that, in overall
terms the officer did
not set up the video
element as well as he
might have done, and
certainly made some
operational procedural
errors in the way he did
that".
Growing concerns
Following a
successful court
challenge in Scotland in
February 2005, the Home
Office is now
considering reviewing
the approval of another
type of laser gun.
But as far as the
police is concerned, it
is the home office who
decide what equipment
they should use.
Superintendent Lawrie
Lewis from the Avon and
Somerset Constabulary
says;
|
"If they [The
Home Office]
have confidence
in them, I have
confidence." |
Superintendent
Lawrie Lewis,
Avon and
Somerset
Constabulary |
"The Police
Scientific Development
Branch and the Home
Office have
type-approved this
equipment.
"They've gone through
extensive testing - If
they have confidence in
them, I have confidence.
"If the Home Office
decides for whatever
reason that the
confidence is no longer
there then they will
withdraw the equipment".
The RAC say it's
important the police get
it right when clocking
drivers. Paul Hodgson
from the RAC says;
"I think it's
important for the
police, as well as
motorists, to know that
the cameras are working.
"They need the trust
of the motorists, so if
a motorist's caught -
they need to think
they've been caught
fairly and squarely.
"If the technology's
not working .. then
those findings need to
be fed into the home
office review".
Dr Clark says, "I
think that these
instruments, or
instruments of this type
should be reviewed, both
in their use, and in the
capability of the
technology to perform
the task that is being
asked to do.
"We talk of I think
it's in excess of 2
million prosecutions
using electronic devices
- if only 1% of those
prosecutions are
incorrect that's 20,000
incorrect prosecutions,
and that cannot be
right". |