How fast would you have to be travelling for a speed camera to be ineffective?
Now, presumably, if you crank up your speed high enough, you would be able to escape out of the cameras field of view or focal range before the camera got activated.
But what speed would be required to acchieve this?
And would it be possible to travel so fast that the speed detector mechanism doesn't even notice you because you've passed it by before it even had a chance to register your existence?
Answers:
In theory this would be possible. Much would depend upon where the speed camera was set up. In most cases, you'd probaby need to be moving well in excess of double the legal speed limit at least.
The total reaction time for the typical speed camera system is well under half of a second -- typically 1/10th of a second. Even at 100 MPH, you'll only move a few feet -- 14.6 to be exact -- in 1/10th of a second. Even at 200 MPH, a motorway camera would still have you well in range.
Below the speed limit
Or over 130mph.
the idea is to get out of the camera's field of view before the second flash. That is a much easier task than beating the electronics (which you NEVER will).
It's been tested in something that did around 170mph, can't remember what. Nice, clear, complete view in the second flash. Don't bother!
Topgear did this with a Lamborghini
The speed was about 180 miles an hour.
The camera detected the car but when it had took the photo the car had gone past.
It was on test track.
they tried this out on top gear on a motor bike and if i remember correctly they had to go at over 167 mph for the speed camera not to work!
probably the speed of sound,or nearly as fast
dont do it , even if you test it, you can if you want, but then face the chargers and pay
LOL you had this under safty you naughty boy
MOST speed cameras in London are set to 10% over the speed limit plus 2 so:
30 = 35
40 = 46
50 = 57
70 = 79
so as long as you just below that you should be ok. not sure what the upper limit is
Faster than the speed of light
Actually it was over 220 mph
325kph
Approx 160mph.
You've had lots of sensible answers, but if you are an electronics wiz or you know one. with lots of time on your hands, you could sample the rf signals from the speed camera and devise an rf emitter to broadcast a false signal to cloak your car.
No its not a sensible answer but the theory is sound and its a lot more imaginative.
Surely it would be just as easy to slow down to 70mph as to speeding up to 170 and not sure if it'll work? it could cost you a big fine and a long ban just to test it out.. go for it boy racer if you think you can handle 170 an hour it's harder than it sounds, and chances are some family man/woman will phone ahead and have you pulled in.
I know one way of avioding the flash of the camera - stick to the limit. But as for going fast enough no idea, why not try it and find out.
Within the speed limit.
Most couldn't catch you if you exceed 224MPH, but some with a larger scan range, say for being planted on a hill, need a speed of nearer 250MPH.
at least over 180 mph
why would you want to , are you one of those idiots who never think of the safety of other road users??!!
I was personally clocked by camera at 147mph! The picture was perfect, it was just prior to the law change and I was lucky to get away with 3 months ban and £ 385 fine! This was on an empty UK motorway during the night driving home from Germany in a modified RS Turbo.
The answers post by the user, for information only, UKQnA.com does not guarantee the right.