I create videos of my drives and upload them to YouTube. I produce the videos without sound to ensure I don't breach copyright and respect the privacy of passengers in the car. My aim was for people to play their own radio or music in the background whilst watching the videos.
I could add music to my videos whilst creating them but unfortunately I never know if YouTube are going to mark the music copyright, which they have in the past, even though the music is supposedly copyright free. I could also add free music to the video using the YouTube editor but frankly it's hard to go through all the music to find something I like, let alone what other people will like. Frankly I can't stand the music many people add to their videos on YouTube.
I decided perhaps a good way around this problem was to create my own freeRadio web app. On a desktop computer if freeRadio is opened in one tab and YouTube in another freeRadio will keep playing. Whilst this is possible on Apple iPads, it's too clumsy and on Apple iPhone the YouTube app cuts off the freeRadio sound. That's OK because most people have an older phone they can connect to their network or hotspot and use that phone as a radio.
I've put in a selection of internet radio streams for people to choose from. If you want nothing more than to listen to radio whilst travelling on the train, bus, or even at home or work, freeRadio can be used for that too.
On YouTube a number of people uploaded their actual driving test showing the route they took and you're able to hear the instructions they were given by the tester. This is great information for someone about to take their practical driving test. Whilst you may get another route and examiner, at least you can still see what the general process is and that's a great help in calming the nerves.
When watching the videos I thought one things was missing. I really couldn't tell where the person drove. I decided to create a map of the route taken and also link the map back to the video. Now people could easily see the route and also check out particular parts of the route very easily. You can find Practical Driving Test at https://www.PracticalDrivingTest.com.au.
Then I thought if you want to do the actual route yourself for practise, you really need to hear the instructions as the person did as they drove. I decided to add an Audio Guide to Practical Driving Test.
To see and hear the Audio Guide for Practical Driving Test in action I've created the following video which is available on YouTube. In the video I drove the same route taken by a person taking their Practical Driving Test at VicRoads Ringwood. VicRoads Ringwood has now closed but following the audio guide is still excellent practise.
I hope others find the maps and audio guide interesting and useful.
Recently Alphington Grammar School was in the news because people have petitioned for the gates to be left open since Alphington Grammar School has built access over Old Heidelberg Road. I wondering if Alphington Grammar School was closed off from the Darebin Creek Trail and it certainly looks like it is with quite a high fence.
I don't know about you, but I was very nervous for my practical driving test many years ago. In hindsight, when the driving instructor was telling me where I was driving was possibly part of the actual practical driving test route, I really had no idea what he meant. With dashcams it's now possible for drivers and instructors to share actual video footage of the practical driving test and I feel, those videos can take away some of the mystery of the practical driving test.
In addition I find many older people like myself don't realise the road rules have evolved over the years and watching people take their practical driving test can often show things we don't know or could do better. For example, I find older people (including myself) think when you turn from one road (say from single lane or slip lane) into a road with multiple lanes we have to stick to the left lane and then move across to the right lane when it's safe to do so. This often means the car behind you cuts you off trying to go around you. Knowing that I can go into either lane makes for safer driving for me and knowing the rules takes some of the stress out of driving. Even for more experienced drivers checking out practical driving test videos can teach them a thing or two.
The practical driving test videos can all be found on YouTube but the problem I've found is to find them. There's a lot of videos and many are just people trying to get you to watch their video. The aim of the Practical Driving Test site is to link directly to real people doing the actual practical driving test. This is good for the creator of the video too as they get all the credit for the video including any potential revenue or subscribers the video may generate.
The one thing I found from watching the videos on YouTube is I wanted to be able to see the actual route taken for the practical driving test. Just driving along turning right and left doesn't really give me the context of where the drive was located or where the person drove. For that reason I've created a map of each drive which shows the route and the route is synchronised with the video. Using the map it's possible to click on a location on the map and start watching the practical driving test video from that point in the video.
I hope others find watching practical driving test videos as interesting as I do.
There is no doubt to me that some roundabouts are poorly placed. To me if the traffic level is appropriate a roundabout can aid the flow of the traffic, but once the traffic level gets too great, you get people racing to get through that take risks, not giving way when they should.
The above VicRoads video I thought was quite reasonable, however there's one thing that's not made clear, or the cars are acting contrary to what they're advising.
The statement is, "Unless you're travelling straight through you should indicate left when you leave the roundabout to let others know what you're doing - just like you would when you left turn on any road".
In the video you'll see cars travelling straight through in all directions and some indicate and some don't.
What's also weird is three of the four entry points into the roundabout have arrows, but the left to right entry point has no arrows. Having no arrows is a disaster waiting to happen as the car in left hand lane could turn right and the car in the right hand lane could go straight ahead.
Back to the main point in the video. It isn't explained why some cars going straight ahead are indicating left to exit the roundabout yet we're told "unless you're travelling straight through you should indicate left" which implies if you are travelling straight ahead you don't need to indicate.
According to the following link which I believe is for Victoria's road rules, people should indicate if it's practical, but what one person considers practical another may not.
Reviewing the above video we see the following cars going straight through the intersection.
0:29 Yellow truck, indicates, going left to right
0:32 Yellow motorbike, indicates, going right to left
0:38 Red truck, doesn't indicate, going top to bottom
0:42 Green car, indicates, going left to right, yellow car, doesn't indicate, going right to left
0:49 Green car, indicates, going left to right
0:56 Red car, doesn't indicate, going right to left
0:59 Blue car, doesn't indicate, going bottom to top, green car, indicates going left to right
The only pattern I can see if if the car is entering the roundabout and there's no arrows indicating direction, then the if the car is going straight ahead, the car indicates left to exit. For cars going straight across if there's arrows they may or may not indicate. It's just a pattern. It doesn't mean it's right.
In general I feel I indicate correctly when exiting a roundabout, but trying to indicate left to exist when going straight across is difficult as you can't indicate too early otherwise cars on your left waiting to enter the roundabout may think you're turning left at the first exit. So by the time you reach the cars waiting on the left and then indicate to exit left when going straight ahead you're giving almost no advance warning to anyone. Just perhaps a single cycle of the indicator which could be easy to miss. Having said that, I still attempt to indicate to exit if possible.
I found Ben O'Shea's article in Perth Now interesting as Ben saw a mobile speed camera set up about 50m before the speed limit sign on a Mitchell Freeway onramp. Unfortunately I don't know which onramp which would have been good to know.
I was under the understanding the guidelines in Victoria stated mobile speed cameras shouldn't be set up within 200m of a change of speed limit sign and thought the same may apply across Australia.
However there's two things to note here. First, there's the law and there's guidelines. If I'm correct, basically the law states we can't exceed the speed limit and that's all we can rely on if we went to court. You're at the mercy of the court and I wouldn't be too confident. I did have a parking fine dismissed before getting to court for the third time because the distance between signs didn't meet the Australian Standard, but that's only because the Whitehorse Council withdrew the fine (after nearly two years).
When we see a speed sign ahead we all speed up. Strictly speaking we'll often be breaking the law and if you do that you can expect to get fined. It's weird how you can't be at the speed limit when you're speeding up approaching the sign but you have to be at the speed limit when slowing down approaching a sign. Although what is reasonable to some would be taken advantage of by others. Some people would speed up just as they approach the sign and others would speed up hundreds of metres before the sign.
More and more the government is tightening down and things we used to do (or still do now) can potentially end up getting us a fine. Remember the good old days when you'd use the momentum of the hill going down to help you go up. Environmentally friendly but now we have to brake continuously to make sure we don't exceed the speed limit and accelerate as the hill rises again, only to have slowed even further due to gravity and friction before the acceleration kicks in. It really is all very petty but that's the way it is.
You know the law and whilst you may not be happy with some of the laws, stick to the laws and stop donating to the government's coffers. Ultimately it's your choice.
I thought it would be a good a good idea to compile the top 10 Victorian red light speed camera locations for 2020-2021. This is the most recent financial year's data provided by the Victorian government.
Why a top 10 compilation?
The top 10 red light speed camera locations catch a lot of people out. With 170,225 fines out of 1,216,979 these cameras represent around 14% or roughly one in six fines. Lots of people make the same mistake and if you don't know the area, you may make the same mistake too.
Half of the locations are 40 km/h speed zones for part of the day. People often don't expect 40km/h zones near schools to operate extended hours or even on weekends, so it's easy to make an error in judgement. Rosanna Road has a number of relatively recently installed cameras and whilst people who drive that way regularly, got a period of warning, if you don't regularly drive along Rosanna Road you may not be expecting the speed change. I know I've driven through areas and wondered when the speed limit changed. In fact I was completely unaware for quite a long time the entire central city area had become 40km/h. If you're driving according to the speeds you remember (as many of us do) and don't pay attention to the speed signs (called being change-unaware and it's very common) you will pay the price.
North Road is another major road where you really can't see there's a school coming up.
Warrigal Road and Batesford Road has extended 40km/h times Monday to Saturday (yet not Sunday) and up to 8pm at night. Personally I think the government should use some of the tens of millions of dollars raised in fines to improve the pedestrian infrastructure (car/pedestrian separation) to make this area better for drivers and pedestrians. There's a useless pedestrian overpass to the north of the train line (goes way to far east making it inconvenient) and a redundant pedestrian crossing to the south of the train line. Build a shorter/better pedestrian overpass to the south of the train line, get rid of the pedestrian crossing and provide barriers to stop pedestrians crossing at any other point. Perhaps even remove the car parking on Warrigal Road and provide better parking at the rear as most of the shops now are restaurants.
The Melbourne Airport red light speed camera is an interesting one. People come off a higher speed freeway and perhaps that affects their perception of speed. I know that's happened to me and resulted in a speed fine. Also there's a very high level of traffic, more cars generally means more fines.
Fitzroy Street St Kilda is a nice big open road and it makes little sense for the lower speed limit quite a distance from pedestrian activity. Unfortunately, Victoria mainly has speed cameras at intersections so there's quite a distance where the speed limit doesn't make sense.
The Western Ring Road west of Sydney Road is bound to catch out many people due to the variable speed signs. A research article I read recently showed 58.3% of people who drive a road regularly where the speed signs are often the same, won't see one or more variable speed signs have changed. It would be interesting to see what percentage of people are caught out by variable speed sign changes. I can't help wonder perhaps if variable speed signs at the default speed of the freeway (in this case 100km/h) then when the speed is changed the annulus should always be flashing. Flashing does alert people to a change.
Geelong Road, Footscray goes from 80 km/h to 60km/h, 40km/h school zone then back up to 60km/h with a huge three lane highway so easy for people to creep up in speed with speed perception issues after a long drive along a major road.
Eastlink, Rowville is interesting as it is the only speed camera on Eastlink in the top 10. My guess is the long downward slope will catch many people out as cars speed up when there's a downward slope if people aren't proactive. Of course there's always going to be those travelling in the right lane who speed past the rest of the traffic as well. The right lane on major freeways nearly always catches more people than the other lanes.
Hopefully sharing these thoughts and the locations of the top 10 red light speed camera locations help people to adjust their driving for the benefit of everyone including their hip pocket.
A short while ago I read about a young man from Sydney, Beau Jackson, who regularly warns drivers of a mobile speed camera by displaying a sign before the mobile speed camera.
I couldn't help think at the time of reading the article that one of the lessons I've learnt in life is when you attack the system, the system will attack you back. It's a sad lesson as it's really a way to keep people in line and we shouldn't have to live in such a system. Perhaps it's just human nature. If someone attacks you would you attack them back? Probably. So why do we think the system should be any better than us since we are the system.
Now just a few weeks later we've found the "Aussie hero" has been hit with a fine for littering from the EPA.
The EPA wouldn't have issued such a notice without some cause. It may be as simple as someone going past, not agreeing with what Beau Jackson is doing, saw the sign and some drink cans on the ground whilst he was there and reported him for littering. Even though Beau could have cleaned up everything from the site when he left, a report could have been made. It may even be there's a regulation we wouldn't normally know about that could be used. For example is having a sign on a vehicle illegal in some way? Most people just wouldn't know.
The problem is Beau Jackson either pays the fine or fights it potentially in court. Having recently fought a parking ticket (signs were not seen as they exceeded the Australian standard for distance between signs) and had the parking ticket withdrawn, this was nearly a two year saga that created undue stress. The government losses nothing when they raise an infringement against you but you can lose a lot of sleep, get stressed and potentially be faced with a considerable increase in penalty if you're ruled against.
Sometimes I think the best thing Beau Jackson could do is provide a link for donations to pay the fine. Pay the fine from donations and move on. This isn't the right thing to do but sometimes it can be the prudent thing to do. As a council officer said to me when I was much younger when I questioned my fine, "you can take the fine to court and lose a day of work if you want". My car had broken down and I pushed it into the gutter by myself in front of my house, but that meant it was parked facing the wrong way so I was fined for parking on the wrong side of the road. I paid the fine. I've now learnt if you fight a fine it's not just one day. The recent fine was multiple visits to the council, multiple visits to the site gathering evidence, online hearing, in person hearing, telephone meeting where fine was dismissed, all over nearly a two year period. So it isn't just one day in court.
I wish Beau Jackson all the best and would be more than happy to chip in a 20 to help with the fine. We really need people who stand up for what they believe. We don't need to destroy the spirit of the young.
For those who think people shouldn't speed (and they shouldn't), I'm finding through my research, that a driver driving normally within the speed limit, when there's a small two degree decline in the road after a rise in the road can easily exceed the speed limit for a short period of time before readjusting their speed. Mobile speed cameras placed near or after a steeper decline is common and picks up people who are making a common mistake but often would not be deliberately speeding. Most of us would make the same mistake but we are lucky there's no speed camera when we do.
The Burnley tunnel has two speed cameras, one located approximately 430m from the entrance and the other located approximately 2,140m from the entrance. As I investigate speed cameras I often find interesting information I'd not considered.
I found this article which felt like there were a lot of frustrated drivers.
It appears people have no issue going down the hill at the speed limit but once the grade starts to go up people don't increase their speed quickly enough and that causes traffic to slow down behind them.
You can see two things are in play. The first is the slope of the road which initially goes down and then goes up. The second is people trying to keep within the speed limit because there's two speed cameras and very hefty fines waiting for those who infringe.
The slope of the road. If you check my driving speed along Foote Street/Reynolds Road you'll see that even though the speed limit is 70km/h and I try to drive near the speed limit, in fact as I go down the hills I have to brake and then accelerate to go back up the next hill and the driving speed can easily drop by around 10km/h.
Speed cameras. I don't know about others, but normally I drive with my speedometer showing that I'm driving near the posted speed limit. Often the needle is slightly below. That means I'm really driving about 2 km/h below the speed limit. But where there's a speed camera I slow down even further as I have no trust in the government's facilities. So perhaps I'll be driving now at 4km/h below the speed limit according to my speedometer. But legally all speedometers show a speed that is higher than my actual speed. My speedometer is out by around 4km/h. So when I drive where there's a speed camera I'll be driving around 8km/h below the speed limit.
When you add the upward gradient change at the bottom of the Burnley tunnel plus my desire to drive and not get booked, I'd slow down to possibly 18km/h below the speed limit and whilst some of this is by conscious choice, most of it isn't. That means every car behind me would need to slow down so they don't run up the back of my car and that could easily cause the speed to drop a little further.
As you can see, with a posted speed limit of 80km/h, this can easily result in people needing to slow down to around 60km/h to match the speed of the traffic.
So what people are getting frustrated about and calling Australians bad drivers, is really a lack of knowledge on their part as to how the car operates and how others drive. I really wish my car speedometer showed the exact speed and then I'd drive perhaps 2km/h below the speed limit for caution around speed cameras. The government has legislated so that doesn't happen so that's their fault. The angle of the slope in the Burnley tunnel is by design so again the government's fault. A much smoother curve could assist in smoothing out people's speed.
As to the paranoia with speed cameras that's because the government has legislated speed cameras can be out by up to 2 or 3 km/h (2 km/h is used in the Burnley Tunnel) for inaccuracy of their equipment. Now unfortunately if feels like the government gives themselves an error for margin but not us. Actually the government does give a margin for error but they do not publish that margin as they don't wish for that to become the default speed limit people start using.
As for relying on your cruise control to maintain the speed limit, if you haven't tested your cruise control you should think twice. My cruise control (an older Toyota Avensis) does not slow me down, but only keeps me at the speed. Thus when going down hill my car will exceed the speed limit. A Mitsubishi I tested keeps the car at the speed limit and slows down going down a hill, but when reaching the bottom of the slope can lose 15km/h as it adjusts to go up the next slope as in the Burnley Tunnel. Until I tested a number of cruise controls I would have thought cruise controls all kept you at the set speed and that's not been the case in my testing.
So to answer the question "why do people go so slow through the Burnley Tunnel" is not because they're not bad drivers. They're actually driving as people would expect them to. Slightly lower than the speed limit to ensure they look after their own financial interests, braking when they should on the downward slope to ensure they don't break the law and accelerating when the road starts to go up but unfortunately the upward slope slows the car before the person's acceleration returns the car to the desired speed. All cars following need to match (or usually go slightly slower) to ensure they keep a safe distance. There is nothing untoward going on. People aren't bad drivers. It's just the way cars and people work.
In this latest change to the COVID testing regime it really makes me grimace. Now international travellers who could possibly bring in the latest COVID variants no longer need to be tested before heading off to Australia. It makes me shudder.
Yes, these people need to prove they're double vaccinated, but being vaccinated (even with four doses) does not stop you getting COVID or reduce the peak infection. Being vaccinated just helps the body to respond and shorten the period of infection.
If you were booked for an international trip and someone around you had COVID would that stop you from travelling? Most likely not.
Surely a RAT test could be completed whilst people wait. Anyone who travels knows there's a lot of waiting time involved.
To make things even more confusing this is a Federal government change, but each states still have it's own rules, whatever they may be.
Thanks to a couple of people posting comments on my Speed Camera Locations site I became aware that people were getting speeding fines on the Western Ring Road near Sydney Road they didn't expect. A lot of people would say they should just obey the speed limit, but there's far too many people getting fined at that location for it to simply being people deliberately speeding. If you read the online stories from many people they didn't think they were speeding and often haven't receive a speeding fine in years.
Could it be they are "change-unaware".
I stumbled across a fascinating research paper on variable speed limit signage which showed 58.3% of people who participated in the research were change-unaware. That is, when people travel a regular route where the variable speed limit signs showed 80 km/h and then some signs were changed to 100 km/h, some 58.3% of the participants failed to notice the speed limit change.
I found the research quite fascinating as I found many things mentioned I've found in my own experience.
For example:
1. How often have you travelled your regular route home only to think did you notice things such as the traffic lights. You must have otherwise you'd probably have an accident. But after a while many of your driving decisions are less conscious and more sub-conscious.
2. Where there's two speed signs indicating a lower speed limit people can miss the first sign and notice the second. I've done that when I was testing the Amigo speed app.
3. Often I don't know what speed I should be driving even though I obey all speed signs. You just go into semi-autonomous. You are alert and aware so there's no danger, it's just some tasks are actioned (like keeping to the speed limit) but not really remembered, so I have to focus and be conscious of the next speed limit sign.
4. I have some reservation on their methodology because if a person was driving in the simulator they'd keep the car ahead 3 seconds ahead. That may have biased the results by leading people to go faster than they would in real life. We often use the clues of others around us as one source of input. Of course that can lead to people getting fined because they simply drive with the traffic flow.
5. It appears in the article that as people become more familiar with a road they tend to increase their average speed, and unfortunately that meant a lot of people speeding. It could be in the simulator there's no consequences so driving faster once familiar with the route would be people's normal behaviour.
6. In the study, people who were change-unaware appear to drive at higher speeds, perhaps less compliant. Although even those who were aware of the speed limit change often sped, but not to the same level.
7. Interestingly, for the speed-aware people they increased their speed but did not exceed the speed limit as they did for earlier drives. So they were more compliant when there was a change in the situation.
Overall I thought this was very interesting research.
But there were a few things I wanted to check.
When did the variable speed limit signs become automated?
Has the variable speed limit signs changed the level of fines at the speed cameras before Sydney Road on the Ring Road?
For question 1, it appears the variable speed limit signs became fully automated in 2016. I can image the software has evolved since then so it may be possible the changing of the speed limits on sign could impact drivers.
For question 2, my Speed Camera Locations site shows the number of fines for the 2017/2018 year and the speed camera in question was not in the top 10 by number of fines with camera 4 having 11,634 fines. The latest top 10 from an article on the 9 News site shows for 2020/2021 the speed camera is now at number 6 in terms of number of fines, but interestingly the number of fines have come down to 9,390.
This is not what I expected. The number of fines has reduced from three years prior. However looking at a number of other sites that were in the top 10 previously, most have reduced the number of fines. In addition more low speed 40 km/h sites (Rosanna Road/3 and Terminal Ave back online) have come into the top 10 pushing others from three years prior out of the top 10. Overall, if I were to guess, I'd suggest drop in fines is on trend so the variable speed signs aren't capturing more than previously. So it really does appear people are making the same mistakes they've done for the last three years.
I read a lot of information pushed by the government which supports their agenda of reducing speed limits to 40km/h. Some of it I simply don't believe. When that happens I seek out other research and confirm or refute what the government is saying.
For example the latest article I read was the following from Transport NSW.
Basically at 40 km/h there's a 40% risk of death and at 50 km/h there's a risk of death of 90%. This information is to justify the reduction of speed limits to 40 km/h from 50 km/h.
However a quick search on the internet locates the following from America.
Whilst the figures are in mph, if we convert the speeds to km/h we get 10% at 37 km/h, 25% at 51 km/h, 50% at 67 km/h, 75% at 80 km/h and 90% at 90 km/h.
The real difference reducing the speed limit is not as significant as we're led to believe and if the article above is correct, more like a 10-15% increase in the risk of death if the speed limit is 40 or 50 km/h respectively.
Another figure you'll often hear is that doubling the speed increases the risk by a the square or four in this case. When you hear that figure take it with a grain of salt. The reason is they're mixing up the kinetic energy which does increase by the square of the speed, but research generally shows (from what I've read), it's more of a linear relationship.
Sometimes I get asked about speed cameras people have seen on roads where the speed cameras have not been added to the Speed Camera Locations map. Invariably the cameras are for monitoring heavy vehicles to make sure they're complying with driving time. I thought the following article was interesting as it indicates new average speed cameras have been installed just for heavy vehicles in roads around Sydney.
At this stage these cameras will not be added to the Speed Camera Locations site as my site is aimed at the general population and speed cameras for heavy vehicles may confuse people as they don't apply to them when driving their car.
Personally I can't see why they'd limit the average speed cameras to just heavy vehicles. I understand the risk of fatality increases with increased mass of vehicles, but large SUVs also increase the risk of serious injury or death for other drivers on the road.
I thought I'd write a post where I can add items I find interesting about mobile phone detection cameras. These cameras also detect seatbelt offences.
1. Images are in black and white.
2. An infrared flash is used.
3. According to the following article in item 14, during 2012 and 2020 there have been "214 casualty crashes involving a driver/rider using a hand held mobile phone – resulting in 18 deaths and 292 injuries. Of those, 111 casualty crashes occurred in country NSW - resulting in 15 deaths and 149 injuries".
I find those numbers interesting. A large proportion of deaths and injuries occurred in the country area. Over the 9 year period in the city area there's been an average of less than 2 deaths and 17 injuries per year. There's no mention as to whether or not the mobile phone caused/contributed towards the outcome
For the state of NSW there's approximately 2 deaths per year and 32 injuries per year. According to the following site during 2011-2015 there were 1,723 deaths and 129.320 injuries or around 345 deaths and 26,000 injuries per year. Approximately half a per cents of deaths (one in two hundred) and 0.1 per cent of injuries per year (one in a thousand) have been associated with mobile phone usage. Whilst any death or injury on our roads is not acceptable, it does feel like the emphasis on mobile phone usage is perhaps over emphasised. Even more so if we consider city usage only.
As more information reaches the press with regards to mobile phone and mobile phone detection cameras that I feel is worth sharing I'll update this post with links.
I'm pleased to announce I've now added pages to my Speed Camera Locations site for Western Australia/Perth\. Speed Camera Locations now covers Victoria, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory.
You can find the pages for red light and speed cameras in Western Australia using the following link or the web address below.
I have to say it's been interesting to see the different types of cameras used in Western Australia compared to other parts of Australia. Fixed speed cameras along freeways often appear as a black and white column and some red light speed cameras don't appear to have induction loops in the road, perhaps indicating the loops aren't required. In time I can't see why induction loops are required. If a police officer can hold a handheld speed camera with no induction loops required, it only makes sense fixed cameras may not need induction loops as well.
As for other states the information available for those in Western Australia/Perth are:
Red light speed cameras, fixed speed cameras and Point-To-Point cameras
The published list of mobile speed cameras
Links to videos of fixed red light speed cameras, fixed speed cameras and PTP cameras
Map of mobile speed cameras found through various means
Safety Camera Warning page which can be used as a driver's aid to alert them when they're approaching a fixed camera site.
Hopefully the many hours put in to collate and create the speed camera locations map for Western Australia is found to be useful by others.
On my YouTube video review of the Anaconda Fluid ebike I'd previously said I'd be happy to recommend the ebike. Last night that all changed.
I went to the Anaconda Bayswater store to purchase a new set of brake pads for the Anaconda Fluid ebike. I asked the people in the bike section and they said I couldn't buy the brake pads. They don't keep brake pads for retail sale and I'd have to pay for the bike to be serviced to get the brake pads replaced.
Personally I find that disappointing. I find it hard to believe a part that should be readily available for purchase isn't and a more expensive service would be required to get the new brake pads.
I decided to speak to the manager and spoke to a temporary manager. I was told there were no parts and a special order would need to be raised. They don't have the parts for retail sale. Whilst they're one of the largest Anaconda stores they don't hold a large range of parts.
To say I'm disappointed with Anaconda is an understatement. I felt comfortable buying with a larger brand store and their website led me to believe spare parts would not be an issue. However this isn't the case. I really feel misled.
Given that spare parts for the Anaconda Fluid ebike are not readily available I am now changing my review on YouTube to NOT RECOMMENDED.
To me the good thing about user reviews is you get to find out what other people find are issues over time. I hope this review helps others to make a more informed decision. Once I find an alternative supplier for the brake pads I'll add an update to this post.
Update: 18/08/2022 I wrote to Anaconda to provide my feedback that spare parts should be available even if they're only available from the website if it's not warranted for stock to be held in every store. Anaconda got back to me and sent a set of brake pads at no cost. I would have been happy to pay for the brake pads but I'm thankful for the brake pads but more importantly, Anaconda listened to me grievance.
Going forward I'll use the brake pads to find an alternate supplier so this isn't an issue in the future.
I can see that many companies will sell products online and if you use those companies, then it's likely you'll need to find spares and service from third party companies. Whilst Anaconda does have a store front it may not carry spare parts you'd expect them to carry to support their products. I could have had Anaconda service my ebike and the brake pads would have been provided. It's just I'd prefer to purchase the brake pads and install them myself.
The Speed Camera Locations site has a new addition. The speed cameras for the ACT/Canberra.
The ACT/Canberra doesn't have a great number of speed cameras but you can now easily see there's three that generate a lot of revenue for the ACT Government. The three cameras are located in 40km/h areas.
This is a good reminder to take notice of the speed limits when visiting the ACT/Canberra. The main city area appears to be 40km/h and you can easily be caught out by the large multi-lane roads.
In adding the ACT/Canberra speed cameras I was quite pleased at the amount of information the ACT Government provides. What was particularly surprising is the ACT Government provided the GPS coordinates of mobile speed cameras as well. I've not seen this done in Australia before.
In NSW a woman has been fined for scratching her face whilst driving. A mobile phone camera took a photo of her whilst driving and it looks like she's holding a mobile phone to her ear. It really does look like it.
However if you inspect the photo closely and look at the woman's fingers you'll see they'd have to be unusually long to have wrapped that far around the mobile phone. The black only goes half way into the palm of her hand and the dark background is similar between her hand and her face and also between her forearm and her upper arm. Have a look at the width of the black area near the base of the thumb and then the black area between her fingers and you'll see the black between her fingers goes much higher. A mobile phone is a rectangle and is unlikely to create that shape. The width of the black area near the base of the thumb is insufficient to be a mobile phone unless somehow she is holding the mobile phone on back of her thumb which I don't think is possible.
Try it for yourself. Hold a mobile phone in your hand next to your ear and then look at how the fingers wrap around the mobile phone. You'll notice the fingers can't go that far around the mobile phone. Now do the same again scratching the side of your face and you'll see your fingers are in the position shown by Steff Doney, the woman in the picture.
The problem I've had with the review process for other matters is often it's not doesn't feel very thorough. For a parking fine where the signs exceeded the distance limit it needed to get to the point of a court case before the case was reviewed properly. An elapsed time of nearly two years. Another family member was fined for being in a parking spot without a permit when the permit was displayed and they had a witness backing them. Multiple days off to attend court with the case being dropped before being heard.
There's no incentive when you're incorrectly fined as if they drop the case they pay nothing. You've just had a lot of angst over a long period of time. Most people will simply pay the fine to avoid the angst and the potential of having to pay even more if the case is awarded against you. It almost feels like extortion but that's the way the system works. Even when a case is won by someone else and many have already been fined, the general line that comes out of a review is if people have already paid they have admitted guilt. Only those who have elected to fight have their cases withdrawn, or in some cases penalty refunded and points removed. This is not a fair way to treat people.
I wish Steff Doney all the best in her fight for justice.
It's really quite sad how much effort you really have to make to prove your innocence when it's you against the system. People don't realise it is quite time consuming and it really, it least it does for me, cause a lot of angst.
Fine arrives in the mail unexpectedly which you're not at all happy with.
You need to review the fine and check what has happened. This may take some investigation.
Write a letter requesting a review.
Request is denied.
Request the matter go to court.
In my parking fine case the court held the case before the date of the hearing without my presence or my knowing the court case was being held. I was found guilty. I then had to complete the task of asking for a rehearing.
Court hearing to have case reheard
Attach court hearing and have case rescheduled.
Attend initial court hearing (may or may not get delayed).
Plead not guilty. Another court hearing for case to be heard if you plead not guilty.
Court hearing to be held scheduled.
Need to have meeting with prosecutor (in my case) which may be time consuming to organise as they don't get back to you.
Another court hearing if the fine isn't withdrawn.
Matter is heard in court and system is biased against you. In my experience it feels like it's the government's legal system and the prosecutor against you. You have to have a case that goes above and beyond. At this point you're in the hands of the magistrate and I can't help feeling it's their opinion that matters so it can go either way.
Many hours of research, revisiting location, taking measurements, talking to council officers, preparing evidence, preparing and submitting paperwork, A lot of work goes into fighting a fine and if you don't put in the work you probably won't win.
The general advice is to simply pay the fine and accept it as another way we are being taxed.
The last fine we paid was for a red light camera infringement. Even though the timing for the orange turn light is set below the standard of 3 seconds and thousands of people are getting fined, it's just easier not to fight the system. I requested a review which of course was just discarded even though video evidence was provided. Any system has it's flaws but once it's part of the government's system the energy needed to correct wrongs is far more than it's worth. For me whilst technically the fine should be dismissed as the camera is not working to specification, a magistrate could end up saying the time difference wouldn't have affected the outcome.
For me it's better to produce a map of mobile phone cameras so people can make sure when they approach such a camera they and their passengers are not holding anything that such flawed technology might think is a device. Yes even your passenger. You can get booked if your passenger's screen is visible to you as the driver.
PS. There's always a chance I'm wrong in my reviewing of the picture but that's what I see in the picture.
PS. I also have a friend that was pulled over by police and accused of using a mobile phone whilst driving who had their hand to their face. Not sure if they were scratching their face or rubbing their eye. So it isn't just technology that can get this wrong but the outcome can be the same.
