View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
gcranston Lifetime Member
Joined: Nov 30, 2008 Posts: 24 Location: Sheffield, UK
|
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:10 pm Post subject: M42 specs cameras |
|
|
On the M42 on the stretch between the M6 toll and where it turns into the A42. There are numerous specs cameras along it now, with a certain group of them flanking a 50 roadwork section, and the rest just being on open 70 road. There are no signs warning about the ones in the 70 section. None are yet on the database.
Should we add just the cameras that are around the 50 section, and assume that the '70' ones aren't yet in use (i.e. rolling roadworks for the future)? There's no reason they couldn't use them set to 70 is there, as they've put them up!? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Daggers Lifetime Member
Joined: Jun 20, 2005 Posts: 1096 Location: Solihull, UK
|
Posted: Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Last time I was on this stretch of road was between Christmas & New Year (southbound). The cameras were in place, but the roadworks weren't, and the limit was still 70 all the way along. At the very beginning I noticed a sign saying "Cameras not in use", so I din't report any of them on this journey (Unfortunately, I had reported the northbound ones the previous week because I hadn't seen the sign - but my submissions haven't been acted upon).
Could there still be a similar sign in place for the cameras outside the roadwork zone? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gcranston Lifetime Member
Joined: Nov 30, 2008 Posts: 24 Location: Sheffield, UK
|
Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, I was thinking of mentioning that but thought I might confuse myself and everyone else! When I drove southbound few days into the new year, I recall the same sign, cameras not in use. Going northbound yesterday I never saw the same sign, but I don't know if it ever was on that side.
Guess we should add the cameras that do surround the 50 area, but not the rest until the roadworks move up there. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DennisN Tired Old Man
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14893 Location: Keynsham
|
Posted: Tue Jan 13, 2009 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Just for information - from a Verifier.
We've been getting reports of Specs on M42 since just before Christmas and when I went north two days before Christmas I took a printout of 16 cameras to check. Unfortunately, they had been submitted from some sort of inside information which was inaccurate and there weren't any there to check at that time (so every last one was rejected)! I've been very quiet since I last went that way - nobody wants me to do any deliveries. Keep up the submissions and a Verifier will be along quite soon now. _________________ Dennis
If it tastes good - it's fattening.
Two of them are obesiting!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
black_knight Occasional Visitor
Joined: Dec 21, 2006 Posts: 4
|
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 5:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I went that way yesterday and there are indeed lots of sets of cameras both in the roadworks and on the open carriageway.
I have just updated my PGPSW camera DB on my 720 as I am going there on Thursday again so would I be correct in assuming that these are not included yet?
Thanks. _________________ TomTom Go 720
Navcore v8.3
Western Europe Maps v815.2003
PocketGPSWorld Camera Database |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DennisN Tired Old Man
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14893 Location: Keynsham
|
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
black_knight wrote: | I went that way yesterday and there are indeed lots of sets of cameras both in the roadworks and on the open carriageway.
I have just updated my PGPSW camera DB on my 720 as I am going there on Thursday again so would I be correct in assuming that these are not included yet?
Thanks. | I'm not the database Administrator, just a Verifier, so I can't say. However remember the database is now updated and latest version is released each Wednesday, so download the latest one tomorrow night to get the latest confirmed ones before you travel on Thursday. We've certainly had several for M42 and unfortunately the last time I travelled over it, I'd had a computer crash the morning before I left, so I had been unable to download properly - the 16 I went out to check (before Christmas) did not exist - some bright spark had submitted them well in advance of the highways people even starting to put them up, a proper waste of my time! It really is unhelpful if people submit where they think cameras are going to be in advance of any erection work even starting, as it is in my experience usually far too inaccurate to be of any use to us. _________________ Dennis
If it tastes good - it's fattening.
Two of them are obesiting!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005 Posts: 19991 Location: West and Southwest London
|
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As of yesterday (2009-01-19 10:26:40) between the M6 Toll turn off and the end of the motorway there were 14 SPECS cameras already reported and in the process of being verifed and a further 2 verified ones.
I suspect most if not all of them will be in tomorrows release.
It helps an awful lot if the reports are as close to the exact position as possible and also if they include the speed limit (difficult in this case I know, where the cameras went up before the limit was changed). |
|
Back to top |
|
|
black_knight Occasional Visitor
Joined: Dec 21, 2006 Posts: 4
|
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the replies guys, much appreciated. _________________ TomTom Go 720
Navcore v8.3
Western Europe Maps v815.2003
PocketGPSWorld Camera Database |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DennisN Tired Old Man
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14893 Location: Keynsham
|
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Andy_P wrote: | It helps an awful lot if the reports are as close to the exact position as possible and also if they include the speed limit (difficult in this case I know, where the cameras went up before the limit was changed). | It actually helps an awful lot if the reports are of actual cameras or at the very least actual poles. The first 16 were scotch mist! I was in that area today, but on M5, not M42, so don't count on me verifying them! _________________ Dennis
If it tastes good - it's fattening.
Two of them are obesiting!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gcranston Lifetime Member
Joined: Nov 30, 2008 Posts: 24 Location: Sheffield, UK
|
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I really don't quite get what the logic of submitting proposed cameras is about!? We don't care if it will be a camera even if its accurate, we care if it is a camera ! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
DennisN Tired Old Man
Joined: Feb 27, 2006 Posts: 14893 Location: Keynsham
|
Posted: Tue Jan 20, 2009 11:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gcranston wrote: | I really don't quite get what the logic of submitting proposed cameras is about!? We don't care if it will be a camera even if its accurate, we care if it is a camera ! |
You submit a camera. We check it. Until we check it, it's a proposed camera (you have proposed it for inclusion in the database). Geddit? Goddit!. Good!
But you're right. If it isn't a camera we don't want it. If it is proposed to place a camera somewhere, we don't want it until it becomes not a proposed camera, but an actual camera.
Now I don't even know what I'm talking about myself!! _________________ Dennis
If it tastes good - it's fattening.
Two of them are obesiting!! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
gcranston wrote: | I really don't quite get what the logic of submitting proposed cameras is about!? We don't care if it will be a camera even if its accurate, we care if it is a camera ! |
The 'p' stands for pending, which means that the camera is pending verification. Most cams are first given the p prefix unless there are lots of reports for the cam that are all in the same place (or close).
The 'p' cams become 'real' cams after verification by a verifier. In the case of mobile cams, they must have been reported by two or more independent spotters and the site must be verified as a viable site for a mobile cam by a verifier.
I'm sure that MaFt, our database administrator, will pop up and tell me if I'm wrong here.
So, a cam is not reported as a 'p' cam, it is made a 'p' cam by MaFt in the database until it has been verified.
This process is in place to make sure that we only get real cams that are realy there (or a fairly certain active mobile location) in the database.
Hope that this clears up your observation. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
gcranston Lifetime Member
Joined: Nov 30, 2008 Posts: 24 Location: Sheffield, UK
|
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 12:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Think we're referring to two different 'p's here!
I was talking about proposed cameras that people might submit, i.e. rumoured future camera locations based on some kind of inside info, or predictions. I think that's what Dennis was referring to.
No, the 'p' for pending is a great system. Fully support it, have it on all the time. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Darren Frequent Visitor
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
|
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 8:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
gcranston wrote: | I was talking about proposed cameras that people might submit, i.e. rumoured future camera locations based on some kind of inside info, or predictions. |
The reasoning is that by submitting a camera before it's install they hope to get a lead on other reporters and grab the coveted Lifetime Subscriber award.
If they are lucky and the camera is installed and goes live before we verify then the gamble pays off, if not its an own goal and the first reportee who actually sees it gets the award. _________________ Darren Griffin |
|
Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 10:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
gcranston wrote: | Think we're referring to two different 'p's here! |
Oops, re-read and see what you mean
dennisn wrote: | Now I don't even know what I'm talking about myself!! |
I now feel the same way Dennis |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|