View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Paul80 Regular Visitor
Joined: Aug 25, 2005 Posts: 246
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 6:25 am Post subject: Removal of in-correct camera |
|
|
Hi Guys
For manymonths I have tried to have removed a local camera that has not been used for over a year.
MOBILE:18391@70, Heading:15, Single Direction
It was removed from the database once but was then put back on.
Anyone know why this is
Its on the A249 near the new bridge onto the Isle of Sheppey Kent.
The lay-by it used to be in was removed in all the new road works that went on in building the new bridge.
The Camera was re-sited and the new possition is in the Database as well.
Why does it keep being put back on the database.
Paul |
|
Back to top |
|
|
scarymonkey Lifetime Member
Joined: May 09, 2007 Posts: 454 Location: Worcestershire
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
I guessing because someone keeps reporting its use.
Are you 100% sure it is no longer in use and not just they have not used it when you are not around?
Around here many of the mobile locations are rarely used but these are the ones most likely to bite as you become complacent and not as observant of your speed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GPS_fan Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
The submission notes say:
Quote: | Submission Comments: This camera is in place once per month
Database Notes: reactivated due to new sighting |
It would, therefore, appear that although you haven't seen this camera yourself, it has been seen and reported by others _________________ Andy
PocketGPSWorld.com supports Help for Heroes - Read here |
|
Back to top |
|
|
M8TJT The Other Tired Old Man
Joined: Apr 04, 2006 Posts: 10118 Location: Bexhill, South Sussex, UK
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
There is another possibility in that the cam MOBILE:28276@70, Heading:190, Reversible about a mile further south is the 're-sited' location, and the 'renewal' of MOBILE:18391@70, Heading:15, Single Direction is a bad mis-hit for that one.
The OP also says that the layby in which MOBILE:18391@70, Heading:15, Single Direction was located has now gone. Seems like a new verification of these sites is desirable (sorry, too far away).
It also seems that both cams need moving to carriage way centre and doubling up for TT. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul80 Regular Visitor
Joined: Aug 25, 2005 Posts: 246
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yep site is no longer there, it was done away with during the build of the new road for the new bridge.
The new site for the mobile camera is already recorded before the old site. New position is MOBILE:28276@70, Heading:190
Paul |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GPS_fan Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 9:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
When you attempted to have the camera removed, did you include a full explanation in the comments box?
Perhaps an abbreviated comment like "camera no longer at this location" wouldn't stop a new submission being added to the database, but if you were to include the full description here, then MaFt would know that a new request to have that camera added would be erroneous since it would have been built over.
Without knowing exactly what has been submitted by yourself and others, it's not possible to say why this camera has made it's way back - perhaps MaFt could comment. _________________ Andy
PocketGPSWorld.com supports Help for Heroes - Read here |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul80 Regular Visitor
Joined: Aug 25, 2005 Posts: 246
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 10:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes full explanation given every time.
MOBILE:18391@70, Heading:15, Single Direction
Latitude: 51.38506654725612 Longitude: 0.7426071166992187
United Kingdom
Note
Camera Position no longer used
Position removed when new road was built for the new bridge |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MaFt Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15226 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 2:54 pm Post subject: Re: Removal of in-correct camera |
|
|
Paul80 wrote: | For manymonths I have tried to have removed a local camera that has not been used for over a year.
MOBILE:18391@70, Heading:15, Single Direction
It was removed from the database once but was then put back on.
Anyone know why this is
|
because it was seen again on 26th march 08
MaFt |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul80 Regular Visitor
Joined: Aug 25, 2005 Posts: 246
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't know how. There is no were for the van to park since the new road was built. which is why there is a new position for the camera already listed. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005 Posts: 19991 Location: West and Southwest London
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It doesn't have to have been a van, it could have been a single copper on foot, or on a bike.
They are pretty good at parking their vans illegally/dangerously too. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul80 Regular Visitor
Joined: Aug 25, 2005 Posts: 246
|
Posted: Fri Jun 20, 2008 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok I will give up trying to get the error corrected then. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MaFt Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: Aug 31, 2005 Posts: 15226 Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
|
Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
look at it from my point of view. i don't know this area in any way shape or form so i can ONLY go off the comments made by submitters.
so at present i have one person saying it has been seen again and another saying it should be removed.
until there have been further submissions either way then the best bet is to leave it in place for now. rather have people being warned than not.
hope that makes sense!
MaFt |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Paul80 Regular Visitor
Joined: Aug 25, 2005 Posts: 246
|
Posted: Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think I have now sussed what the problem is.
Firstly
I drive over the sheppey bridge 5 or 6 times a day every day of the week and I was also the one who first posted the position of this speed camera.
Just been over the bridge again tonight with my TomTom on noting the exact positions of the cameras.
What I noticed was that what I thought was the camera in the new position was actualy a camera on the other side of the road.
I have now posted notification using the web site of the actual position of the new camera.
Hopefully the in corrrect position will now be removed.
Just to note
The old position is now about 100 yards up the new bridge
Beleive me even plod or the Kent Safety Camera Partnership would not stop on the bridge. |
|
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 |
|
|
|