False radar beams?

[k14]

Found this link (http://www.flickr.com/photos/beautox/4328470701/) on another forum, seems as though ACC has paid to have some radar beam senders installed at some accident black spots around auckland that send out a radar beam to trick drivers/riders with radar detectors.

Good to see that levy money going to a good cause...

[Jantar]

Is there also one on the motorway into Christchurch from the north? My detector always goes off at the same spot and I haven't seen a cop there yet.

[Berries]

Is there also one on the motorway into Christchurch from the north?

Quite probably, they have gone up all over the country over the last 12 months, including some a bit closer to home. I don't have a detector so it doesn't bother me, but next time yours goes off look for a device similar to the one in the link at the side of the road.

[Blackbird]

Is there also one on the motorway into Christchurch from the north? My detector always goes off at the same spot and I haven't seen a cop there yet.

Malcolm, one near our place does the same. It shows up as Ka microwave. Now here's the odd thing.... it's in the hills just south of Coromandel and the only thing nearby is one of these new age quasi-religious retreats that seems to have plenty of money. I wonder just what sort of communications or electronics gear they need to talk to God? Hope it isn't another Waco in the making!

[MSTRS]

..., seems as though ACC has paid to have some radar beam senders installed at some accident black spots around auckland that send out a radar beam to trick drivers/riders with radar detectors.

Good to see that levy money going to a good cause...
Yep. ACC's first guideline is 'accident prevention'.
But unless these devices are moved about the place, I think TheBoyWhoCriedWolf will be paying a visit to regular motorists in those areas.

[slofox]

Guess it beats getting a fine though...

[rainman]

Sounds like a bloody good idea to me. If people would rather slow down in case they get fined and lose some $$$, rather than slow down in case they crash and lose their life, so be it.

[Swoop]

What a good idea. Instead of spending money on driver/rider education and training, why not spend money on things like this. Hopefully the hillbillies will use them for target practice instead of signposts.

[CookMySock]

I wondered what that was. I found one last summer way out in the boondox north of Kerikeri. Oddly, about 5km down the road there was a patrol unit ticketing someone with a trailer - no microwave signal.

Steve

[dipshit]

Nothing new in other countries... http://www.speedlabs.com/radar_drones.html

[dipshit]

Oh, and Cobra have been selling drones disguised as radar detectors for quite a while too. ;)

[rastuscat]

What a good idea. Instead of spending money on driver/rider education and training, why not spend money on things like this. Hopefully the hillbillies will use them for target practice instead of signposts.

There are plenty of rider training opportunities out there, but we all think we are so damn good, how many of us have taken them up?

ACC spends money on training, it's getting the right people to do the training that's the challenge. The people who actually seek out training are not normally the ones who have the problem. They are psychologically aware of their shortcomings, and generally factor them in. The big issue is the tossers who think they are so flash on a bike that they don't need the training.

So there.

[CookMySock]

The big issue is the tossers who think they are so flash on a bike that they don't need the training. So there.There is not really any opportunity to disagree with any of your post.

I am puzzled about how they will do that. The only way I see it, is to change the licensing process. No one wants to go to boring go-to-sleep condescending "training" courses. :yawn:

Steve

[Ixion]

There are plenty of rider training opportunities out there, but we all think we are so damn good, how many of us have taken them up?

ACC spends money on training, it's getting the right people to do the training that's the challenge. The people who actually seek out training are not normally the ones who have the problem. They are psychologically aware of their shortcomings, and generally factor them in. The big issue is the tossers who think they are so flash on a bike that they don't need the training.

So there.

I am becoming somewhat disillusioned with the whole training thing. The problem is that the great majority of crashes (both bikes and cars) are not due to the driver lacking the skill to adequately control the vehicle. They are caused by people (both cagers and bikers) doing bloody stupid shit.

Take for instance that perennial, the driver (or rider) crossing the centre line through a bend . Mostly (not always, granted) the solution to that is not to train the driver/rider how to go round corners better. The solution is for the driver/rider not to attempt to go rounds corners at such bloody silly speeds. I guarantee that 9 times out of 10 if you asked the centre line crosser "how did that happen" , if they were honst they would reply "oh I was trying to see how fast I could go". There are exceptions, where a corner is deceptive, and training would help, but mostly it is just people being fools.

And the head on crashes when people overtake - what training is going to rectify that.

You can't train people not to be fools. They know they ought not to do it, but do it anyway.

[red mermaid]

So to paraphrase...speed causes you to do silly things that endanger you and others, and will often kill or maim you.

And to be perennial it is a constantly occuring problem.


I
Take for instance that perennial, the driver (or rider) crossing the centre line through a bend . Mostly (not always, granted) the solution to that is not to train the driver/rider how to go round corners better. The solution is for the driver/rider not to attempt to go rounds corners at such bloody silly speeds. I guarantee that 9 times out of 10 if you asked the centre line crosser "how did that happen" , if they were honst they would reply "oh I was trying to see how fast I could go". There are exceptions, where a corner is deceptive, and training would help, but mostly it is just people being fools.

[grusomhat]

Meh, sounds like they are putting them up in places where a radar detector isn't of much use anyway.

[quickbuck]

I am becoming somewhat disillusioned with the whole training thing. ..................

I can see your points.... Well, can't in the quote, as I deleted them!
This provides good food for thought Ixion...

The "training" actually might be better if it was directed to a course on personal responsibility for actions.
Also, educating operators of motor-vehicles that they are in charge of a potentially lethal weapon....

Something along those lines.
Granted, it has to be much more than an afternoon around the local race track.
While there is some benefit in that, it is not actually the cup of tea that the majority need, or are ready for.

The "Training" that is given MUST be applicable and effective. Only then will it make a difference.
And a boring 8 hour lecture will not cut it either!

It is like the servicing of a chain on a bike.
You can go out and look at it for damage before every ride, but unless you actually adjust it to the correct tension, clean and lubricate it, it will wear out prematurely.
Looking at it does not much except tell you it is failing.

[Ixion]

So to paraphrase...speed causes you to do silly things that endanger you and others, and will often kill or maim you.

And to be perennial it is a constantly occuring problem.

But that has nothing to do with speed LIMITS. Usually, the line crossing culprit is way below the speed limit. None has ever argued that INAPPROPRIATE speed is dangerous. What is not valid is to attempt to extend that (as the Police invariably do) into a truism that "Speed in excess of the speed limit is ALWAYS dangerous, but is you stick to the speed limit you are ALWAYS safe". I would guarantee that 90% of the line crossing drivers, if tasked with their stupidity would retort "But I wasn't speeding".

And that is a large part of why they do it. They believe that so long as they don't break the speed limit they can safely go as fast as possible. Because that is the message that the Police and LTSA-as-was send them

The police have now made such a total balls up of attitudes toward speed, that "not breaking the speed limit " is a rebuttal to any stupidity. No matter how idiotic the behaviour, it is OK so long as you don't break the speed limit.

Whereas the safe driver will select a sensible and appropriate speed at all times. Safe and appropriate may sometimes be ABOVE the speed limit. But often, will be BELOW the speed limit.

[pritch]

So to paraphrase...speed causes you to do silly things that endanger you


I think you missed the point. Speed alone isn't necessarily a factor. Sheer stupidity is.

[Jantar]

So to paraphrase...speed causes you to do silly things that endanger you and others, and will often kill or maim you.

And to be perennial it is a constantly occuring problem.
I read it as being people do silly things among which is inappropriate speed. It is the person doing silly things that is the prime cause, not the speed.

[quickbuck]

The police have now made such a total balls up of attitudes toward speed, that "not breaking the speed limit " is a rebuttal to any stupidity. No matter how idiotic the behaviour, it is OK so long as you don't break the speed limit.

Whereas the safe driver will select a sensible and appropriate speed at all times. Safe and appropriate may sometimes be ABOVE the speed limit. But often, will be BELOW the speed limit.

So, back to the "Training" thing, I guess we are talking the need for a whole social attitude adjustment for anything to really change...... Nothing new there, we just have to work out how to do it....
I know Katman has tried, but his approach doesn't work on all......

Okay, for those that are sitting there thinking this is a bit of a hijack,
Weill I will get it back on track for you...

Putting up deterrent devices to slow traffic down will only teach drivers/ riders to look around for other things. this will distract them from the task at hand.

Scenario.... Driver of a sports car cruising along a perfectly straight stretch of road as a pace well within the capabilities of the car.. ie less than a third of it's top speed, but a little over the Open Road Speed limit.
His Valentine One goes nuts. Driver is just driving to the conditions and well within his capabilities, BUT as soon as the Valentine goes off his natural instinct is to touch the picks....

The thing is WHY? I mean, I know why it is instinct, BUT he was traveling along a road and the only thing he was doing was traveling slightly above the posted speed limit.
The thing is, he has just created a situation that is much more dangerous than traveling over the posted speed limit!
He has upset the flow of traffic.

Now imagine that there are a whole line of cars following said sports car....... Well, we wonder how accidents happen?

[dipshit]

Now imagine that there are a whole line of cars following said sports car....... Well, we wonder how accidents happen?

haha... look at the last half of this....
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0210/702899.html?ref=em

[CookMySock]

I guess we are talking the need for a whole social attitude adjustment for anything to really change...... Nothing new there, we just have to work out how to do it....That sort of thing can take fifteen years, and in the meanwhile, is otherwise tantamount to enforcing ones' lifestyle and opinions on others (not yours or mine.)

The anti drink-driving and anti-smoking people seem to be making some headway, and the "hitting kids" crusaders seem to be a little stuck at the moment, but perhaps in time the "don't be an arse on a motorbike" people might get somewhere? It might be 25 years instead of fifteen perhaps?

Steve

[pritch]

BUT as soon as the Valentine goes off his natural instinct is to touch the picks....


Not necessarily. My first reaction was to look around for the source of the radar signal...
Obviously (even to me) that wasn't a very good idea. :whistle:
The lunge for the brakes therefore is the result of training rather than instinct?

[MSTRS]

Not necessarily. My first reaction was to look around for the source of the radar signal...
Obviously (even to me) that wasn't a very good idea. :whistle:
The lunge for the brakes therefore is the result of training rather than instinct?

Training = conditioning? Yep.
Now, if that training could only be to teach people how to read a road/corner and select an appropriate speed based on that training, I'd bet we'd see a lot less 'running wide on a corner' incidents.

[quickbuck]

The lunge for the brakes therefore is the result of training rather than instinct?

Well yes, not formal training, but more along the lines of:
You are going faster than the posted speed limit, so when a policeman sees you doing this, he will pull you over and give you an instant fine.
If this happens often enough (or you realise what the Policeman in the patrol cars job is), then the natural reaction will be to slow down every time you see a police car, whether you are going over the posted speed limit or not.
That is the bit that has been "Trained" into us. Well, me for one.

As you know a radar detector is a device that does the looking out for you, so it can be assumed that there is a police car in the area every time the thing goes off.

Now, note I never mentioned excessive speed....
I have also caught myself dabbing the brakes while traveling under the posted speed limit. It is a reaction that has been "trained" into me through the fear of getting a ticket.
Yes, I know this is NOT good, and is something I have to untrain myself to do........

I wish I could just "Ride the road in front of me" without the revenue limit existing....
The trouble is though, not everybody can make a sensible choice on what that speed should be for them...

Also it is speed differential that is dangerous, and not everybody's safe speed is the same..... In fact the posted speed limit is not safe for all situations.

[mulletman]

Is there also one on the motorway into Christchurch from the north? My detector always goes off at the same spot and I haven't seen a cop there yet.
It sits on a pole by the new waimak bridge facing north, same shape as plod uses, also one on pole where they pull trucks etc in just before waipara.

[dipshit]

This way would work better...
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=2017961664

[Hitcher]

Hit me
Hit me
Hit me with your radar beam.

[Swoop]

ACC spends money on training, it's getting the right people to do the training that's the challenge.
RRRS style training is what I would like to see as a common entry point for bikes and also a similar system for car drivers. Under our current system there is a lot of focus on theoretical topics, but insufficient practical based learning.
Knowing that "I should have done xyz when in a certain situation" means nothing when physically in charge of a motor vehicle.
We know the testing standards in NZ are crap. The test simply lets a person loose on the road, legally.


The "training" actually might be better if it was directed to a course on personal responsibility for actions.
Also, educating operators of motor-vehicles that they are in charge of a potentially lethal weapon....

Something along those lines.
The old "Defensive Driving" course used to do that. Sit through a day of lectures and watch a few videos. Absolutely no practical, hands-on training included. Hopefully they have attended to that now.

Now, if that training could only be to teach people how to read a road/corner and select an appropriate speed based on that training, I'd bet we'd see a lot less 'running wide on a corner' incidents.
Education? There's a concept!

[3umph]

Is there also one on the motorway into Christchurch from the north? My detector always goes off at the same spot and I haven't seen a cop there yet.

There is actually one at each end of the northern motorway... but the one by the waimak bridge is the one thats on the most...

Have a good look at the pole that its/they are on... It also has a video camera on it and my guess its hooked to the traffic monitoring in central...
I did a job at central in one of there camera monitering rooms and was amazed at the clear quality and zoom distance these cameras have!!!

Never heard of anyone getting a ticket in the mail from them but I suppose it could be possible...

[scumdog]

Yep. ACC's first guideline is 'accident prevention'.
But unless these devices are moved about the place, I think TheBoyWhoCriedWolf will be paying a visit to regular motorists in those areas.

Then they cunningly move it elsewhere and put a REAL device in its place....:shifty:

[peasea]

So to paraphrase...speed causes you to do silly things that endanger you and others.

Fucking bullshit.
"Speed causes you to do silly things.." What utter nonsense.

People do silly things at walking pace ya knob. (Well, I suppose that's a speed of a certain amount.)

Speed doesn't 'cause' anyone to do anything. Get a grip. The results of doing something stupid at high speed could have dire consequences, yes. Just as doing something stupid at 20kph going around a roundabout or through a stop sign. The greater the speed the more dire the consequences of stupid actions. Prevent stupid actions and I am willing to bet that speed (high speed) won't be an issue when conditions suit.

180kph in the middle of butt-fuck nowhere didn't cause ME to do anything silly on Sunday, nor my riding buddy nor the people in the Holden in front of us.

[Dino]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3306026/Fake-speed-radars-used-to-fool-motorists

.

[CookMySock]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3306026/Fake-speed-radars-used-to-fool-motoristsCool! Inside that waterproof box must be a complete Ka band radar unit.. that makes it quite a stealable unit doesn't it! And sooo easy to access too - mounted on poles out in the middle of nowhere. I first assumed they really were "drones" - just worthless transmitters, but they are in fact complete Microwave Doppler Radars. Nice. :clap:

Steve

[Swoop]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10625027

[Scuba_Steve]

I see ACC are trying to increase their client base by installing dummy cameras.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3306026/Fake-speed-radars-used-to-fool-motorists
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10625027&pnum=0

Now every study I've ever seen (& probably ever done) shows speed traps (fake or not) increase accidents rates, hence why the Police like to associate their scam with death tolls rather than accident rates (which would be a more accurate comparison) as the safety devices in vehicles are bringing down the death toll so it looks "good" whereas the speed traps are increasing the accident rates that doesn't look so good for their money making scam.
Now the ACC have joined in making our roads more unsafe too, the worst part is its our money paying to make the roads more unsafe & they're trying to get even more again from us (us being vehicle users of any sort). This is not only a huge waste of money but also it endangers the Lives of every New Zealander and I think this is totally unacceptable.

[Azi Dahaka]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10625027

cheaky sods

[MaxB]

Hmm, the units look like they have been removed from their enclosures. I wonder whether ACC have got clearance from a radiological protection agency like the Natoinal Radiation Laboratory? I'll bet those cheap bastards haven't bothered.

[Pixie]

I wonder if they are Safety Warning System units.Any one with SWS on their detector will be able to tell.
SWS has been around for years.It gives warning of accidents and road works from mobile beacons and can include voice messages.I often get SWS beeps from US made tractors as they have SWS beacons as standard equipment.
One gave me warning of a John Deere around the next bend ,just the other day.

NZ authorities (police) where offered SWS beacons for free by the manufacturers some years ago,but declined because they thought that it would encourage and legitimise radar detector ownership.And they aren't interested in safety anyway,just revenue collection.

[smoky]

I'm sure one turned up on the Southern motorway just prior to heading up the Bombays - about 6 months ago it happened

Radar detecters do slow traffic down, they go off with oncoming traffic (with radars) and some trucks and tractors, gas stations, some shops and alarm systems....... it all causes you to back off and eventually you do end up driving a bit slower - so why would they want to ban radar detecters? Oh that's right...... it would eat into their revenue gathering

[Pixie]

I am becoming somewhat disillusioned with the whole training thing. The problem is that the great majority of crashes (both bikes and cars) are not due to the driver lacking the skill to adequately control the vehicle. They are caused by people (both cagers and bikers) doing bloody stupid shit.

Take for instance that perennial, the driver (or rider) crossing the centre line through a bend . Mostly (not always, granted) the solution to that is not to train the driver/rider how to go round corners better. The solution is for the driver/rider not to attempt to go rounds corners at such bloody silly speeds. I guarantee that 9 times out of 10 if you asked the centre line crosser "how did that happen" , if they were honst they would reply "oh I was trying to see how fast I could go". There are exceptions, where a corner is deceptive, and training would help, but mostly it is just people being fools.

And the head on crashes when people overtake - what training is going to rectify that.

You can't train people not to be fools. They know they ought not to do it, but do it anyway.

Four wheel crossing of the centerline in corner is nearly always laziness.I have never followed a vehicle that crossed the centerline and was not able to go faster through that corner without crossing it.

[PrincessBandit]

Interesting that school bus companies have bought some. Surely they shouldn't need them? (asked while thinking about putting tongue in cheek)
At least it's out in the open now and people are aware of it. What they then do or don't do about it is their business.

[MSTRS]

Then they cunningly move it elsewhere and put a REAL device in its place....:shifty:

Yea...slimey bastards...just can't trust them.

[NighthawkNZ]

Old radar technology fools speeding motorists
http://southernrider.co.nz/forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=10185

[mashman]

Four wheel crossing of the centerline in corner is nearly always laziness.I have never followed a vehicle that crossed the centerline and was not able to go faster through that corner without crossing it.

Absolutely. I see it every day (from my window), am part of it every day (leaving work) and am fed up with seeing lazy bastards go around roundabouts using both lanes... sheer laziness... I think these devices are a great idea when placed appropriately, like on school busses etc... they slow traffic around kids... kids do strange things, like bolt out into the road. I've had a few run in to the side of my car before and hate the little shits... Adults should just know better, but some just don't give a shit about "baby on board", "mind that child" etc... primarily because they're thinking about something else, the hard day coming or just been at work, the curtains, the shopping, new ruby slippers etc...

If you want to "educate" new drivers, old drivers, any driver for that matter, i'd put them all on a track and let them drive around at a "modest" speed limit... but, also have a person in some form of vehicle drive around and cause crashes once in a while... when they least expect it. That way people get to know what it's like to have a crash, how it feels, reflect on whether it could have been avoided etc... Add gravel to the odd corner herer and there, spill water across the track, diesel, oil, cardboard kids leaping from behind cars etc... the list is endless and could actually turn into a comprehensive trainign course, more relevant to today than the pathetic excuse for licensing that we currently haqve. Granted this may not work too well for bikes (especially the track conditions), but if you can rig a bike up to crash safely, then the same can apply for bikes. Unfortunately $$$ is the overriding factor AGAIN... what's are the lives of our road users worth!!!

[avgas]

I think its a good idea, but what I really need is one near all the things I smack my legs into at home.

[dangerous]

found here http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10625027

ACC has been buying old police radar gear in a covert plan to thwart speeding motorists.

The radars have been mounted on power poles at up to 70 sites nationally, and are intended to fool drivers with detectors in their cars into thinking police are nearby.

Five radars have also been bought by school bus companies to slow motorists around children, and another six have been requested.

Official estimates put the number of motorists with radar detectors at about one in 10.

A Wellington firm, Emergency Vehicle Systems, buys the radars from the police and sells them on renamed as "drones".

They are used as part of a project between ACC's road safety action planning group, police, the Transport Agency and councils.

It has been under way for about a year, and about $7000 has been invested so far.

ACC buys the drones for around $150 and passes them on to the agency, councils and others for distribution.

Injury prevention manager Phil Wright said yesterday that 10 drones were initially trialled in Canterbury for six months before being shifted to the North Island.

While there had been no plan to keep the project secret, ACC had been happy for it to remain under wraps, he said.

"We didn't tell anyone as we thought it would be best if, when a signal went off, motorists didn't assume it was part of this programme," Mr Wright said.

In the last financial year, ACC received claims worth at least $81 million relating to crashes where speed was a factor.

Mr Wright said the radar idea had followed on from a proposal by Harry Duynhoven when he was Labour's Transport Minister to ban detectors.

"[Detectors] are sold to people who are the more hardcore speedsters. They are an essential element in a boy-racer car.

"They are banned in Australia. Even if they were banned here, there is a couple of years' leeway for retailers. We thought, 'What can we do in the meantime?"'

Current minister Steven Joyce's office said yesterday that he was still awaiting advice from officials on the proposed detector ban.

It was revealed in July that police had begun removing radars from their fleet throughout the country.

The drones are also being used by roadwork contractors to attach to their machinery.

Well, thought as much. There has been one on the M/W at the Mak bridge for a year or so, and also down Lincoln Rd, I have not spoted that one as yet.

Ya know these detectors have SWS which is used in the US, it gives warnings of accos, schools, road works, John Deer fit them to theer tractors etc, and I might add that saved me from rearending a tractor as I rounded a bend on the open Rd (shows as a ka band, but if NZ used SWS it would show as 'tractor' etc.
Why dont these pricks look at doing good with the money thay have instead of making enemys and decieving us?

[captain_andrey]

Just disable K band - easy.

[p.dath]

If someone has the time, it would be interesting reading up who the radio frequency licence was given to (I'm guessing it will be in the name of the Police).

I suspect with ACC being an SOE, it wont have a licence to operate equipment in that band. Ditto for any council deploying these units.

[captain_andrey]

I think the K band is pretty open. Ka on the other hand is restricted. This is why I'm not allowed a Radar Jammer :(

[dangerous]

ummm, but these x cop radars are ka...

ps: dumb mod that scrubed my thread, a p/m would have been nicer.

[slofox]

Just disable K band - easy.

They work in Ka...same as real police radars...disable that and you might as well uninstall the detector...

[peasea]

ummm, but these x cop radars are ka...

ps: dumb mod that scrubed my thread, a p/m would have been nicer.

Mods being nice? Hahahahahahahaha:killingme:

[CookMySock]

Mods being nice? HahahahahahahahaI've never had a rude word from a moderator, not in their official duties anyway.

Steve

[Str8 Jacket]

I've never had a rude word from a moderator, not in their official duties anyway.

Steve

They're too scared to raise a barrage of complaints from you I would say.

Always be more worried about what people are saying behind your back, not to your face.

[R-Soul]

Ther's a really cool urban legend about a pair of cops busy speed trapping in Northern Scotland. There they are sitting behind a bush over their radar detector, when they get a reading of some 1000km/hr.

Next thing a bloody great big fighter jet comes through over them at really low altitude.

So they tell their commanding officer about it at the station, who then calls the local air base's CO to complain.

The airbase's CO cuts him off mid- complaint, and says to him "Do you have any idea how lucky your two officers were today?"

The cop CO asks why. The base CO then explains that the Harrier jets have an IFF system (for - Iidentification Friend or Foe) on them. Each friendly jet (i.e. westernised allies) sends out a coded identification signal with their radar that identifies them as a friend. Those that don't are regarded as foes.

Typically, when the Harrier jet's sensors pick up a radar signal, it warns the pilot that they are being tracked. But sometimes the radar signal source is too close, and the pilot would not have enough time to react to the threat. In such cases it automatically releases an anti-radar missile that tracks the source of the radar and homes in on it to destroy it. The cop's radar had no "friendly" signal associated with it. the
Harrier 's system had picked up on it and had actuated the release missile release. But it was only by a stroke of luck that no radar tracking missiles were fitted that morning....

[shafty]

found here http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10625027



"They are banned in Australia. Even if they were banned here, there is a couple of years' leeway for retailers. We thought, 'What can we do in the meantime?"'

Current minister Steven Joyce's office said yesterday that he was still awaiting advice from officials on the proposed detector ban.

It was revealed in July that police had begun removing radars from their fleet throughout the country.

The drones are also being used by roadwork contractors to attach to their machinery.

Well, thought as much. There has been one on the M/W at the Mak bridge for a year or so, and also down Lincoln Rd, I have not spoted that one as yet.

Ya know these detectors have SWS which is used in the US, it gives warnings of accos, schools, road works, John Deer fit them to theer tractors etc, and I might add that saved me from rearending a tractor as I rounded a bend on the open Rd (shows as a ka band, but if NZ used SWS it would show as 'tractor' etc.
Why dont these pricks look at doing good with the money thay have instead of making enemys and decieving us?

Thats interesting Dangerous - I had wondered what the signal from tractors was for - seems a brilliant idea, and sad that NZ authorities have take the "Detectors are only used by hard core Speedsters approach".

If they played fair, I wouldn't need mine...

[captain_andrey]

They work in Ka...same as real police radars...disable that and you might as well uninstall the detector...

Do you have any source for this? I thought this would be illegal.

[peasea]

I've never had a rude word from a moderator, not in their official duties anyway.

Steve

Aren't you lucky.

No, they're not rude, just twats from time to time. Humourless, conservative, anally retentive cop lovers.

[grusomhat]

Do you have any source for this? I thought this would be illegal.

They are using old police radar so very likely it's Ka. Would be pointless if they weren't as that's all most RD user's look out for. What would make it illegal? Someone commented in one of the articles about it being illegal due to it being a breech in the FCC. Can't remember the exact wording but something to do with deliberate interference.

That would not hold up though for the same reason it's legal to use a radar jammer.

EDIT: Definitely Ka band. Dude on the news had his V1 go off and it was showing Ka. Then again they showed a LIDAR gun when referring to radar so who know's if the footage was from that.

[scumdog]

Aren't you lucky.

No, they're not rude, just twats from time to time. Humourless, conservative, anally retentive cop lovers.

Gee, how come you get all the luck?

I've never had any dealings with one of these mods as you described.:confused:

[dangerous]

Thats interesting Dangerous - I had wondered what the signal from tractors was for - seems a brilliant idea, and sad that NZ authorities have take the "Detectors are only used by hard core Speedsters approach".

If they played fair, I wouldn't need mine...
yeah and remember tractors are only one SWS alert, see atachment, so there idea of using the decoys is simply to piss those with detectors off till they are baned.

[p.dath]

If someone has the time, it would be interesting reading up who the radio frequency licence was given to (I'm guessing it will be in the name of the Police).

I suspect with ACC being an SOE, it wont have a licence to operate equipment in that band. Ditto for any council deploying these units.

This seems to be the tool for searching the RSM (radio spectrum management) database held by the Ministry of Economic development.
http://www.rsm.govt.nz/smart-web/smart/page/-smart/WelcomePage.wdk
What frequency does K and Ka band use?

[peasea]

Gee, how come you get all the luck?

I've never had any dealings with one of these mods as you described.:confused:

Oops, my bad, replace the word 'cop' with 'pig'. There's a difference.

No offence. (Bwahahahaha....so lame.)

[peasea]

This seems to be the tool for searching the RSM (radio spectrum management) database held by the Ministry of Economic development.
http://www.rsm.govt.nz/smart-web/smart/page/-smart/WelcomePage.wdk
What frequency does K and Ka band use?

Never mind K and Ka, what about KC and the Sunshine band?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/VWf1MdHv80Q&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/VWf1MdHv80Q&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[p.dath]

Hey this is getting interesting. Do a search on Licensee #137373 ("Every person" - what every person in NZ is allowed to use).

K band on 24.125 Ghz and 24.150 Ghz are listed. My take on this is you could (under the radio spectrum management laws) legally operate a radar jammer in these frequencies.

And more interesting, I can't find a frequency allocation for Ka band at 33.4 - 36.0 GHz. Could the Police be operating Ka band radars illegally?

[k14]

Hey this is getting interesting. Do a search on Licensee #137373 ("Every person" - what every person in NZ is allowed to use).

K band on 24.125 Ghz and 24.150 Ghz are listed. My take on this is you could (under the radio spectrum management laws) legally operate a radar jammer in these frequencies.

And more interesting, I can't find a frequency allocation for Ka band at 33.4 - 36.0 GHz. Could the Police be operating Ka band radars illegally?
No point using a K band jammer because no cops use them. I used to have it turned on for my RD but the only thing it ever detected was falses along with those speed trailers that tell you how fast you are going. There may be 1 or 2 cops out there with them but I highly doubt it. Pretty sure all (incl speed cameras) use Ka now in cars along with laser if they are setting up on the side of the road.

[shafty]

Coincidentally there is a Poll on http://nz.yahoo.com/ today asking: Should Radar Detectors be banned in NZ? Go and vote...

[dangerous]

No point using a K band jammer because no cops use them. I used to have it turned on for my RD but the only thing it ever detected was falses along with those speed trailers that tell you how fast you are going. There may be 1 or 2 cops out there with them but I highly doubt it. Pretty sure all (incl speed cameras) use Ka now in cars along with laser if they are setting up on the side of the road.
Na man, the old mobile speed cameras were ka... but they are now using k band again, detection is next to usless ya passing the van as the detector goes off, at least with the ka vans it was 100m with a good detector.
best thing IMO is to use ka only in town but ka and k on the open rd.

[Pixie]

Hey this is getting interesting. Do a search on Licensee #137373 ("Every person" - what every person in NZ is allowed to use).

K band on 24.125 Ghz and 24.150 Ghz are listed. My take on this is you could (under the radio spectrum management laws) legally operate a radar jammer in these frequencies.

And more interesting, I can't find a frequency allocation for Ka band at 33.4 - 36.0 GHz. Could the Police be operating Ka band radars illegally?

That is exactly true.If they make RD's illegal I'm going to steal a drone and use it for a jammer.Might do it anyway.

Stupid comment from the cops on the news: "We want to know where the drones are so we can hide our radars in the same area."
That is bound to invite a legal challenge to any infringements handed out on the basis of the radar being operated outside it's operating parameters,i.e. in an area of known microwave interference.

[captain_andrey]

No point using a K band jammer because no cops use them. I used to have it turned on for my RD ...

You mixing up radar detectors and jammer?

There is no reason you cant use active K jammer as the frequency is open. Just as an active laser jammer, its is completely legal. But I dont know any jammer that does specifically that frequency and any device that can interfere with a licenced freqyuency is illegal.

[YellowDog]

Big feature on the ACC Drone on the News this evening.

Placing them in accident black spots is a pretty good idea.

You now need to sell Radar detectors the other 98% of drivers.

[k14]

Na man, the old mobile speed cameras were ka... but they are now using k band again, detection is next to usless ya passing the van as the detector goes off, at least with the ka vans it was 100m with a good detector.
best thing IMO is to use ka only in town but ka and k on the open rd.
Oh ok, did not know that. Have not seen a new speed camera van, can't remember ever seening a speed camera down this part of the woods.

You mixing up radar detectors and jammer?

There is no reason you cant use active K jammer as the frequency is open. Just as an active laser jammer, its is completely legal. But I dont know any jammer that does specifically that frequency and any device that can interfere with a licenced freqyuency is illegal.
No I know exactly what it is, should have said I turned K band on my detector off. Stupid englandish...

[p.dath]

You mixing up radar detectors and jammer?

There is no reason you cant use active K jammer as the frequency is open. Just as an active laser jammer, its is completely legal. But I dont know any jammer that does specifically that frequency and any device that can interfere with a licenced freqyuency is illegal.

Refer post 67, they are licenced for "every person". The Crown has given you a licence to use a radio transmitter in the K band.

[Dschubba]

Back when I was in the radio inspector business, there was a court case challenging the legality of the police radars. It turned out they weren't licensed. The guy challenging their legality (who worked with us) was seriously told to pull his head in while the powers that be ran round writing licenses for the radars and fudging the issue date. The ticket that my colleague received was dropped- but he really put the cat amongst the pigeons.

This newspaper article did make me wonder if they are licensed to operate and basically cause interference on that radio frequency band.

[Dschubba]

oops oops oops

[grusomhat]

Back when I was in the radio inspector business, there was a court case challenging the legality of the police radars. It turned out they weren't licensed. The guy challenging their legality (who worked with us) was seriously told to pull his head in while the powers that be ran round writing licenses for the radars and fudging the issue date. The ticket that my colleague received was dropped- but he really put the cat amongst the pigeons.

This newspaper article did make me wonder if they are licensed to operate and basically cause interference on that radio frequency band.

Interesting post and it made me google for the radio spectrum laws. And I think I just found something interesting, someone please let me know if I'm reading this right. Relavent info posted below, T&C #5


2. General user radio licence

A general user radio licence is granted for the transmission of radio waves, by means of vehicular radar short range device radiocommunication transmitters, for the purposes of road vehicle collision mitigation and traffic safety applications, in accordance with the terms, conditions and restrictions of this notice.

3. Terms, conditions and restrictions

1. Except as otherwise provided in this notice, the frequencies and other emission characteristics are those prescribed in the Schedule to this notice.
2. Transmitters must conform to technical standards as prescribed in notices made under Regulation 32 (1) (b) of the Regulations.
3. Frequency use is on a shared basis and the chief executive does not accept liability under any circumstances for any loss or damage of any kind occasioned by the unavailability of frequencies, or interference to reception.
4. The chief executive reserves the right to require and ensure that any transmission pursuant to this general user radio licence changes frequency, reduces power, or ceases operation, where reasonable evidence is provided to the chief executive of harmful interference being caused to licensed services.
5. Transmitters must not be permanently installed at a fixed location.
6. This licence expires on 1 July 2013.

Source:http://www.rsm.govt.nz/cms/licensing/types-of-licence/general-user-licences/vehicular-radar-short-range-devices

EDIT: I guess that applies if they are operating under a general user license. Anyone have the specifics for the Ka Band spectrum license?

[Jdogg]

meh....if I get a ka on the V1 I always do a brake check.....if I dont see a cop (you can tell by the strength of the signall) I carry on....I think its a good thing if they deem it a black spot, all good..and if they try and hide other coppers under the trap the good ol v1 will pick it up on the counter

[TimeOut]

Thats interesting Dangerous - I had wondered what the signal from tractors was for - seems a brilliant idea, and sad that NZ authorities have take the "Detectors are only used by hard core Speedsters approach".

If they played fair, I wouldn't need mine...

Na the tractors here don't have SWS what they have is speed sensing radar (K band)

It compares actual speed (radar) to the transmission speed to give the % of wheel slip

[Swoop]

Ther's a really cool urban legend about a pair of cops busy speed trapping in Northern Scotland.
Sorry. Look here (http://www.snopes.com/horrors/techno/radar.asp).
As for "auto release of a missile"...:rofl:

the only thing it ever detected was falses along with those speed trailers that tell you how fast you are going.
The speed camera vans up this way are hiding their vans in the vicinity of those devices. Attempting to hide their systems in the radar beam.



It is interesting to note that a "drone" refers to a target that gets shot at and destroyed...:rofl:

[R-Soul]

Sorry. Look here (http://www.snopes.com/horrors/techno/radar.asp).
As for "auto release of a missile"...:rofl:


Hey I did say urban legend - its still quite a cool story though- sometihing for those drunken evenings around the fire..

I guess in wartime situations there could be some form of auto release - where alerting and firing would take too long. I guess thats how so many Afghan wedding parties get nuked... ;)

[TimeOut]

Sorry. Look here (http://www.snopes.com/horrors/techno/radar.asp).
As for "auto release of a missile"...:rofl:

The speed camera vans up this way are hiding their vans in the vicinity of those devices. Attempting to hide their systems in the radar beam.



It is interesting to note that a "drone" refers to a target that gets shot at and destroyed...:rofl:

Good point a 12g at 10m should do the trick:2guns::2guns: