Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 42

Thread: Redflex fixed speed / red light camera internals

  1. #1
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default Redflex fixed speed / red light camera internals

    Disclaimer: The pictures provided are of a speed camera which I noticed had its rear cover open. I do not know why the cover was open be that due to human error, mechanical failure or interference with the camera. In the event the camera was interfered with it was not me and I have no knowledge whatsoever of how this came to be in this state. I have solely taken photographs of the unit while on public land but at no time touched or interfered with the unit it in any way whatsoever.

    Here in Victoria other than mobile cameras there are a number of Redflex fixed speed and red light cameras. The basic operation of these cameras is in most cases strips in the road that allow the camera to detect speed and red light offenses. The detail of which is transmitted back to a central office and a ticket issued.

    Details of the inner workings of these units is not public and to and extent protected to some extent to avoid court challenges.

    I noticed the camera shown had its rear access cover open a few days ago. On the off chance it was still open I bought camera along the next time I was passing. To my surprise it was still open.

    This raises a question re the validity of any tickets issued by this camera given it is exposed to the elements and unprotected from external interference.

    The actual camera units are only viable as black boxes but the road strip terminations, processor units with dip switch settings, 1.6 GHz CPU, power box and ISDN modem are visible.

    The photos are high resolution so you can zoom in on the detail of individual components

    PS: The authorities will not have to be rocket scientists to work out which camera this is. I am surprised it did not phone home a distress call does this mean these cameras can be opened and tampered with without causing an alarm. If so that’s troubling.

    The belly of the beast.

    Cam 1.JPG (4.35 MB)


    Cam 2.JPG (4.69 MB)


    Cam 3.jpg (4.42 MB)


    Cam 4.JPG (4.95 MB)


    Cam 5.JPG (4.51 MB)



Look Here ->
  • #2
    Member streeter75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    291
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 11 Times in 6 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Reputation
    62

    Default

    I like the disclaimer mate...


    Interesting find that, great pics, Wonder wether it has been turned down by someone in the know... Silly to leave cover open though or no one would know til next calibration test. Suprised they arent alarmed in a fashion

  • #3
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    I was amazed it is still open. I noticed it a few days ago but did not have my camera at the time. If you look at the top left hand side of the case there is a tamper switch to indicate the door being open. These things cost something like $70k so you would think they would have been on the job fast to fix it if they had known it was open.

    I could not see any signs of forced entry so perhaps it was not closed properly last time someone worked on it.

  • #4
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    What’s inside details.

    Left side Cisco Systems 802 ISDN Router



    Security problem with some versions of this router - perhaps not relevant given its ISDN



    Right side top Nortech Traffic Detector



    Right side bottom

    Smart Ethernet and Web I/O Module


  • #5
    Senior Member
    trash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Tamworth
    Posts
    4,088
    Thanks
    148
    Thanked 3,229 Times in 1,451 Posts
    Rep Power
    1287
    Reputation
    47674

    Default

    I did however see you performing a rain dance after you took those pictures SR

  • #6
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    My spies tell me they were working on the camera the other day and have stripped out the guts of it. Perhaps for repair and testing.

    It did rain over that weekend while the door was wide open and it was also very windy. I could not see corrosion on any of the pictures but who knows what happened to the circuit boards.

    I feel like putting up a sign did you get booked by this camera during the period it was open. If so look at the roadwatch site and contest it.

    It surprises me that with a tamper switch (top right hand corner of unit) that there was not a fast response from the police to check it out. The people who monitor these things must be asleep at the wheel. Makes me wonder if they can be trusted.

    It’s a shame the IP address listed on the blue control unit is a non public address, Bugger via the TOR network that could have been fun.

    On a technical note I had always believed these units used piezoelectric strips. The traffic detector units fitted to this unit are Nortech TD424N’s these appear to be wire loop detectors not pizo pressure sensors. They also appear to be multiplexed to avoid cross talk. I wonder about the accuracy of the trigger point and if these loops are susceptible to external signals which might induce an erroneous reading. I guess all that has been well tested but I wonder ?. The inputs are protected with clamping diodes and gas arrestors.

  • #7
    Senior Member z80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,840
    Thanks
    112
    Thanked 77 Times in 48 Posts
    Rep Power
    0
    Reputation
    708

    Default

    Sensational Mate.....

  • #8
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    A correction the road sensors are in fact piezoelectric and not inductive which makes a lot more sense for speed sensing. Not sure why the doco from Nortech suggest its inductive.

  • #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    568
    Thanks
    39
    Thanked 51 Times in 27 Posts
    Rep Power
    220
    Reputation
    201

    Default

    A bloke would reckon - with the amount of revenue raised by these evil devices - that some of the bits could be made in this country !

    Oh, how silly of me thinking these devices were for revenue-raising !

    ....wash my mouth out, um - wash my typing finger ? .

  • #10
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    In my digging for info on these its seems they are doing very well in the US with exception of a few legal challenges based on if you are booked by one of these devices you can’t face your accuser as in if a cop pulled you up and booked you. It also seems Redflex are on a percentage of the take in some areas of the US. That's not the case in Victoria but the firm that operates the mobile camera here are on performance bonuses.

    some guy is also going through court there for shotting up a camera too.

    Have a look at the video on the bottom right

  • #11
    Senior Member
    intelliGEORGE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sydney, AUSTRALIA
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4,106
    Thanks
    884
    Thanked 1,484 Times in 691 Posts
    Rep Power
    478
    Reputation
    7236

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SystemRat View Post
    On this page read the "Class Action Lawsuit" very interesting read.

    Some interesting points raised;

    Cameras violate the civil right of being "Innocent until proven guilty", fines are mailed to you automatically meaning you are Guilty until proven innocent.

    Plead "Not Guilty" and remain silent forcing the prosecution to prove the state's case. A photo may show the car but can they prove you were driving it?


    Cameras violate the plaintiff's right to "confront the prosecutions witnesses" because the "witnesses" are automated devices.

    Because the infringement violated the civil rights of the accused the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff's and ordered the local government and REDFLEX to foot the bill of the legal proceedings.

    I would be interested to know if these examples are applicable here in AUS.

    This not only applies to Fixed speed cameras, but also for fixed red light cameras as well!

  • #12
    Senior Member
    iwacelect's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,581
    Thanks
    858
    Thanked 663 Times in 434 Posts
    Rep Power
    367
    Reputation
    4190

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by intelliGEORGE View Post
    Cameras violate the civil right of being "Innocent until proven guilty", fines are mailed to you automatically meaning you are Guilty until proven innocent.

    Plead "Not Guilty" and remain silent forcing the prosecution to prove the state's case. A photo may show the car but can they prove you were driving it?

    I would be interested to know if these examples are applicable here in AUS.
    not here george, here your guilty till you prove your innocence.

    alot of people make this mistake
    When I explained to the guy what avatar I wanted, that wasn't what I meant!

  • #13
    Senior Member
    eeprommemory's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    ADL
    Posts
    1,048
    Thanks
    850
    Thanked 479 Times in 235 Posts
    Rep Power
    373
    Reputation
    7091

    Default

    i see it has a small problem with RF and has ferrite beads to fix OR reduce it. (HINT)

  • #14
    Member tytower's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    352
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 17 Times in 15 Posts
    Rep Power
    213
    Reputation
    238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iwacelect View Post
    not here george, here your guilty till you prove your innocence. alot of people make this mistake
    Not my understanding ! It may seem like it at times , Do you have a citation for this statement?

  • #15
    Senior Member
    intelliGEORGE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Sydney, AUSTRALIA
    Age
    43
    Posts
    4,106
    Thanks
    884
    Thanked 1,484 Times in 691 Posts
    Rep Power
    478
    Reputation
    7236

    Default

    I'm going to look into it, would be nice to see the bastards pull them down here too!

    NSW - Welcome to the Police State of Australia

  • #16
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    I think the ferrite filters are there for two reasons. Firstly these units are sold internationally and I imagine they must comply with a range of RF interference emission standards, Secondly all that stuff jammed in tight might produce problems with crude from the switch mode power supplies affecting the image quality.

    I run a few security cameras feed off an 8 amp 12 volt switch mode at home and I ended up mounting that in a diecast box with ferrite beads and bypass caps on the in/out because it was wiping out the AM radio and there is a switch mode supply on the right hand front and the Cisco one on the left.

    Also in Victoria you are guilty unless you can prove you’re innocent with traffic cameras. The process is automatic with a review if you complain. If you challenge the ticket in some cases the police will appeal the result to a higher court if you win as they don’t want to risk a precedent being set. Someone here used the camera operators manual to prove there was a problem and was let off in court as a result. The government responded by clamping down on the public availability of that manual claiming it was crown copyright. The person who obtained it did so through freedom of information and by virtue of it being germane in his court case.

    Last year they made something like $400 mil in fines the future budget projection is something like $750 mil. When the former premier Brack's was pressured on this they quickly announced all camera revenue would go into roads and safety projects to make people feel better about getting fined.

    What he did not say was because of that the government would not put in the money to roads etc they normally allocated. Thus the spending remained the same just the camera money went to roads and the former roads money remained in consolidated revenue. Thus in effect nil gain to roads just Page Ranking.

    I’ve not heard mention of how road funding now works here and it would not surprise me if now all camera money is no longer going to roads.

    As a result of my Redflex project someone told me about some new technology that is currently under evaluation that will further increase camera revenue. More about that latter on maybe with pic’s

  • #17
    Senior Member global88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Age
    59
    Posts
    1,157
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
    Rep Power
    237
    Reputation
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SystemRat View Post

    As a result of my Redflex project someone told me about some new technology that is currently under evaluation that will further increase camera revenue. More about that latter on maybe with pic’s
    About a week or 2 ago, i was driving down Pascoe vale rd here in Melbourne, a road well known for cameras in cars and passed a open block on a corner with a camera setup at hip height, placed well into the block (atleast 10 metres) not includeing the footpath and nature strip. Angle of the camera was at least 45 degrees (sharp) to the road.

    Sign said "new saftey camera technologies under testing".

    Im under the impression that the speed of the photo is quicker, the angle and resolution better and the ability to calclate the speed of the vehile faster.

    It all adds up to finding better hiding spots for the operators, possibly even being able to be parked with another car right infront and still take pics.

  • #18
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    That fits with what I was told. The current generation of mobile camera in Victoria are microwave slant radar. The beam runs across the road on a 30 something degree angle. At present if two cars are within the beam the resulting photo is discarded due to possible inaccuracy in who comittered the offence.

    I can remember being shown a speed camera photo which had some sort of encoding at the bottom of the image which was said to indicate which vehicle was responsible but that might not account for reflections from the two objects producing a false reading.

    Anyway I’ve heard they are trailing lidar laser based radar systems. These can scan the road way and detect and record an offence against multiple targets thus if you’re on a multi lane road with busy traffic your no longer safe and the camera will ping everyone it can within the limits of the processing technology.

    Add to that these use digital image capture not wet film. The digital cameras are capable of operating in inferred mode with an inferred flash which is not viable to drivers. The government stands to make a hell of a lot of money out of this with their only concern perhaps being a negative reaction from the public to being fined. I think the campaign to soften that response has already started.

    The transport accident commission made an advertisement featuring people who had lost loved ones due to road accidents. I have no problem with that as a means or encouraging people to drive safely but at the end of the advertisement “that’s why you’re photographed when you speed” I think it’s pretty pathetic to use these peoples suffering to justify revenue rising cameras.

    I am waiting to hear back on the new cameras and perhaps some photos too.

  • #19
    Senior Member global88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Melbourne
    Age
    59
    Posts
    1,157
    Thanks
    4
    Thanked 7 Times in 3 Posts
    Rep Power
    237
    Reputation
    53

    Default

    Hmmmm any connection?


  • #20
    I am NOT the Messiah!
    SystemRat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,131
    Thanks
    278
    Thanked 563 Times in 274 Posts
    Rep Power
    332
    Reputation
    3178

    Default

    Interesting. They seem to be saying the detection method is inferred on these. One here in Vic was using laser but had the option of an inferred photo sensor and flash making it covert. If the SA one is using inferred for detection I wonder if what they mean perhaps was inferred laser.

  • Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

    Bookmarks

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •