I never really thought about this much in the past, but lately I've been wondering about it more and more. I think most people here can say that they have seen a sign that says "speed limit enforced by aircraft" at one point or another. The only one that I can actually think of is somewhere on I-25 in northern New Mexico. So do aircraft really enforce speed limits on a regular basis? Or is it a rare occurrence? The reasons for my questioning are:
a)It seems very inefficient to me to use an aircraft to enforce traffic laws. I feel like the costs of operating an aircraft(paying the pilot, fuel, maintinence, etc...) would be far too high to justify such a method of law enforcement on a regular basis.
b)Obviously, airplanes can't pull over cars(at least I haven't seen them try :-D) so of course there would be cops on the ground to do that. That leaves me wondering, If there are already cops on the ground, then why would there need to be an aircraft to detect speeders in the first place?
Now, all that being said, maybe aircraft enforcing speed limits is something that only actually happens on rare occasions, but perhaps it is required that permanent signs declaring the use of aircraft be erected even though it might not happen often.
I probably sound really naive, I was just wondering if there was someone here who knows a little more about this, and who could enlighten me.
It does happen, though some states (Virginia in particular) have dropped it or scaled it back a lot. But they still keep the threatening signs, and the pavement markings -- some with aircraft symbols -- to help the "bear in the air" measure speeds.
In addition to the costs of flying the aircraft, there's this little issue of having to provide two cops to testify at trial should a driver contest charges (both the one in the plane who measured the speed, and the one on the ground who pulled over and identified the driver).
Weather has to cooperate too, such as no low clouds in the way. Maybe not a problem in desert states, but out east weather often keeps the police planes on the ground.
I doubt anyone actually enforces this. I've never seen it. However, with drones and everything else these days, I wouldn't be surprised to see unmanned aerial vehicles flying around in the future taking the speed of the vehicles. Of course, the FAA doesn't allow drones in the states, but here in Canada, they're perfectly legal.
https://goo.gl/maps/bSPZk
NYSTA posts signs warning of speed enforcement by aircraft but I've never seen it done.
Also, this sign (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.022675,-77.445153,3a,37.5y,355.94h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sRUAEwJbkvfE1Hqm2cBVrIg!2e0?hl=en) on I-490 WB in Victor. (Not NYS Thruway but near it.)
Quote from: pumpkineater2 on April 25, 2015, 07:40:10 PM
...If there are already cops on the ground, then why would there need to be an aircraft to detect speeders in the first place?
This.
Many will recall the Garden State Parkway in NJ used to have signs that stated "Speed monitored by Helicopter" or something to that effect. Those signs I believe are long-gone - I tried doing a search for one online and came up empty. You probably have to go back many years for any sort of speed monitoring via aircraft.
Since nearly every cop car has radar or laser mounted inside, they can easily capture a speeder anyway. No equipment? The cop has a speedometer, and can simply pace a vehicle for a short while.
My Dad got a ticket on I-71 in Ohio in the 80s from an aircraft- I think they just fly at low speed and low altitude and pick out who is going faster than the pack and nail them for tickets. When they first figured out how to do it 30-40 years ago, I think it was more common. Perhaps reality set in that it's just not that practical.
It happens sometimes, but it's a rare enough event that it's a big deal when it does happen (at least to the workers in the state government). From my own knowledge, I would say that it tends to happen around holidays or other times when there's enough traffic density to make it worthwhile.
Quote from: corco on April 25, 2015, 08:58:31 PM
My Dad got a ticket on I-71 in Ohio in the 80s from an aircraft- I think they just fly at low speed and low altitude and pick out who is going faster than the pack and nail them for tickets.
Now, I'm curious, did the pilots land the plane on I-71, turn on the sirens, and then pull your dad over? :awesomeface:
Ohio does this, and a local suburb (Westerville) does this on one particular road. Also,
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 25, 2015, 08:51:26 PM
Many will recall the Garden State Parkway in NJ used to have signs that stated "Speed monitored by Helicopter" or something to that effect. Those signs I believe are long-gone - I tried doing a search for one online and came up empty. You probably have to go back many years for any sort of speed monitoring via aircraft.
They had the helicopter signs between 98 and 100 on the GSP a few years ago. Gave me a good laugh at the time ("Like they have the budget for that..."). The signs disappeared maybe a year or two ago, around the time they started on the 83-100 widening work.
Pennsylvania was doing it though with Cessnas a few years ago along 422 between King of Prussia and Pottstown. I remember it on the news at the time, and here's an old article too...
http://articles.philly.com/1998-04-06/news/25764470_1_state-police-aerial-reconnaissance-clock-vehicles-operation-centipede (http://articles.philly.com/1998-04-06/news/25764470_1_state-police-aerial-reconnaissance-clock-vehicles-operation-centipede)
When are we going to have electromagnets on helicopters that just pick up your speeding car from the road and deposit it in an impound lot? No need for troopers on the ground - except for the one at the lot to issue the tickets. I guess they have to figure out how to deal with those pesky bridges and overhead wires first.
Arkansas allegedly uses aircraft, but I haven't seen it:
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.018547,-93.154476,3a,37.5y,36.95h,87.53t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr2zXoovvcuv1GvoT3hyH4g!2e0 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.018547,-93.154476,3a,37.5y,36.95h,87.53t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sr2zXoovvcuv1GvoT3hyH4g!2e0)
US 79 just across the Louisiana state line.
I got a ticket from the WSP due to airplane radar. I was traveling Eastbound on I-90 near the Farmers market just West of Ellensburg, and a Cesna flew overhead, about 500ft up, just as I was passing a truck. At the next overpass, I was pulled over by a trooper for doing 76 in a 70 zone while passing, but was back around 70 when he stopped me.
Quote from: 6a on April 26, 2015, 10:52:04 AM
Also,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5Es1RiupA0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5Es1RiupA0)
Washington State Patrol is very public about their use of aircraft to snag speeders, aggressive drivers, people who drive like ass around trucks, and of course drunk drivers/distracted drivers (which are effectively the same). They recently rolled out a new camera (http://goo.gl/TJJshS) that allows the aircraft to point their camera at anything on the ground, and once the camera has a lock, it gives them a readout of the speed they are travelling. Cops on the ground then track down the car and pull them over. It replaced the old timer/marks in the shoulder system, which was hard for the pilot and was impossible during the night (the new camera has night vision which allows the new system to operate at night).
I can't think of very many "Speed Limit Enforced By Aircraft" signs, and frankly, as far as I know, unless the cop that pulled you over was the one who 'tagged' you going whatever speed you were doing, it would be hard for the ticket to stick, since the cop didn't technically see you speeding.
Quote from: TEG24601 on April 26, 2015, 01:33:17 PM
I got a ticket from the WSP due to airplane radar. I was traveling Eastbound on I-90 near the Farmers market just West of Ellensburg, and a Cesna flew overhead, about 500ft up, just as I was passing a truck. At the next overpass, I was pulled over by a trooper for doing 76 in a 70 zone while passing, but was back around 70 when he stopped me.
I hope to God that the 76 in a 70 was downgraded from something else. I regularly drive between Seattle and Moses Lake at about 78 to 80, without issue.
Quote from: jakeroot on April 26, 2015, 01:37:10 PM
Quote from: 6a on April 26, 2015, 10:52:04 AM
Also,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5Es1RiupA0 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5Es1RiupA0)
Quote from: TEG24601 on April 26, 2015, 01:33:17 PM
I got a ticket from the WSP due to airplane radar. I was traveling Eastbound on I-90 near the Farmers market just West of Ellensburg, and a Cesna flew overhead, about 500ft up, just as I was passing a truck. At the next overpass, I was pulled over by a trooper for doing 76 in a 70 zone while passing, but was back around 70 when he stopped me.
I hope to God that the 76 in a 70 was downgraded from something else. I regularly drive between Seattle and Moses Lake at about 78 to 80, without issue.
Nope. Just like my 81 in a 75 in ND.
Nevada used to have more of these "Speed enforced by aircraft" signs posted in rural areas. I remember seeing a few along the drive between Las Vegas and Reno many years ago (along with the aircraft pavement marking symbol and associated stripes). These are not visible as much on that drive anymore, especially as they've resurfaced and replaced signs over the years. I would guess aircraft enforcement is being phased out...but the current NDOT standard plans still include the markings and details for airplane enforcement.
Wisconsin State Patrol still maintains an aerial speed enforcement program (http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/statepatrol/enforcement/aircraft-program.htm), however its wings have been clipped in previous budget crunches. They maintain 3 planes (used to be at least 4) but only tend to fly when there's federal grant money available. They seem to get used more for helping in rescue missions now than speed enforcement, however, they have been placing a few new, permanent, aerial speed enforcement signs. I saw one recently on WB I-94 (https://www.google.com/maps/@43.053879,-88.397798,3a,75y,282.81h,76.87t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1siyL5bSeAcaDsGJXbNfQ6Tw!2e0) between Waukesha and Madison. WiSP also put together a YouTube (https://youtu.be/60MJmT5otB4?list=PLoGzf6P7PsQ9EWl_8yOVm6rNfHvzz4ohH) video on how the aerial speed enforcement program works (speed capturing device in the plane, pavement markings, special training, etc.):
^^ Surprised they used a yellow diamond warning sign as other speed enforcement signs I have seen are black and white rectangles.
As MUTCD R10-18 is a photo enforced sign is a black on white rectangle
Quote from: Big John on April 26, 2015, 03:46:24 PM
^^ Surprised they used a yellow diamond warning sign as other speed enforcement signs I have seen are black and white rectangles.
As MUTCD R10-18 is a photo enforced sign is a black on white rectangle
I see what you mean with the R10-18, but this is a case where I disagree with the MUTCD. The R10-19P and R10-19aP (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009r1r2/images/fig2b_03.gif) are fine, IMO, because they are meant to supplement another regulatory sign. IMO, the R10-18 should be a black-on-yellow diamond sign as the sign is not posting a law that must be followed. In this application, I think the yellow diamond is more appropriate as they're
warning the motorist of the zone, similar to a sign for Low Flying Aircraft. As seen in the video, elsewhere they use a florescent pink diamond roll-up sign, consistent of the warning nature of the message.
Colorado's State Patrol must have a sense of humor:
On I-70 between Exits 31 and 37-ish, there are a couple of signs which say SPEED ENFORCED BY AIRCRAFT. What they don't tell you is that this particular area is right in line with the flight path approach of the Grand Junction Regional Airport just to the north of the freeway in this same area.
I cannot see the CSP doing any lengthy air patrols in this particular area due to what I would assume would be FAA clearance regulations. While GJT is not on par with major international airports in the US, they usually have several landings/takeoffs per hour for everything from private Cessnas to military jets, which use the airport as a refueling stop on a regular basis.
Quote from: oscar on April 25, 2015, 07:58:16 PM
It does happen, though some states (Virginia in particular) have dropped it or scaled it back a lot. But they still keep the threatening signs, and the pavement markings -- some with aircraft symbols -- to help the "bear in the air" measure speeds.
Maryland State Police once flew a fair amount of speed limit enforcement from the air (with fixed-wing aircraft), but like Virginia, I am not sure they do much of it any longer.
Quote from: pumpkineater2 on April 25, 2015, 07:40:10 PM
I never really thought about this much in the past, but lately I've been wondering about it more and more. I think most people here can say that they have seen a sign that says "speed limit enforced by aircraft" at one point or another. The only one that I can actually think of is somewhere on I-25 in northern New Mexico. So do aircraft really enforce speed limits on a regular basis? Or is it a rare occurrence?
First place I ever heard of aerial speed limit enforcement was in the great 1968 National Geographic article about the Interstate system, which featured a photograph of speed limit enforcement from the air in Utah.
Quote from: BigRedDog on April 25, 2015, 10:52:39 PM
Quote from: corco on April 25, 2015, 08:58:31 PM
My Dad got a ticket on I-71 in Ohio in the 80s from an aircraft- I think they just fly at low speed and low altitude and pick out who is going faster than the pack and nail them for tickets.
Now, I'm curious, did the pilots land the plane on I-71, turn on the sirens, and then pull your dad over? :awesomeface:
That's why we have move over laws - so that people won't damage the wings of the plane ;)
Most state police agencies have at least one and often an entire fleet of aircraft. Generally maintained to move politicians about.
Since aircraft have virtually no legitimate law enforcement use, they will occasionally use them for speed related random tax duty. This help justify the presence of these costly items in the budget. Also the pilots need to get their hours in, and "speed enforcement" looks more legitimate in the audit reports than "needed to get my hours in, flew around in a circle all day."
Of course, in most states, a warrantless arrest requires a crime to be committed in the presence of the LEO. Since the ground LEO is merely acting on the (inadmissible in court, see your state's rule of evidence version of 602) say-so of someone else, he is guilty of kidnapping or at least unlawful detainer.
Meanwhile three women in Cleveland can be held as sex slaves for a decade. Because actually doing serious useful police work is hard, and dangerous, and there is no $$ in it.
Quote from: SP Cook on April 27, 2015, 06:12:38 AM
Of course, in most states, a warrantless arrest requires a crime to be committed in the presence of the LEO. Since the ground LEO is merely acting on the (inadmissible in court, see your state's rule of evidence version of 602) say-so of someone else, he is guilty of kidnapping or at least unlawful detainer.
I don't see it. The bear in the air can testify that a certain car was traveling at X speed "in the presence of the LEO", and that car was pulled over by the cop on the ground (assuming the pilot didn't fly away before the pullover). The cop on the ground can identify in court the driver of the car spotted from the air. Even if neither alone can prove the offense, they can do so together. Of course, getting both of them in court at the right time can be a logistical challenge, but not a legal one.
I believe Massachusetts still has STATE POLICE ENFORCE SPEED BY AIRCRAFT (or equivalent) signs posted along some highways; usually just inside the state's borders and/or at the entrance ramps to the Mass Pike (I-90).
Quote from: oscar on April 27, 2015, 08:43:06 AM
Quote from: SP Cook on April 27, 2015, 06:12:38 AM
Of course, in most states, a warrantless arrest requires a crime to be committed in the presence of the LEO. Since the ground LEO is merely acting on the (inadmissible in court, see your state's rule of evidence version of 602) say-so of someone else, he is guilty of kidnapping or at least unlawful detainer.
I don't see it. The bear in the air can testify that a certain car was traveling at X speed "in the presence of the LEO", and that car was pulled over by the cop on the ground (assuming the pilot didn't fly away before the pullover). The cop on the ground can identify in court the driver of the car spotted from the air. Even if neither alone can prove the offense, they can do so together. Of course, getting both of them in court at the right time can be a logistical challenge, but not a legal one.
I'm not sure how an officer can write a ticket for something he didn't see you do. He'd be writing a ticket with the assumption that the pilot is in fact not bullshitting him. Not to mention, even if the evidence did exist later in court, unless the officer that pulled you over can prove he was able to access the evidence before the citation, the citation holds little ground.
(FWIW, I'm not a lawyer, and I have zero court experience -- this is just how I would assume hope the court would approach things)
I think the NJ signs say (said?) "Speed *controlled* by helicopter". Which is really odd because the helicopters are not controlling anything.
Quote from: bzakharin on April 27, 2015, 12:59:07 PM
I think the NJ signs say (said?) "Speed *controlled* by helicopter". Which is really odd because the helicopters are not controlling anything.
The actual word might be
Speed patrolled by helicopter.
Quote from: jakeroot on April 27, 2015, 12:53:05 PM
Quote from: oscar on April 27, 2015, 08:43:06 AM
Quote from: SP Cook on April 27, 2015, 06:12:38 AM
Of course, in most states, a warrantless arrest requires a crime to be committed in the presence of the LEO. Since the ground LEO is merely acting on the (inadmissible in court, see your state's rule of evidence version of 602) say-so of someone else, he is guilty of kidnapping or at least unlawful detainer.
I don't see it. The bear in the air can testify that a certain car was traveling at X speed "in the presence of the LEO", and that car was pulled over by the cop on the ground (assuming the pilot didn't fly away before the pullover). The cop on the ground can identify in court the driver of the car spotted from the air. Even if neither alone can prove the offense, they can do so together. Of course, getting both of them in court at the right time can be a logistical challenge, but not a legal one.
I'm not sure how an officer can write a ticket for something he didn't see you do. He'd be writing a ticket with the assumption that the pilot is in fact not bullshitting him. Not to mention, even if the evidence did exist later in court, unless the officer that pulled you over can prove he was able to access the evidence before the citation, the citation holds little ground.
(FWIW, I'm not a lawyer, and I have zero court experience -- this is just how I would assume hope the court would approach things)
Sounds like arrests made for drug possession, where the arresting officer isn't 100% sure that suspicious-looking white powder she found is an illegal drug, so long as the suspicion was reasonable enough (or there are other grounds) to support the search and resulting arrest. That she doesn't personally know all the facts needed to secure a conviction doesn't invalidate the arrest, though a lab tech may need to confirm (and testify in court) the powder was indeed something illegal.
FWIW, I am a (retired) lawyer, but my specialty was non-criminal, and I learned only enough criminal law to pass the bar exam plus skimming Supreme Court decisions on SCOTUSblog.
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 27, 2015, 01:00:44 PM
Quote from: bzakharin on April 27, 2015, 12:59:07 PM
I think the NJ signs say (said?) "Speed *controlled* by helicopter". Which is really odd because the helicopters are not controlling anything.
The actual word might be Speed patrolled by helicopter.
The signs on the ACE definitely say "Speed radar controlled". I may be conflating the two
I've seen a lot of "speed radar controlled" signs. Obviously they mean "enforced" or some other synonym.
I drive by one of these signs all the time, on CA-37 going east from Novato toward the Napa area.
Part of it directly crosses the approach path of the nearby airport (perpendicular to it), so I would think that would make it NOT good for this purpose, rather than appropriate.
Quote from: oscar on April 27, 2015, 01:18:25 PM
Sounds like arrests made for drug possession,
Not exactly. Government agents only have the power to arrest for crimes committed in their presence. Otherwise the 4th Adm applies. A so-called "ticket" is actually a combination criminal complaint and a promise by the victim to appear. In a classic random tax, the traffic cop scum is SWEARING that a crime was committed in his presence, and thus avoiding the application of the 4th Adm . And since he has the power to arrest for crime committed in his presence, you have to sign the extortion ticket or go to jail. In the airplane variant, the cop has no personal knowledge of any crime. He has no power to stop your car, and no power to arrest you. He has just been told of something over the radio. He has no power to arrest for crimes not committed in his presence. To continue the drug analogy, it is as if he got a phone call and was told that somebody has some drugs and arrested the individual based on that say so.
It does not work that way. The 4th Amendment requires a cop to appear before a judicial officer and obtain a warrant for crimes not committed in his presence.
So it sounds like how common it is varies from state to state.(not surprising)
Apparently Arizona also enforces speed with aircraft,(maybe all 50 states do it?) though I have never seen any signs saying so. Of course, there are many places in this state I haven't been.
It still seems silly to me to make all the effort and spend the money to put an aircraft in the air just because there is a possibility they would catch speeders, but hey, I'm not the expert.
The only real advantage an air patrol has in catching speeders is that they use a stopwatch to time speeders between (usually) quarter-mile stripes on the ground. To this extent, radar detectors are useless for drivers, because no laser or radar is used and the cops just have to wait "around the bend" for said driver. Even if he slows down in sight of the cops, the speed has already been determined.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 25, 2015, 08:51:26 PM
Many will recall the Garden State Parkway in NJ used to have signs that stated "Speed monitored by Helicopter" or something to that effect. Those signs I believe are long-gone - I tried doing a search for one online and came up empty. You probably have to go back many years for any sort of speed monitoring via aircraft.
A couple of days ago I noticed that the "End" sign for the helicopter enforcement zone is still standing along the GSP - hard to notice with the End Work Area sign immediately in front of it:
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.187817,-74.099581&spn=0.000002,0.001635&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=40.187907,-74.099833&panoid=RrTy8bx_1wXGUHWbW4e_4w&cbp=12,24.79,,0,10.55 (https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.187817,-74.099581&spn=0.000002,0.001635&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=40.187907,-74.099833&panoid=RrTy8bx_1wXGUHWbW4e_4w&cbp=12,24.79,,0,10.55)
Quote from: Roadrunner75 on May 09, 2015, 02:42:12 PM
A couple of days ago I noticed that the "End" sign for the helicopter enforcement zone is still standing along the GSP - hard to notice with the End Work Area sign immediately in front of it:
https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.187817,-74.099581&spn=0.000002,0.001635&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=40.187907,-74.099833&panoid=RrTy8bx_1wXGUHWbW4e_4w&cbp=12,24.79,,0,10.55 (https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.187817,-74.099581&spn=0.000002,0.001635&t=h&z=20&layer=c&cbll=40.187907,-74.099833&panoid=RrTy8bx_1wXGUHWbW4e_4w&cbp=12,24.79,,0,10.55)
Why would they advertise an end to this area? Is there some law requiring them to?
I remember seeing signs about how speed is enforced by aircraft in Kansas years ago and thought it would be easy for them to do there, and anywhere else in the midwest where the roads follow the section lines. I was told by someone in my old delivery job all the "bear in the air" does is measure the time it takes to drive 1 mile and if it is under a certain amount of time, it's speeding. Not sure this is, or was, how it is really done, but it seemed reasonable to me.
They probably didn't need to measure for a minute. Measure between two fixed points (lines on the road, etc) for a few seconds; 10 or 15 at the most, and you'll get the vehicle's speed.
Usually the air enforcement zones that I have seen have the perpendicular road stripes at 1/4 mile intervals.
How would you know if an aircraft was involved and not simply a second cop on the ground? I got a ticket in Illinois once for a speed that the cop said I was doing "about 3 miles back". He definitely pulled out from the median right before turning his lights on so he didn't follow me that distance. I'd never even considered I might have been nabbed by a plane. I assumed a second cop was running radar from an overpass or something.
As for enforcement by air, it isn't terribly cost effective from a revenue perspective (especially not with the price of fuel these days... and the proliferation of handheld radar). But damned if it isn't incredibly intimidating, so if people know the cops are doing it they're certainly going to be scared into compliance.
It's bullshit that they won't pull over/ticket another cop, though. I know this is standard practice but that doesn't make it less corrupt.
I've never seen or heard of Minnesota using air patrols, or any signs for it. I'm sure in a lot of places even if it's not actively being undertaken it's just a paper tiger deterrent to speeders to make them have to consider air monitoring in addition to cops on the ground.
My Dad got tagged by aircraft here in Florida in 1990. i also knew of someone who got nailed on I-4 by aircraft on Christmas day around 2005-2006.
I personally have never seen aircraft patrolling for speed. My speculation is that 20-30 years ago when gas was much cheaper, state police more regularly used aircraft to catch speeders. As the costs of fuel drastically went up, many police agencies cut back on the use of aircraft for speed control due to expense.