Trafic Light Cameras

[Tarkus]

seems like a hell of a judgment call on the part of the witnessing officer.  I'd imagine most of them would enforce it as "no drastic and sudden acceleration to make the yellow".

Let alone a hell of a judgment call for an automated machine owned by a private for-profit corporation to be making.

-Tarkus

[realjd]

seems like a hell of a judgment call on the part of the witnessing officer.  I'd imagine most of them would enforce it as "no drastic and sudden acceleration to make the yellow".

Let alone a hell of a judgment call for an automated machine owned by a private for-profit corporation to be making.

-Tarkus

The machines don't make the distinction, a human does. Depending on your jurisdiction, either an employee of the company or a police officer review the video or still photos and then decide whether to ticket or not.

[NE2]

Are there any that get you for entering on yellow in the first place?

[realjd]

Absolutely WRONG.  The police office was not a witness and was not anywhere near the camera installation/intersection, so he/she has no first-hand knowledge of the facts and cannot lawfully accuse the alleged violator of anything.

Just keep in mind that famous line from "Jerry Maguire:"  "Follow the money."

Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong. The witness is a police officer who uses the video of someone running a red light as evidence to issue the citation. Why would video evidence be valid in other cases but not red light running?

[Tarkus]

Just because you don't like it doesn't make it wrong. The witness is a police officer who uses the video of someone running a red light as evidence to issue the citation. Why would video evidence be valid in other cases but not red light running?

It's not always an actual police officer.  At least with a lot of photo radar situations, it's either a retired officer or an employee of the vendor who has been "deputized" (Redflex employees often run photo radar vans in AZ).  Sometimes, if the sheer volume of tickets coming in is more than a department can handle, the police department will hire clerks to handle camera violations.  Vendors have also been known to forge signatures.  ATS recently got in hot water for doing this in Spokane.  Redflex has also been known to send so-called "snitch tickets" out that have NOT been vetted by a police officer.

Also, in the case of video being valid in situations of, say, someone stealing from or robbing a convenience store, there are some key differences.  1) The camera is not being operated to produce traffic fine money.  Instead, it's deterring a criminal offense--theft.  2) The camera is usually owned by the store itself or an outside security company who is being paid on a monthly basis, again, not getting a slice of some revenue pie based on how effective the camera is from a municipal body.  3) It's usually not the sole evidence being used in such a case.  4) The camera is not being triggered by some sort of arbitrary event (e.g. driving over some sensor above some arbitrary speed determined by the vendor).

[Duke87]

I usually tend to expect a yellow light to last about 3 seconds no matter what and react accordingly. It always gets me when I'm on a higher-speed road and the yellow phase is prolonged (especially considering Connecticut and New York do not prolong their yellows on such roads). On multiple occasions on US 1 in New Jersey I've sworn I was going to be running a "pink light" only to find it still yellow by the time I went under it.

[roadfro]

The problem with providing vehicular countdown timers (other than the fact that the MUTCD forbids them) is that doing so requires a green time to be fixed. This might work well for downtown grids and other areas operating fixed-time signals. However, many signals do not operate in this manner. With actuated signals (i.e. where detection is used), each signal phase has different components called a initial green, vehicle extension (also known as a passage gap) and maximum green. Each time the phase turns green, the signal must run for the initial green time plus extension. The extension is a short internal countdown timer. So if no vehicles are detected upstream during the first extension, the phase goes to red; however, if a vehicle is detected in that short time, that extension countdown resets and begins counting down again.

here I had thought it worked in the opposite manner: the light stays default on green until traffic is detected that is due to come in conflict with the main through traffic: side street traffic, someone wishing to make a protected left turn off the mainline, or a pedestrian pushing the "let me cross" button.

Well, you're not incorrect in your initial thoughts. The difference is what type of detection/operation mode the signal is running. If a signal is running in a "free" mode, it basically serves calls for any direction as they are received. So if the signal defaults to through traffic on the main street, a call on the side street, protected left, conflicting pedestrian button push, etc. would prompt the signal to cycle to serve that conflicting call. It would be possible to operate a countdown in this mode, but the amount of time on the countdown would likely be rather short as to not provide sufficient information to the motorist.

In my reply above, I was describing a semi-actuated coordinated signal operation. "Semi-actuated" meaning that not all signal phases rely on detection in order to be served. In these cases, the signal operates on a set cycle length and typically has default phases for a major street as above. However, the minimum green, extension and other settings are in place to maximize the amount of green time for the main street during one cycle for achieving platoon progression for coordination purposes. That extending of green phase for the major street doesn't allow for the countdown due to randomness of arriving vehicles--a countdown timer could be used, but you'd really only be able to display about 2 seconds on it before onset of yellow, so again it's not useful.

A visible vehicle countdown timer would be pretty useless if it counted down to any point in the cycle other than the beginning of the yellow. With the green time components described above, a phase's green time could be as little as 5 seconds or as long as 40 seconds or more. There is no way for a signal to know exactly when it will turn yellow using these settings. This is the main reason why such countdowns are not in use--there are other factors as well, such as emergency preemption.

my idea for a solution hinges on my previous assumption about what triggers the change (see paragraph above) and would involve the green timer being off (displaying no number) - except when the trigger from the conflicting has been established.  

from my observation, the mainline light changes to yellow within about 5 seconds of the side street traffic appearing, so once this 5 second time has been established, then display a green count.  until then, display no count to indicate that there is no plan for the light to change color.

similarly, the side-street (or turning traffic) red should display no countdown until the conflicting vehicle has successfully been detected - at which point, the red light displays 11 seconds (or whatever the combined total is of the mainline's remaining green, yellow, and then the all-red safety margin)

again, that assumption hinges on the conflicting traffic triggering the light change, as opposed to the absence of mainline traffic... but that assumption seems to jive well with my observations.  so maybe I'm misreading your first paragraph?  can you shed some light on why I'm possibly interpreting this incorrectly?

Again, it goes back the signal mode of operation. It seems that what you're describing is more of a signal operating in a free or similar mode. In medium and larger signal networks, an actuated operation is ultimately more efficient in moving traffic. The countdown idea doesn't mesh well with this.

EDIT: Fixed quoting

[agentsteel53]

gotcha; I had no idea traffic lights ran that way.  I had thought there was only a triggered or a timed operation, nothing in between.

I'd still take that two extra seconds of "green is about to turn yellow" notification, though.  I don't believe that would cause me to think "too much information!" while driving.

[Alps]

gotcha; I had no idea traffic lights ran that way.  I had thought there was only a triggered or a timed operation, nothing in between.

I'd still take that two extra seconds of "green is about to turn yellow" notification, though.  I don't believe that would cause me to think "too much information!" while driving.

A little off on "free" operation, though. You can't do pedestrian countdown, because countdown length is constant by time of day. As is Flashing DW length, all red time, etc. It's all dictated by the dimensions of the intersection and approach speeds. What happens in free operation is instant change as soon as a call is detected. Generally, the ped heads will be all solid DW during that time, and will only go to Walk phase if explicitly called. (In other words, there's no minimum time, even for the major through street.) You wouldn't actually get any advance notification. If you see a car approaching the intersection, expect the yellow.

[roadfro]

A little off on "free" operation, though. You can't do pedestrian countdown, because countdown length is constant by time of day. As is Flashing DW length, all red time, etc. It's all dictated by the dimensions of the intersection and approach speeds.

You can set a Flashing Don't Walk/pedestrian countdown (same thing) or an all-red vehicle clearance to be different at different times of day. These usually don't happen because there are required (FDW) or recommended (all-red) minimum times that there is little benefit to changing between timing plans.

All-red can actually vary by individual phase at an intersection, which in my limited non-professional experience, is more common than varying by time of day.

[Alps]

A little off on "free" operation, though. You can't do pedestrian countdown, because countdown length is constant by time of day. As is Flashing DW length, all red time, etc. It's all dictated by the dimensions of the intersection and approach speeds.

You can set a Flashing Don't Walk/pedestrian countdown (same thing) or an all-red vehicle clearance to be different at different times of day. These usually don't happen because there are required (FDW) or recommended (all-red) minimum times that there is little benefit to changing between timing plans.

All-red can actually vary by individual phase at an intersection, which in my limited non-professional experience, is more common than varying by time of day.

Yes. I think what I ought to have said is, there are certain minimums that cannot be violated, regardless of operation type. They can certainly be exceeded, although generally all-red and yellow times would remain constant throughout the day because being too long is almost as bad as too short.

[tchafe1978]

The city of Dubuque, Iowa was recently discussing putting in red light cameras. It's been causing quite a stir in the city. But just this last week, Iowa's Governor Branstad told the city that he will not allow the city to install them. Wish I could link to a story about it in the Dubuque Telegraph-Herald, but the paper's website www.thonline.com requires subscription.

[roadman65]

The City of Edgewood, FL has the initial photo I used to start this thread.  All three cameras are at intersections where RTOR are allowed, but the warning sign that informs motorists of the locations being photo enforced claims it includes right turns.  There is no special turn lane as right turns have to be made from the through lane.  Its obvious here, that the camera cannot make a distinction, so does that meant right turns on red are illegal then?  There is no " NO TURN ON RED" assembly either, so legally under FL Law it is allowed!

Another way, the camera is useless.

[Tarkus]

The city of Dubuque, Iowa was recently discussing putting in red light cameras. It's been causing quite a stir in the city. But just this last week, Iowa's Governor Branstad told the city that he will not allow the city to install them. Wish I could link to a story about it in the Dubuque Telegraph-Herald, but the paper's website www.thonline.com requires subscription.

It's also worth noting that there is a bill in the Iowa legislature right now that if passed, would effectively ban the use of automated photo enforcement statewide.  So far, the bill is going through pretty smoothly.

The City of Edgewood, FL has the initial photo I used to start this thread.  All three cameras are at intersections where RTOR are allowed, but the warning sign that informs motorists of the locations being photo enforced claims it includes right turns.  There is no special turn lane as right turns have to be made from the through lane.  Its obvious here, that the camera cannot make a distinction, so does that meant right turns on red are illegal then?  There is no " NO TURN ON RED" assembly either, so legally under FL Law it is allowed!

Another way, the camera is useless.

Technically speaking, in those situations, it is still legal to make an RTOR, but depending on how the camera is set up, there's a good chance you're going to get flashed making a legal maneuver, though they are in theory supposed to throw them out (that doesn't always happen, though).  Some vendors (esp. Redflex) claim to have made a "technological breakthrough" whereby they can more accurately ticket right-turning red-light running with their newer equipment (which they've rapidly deployed), but the technology is inherently flawed in that whether or not you get flashed is determined by some rather screwy algorithms relating to the embedded sensors.  There's so much of a gray area involved that even if you fully stop at a red light, and make a legal RTOR, you can still get a ticket, and the camera vendors make boatloads of money being anal about RTORs.

The camera in that image looks to be provided by American Gatso, a US division of the Dutch camera conglomerate Gatso, which also frequently supplies equipment to Xerox/ACS.  From what I know of Xerox/ACS's use of that equipment, it's pretty low-tech and often poorly-calibrated--there's often a lot of defects to the tickets (see here, and scroll down to "Defect #5-ACS Camera").  The City Council minutes discussion the contract approval (see here) seem to show that Gatso is running the equipment themselves, rather than another vendor like Xerox/ACS using their equipment.

Given all this, I'd be very hesitant to make an RTOR at a camera intersection, mainly as I don't trust the vendors, or their equipment.

In other news, because of improper dealings in handling camera violations, Atlanta, Georgia is being forced to shut down its red light camera program.

[roadman65]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/6799126768/in/photostream

Check this one out.  A camera that takes pictures of anyone running the light, but a YIELD sign says its okay to pass through when right turning on red after yielding.

[brownpelican]

Things That Get Your Blood Boiling:

The City of New Orleans recently forgave all traffic camera tickets for all city employees. 

[agentsteel53]

Things That Get Your Blood Boiling:

The City of New Orleans recently forgave all traffic camera tickets for all city employees. 

city employees are a higher classification of human being than you or I could ever dream of being.  forgiving their traffic tickets is merely the first step in rightfully acknowledging their divinity and their rule. 

[realjd]

Things That Get Your Blood Boiling:

The City of New Orleans recently forgave all traffic camera tickets for all city employees. 

For all city employees or for city vehicles? That makes a big difference.

[Brandon]

Big flap now in Chicago over both the red light cameras and speed cameras that the city wants to put up.  Apparently the mayor, Rahm Emmanuel, lied about the statistics when lobbying for the law and lied about his relationship with Redflex.

Mayor's speed camera stats sketchy

Denied the city's research, the Tribune performed its own analysis using city traffic data provided to the federal government and came to a very different and less dramatic conclusion.

Instead of the 60 percent reduction the mayor touted, the Tribune's analysis of accidents for the same locations revealed a nearly 26 percent reduction – one that mirrored a broader accident trend in the city and across the nation. The difference? The city said fatalities dropped from 53 to 21 in the targeted zones, but the federal statistics showed the before-and-after numbers were 47 and 35.

Mayor's speed cameras would help political ally

When Rahm Emanuel was a first-time candidate for Congress, Greg Goldner was behind him, quietly marshaling the patronage troops that helped get him elected. When Emanuel ran for mayor, Goldner was there again, doling out campaign cash to elect Emanuel-friendly aldermen to City Council.

And when the rookie mayor was looking for community support for his school reform agenda, there was Goldner, working behind the scenes with the ministers who backed Emanuel's plan.

Now, it turns out the longtime allies share another interest – the installation of automated speed cameras in Chicago.

As consultant to the firm that already supplies Chicago its red-light cameras, Goldner is the architect of a nationwide campaign to promote his client's expansion prospects. That client, Redflex Traffic Systems Inc., is well-positioned to make tens of millions of dollars from Emanuel's controversial plan to convert many of the red-light cameras into automated speed cameras.

The man is a lying sack of shit claiming that the cameras are to "save children".