Originally Posted by
DanW@FastFord
Radar cannot be directional - It sends out a signal, that signal bounces back, and that's how it works out the speed. They just aren't set up to accurately register the speed head on.
Fully functioning cameras can and do flash if you go towards them head on, but you won't get 'done'.
I think you're wrong Dan
The units CAN differentiate between oncoming and receding traffic. This is an option in the configuration.
You are correct in that oncoming cars can trigger the live units, but only if the unit is set to do this. In reality this is unlikely as half of the pictures would then be wasted on unenforceable cases.
If a dummy unit is fitted then I reckon they'd leave it set to bi-directional to scare more motorists...
Originally Posted by
DanW@FastFord
I said it's not directional, which it isn't. By saying 'signal' I implied that it 'fires' out the radar continuously (not twice), and interprets the returned signal/s.
You seem to be confusing 2 signals with the fact that it requires 2 photos to be taken. The photos are needed as the radar alone is too unreliable to be admissable in court. Unfortunately everyone seems to have forgotten this, and just goes off the radar data, not the photographic proof.
The radar forms the initial assessment of speed, the photographs confirm this. The radar actually bounces back from the target a LOT more than twice (several hundred measurements are taken per vehicle), and all readings must be within a certain tolerance, otherwise the unit bins the operation.
Neil.