New yellow cameras that are appearing?

[Bletchleyite]

Oh it’s definitely a thing. And yes. You get the points attributed to both offences.

I seem to recall the cameras only capture an image if the primary offence (speeding or red light) is detected, but when they do the image is run through AI to see if any other potential offences need flagging up (and it's not at all unusual that if you find one offence you find more, criminals after all will be criminals). I'm sure in time this won't be the case, though.

The extra boxes are supposedly just infrared lights, the main camera is on top of the pole.

 

[Egg Centric]

I seem to recall the cameras only capture an image if the primary offence (speeding or red light) is detected, but when they do the image is run through AI to see if any other potential offences need flagging up (and it's not at all unusual that if you find one offence you find more, criminals after all will be criminals). I'm sure in time this won't be the case, though.

The extra boxes are supposedly just infrared lights, the main camera is on top of the pole.

What would be the point in doing that? Mobile phone use and not wearing a seatbelt are "worse" than speeding / red light offences in terms of likely harm so it would make more sense to scan everyone rather than have an arbitrary threshold of "must be committing offence X to be found to be committing offence Y".

 

[Bletchleyite]

What would be the point in doing that? Mobile phone use and not wearing a seatbelt are "worse" than speeding / red light offences in terms of likely harm so it would make more sense to scan everyone rather than have an arbitrary threshold of "must be committing offence X to be found to be committing offence Y".

It's just how they work. They may work differently later.

I wouldn't say not wearing a seatbelt is worse than running a red light or speeding as it would only harm that person. I'd say using a phone is equal to those.

 

[edwin_m]

Of those offenses, running a red light is probably the worst, as it has a high probability of colliding with another vehicle or pedestrian. Speeding, not wearing seatbelt and using a phone, though serious, carry a lower risk of actual consequences.

 

[renegademaster]

Running red lights and speed cameras can be done for cheaper locally using more old fashioned algorithms, while they'd have to ping an API for an AI check which would cost a few pennies per car they'd rather not spend, so they focus on the more likely candidates

 

[Egg Centric]

Of those offenses, running a red light is probably the worst, as it has a high probability of colliding with another vehicle or pedestrian. Speeding, not wearing seatbelt and using a phone, though serious, carry a lower risk of actual consequences.

Most red light jumping is going to be "amber gamblers" or "pulls up a bit late" rather than "completely ignores red light".

I wouldn't say not wearing a seatbelt is worse than running a red light or speeding as it would only harm that person.

I'm speaking in terms of road safety, in which case who is or may be harmed is irrelevant.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Most red light jumping is going to be "amber gamblers" or "pulls up a bit late" rather than "completely ignores red light".

You should try driving around Bradford, where even red lights are apparently merely a suggestion.

 

[edwin_m]

Most red light jumping is going to be "amber gamblers" or "pulls up a bit late" rather than "completely ignores red light".

True, but even if a fairly small proportion completely ignore it and even if a small proportion of those actually have a collision, I think that collision is still more likely than following speeding or using a phone. And not wearing a seat belt doesn't have any safety consequence unless the vehicle is involved in an accident, or possibly brakes very hard to avoid one.

 

[Egg Centric]

True, but even if a fairly small proportion completely ignore it and even if a small proportion of those actually have a collision, I think that collision is still more likely than following speeding or using a phone. And not wearing a seat belt doesn't have any safety consequence unless the vehicle is involved in an accident, or possibly brakes very hard to avoid one.

I've been seeing if I can find any useful stats to compare all 4, but can't. Interested if anyone could suggest anything.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Most red light jumping is going to be "amber gamblers" or "pulls up a bit late" rather than "completely ignores red light".

Neither of those will generally trigger a red light camera. They aren't on on amber and there's often a delay before they start even on red.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

No, not true. Though cameras which took a photo using a flash were banned from taking photos from the front for safety reasons: there was a risk of dazzling the driver. Flashless face shots were allowed. These were usually associated with cameras which were triggered by rumble strips embedded in the road rather than radar and weren't common.

I remember years ago being dazzled by the flash of a GATSO type camera that was triggered by an oncoming vehicle. Cameras that use a flash should really be restricted to dual carriageway roads for that reason.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I remember years ago being dazzled by the flash of a GATSO type camera that was triggered by an oncoming vehicle. Cameras that use a flash should really be restricted to dual carriageway roads for that reason.

To be honest they're quite dazzling on motorways in the dark too. Personally I don't think they should be used any more. Average cameras would be better for smart motorways.

 

[Egg Centric]

Average cameras would be better for smart motorways.

They wouldn't work (unless you kept the speed limits static, making the whole smart motorway thing completely pointless).

 

[Topological]

They wouldn't work (unless you kept the speed limits static, making the whole smart motorway thing completely pointless).

I don't know enough about the software.

However, I would have thought the cameras are simply providing registrations and times, the computer then works out the average speed. It only requires a merge using the time against the speed limit that was in operation (which must be digitally communicated to the signs) and you have a varying average speed camera.

Like many, I do not change my arm that the only thing that matters is the speed passing the camera on smart motorways.

 

[Egg Centric]

I don't know enough about the software.

However, I would have thought the cameras are simply providing registrations and times, the computer then works out the average speed. It only requires a merge using the time against the speed limit that was in operation (which must be digitally communicated to the signs) and you have a varying average speed camera.

Like many, I do not change my arm that the only thing that matters is the speed passing the camera on smart motorways.

Well, what period should the average speed cameras measure you for? 30 seconds or less? Might as well be a fixed camera. 5 minutes? Ok but if the speed limit changes during those 5 minutes...? The point of smart motorways is for the speed limit to be constantly dynamically changing in response to conditions drivers can't see yet, otherwise they're pointless.

It's not practical.

 

[signed]

No, not true. Though cameras which took a photo using a flash were banned from taking photos from the front for safety reasons: there was a risk of dazzling the driver. Flashless face shots were allowed. These were usually associated with cameras which were triggered by rumble strips embedded in the road rather than radar and weren't common.

Ironically the auto lobby in France actually succeded in having the restoration of speed camera flash this year

 

[Topological]

Well, what period should the average speed cameras measure you for? 30 seconds or less? Might as well be a fixed camera. 5 minutes? Ok but if the speed limit changes during those 5 minutes...? The point of smart motorways is for the speed limit to be constantly dynamically changing in response to conditions drivers can't see yet, otherwise they're pointless.

It's not practical.

I don't believe that the speed limits change that often and because you are bound to the speed on the previous sign, it is easy to know what speed a driver saw. So the camera at point B is capturing the time there. The camera at A captures the time there and the computer calculates the speed. The time at A informs what the speed was that the driver saw (and therefore should be sticking to) so again it is a simple merge of data.

You can always add an allowance of 1 minute of the highest speed (previous if reduced, new if raised) as a buffer. That is a bit like having a short lag on traffic light cameras.

Technologically, it never even crossed my mind to think that smart motorways would not use average speed cameras.

 

[Egg Centric]

I don't believe that the speed limits change that often and because you are bound to the speed on the previous sign, it is easy to know what speed a driver saw. So the camera at point B is capturing the time there. The camera at A captures the time there and the computer calculates the speed. The time at A informs what the speed was that the driver saw (and therefore should be sticking to) so again it is a simple merge of data.

You can always add an allowance of 1 minute of the highest speed (previous if reduced, new if raised) as a buffer. That is a bit like having a short lag on traffic light cameras.

Technologically, it never even crossed my mind to think that smart motorways would not use average speed cameras.

If you are measuring between unchanging limits then yes you could easily do it, but my own experience is very much that they do change often.

Seperately, using average speed cameras instead would introduce a perverse incentive to not bother reacting particularly quickly to a limit that just changed!

 

[Topological]

If you are measuring between unchanging limits then yes you could easily do it, but my own experience is very much that they do change often.

Seperately, using average speed cameras instead would introduce a perverse incentive to not bother reacting particularly quickly to a limit that just changed!

I am still not convinced.

Yes you could decide to continue at the previously displayed speed when you see the change. But equally, they may have incorporated a lag before the camera catches drivers at a lower speed anyway.

I will be one of those annoying people still sticking to 50 until I pass the national limit display. Then I will be straight back to standard motorway speed.

 

[D1511]

I can't see the problem with enforcing variable limits......as long as the downstream cameras are communicating with the upstream signage gantry displaying the current limit, then the camera software will just adjust accordingly.

 

[bramling]

They wouldn't work (unless you kept the speed limits static, making the whole smart motorway thing completely pointless).

Also, given how unpleasant it is driving through roadworks with average cameras, it’s a big no from me. They would only work well if you had a situation where everyone drove at exactly the same speed, which just doesn’t happen. Probably quite dangerous at places where there’s a lot of lane changing as well.

 

[Topological]

I can't see the problem with enforcing variable limits......as long as the downstream cameras are communicating with the upstream signage gantry displaying the current limit, then the camera software will just adjust accordingly.

It is so technically simple that I cannot believe it is not done.

You can make it even simpler by just having the cameras reporting their data back to a central computer. If you want images then they just feed the image back too. The computer does the calculations, extracts the images and sends out the letters.

I must confess I never thought about whether average speed cameras on fixed sections actually only take photos when they think they need to. I always assumed they fed their data somewhere else to process.

 

[D1511]

I must confess I never thought about whether average speed cameras on fixed sections actually only take photos when they think they need to. I always assumed they fed their data somewhere else to process.

Average speed cameras photograph every vehicle on entry and exit from a measured section. Once a ANPR 'pair' is matched on entry and exit, the software does the calcs. The naughty VRM list is saved, along with the speed data and the pair of time stamped images required for the PCN, while the speed and ANPR data and images of all the well behaved folks are overwritten more or less straight away.
The naughty list then gets downloaded, normally remotely by fibre or 5G, where it is manually verified by Traffic Cop admin before the PCN is issued.

 

[Topological]

Average speed cameras photograph every vehicle on entry and exit from a measured section. Once a ANPR 'pair' is matched on entry and exit, the software does the calcs. The naughty VRM list is saved, along with the speed data and the pair of time stamped images required for the PCN, while the speed and ANPR data and images of all the well behaved folks are overwritten more or less straight away.
The naughty list then gets downloaded, normally remotely by fibre or 5G, where it is manually verified by Traffic Cop admin before the PCN is issued.

Thank you. That is what I expected.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They wouldn't work (unless you kept the speed limits static, making the whole smart motorway thing completely pointless).

They would, by averaging the speed between pairs of gantries.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Jan 2026 ==

Also, given how unpleasant it is driving through roadworks with average cameras, it’s a big no from me. They would only work well if you had a situation where everyone drove at exactly the same speed, which just doesn’t happen. Probably quite dangerous at places where there’s a lot of lane changing as well.

How's it unpleasant?

 

[Paul AC]

Your car has cruise control specifically for driving at 52 mph (or whatever ) in 50 mph road works that have average speed cameras. That's what I do, anyway. It makes the task as pleasant as it can be.

The alleged smart motorway that is the M6 between J16 and J19 is certainly not, though it does have four running lanes with no hard shoulder, so it requires more care on the part of the drivers. Usually this involves the following use of the four lanes:
* lane 1 - lorries doing 56 mph
* lane 2 - empty for long distances, except for the odd lorry that decides to overtake another lorry
* lane 3 - full of cars doing 65 mph, not going any faster due to being right behind the car in front doing the same thing, presumably not using lane 2 in case a lorry pulls out
* lane 4 - full of cars doing 70 to 75 mph, except when a lane 3 car gets fed up and pulls out into lane 4, so slowing the following cars

Perhaps the cameras need to be re-programmed to combat this literal waste of space.

 

[AM9]

Your car has cruise control specifically for driving at 52 mph (or whatever ) in 50 mph road works that have average speed cameras. That's what I do, anyway. It makes the task as pleasant as it can be.

The alleged smart motorway that is the M6 between J16 and J19 is certainly not, though it does have four running lanes with no hard shoulder, so it requires more care on the part of the drivers. Usually this involves the following use of the four lanes:
* lane 1 - lorries doing 56 mph
* lane 2 - empty for long distances, except for the odd lorry that decides to overtake another lorry
* lane 3 - full of cars doing 65 mph, not going any faster due to being right behind the car in front doing the same thing, presumably not using lane 2 in case a lorry pulls out
* lane 4 - full of cars doing 70 to 75 mph, except when a lane 3 car gets fed up and pulls out into lane 4, so slowing the following cars

Perhaps the cameras need to be re-programmed to combat this literal waste of space.

Make all lanes 56mph. Simple.

 

[johncrossley]

How's it unpleasant?

I also found this comment strange. If anything these are the most comfortable places to drive, because nearly all drivers stick to the limit and therefore there is less pressure from other motorists who don't normally care about speed limits.

 

[styles]

Also, given how unpleasant it is driving through roadworks with average cameras, it’s a big no from me. They would only work well if you had a situation where everyone drove at exactly the same speed, which just doesn’t happen. Probably quite dangerous at places where there’s a lot of lane changing as well.

On the contrary, I find people adhere to the limits pretty well in these areas because they know there's a series of closely placed average speed cameras. Set cruise control and enjoy.

There's sometimes an exception for someone who knows they are joining or leaving the motorway before the next camera but that's about it.