Good article on speed in the Age! Nice to see they arent pandering to the Govt!!

[EDManual]

Lets get the truth out there! May be a good start! I'd say 90%+ of people actually think driving faster than speed limits (on highways) is dangerous. They think this because of all the govt propaganda for revenue raising has infiltrated their "i need a nanny" brains....

I like their comments about how European travellers basically open their eyes on the speed issue and realise its all a lie!


http://theage.drive.com.au/motor-new...508-2j6zy.html

[russellw]

Can't do that ... the truth is dangerous and would result in anarchy, chaos and the death of some rare species in some remote place that 6 unwashed protesters have been protecting.

[Keepleft]

The Age article also relates to NT and its ongoing work into (//), so I've linked to our NT discussion;-
http://fordforums.com.au/showthread....=1#post4727582

Excessive speed is straightforward, however, there are often cases where a vehicle is travelling below the posted speed limit, but the speed is deemed inappropriate for the conditions,

the general manager of the NSW Centre for Road Safety, Marg Prendergast, told Fairfax.
Well then fellow NSW person - we really should consider (//) for NSW application in due course. Naturally, this will involve current Action Plan points (Vehicle Standards - Points 9 & 10) from our RMS Breakdown Safety Strategy that see's NSW requesting vehicle manufacturers to supply/retain in vehicles - a warning triangle and high-vis vest. (Now with growing interstate government support, incl NT & QLD).

Done, as part of a long term goal of improving our road safety lot, in a complete new approach to 'driving'.

My signal to academics in the domestic road safety industry, on the basis of national productivity; is to work with speed, rather than pretend it cannot be allowed to exist. The Prendergast quote accepts that reality, and we are NSW.

Harold will of course complain loudly, but I remind all, he is the same chap that tried to ban jogging in Mossman, Sydney, and even tried to have police fine athlete Tanya Ruckle for doing so. That media turn to him for opinion, states more about media.

Professor Cameron said that on top of overwhelming evidence against increasing speed limits, Australia’s older fleet of cars, sub-standard roads and poor lane etiquette were further reasons not to increase speed limits

Cut the crap Cameron; your simply showing us "absolute' speed-limit control" has the outcome you've stated, think man, its really not that hard to get a grip of it all. Lane discipline; give us (//) or 130km/h in relation to motorway class; you then give us much more incentive to give a stuff about vital aspects of driving such as lane discipline. Hardly so vital when on some of the best motorway stretches of road in the world, we only post 110km/h. Heck, its another reason to NOT fund motorway, think! Spare me backward thinking people.

The clock is ticking against the old marxist guard:-) Freedom and responsibility will return to Australian roads, with government supplying the tools for the entire task.

[Keepleft]

I'll add, for NSW to go higher than 110km/h, means a required change to our "NSW Speed Zoning Guidelines".

My intention is that work soon be pushed. And it will happen.

[Franco Cozzo]

If you where on one of those highways, you probably wouldn't see many cops/other drivers much at all would you? Speed limit only applies when other people are around, lol.

I had a nice trip down Eastlink the other week, why it can't be 130km/h is anyones guess, its in such good condition, its wide and straight.

[mik]

Some of our good stretches of road are so boring , in my mind there's no doubt that increasing the speed limit on certain roads may well save lives, some of these anti speed at all costs blokes need to take their head out of their posteriors and listen to people that actually have driven these roads time and time again.

[paulb351]

Isn't it interesting that the speed limit was implemented originally as a fuel saving measure during the first Oil shocks when OPEC restricted supply and have morphed into a proxy for road safety and a source of revenue for State & Territory governments of both political persuasions...

Poor driver skills, (try driving in Queensland with all the right hand lane squatters maintaining the same speed as the car next to them and invariably 10km/h under the posted limit), poor roads and an easy political spin of speed kills will see this argument go around and around and (unfortunately) not get resolved by more appropriate speed settings.

[WPR1]

About time they printed the truth - our open speed limit should be 130kmh nation wide

[flappist]

Unfortunately, especially for Victorians, the govco/academics have painted themselves into a corner on the speed issue.

For then to allow or support a 130 limit after decades of espousing the "speed kills" mantra would put them is a position where someone may ask the question that they will NEVER answer honestly.

That question: "Were you wrong?".

In the history of Australia there has never ever been a Government or an academic group that has publically admitted that they were wrong.
There are plenty who have been proven or accused of being wrong by subsequent groups but this was only long after the first group no longer had influence or control.

[chevypower]

@Flappist, you know who universities rely on for research funding and grants, right? Their reports should declare that conflict of interest in their research papers. In addition, governments enable universities to charge astronomical tuition fees. The point is, why wouldn't they side with the government?

[BHDOGS]

i dont trust people driving 50 on the roads let alone 130 teach people to drive properly and i might change my mind till then dont bother

[MAD]

Surely it can't be too hard to start recording the speed limit at the crash site, and the expertly estimated speed of travel for each crash.

Professor Cameron needs to wake up, smell the tarmac, and realise that we can all see he has been as brainwashed better than govco could have ever hoped with their incessant ad campaigns that traveling 5km/h over will kill angels, unicorns and kittens.

Australia's average fleet age is constantly reducing.

[mik]

Thinking about it , I don't think I would up the speed limit around the burbs, the freeways around the city are to unpredictable and prone to erratic speed fluctuations, definitely a case for looking at the speed limits away from the big smoke though.

[stazza]

My brother died in a car crash a couple year's ago, they said speed was not a factor, yet on the radio the next day a constable spoke about the crash and said "people need to slow down", yet they told my family he was going more than 10km/h below the limit.

As has been stated repeatedly, it's plain and simply revenue raising. I spend more time watching my speedo than looking at the bloody road cause I'm so paranoid of getting a ticket.

[EDManual]

Originally Posted by stazza

My brother died in a car crash a couple year's ago, they said speed was not a factor, yet on the radio the next day a constable spoke about the crash and said "people need to slow down", yet they told my family he was going more than 10km/h below the limit.

As has been stated repeatedly, it's plain and simply revenue raising. I spend more time watching my speedo than looking at the bloody road cause I'm so paranoid of getting a ticket.

Government Police justifying revenue....makes me sick.

There are some stats that never show up, and they would have them!!!

-crashes involving drivers that have points for speeding, what is the % compared to non speeders?(I would say its less than the average as these people are watching the road, and having fun concentrating on the task at hand)
-What is the % of speeding over the limit ONLY related crashes (in England its 2% if I remember correctly!) If someone is drunk and speeding, thats got nothing to do with safely speeding on a highway.

Oh, do I speed? Do I contribute to the govt taxes? Yes... in now 18 years of driving, I have averaged at least 1 ticket a year(in Vic, up to 10kmh over), always 3 pointers (10-25 over (and when I get caught, i'd be annoyed if it was for 12 over, 20-25 over is the usual..), as I never get caught by speed cameras, and the real cops dont bother to pull you over for a 1 pointer. Yep, i've had at least 50 points (yep...at least...), and done the 12 month bond period 3 times! and never lost my licence... Am I dangerous? Every time I've been caught has been pretty much on a deserted country road... Will I slow down? No way...

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by EDManual

I'd say 90%+ of people actually think driving faster than speed limits (on highways) is dangerous.

The poll at the end of the article shows (today) 92% favouring raising speed limits!

The whole mantra is intellectually flawed and it's also a convenient source of revenue for govco. Although the other day I was pulled over by Mr Police for 17 km/h over and just given a little talk and sent on my way. I'm wondering if they might be grappling with the logistics of large numbers of people losing their licence on the points system, but still needing to drive because there's no public transport alternative. I reckon there must be 10s of thousands of people now driving in Australia with cancelled licences. That'd be a big liability issue.

After 6 months in Europe, driving safely at high speed, I'm finding driving back here so unpleasant I'd really be quite happy to give it up altogether if there was an alternative. And the driving standard of many people has become abysmal in recent years, obviously so nannied that they think they don't need to think or use common sense as long as they're below the speed limit.

[mik]

Originally Posted by chevypower

@Flappist, you know who universities rely on for research funding and grants, right? Their reports should declare that conflict of interest in their research papers. In addition, governments enable universities to charge astronomical tuition fees. The point is, why wouldn't they side with the government?

yes you do hear rumours on the grape vine about gov funded institutions, i heard another on the grape vine yarn about a scientific place called the csir ....... oh i forget the name of the place now but i think you know what i mean ;).

[mik]

Originally Posted by BHDOGS

i dont trust people driving 50 on the roads let alone 130 teach people to drive properly and i might change my mind till then dont bother

I'm starting to feel that way too mate, i was stationery about 3 weeks ago in the left lane at the lights and a bloke 2 lanes to right of me going in the same direction who was also stationery and then decided to move up in the mt lane between us and hit me at about 20 kph ...... o0, gawd damned it.

[Neale]

I love this quote
“There is no evidence to suggest that increasing speed limits reduces boredom"

How about we do 20 laps of a race track at 40kph then to 20 laps at top speed & see if it decreases boredom ;)

[OwnTheRoad]

Sure speed is a common factor of a crash as the govt have told us so ,so is boredom , distraction , and just plain stupidity , however I would really like to know how many of speed related crashes also involved alcohol or drugs as well and to what extent this contributed to the crash ,I suspect we shall never know the truth to this as it would impact on the "speed kils " campaign .
It's long over due that all new drivers pay for some real driver training ,the system as it is now is down right ludicrous , we are blind to ignorance as to just how dangerous driving is until someone we know dearly gets injured or killed in a crash .Scrap the ******** 120 hours or reduce it and make a real driver training course mandatory ( not some one day short course either i mean a week )for new drivers including new residents from overseas and make those whose license was cancelled for any reason also attend ,once we acknowledge that proper driver training is reqd we shall see the benefits of this in the future.
I'm also all for mandatory licence testing for all licence holders every ten years , too many people don't know the current laws and this will keep them up to date.
Yes people will bleat on about not having time or it's too hard but driving is a privilege not some bloody right .
Oh I'd like to see speed limits increased as well where appropriate ,like the Hume and east link in Melb ,another recent ******** move by the Vic govt has been the abolishment of the 70 and 90 limits and thus dropping these areas to 60 and 80 ( they stated some would go up ,id like to see that !) seriously this is just absurd and the locally where I live (semi rural ) its just damn frustrating as soon as an intersection racks up crash stats the roads at the intersection have new lower posted limits applied ,seriously it's not the speed , its impatient uneducated drivers taking stupid risks.
Why do we tolerate this ? Because we're all too darn lazy to be make enough noise about it, in the same way we accept the current inept licencing system.

[CoupeKing]

130km/h......What about the people that have a permanent tendency to go 20km over regardless of the limit?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by CoupeKing

130km/h......What about the people that have a permanent tendency to go 20km over regardless of the limit?

Well in a just society they would be lined up with those who have a permanent tendency to go 20km under usually in the right lane regardless of the limit together with those who will clutch at any straw regardless of how puerile in a last desperate attempt to prevent speed limit increases and shot......

Originally Posted by Neale

I love this quote
“There is no evidence to suggest that increasing speed limits reduces boredom"

How about we do 20 laps of a race track at 40kph then to 20 laps at top speed & see if it decreases boredom ;)

You have to view this in context. Academic researchers tend to base a lot of their findings on personal experience and peer group discussions.

There is no perception of boredom at any speed if one is absolutely terrified whenever one is travelling in a motor vehicle......

Can you imagine aviation laws proposed by people who are afraid of flying?

[Elks]

Originally Posted by flappist

Unfortunately, especially for Victorians, the govco/academics have painted themselves into a corner on the speed issue.

There is also, in my opinion, an unholy alliance between the Gov, raising cash though fines, $300m + annually, the TAC and its add agencies who must receive $100m+ at a guess, the there the Monash uni research centre as well.

All these people do fantastic and worthwhile work, but they are also vested interests who make the decisions, and have gone from making a difference to squeezing blood out of a stone.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by CoupeKing

130km/h......What about the people that have a permanent tendency to go 20km over regardless of the limit?

I guess this is a non scientific (personal) observation, but I suspect you'll find that 130 is a comfortable balance speed for many people on open roads. It moves you on above the frustration of obviously travelling too slowly on a road on which higher speeds are safe, but is below some vague point where maybe the car becomes too noisy or uncomfortable, fuel consumption rises etc.

What you do need is the ability to do a burst of speed over, to safely clear obstacles. The motorway technique in Europe is that you may be cruising at 120-130, then you come up behind a truck, you check the mirror for the Audis and BMWs coming up behind at 200 and, if the coast is clear, you accelerate up to about 140-150 to clear the truck as quickly as possible and then move back over.

One of the biggest problems with Australian open road driving is that cars and trucks/buses have the same speed limit, not about 40 km/h apart like in Europe. So everybody here (truck drivers included) gets frustrated when cars have to overtake slower vehicles (where there is only a few km/h difference) at a creep and then pull in front down near the same speed, because there's the danger of being pinged by a police radar.

Pinging people while overtaking (especially on single lane roads where you should be concentrating 100% on the maneouvre, not on the speedo) is something where the lawmakers are certainly not doing the cause of road safety a favour.

One of the most important things in Australia from a safety point of view I reckon is reducing journey times. There are big distances between towns and cities here and holding people down to an artificially slow limit increases the journey time, increases boredom and fatigue and increases the chance of mishap. No use repeating a mantra of "take a break every 2 hours" when there is no town in 2 hours and you don't want to place the family at risk at some isolated spot in the bush. So people tend to press on regardless - at 100 km/h, watching all the time for radars and becoming mesmerised. So stupid.

[Revolver]

For there to really be a genuine raise of speed limits, Australia's road network needs to be radically overhauled. Bruce highway, a prime example.

Yes there are stretches of highway/motorway that are in good condition and should have a higher-than-posted speed limit. The upgraded section of Ipswich motorway in QLD is one of them.

6 times winner of Bathurst Mark Skaife did a bit of research on this & went to the autobahn & spent a few days with the police. And they focus on the other road laws other than speeding. Skaife presented his findings to one of the state governments, Victoria I think it was, and basically the premier and/or transport minister came out & said Skaifes findings were irrelevant & he has no idea on the ramifications of such a notion. In a nutshell, told him to crawl back into a racecar.

Then there is the permanently injured victims & the families of dead victims who at the drop of a hat will get on TV, on a 60 minutes special, bawl their eyes out about how speed kills, & side with the government.

What they will forget to mention is that their darling son had a carload of friends going 110 in a suburban 60 zone & was attempting to emulate ken block through a local roundabout in his 20+ year old VN commodore or mid 90's hatch or something with bugger all safety equipment, & wound up emulating Peter Brock (RIP).

There would have to be a massive awareness campaign to bring attention to this, & no government would advocate this, so it would be up to joe of the public who hasn't got the $$$ to mount such a campaign. Only once there are enough people to back it in the state (and it would have to be a substantial & massive amount) would there be a rethink of this situation. And only a rethink. No nessecarily action.

The issue is this 30 years or more of entrenched dogma. That any, every & all forms of goverment will always agree on.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Revolver 45

6 times winner of Bathurst Mark Skaife did a bit of research on this & went to the autobahn & spent a few days with the police. And they focus on the other road laws other than speeding. Skaife presented his findings to one of the state governments, Victoria I think it was, and basically the premier and/or transport minister came out & said Skaifes findings were irrelevant & he has no idea on the ramifications of such a notion. In a nutshell, told him to crawl back into a racecar.

Worth linking to that again in case anybody has forgotten:

http://www.caradvice.com.au/70446/ma...-on-deaf-ears/

and this typical academic response:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...0621-yrwd.html

doing very well at misrepresenting reality in Germany. I thought academics were supposed to be intellectually honest.

Australia's motorways are generally to the quality of Europe's best (especially where crossover protection is in place) and Europe's roads overall have the same variety as Australia - from excellent to poor. Obviously, just as here, speed limits reflect the limits of each particular road. The argument "we're not the same as Europe" doesn't wash, except for driver training and attitudes. And who is the legal caretaker for that? Government.

If government diverted its attention for a moment from "speeding" (revenue) and genuinely looked at the other issues we might get somewhere.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Revolver 45

For there to really be a genuine raise of speed limits, Australia's road network needs to be radically overhauled. Bruce highway, a prime example.

This is another misdirectional tactic. Should every road in Australia be reduced to 60km/h until every single section of every other road is repaired or upgraded to be suitable for a higher speed?

Yes some roads are not good enough for 130 or actually for 110, 100 or even 60. But some sections of some roads are.

Examples of the Bruce Hwy that are definitely suitable.

Caboolture to Caloundra, Namour to Cooroy, Section B of Cooroy to Curra (the bit that has be finished).
And if they close all those stupid and very dangerous side roads actually the who section from Bald hills to Cooroy and eventually to Curra when it is finished.

Examples of Highways that are probably suitable.
Marlborough stretch, sections of the Capricorn, Landsborough and Flinders Hwys west of the GDR.

Why is it that when ever a speed limit increase is proposed the "anti" crowd get fixated on the worst possible sections of road being the first to have the limit increased instead of the best?

[Cobramad]

This is a multi-faceted issue...
Govco dont walk the talk... its easier to be punitive and punish those who transgress, no matter by what margin, for example Vics "Zero Tolerance" approach to speeding...Clowns!
Driver education, better roads and indeed better laws are too expensive and time consuming....Penalties keep the coffers filled!

[2011G6E]

Yes, the description "excessive speed" can...and actually should...mean "driving too fast/slow for the conditions".

Coming back out here last night after picking up my old Celica from my sons place in Rocky, I was in a bit of a hurry...said bye to the missus who was staying down in Gracemere at our other house babysitting the grandkids for a day or two, and I had to work at midnight, so I wanted to get home and fall into bed.

Came over a crest just on dusk doing 110kph (in a 110 zone), and there in front of me was a caravan...not a very large one, but a decent size...doing maybe 60kph on some gentle curving bits after the Gogango range.
You know, I've always liked the tactile feel of the Celica, the lack of modern assistance and computers...but I'd have given my lefty for anti lock brakes. I hit the pics...hard...and the brakes locked. I let off, and thankfully nothing was coming from the other way as I passed by him, still trying to slow down.

The thing was, it was being towed by a brand new 200 series Landcruiser...a vehicle perfectly capable of pulling even a large van at the legal limit or close to it.
After my heart started again a few kilometers down the road and I'd given the driver of the 'Cruiser a few helpful driving hints on the two way, I had time to think.

Was he driving legally? Yes...unfortunately...perfectly legal. The "limit" is just that...a "limit". He can legally trundle along at 40kph if he wishes. Oh, a cop could pull him over and ask if there's a problem...but I don't actually think he could fine him unless he does something...erm..."dangerous"...which would mean going "one K over"...obviously...

[XXX747]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Yes, the description "excessive speed" can...and actually should...mean "driving too fast/slow for the conditions".

Coming back out here last night after picking up my old Celica from my sons place in Rocky, I was in a bit of a hurry...said bye to the missus who was staying down in Gracemere at our other house babysitting the grandkids for a day or two, and I had to work at midnight, so I wanted to get home and fall into bed.

Came over a crest just on dusk doing 110kph (in a 110 zone), and there in front of me was a caravan...not a very large one, but a decent size...doing maybe 60kph on some gentle curving bits after the Gogango range.
You know, I've always liked the tactile feel of the Celica, the lack of modern assistance and computers...but I'd have given my lefty for anti lock brakes. I hit the pics...hard...and the brakes locked. I let off, and thankfully nothing was coming from the other way as I passed by him, still trying to slow down.

The thing was, it was being towed by a brand new 200 series Landcruiser...a vehicle perfectly capable of pulling even a large van at the legal limit or close to it.
After my heart started again a few kilometers down the road and I'd given the driver of the 'Cruiser a few helpful driving hints on the two way, I had time to think.

Was he driving legally? Yes...unfortunately...perfectly legal. The "limit" is just that...a "limit". He can legally trundle along at 40kph if he wishes. Oh, a cop could pull him over and ask if there's a problem...but I don't actually think he could fine him unless he does something...erm..."dangerous"...which would mean going "one K over"...obviously...

You can be fined for going slower than the speed limit. If it is considered dangerous you can be fined as you said. If what he was doing was Dangerous then consider it illegal