MySwag.org The Off-road Camper Trailer Forum
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: olddigger on January 07, 2013, 01:48:40 PM
-
Report in Perth newspaper The West Australian today should attract some interesting responses:
A leading road trauma researcher says the WA Government lacks the political courage to bring in measures that could cut the State's road toll.
Max Cameron, of Monash University's accident research centre, said speed limits on thousands of kilometres of rural highways across WA needed to be cut from 110km/h to 90km/h, with an 80km/h limit for trucks.
"One of the regrettable things about speed enforcement and speed cameras in particular is that it seems to be a difficult issue for politicians to address," Professor Cameron said yesterday.
"It seems to be an area where there are often very strong negative responses from a vocal minority - it's caused many State governments to be quite weak-kneed about being serious on speed enforcement."
He said existing speed limits were too high for roads that were often poorly maintained and unsafe. "We need to come to grips with the idea that the traditional 110km/h limit on any rural road is just not acceptable," Professor Cameron said.
"When you take into account the travel time and costs of reduced speeds and the enormous road trauma benefits - it tells me a speed of 90km/h by cars on rural undivided roads is the maximum you should be doing."
He said the Government had to begin placing speed cameras in unmarked vehicles and introduce point-to-point speed cameras, which measure the average speed of a vehicle over up to 10km.
The daily publication of speed camera locations should also cease, Professor Cameron said.
"The idea is that a driver should have a fear of being caught anywhere at any time," he said.
"Regrettably, governments don't seem to have the courage to do it."
-
From my reading you get just as many "experts" telling you that speed has little to do with it and speed limits should be increased.
Not sure from my perspective which is the better view, getting somewhere faster or going slow and taking longer. Is it the speed or the time behind the wheel that causes incidents? Is it either or just inattentive drivers and it woulod not matter how long they had been behind the wheel.
btw which fridge should I buy, how should I setup my 12V or is KK or Aussie Swag better? ;D
Bunyip
-
how about spending money on driver training as a priority... once around the block and you get the pass mark doesn't cut it.
then how about maintaining the roads.. Oops... that's spending again.. would need 230948230498230489 more speedcameras then.
-
The same thing came up, from the same "expert" in South Australia. Read the section about "poorly maintained roads". This bit implies, that it is government funded research to reduce further the cost of road maintenance. Cut the speed limit then not maintain the roads. Political Bullsh1t if you as me.
:cheers: Cracka
-
It would seem this professor Max Cameron is quite a travelled expert, being that he has also been on about the Northern Territory government needing to lower road speed limits.
On the back of the NT CLP looking at removing the 130km/h limit on some sections of the Stuart highway. I would wonder if the Professor has indeed travelled as many of these rural roads as he states need lower speed limits. I personally drive to the conditions and strongly believe that drivers need real training to get their licence and not jus be shown how to pass the test. When push comes to shove an accident at high speed is gonna hurt or even kill but on the other hand a tired driver travelling at a reduced speed and falling asleep ending in accident has just the same outcome. Just my thoughts.
Batto.
-
Here's an idea. Why don't we all walk and carry our
items in a basket on our heads or ride elephants.
Maybe that'd be slow enough to please him, it about
time they spent the revenue raised by fuel tax and rego's
on the roads and infrastructure instead of else where.
Anyone payed a Vic rego lately ? Gone from $480 to 600
for a country commodore rego.
Wankers like this are ruining this country.
-
I bet this will be the polar opposite of the dui thread. :cheers:
-
I bet this guy drives a prius and rides the tram to work...................
-
I bet this guy drives a prius and rides the tram to work...................
I reckon he drives his neighbours Corgy (quite often..) and rides his pet goat to work !!!
-
You don't need to be Einstein, lower the speed on highways to 50 k's and you will lower the road toll. But is that the answer? In Qld they are about to increase the number of speed cameras to lower the road toll. No, it is not revenue raising. >:D They have also lowered the speed limit on sections of the Bruce Highway where crashes have occurred. Some are 90 k's, some 80.
I just love research centres. :P
Kevin
-
I reckon he drives his neighbours Corgy (quite often..) and rides his pet goat to work !!!
Lets not hold back.............. ;D ;D ;D ;D
-
Something that's always puzzled me, is every year they compare the road toll
to the year before's figure and yet the countries population has increased by a large
% over the years and this would put more drivers on the road. So this would mean
actual figure has come down.
Can't see them sprook'n that.
I feel sorry for the corgi, what'd he do.
-
Here in the NT our open limit on the highway was cut to 130. Guess what? Our road toll went up. However if you read into the stats, the overwhelming majority of fatalies were not in these zones but to 100 or less with vehicles doing in excess of 100. Also quite a few were troopys with 14 people on board.
The limit isnt the problem its the drivers.
-
Lets not hold back.............. ;D ;D ;D ;D
Holding back is not something I'm know for.... I still reckon he fiddle's Corgis..
Let's fix the damn roads with our tax dollars and leave the limits alone :)
-
Here's an idea. Why don't we all walk and carry our
items in a basket on our heads or ride elephants.
Maybe that'd be slow enough to please him, it about
time they spent the revenue raised by fuel tax and rego's
on the roads and infrastructure instead of else where.
Anyone payed a Vic rego lately ? Gone from $480 to 600
for a country commodore rego.
Wankers like this are ruining this country.
Does this include CTP insurance? In Qld 6 cylinder vehicles are around $800 including CTP, & a tad over a grand for those of us with V8's. It's absolute c?*p how state govt's now rely on fines to form part of their budget. Fines are dis-incentives, in a perfect world they would not exist. It's why the govt isn't stricter on the fines> they want people to speed slightly because they know that its not really that unsafe and they actually set the limits lower than road conditions allow, purely for this reason. Crock of sh*t? Maybe, but I am getting cynical these days, especially when it comes to political motives.
-
Does this include CTP insurance? In Qld 6 cylinder vehicles are around $800 including CTP, & a tad over a grand for those of us with V8's. It's absolute c?*p how state govt's now rely on fines to form part of their budget. Fines are dis-incentives, in a perfect world they would not exist. It's why the govt isn't stricter on the fines> they want people to speed slightly because they know that its not really that unsafe and they actually set the limits lower than road conditions to allow purely for this reason. Crock of sh*t? Maybe, but I am getting cynical these days, especially when it comes to political motives.
Don't have that car infront of me at the moment but I'm looking at another one
thats due tomorrow and it gone up from $780 to $1050 This one commercial.
Road use fee $542.00.
Admin fee, $0.00 must be coming sometime in the future.
TAC Charge, $462.00
Insurnace duty $46.20
-
Wank3r. Yea, can't wait to have to drive 4 hours to get to the next town. As it is it takes 2 hours at 130K (That's the cruise control limit on our stupid Patrol at work)
-
The limit isnt the problem its the drivers.
I totally agree..... when the "powers that be" finally get serious and push for driver training that actually teaches something about vehicle control and hazard assessment then we may all be a little safer on the roads....
-
Monash University accident research centre is generously funded by the Vic government, and in return they play the 'speed kills' tune at 11 (most amps only go up to 10).
Quality research (as opposed to Monash research) consistently shows that if left to their own devices, the vast majority of people will drive at a relatively sensible speed - 130km/h is about as fast as they are prepared to go. Now given that this is also roughly the speed that quality research shows is the right balance to promote alertness (rather than drowsiness and boredom), isn't it fair to say that our arbitrarily decided speed limits are simply too low? Don't agree? OK then, how about we also factor in the vast improvements in vehicle capabilities and road conditions that have occurred since Noah set the limit at 100, or 110 if you're lucky.
Nope, drop the limit, because we know people will still simply drive at their comfort level, and bingo! watch those dollars roll in from the 'safety' cameras.
Those big billboards you see around the place should have a more honest message. Something like "Speeding? You're in our 2013/14 budget estimates" would be appropriate.
-
Obviously Mr. Max [corgi rider] Cameron hasn't seen the accident rates for Victoria, possibly one of the most over policed states in the country. Victoria consistently ranks in the top states for prangs, yet has the most traffic cops, most cameras, and zero tolerance and double demerit days of anyone. And it's not speed that causes the most crashes, it's differences in speed ie. one vehicle doing 80 in a 100 zone, and just getting in everyone else's way.
-
The anti speeding message has become a thought terminating cliche http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism#Thought-terminating_clich.C3.A9 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_Reform_and_the_Psychology_of_Totalism#Thought-terminating_clich.C3.A9)
Some examples..
"speed was a factor in the accident". well of course it was, assuming the vehicle(s) where in motion at the time.
Road signs advising to "slow down". But I'm already driving safely and within the limit.
Campaigns such as this one proposing to reduce the road toll by reducing the speed limit. But why stop there? If a reduction of 10km/h reduces the road toll by 5% and "surely it's worth it to save lives" then the same logic says simply keep reducing it until the road toll is zero.
The problem with speed limits and the anti speeding message is that it promotes the notion that there is a magical safe speed. Any half sensible driver knows that the maximum safe speed on any stretch of road will vary according to many factors; weather, daylight, traffic, performance and condition of vehicle, skill of driver, etc. Many times this safe speed may be actually below the limit, but many times it is well above it. I would rather see better training to ensure drivers have the skills to make this assessment rather than simply demonize all those who "speed". There will always be lunatics who drive beyond their skills or the conditions. Perhaps we'd do better by educating and rehabilitating them than by using them as a revenue source.
-
It is an easy message and easy to enforce. Speed cameras are an easy way to collect fines. The government’s argues that all of the revenue raised from fines goes back into driver education, safety programs and such. This may be true, but does that mean the government does not have to put funds raised from other sources into these programs? Therefore any increase in fines could mean that is less the government has to budget, therefore saving them money?
I am against speeding. But with modern cars it is hard not to creep over the limit, even with the cruise control on. And I have often argued against speed cameras being deployed at a location where there has never been a crash etc. Hard to argue it is not for revenue raising. Kevin
-
My biggest concern is the amount of deadly items in the kill zones around many roads, trees and poles way too close to the road on apexes of corners etc. Shocking shoulders of roads and of course the ever present 25 speed zones in 5km of road.
More drivers need to understand that the speed limit is to indicate maximum speed limit as conditions allow not just blindly drive at 100 because that's what the sign says.
-
My biggest concern is the amount of deadly items in the kill zones around many roads, trees and poles way too close to the road on apexes of corners etc. Shocking shoulders of roads and of course the ever present 25 speed zones in 5km of road.
More drivers need to understand that the speed limit is to indicate maximum speed limit as conditions allow not just blindly drive at 100 because that's what the sign says.
Yea, but that doesn't excuse all those idiots that think 90 in a 110 zone is acceptable either. There should be a law regards going too slow. That p1sses me off the most of any driving issue. It is not the speed limit less 10k as many must think it is. Can be just as dangerous as 30 K over. It causes people (yes me) to frustration and some (not me) take risks.
-
There should be a law regards going too slow.
In NSW at least there is. There is a charge "Driving at a dangerous speed" or words to similar effect. This covers not only the ones who think they are race car drivers, but also those that are going too slow to be safe.
Then of course we have the almost never enforced keep left unless overtaking law, but don't get me started on that.
Bunyip
-
I don't have a problem with someone doing 90 in a 110 zone if that is the speed he/she are comfortable at - I do have a problem with such people not allowing faster motorists to overtake when it is safe to do so. I would also have a problem with people who feel safe at 90kph being forced to drive at 110. Many vehicles legally on the roads (e.g. tractors, backhoes) are incapable of getting anywhere near the posted speed limit anyway.
On a recent trip from Brisbane to Adelaide I did the first half at 100 and the second half at 80 (to check relative fuel consumption). At 80 I didn't get queues building up behind me because I moved over to let them pass when it was safe to do so.
-
We really need some violin music for this thread.
-
I think instead of stuffing around with the speed limits, we should not have cars that can break the highest speed limit in Australia - currently 110??
People are going to kill / maim themselves and others with vehicles no matter what speed they are doing.
I'd suggest mandatory testing with each licence renewal and defensive driving courses for those with an accident history or learning AND those that have never done one before. That will help make our roads safer.
They might also try actually making the road safer by spending more on upkeep thus leaving mechanical failure and stupidity as the final straw.
Kit_e
-
I think instead of stuffing around with the speed limits, we should not have cars that can break the highest speed limit in Australia - currently 110??
People are going to kill / maim themselves and others with vehicles no matter what speed they are doing.
I'd suggest mandatory testing with each licence renewal and defensive driving courses for those with an accident history or learning AND those that have never done one before. That will help make our roads safer.
They might also try actually making the road safer by spending more on upkeep thus leaving mechanical failure and stupidity as the final straw.
Kit_e
I think you will find the highest speed limit is 130. 8) I am not sure about mandatory testing with each licence renewal, but a defensive driving course should be mandatory for all drivers. Maybe that should come in immediately for all new licence holders. Kevin
-
"speed was a factor in the accident". well of course it was, assuming the vehicle(s) where in motion at the time.
Road signs advising to "slow down". But I'm already driving safely and within the limit.
Campaigns such as this one proposing to reduce the road toll by reducing the speed limit. But why stop there? If a reduction of 10km/h reduces the road toll by 5% and "surely it's worth it to save lives" then the same logic says simply keep reducing it until the road toll is zero.
The problem with speed limits and the anti speeding message is that it promotes the notion that there is a magical safe speed. Any half sensible driver knows that the maximum safe speed on any stretch of road will vary according to many factors; weather, daylight, traffic, performance and condition of vehicle, skill of driver, etc. Many times this safe speed may be actually below the limit, but many times it is well above it. I would rather see better training to ensure drivers have the skills to make this assessment rather than simply demonize all those who "speed". There will always be lunatics who drive beyond their skills or the conditions. Perhaps we'd do better by educating and rehabilitating them than by using them as a revenue source.
[/quote]
Well said, Brucer.
-
I think instead of stuffing around with the speed limits, we should not have cars that can break the highest speed limit in Australia - currently 110??
People are going to kill / maim themselves and others with vehicles no matter what speed they are doing.
I'd suggest mandatory testing with each licence renewal and defensive driving courses for those with an accident history or learning AND those that have never done one before. That will help make our roads safer.
They might also try actually making the road safer by spending more on upkeep thus leaving mechanical failure and stupidity as the final straw.
Kit_e
Kit_e. In the NT the highest is 130. And you would need to have a power to speed ratio so you can over take. There are far to many dangers in limiting a car that way, IMO and while I realize you should no break the speed limit to over take you may need to in a danger situation, can't see that working.
-
Accidents are not caused by speed, accidents are caused by:
- Driving beyond the capability of the driver,
- Driving beyond the capability of the car,
- Driving beyond the capability of the road
- Mechanical failure
- Mental attitude of the driver
- Loss of attention (distraction)
All the speed of the vehicle does is determine the severity of the outcome. Surely it is better to concentrate on the driver training which can prevent accidents rather than the speed which determines the cost of the outcome of the accident.
When my father started driving there was no such thing as a driving test - but there were also considerably fewer cars on the road in the 1930's and they didn't go very fast (Dad had an Austin 7). When I started driving in the 1960's I had to pass a test, the roads were better, there were many more cars on the road, and even my Morris Minor was capable of 100kph if pushed.
Nowadays there are a huge number of cars on the roads and all are capable of speeds in excess of 100kph. Except for a few major highways the road conditions haven't improved significantly - and most importantly the quality of driver training hasn't improved either. We expect young drivers to be able to cope with 2010's conditions having received 1960's training. I personally think that the driving training and test should be upgraded to reflect the current conditions on our roads. Include skid pan training and test, don't allow a driver on dirt roads unless he has passed a competency test, etc.
-
I reckon we should double all speed limits.
-
Pipeliner, very good points. What is the use of L plate drivers needing 100hrs of supervised driving if the supervisor(s) is/are poor drivers themselves? Even if some if that 100 is with a driving instructor its still debatable whether it makes that much difference. People who are going to be competent will be so after way less, and there is no amount of supervision that will save those doomed to be hopeless. Remember the old system: 6 weeks on L's, then P's for 12months and then you're away. Are new young drivers any bettet under the current system?
-
Accidents are not caused by speed, accidents are caused by:
- Driving beyond the capability of the driver,
- Driving beyond the capability of the car,
- Driving beyond the capability of the road
- Mechanical failure
- Mental attitude of the driver
- Loss of attention (distraction)
All the speed of the vehicle does is determine the severity of the outcome. Surely it is better to concentrate on the driver training which can prevent accidents rather than the speed which determines the cost of the outcome of the accident.
Seeing as you posted a list I take it you were an accident investigator or similar? How many years did you do it?
-
IMHO reducing the speed limits on country roads wouldnt work. From my time in the Pilbara most people seem to struggle doing 110, 130km/h+ is the norm. But then again if you have a 90km/h limit and people still speed but roughly 20km/h then hey presto you have everyone doing 110km/h like you wanted in the first place ;D
And I agree driver training would be the best way forward. I've watched a few of the crash investigation programs and I estimate 90%+ of the accidents are caused by driver error. I think a simple way to get extra training would be to force all P platers to do a defensive driver course before they come off their "P's" You dont do the course you dont get off your P's
-
And I agree driver training would be the best way forward. I've watched a few of the crash investigation programs and I estimate 90%+ of the accidents are caused by driver error. I think a simple way to get extra training would be to force all P platers to do a defensive driver course before they come off their "P's" You dont do the course you dont get off your P's
I tried to get my son a defensive driving course before he got off his L plates, once they are on their P's with their own car you lose leverage.
All the courses I looked at said no L platers.
Bunyip
-
I tried to get my son a defensive driving course before he got off his L plates, once they are on their P's with their own car you lose leverage.
All the courses I looked at said no L platers.
Bunyip
What was his reason for not doing it? And why would anyone (esp inexperienced people) not want to be a better driver? Is he suggesting he does not need it? I did one, admittedly after I had my licence for a couple of years, and its the best thing I've ever done as far as driving goes.
-
What was his reason for not doing it? And why would anyone (esp inexperienced people) not want to be a better driver? Is he suggesting he does not need it? I did one, admittedly after I had my licence for a couple of years, and its the best thing I've ever done as far as driving goes.
He was too busy with his social life to waste the time. He is 20 and bullet proof.
The other son will happily do it once he has his P plates. We have two VERY different boys aged 2 years apart.
Bunyip
-
He was too busy with his social life to waste the time. He is 20 and bullet proof.
The other son will happily do it once he has his P plates. We have two VERY different boys aged 2 years apart.
Bunyip
Thats tough for you I imagine. The problem with older son's attitude is that his ability (or inability) to drive affects more than just his own ego. If he was resisting reading lessons or something well that's fine but when other people's lives are at stake that is a pretty selfish attitude. Best of luck with your other child, maybe older brother will have a change of heart and do it then...
-
Seeing as you posted a list I take it you were an accident investigator or similar? How many years did you do it?
You take it incorrectly. I have never been an accident investigator, just an intelligent individual with 50 years of driving experience. And I know that every accident and near miss that I've had has been the consequence of one of the items in the list.
-
As a previous accident investigator conducting actual investigations I found that speed, even a relatively small amount over the posted limit, is a causational factor in many collisions.
The three factors are inattention/attitude, excessive speed and alcohol. (I once posted that a senior serious crash investigator reckoned that in virtually EVERY fatal accident he found a combination of the two and always one of them).
Mechanical failure is almost non existent to the extent as to be statistically irrelevant.
Actual driver ability, other than observation and anticipation skills, tends to be irrelevant as by the time avoidance can be taken the vehicles are in extremis anyway.
Now this is the time to que the "police tick box marked 'speed' "argument which is another load of BS. Come on, dont let me down fellas. :)