Speed Limits Hay Plains

[levymetal]

oh, and for anyone that is interested, it has been shown many times that there is a relationship between speed limits and deaths on the road. here's 1 article:
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=2&ved=0CBAQFDAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbooks.google.com.au%2Fbooks%3Fid%3Dj5xWsf4DD58C%26pg%3DPA201%26lpg%3DPA201%26dq%3Dcorrelation%2Bbetween%2Bspeed%2Blimits%2Band%2Bdeaths%26source%3Dbl%26ots%3DAedosOd0sC%26sig%3DUQM9BZowYdZ9UCY2v7KiDNw1AWE%26hl%3Den%26ei%3DNYHmSrntL4WpkAWZztDNBg%26sa%3DX%26oi%3Dbook_result%26ct%3Dresult%26resnum%3D2%26ved%3D0CBEQ6AEwAQ&rct=j&q=correlation+between+speed+limits+and+deaths&ei=NYHmSrntL4WpkAWZztDNBg&usg=AFQjCNGB2kUJekNYK-sil2wxC8WycX7MiQ

there are many more if you search. call bullshit if you want, but it's the statistics. the faster you go, the more likely you are to die, regardless of what car you drive. if everyone drove at 10km/h then no one would die. but of course no one would be able to get anywhere, so there needs to a balance between how many people die and how quickly we can get places.

 

[Keepleft]

I live nearby to this area, 110km/h out that way is ridiculous, it should be upped to 130, those roads r ever so boring!!

Why 130km/h? Why not 120km/h or 140km/h?? Why speed-limit at all??

Why not a higher day limit and lower limit for night??

I can tell you RTA are looking at reducing the number of 110km/h zones.

i often wonder about this same question , about 20 years ago the max limit in NSW was 120.

Noooooo it wasn't sport.

yes i beleive 130 from narrellan rd to the border would be good, and from the border to graigeburn. North some section from raymond trc to kempsey, and tamworth to cunninghams gap.

I don't - these divided highways are *not* to full freeway construction, they lack median barrier, and have U-Turn bays that too many dumbarses treat as private intersections. Once these two issues are remedied AND our cars are supplied with safety vest and warning triangle, THEN we will consider raising the limit.
U-turn On Freeway Resultant Outcome (an Illegal Act). - Boostcruising.com

Taree crash a day or so ago, no median barrier:-
TRAGIC ACCIDENT CLAIMS YOUNG LIFE : NBN

well the hay plains...even tho the limit is 110...who do u actually see doing that?

we passed utes with trailers, they where doing about 140... not mentioning how fast we where going...but its seriously should have...if anything..no limit... theres NOTHING !

Many lengths should be speed derestricted (//). The sign has just been removed from Australian Standards, so that won't happen so easily.

The Northern Territory government abolished their open limits, because too many people were dying in high speed crashes. Do you remember the Cannonball Run they had a few years back, with the two dudes in their Ferrari?

Wrong on the first bit, the second bit - Cannonball - was subject to signage and speed control - the length of road had fresh pebbles.
For two years AFTER the NT Communist/ALP party imposed a rural 130km/h speed limit with its very, very stoopid 110km/h 'rural default', NT's toll CLIMBED to decade high levels.

If a proper high speed corridor were introduced, it'd have to be a dual carriageway with multiple lanes. You could have a lane, for learners like Jamie-b and articulated tourists (oldies in caravans), for vehicles travelling at less than 100. A lane for 100 to 120, a lane for 120 to 140 and then an ultra high speed lane, the last two lanes should have a MINIMUM speed set, if you're not doing your 120 or 140, you're gunna get done.

Nooooo, - Australia is a contracting party the "The UN Convention on Road Traffic", all that is needed is for people to do as is required at international law as adopted into Australia, that is "keep left", speshul lanes are not required. The Germans, French, Hungarians, Austrians, Italians seem to get it right, and at much faster speeds than we do, speeds that make Aussie men and women break down and cry, and cause their cars to burst into flames, and I do speak from experience and employment in the field.

Our intercity highways; the Hume for example, - could do the job ONCE median barrier is installed and the U-Turn bays are gatelocked (a la F3 progress). Keep-left lane discipline is all that is needed. Our cars WILL get a warning triangle and safety vest, like the Euro fleet. I am expecting changes to the ARR's in 2010 and a second lot in 2011 to begin effect for this.
U-turn On Freeway Resultant Outcome (an Illegal Act). - Boostcruising.com

 

[Turd Ferguson]

this needs a :lock:

 

[Tsunamix]

oh, and for anyone that is interested, it has been shown many times that there is a relationship between speed limits and deaths on the road. here's 1 article:

there are many more if you search. call bullshit if you want, but it's the statistics. the faster you go, the more likely you are to die, regardless of what car you drive. if everyone drove at 10km/h then no one would die. but of course no one would be able to get anywhere, so there needs to a balance between how many people die and how quickly we can get places.

I Call bullshit on the article.

you see speeding very rarely CAUSES an accident. Speeding exacerbates the effects of an accident, but it doesn't cause them.

Driving at excessive speed through a corner means you lose control - thats an acident but speed didn't CAUSE it. the driver not driving at an appropriate speed for the situation caused it.

Driving so fast that you cant brake fast enough on a greasy road is identical.

YES - the chances of you getting killed in any accident increase with speed. But without an accident the speed is irrelevant.

So if anyone trulty wants to reduce the number of ACCIDENTS, they have to get the speed idea out of there heads, and start looking at the other side of the equation. The driver training, the road condition, the drunks, the drugged and the ********.

 

[levymetal]

Driving at excessive speed through a corner means you lose control - thats an acident but speed didn't CAUSE it. the driver not driving at an appropriate speed for the situation caused it.

that's EXACTLY what speed limits are for. to tell you how fast you can drive safely . why would you increase the speed limits if it wasn't safe to drive at them?

also, your example doesn't make sense. you said that speed didn't cause the accident. you then said that the cause was "the driver not driving at an appropriate speed". ummm.. isn't that speed?

 

[Tsunamix]

Hey Levy,

Not really.

regardless of speed limit, road conditions change. If someone spills oil on a road, the driver must judge what is an appropriate speed and drive at it. A failure to judge correctly is the fault, not the speed itself. The accident would be caused by the drivers lack of judgement, or attention.

If your speed limit is 80, and there are kids on the road, you must use your judgement to drive without accident.

The key here is driver judgement. Without bad judgement, there is no accident. Speed doesn't contribute significantly at all, it just Exacerbates the repercussions.

Speeds contributions to accidents is to increase stopping distance. This can be couteracted mechanically with better wheels, tyres, brake pads, rotors etc. It would be fairer to Allow people with modified brakes to Exceed the speed limit by a set amount because they have a decreased stopping distance.

Pointing the finger at speed is one eyed at best, and negligent at worst. Speed is measurable and therefore taxable. Driver training and ability is not accuratley measurable, and therefore not taxable.

The root cause of ALL accidents is Poor Driver judgement. Be it choosing to drive at too high a speed, or choosing to drive while drunk, choosing to follow to close or choosing to overtake on a blind corner.

If the sole cause was speed, planes would be garunteed death traps, and pedestrians would never get hurt.