Select to expand quote

Ian K said..

sotired said..




This is like the ad where they show you hitting something at the higher speed and just missing it if you had been 10km/h slower.

What about if you had been paying attention at 130km/h and not paying attention at 90km/h? How much delay in your reaction time would it take to make these stopping distances equal?

That's the straw man argument Sotired.

But anyway.

You'd have to be asleep at the wheel for an extra 2 seconds, The stopping distance at 130 kph is 120 metres, at 90 kph it's 64 metres. To waste 56 metres at 90 kph, 25 metres per second, that's 2 seconds.

If you're asleep for 2 seconds you've hopefully already run off the road, coming to rest safely in a ditch, before you hit anything.

Alertness is a factor but unfortunately you can't police it. Just because you can't police one factor doesn't mean you should throw your hands up on the ones that can be policed.

Well, its a pretty strange argument anyway. How often is it that one is presented with a completely stationary object in the middle of the road where you have just noticed it and have to stop completely before hitting something, from your normal driving speed?

The only scenario I can think of is where you come around a tight blind corner and there is a cement truck or similar stopped in the middle. I can't say that this would be a highly rated cause of accidents on the roads. If you aren't already hovering over the brake as you go around that corner, you are going to hit that object anyway.

Instead, I suspect that in the majority of cases accidents are caused by people doing dumb things. It just so happens that catching people speeding is easy to do, and much easier to police. I do believe there is a link between the people doing dumb things and the same people speeding in stupid locations, so I actually don't mind that speed cameras are used. After all if you are not observant enough to know there is a speed camera in a particular place, or that traffic conditions warrant you slowing down, maybe you deserve to be fined.

The police comment that seems to appear in accident reports of 'speed was a factor' is disingenuous in that it only means 'if they weren't moving they wouldn't have hit anything'. They never actually say that the cause of the accident is that the person is speeding, only that maybe if they weren't speeding they might not have driven into a tree.

I recall driving home from the snow one Sunday evening and watching some twit overtake people on the wrong side of the road on a blind corner, going up hill. Technically he probably wasn't speeding, but he was being an idiot and risking his life and everyone's around him. Unfortunately the only thing that seems to prevent that behavior is obvious policing, i.e. having a police car or two cruising in the line-up, but I guess that is more expensive than just having cameras.

Fatigue is a bigger issue on freeways than a foreign object in the road - but after a lack of rest stops, the biggest impediment to reducing fatigue is our antiquated freeway speed limits.

For instance, if the submission to parliament for a 20km/h increase to the Hume Freeway limit was adopted, a Melbourne to Sydney trip could be reduced by two hours and with complete safety. That's two hours less someone is on the road at the most tired. Trucks could also be allowed an increase to 110 on the freeway. That would save hundreds of millions of dollars for the economy annually.

Select to expand quote

Adriano said..
Fatigue is a bigger issue on freeways than a foreign object in the road - but after a lack of rest stops, the biggest impediment to reducing fatigue is our antiquated freeway speed limits.

For instance, if the submission to parliament for a 20km/h increase to the Hume Freeway limit was adopted, a Melbourne to Sydney trip could be reduced by two hours and with complete safety. That's two hours less someone is on the road at the most tired. Trucks could also be allowed an increase to 110 on the freeway. That would save hundreds of millions of dollars for the economy annually.

If you can figure out how to police fatigued drivers good, go for it. And if you can successfully lobby for the speed limit to be increased on the Hume, fair enough, but that's OT. If you exceed the new limit you've successfully lobbied for you're now infringing your rights as an upstanding citizen of the community. And you're back on topic.

Select to expand quote

sotired said..

Well, its a pretty strange argument anyway. How often is it that one is presented with a completely stationary object in the middle of the road where you have just noticed it and have to stop completely before hitting something, from your normal driving speed?

Yes it's a simplified scenario. One of many scenarios where you hit the brakes but still run into something. Do the sums on any of these scenarios and the conclusion is the same. There's a lot of extra kinetic energy to scrub off with an extra 10 kph on board. Things go wrong for all sorts of compounding reasons, it may not be primarily the speed's fault, but it's the speed that kills. And 10kph extra makes it a whole lot more likely that the prang will be fatal.

If a radar detector was able to tell a driver that there is a speed camera ahead , i would definitely get one for those country roads where trying to pass semi trailers that all seem to be able to exceed 100km/hr.
Having lost 6 demerit points in one passing attempt , i now will never try to pass a "B Double " again.
Speeding Trucks and speeding caravaners/boat trailers etc are the most dangerous vehicles on country WA roads.They are all supposed to be limited to 100km/hr.
The radar detectors only work if the radar operator has it switched on. Police traffic cars only turn them on when a car is in sight, the same with hand held radars.
I don't believe these detectors work on stationary speed cameras, or point to point cameras which is the new trend to stop speeding.

Select to expand quote

Adriano said..
Fatigue is a bigger issue on freeways than a foreign object in the road - but after a lack of rest stops, the biggest impediment to reducing fatigue is our antiquated freeway speed limits.

For instance, if the submission to parliament for a 20km/h increase to the Hume Freeway limit was adopted, a Melbourne to Sydney trip could be reduced by two hours and with complete safety. That's two hours less someone is on the road at the most tired. Trucks could also be allowed an increase to 110 on the freeway. That would save hundreds of millions of dollars for the economy annually.

Higher speeds would also mean less traffic, which is obviously safer. This was figured out long ago in Europe.

We agree again - bloody hello what is happening here??!!

People get so caught up in the government message that speed kills, but when you look at the numbers it is clearly a furphy. The only reason I can think governments use it is to justify their revenue raising methodologies aligned to speeding.

A quick look through the statistics shows that in the UK speeding is attributable to 3% of accidents, in the US 7%. The Victorian government claims it is the No1 factor in accidents yet doesn't publish the evidence. I can't imagine Australia is such a statistical outlier, that their statement would be true.

If you really want safe roads, speeding should be a low level priority. Perhaps increased driver skills would be better to focus on.

^^ It's a populist thing. State governments like to be seen as "tough on crime" and "doing something" about the road "toll".

Argue all u want but cameras are a necessary evil until we go autonomous. like most "restricting or inconvenient" measures implemented by our governing body they serve to contain the completely wild and reckless minority's like 'doug the methed out doll bludger who deems it necessary to travel as fast as his POS 87 Corolla will take him past a primary school at 830 in the morning because yolo'... Either u have these rules and u enforce them to everybody or u don't and the complete f'wits who don't give a $h!t about any bodies safety do whatever they want when they want.

If u got done for doing 8 over good, that tells me there is a cop on the ball doing his job trying to save me and my children from people like doug, ur just unfortunate collateral.

For those who use radar detectors, I invite you to reflect on the following…

- How many times a day whilst driving in traffic do you get angry at other drivers, swear at other drivers or just call other drivers idiots (in head, under breath, out loud) for such atrocities as going too slowly, not indicating, sitting in the right hand lane etc
-How many times a day do you tailgate/deliberately ride someone’s arse trying to get them to hurry up and get out of your way.
-How many times a day do you think my driving is better than that &^$#... My car is better than that sh!tbox.

Do you think the behaviour described above is safe for other road users?

My perception is people who use radar detectors are agro and likely to go through all of the above every day... I saw a couple of cars this morning on the way to work with radar detectors... one V8 commodore and one V8 falcon ute... both lowered... both what is most easily described as hoon cars...

Select to expand quote

Pugwash said..
For those who use radar detectors, I invite you to reflect on the following…

- How many times a day whilst driving in traffic do you get angry at other drivers, swear at other drivers or just call other drivers idiots (in head, under breath, out loud) for such atrocities as going too slowly, not indicating, sitting in the right hand lane etc
-How many times a day do you tailgate/deliberately ride someone’s arse trying to get them to hurry up and get out of your way.
-How many times a day do you think my driving is better than that &^$#... My car is better than that sh!tbox.

Do you think the behaviour described above is safe for other road users?

My perception is people who use radar detectors are agro and likely to go through all of the above every day... I saw a couple of cars this morning on the way to work with radar detectors... one V8 commodore and one V8 falcon ute... both lowered... both what is most easily described as hoon cars...

I don't get abusive and i don't tailgate . But i also do alot of country driving and having speed limits of 100 and 110 is dangerous . It should be more . I also see alot more **** driving by people who don't have radar detectors .


IE inability to merge safely , inability to join the freeway at 100kmh like the sign says but instead merge at 70-80kmh , inability to stay left when there are two or more lanes , inability to drive on a road when there is a light sprinkling of rain and proceed to drive 10-20 under the limit .



I have to ask you pugwash how many accidents are caused by people with radar detectors compared to drunk drivers, stoned drivers, just basically **** drivers ?

Select to expand quote

mywisdom said..
Argue all u want but cameras are a necessary evil until we go autonomous. like most "restricting or inconvenient" measures implemented by our governing body they serve to contain the completely wild and reckless minority's like 'doug the methed out doll bludger who deems it necessary to travel as fast as his POS 87 Corolla will take him past a primary school at 830 in the morning because yolo'... Either u have these rules and u enforce them to everybody or u don't and the complete f'wits who don't give a $h!t about any bodies safety do whatever they want when they want.

If u got done for doing 8 over good, that tells me there is a cop on the ball doing his job trying to save me and my children from people like doug, ur just unfortunate collateral.

totally agree that people should have the book thrown at them and actually increase the points and dollar fines for people speeding in school zones , absolutely 100% .

I see it all the time down albany highway as well which is 40 and people doing 20 over , 99% of those people don't have radar detectors either so that blows pugwash's theory out the window .

Country roads are different though . Throw the book at f$ckwits who do 80 in a 110 zone then do 140 on an overtaking lane and then slow down again .

btw for any poor soul that elected to become an officer of the law and has to read people on this forum refer to them as "parasites" I apologise and stress that these ignorant views are held by the vocal minority do not represent the greater communities opinion.

Select to expand quote

dusta said..

I have to ask you pugwash how many accidents are caused by people with radar detectors compared to drunk drivers, stoned drivers, just basically **** drivers ?

I dunno dusta... I do know which is the easiest to control. The supposed person of rational (not impaired) mind that seeks to deliberately flout the law.

Select to expand quote

dusta said..

...so that blows pugwash's theory out the window.

Nah...I don't think so. People without radar detectors also behave poorly... However, the percentage of people who have radar detectors with the intent of behaving poorly has to be higher than those without... Why else buy one?

I get what ur saying dusts but lots of vehicles on the roads can't even do over 100 and roads general go as fast as the slowest car..

I general don't give a **** how fast you go (within the boundaries of reason and safety) just be consistent lol. I can chill behind u doing 15 under no problem (I drive heavy vehicles most of the day) just aslong as I can set my cruise control or safely over take u and not worry about u speeding up mid manoeuvre lol

Select to expand quote

AUS1111 said..
^^ It's a populist thing. State governments like to be seen as "tough on crime" and "doing something" about the road "toll".

Bingo, let's crack some champagne!

Drugs, alcohol, youth, inexperience and fatigue are by far the biggest killers. Excessive speed just adds to the mix, but rarely causes an accident in the first place and very, very, very rarely on it's own when only minor speeding is a factor.

Again, this is not me advocating for breaking the speed limit or driving recklessly in built up areas, or using radar detectors - but it is just a simple observation.

Highway Patrol cars use LIDAR which is a laser aimed right at you and speed cameras take photos relative to activation on the road surface. That's why radar detectors are so cheap because they are useless. If you are driving so fast that you can't see a cop lurking ahead well that just proves you are driving too fast for your ability.

Select to expand quote

Brien said...
Highway Patrol cars use LIDAR which is a laser aimed right at you and speed cameras take photos relative to activation on the road surface. That's why radar detectors are so cheap because they are useless. If you are driving so fast that you can't see a cop lurking ahead well that just proves you are driving too fast for your ability.

Well said but let's just keep it on the down low so these 'well meaning and valued citizens' keep 'driving within their ability' and giving away their $$ to Chinese eBay sellers and the state government.

Select to expand quote

Brien said..
Highway Patrol cars use LIDAR which is a laser aimed right at you and speed cameras take photos relative to activation on the road surface. That's why radar detectors are so cheap because they are useless. If you are driving so fast that you can't see a cop lurking ahead well that just proves you are driving too fast for your ability.

I usually slow down little bit, but once I get over those lines on the road (you hear the tyres roll over them "bum-bum")get back to normal speed

Radar Detectors are legal in NZ, the tolerance level there is 4 kph, this has resulted in large convoys following motor homes etc as you can't pass safely unless you go over 4kph ,there is now a cop on every long stretch of road with a hair dryer revenue raising , the road toll is still rising , conclusion... the 4kph tolerance level is f....ed..! QueeNZlander

How about this for a suggestion.
Put a big sign up on the side of the road showing you your speed.
people can then know that there may or may not be a camera ahead and be given chance to adjust their speed to the 'correct' speed rrstriction. This board could be positioned at a point that only gives the minor offender the chance to adjust his speed to below the limit. The major offender (murderers escaping the police etc) dont have timr to slow enough and will be zapped.
That seems fairer...than clobbering dozies...

Speeding saves lifes:

Select to expand quote

Brien said..
If you are driving so fast that you can't see a cop lurking ahead well that just proves you are driving too fast for your ability.

No it doesn't. Sometimes this is true. Sometimes it isn't. An unmarked car stopped by the side of the road isn't a warning.

Select to expand quote

Ian K said..

A limit is a limit, you deserved it. You obviously haven't done the maths on the effect an extra 8 kph has on the final collision speed, after an equivalent time on the brakes, to someone obeying the law.

I got dinged for, I think it was only 4kph over the limit in Vic. I deserved it, deserved twice the fine in fact.

Do you drive a Camry Ian? I bet you drive a Camry.

He said he's an A-B driver in another forum. IMHO there is poetry and beauty in everything if you know how to look. Driving a fantastic car is poetry and beauty, just as sailing a sweet windsurfer.

well my trusty bell 990 international saved me three speed camera's hidden on straight sections of bussel highway and forest highway yesterday . Piggies can go get f$cked with their road safety campaign. Straight dual lane highway, blackspot my arse .

Select to expand quote

dusta said..
Straight dual lane highway, blackspot my arse .

Let's hope it stays that way...

Select to expand quote

Pugwash said..

dusta said..
Straight dual lane highway, blackspot my arse .

Let's hope it stays that way...

it will if they remove all smart cars doing 80 in a 110 zone .