I like the idea of testing a hypothesis based on research, however, since all public policy decisions are just hypotheses when do you see this ever happening in a way that does not result in a government being thrown out because they may have got it wrong?
That's a very good point. It's especially valid in our current environment of "knee-jerk" policy making (remember the few that used a green laser pointer...)
I think it would be realistic to introduce the change progressively.
For example.
Sa there is a well travelled piece of road, pretty straight, between two major points.
The government in power could introduce a new campain to improve driving skills.
TV ads with professional, responsible drivers like Polce and Ambos, Firemen etc showing that a particular driving program really enhanced their skills and makes them better drivers, especially since they now understand their limitations and dangers better etc..
The gov wishes to introduce a new driving class/rego system based on research from around the world (let the spin doctors do it, they can sell you anything...including increased taxes because the sky is falling...or is it the Ozone layer that has a hole in it ....no wait, its global warming or whatever...
from whatever Date the Government would sponsor X percentage of the cost of the driving course for X number of people in a particular region.
to enter you cant have been convicted of x, y or z offenses in te past (ie filter out the yahoos).
a bit of a TV campain to explain the new rules, drivers with class X will have priority usage of the lanes (indicated with signs say blue zone ahead or whatever.
You must not use this lane between whatever hours etc...
These drivers will have stringent tests done on the vehicles and be allowed to a max speed of 130 where it was previously 110.
That wont be much of a stretch, how many people have you ever seen do 110 in a 110 zone...
this new system will be reviewed in a few months etc etc...
demonstrate later the analysis of the benefits. Responsible people drive responsibly and dont cause crashes.
expand the program either in coverage (across more places) or in scope (different classes including a new one allowing up to 150 in designated places by people with other class (see my previous post re tier system idea)
I think like many things, when it comes to change management much of it is in the communication strategy utilized.
You could *park* a truck on the wrong side of the road with similar disastrous consequences.
Plus you seem to be in denial about German autobahn statistics...every bugger there is going quite fast, yet there is *an order of magnitude* difference *less* in the accident rate.
Hence my position, it's not how fast you drive, it's how you drive.
Sorry Peter, I'm going to jump on the band wagon.
Your points are not only irrelevant, they are non-sensical.
You are clearly binding your whole POV on German autobahn statistics. These statistics are irrelevant in an ultimate conclusion on the subject. You are correct, speed does not kill on an Autobahn. That however has nothing to do, with concluding that "speed" does not kill.
How does taking the example of high grade / quality roads, designed for high speed, with unique equipped preformance vehicle usage, equate itself in respect to our Australian situation? It does not and I really can not see for the life of me, where you are coming from.
We have low quality roads, intersections, people not use to such speeds, dodgy clapped out old cars which can barely make the current speed limits and pedestrian traffic. If you add speed, you do indeed dull reaction times. Any debating of that is just obsurd.
In a theoretical world or your Autobahn example, no speed does not kill.
I would like to hear though however, how you would relate that to the comment "Speed does not kill" in general. With or without "drongos" on the road, people make mistakes, hell even I make mistakes. Speed increases the likelihood of a crash, not only that, it exponentially increases damage. Reminds me of the old fall back that "Guns don't kill people, people kill people". If the gun / speed was never there, then there is a whole lot less chance of someone being killed in the first place.
Your comment about a pedestrian and a mack is just cannon fodder, it has no relevance either.
Last edited by Lumen Miner; 01-11-2009 at 10:08 PM.
We have low quality roads, intersections, people not use to such speeds, dodgy clapped out old cars which can barely make the current speed limits and pedestrian traffic. If you add speed, you do indeed dull reaction times. Any debating of that is just obsurd.
...........
I figured it wouldn't be long before these tired old arguments were wheeled out.
You have totally misinterpreted my position, and made statements that patently are false.
There are dual carriageway sections on the Hume & Pacific Hwys, Goldcoast freeway etc. that are truly world class with no intersections.
Doing 110km/hr on these excellent roads ignores the performance and secondary safety built into many modern vehicles. Journey times can be significantly reduced, less driver fatigue from chugging along with the gaggle, etc.
Suggesting, say a S-class Benz owner, must be slowed as there is a clapped out Morris also using the road I find absurd. (& oddly quite Australian)
Assuming everyone has clapped out cars is false (mine certainly are not! ) and of those that drive rubbish, far more rigorous registration laws would quickly fix that issue.
Pedestrians have no place on 110km/hr freeways.
Speed itself does not kill.....even at currently "acceptable" speeds, any number of human factors can lead to an impact which most likely could have been avoided if these factors alone were finally & seriously addressed in Oz rather than the "(only) speed kills" mantra.
"Cheap" often equates with "old". Meaning your inexperienced driver doesn't get all the advantages of ABS, multiple airbags, ANCAP **** safety, etc at the time when they most probably need them.
Interesting bare with me....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
Suggesting, say a S-class Benz owner, must be slowed as there is a clapped out Morris also using the road I find absurd. (& oddly quite Australian)
Assuming everyone has clapped out cars is false (mine certainly are not! )
Again that's great (I would if I could too btw Peter)
So you're in a life preserving cocoon, is everybody you love in these cars too?
Peter whilst the German system seems to work the Italian equivilant was not so successful (driver temperment?) having frequent huge pile ups.
Mark
Early last year, was enroute from Rome to Pompeii in a little but torque' diesel. I HAVE NEVER SEEN SUCH RISK IN MY LIFE and I do not drive slow. One of 50 shockers we saw in a half day drive - ok I was in the fast lane accidentally, the Italian police actually tapped our rear at 160km+ to say 'please speed up or move lanes'...I still laugh at the uniformed cop in the back with a ciggy and one leg fully out the back window.
The only positive I have to say on their roads was that truckies must use the slow lane 24/7.
So you're in a life preserving cocoon, is everybody you love in these cars too?
I insisted that both my kids have at least airbags and ABS in their (not expensive) cars. Good tyres/brakes/shocks mandatory. My car has all of the above then some, however secondary safety is just that. Secondary.
Appropriate speed, driving predictability, anticipation & situational awareness, driving well rested and un-drugged has kept this black duck free of collisions for 30+ years. And yes, I "speed" (at least by kindergarten Oz standards) in Germany.
Last edited by Peter Ward; 01-11-2009 at 11:29 PM.
Reason: clarification.
Here are the Northern Territory road death toll statistics, filtered on 130+unlimited speed limit (i.e the road/s in question) for the past years. Note how deaths have dropped markedly since the open speed limit was removed.
Basic Physics tells us:
- Impact Energy increases as a square of speed.
- Braking effort to stop also increases as near the square of speed.
- Reaction times become proportionally more critical as speed increases.
Here are the Northern Territory road death toll statistics, filtered on 130+unlimited speed limit (i.e the road/s in question) for the past years. Note how deaths have dropped markedly since the open speed limit was removed.
Basic Physics tells us:
- Impact Energy increases as a square of speed.
- Braking effort to stop also increases as near the square of speed.
- Reaction times become proportionally more critical as speed increases.
T.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
This needs addressing...and some pretty damming local statistics were in the Sydney Morning Herald recently.
"In the first two years of the 130km/h limit, the (Northern) territory's toll leapt alarmingly *above* the last of the open-slather years,
from 35 deaths in 2004,
55 in 2005 and 44 in 2006 to 57 in 2007
followed by a tragic jump last year to 75 fatalities – the worst for 21 years"
the Italian police actually tapped our rear at 160km+ to say 'please speed up or move lanes'...I still laugh at the uniformed cop in the back with a ciggy and one leg fully out the back window.
Anything to get the riff-raff off our main roads. I mean, what are B roads for, if not for B-grade drivers with their B-grade cars. And they breed like catholics. Seriously, am I the only one who wishes the government would declare an amnesty so that we can finally just shoot these people? Back in India, when the tigers thinned out, it was considered nothing to have a shot at a native or two. And running them down leaves such an icky mess. Besides which, you seldom get a specimen fit enough to mount in the trophy room.
Anything to get the riff-raff off our main roads. I mean, what are B roads for, if not for B-grade drivers with their B-grade cars. And they breed like catholics. Seriously, am I the only one who wishes the government would declare an amnesty so that we can finally just shoot these people? Back in India, when the tigers thinned out, it was considered nothing to have a shot at a native or two. And running them down leaves such an icky mess. Besides which, you seldom get a specimen fit enough to mount in the trophy room.
hope you're feeling alright down there.
Last edited by Astro78; 02-11-2009 at 09:31 AM.
Reason: Tosser aint worth it
There is not doubting vehicle energy and reaction times are more important when traveling at speed. But the assumption....... that you are bound to impact something simply because you are traveling at speed.....I believe we have got wrong.
Well regulated high speed environments (eg aviation) are remarkably safe.
Asking why might be a good start....
Yes, fine, just a bit cheesed that someone scratched the Hummer. Had to take the Silver Cloud out instead. (The runabout beemer's at the shop; too much blood in the air filter...) And Westerley's dropped dead, selfish blighter, so I've had to make do with Basil, who's not nearly as good a chauffeur, and objects mightily to Lady Markham's sexual advances.
I insisted that both my kids have at least airbags and ABS in their (not expensive) cars. Good tyres/brakes/shocks mandatory. My car has all of the above then some
Good for you and your children Peter - what about say the single mum who simply doesn't have that luxury?
totally missed the humour on previous post there Miaplacidus
- what about say the single mum who simply doesn't have that luxury?
Pulling my chain eh?
Let me put it this way..when I was at Uni (= very low income) I rode a motocycle. When I first got the bike, I needed a helmet. There were cheaper generic ones, and some rather nice...plus quite a bit more expensive... full face Shoei's.
The salesman said...What's your head worth?
A bought the Shoei. I'm sure single mum's can make their own choices.
(I would if I could too btw Peter) 
