"It's not the people who are under 0.5 causing the trouble."
I tried to do research on that once but the NSW RTA does not provide BAC readings for individual accidents. I am not sure who they are trying to protect. I think some drivers under 0.05 are more dangerous than a sober driver.
I did find that many of the fatal crashes blamed on speed actually involved vehicles that were not exceeding the speed limit. For example if a car crashes on a corner they blame speed even if it is not exceeding the speed limit. A lot of drivers do not know how to pick a safe speed for a corner, especially when it is wet.
If the speed limit was set at the 85% percentile most people (85% at least) would be happy to obey it. (see post #65 below)
[QUOTE=glenc;541621For example if a car crashes on a corner they blame speed even if it is not exceeding the speed limit. A lot of drivers do not know how to pick a safe speed for a corner, especially when it is wet.QUOTE]
This is EXACTLY what I was saying earlier. The driver training is appalling right across Australia. Raise the standard of the driver training & 40% of the road fatalities will disapear.
It is so obvious, the faster a collision occurs the worse the accident will be.
Wake up to yourselves, the public roads are not racetracks.
All sorts of people drive on our roads. There's the car nut who thinks his Brocky to the little old lady, all have different levels of skill.
We all need to drive on the same roads so we all need to cooperate. We must consider others. The public road system is for transport only. Yes we can enjoy a drive just for the sake of if, but there's no need to speed.
Driver's skill is very important, but even the best drive will make a mistake without the involvement of any other driver. He will make the mistake all on his own. Once the mistake has occurred the inevitable collision will happen. Better to be going slow when it does.
Sadly one of our best known and loved drivers died because he made a mistake at high speeds. A race is a race and the drivers all know the risks involved.
Yes I have got a couple of speeding fines for just being slightly over the limit. In all cases the speed cameras were correct. I was being careless in not keeping a close watch on my speed. I was fined and so I should have.
Yes I have got a couple of speeding fines for just being slightly over the limit. In all cases the speed cameras were correct. I was being careless in not keeping a close watch on my speed. I was fined and so I should have.
THE PUBLIC ROAD SYSTEM IS NOT A RACE TRACK
With this government forcing people to watch their speedo so they don't accidentally hit 3 km over the limit, they are creating danger as people are constantly taking their eyes of the road so they don't get slugged for doing half walking speed over on a bloody multi lane freeway.
What really infuriates me is how they have those signs "ROAD SAFETY CAMERAS OPERATE IN THIS AREA"....what a bunch of communist propaganda. Road safety yeah right....set a decent tolerance of say 10-20km/h then those big blue letters would be believable.
I've heard of people blowing these revenue cameras to smithereens with shotguns before..should I meet such an individual I'll be the first to shake his hand and buy him a slab.
It is so obvious, the faster a collision occurs the worse the accident will be.
Wake up to yourselves, the public roads are not racetracks.
All sorts of people drive on our roads. There's the car nut who thinks his Brocky to the little old lady, all have different levels of skill.
We all need to drive on the same roads so we all need to cooperate. We must consider others. The public road system is for transport only. Yes we can enjoy a drive just for the sake of if, but there's no need to speed.
Driver's skill is very important, but even the best drive will make a mistake without the involvement of any other driver. He will make the mistake all on his own. Once the mistake has occurred the inevitable collision will happen. Better to be going slow when it does.
Sadly one of our best known and loved drivers died because he made a mistake at high speeds. A race is a race and the drivers all know the risks involved.
Yes I have got a couple of speeding fines for just being slightly over the limit. In all cases the speed cameras were correct. I was being careless in not keeping a close watch on my speed. I was fined and so I should have.
THE PUBLIC ROAD SYSTEM IS NOT A RACE TRACK
Nor should it be a death trap!
I use both race tracks and public roads a lot. If more public roads were designed as race tracks are, then the road toll would be significantly lower still.
It beggars belief that really large coniferous trees line the Westagate freeway just West of the bridge. They have recently had motorcycle shredders (Wire barriers) installed, but only after a car load of youths ploughed into the trees at speed and incinerated themselves. Whilst the youths may have been exceeding the speed limit, and were certainly exceeding the driver's ability, should they have paid for this with the lives????????
This is one example of really poor road design on may way to and from work, there are many others.
Did it matter if the car had hit at 100kmh or 90 or 120kmh, probably not.
As you bring up Peter Brock, his car entered the corner at 110kmh, a road legal speed in many states. Something unexpected happened and Australia lost one of it's greatest drivers. Possum Bourne was killed in a head on smash do recon for a rally run, he was not speeding nor on the wrong side of the road as many people have said. These are two of the best drivers in the world who have died in motorsport, neither would have been booked for speeding at the point where the crashes occurred. SPEED IS NOT THE CAUSE of accidents.
I have had one of my closest friends killed on the road, he was over the BAC limit and paid for his mistake with his life. Recently, the brother of a friend of mine was killed in the Classic Adelaide rally. Both were killed because the car hit something large and solid that had no reason being on the side of the road unprotected (a bus stop in one case, and a large tree in the other).
To excuse bad driving based on the fact that some people have less skill than others is very dangerous. If i had my way everyone would have a MANDATORY road skills test every three years, if you fail, you're off the road.
Then again if I had my way there would be no automatic cars on the road either, so some may say that I'm a bit of a fanatic, but I don't care, if you can't manage the three pedal and steering bit at one time, you're dangerous. A licence to drive should be that, a licence, NOT an unwritten right.
I've heard of people blowing these revenue cameras to smithereens with shotguns before..should I meet such an individual I'll be the first to shake his hand and buy him a slab.
One of the local revenue raising cameras has been vandalised so many times the RTA have put in a CCTV video camera to "protect" it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by richardda1st
It is so obvious, the faster a collision occurs the worse the accident will be.
This is obviously the reason why the multi-lane divided road through the local industrial estate had the limit reduced from 60 to 50.
Reduce all the speed limits to zero. That will make both you and nut case Harold Scruby happy.
One of the local revenue raising cameras has been vandalised so many times the RTA have put in a CCTV video camera to "protect" it.
lol just walk up to the CCTV from behind with a black spray paint can (or bazooka), then proceed to make mince meat of the revenue camera
Quote:
This is obviously the reason why the multi-lane divided road through the local industrial estate had the limit reduced from 60 to 50.
Reduce all the speed limits to zero. That will make both you and nut case Harold Scruby happy.
THe speed limit on a divided road, with NO property access in my area has been reduced to 60 from 70 after much sooking from local prudes and other assorted neo-commies and imbeciles. Apparently, it'll make it "safer" for pedestrians - as one girl got killed on this road a few months ago. But no one has disclosed the actual reason for this death Could've been anything from the girl walking out onto the road into oncoming traffic, to a drugged driver. But you have to think....didn't the pedestrian see the oncoming car? Don't most people look before crossing? Surely if you see an oncoming car you don't cross....regardless how fast its going.
Furthermore...if you get hit at either 60 or 70, you're gonna die.
Seriously, why doesnt this pathetic governement / clowncils etc just crush every car in Australia into a cube and be done with it. Deaths are a fact of life, should be ban everything else that could result in death? If you think about it , pretty much every activity you participate in could kill you in some way...
.....I have got a couple of speeding fines for just being slightly over the limit. In all cases the speed cameras were correct. I was being careless in not keeping a close watch on my speed. I was fined and so I should have.
I'd rather you watched the road, traffic, pedestrians, animals & potential threats.
Putting these ahead of being "slightly over the limit" says to me you are challenged as a driver.
The force in a crash depends on the mass of the objects involved, the speed of the objects involved and the time it takes to stop.
If you hit a large tree the mass includes the earth the tree is growing in. The tree does has no crumple zones so the time it takes to stop is very small and the force is very big. Both mass and time are against you, especially if you hit the tree side on.
If you hit a large loaded truck mass and time are also against you because most trucks have bull bars not crumple zones and the trucks are heavy.
Also the trucks are often traveling faster than the cars.
At car races like Bathurst the cars have similar masses and are mostly traveling at similar speeds in the same direction, hopefully. There are also barriers on the edge of the road to increase crash times and reduce forces.
Large trees near the road are dangerous and bull bars are too because they don't "give", and they increase the force in a crash.
lol just walk up to the CCTV from behind with a black spray paint can (or bazooka), then proceed to make mince meat of the revenue camera
Apparently the best thing to do is wrap them in gladwrap. It's non-destructive and registers your protest. Of course I couldn't possibly recommend doing it.
A 40 tonne truck traveling at 100 kph produces the same force in a crash as a 2 tonne car traveling at 1,008 kph. (The formula for force is a half times mass times velocity squared divided by stopping distance.) I am assuming the stopping distance (amount of crumpling) for the truck is 0.1m and the stopping distance (amount of crumpling) for the car is 0.5m. Cars don't travel that fast of course.
I think we need more divided roads and more rail freight.
In many cases Speed is not the CAUSE of an accident. It just makes the accident worse as has been said.
In the heavy Construction industry (and I'm sure many others) we are trained to identify a safety issue at the source & REMOVE the hazzard, not just flop about with crap trying to make it look better.
Reducing speed limits to rediculous levels in areas that clearly should be running faster, is just flopping about with crap to appease the un-educated & trying to win votes. It has nothing to do with road safety.
EXPERIENCE and TRAINING are the major flaws in the current system. Spend more money on the training / licencing system you end up with a better prepared driver at the end. Then slowly comes the experience.
Half of the problem is young drivers being taught by their parents & piers. All those bad habits being passed on.
Yesterday I was travelling to my parents house north of Brisbane. There was a 'L' Plated car cruising along he highway at approx 90klm/hr in the right lane.
What has happened to the "Keep Left" rule??? This alone causes accidents, with people who want to travel at the SPEED LIMIT trying to get around the slow driver.
I believe the fully licenced driver in this car should have been booked for poor instruction or something.
I thought that slow cars in the right lane was normal in Qld.
Bryan I agree with you.
Yes Glen,
Unfortunatley it's become the norm here....
It truely amazes me. The other day I was coming up on a slow car in the right lane. To his credit, he moved over to the left to let me pass, but then he moved straight back into the right lane again after I'd gone by.
The amazing thing is, there was no traffic at all in either lane.
I could have easily just moved to the left & gone around him... Sooooo.
Why MUST this driver sit in the right lane rather than the left???
In this situation it was not a problem, but in traffic, it's a big problem.
A 40 tonne truck traveling at 100 kph produces the same force in a crash as a 2 tonne car traveling at 1,008 kph. (The formula for force is a half times mass times velocity squared divided by stopping distance.)
Err..your calculation is in error. Try 447km/hr for the car
Peter, I am assuming the stopping distance (amount of crumpling) for the truck is 0.1m and the stopping distance (amount of crumpling) for the car is 0.5m. The truck would probably crumple less than that and the car might crumple more. You didn't allow for this.
Kinetic energy is the same in both cases.
40 ton truck @ 100km/hr has 200,000 "units" (sorry couldn't be bothered converting to joules) of energy.
A 2 ton car needs a velocity equivalent to the square root of that....447km/hr. How much the car or truck crumples does not change the initial KE.
A race is a race and the drivers all know the risks involved. 
