70 & 90 zones may be a thing of the past says RTA

[Ben73]

So apparently there was a fatal crash recently on a road that has multiple speed limits near nelsons bay. I heard on the news this morning in response to this incident the RTA is thinking of getting rid of 70 & 90 limits.
How will this prevent crashes?

Alot of roads I drive on are 70 & 90 zones so I am not looking forward to driving everywhere at 10kmh slower.
Newcastle inner city bypass will be pathetically slow at 80 when it seams to be good for 120

Does anyone think the rta will follow through?

[DJM83]

After traveling the east coast from Brisbane to Albury numerous times (as recent as this week) i can say that is i had a dollar for every 70/90 speed zone change i could probably pay for my fuel down to Albury. The way i see it, eliminating certain speed limits may reduce the amount of speed changes.
Yeah id say the 70kmh zones will most likely go to 60 and 90kmh zones go to 80 i couldnt see them going up.

[aussie muscle]

it makes sense to have fewer zone changes. it adds an unnecessary complication, especially when you can change zones 3 or 4 times in a couple hundred meters.

[kaniSS]

Knowing the RTA 70 will become 60 and 90 will become 80.

[hamoudy10]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

it makes sense to have fewer zone changes. it adds an unnecessary complication, especially when you can change zones 3 or 4 times in a couple hundred meters.

Exactly, people are too busy concentrating on what speed they should be going than on driving!

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

it makes sense to have fewer zone changes. it adds an unnecessary complication, especially when you can change zones 3 or 4 times in a couple hundred meters.

I agree that a change every few hundred metres is stupid. But I can think of many 70 & 90 zones I use that go for few k's at a time. I don't see the need to change them all, just fix the areas that have too many limits.

New England Hwy from Hexham to Greenhills is 90kmh. It's a nice road with 2 lanes each way separated by a large medium strip. That road would be painful at 80kmh with little traffic around.
I think the RTA needs to review some roads with too many speed limits. It's just easier for them to do the knee jerk response and remove all 70 & 90 zones with no consideration for individual locations.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Ben73

So apparently there was a fatal crash recently on a road that has multiple speed limits near nelsons bay. I heard on the news this morning in response to this incident the RTA is thinking of getting rid of 70 & 90 limits.
How will this prevent crashes?

Alot of roads I drive on are 70 & 90 zones so I am not looking forward to driving everywhere at 10kmh slower.
Newcastle inner city bypass will be pathetically slow at 80 when it seams to be good for 120

Does anyone think the rta will follow through?

Yeah, the bypass can easily handle the extra speed. It is built much better than many other highways, but is lumbered with a 90kmh limit. Hopefully it will go to 100kmh.

Reducing the number of speed zone changes is a good thing in my book.

Considering the new government has essentially scrapped the RTA by merging it with other bodies and reduced it's powers, plus got rid of a large number of revenue raising or non-performing (road safety POV) we can only hope that not all 70kmh/90kmh zones go down to 60kmh/80kmh respectively.

They have increased parts of the Newell Hwy etc back UP from 90/100 to 110kmh. SO, it isn't without precedent to raise some limits.

Certainly, it seems some in the Nationals would like to see 130kmh limits where appropriate.

[FPVGT500]

I wont be happy until we get unrestricted..........

[2011G6E]

Yep, they'll drop to the next lowest 10kph marker, bet on it.

Originally Posted by FPVGT500

I wont be happy until we get unrestricted..........

Really? Sit in traffic on the highway...look at the cars around you and the "typical" driving habits they display. Would you really be happy letting half those numpties know that they can drive as fast as they like?

Hell, we all know people who we'd happily fall asleed in the passenger seat with when they're barrelling along a winding highway late at night...the same as we all know people we wouldn't drive around a parking lot with at 10kph...

The Northern Territory is a perfect example of this...they imposed a speed limit of 130kph, and in the next 12 months thier road toll went up by 50%! One suggestion as to why this happened was that previously with no restrictions, people would drive to a speed they were happy with...sometimes well over 130kph, but usually around the 100 to 120 region, and to suit the conditions. Now you suddenly "officially" say it's perfectly OK to do 130kph morning noon and night, rain hail or shine, so people feel "obliged" to "do the limit", a speed they might never have dared drive at before the new limit came in. You had people who were inexperienced with high speed long distance travel suddenly doing this, with obvious consequences.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

The Northern Territory is a perfect example of this...they imposed a speed limit of 130kph, and in the next 12 months thier road toll went up by 50%! One suggestion as to why this happened was that previously with no restrictions, people would drive to a speed they were happy with...sometimes well over 130kph, but usually around the 100 to 120 region, and to suit the conditions. Now you suddenly "officially" say it's perfectly OK to do 130kph morning noon and night, rain hail or shine, so people feel "obliged" to "do the limit", a speed they might never have dared drive at before the new limit came in. You had people who were inexperienced with high speed long distance travel suddenly doing this, with obvious consequences.

Drawing valid conclusions from highly variable NT road statistics? you are not the first to attempt this;
see http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...6&postcount=77

[prydey]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Drawing valid conclusions from highly variable NT road statistics? you are not the first to attempt this;
see http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...6&postcount=77

and luckily, you were there, waiting, ready to pounce.... aaaaaand... voila, here we are.

by not adhering to the magical number in the red circle, you aren't necessarily driving dangerously or unsafely, but simply disobediently. camera's are there to try to make you obedient.

i do agree that there are too many speed zones though. i can travel 60, 70, 80, 90 and 100 all on one road (obviously many km long) but its all these variations that catch out the motorist who is slightly inattentive for that split second they go past the sign hidden by the overgrown tree.

oh no, i'm building a strawman...

sorry, back on topic.

[SLO-04L]

if a section of rd has both 70 and 90 zones would it not make sense to just drop it to a flat 80 the whole stretch rather than swapping between 60 and 80 as opposed to 70 and 90???

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Drawing valid conclusions from highly variable NT road statistics? you are not the first to attempt this;
see http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...6&postcount=77

Seriously do you have anything better to do? I mean posting a link to one of your previous posts about some Govco rubbish.
This to me highlights that you are clearly not interested in this site and are just a troll here to create arguments, seriously live a little rather then trolling the internet looking for an argument.
As soon as someone posts anything against your someone elses info you get shirty.

[JC]

Should just make it all 100, and let natural selection run it's course. OK, too harsh? Seriously though, people need to drive to the conditions, not just the posted speed limit. For example, in a 60 zone in torrential rain with water flowing over the road, 40 may be too fast, but some still try to do 60.

[SteveJH]

Originally Posted by JC

Should just make it all 100, and let natural selection run it's course. OK, too harsh? Seriously though, people need to drive to the conditions, not just the posted speed limit. For example, in a 60 zone in torrential rain with water flowing over the road, 40 may be too fast, but some still try to do 60.

I was doing about 50km/h (might have even been going slower, was concentrating on seeing the road) down the pacific hwy at one stage on Sunday the 25th..

The weather was insane....

[2011G6E]

Try the 70-odd kilometers of Highway One from down near Cooroy to north of Gympie that is now 90kph, with a wide dividing line and absolutely no overtaking allowed, and signs everywhere saying "high crash zone"...it was at one stage...only because of idiots pulling out in front of highway traffic and overtaking in heavy rain.

I was coming back from Maleny and got stuck behind a long string of cars doing 70kph...I call it "road safety by lowest common denominator"...if the idiot up the front decides he wants to sit on 70, he forces everyone else behind him to do likewise...for about 40km in this case...

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

I was coming back from Maleny and got stuck behind a long string of cars doing 70kph...I call it "road safety by lowest common denominator"...if the idiot up the front decides he wants to sit on 70, he forces everyone else behind him to do likewise...for about 40km in this case...
image

If that was in Europe the first car driver would be checking his/her rear vision constantly to see if they are holding up anyone behind and would move as far as possible onto the sealed shoulder (now a European-style feature added to many Australian highways in recent years) so that following cars could overtake - even on a single lane road such as this. The overtaking cars will go slightly over the centre line but oncoming vehicles will see the situation and also move over onto the shoulder so that there is not a head-on collision.

Shift to Australia and the driver inattention to anything going on in the world beyond a ten centimetre radius from the centre of his skull (including using the rear view mirrors), together with the nanny-inculcated belief that the lines on the road (either side) must not be crossed under any circumstances and we get the above most-typical Australian country highway scene. Any changes to any speed limits are nullified by stupid driving in a large enough percentage of the population to make a difference.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by new2ford

If that was in Europe the first car driver would be checking his/her rear vision constantly to see if they are holding up anyone behind and would move as far as possible onto the sealed shoulder (now a European-style feature added to many Australian highways in recent years) so that following cars could overtake - even on a single lane road such as this. The overtaking cars will go slightly over the centre line but oncoming vehicles will see the situation and also move over onto the shoulder so that there is not a head-on collision.

Shift to Australia and the driver inattention to anything going on in the world beyond a ten centimetre radius from the centre of his skull (including using the rear view mirrors), together with the nanny-inculcated belief that the lines on the road (either side) must not be crossed under any circumstances and we get the above most-typical Australian country highway scene. Any changes to any speed limits are nullified by stupid driving in a large enough percentage of the population to make a difference.

The problem is no one uses thier horn over here, beep your horn until they move over or speed up. My wife who is European leans over and beeps the horn for me sometimes ha!

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by prydey

did you get to see what sort of car sudszy was driving??

also, the dash on your g6e looks a bit dated. must be the pov pack

Nah, it's the "Back to 1982" pack...it's tucked away on the Ford Australia website where you can "build your own" Falcon...but it takes a bit of finding...only the truly dedicated can find and tick that option box...

[AWD Chaser]

Originally Posted by prydey

also, the dash on your g6e looks a bit dated. must be the pov pack

Or the first FG2 spy shot

[ltd]

Can't see it. The Road Tax Authority will simpy make 70 60km/h, and 90 80km/h, then put up cameras to watch the behaviour of those who detest having one by one our freedoms restricted.
Welcome to George Orwells 1984, Govco is here to help just ask them.

[Sizey]

Originally Posted by ltd

Can't see it. The Road Tax Authority will simpy make 70 60km/h, and 90 80km/h, then put up cameras to watch the behaviour of those who detest having one by one our freedoms restricted.
Welcome to George Orwells 1984, Govco is here to help just ask them.

I am in SA and if there are that many changes between 70 and 90 and the RTA changes to 60 and 80 would there then not be just as many speed limit changes?

Just at ten km's slower. More $$$$$$$$$ I say. IMO make it blanket 80 for that particular road in question. We used to have similar things here in SA. All of the roads with just a 70 zone became 60 the whole way through. A 90 sign is a rarety over here and even 80 zones are getting phased out.

I say that give it 10 years, 100 will be the fastest allowable in Australia, 80 zones won't exist, main roads will begin to become 50, side streets will be 40 and All CBD's will be 40 with restricted access!

I would like to know though (For all of you in the eastern states) what the limits are on toll roads. If the road is privately owned must they still abide by government set limits or do the private companies make a fair and equitable limit? Is the government allowed to patrol these roads or is it up to the private company to hand out speeding fines? (as you can see by my questions SA doesn't have any)

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by Sizey

I would like to know though (For all of you in the eastern states) what the limits are on toll roads. If the road is privately owned must they still abide by government set limits or do the private companies make a fair and equitable limit? Is the government allowed to patrol these roads or is it up to the private company to hand out speeding fines? (as you can see by my questions SA doesn't have any)

They are covered and policed under state road law.

I think the issue that keeps popping up here is some that are against increasing speed limits think those that are for it are suggesting we increase them everywhere without other changes made.

Having been around here for about 7 years now I have seen this topic a million times, often active in it myself because road safety is something I both care about and have to deal with on a daily basis as part of my job.

My belief is those that are for an increase in speed limit do not think it should just be widely applied without other factors managed. Yes there are some country roads that could not allow a limit of 130, many of them you are brave to do the 100 limit. For those that are correctly designed that could take 130, why not. Cars today, even down to the little budget buzz boxes are safely capable of that speed. Driver training, well that is not an incurable problem. Road structure, improve it, perhaps a good place to spend some of that speed camera revenue.

I feel that I am in a good position with a good experience base to have an opinion on this. Not only do I clean up the result of road trauma, I also regularly exceed the posted speed limit in vehicles that are theoretically less capable than the average sedan (legally and within reason to a prescribed level). I have also driven across Australia a number of times and have done 1500km trips more times than I can count. One thing I can say, the difference in fatigue between driving in a state that has a lot of 80-100 zones (QLD/NT border to Brisbane) is a lot more tiring than driving in a state that has mainly 110 zones (Karratha to the WA/NT border). Driving in the NT without speed limits, well that was a piece of cake compared to both of them.

By the way, yes the time saved might be negated by an extra fuel stop or two, but that time refueling is time you are not driving and hence actually reducing fatigue as well. Think of it as forced fatigue breaks.

Think of it this way, 1000 km @ 80 km/h (I have done this in a Army Unimog) = 12.5 hrs of driving not including time for breaks. As I have said, I have done it and the fatigue was over the top. The same distance at 100 km/h = 10 hrs + time for breaks, considerably better but remember the human nature is they want to get there, the longer the travel time the more they will push the legs out and the less rest breaks taken. Now do that 1000 km at 130 km/h and it now takes 7.7 hrs plus breaks, the advantage here is the lesser travel times allows for longer breaks.

So lets play with some figures on my example of the 1000 km trip, a good distance as it is approximately Melbourne to Sydney or Sydney to Brisbane. Lets for the sake of the game assume all roads are more than adequate for either a posted speed of 100 or 130 as applicable. Lets also use the recommended break every 2 hours of travel time, each break of 15 mins.

With a posted speed limit of 100 km/h, that is 10 hrs of travel time + 4 15 min rest stops, so 11 hrs of travel. Most people don't even work a 11 hr day, not something the average person is used to.

Now do the same trip with a posted limit of 130 km/h, that is 7.7 hrs of driving and 3 15 min rest breaks, totaling about 8.5 hrs. That is a pretty normal working day for most and something that is both more familiar and more manageable. Personally I think blind Freddy could see that the increased speed of travel even using the same break schedule reduces the potential for fatigue.

Now before some here say "but do we really want people that exceed the speed limit at 100 now doing that at 130"? The answer is no we don't. How is this for an idea? In the road upgrade put in speed cameras, point to point cameras and increase the number of police units that operate in the area. Also make it a legal obligation to conduct the appropriate rest stops, you have the point to point cameras to enforce it. Then double the fine and demerit points for any speed violation in a 130 zone, hit the bad people harder. That way we can all spend less time traveling, get there less tired and have safer roads in the process.

Now I am going to cut my way out of my happy fairytail bubble and come back to the reality so happily pushed by the state governments of Australia and their fan club.

[Angeldust]

whatever happened to drive at your own risk?

[prydey]

when it happens, if you drive at the old limit instead, all the experts will tell you that you are 4 times more likely to crash, even though the week before, it was perfectly legal to do that speed.

[xisled]

I do not think the RTA will change what is in place. They want everyone to go slow.

on a side note.
There is a road near my house. It is one of the main roads out of my suburb. For aws long as I have lived in the area, around 27 years it has been 80, then when approching the roundabout it drops to 60ks. Now just recently in teh last 6 months, all of a sudden they dropped the speed limit to 70ks. This has changed the way traffic flows. Instead of a decent flow it is now traffic jam. Plus over all my life I have seen 2 major accidents on this road.

[Brazen]

I dont see the problem with 70 and 90 if its appropriate, I would rather that than 60 and 80.

I think the limits should be 50, 70, 90, 110 and 130

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Brazen

I dont see the problem with 70 and 90 if its appropriate, I would rather that than 60 and 80.

I think the limits should be 50, 70, 90, 110 and 130

They are the limits I would prefer too!

[mik]

myself, i`d rather the powers that be lose the multiple speed limits on some roads, even if it means in some cases a slight drop in speed, it`s a much nicer drive if the traffic is`nt slowing down and speeding up for the whole trip and it`s flowing nicely .

[XRGhia]

It'll be a variable kind of setup to get rid of these multiple speed zones within a few km of each change...

Not all 90/70kmh zones will go, some will stay if the local council wishes to keep that speed zone, BUT the RTA will not allow for more than 2 speed changes (unless roadworks) within 5km's of each other... Any application by local councils will be seen by the RTA, but then it's just up to the RTA to approve/deny the applications for the speed limit to be kept in that area....