Speed Kills - Rubbish - from Motor....

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by AnthonyQLD

Thats right in the NT on the unlimited speed roads you can see for Km's and Km's down the road. and for most of it you can see a fair way either side of the road. So it is not very often that you would get surprised by anything.

Same goes between Deniliquin and Jeriliderie, yet the speed limit is still 100km/h.

Is it really speeding (and therefore dangerous) if the designated speed limit is unrealistcally low?

Some country roads in my region have had the speed limit dropped by 40km/h. The roads are rather remote and they would be lucky to have 10 cars per hour. The speed limit is that unrealistic that even with such little traffic it is still offers rich pickings for the police that have to drive almost an hour to get there.

[Sourbastard]

Originally Posted by DOC

I also believe some speed limits are way out whack with all this poly talk and guy guy stuff, we used to be able to and still can run at 110kph up to the vic border on crappy roads ( parts fixed now ) then hit Vic but down to 100kph on great roads ?

On a side issue, especially in SA, ive seen a pattern in regards to our own speed limits changing now on a regular basis. I think alot of it stems firstly from the 50kph limit set in back streets, which enabled the government to pat itself on the back and say accidents in back streets are down something like 50%.

Well done(I note they never mentioned if accidents were up on or down on main roads since the policy change), but what I feel has happened, is that drivers are no longer taking short cuts or alternative routes through back streets because of the lower limit. They are sticking to arterial roads. This has lead to greater congestion and road use on those arterial roads, which are starting to decay at an extremely fast rate. To the point now that they are lowering speed limits because the roads can no longer safely be driven at higher speeds due to decay.

Transport SA and Local Councill have their heads stuck firmly in their buttocks.

[TheSneakiness]

Originally Posted by Steffo

I guess its been said a million times over, but I'll say it again... something needs to be done... proper defensive driver training would be an excellent start. And on huge roads that are straight for a long amount of time, nice and smooth... a bit more then 110km/h wouldn't hurt...

Just with this last bit, where you dabble about 110km/h speed increase, I can't agree more.

There have been countless times I've driven to Brisbane, just after the Ettamogah Pub, where I wish the limit was around 120-130km/h.

All you see is kilometres and kilometres of trees. That's it. The only time it's starts to get "exciting" is when just after Caboolture, where the limit drops to 100km/h and everyone slams on their brakes...

When I get lectured by my parents that I shouldn't be speeding, even when my uncle was here last, it's goes in one ear, out the other. Why?

I know the roads I drive on constantly, I know where the s**t parts of the road are, and I slow accordlingly. I know the limits of my ute. That's what people don't understand. They seem to think that the black, white and red signs with numbers on them dictate how fast you HAVE to go.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by AUII_SE_Ute

Just with this last bit, where you dabble about 110km/h speed increase, I can't agree more.

There have been countless times I've driven to Brisbane, just after the Ettamogah Pub, where I wish the limit was around 120-130km/h.

All you see is kilometres and kilometres of trees. That's it. The only time it's starts to get "exciting" is when just after Caboolture, where the limit drops to 100km/h and everyone slams on their brakes...

When I get lectured by my parents that I shouldn't be speeding, even when my uncle was here last, it's goes in one ear, out the other. Why?

I know the roads I drive on constantly, I know where the s**t parts of the road are, and I slow accordlingly. I know the limits of my ute. That's what people don't understand. They seem to think that the black, white and red signs with numbers on them dictate how fast you HAVE to go.

just on a side note there if i was driving behind the girl on the motorbike in your AVATAR . I'd be in a trans. AND GOD HELP WHAT WENT ON AROUND ME . :the_finge

[rodderz]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

just on a side note there if i was driving behind the girl on the motorbike in your AVATAR . I'd be in a trans. AND GOD HELP WHAT WENT ON AROUND ME . :the_finge

The said girl in the avatar is Michelle Leslie isnt it? Before Bali of course!

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by rodderz

The said girl in the avatar is Michelle Leslie isnt it? Before Bali of course!

I doubt it , a muslim would never pose like that.

[Blue Oval Mopar Man]

Originally Posted by '67

I was taught that speed doesn't kill, Deceleration does....

A good mate of mine used to be a WA Highway patrol offices and he NEVER used the term speed , to describle the cause of death! He always called it "Deceleration Syndrome " . Although he attended many crashes , the result of many causes , he beleived that most of them were due to inexperience. Of course sometimes the drivers inexperience involved them not concentrating on what they were doing at the time , and it cost them their life ! Even I know some or most of these crashes could be avoided with Better driver training !

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

drivers will always make cars hit trees and telagraph poles the speed at which they hit them at determines wether they live or die

True....

You hit a substantial tree at 100 km/h, you will die

You hit a substantial tree at 120 km/h, you will die

:

[rodderz]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

I doubt it , a muslim would never pose like that.

hence the before bali part

Those pics plus more revealing ones did the rounds a while back

[GTENVY]

Yank is mass x jerk[/QUOTE]

As long as there isnt a mass yanking or jerking contest on![/QUOTE]

[Woz]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

well i'm afraid speed does kill . the laws of physics agrees with me. id rather hit a tree at 20kms an hour than 100kms hour.

Did you even read what was written?

Whether you hit a tree at 20kms or 100kms is entirely because you, as the driver of the vehicle, have hit a tree. The danger is therefore in hitting the tree, not the speed you were driving at.

It's basically a case of "It's not the speed that kills, it's the sudden stop at the end".

[chief]

I am on the side that "Speed does not kill its the sudden stop that does" camp. If you are involved in an incident at moderate to low speeds you can walk away (Not everytime but generally you can) and have a smashed or written off car . You can have a high speed crash and walk away with some broken bones and be alright (considering). Not every high speed crash ends in a fatality mainly just a written off car. All that matters at the end of the day is that everyone is ok. I am sure I and most of ou would still get p!ssed off though.

To get your L's is an absolute joke you get asked 40 questions, get 38 of them right and you passed. My sister who was 11 at the time could of got it. You dont need any car experience at all to legally drive on our roads, regardless if you have a fully licenced driver there. They can control the car, only the driver can. One question I will never forget from the test is:
Q: You see train tracks ahead what do you do?
a) Continue driving with out looking and cross.
b) Stop on the tracks and then look.
c) Stop before the tracks look to see oncoming trains and then cross when it is safe o do so.
d) Find another route to get to your destination.

A blind monkey on cocaine could answer that question. How can you justify getting that question right then giving them a licence. Or even worse they get that wrong and still get their licence.

[Uncle_Ken]

I recall a statment (from last century) that it was safer to be in Vietnam on active service than be a young driver on Aussie roads.
All I know is when my son goes out (20 yr old) I ask him, is he drinking or driving? If he's the driver tell him don't speed, if he's drinking, don't drive, stay where you are and have fun.
old man Uncle Ken

[billyb35]

Driver training in Australia, especially Qld, is an absolute joke. More time needs to be spent here.

Speeding (AKA Driving faster than the posted speed limit) in an inappropriate situation (in traffic, around sharp bends, when it's raining) is a sure fire way to endanger yourself and others. I think everyone agrees on that.

On a four lane highway to the Gold Coast on a sunny day, with little traffic, doing 130km/h in a 100 zone is going to make a bee's dick of difference to my chances of dying that day especially while driving a BA Falcon.

The most speed cameras you will ever see: driving to the coast on a sunny day, with little traffic.

Speed cameras would be exponentially more effective in places where people are more conducive to drive over the speed limit at an inappropriate time.

The best example I can give is the former coast road from Brisbane to Ballina and beyond. Through the hills at Murwullimbah, it is a mountain road that you could get over confident on early and then get into serious trouble as the corners get sharper. On that spot they have fixed speed cameras. You know not to speed through there because you will get caught. Coincidentally, in most cases, people have been forced to slow down in a dangerous situation.

Has anyone notcied that highway speed limits haven't changed since, well forever, yet the cars we drive are capable of driving at that speed 100% more safely?

[Walkinshaw]

We'd better slow all aircraft to 100kmh cause they go way too fast. Sorry Perth to Sydney is now a 2.5day flight.

People who subscibe to the "speed kills" theory quite frankly should have their licence taken away due to their inability to use their brain.

[MO]

Mack 6...the speed limit from Erldunda to Ayers Rock is 110kph..this was introduced because too many back packers...not to mention three well known Alice Springs families losing their kids on a new years eve....were killing themselves.

gtfpv...grow up and get a life when it comes to this debate you know not of which you speak.

SPEED DOES NOT KILL....inapropiate speed for conditions does....lack of attention/concentration does...lack of proper driver education and training does...the list is endless...oh just to add one more mechancal failure ...I have had a throttle stick open in a Jensen Interceptor which took us upto 130mph before I could drag it back using the brakes and g/box the disc almost melted.

[tbearz]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

well i'm afraid speed does kill . the laws of physics agrees with me. id rather hit a tree at 20kms an hour than 100kms hour.

speed DOES NOT KILL

its the sudden decelleration DUH didnt school teach you anything? :

[gtfpv]

ok ok ok speed does not kill as everyone here keeps contradicting me . its the wall or tree or or car or bus that you hit when you lose control, and the speed you impact at determines nothing of your mortatlity wether it be 5kms an hour or 220 kms an hour .and the chances of me losing control is irrelavent of what speed i was going be it 5kms an hour or 250kms an hr . ok EVERYONE FFFFFF****CKEN HAPPY NOW .

[chrisl]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

ok ok ok speed does not kill as everyone here keeps contradicting me . its the wall or tree or or car or bus that you hit when you lose control, and the speed you impact at determines nothing of your mortatlity wether it be 5kms an hour or 220 kms an hour .and the chances of me losing control is irrelavent of what speed i was going be it 5kms an hour or 250kms an hr . ok EVERYONE FFFFFF****CKEN HAPPY NOW .

It is this attitude that leads to the total failure in our laws to reduce our road toll. Our authorities come up with stupid imaginary situations and then pretend that they apply to the real world. Who on earth would be driving at 5kmh? It’s a nonsense!

Furthermore, physics might say that the faster you go, the harder you hit, but the real world says that if you hit a tree at 50kmh you are just as dead as if you hit a tree at 120kmh (road cars are not designed to save your life above 35kmh). So, on a trip from Melbourne to Sydney, why on earth would you add an extra hour to your trip by slowing down by 10%. All you have managed to do is add an hour at the most dangerous part of your trip… when you are most fatigued. Fatigue IS the BIGGEST killer of all in the country.

And finally, the laws of physics that you have described take NO account at all of the PROBABILITY of hitting something. There are two ways to avoid getting injured in a collision. One way is to minimize the damage during a collision, and the other is to avoid the collision altogether. If you slow down too much, then you increase boredom, you decrease attention levels, you increase stress, you increase fatigue and you increase the number of moving objects to hit (other slow traveling cars). All of which INCREASE the PROBABILITY of actually hitting something.

So instead of saying that “I would rather hit a tree at 80kmh than 100kmh”, you should be saying that “I would rather hit nothing at 100kmh than hit something at 80kmh”.

And before anyone comes up with another nonsense comment about traveling at 300kmh to your corner store, the point I am making here is to get off the propaganda horse that the slower you go the safer you are, and stop creating a generation of people that think they are invincible as long as they are traveling on or below the number on the sign. Instead, pressure your government representative to commission a study that will determine once and for all what speeds are most appropriate.

[divine_afg]

well imo also speed is difinetly not the main factor .......... it is driver training and better awareness of the conditions that your travelling in. i would also like mention that when i drive slower i do feel bored and tend to lose consentration at times. i have test my self driving in many conditions . one is that when i follow the person in front of me usually "safe speeding" driving below posted limit, i feel fatigue where as if im driving at the posted limit or "speeding" where i think its safe to do so usually freeways im more alert so therefore as mention in a previous post hi speed travelling is no the factor. goverment needs to see ways of improving current road conditions cause some of road are absolutly pathetic , just on this point if you travelling on bad condition road then IMO it will play a major role in that ACCIDENT aswell. i havent had any advance driving course as yet but its difinetly of high priority !!! im p plater in looking back at the first day i start driving and camparing it today i say with confidence that its driving skill and practice you need to survive not wiping off 5 !!!

serious road system failure experience i had was when i first got my licence ...
i was called in a meeting room where i was introduced to the person testing my driving skills . well i was showed couple of diagrams and so den taken out to the real world. the instructor asked me have you had driving lessons .... me NO!!! i havent had any just drive in my parents car
instructor ... ok put on your seat belt lets go
well went for a drive with him stuck to limit and all....
turn in to a street instructor make a three point turn....... me..... THREE POINT TURN wats that " explained done successfully" we headed back feedback was well your good driver with lots of confidence your are alert so therefore i pass you !!! yes i got my licecnce................. now im not saying anything about the instructor was nice and helpfull good man nor would i say he was bad ......... the point is..... we should have stricter laws more driver training ................ its not 100% to say SPEED DOES NOT KILL BUT CERTAINLY LACK OF DRIVING SKILLS DOES............... !!!
divine_afg

[KEV EB XR8]

To be a butcher a baker a candlestick maker............4 years apprenticeship

vehicle with 12 or more pasengers..........................$700 1day course

forklift- articulated vehicle....................................$220 12month log book

class b truck............................$700 12 months in fixed single axle truck

Dont quote me on the monetry values state to state but dosent this short scenario paint picture.

When i went to get my licence, 16&9 months old- eye test-short test for L's
30min driver test for p's- 1 year thats it ---?

Hasnt changed too much since the 70's to present day ?

[LTDHO]

Originally Posted by chrisl

It is this attitude that leads to the total failure in our laws to reduce our road toll. Our authorities come up with stupid imaginary situations and then pretend that they apply to the real world. Who on earth would be driving at 5kmh? It’s a nonsense!

Furthermore, physics might say that the faster you go, the harder you hit, but the real world says that if you hit a tree at 50kmh you are just as dead as if you hit a tree at 120kmh (road cars are not designed to save your life above 35kmh). So, on a trip from Melbourne to Sydney, why on earth would you add an extra hour to your trip by slowing down by 10%. All you have managed to do is add an hour at the most dangerous part of your trip… when you are most fatigued. Fatigue IS the BIGGEST killer of all in the country.

And finally, the laws of physics that you have described take NO account at all of the PROBABILITY of hitting something. There are two ways to avoid getting injured in a collision. One way is to minimize the damage during a collision, and the other is to avoid the collision altogether. If you slow down too much, then you increase boredom, you decrease attention levels, you increase stress, you increase fatigue and you increase the number of moving objects to hit (other slow traveling cars). All of which INCREASE the PROBABILITY of actually hitting something.

So instead of saying that “I would rather hit a tree at 80kmh than 100kmh”, you should be saying that “I would rather hit nothing at 100kmh than hit something at 80kmh”.

And before anyone comes up with another nonsense comment about traveling at 300kmh to your corner store, the point I am making here is to get off the propaganda horse that the slower you go the safer you are, and stop creating a generation of people that think they are invincible as long as they are traveling on or below the number on the sign. Instead, pressure your government representative to commission a study that will determine once and for all what speeds are most appropriate.

Chris, you make the most sence!

[xbgs351]

Originally Posted by chrisl

, the point I am making here is to get off the propaganda horse that the slower you go the safer you are, and stop creating a generation of people that think they are invincible as long as they are traveling on or below the number on the sign. Instead, pressure your government representative to commission a study that will determine once and for all what speeds are most appropriate.

What I really don't like about the Speed Kills agenda being pushed by governments and road authorities is the mindset that it is creating. It seems to be taking away peoples abilities to drive to their abilities and the prevailing conditions. People seem to think that they are safe if they are sitting at or below the speed limit. Look at the Geelong Rd for instance. The majority of drivers are sitting very close to the speed limit, but they are also tailgating. Their behaviour doesn't even change when it's wet. The lastest trend that I have noticed is reduced speed limits for windy roads. This further enforces the "I'm not speeding so I'm safe attitude". The problem with this is when a driver comes up to a corner that isn't safe at the speed limit. Drivers are that used to the road authorities making their decisions for them that when they have to make a decision for themselves they are likely to get themselves into trouble.

[mickey t]

Originally Posted by xbgs351

Mickey T seems to have forgotton that other factors also cause accidents. Examples include mechanical failure, wildlife and other road users.

I am aware of somebody who died when there auto failed at 100mph. The police put the cause of the accident down as speed.

Hi guys, glad you're all interested.

nope, haven't forgotten any of those things. Statistically, mechanical failure is a very, very rare cause of crashes (i refuse to use the term accident. car crashes are the end result of a series of mistakes, and are, as such, not accidents). perhaps some of this comes back to there being less effort put into crash analysis than i think there should be.

Wildlife? that comes back down to car control and your training. If you look where the animal isn't, you have a far greater ability to miss it. if you sit in the car where you can maintain the ability to steer the car without using the wheel as a bracing device, you have a far greater ability to miss it. I grew up in roo-laden countryside and have never hit one. ever. at all hours, at all speeds. I'm not putting myself up as a paragon of driving, but i treat it as a craft and try to learn something every time i drive. a lot of other drivers who treat driving as a craft are in the same boat.

The speed at which you travel means absolutely nothing until you make a mistake. A lot of people make mistakes because either a) they're tired, b) they're drunk/drugged, c) they just do because they're human or d) they were never taught the right way to do it in the first place.

eg, both Volvo and Mercedes-Benz have their own crash investigation units - have had since the 60s, and they go to as many injury and fatal crashes as they can. one curious thing Benz found in the 1990s (and, when they consulted Volvo, they found agreement) was that nearly 80 percent of the crashes officially attributed to speeding occured on the INSIDE of a corner.

if this truly was speed as a causal factor, surely the car would impact the scenery on the outside? the joint investigations then found the crashes caused by something as simple as not sitting correctly in the car. the drivers made small mistakes (didn't read water or ice on the road, didn't wash off sufficient speed for a corner), then panicked when the car moved and gripped the wheel hard to brace themselves, pulling their shoulders off the seat and having zero ability to steer the car. they over-correct and go inside.

This is not a speed crash. this is a driver knowledge crash. speed is a contributor, yes, but not a cause. the cause is the driver's mistake(s).

the other point i've raised elsewhere is this:

And as for young drivers; what peanut decided it would be a beaut idea to have them discovering the joys of driving a car at precisely the same time in their lives as they're discovering the joys of a) their first incomes, b) their first time living away from home, c) their hormone-rich years, c) women and the emotional highs and lows that accompany them and, c) legal consumption of grog, and the matey booze culture that accompanies it?


was there not sufficient imagination at legislative level to foresee that grouping all of this in a critical one to three year period in young bloke's life might be akin to a perfect storm that many of them would be unable to negotiate safely?


would it not be smarter to teach them to drive at, say 15 to 16 before the alcohol legally turns up, and at a time when it could be accommodated into a school program?

...and another thing. similar reductions in the road toll have been met elsewhere in the world without this ridiculous speed-only emphasis, which has only survived this long because of the compliant nature of our people.

why are power poles and trees still sited on the exits of corners? if they need to be there, armco them. if not, get rid of them. most drivers, in the event of having made a series of mistakes which have put them in a hazardous situation, actually look around for something to focus on. this is the real reason drivers fishtail up the road with over-correction. they're literally (and unconsciously) looking left and right for something to hit.

it's called target fixation. if there's a visually handy power pole, guess what gets hit? and it's always either the middle of the bonnet or on the driver's door. why? they've looked at it. look at it, and you will hit it.

Sweden, in particular, has made enormous strides in cleaning up its roadside furniture. we've done nothing but take the cheap option of blaming the motorist for it all.

Technically, a head-on into an immovable object at 60km/h is an unsurvivable impact. In anything, so don't kid yourself (and that comes from the safety engineers of the world's most safety-conscious carmakers).

the issue to look at is the one that's hidden behind a deaths-per-thousand curtain. yes, deaths are falling, but serious injuries are on the rise.

why? because cars are allowing people to survive the same crashes they used to die in, but at a price, obviously.

this will be the trend in the future as cars get safer. more people will survive crashes because cars are built more safely. And, snuck in behind the fatality figures is the number the gummint doesn't want you to see - the crash rate is on the rise! significantly!

it's only because cars are a lot safer that there aren't more fatalities, but you won't hear a government, state or federal, giving any credit there.

the sooner all cars are fitted with ESP (skid control) the sooner the road toll will really begin to drop. But people need to be trained in how it works. there is precedent, because ABS is statistically ineffective, because nobody knows what it does - nobody's shown them, and if they're looking in the wrong place mid-drama, they're still going to hit the hazard.

just my two cents.

[Abacus]

Anyway, its not speed that kills....its the sudden stop!!

[aimzes]

just my two cents.

looks more like a buck o fives worth there mate...

[oneredED]

Quite a number of people have posted about the poor licensing system that pretty much all states have in place at the present, and I agree entirely. I remember (hey, it's only a couple of years ago) when i was 17, and a number of my friends were getting cars, and had just got their licences, and they ALL scared me witless.

Now, there is some background to this sorry, it's boring, but I have time :P so bear with me here, there is a point. Anyways:
I learnt to drive at an extremely young age (country boy), the first solo time being when I was 4 years old (ignition key was accelerator + brake while i stood on the seat). Now, once I reached 10 years old, I started driving every day until I actually got my drivers licence. The importance of car control, and being aware of surroundings was shown to me to be extremely important. Which brings me to my point, well almost.

When i was around 15, I used to take friends with me out in the paddocks to drive with me. The majority had never driven before, or were on their L plates. The massive lack of any driving ability of these people, I did not mind at all in fact it was funny, however when these people then went on a short time later to get there P's with little more than a few hours on the roads, I was literally terrified. I would not drive in a paddock with them at 80km/h because they couldnt drive in a straight line or avoid trees, and yet they were legally allowed to do 110 with other people around? A good example is roads posted at 100, with corners not possible at that speed. I frequently witnessed friends assume that they would make it around a given corner at 100, simply because there was nothing to tell them to slow down (they always realised their incorrect assumtion just before disaster, luckily).

Compulsory driver training please? I do believe that all most people need is to learn some basic car control that may just help them if they ever do come to a sticky situation, or at least help them avoid such a situation.

[mr_efxr]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

well i'm afraid speed does kill . the laws of physics agrees with me. id rather hit a tree at 20kms an hour than 100kms hour.

What are you doing aiming for a tree at any x amount of speed anyways?

SPEED CAMERAS = REVENUE RAISING A###HOLES!! Plain and simple.

[mr_efxr]

Agreed with oneredED.
It's not the speed that kills, it's the unexpereienced driver behind the wheel and/or unsafe vehicle.
Getting a licence in Victoria can be viewed as finding it in a Kelloggs box.
As part of attaining your P's there should be a compulsory adnvanced/ skilled driving course introduced which you must pass along with the theory/ solo drive and simulation questions.

Anyone can memorise theory, it's putting it into practice on the road that counts. Your not gonna get time to read through the guidelines when a situation arises.

[jabba]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

well I'm afraid speed does kill . the laws of physics agrees with me. id rather hit a tree at 20kms an hour than 100kms hour.

Firstly, I didn't think you were stupid enough to drive your car into a tree. secondly, show me in the physics how speed kills, (and I am not talking about the powdered form either..). People kill people due to there inadequate knowledge and driving skill's.... and the first rule of thumb is, You don't drive above your's and your vehical's capability's and always drive to suit the condititions.