Open Speed Limit Highway in NT???

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

Now do a search about rescue and medical infrastructure in place along the autobahn and let us know what you find.

Speed managers inside our academic teaching uni's and road agencies use an item called 'The Hall Matrix', its one of the tools used to determine speed-limits, or derestriction.

Bear in mind that derestriction, in the new format proposed should be safer than 130km/h,- which is simply giving folk something to 'drive at'; often come what may - owing complacency over time. All is not as it would first seem in expected fundamentals. (//) should mean fewer crashes, but you might expect BIG ones on occasion, but the number of serious crashes should be LESS than under a speed-limit, regardless of it being in the 100-130km/h range.

(//) SEPARATES traffic, when you leave Germany and enter the hell hole we call Belgium with its 120km/h freeways, one thing is noticeable; "platoons" of vehicles form, just like in Australia. In driving, DIVORCE is good and is represented by (//), MARRIAGE = TAILGATING/SITTING TOO CLOSEand is represented by the speed-limit>> (90-130). MARRIAGE, for driving, is VERY, VERY BAD:-)

REGARDLESS, places like NT and NW-WA always have had, and always will have a higher than average fatal crash rate perhead of population/per registered vehicle, and VKT's, owing that environment.

CONSIDER ITS; we are heading for intelligent speed control, that will impact top speeds, regardless of allowance.

Originally Posted by GT-0733

true that.
i remember a few people getting killed in rollovers on the Central Arnthem Hwy. at the time we knew it as the Gove track, which is an usealed road.

Will likely remain under the RURAL DEFAULT limit, currently 110km/h max. This 'default' limit might change - lower in time, it should, we'll see.

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

Also, take a long hard look at your cars tyres and pressures. Every rental I have ever driven they have beed all over the place. Another rulle of thumb. Run your tyres at one or two PSI lower if you are planning of long 130 drives. It also helps when it is summer to let a PSI or two out.

I tend to keep to the tyre placard myself (ignoring the sticker-cos tyres change over time). You've reminded me to get NT to nag the feds to harden up the NVS in relation to replacement tyres. You might recall that new cars, under our /ADR/UNECE regs are required to have tyres bearing a speed rating that exceeds the vehicles top speed potential. Years back FEDS weakened that for 'replacements' in NVS, meaning - sometimes you'd get high-enders with speed ratings of 170, 180km/h at 220km/h! NT could create a specific regulation (challengeable by Feds) for domestic consumption requiring same as ADR, AND/BUT such a thing wouldn't stop interstaters with replacement tyres with low speed ratings (unknowingly) driving at high-speeds beyond the tyres design and complaice criteria.

Tyre industry won't necessarily be pleased will they?

Originally Posted by Brazen

Keepleft, have you heard anything further about the 120 or 130kmh limits being introduced to NSW? there was some talk a while back. Barrier Hwy between Broken Hill and Willcania or Cobar would be perfect (well, unrestricted would be better actually).

Agree - I'll seek an update and discussion......

[Bucknaked]

I got to Darwin on Wednesday last week. Had my first run on the 130 speed limit. I set the cruise to 130 but given it was getting dark and I was unfamiliar with the road and apparently no critter damage coverage in the hire agreement between dusk and dawn, I knocked back on the speed to 110. Then the rain started and being so heavy, I ends up going the last 20 k's into Katherine at 60.

On the trip back to Darwin I set the cruise to 120. The 130 limit even though legal, didn't feel like it. Yeah I know 120 is not legal either in other states, but 130 felt odd. So even if we had no limit on the road, I think I'd still stick to 120. What I found is that times I wanted to overtake slow cars doing 110, I'd give it a bootfull and ended up over 130 dropping back to 120 when I reset the cruise.

[Bunyip04]

I'm about to do the trek to Brissy from Darwin again (did it last chrissy)
and i reckon 130 is fine to do, what i've found is that, if you have a car
in good nick and it's obvious by looking at, if your doing, usually about, 150 (if you so desire) cops normally don't mind, or just wave their hands indicating
to slow down.

As nice as it would be to have it open speed again, i think everyone's
over the debate and used to it, but hopefully one day it'll be open again...

[Keepleft]

It *will* be open (//) once again if CLP win the next election. The new derestriction, if that election is successful for them, will replace some existing signposted 130km/h lengths.

Unlike in times past, the derestriction won't apply 'geographically' ie - outside towns, but rather on a linnear basis as we do with speed-limit signs, meaning for most part,- the existing 110km/h rural default will remain.

I expect the new derestriction signs will bear the words underneath the symbol, (where they are posted at border entry points into NT), "DRIVE TO CONDITIONS" or "DRIVE TO SUIT CONDITIONS", a la NSW application.

Its not hard, just drive at a speed your comfortable at for the prevailing conditions, often that speed will vary, and at a speed you can afford - fuel wise.

Derestriction should never, ever have been removed, all that was required was for its application to change from geographical to linnear. Bolshie governments make me sick:-)

[flappist]

Sure do hope so. I am off to Yulara shortly as it is going to be a LONG WAY at 130km/h...

[Bunyip04]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

It *will* be open (//) once again if CLP win the next election. The new derestriction, if that election is successful for them, will replace some existing signposted 130km/h lengths.

Unlike in times past, the derestriction won't apply 'geographically' ie - outside towns, but rather on a linnear basis as we do with speed-limit signs, meaning for most part,- the existing 110km/h rural default will remain.

I expect the new derestriction signs will bear the words underneath the symbol, (where they are posted at border entry points into NT), "DRIVE TO CONDITIONS" or "DRIVE TO SUIT CONDITIONS", a la NSW application.

Its not hard, just drive at a speed your comfortable at for the prevailing conditions, often that speed will vary, and at a speed you can afford - fuel wise.

Derestriction should never, ever have been removed, all that was required was for its application to change from geographical to linnear. Bolshie governments make me sick:-)

That's great news, you are very clued on with all this information,
do you work for a department of the NT gov?

[Vincenzo]

Here is my background.

Arrived in the NT in 1980 - 1983 to 1998 I was in the Ambulance Service working in all parts of the Territory so if it has happened chances are I have seen it.

Taught First Aid for two years.

Worked at the MVR as a licence tester for two years ( tested M/C to HR)

Ran my own business as a driving instructor for six years (learners and defensive driving instruction)

Firstly - yes the Territory Labor government did slash the speed limit from derestricted to 130 kmph. What is not common knowledge is that the Federal Government told the Territory that if it does not drop the speed limit it will withdraw all Federal Funding for road works. As the Territory has such a small population base (between 250k to 300k) to call on (read tax) they felt that they had no choice but to agree.

In derestricted days locals travelled at speeds that felt safe for them. I cruised at 130 with the family aboard, friends anywhere from 110 to 200. Having said that in 1985 I did the trip from Darwin to Alice in 8 hr 47 m, covering the last 195 km in 53 minutes - Honda VF1000F11.

Fuel stops are regularly placed throughout the length of the highway. I may be proved wrong but the biggest distance between fuel is about 150 kms. If it is not a town then some of the road houses are great. Stop where all the road trains are parked in front of and you will find a clean respectable place to get a good meal.

Accidents in town are usually alcohol / stupidity related. (traffic breaches)

Rural accidents are alcohol / stupidity / unsafe vehicles

Remote accident are Alcohol / fatigue / unsafe vehicles / speed

Unlike what most would have you believe it is not speed that kills in the Territory it is Alcohol. There appears to be some sort of agreement between the media and Police that any accident reported on has a quote relating to potential breach of speed limits in it. 15 years as an Ambo taught me that is not the case and rank and file members of the Police would agree.

As for the CLP bringing back the derestricted speed limits, unless the Coalition wins federally I cannot see it happening, as any Legislation passed by the Territory elected Government can be overturned by the Federal Government anytime they want to.

[Ben73]

If they ever brought back the de-restrictions I may actually go check out the NT. Until then, no thanks. To much space for a lowish limit.

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by Ben73

If they ever brought back the de-restrictions I may actually go check out the NT. Until then, no thanks. To much space for a lowish limit.

What is the practicality of actually enforcing those speed limits on open stretches of road? What's the terrain like along those NT roads, plenty of hiding spots? And would one really be hiding in the middle of nowhere in the odd hours of the night? Couldn't one just get away with slowing down at the sight of any oncoming vehicles, like any other remote road in Aus

[comagutsa]

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

Having said that in 1985 I did the trip from Darwin to Alice in 8 hr 47 m, covering the last 195 km in 53 minutes - Honda VF1000F11.

.

dam you beat me .. i did darwin to alice in 9h 30mins in about 2001 when i was living in alice

[OLDFORDNUT]

Have things changed drastically since i left Darwin in 1992?
before i left the road toll was made up of mostly Aborigines walking across road from the Nightcliff hotel to Kentucky fried chicken and getting bowled over and same groups rolling there landcruiser utes on side tracks off hiways going back to there camps from roadhouses usually resulting in two or 3 dead and 10 injured?
the actual Hiway seems to rarely have crashes on it.
and no im not racist,its just the way its always been on NT Roads

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

What is not common knowledge is that the Federal Government told the Territory that if it does not drop the speed limit it will withdraw all Federal Funding for road works. As the Territory has such a small population base (between 250k to 300k) to call on (read tax) they felt that they had no choice but to agree.

This has been suggested many times, the suggestion is absolutely and utterly false. The 'feds' (under Howard and indeed later) have never threatend to pull or deny road funding over a speed-limit issue. That is not how we work.

The move to 130km/h was purely political, and backed by extremist activists like Scruby, other left-wing road safety stalinist/bolshie academics and assorted do-gooders. Make no mistake, these people wanted 110km/h, even less, - not 130km/h. KEATING, in kicking off ARR development, suggested in conversation the idea of 140km/h for NT and other states as an optional maximum, he mean't no compulsion.

In every Australian state that had derestriction circa 60's - 70's ONLY Labor/bolshie governments have seen to their removal, and that is fact. One small part of the dumbing-down agenda in physcology, to create a compliant, pliable people.

As for the CLP bringing back the derestricted speed limits, unless the Coalition wins federally I cannot see it happening, as any Legislation passed by the Territory elected Government can be overturned by the Federal Government anytime they want to.

The move back to derestriction (//) per the basis I've mentioned above, has no bearing whatsoever on the federal government in power. It is, and remains CLP policy IF elected.

The academics I refer, in an effort to stop any elected parliament from ever reintroducing (//) have removed the derestriction sign from AS 1742.4 of 2008. They think that by doing this they'll prevent an elected government from being able to re-use the sign.

As Howard warned his agencies; "it is parliament that makes enforceable law, not employees of government agencies", as did indeed the NSW Labor head of the NSW Regulation Review Committee back in 1999, - in relation to ARR adoption, in his shot across the table at government agency staffers who were creating "policies" that they would then enforce upon the public.

Public servants need reminding, periodically, just who it is that makes l.a.w.

CLP are aware of the AS1742.4 development, its reintroduction remains party policy. They point out that since its removal FUNDS for maintenance have reduced in real terms, meaning that somelengths once suited to (//) will remain limited until funds are available to bring the section of highway up to standard, once again.

Let me say this, in NSW a government agency decided off its own back in the dying days of Labor, to fix a maximum speed-limit in ALL NSW state Forrests of 60km/h, they signpost certain roads leading into their bush area with R4-1 60km/h signs. They fail to understand the signs can only apply to the specific length of road on which it is posted, and have in effect many times, created 60km/h limit beyond each state forrest road, as they have not used END 60 or R4-1 speed-limit signs at each exit.

Now, to create a DEFAULT 60km/h limit (for forest roads not fixed with 60 signs), they need to pass an act of parliament). They created this limit under the Forestry Act. It shall be tested. We will either create this limit properly through parliament, or reduce the rural default to 80km/h and force that. One way or the other.

My signal to them, is that NSW Parliament is the only body that can set enforceable law. Shall we then have the Sydney Opera House Trust post 100km/h for its roads? Just as dumb, and as probable in stretching the law of each agencies governing Act.

You'd think your elected government runs this place, right???

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

(//) SEPARATES traffic, when you leave Germany and enter the hell hole we call Belgium with its 120km/h freeways, one thing is noticeable; "platoons" of vehicles form, just like in Australia. In driving, DIVORCE is good and is represented by (//), MARRIAGE = TAILGATING/SITTING TOO CLOSEand is represented by the speed-limit>> (90-130). MARRIAGE, for driving, is VERY, VERY BAD:-)

It's not just speed limits that form platoons, it's inattentive and selfish driving. Compare with the Australian habit the European habit of always observing the RV mirror and moving over (even to the verge on a single lane road) to let a vehicle behind pass.

Your average country road here is full of platoons behind someone driving, not just at the speed limit but sometimes 20 or 40 below, and not giving any thought (some truckies excepted) to that nice wide bitumen verge that road authorities have been creating in recent years. Speed limit thinking by authorities might be substandard but also is driver training.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by new2ford

It's not just speed limits that form platoons, it's inattentive and selfish driving. Compare with the Australian habit the European habit of always observing the RV mirror and moving over (even to the verge on a single lane road) to let a vehicle behind pass.

Your average country road here is full of platoons behind someone driving, not just at the speed limit but sometimes 20 or 40 below, and not giving any thought (some truckies excepted) to that nice wide bitumen verge that road authorities have been creating in recent years. Speed limit thinking by authorities might be substandard but also is driver training.

People adapt to changing conditions, if you stifle traffic by enforcing and imposing low-speed limits on high-standard highways, as we do with extreme religeous fervour, then your hardly going to get the best performance from people, nor productivity.

Can we really blame people for being cynical and driving badly when that is all that is expected from them?? It's XMAS, and once again our police will be out on freeways and highways enforcing 'speed', first and foremost. Despite this, we'll still have teen/twenty somethings wrapping themselves around power poles and interrupting someones dinner. We'll get Majorie and Mal sleepily heading into oncoming traffic in their attempt to create an offset crash. We'll get the drugged and distracted driving into shops or onto railway tracks.

Under derestriction in NSW, we used our indicators much more often, paid attention to one another, tailgating was much less common, and so were the platoons, and so on. The observation of this creation of platoons when leaving Germany on its motorway into the Victorian like hellhole of Belgium, is a very real one.

We need to give people incentive.

[new2ford]

^^
I agree with you absolutely on the speed limit factor, but there are also driver behaviours in Australia that have nothing to do with speed limits. Combine the two ingredients and you have a particularly foul soup. Driver education here is hopeless - and what can you expect when road authorities themselves can't even explain the concept of a roundabout (for example) properly!

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

This has been suggested many times, the suggestion is absolutely and utterly false. The 'feds' (under Howard and indeed later) have never threatend to pull or deny road funding over a speed-limit issue. That is not how we work.

The move to 130km/h was purely political, and backed by extremist activists like Scruby, other left-wing road safety stalinist/bolshie academics and assorted do-gooders. Make no mistake, these people wanted 110km/h, even less, - not 130km/h. KEATING, in kicking off ARR development, suggested in conversation the idea of 140km/h for NT and other states as an optional maximum, he mean't no compulsion.

In every Australian state that had derestriction circa 60's - 70's ONLY Labor/bolshie governments have seen to their removal, and that is fact. One small part of the dumbing-down agenda in physcology, to create a compliant, pliable people.



The move back to derestriction (//) per the basis I've mentioned above, has no bearing whatsoever on the federal government in power. It is, and remains CLP policy IF elected.

The academics I refer, in an effort to stop any elected parliament from ever reintroducing (//) have removed the derestriction sign from AS 1742.4 of 2008. They think that by doing this they'll prevent an elected government from being able to re-use the sign.

As Howard warned his agencies; "it is parliament that makes enforceable law, not employees of government agencies", as did indeed the NSW Labor head of the NSW Regulation Review Committee back in 1999, - in relation to ARR adoption, in his shot across the table at government agency staffers who were creating "policies" that they would then enforce upon the public.

Public servants need reminding, periodically, just who it is that makes l.a.w.

CLP are aware of the AS1742.4 development, its reintroduction remains party policy. They point out that since its removal FUNDS for maintenance have reduced in real terms, meaning that somelengths once suited to (//) will remain limited until funds are available to bring the section of highway up to standard, once again.

Let me say this, in NSW a government agency decided off its own back in the dying days of Labor, to fix a maximum speed-limit in ALL NSW state Forrests of 60km/h, they signpost certain roads leading into their bush area with R4-1 60km/h signs. They fail to understand the signs can only apply to the specific length of road on which it is posted, and have in effect many times, created 60km/h limit beyond each state forrest road, as they have not used END 60 or R4-1 speed-limit signs at each exit.

Now, to create a DEFAULT 60km/h limit (for forest roads not fixed with 60 signs), they need to pass an act of parliament). They created this limit under the Forestry Act. It shall be tested. We will either create this limit properly through parliament, or reduce the rural default to 80km/h and force that. One way or the other.

My signal to them, is that NSW Parliament is the only body that can set enforceable law. Shall we then have the Sydney Opera House Trust post 100km/h for its roads? Just as dumb, and as probable in stretching the law of each agencies governing Act.

You'd think your elected government runs this place, right???

With all the agenda pushing, spin doctoring and wowserism that abounds on this forum it is good to see the actual story from a first hand perspective being given some light.

Keep up the good work.

[raptorv8]

Originally Posted by Vincenzo

Here is my background.

Arrived in the NT in 1980 - 1983 to 1998 I was in the Ambulance Service working in all parts of the Territory so if it has happened chances are I have seen it.

Taught First Aid for two years.

Worked at the MVR as a licence tester for two years ( tested M/C to HR)

Ran my own business as a driving instructor for six years (learners and defensive driving instruction)

Firstly - yes the Territory Labor government did slash the speed limit from derestricted to 130 kmph. What is not common knowledge is that the Federal Government told the Territory that if it does not drop the speed limit it will withdraw all Federal Funding for road works. As the Territory has such a small population base (between 250k to 300k) to call on (read tax) they felt that they had no choice but to agree.

In derestricted days locals travelled at speeds that felt safe for them. I cruised at 130 with the family aboard, friends anywhere from 110 to 200. Having said that in 1985 I did the trip from Darwin to Alice in 8 hr 47 m, covering the last 195 km in 53 minutes - Honda VF1000F11.

Fuel stops are regularly placed throughout the length of the highway. I may be proved wrong but the biggest distance between fuel is about 150 kms. If it is not a town then some of the road houses are great. Stop where all the road trains are parked in front of and you will find a clean respectable place to get a good meal.

Accidents in town are usually alcohol / stupidity related. (traffic breaches)

Rural accidents are alcohol / stupidity / unsafe vehicles

Remote accident are Alcohol / fatigue / unsafe vehicles / speed

Unlike what most would have you believe it is not speed that kills in the Territory it is Alcohol. There appears to be some sort of agreement between the media and Police that any accident reported on has a quote relating to potential breach of speed limits in it. 15 years as an Ambo taught me that is not the case and rank and file members of the Police would agree.

As for the CLP bringing back the derestricted speed limits, unless the Coalition wins federally I cannot see it happening, as any Legislation passed by the Territory elected Government can be overturned by the Federal Government anytime they want to.

Thanks for your post.

Your first hand info and experience is appreciated thanks for sharing.

[aussie muscle]

i'd be interested to see how much movement of limits we'd see if they evaluated every road based on it's condition and traffic volumes. i'm sure the monaro highway at bombala would be downgraded to 80k.

Originally Posted by EgoFG

I have said it before, and prolly will again, Speed does not cause accidents without another cause. Granted, it does make them worse, but reducing speed limits, and enforcing them will only ever be a symptomatic cure.

i guess you are right, technically speaking. if an accident was 'caused by speeding' it's actually caused by lack of skill or exceeding the limits of the tires (oversteer) and other reasons for it leaving the road.

Originally Posted by Keepleft

required to have tyres bearing a speed rating that exceeds the vehicles top speed potential.

if that applied to all vehicles, i'd hate having to buy tires rated for 240kph. especially when i'm not allowed to exceed 110. (imagine they'd cost more, even if they are identical to the existing ones).

Originally Posted by new2ford

can't even explain the concept of a roundabout (for example) properly!

i'm staggered at the number of motorist who don't understand the rules for a roundabout

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by aussie muscle

i'm staggered at the number of motorist who don't understand the rules for a roundabout

In fairness, this is probably because the road authorities themselves are cluelessly incapable of educating drivers about roundabouts, using terms like "going straight ahead" or "turning left/right", thus creating total confusion. I suspect they don't care because it was somebody's bright idea brought back from the UK to save the cost of a few traffic lights and give us instead a fairground carousel on which motorists can sort themselves out. Add on top of this local councils planting a rainforest in the middle, thus obscuring the sight-lines that are so essential and you have a total ballzup.

Don't want to take the discussion OT but it's symptomatic of the same incompetence that makes a hash of the "speed" issue. Can the police issue on-the-spot incompetence fines to roads and traffic authorities I wonder?

[flappist]

Guys, this is a somewhat emotive issue.

Please keep all of your attacks against the arguements not the arguers.

There are a lot of members who have had a lot of experience in various areas and no one is 100% right or 100% wrong EVER.

[Burnout]

I lived and worked in the Territory for a while, I attended a couple of accidents with the Local copper, just helping out, you know.
The first was an XW station wagon with eleven dead, most of them being young kids crushed by the adults as the vehicle rolled four times before it hit a tree. There were twenty-two people in the car.......
The second was a kid from Adelaide going home for Xmas back in '84, I think.
He hit a bull which was asleep on the Stuart Hwy just handy to the Beetaloo northern Boundry, the bike a Susie 1300 Katana was imbedded into the side of the Bull up to the engine, we found him down the road, the leathers stripped off him and half his helmet worn away by the road. The speed he was traveling at would have impressed most I think.
I met another bloke who survived for three days off the side of the Stuart near the spot above when he admits he went to sleep behind the wheel of his three speeder FJ-45, it rolled down the embankment there and bits of it were on top of him. His only injuries being bruises and an astonishing thirst as it was deep in the wet and the cruiser just squashed him into the mud.
He was discovered by a bore runner from 'Newcastle Waters' who stopped to relieve himself on the side of the road.
According to the Police at the time only one of these accidents was a result of speed.... The XW doing an estimated 80-90kph.
Accidents in the Terrritory tend to be either minor or full on horror jobs, not all involving speed at all.
I know of a pedestrian who decided to sleep it off just in front of the rear tri of a tripple at Daly Waters with predicable results.
Whilst all my driving up there was in the days of (//), I think for most people 130 is about right, that's not to say I agree with the current limits. However most arn't going to push the ol' Ute much harder. I passed plenty up there who didn't go much harder.

[flappist]

The thing I personally found interesting about (//) was the lack of "hurry".

If you can go as fast as you like then you do not need to push people to over take in dangerous places or spend far too long on the wrong side of the road overtaking just in case there is a radar and you get rolled for 10km/h over the limit.

It is impossible to be killed in a head on crash if both vehicles on on their own side of the road........

[Burnout]

I agree with you entirely, the only time I became concerned was arriving at almost the same place in the roadway as a 'Mickey" one time. It was an interesting few moments......
The vehicle I had at the time could do impressive speeds...... which I almost never tested beyond say 170km or so.

[Falcon_Crazy]

Ive experienced NT with 130km/h and // - Before the 130 limit, id generally sit on 140/150 depending on traffic and time. At 160km/h between Alice and tennant - so much more contentration on road than even at 130kmh.

But its not just NT. Most of the Hume Fwy south of Maybe final Cambelltown off ramp, in many ways should have 130km/h limit. Indeed even parts of F3 in right traffic conditions should be 130 - a 120km limit even south of Gosy On ramp would be fine - a signficant number already sit on this speed every day.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Falcon_Crazy

Indeed even parts of F3 in right traffic conditions should be 130 - a 120km limit even south of Gosy On ramp would be fine - a signficant number already sit on this speed every day.

I think on the F3 you'd have to vary the limit according to traffic. I find it quite a dangerous road because of the turns and sightlines.

Spare a thought for us on the south coast where the Princes motorway (south of Wollongong) remains restricted to 100 despite work over the years that has removed any hazards such as ability to cross the median.

[Ben73]

There is a variable limit on the F3. Near Hawksberry I think.
90 in wet 100 dry. I really think there should be more variables around the place.

130 on the F3 in light traffic would be fine. But heavy traffic or bad weather not so much.

[EgoFG]

I personally am not too fond of variable speed limits.
It takes responsibility away from the driver.

Take an extreme example:
I have to drive at 40kmph near a school ... therefor I do not have to look out for children.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Ben73

There is a variable limit on the F3. Near Hawksberry I think.
90 in wet 100 dry. I really think there should be more variables around the place.

130 on the F3 in light traffic would be fine. But heavy traffic or bad weather not so much.

And here is a perfect example of the problem.

(//) means you decide what speed at which to travel.
The do gooders see this as 300km/h++, the average person sees this as "well I will go as fast as I feel is safe".

(130) means the maximum speed is 130km/h.
The do gooders see this as "we will all be killed, it is too fast for (insert group here)", the average person sees this as 130km/h +/- 0.001 km/h and travelling slower than that is anti-social and disruptive while travelling faster than that is beyond culpable.

We have a whole generation of drivers who have spent so long being told what to do in any situation and have such an inground fear of punishment from not following instructions exactly that they feel uncomfortable when being forced to make a decision for themselves.

Just remember what you think every time you catch up to someone doing 90 in a maximim 100 zone and then how fast do you go overtaking them.

Pavalov's speedometer........

[drew`SEVNT5]

Originally Posted by flappist

And here is a perfect example of the problem.

(//) means you decide what speed at which to travel.
The do gooders see this as 300km/h++, the average person sees this as "well I will go as fast as I feel is safe".

(130) means the maximum speed is 130km/h.
The do gooders see this as "we will all be killed, it is too fast for (insert group here)", the average person sees this as 130km/h +/- 0.001 km/h and travelling slower than that is anti-social and disruptive while travelling faster than that is beyond culpable.

We have a whole generation of drivers who have spent so long being told what to do in any situation and have such an inground fear of punishment from not following instructions exactly that they feel uncomfortable when being forced to make a decision for themselves.

Just remember what you think every time you catch up to someone doing 90 in a maximim 100 zone and then how fast do you go overtaking them.

Pavalov's speedometer........

Here here.

I drive a long distance of freeway from home to work and back again.

Even in light traffic, most are scared stiff of doing over 100km/h.

The one exception to that rule is when I leave work late, after 7pm, and the people on the road aren't your general mum-and-dad pottering up to the nearest Westfield, etc... It is mostly trucks (in the LH lane) and your more serious business people, and if you aren't 10-20km/h over the limit on the Monash/Tulla/Ring Rd (the speed cams near and in the tunnel, 4 in total, aside) your severely holding up traffic... Honestly, you just fly along.

Yet, the same amount of traffic at 11am, you will be held up by people doing 90-99km/h in all lanes.

Baffling.

[Outbackjack]

Election in two weeks. Yeeha!! CLP are still adamant that the open road 130 will be replaced on most NT highways with an open limit. There might be a yellow 130 reccomended limit, but you will be free to choose your own cruise speed.