NT speed limits 'should be scrapped'

[DRU842]

The Northern Territory government is being called on to scrap open road speed limits it adopted at the start of this year, after recording the worst road toll in a decade.

Despite introducing a 130km/h limit for the region's four main highways - the Stuart, Arnhem, Barkly and Victoria - and establishing a demerit point system, road fatalities in 2007 have climbed to climbed to 57.

The toll is up from 44 in the same period last year and 35 in 2004.

A damning report released last year found NT roads had a death rate three times higher than the rest of Australia on a per capita basis, with one person dying and nine seriously injured every week.

The findings prompted the government to put an end to a tradition whereby NT drivers were among the few left in the world - and the only ones in Australia - who could freely decide their speed on the open roads.

But the opposition Country Liberal Party (CLP) said it was time for new NT Chief Minister Paul Henderson to reverse the controversial changes.

"Now the evidence is in," CLP transport spokeswoman Fay Miller said in a statement.

"(Mr) Henderson has the option of correcting a mistake of his predecessor and get rid of the open road speed limit."

Ms Miller said data suggested that drink drivers and people failing to wear seat belts were the main reason for road fatalities - and not speed.

"The opposition was highly sceptical that Territory Labor's attack on our way of life would have a positive impact on the road toll," she said.

"It is a great shame that one of the qualities that made the Territory unique has been sacrificed without an obvious benefit.

"Making such a far-reaching change to the character of the Territory on a hunch was reckless policy making."

Ms Miller said demerit points - introduced in most Australian states in 1969 - would also prove to be equally useless in curbing the road toll.

http://au.news.yahoo.com/071228/2/15dub.html

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by DRU842

....road fatalities in 2007 have climbed to climbed to 57.

The toll is up from 44 in the same period last year and 35 in 2004.

Surprise surprise

[Sorted]

Ms Miller said data suggested that drink drivers and people failing to wear seat belts were the main reason for road fatalities - and not speed.

Hmmm maybe they should investigate the entire speed limit system in Australia and I bet they would come to similar conclusion but its easier to blame speed........... and it actually looks like they are doing something when reducing speed limits and its cheaper just to change signs than to educate.............. :

[Casablanca]

well that's bullcrap as the mosr recent statistics say its the same as the previous year but up from 2 years ago, and the reason why there are so many death are young hoons. (you cant say im stereotyping because im only 19 myself) i've learned my lesson having lost my license once and been in a major accident (not me driving btw) and have no completed both offensive and defensive driving courses to get my knowledge up in driving in all sorts of conditions. i honestly think that every new license holder should be made to do both a defensive and offensive driving course as part of getting their license as its not fair to the rest of us young people that are trying to do the right thing.

(and i know i dont have unlimited experience driving i just think that this would be a great measure in decreasing fatalities as people that cant control a car in certain situations are what cause these issues).

just a thought anyway please dont bite my head off as its not right.

[Sorted]

Originally Posted by Casablanca

.............. i've learned my lesson having lost my license once and been in a major accident (not me driving btw) and have now completed both offensive and defensive driving courses to get my knowledge up in driving in all sorts of conditions. ...............

Thats what you call EDUCATION!!!!

How about they teach that in schools............. instead of get some hours up and you will be right..........

[sbutler]

DRU842
I noticed that last night on the news.. Tells the story doesn't it?
Speed limits should be revised Ozz wide!
The road in front of my place is 90/100k in some parts. Its a narrow, rough, single lane country road. 100kph :
Then you get on the F3 & its 3 lanes wide & 90K in fine weather, 80 in wet??
Just doesn't make sence to me.

Same as the Nullaboar[spelling] plans to WA Flat as a pancake, straight as an arrow, I dont think Ive heard of any major prangs, yet it is limited to 110! I think. Just silly revinue raising. :

If you cant drive up the F3 at 130Kph without crashing into something,or someone you shouldn't have a licence in the first place. :

[aye you]

not surprise there, i remember when the CLP challenged Labour to produce the statistics/evidence in parliment and the mysteriously couldn't find them. The facts they used included tourists who never had experience at these speeds, and drunk drivers. they also could not produce the evidence and facts as to how 130km/h was going to reduce the road toll. bunch of idiots

Will be voting CLP at the next elections, they've promised the first thing they'll do is reinstate open speed limits

[schnoods]

Originally Posted by aye you

not surprise there, i remember when the CLP challenged Labour to produce the statistics/evidence in parliment and the mysteriously couldn't find them. The facts they used included tourists who never had experience at these speeds, and drunk drivers. they also could not produce the evidence and facts as to how 130km/h was going to reduce the road toll. bunch of idiots

Will be voting CLP at the next elections, they've promised the first thing they'll do is reinstate open speed limits

Bring back Dennis Bourke!!!


If you look closely at the statistics n the NT, alot of the deaths are alcohol related, even a few from backpackers. Especially when they come from countries where 80kmhr is fast and they get in a Britz camper and get told they can go fast as they want. Even at 130kmh, the backpackers will struggle.

Also a few of the deaths have been Community related, A rollover in a delapidated Troopy with 6 people rollover causing a few deaths and injuries, its part of the statistic. Then there are the truckies that are involved and fatigue was a factor, not speed (sometimes its the substance though).

Fair dinkum, its about time a bit of common sense prevailed. The roads are in ok condition, no sharp corners and as long as people drive to the conditions (when it rains), its no probs.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by DRHEMI

Hmmm maybe they should investigate the entire speed limit system in Australia and I bet they would come to similar conclusion but its easier to blame speed........... and it actually looks like they are doing something when reducing speed limits and its cheaper just to change signs than to educate.............. :

Look at Vic, the most stringent laws in the country yet were in front of deaths during this Holiday season (well were two days ago).

[EF Futura 07]

Originally Posted by sbutler

DRU842
I noticed that last night on the news.. Tells the story doesn't it?
Speed limits should be revised Ozz wide!
The road in front of my place is 90/100k in some parts. Its a narrow, rough, single lane country road. 100kph :
Then you get on the F3 & its 3 lanes wide & 90K in fine weather, 80 in wet??
Just doesn't make sence to me.

Same as the Nullaboar[spelling] plans to WA Flat as a pancake, straight as an arrow, I dont think Ive heard of any major prangs, yet it is limited to 110! I think. Just silly revinue raising. :

If you cant drive up the F3 at 130Kph without crashing into something,or someone you shouldn't have a licence in the first place. :

2nd that. at last someone with a brain. i dont understand that either. i am more alert at 120+ than i am at 100, watching the speedo constantly incase officer plod might pop out and book me for doing 106 in a 100 zone. honestly i dont know why freeways cant be 130 or maybe 140 (okay some might say that 140 is a bit quick but i dont think so) like why is the M7 still 100ks? why not 110 like (part(s)) of the M5/M4 etc ???


why do you have to slow down from 110-100 (heading north) and down to 90 heading south to climb mt white on the F3? its only a hill! it has 3 lanes! why cant i go up at 110?


1 thing i have to admit is country cops are far more nicer than city. i couldnt tell you how many times i have been out west and gone past a highway patrol car doing 15+ ks over the limit and all they do is flash their hi beam and give me a wave as i go past. meaning your speeding, i know but im not going to do a massive u turn with a smoke show just because your just cruising along minding your own buissiness. like me except im doing 140. etc

also while we are at it, double demerits is just revenue FULL STOP. the roads dont change! its just there is more people that dont know what they are doing and cause accidents. its also very frustrating because people are TOO scared to even do the speed limit. eg, how many people have you followed that are doing 95 in a 100 zone? do you overtake them with a risk of getting caught speeding? (yes) or sit behind them because you are a criminal if you overtake at 5km more than the limit?

ON the other side. when i am in a 50 zone or a 60 ect i am very carefull with my speed. and when some idiot gets caught at 170 in a 50 zone, thats when your a criminal, lock you away i say, but if your out in the middle of stuff all why cant you sit on 140???

rant off

[VSSII]

I think it would be fair to say NT has some unique problems NSW and VIC don't encounter as significantly, that contribute to their road related deaths, which are very hard to police. I guess they didn't want to look like they were just sitting on their hands and doing nothing. And figured this would have to make a difference.

I can't believe they never had demerit points! What's the incentive for all of the wealthy people to do the right thing?!

[Keepleft]

sbutler wrote:-

I noticed that last night on the news.. Tells the story doesn't it? Speed limits should be revised Ozz wide!

Speed limit 'setting' as to the maximums or id derestriction is allowed remains purely state responsibility resting the each jurisdictions transport dept, not via a 'roads minister'.

Speed signage (indeed most traffic signs) must have 'uniform intent' (and do), what each sign means, its spacing, dimesnions etc is primarily held in AS1742.4 of 1999.

The road in front of my place is 90/100k in some parts. Its a narrow, rough, single lane country road. 100kph.

May I ask which?

Then you get on the F3 & its 3 lanes wide & 90K in fine weather, 80 in wet?? Just doesn't make sence to me.

This section was built by an American contractor back in the 60's, its technical design speed is 80km/h, despite improvements, its key 'issue' is delinneation & sight distance. It is NOT up to modern standard, that said, it once carried 110km/h both directions.
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety...peedlimit.html

Same as the Nullaboar[spelling] plains to WA Flat as a pancake, straight as an arrow, I dont think Ive heard of any major prangs, yet it is limited to 110! I think. Just silly revinue raising.

You have had fatals and other lesser crashes, all quite normal. The road was once derstrestricted (70's), but is signposted 110km/h.

LIB SA MP, the Hon Graeme Gunn has been trying for years now to have a 130km/h speed limit applied on that, and other key highways. His private members bill gets to the house for debate, where that debate is then 'put off' for another day, year after year by the SA ALP majority.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/items/200608/1721806.htm?sa

I am fundamentally opposed to higher speed LIMITS on those high-grade rural roads bearing good sight distance and wide run-off shoulders, but keep suggesting instead Graeme and associates of any party advocate instead for speed derestriction for those lengths of road instead. At the same time, as an offset and to bring greater compliance with posted speed-limits, REDUCING basic rural default to 80km/h. 90-110km/h for those low grade roads is just 'stoopid'.

In effect, you'd be responsible fully for choosing 'safe-speed' under a derestricted length of highway, BUT the moment you exit that highway onto another rural road, the 80km/h default woul apply UNLESS the road carries a higher speed-limit, OR the new road is posted with a speed de-restriction sign.

LICENCE CONDITONS impose certain speed limits when on a speed de-rerstricted length of highway, example those applying to L, P1 and P2 drivers.

If you cant drive up the F3 at 130Kph without crashing into something,or someone you shouldn't have a licence in the first place.

Putting aside the the wet weather limit section (see link), we CANNOT and WILL NOT raise the 110km/h on the F3, or ANY OTHER 'freeway class' inter-urban becuase of the dedicated Emergency Services Only, median located, U-Turn bays.

Too many people use the U-Turn bays as 'private intersections', either because the driver chooses to 'go-back' for whatever reason, OR simply to turn into a business on the other side of the carriageway. This, to my Euro leanings is one of the most dangerous driving offences one can commit.

Get my way the the fine will sit at $1,500 and an offending driver will gain 6 demerits.

In order to raise the speed limits on these otherwise high-grade roads, we will either REMOVE the U-Turn bays altogether (EU survives without them, as can we), OR we install a gatelock ststem to each and ever one of them to ensure the safety and security of throughput traffic.

Once done we could raise the speed limit from 110 to say 130km/h, OR even derestrict some lengths.

NSW Hume highway divided carriageways bearing 'intersections' as opposwed to a freeway stadards 'grade seperated' interchanges, cannot be raised in limit either. INTERSECTIONS - MUST GO completely.

TYPICAL, higher-standard rural two-traffic laned NSW highways bearing wide paved shoulders; Could readily accept speed derestrestriction. Speed derestriction is preferable over a higher 'posted' speed limit allowance, this would avoid 'speed-limit conditioning' behaviours, reduce bunching-up events and fatigue, drive 'nervous tension' caused by above etc will reduce.



But first, the rural default needs to go back to what it was as at July 1978 > 80km/h.

[Keepleft]

Further to above, this Pdf link will hint - as to 'the future' of speed allowance and management.
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committe...port/chap3.pdf


40 NATIONAL ROAD SAFETY – EYES ON THE ROAD AHEAD


Rural Roads

3.36 In a study of potential benefits and costs of speed changes
on rural roads, Professor Max Cameron of the Monash University Accident
Research Centre (MUARC), looked at the economic costs
and benefits of increasing the speed limit to 130 km/ h on rural
roads. Impacts were examined for rural freeways, rural divided roads
and rural two-way undivided roads.

The costs tested were vehicle operating costs, time costs, crash costs and
air pollution costs, the aggregate of these impacts representing the total
social cost. Two different methodologies were used, ‘human capital’ and


‘willingness to pay’. 18

3.37 Broadly speaking, vehicle operating costs, crash costs and air pollution
costs decline as speeds are reduced, while time costs increase.

The optimum speed for total social cost is somewhere in between.
The optimum speed for total social cost is lower for trucks than for cars.
Crash costs are higher under the willingness to pay approach than
under the human capital approach, with consequent reductions
in optimum speeds.

Any increase in speed increases the cost of road trauma.


3.38 With regard to rural freeways the report found:

Increasing the speed limit to 130 km/ h for all vehicles on rural
freeways would have substantial social costs. The total social cost
could be constrained, and even reduced, if trucks were limited to
100 km/ h on such roads. A variable speed limit system allowing
speeds of 120 km/ h for cars and light commercial vehicles during
good conditions, but reduced to 100 km/ h under adverse
conditions, while limiting trucks to 100 km/ h at all times, would
keep total social costs below current levels. However, all scenarios
whereby speed limits are increased for some vehicle types and
circumstances are necessarily accompanied by increased road
trauma to provide travel time saving benefits.


18 The human capital approach characterises people, and
therefore life, as a labour source and input into the production
process. The value to society of preventing injury or death
is the saving in potential output or productive capacity.
The willingness to pay approach attempts to capture
trade-offs between wealth and risk. It estimates the
value of life in terms of the amounts that individuals are
prepared to pay to reduce risks to their lives. The willingness
to pay approach will generally put higher values on life
than the human capital approach. However, the human
capital approach provides a fairly reliable lower bound estimate
of the social cost of crashes.

Bureau of Transport Economics, Report 102, Road Crash Costs
in Australia, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 2000, pp. 19– 21.
19 M. Cameron, Potential Benefits and Costs of Speed Changes
on Rural Roads, ATSB, Canberra, 2003, p. 56.


SPEED MANAGEMENT 41

3.39 Prospects for increased speed limits were even
less promising on rural divided roads:

Increasing the speed limit to 130 km/ h on rural divided roads
would have even greater social costs than the increased limit on
freeways. If trucks were limited to 100 km/ h, the impact on total
social costs would be smaller but they would still increase. Even a
variable speed limit like that for freeways described above would
be associated with an increase in road trauma costs. The higher
crash rate on the divided roads compared with rural freeways will
result in any speed limit increase producing even greater road
trauma increases than on freeways, despite lower traffic volumes
on non-freeway roads.


3.40 The report found that using ‘willingness to pay’ valuations, there was little
case for increasing car speeds and a case for reducing truck speeds from
current levels. Optimum speeds for cars on rural freeways was found to be
120 km/ h taking into account total social cost, but there would still be an
increase in road trauma.


3.41 With regard to rural undivided roads the report found:

There is no economic justification for increasing the speed limit on
two-lane undivided rural roads, even on those safer roads with
sealed shoulders. On undivided roads through terrain requiring
slowing for sharp bends and occasional stops in towns, the
increased fuel consumption and air pollution emissions associated
with deceleration from and acceleration to high cruise speeds
would add very substantially to the total social costs. Using
‘human capital’ costs to value road trauma, the optimum speed for
cars is about the current speed limit (100 km/ h) on straight
sections of these roads, but 10– 15 km/ h less on the curvy roads
with intersections and towns.

The optimum speed for trucks is substantially below the current
speed limit, and even lower on the curvy roads. The optimum
speeds would be even lower if ‘willingness to pay’ valuations of crash
costs were used. 22


20 Cameron, Potential Benefits and Costs, p. 56.
21 Cameron, Potential Benefits and Costs, p. 56.
22 Cameron, Potential Benefits and Costs, p. 56.


42 NATIONAL ROAD SAFETY – EYES ON THE ROAD AHEAD

3.42 The Committee is of the opinion that speed limits on rural roads should be
re- examined. The disproportionate representation of rural roads
in trauma statistics, and the evident problems with creating a safe road
environment in rural road networks (see Chapter 4), indicate that
speed limits on rural roads need to be set at levels appropriate to the
engineering standards and local conditions of roads.


Recommendation 6

3.43 The Committee recommends that the Australian Government ask the
Australian Transport Council to undertake research into safe speed
limits on rural roads with a view to implementing a system of speed
limits and signage appropriate to the engineering standards and local
conditions of roads.

[DRU842]

Typical of previous efforts by Monash Uni studies.

Where is the mention on improved licencing standards that most responsible debaters request time & time again?

It is interesting to see the focus on engineering standards and there relationship to speed limits. Is the deteriorating state of roads (NSW being a particular case in point) being used to justify ever decreasing speed limits?

[Green X]

I would love to see the NT once again open it roads with // Limits, Some questions would start getting asked about what is going on in the rest of Aus, Like on roads in country WA.

Like the Grate Northern, North West Coastal, parts of the Grate Eastern and a few other country roads where you are covering big distances with little traffic on long straight roads. If you got the average speed of most cars on those roads NOW it would be at 120-130km/h anyway.

Even on a open Limit I feel I would still only cruse on 120-140km/h which is what i do now any way.

[Trevor 57]

Here we go again, why don't you all just re-gurgitate the other thread on this topic.



here is the link

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11191052

And that is enough from me on this subject, I have said all I want to on the other thread.