Key Board Experts

[Williamson]

I start this thread with apprehension, and fear that this may turn into a slinging match.  The mods have my permission (if it’s needed) to delete this thread if posts or responses get (too) personal, off-track or out of control.

The world is full of armchair experts, in this case key board experts – perhaps me included you say – when it comes to road safety and traffic operational matters.   The older and wiser (?) I get, the more I think that my theory that everyone thinks they are a traffic engineer, is true.   Everyone that is that drives a car or truck, rides a motorcycle or bicycle, is a car, truck, bus, train or tram passenger, or walks, especially if they cross a road (I think I’ve got everyone at some stage of their life covered), has an opinion.   Yeah, they’re all experts.   They can tell us what’s wrong with the road, intersection, traffic lights, bus stop, car park, etc…

At this stage I mention that I’m been involved in road safety and traffic engineering for over 37 years at VicRoads (and it’s predessors RoSTA & RTA) and now at a municipal Council, and despite this experience I’m no expert, just a person with lots of experience, enough to know that the answers to our road safety and traffic problems are not a one-size-fits-all solution, but too much to admit that I’m still learning.

It’s good that the community can tell us what’s wrong with the roads.  Some of their ideas for safety and traffic solutions may have merit (that’s me mostly being tactful) but their ideas may not be the real solution.    Quite often an individual’s or the community’s suggestion will solve their problem, but more often than not it’s just as likely to relocate the problem or create another problem.   Often the skill is to identify a solution that is a best fit, one that benefits the broader community, sometimes the solution that has the least negative impact.

The recent discussion on speeding, speed limits and enforcement is a good example.   The current speed management arrangements in Victoria, and from discussions with my colleagues in other States, are a line-of-best-fit.  Sure this doesn’t suit everyone all of the time, everyone some of the time, probably just the majority most of the time.

From my point of view, whether the speed at which someone is travelling at when caught exceeding the speed limit is safe or not, whether the speed limit is appropriate or not for the road conditions, whether the Police tolerance threshold is adequate or not, are all irrelevant.   

You, we all know the speed limits, know how accurate your speedo is (or isn’t and should take any error into account), know the Police are out there (hiding or not), know the penalties.  We all adults, so we should be accountable and responsible for our actions and not look for excuses or lay blame on others for our indiscretions. 

[Sean]

Michael, you are quite right. We all think we know what is best or how wrong the govt is. It is interesting that we all follow the rules when playing football for instance and have no problem when the ref calls offside, yet we believe we have the right to set our own speed limits.  At the end of the day if you do the crime then be prepared to pay the fine so to say. Also be prepared to give the message to the family of anyone who is hurt or worse.
My comments are not made from any official position, just as an observer of human nature. Where do you sit?

[Pezzz]

Hey guys,
Both well worded.... I do honestly worry though that more accidents will happen especially after an announcement of lower tolerance due to drivers / riders paying more attention to speedos than to their surroundings.
Case in point .... a new speed sensing red light camera was installed at an intersection a year or so ago .... i was following a car and even though i had what i considered a safe stopping distance, the light change to amber as the driver in front was inside the solid lane marker. I prepared to stop as i could do so in that time but the driver in front of me slammed on the anchor and pulled up part way over the line and i was unable to adjust my braking in time and tapped her on the back end....   
After the lights changed back we pulled through the intersection and pulled over...  when i asked her why she suddenly stopped she replied because there was a new camera on the intersection that "gets you" for speeding ...... 
The ironic part is the camera was set up for the traffic traveling at right angles to us ....

How many times have we seen (and been) the person suddenly slam on the brakes because there is a shadow in the bushes that may or may not be camera EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE DOING THE LIMIT OR BELOW ?????

I watched a driver a few months ago nearly knock down a kid in a school zone (he was doing 40 which is the limit for school zones here) because he was concentrating on the cops down the side street pinging cars coming from the opposite direction ....

Inattention and distraction (whether mobile phones, talking to passengers, eating, smoking, drinking, ... whatever) including obsessing over your speedo is more dangerous then driving to the conditions which may mean slightly over the limit .....

Anyway .. my 2c worth ...

 

[Biggles]

I am one of the several who have commented regarding speed limits and the policing thereof.
I accept most of our bleating is unwarranted because we don't have the right to set our own speed limits.
However, I would point out that the thrust of most of the offending comments has been grievances about perceived entrapment rather than inappropriate speed limits.
Beyond that, this Forum, like any other public medium, offers the rare opportunity for road users to air their complaints.  In some cases folk have simply been seeking sympathy, in others, venting their frustration.
Luckily, this medium is not a Royal Commission, and will carry absolutely no weight with the authorities.
Perhaps it's a harmless amusement.  At worst, a cathartic expression.

[Pezzz]

I am one of the several who have commented regarding speed limits and the policing thereof.
I accept most of our bleating is unwarranted because we don't have the right to set our own speed limits.
However, I would point out that the thrust of most of the offending comments has been grievances about perceived entrapment rather than inappropriate speed limits.
Beyond that, this Forum, like any other public medium, offers the rare opportunity for road users to air their complaints.  In some cases folk have simply been seeking sympathy, in others, venting their frustration.
Luckily, this medium is not a Royal Commission, and will carry absolutely no weight with the authorities.
Perhaps it's a harmless amusement.  At worst, a cathartic expression.

Too true Biggles...  The hiding really makes it feel more like "revenue raising" rather than "road safety" ... i think this is the main gripe people have.

[Marcus]

I don't care that it is "revenue raising" or not.

If I was the police spokes person I would just come right out and say it...
 
"Yes, you're all correct. we're revenue raising...you want to stop us doing that...it's simple...Stop speeding, end of discussion" and walk off.

They don't book people doing under or on the limit, they only book people breaking the law. (sure there will always be instances of calibrations being out) but all in all they are accurate.

Up the speed limit to 130 on the major hwys connection the capital cities. Up the speed limit to 110 everywhere else.

Anyway.

I'm a massive fan of round-a-bouts, as I think they keep the flow of traffic moving... So I purpose a round-a-bout at very single 4 way intersection, I think this will cut down on collisions and make it safer for everyone...

I should be running the world.

 

[Streak]

I agree with Marcus, I have had a few speeding tickets in my time, never been upset about any of them...why...because i was speeding, does not matter why, how or where the speed gun was, in the end i was doing the wrong thing.

if you don't want to pay a fine....don't speed.....

[Whizz]

If everyone on the road really wants to 'stick it to the cops', upsetting their spare-time income, then simply stay within the speed limit for a period of 12 months. Never break the speed limit for any reason! If the whole country did that then I can almost guarantee that the total number of cops would be on the reduction, they would be running out if income to keep them employed!!!

[Marcus]

I agree with Marcus,

Thanks... that's you, my wife, myself and my mum, who thinks I should be running the world... Next election lets make a party and vote me into Canberra like that guy from the motorist party...

[Biggles]

I'm a massive fan of round-a-bouts, as I think they keep the flow of traffic moving... So I purpose a round-a-bout at very single 4 way intersection, I think this will cut down on collisions and make it safer for everyone...

I'm with you on that campaign, Stringo!  Forcing drivers to sit at a dumb red light when there is no traffic in sight, or even when there are a few other vehicles around is plain unintelligent traffic management.
Roundabouts don't fail when the power goes off.  They don't need programming.

What they do need is observant, thinking drivers.

But that will start more "forum fallout".

                                         

[Sean]

Roundabouts are okay if everyone knows the rules, but they don't unfortunately. Most rules are made to fit the lowest common denominator so they can't create too much mayhem.

[Williamson]

...... My comments are not made from any official position, just as an observer of human nature. Where do you sit?

On the fence until I've had an opportunity to investigate a problem, identify possible solutions, consider impact of solutions, decide on which solution is best, or in some situations least worst.

.... when i asked her why she suddenly stopped she replied because there was a new camera on the intersection that "gets you" for speeding ......

That's not what caused the crash, it was someone was travelling too close.

VicRoads have definitions for classifying accidents (DCA), the other State road authorities probably have something similar.  Anyway the DCA code for a vehicle hiting the rear of the vehicle in front is 130.  They don't have one for silly drivers stopping suddenly and unecessarily, and then being hit in the rear.  I don't suppose they'll assign e new code for that either, afterall the crash was a 130.

......Luckily, this medium is not a Royal Commission, and will carry absolutely no weight with the authorities.
Perhaps it's a harmless amusement.  At worst, a cathartic expression.

True .....

Up the speed limit to 130 on the major hwys connection the capital cities. Up the speed limit to 110 everywhere else.

But then we still have the tolerance problem discussed in the other thread, ie. do we have a 2, 4, 6, 8, 10km/h or whatever tolerance threshold?

I'm a massive fan of round-a-bouts, as I think they keep the flow of traffic moving... So I purpose a round-a-bout at very single 4 way intersection, I think this will cut down on collisions and make it safer for everyone...

Yep, roundabouts are good, better for vehicles than Stop or Giveway controlled cross-road intersections, but not better for pedestrians.

We (in "my" municipality) have installed many roundabouts.  We have removed roundabouts and installed traffic signals. 

Had a long drawn-out agruement with VicRoads re. one intersection, they wanted signals, we wanted a roundabout, we won, roundabout constructed.  At least we thought we won, now 12 years later we want to remove the roundabout and install signals - all because of the pedestrians.

In the end, installing the best form of traffic control is often limited to the funding available.  To give you some context here, a few years ago the cost to remove a multi-lane roundabout at an arterial road / arterial road intersection and install traffic signals was $4.7M.  VicRoads & Council are saving up for the next one.

Hopefully it's not one of the roundabouts that you guys and gals like.

[jwm]

Speed limits and traffic laws in general, in all instances, are designed to accommodate the lowest common denominator. You and I might understand the traffic laws, you and I might be able to drive/ride at 130kph but the majority of individuals out there can't. End of story.
The legislators have to make sure the driving population as a 'whole' can get from A to B with a minimal amount of fuss and hopefully without causing a major incident.

Oh, and of course, there is that thing about the revenue raising the government undertakes from motorists to keep our various states financially afloat.

[Shiney]

All the points here have been well made and make sense...

But ...

I'd still like to see the speed limits increased to 110 on highways and tolerance set to 10% 

[Whizz]

Shiney, mate, whilst I agree completely with your view, you must remember that there is NO 'tolerance' of any degree. In other words if the speed limit is 100 it is illegal to do any speed whatever over the 100, regardless of whether your speedo is accurate or not, or whether getting past the moron in front of you, who is doing 95 in the 100 limit, by doing 110 means that you are more likely to survive the process. The cops in this instance have absolutely no common sense whatever, so what can we do? My only answer to that is I am far more interested in surviving than keeping a cop happy, so I will break the speed limit to get past Mr Slow Coach then get back into the legal limit from then on.

The idea of increasing the speed limit is, to me, far more sensible, lets face it the phrase is "speed limit", what does that tell you??? 

[Streak]

just to raise a small hand here, as i have been following the news with this one, so far i have not read anywhere about what change the tolerance will be, if any, seems to be more of a media beat up to sell papers more than anything....

and i think they have done a great job of it....

one more thing, I would like everyone to keep in mind with this thread that a number of our club are police officers, who are just doing their jobs, just like the rest of us, so just be mindful of what you are going to say, as like the rest of us in the club they are good people.

[Marcus]

I see the other flip of the coin... as well... It doesn't matter what the speed limit is if it was set at 130 you're still going to have people doing 125 and be frustrated and the slow poke, and you're still going to have people doing 140.

Yep, roundabouts are good, better for vehicles than Stop or Giveway controlled cross-road intersections, but not better for pedestrians.

We (in "my" municipality) have installed many roundabouts.  We have removed roundabouts and installed traffic signals. 

Had a long drawn-out agruement with VicRoads re. one intersection, they wanted signals, we wanted a roundabout, we won, roundabout constructed.  At least we thought we won, now 12 years later we want to remove the roundabout and install signals - all because of the pedestrians.

In the end, installing the best form of traffic control is often limited to the funding available.  To give you some context here, a few years ago the cost to remove a multi-lane roundabout at an arterial road / arterial road intersection and install traffic signals was $4.7M.  VicRoads & Council are saving up for the next one.

Hopefully it's not one of the roundabouts that you guys and gals like.

In Vic we give way to pedestrians... so bring on the round-a-bouts... the more the merrier

[Whizz]

Sorry Streak (et al), I did not really write a clear enough description of my views in this and I did not mean to imply anything about the traffic police other than they are as limited as everyone else with their interpretation of what a 'speed limit' actually is. It is, as described, "A Speed Limit", not a bit of advice or a novel idea, it is a limit that they are no more legally capable of forgetting than the rest of us. So the choice of whether I (or anyone else) could or should make up our own minds on whether to stick with the speed limit is solely our choice. A police officer has no legal ability to allow anyone to break what is, in actuality, a Law, however a considerable number do tend to use the idea of common sense in some situations. For this they have my gratitude, but the decision to break the speed limit is mine and mine alone! Hence the making of the choice between sticking to 100, this giving myself the strong possibility of being hit by any approaching vehicle, or speeding up to 110 or 115 and getting back on my side of the road quicker thus reducing my risk level is, as far as I'm concerned, a no-brainer. The choice is mine! I would rather be alive for the policeman to give a speeding ticket too, than being washed off the opposite side of the road because I was there for far too long!

Hope this clears up the apparent implications that I was having a go at anyone. I do understand the limits of the Law, and I also understand that the actual enforcing of the Law can, in some instances, be more of a risk than less, but this is not a dig at the police officers who are in the same situation as I am, so I accept the fact that the risks are mine not theirs.

[Streak]

great response Whizz! i was actually just saying that as a general reminder to everyone 

but i think you summed it up nicely 

[Cerebral Knievel]

After a " minor " infringement last year i have been on 2 point probationary licence for the last 361 days ( but who's counting ).
For this i have only have my own stupidity to blame & no one else.  Has it made me a safer motorist ..... i don't think so.
It has made me diligently stick to the speed limit everywhere with the exception of being in the middle of nowhere on RTE's.
I believe it has put me & other road users in danger in situations when higher speeds were required in individual unique traffic flow situations for fear of being  nabbed by an unmarked vehicle .
Just yesterday i passed a marked camera van only to find a unmarked white twin cab nissan 4wd camera vehicle 5km down the same road.
Revenue raising- absolutely.Having just spend 50 million upgrading the road significantly , safety in this instance is not the issue. 
Regardless of what traffic management systems & speed limits are in place to increase safety, i have come to the conclusion that the major factor in this debate is the fact you can't legislate against public stupidity.
Anyhoo , work beckons, so i shall continue this at a later time. Ride safe folks. 4 days to go ......   

[STupid]

Speeding -
Did you know?

FACT SHEET 1 of 6
Roads and Traffic Authority of New South Wales www.rta.nsw.gov.au | 13 22 13 July 11 RTA/Pub. 11.307

Why is speeding a problem?
 
1. What is speeding?

If you drive above the maximum speed limit or you drive too fast for the weather, road and/or traffic conditions, even if the posted speed limit is not exceeded – you are speeding! Speeding is one of the most commonly reported factors associated with crashes, yet, few drivers view speeding as an immediate risk to their personal safety.

2. I’m a good driver, so I can speed safely. Can’t I?

No. There’s no such thing as speeding safely. Speed alone, regardless of any other factors, including how good a car you may be driving or how good a driver you may be, increases both the likelihood and the severity of a crash. Think about it. Any crash with a speeding vehicle could involve you, your passengers, pedestrians and/or the driver and passengers of one or more other vehicles.

3. The faster you drive - the greater your risk of a crash and severe injury.

As your speed increases, so does the distance travelled while processing and reacting to a hazard. At the same time, the distance needed for you to stop also increases - at a considerable rate.
Speeding also contributes to the increased risk of losing vehicle control. At higher speeds, cars become more difficult to manoeuvre - especially on corners or curves or where evasive action is necessary. The forces experienced by the human body in a collision also increase as the speed increases. Driving within the speed limit:
• Allows road users more time to assess hazards and avoid potential crashes.
• Reduces the distance travelled while reacting to hazards.
• Provides a greater opportunity to avoid a collision.
• Makes it less likely that either you or another driver/rider will lose control.
• Reduces the impact forces in the event of a crash, making severe outcomes less likely.

4. The faster you drive - the harder you hit another vehicle, pedestrian or other object in a crash.

Even exceeding the speed limit by a small margin can have a considerable impact. Consider this example: A driver notices a pedestrian crossing the road. If the car is travelling at 50 km/h and the driver brakes when the pedestrian is 29 meters away, there will be enough space in which to stop without hitting the pedestrian. Increase the vehicle speed by just 10 km/h and the situation changes dramatically. At 60 km/h, with the pedestrian 29 meters away and the driver braking at the same point, the car will be travelling at 44 km/h when it hits the pedestrian.
The following diagram illustrates the stopping distances and impact forces at various speeds:

5. I don’t speed very often or by much, so, speeding doesn’t really matter to me. Does it?

It only takes one driving error, at one moment in time to cause a casualty crash. While high level speeding places that driver and other road users or passengers at great danger, low level speeding is a dangerous community wide issue due to the large number of drivers who speed by a small margin.
Exceeding the speed limit by even a small amount increases the risk of a crash. A study by Kloeden of 151cases in Adelaide found that each additional increase in speed by 5 km/h doubles the riski of a casualty crash. Low level speeding is such a large issue because the cumulative effect of the additional risk associated with low level speeding multiplied by a high number of drivers speeding at these low levels, results in more casualty crashes than high level speeding.
 
6. If I think the speed limit is too low, why should I stick to the limit?

Speed limits are set by road safety experts in accordance with the NSW Speed Zoning Guidelines. Speed limits accurately reflect the safety factors affecting given lengths of road. The factors determining the speed limit may not be immediately apparent to road users who may not appreciate the level of risk associated with speed relative to a particular road.
 
7. I can save time by driving fast?

Little time is saved by speeding, but if everyone is travelling at a similar speed it will make travel conditions more harmonious and free flowing. It is much easier and safer to judge gaps and there will be fewer disruptions due to crashes.
You save only a maximum of 46 seconds over a 10 kilometre distance if you travel at 65 km/h instead of 60 km/h, however, it doubles the risk of being involved in a casualty crash. In fact delays are more likely to be associated with other traffic, traffic controls such as roundabouts and traffic lights and road geometry such as curves and grades. So, you only save the full 46 seconds in the rare circumstance of a relatively straight road, with no impeding traffic and no signals, stop signs, give ways or roundabouts.
 
8. Aren’t the fines for exceeding the speed limit, just another form of revenue raising?

Reducing the road toll on NSW roads is the RTA’s key objective. It is estimated that speeding related crashes cost the NSW community over $900M each year in costs to health, emergency services and lost income. In addition over $800 million has been spent in road safety initiatives in NSW over the last five years (this is much greater than the revenue generated by fines). Fines are used in conjunction with demerit points to deter drivers from speeding. Penalties from speeding have been shown to be an effective way of managing speed and improving road safety, in Australia and internationally.
The revenue from fines is redirected into the community through various government programs and initiatives, including health, education and road safety.

9. But not all crashes are speed related, so, why are we told speeding is such a big problem?

While speeding is not the primary cause of all crashes, higher speeds increase the likelihood of a crash occurring and make the outcome of any crash far more severe. Managing speed will reduce the severity and frequency of all crashes regardless of factors contributing to the crash in the first instance – that is why controlling vehicle speeds is so important to road safety.
Speed is the major cause of many crashes, so, while we don’t expect that reducing the speed limit will remove all crashes, reducing speed will certainly reduce both the risk and severity of crashes.


In addition, if all road users drive their vehicles within the recommended speed limits, there would be no need for deterrents such as fines and penalties, including the demerit points scheme.
Speed limits are enforced by NSW Police Force and the RTA and fines and demerit points are set by legislation in accordance with the seriousness of the offence. Fines and penalties have been shown to be an effective deterrent for most drivers to keep within the speed limit in countries where they exist.
For more information visit: Road rules and regulations

10. More information/contact details

For more information on speed zones and to ‘Have Your Say’ on speed limits and speed limit signs, visit the RTA’s new Safer Roads NSW website at www.rta.nsw.gov.au.
Contact:: safer_roads@rta.nsw.gov.au
References:
i Kloeden CN, McLean AJ, Moore VM, and Ponte G (1997). Travelling Speed and the Risk of Crash Involvement, NHMRC Road Accident Research Unit, The University of Adelaide.
ii Gavin, A, Walker, E, Murdoch, C, Graham, A, Fernandes, R, Job, RFS (2010). Is a focus on low level speeding justified? Objective determination of the relative contributions of low and high level speeding to the road toll. Proceedings of the Australasian Road Safety Research Policing Education Conference, Canberra, 2010. 

[jwm]

This subject has been flogged to death on every bike and car forum available, in the media and in every club and pub in Australia. You and I are not going to change the legislators attitude for  any number of reasons. I think that we are far more likely to reach a consensus on who will be the next Coach of the Parramatta Eels. Let me see, so far the media have nominated, Brad Arthur, Daniel Anderson, Jason Taylor, John Cartwright, Michael Maguire, Julia Gillard (yep, juilia is looking for a new direction in life), Neil Henry, Brian Smith, Tim Sheens, McNamara from England and half a dozen others. Anybody on the forum want to have any input into this discussion?????

[Shiney]

..... I think that we are far more likely to reach a consensus on who will be the next Coach of the Parramatta Eels. Let me see, so far the media have nominated, Brad Arthur, Daniel Anderson, Jason Taylor, John Cartwright, Michael Maguire, Julia Gillard (yep, juilia is looking for a new direction in life), Neil Henry, Brian Smith, Tim Sheens, McNamara from England and half a dozen others. Anybody on the forum want to have any input into this discussion?????

Don't for get Marcus,  if he can run the world, a little sports club should be easy

I agree with Marcus,

Thanks... that's you, my wife, myself and my mum, who thinks I should be running the world... Next election lets make a party and vote me into Canberra like that guy from the motorist party...

Add me to the list, I'll vote for you

[Streak]

This subject has been flogged to death on every bike and car forum available, in the media and in every club and pub in Australia. You and I are not going to change the legislators attitude for  any number of reasons. I think that we are far more likely to reach a consensus on who will be the next Coach of the Parramatta Eels. Let me see, so far the media have nominated, Brad Arthur, Daniel Anderson, Jason Taylor, John Cartwright, Michael Maguire, Julia Gillard (yep, juilia is looking for a new direction in life), Neil Henry, Brian Smith, Tim Sheens, McNamara from England and half a dozen others. Anybody on the forum want to have any input into this discussion?????

well i am still laughing! well said sir 

[Williamson]

All the points here have been well made and make sense...

But ...

I'd still like to see the speed limits increased to 110 on highways and tolerance set to 10% 

So what would be the speed limit on highways, 110km/h or 121km/h?   

At what point would some drivers / riders start concerntating on their speedo, rather than on the road and traffic, to ensure they don't go over the "limit"?