Open Speed Limit Highway in NT???

[Outbackjack]

There is still a palpable underlying anger up here about the speed limit issue. The 130 kph has had no effect on the road toll, except to cause fatigue related accidents. Political correctness will not allow the currenty guv to target the real cause of the NT road toll. The current guv is in power by the grace of one independant, and he scraped in by 150 votes. There will, no doubt, be a change of guv next election. Wether they bring back the (//), time will tell. But having had a long talk with my local member (Matt Conlan) the CLP are determined to follow up with their pledge. BTW, the feds have never withdrawn road funding up here. The Stuart Hwy is a vital military asset. They cannot let it fall into disrepair any worse than what it is after 7 odd years of neglect.

http://www.keepntlimitfree.org/Porta...%20080721A.PDF

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

except to cause fatigue related accidents.

and that can be proved where?

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

Political correctness will not allow the currenty guv to target the real cause of the NT road toll. The current guv is in power by the grace of one independant, and he scraped in by 150 votes. There will, no doubt, be a change of guv next election. Wether they bring back the (//), time will tell. But having had a long talk with my local member (Matt Conlan) the CLP are determined to follow up with their pledge. BTW, the feds have never withdrawn road funding up here. The Stuart Hwy is a vital military asset. They cannot let it fall into disrepair any worse than what it is after 7 odd years of neglect.

http://www.keepntlimitfree.org/Porta...%20080721A.PDF

In relation to statistics, best you check the link I put up, the Territory Government link I mean. I think you will start to see a decrease, to me at a cursory glance I reckon there could be a downward trend occuring, but time will tell.

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

and that can be proved where?

I live here , I talk to people all the time. People are constantly telling of the time it takes to get from ASP to DWN and how it now involves a night time drive. Before the 130 you could, if yo chose to, do the trip in day light hours. The emergency workers that I know have told me of the increase in fatigue related accidents, they always get written up as eccessive speed.


In relation to statistics, best you check the link I put up, the Territory Government link I mean. I think you will start to see a decrease, to me at a cursory glance I reckon there could be a downward trend occuring, but time will tell.

If the speed limit is all mighty at reducing road trauma, then how do you explain 2007, 2008. There was a small drop after that but the numbers are getting back up again.

Here is a summary for 2010.

http://www.pfes.nt.gov.au/Media-Cent...l-wrap-up.aspx

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

If the speed limit is all mighty at reducing road trauma, then how do you explain 2007, 2008. There was a small drop after that but the numbers are getting back up again.

Here is a summary for 2010.

http://www.pfes.nt.gov.au/Media-Cent...l-wrap-up.aspx

a small drop?, it went from (2008), 75 to (2009), 31.

The numbers for the NT are small and averaging 50 in the last 10 years. They aren't going to be exactly 50 every year and trying to attach significance to the +/-10 each year is really just guess work.

I suppose the data you are after is has there been any change on the roads that have been "downgraded" to 130km/h, don't know, the data doesnt appear to be available.

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by sudszy

a small drop?, it went from (2008), 75 to (2009), 31.

The numbers for the NT are small and averaging 50 in the last 10 years. They aren't going to be exactly 50 every year and trying to attach significance to the +/-10 each year is really just guess work.

I suppose the data you are after is has there been any change on the roads that have been "downgraded" to 130km/h, don't know, the data doesnt appear to be available.

It looks to me that over the last two or three years there has been less traffic up here. Definately less grey nomads and I think less tourists (sadly). We have been hit hard by the GFC like the rest of the Aussie tourist industry. The NT intervention has also caused too may indiginous folk out of their remote homes and into places like the Alice , Tennant and Katherine. The number in Darwin has also gone up. This has had the effect of keeping them away from the main Highways. The indiginous people in the road toll up here is way over represented. They make up about 15% of the population and constantly account for around 50% of the road toll. Given the condition of the cars they drive, any speed above walking pace is dangerous. This is where the political correctness up here is killing people. It would be easy to set up random road blocks and check every car that passes thru and put the bombs off the road. But the only road side police presence up here is with a money gun. They ignore the wrecks that drive by. If we could halve the road toll up here on a permanant basis, that would be a good thing.... no.??

[Bunyip04]

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

It looks to me that over the last two or three years there has been less traffic up here. Definately less grey nomads and I think less tourists (sadly). We have been hit hard by the GFC like the rest of the Aussie tourist industry. The NT intervention has also caused too may indiginous folk out of their remote homes and into places like the Alice , Tennant and Katherine. The number in Darwin has also gone up. This has had the effect of keeping them away from the main Highways. The indiginous people in the road toll up here is way over represented. They make up about 15% of the population and constantly account for around 50% of the road toll. Given the condition of the cars they drive, any speed above walking pace is dangerous. This is where the political correctness up here is killing people. It would be easy to set up random road blocks and check every car that passes thru and put the bombs off the road. But the only road side police presence up here is with a money gun. They ignore the wrecks that drive by. If we could halve the road toll up here on a permanant basis, that would be a good thing.... no.??

Grey nomads getting less??? I'm going to have to disagree on that one, on my way down to Woomera earlier this year, in the arvo at the end of everyday, places like Banka Banka, and even just well set up rest areas, were FULL of em!! haha. It was amazing, i'd never seen anything like it, and they were all heading north. Coober Pedy was full on the way there and back too, haha.

As for the road toll, it would be great if we could reduce it by half indeed!! My opinion on 'one way' of doing it, is to re-test everyone's driving abillity maybe every 4-5 yrs? The standard of people driving on the road in a lot of places (regardless of state) is appalling... IMO, some sort of re-test system would help a LOT.
But... Then with less bad drivers committing offences, would lead to less fines... And we can't have that....

Oh and on the subject of speed, one good superintendant, Bob Rennie, once told us (in a road awareness gathering) there is such thing as "sensibly stupid", and i totally agree...

[NAK302]

Originally Posted by Bunyip04

Oh and on the subject of speed, one good superintendant, Bob Rennie, once told us (in a road awareness gathering) there is such thing as "sensibly stupid", and i totally agree...

wow Bob Rennie, now there's a name i haven't heard for ages. he did some time in Nhulunbuy just after i got my licence. he was a good bloke. last time i saw him was during one of my Tech blocks in Darwin around 1984. he canaried our car but then gave us an hour to get it off the road

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

and that can be proved where?


In relation to statistics, best you check the link I put up, the Territory Government link I mean. I think you will start to see a decrease, to me at a cursory glance I reckon there could be a downward trend occuring, but time will tell.

The same place it can be disproved.

Yes there is a slighly downward trend. If it continues at the same rate it will be down pre 130 road toll in another 10 years or so.

There will be a HUGE amount of pressure on this.

There is no actual physical evidence anywhere in Australia on what happens when speed limits are raised significantly just the constant dogma pushed by the academics and their financers.

If, where the limit is raised, the toll drops there will be a lot of questions that need to be answered and a lot of "experts" will be shown up.

Therefore the only way that the "experts" can protect themselves in to make sure that it never happens.

It is the bully principle. Threaten and cause fear and you will get your way until someone stands up to you and knocks you down.
The best way to never be knocked down is to ensure that no-one ever gets a chance to stand up to you......

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by flappist

The same place it can be disproved.

Yes there is a slighly downward trend. If it continues at the same rate it will be down pre 130 road toll in another 10 years or so.

There will be a HUGE amount of pressure on this.

There is no actual physical evidence anywhere in Australia on what happens when speed limits are raised significantly just the constant dogma pushed by the academics and their financers.

If, where the limit is raised, the toll drops there will be a lot of questions that need to be answered and a lot of "experts" will be shown up.

Therefore the only way that the "experts" can protect themselves in to make sure that it never happens.

It is the bully principle. Threaten and cause fear and you will get your way until someone stands up to you and knocks you down.
The best way to never be knocked down is to ensure that no-one ever gets a chance to stand up to you......

As a former VicSES road accident rescuer, I can tell you that when a car hits a pole/tree at 100km/h there is significant damage and injury, but when that same car hits that same pole/tree at much higher speeds there is significantly more damage and injury, I didn't think you needed to be Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton to work that out.

People are currently struggling to come to grips with driving now given their level of ability and concentration.

This is not an argument about speed limits, this is an argument about compliance with simple rules, this is about I want everything now, it is about I need to be somwhere NOW, oh so typical of the NOW generation.

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

As a former VicSES road accident rescuer, I can tell you that when a car hits a pole/tree at 100km/h there is significant damage and injury, but when that same car hits that same pole/tree at much higher speeds there is significantly more damage and injury, I didn't think you needed to be Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton to work that out.

People are currently struggling to come to grips with driving now given their level of ability and concentration.

Bugger all tree's / posts on the roads where the (//) is being proposed,Trev. BTW, if the (//) does come back here, its is still voluntary as to what speed you travel at. Please accept that on the right roads and the right conditions that speed can be safely managed. Pre 1/1/2007 my chosen cruise speed solo was 200kph and with SWMBO and kids it was 160kph. We never had any situation where we were in any kind of danger. And as far as I know we are all still alive and kicking.

I can understand your reservations, knowing your background, but we can't keep on making laws that draw back to the lowest common denominator ie brainless hoons. They are best taken out of the gene pool anyway.

[NAK302]

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

Bugger all tree's / posts on the roads where the (//) is being proposed,Trev. BTW, if the (//) does come back here, its is still voluntary as to what speed you travel at. Please accept that on the right roads and the right conditions that speed can be safely managed. Pre 1/1/2007 my chosen cruise speed solo was 200kph and with SWMBO and kids it was 160kph. We never had any situation where we were in any kind of danger. And as far as I know we are all still alive and kicking.

I can understand your reservations, knowing your background, but we can't keep on making laws that draw back to the lowest common denominator ie brainless hoons. They are best taken out of the gene pool anyway.

excellent reply mate.
i think some people just don't get it when they haven't been there to experience it.

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by GT-0733

excellent reply mate.
i think some people just don't get it when they haven't been there to experience it.

Thaks mate, one of our (Teritorians) pet hate, is east coast chardonay sippers telling us how to live. We are the same people living in vastly differnet conditions. I would aslo include those living in northern WA and parts of QLD. But having just said that, QLD roads are the worst in the country. Speed limits there are definately justified....

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

As a former VicSES road accident rescuer, I can tell you that when a car hits a pole/tree at 100km/h there is significant damage and injury, but when that same car hits that same pole/tree at much higher speeds there is significantly more damage and injury, I didn't think you needed to be Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton to work that out.

People are currently struggling to come to grips with driving now given their level of ability and concentration.

This is not an argument about speed limits, this is an argument about compliance with simple rules, this is about I want everything now, it is about I need to be somwhere NOW, oh so typical of the NOW generation.

Then a simple question Trev.

Two cars, one a XY Falcon the other FG Falcon hit the same immovable tree, the XY at 100km/h the FG at 150km/h.

Which occupants have the best chance of surviving?

Change the speeds to 60 & 100, speed is not the only factor in road trauma and remember that travelling from one end of Victoria to the other is just a trip to the shops in NT, WA or western QLD.

Technology has come a long way.....

[AWD Chaser]

Originally Posted by flappist

Then a simple question Trev.

Two cars, one a XY Falcon the other FG Falcon hit the same immovable tree, the XY at 100km/h the FG at 150km/h.

Which occupants have the best chance of surviving?

Change the speeds to 60 & 100, speed is not the only factor in road trauma and remember that travelling from one end of Victoria to the other is just a trip to the shops in NT, WA or western QLD.

Technology has come a long way.....

Or even a used Territory vs a brand new Cherri, Great Wall, or Hyundai Getz...

[fg_nitro]

Originally Posted by flappist

Then a simple question Trev.

Two cars, one a XY Falcon the other FG Falcon hit the same immovable tree, the XY at 100km/h the FG at 150km/h.

Which occupants have the best chance of surviving?

Change the speeds to 60 & 100, speed is not the only factor in road trauma and remember that travelling from one end of Victoria to the other is just a trip to the shops in NT, WA or western QLD.

Technology has come a long way.....

Flappist great point you raise, I have noticed a few roads I travel on where the limit was 100 now that has been scrubbed out and reduced to 70 or 80 without any change to the area.... (no housing or new side roads).

Yet when the limit was 100 the average car owned by someone using that road would have been a 1992/1993 Falcon or Commodore at best.

Yet we have ANCAP 5 cars on the roads now and speed limits reduce? Nonsense!

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by fg_nitro

Flappist great point you raise, I have noticed a few roads I travel on where the limit was 100 now that has been scrubbed out and reduced to 70 or 80 without any change to the area.... (no housing or new side roads).

Yet when the limit was 100 the average car owned by someone using that road would have been a 1992/1993 Falcon or Commodore at best.

Yet we have ANCAP 5 cars on the roads now and speed limits reduce? Nonsense!

Yeah, it seams cars are getting safer, roads are being built and maintained better, and speed limits are still dropping.

With better roads and cars, you would think the speed limits would slightly go up, or at the very least stay the same. But that seams to not be the case.

In the past few years I have seen many locals roads drop there speed limit, and only 1 raise it. Well the 80 zone was extended after major road improvements. About 500 metres of road was increased from 60 to 80.

[MAGPIE]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

As a former VicSES road accident rescuer, I can tell you that when a car hits a pole/tree at 100km/h there is significant damage and injury, but when that same car hits that same pole/tree at much higher speeds there is significantly more damage and injury, I didn't think you needed to be Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton to work that out.

You don't need to be a former VicSES road accident rescuer to work that out do you ?

In my experience any vehicle hitting an imovable object whether it be a tree, pole, retaining wall or whatever at 100km/h or more has always resulted in fatalities.

IMO the fatigue risk is greater than the speed risk.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by MAGPIE

IMO the fatigue risk is greater than the speed risk.

Agreed.

[dogfish]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

As a former VicSES road accident rescuer, I can tell you that when a car hits a pole/tree at 100km/h there is significant damage and injury, but when that same car hits that same pole/tree at much higher speeds there is significantly more damage and injury, I didn't think you needed to be Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton to work that out.

Mate when you have 20+ indigenous members of the community in the back of a troop carrier and it rolls you don't have to be Einstein to work out why the road toll jumps in leaps and bounds in the Territory.

People are currently struggling to come to grips with driving now given their level of ability and concentration.

How so not in the NT I felt I was more focused Driving at 170kmh down the Stuart Hwy rather than 130kmh. As the peripheral vision is reduced as you travel faster hence more concentration required. I know I am a better driver from having the benefit of No speed limits on HWY's as I know I can drive and Ride at high speed for distance driving and also overtaking at high speed to get pass Road Trains etc.

This is not an argument about speed limits, this is an argument about compliance with simple rules, this is about I want everything now, it is about I need to be somwhere NOW, oh so typical of the NOW generation.

The open speed limit was in the NT for as long as anyone can remember so what does this relate to people wanting to get places faster now?
People just want what they had back.
I have over taken police at high speeds especially between Adelaide River and Pine Creek and they didn't batter an eye lid the odd one or two looked to see if my Bike/Car complied with the roadworthy requirements and if they were capable of doing such speeds and due to having 12monthly vehicle inspections you don't see half as many people driving around on flogged out tyres Ridiculously lowered vehicles etc etc as you do in Vic and Qld.
I would Never Ever contemplate riding a Motorcycle whilst I live in QLD.

[NAK302]

Originally Posted by dogfish

The open speed limit was in the NT for as long as anyone can remember so what does this relate to people wanting to get places faster now?
People just want what they had back.
I have over taken police at high speeds especially between Adelaide River and Pine Creek and they didn't batter an eye lid the odd one or two looked to see if my Bike/Car complied with the roadworthy requirements and if they were capable of doing such speeds and due to having 12monthly vehicle inspections you don't see half as many people driving around on flogged out tyres Ridiculously lowered vehicles etc etc as you do in Vic and Qld.
I would Never Ever contemplate riding a Motorcycle whilst I live in QLD.

another sensible post

[2011G6E]

The best stats I saw was that in the 12 months following the introduction of the 130kph limit, the road toll went up by 50%. A police road safety guy said one possible explanation was that drivers, left to thier own devices, usually travel at a speed comfortable for them...for some people that could be 150, for others it could be 100 to 110. Suddenly though you say "Hey, it's "safe" to do 130kph...go for it", and drivers who probably wouldn't have driven that fact before suddenly tried it out and came to grief when they ran out of talent.

[2011G6E]

Yep...road deaths went up by about 50% in the first year after they brought in the 130 limit.

One theory was that before when there was no limit, you drove to the conditions and at a speed you felt comfortable with...and for a lot of people, they might feel "comfortable" at 100 or 110 as they drove in other states. Now put a sign up saying "130" and they think they "must" do 130 or that it's perfectly OK to do 130 at any time of the day or night, rail hail or shine, and will drive outside thier comfort zone...but it must be safe because the government put up a sign saying it was OK...

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Yep...road deaths went up by about 50% in the first year after they brought in the 130 limit.

One theory was that before when there was no limit, you drove to the conditions and at a speed you felt comfortable with...and for a lot of people, they might feel "comfortable" at 100 or 110 as they drove in other states. Now put a sign up saying "130" and they think they "must" do 130 or that it's perfectly OK to do 130 at any time of the day or night, rail hail or shine, and will drive outside thier comfort zone...but it must be safe because the government put up a sign saying it was OK...

It wasn't quite 50% but anyway . . . . . .

Now tell us what happend in the years after the first please

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

It wasn't quite 50% but anyway . . . . . .

Now tell us what happend in the years after the first please

It went up and down as it was affected by other events such as floods etc.

It very plainly showed that the removal of the open zones had no demonstrable positive effect whatsoever other than to make a group of rabid zealots who do not actually live or drive in NT feel better about themselves.

I really can understand why there is such strong opposition to open zones. It shows actual evidence rather than theory and puts is peril a number of academic's credibility.

I do find quite amusing the comments that Australian drivers are not capable of judging what is a suitable speed for them in any situation.

Maybe the trainers, training and dogmatic agenda focused curriculum are a major factor in the problem.......

[Outbackjack]

One good year since 1/1/2007. That was at the height of the GFC. Traffic here was noticably light.

http://transport.nt.gov.au/safety/ro...our-statistics


2008 should shoot down any credibility of the pro speed limit loonies.

Notice the indiginous figures. Keep in your mind that they make up about 10% of the population. (spread out over the whole NT)

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

One good year since 1/1/2007. That was at the height of the GFC. Traffic here was noticably light.

http://transport.nt.gov.au/safety/ro...our-statistics


2008 should shoot down any credibility of the pro speed limit loonies.

Notice the indiginous figures. Keep in your mind that they make up about 10% of the population. (spread out over the whole NT)

have you actually looked at the trend in figures, they are trending down, you have shot yourself in the foot with your own argument, as I have said before, 1 year was bad but the trend is down - sorry

[mcnews]

So is the national trend. Still a huge point that in year one there was a big spike, that can't be discounted.

[Outbackjack]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

have you actually looked at the trend in figures, they are trending down, you have shot yourself in the foot with your own argument, as I have said before, 1 year was bad but the trend is down - sorry

Trev, if you read back through your own comments you will see that your shoes are full of holes. Those figures only show a five year period. If you go back to when figures were first started to be recorded, you will see that the trend is actually up for that period. Another reason that you should be very carefull when you use partial figures and very loose facts. Will you be retracting your assertion???

I put that link up there to show that it is very obvious that speed limits have made no difference. If the guv of the day got off their politically correct horse and targeted the real problems up here then we might have seen a decline in fatalities. Hopefully that might happen now that we have a change of Guv. Also as I highlighted, the indiginous figures account for about HALF of the fatalities. I can assure you that they are not traveling up the highway in performance cars...... You chose to ignore that as well.

[phild12s131e]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Yep...road deaths went up by about 50% in the first year after they brought in the 130 limit.

One theory was that before when there was no limit, you drove to the conditions and at a speed you felt comfortable with...and for a lot of people, they might feel "comfortable" at 100 or 110 as they drove in other states. Now put a sign up saying "130" and they think they "must" do 130 or that it's perfectly OK to do 130 at any time of the day or night, rail hail or shine, and will drive outside thier comfort zone...but it must be safe because the government put up a sign saying it was OK...

So precisely how many of those deaths were in the new 130 zones AND happened due to speeds at around the 130? My guess from being up here and hearing about most accidents is that the answer is somewhere between bugger all and none. By far the deaths were related to other major causes and happened mostly in already restricted metro areas. A workmate of mine was one of them and despite the carry on about the speed involved (he wasn't the driver) it actually happened in an 80 kph zone within Darwin.

I recently drove back from Adelaide and the fastest vehicle I saw was a Wicked Camper and the driver must have thought that 130 was mandatory. In 3 round trips in the last 3 years I only saw one vehicle faster than that. He passed me twice between Alice and Tennant as he had to refuel. When cruising at the higher legal speeds it's hard to judge overall behaviour as you don't catch the faster ones and the ones coming behind you take some time to catch you. Going on traffic headed the other way I'd say not many are over the current 130.

While I'm not particularly concerned if the 130 stays, I'd rather see SA lift much of their side to something more reasonable. The 130 is about where my RTV becomes uncomfortable in many places.

Phil