Speed Limits Tomorrow....NT Speed Limits - Page 4

**Professor Farnsworth** · 03-11-2006, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tabletennisman

Oh well, hopefully the new speed limits will reduce fatalities on NT roads.

unlikely.

krt10 · 03-11-2006, 04:58 PM

so now because im doing the speed limit it will take much longer to get to my destination and i will get so tired from driving for so long i will fall asleep and kill my self

**Professor Farnsworth** · 03-11-2006, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krt10

so now because im doing the speed limit it will take much longer to get to my destination and i will get so tired from driving for so long i will fall asleep and kill my self

i have an idea. how about you stop every couple of hours and get out of the car, stretch your legs, have a coffee or something, like the rest of aus does

Outbackjack · 03-11-2006, 05:04 PM

Hi all, for those that are interested here is a map of all fatal accdents in the NT over the last FIVE years. This is what they used to tell us we need speed limits. There is absolutely no other data regarding each accident. Notice that the most dots are gathered around towns and comunities. There are already speed limits in those areas.

http://www.saferroaduse.nt.gov.au/ma..._CabSub_A4.pdf

Now I dont believe in conspiracies, but if I didn't want the public to see this info I would put it on the slowest computer I could find. Jeeeez it is slow to load. Be patient.

Outbackjack · 03-11-2006, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fantz

i have an idea. how about you stop every couple of hours and get out of the car, stretch your legs, have a coffee or something, like the rest of aus does

Good idea, it will take even longer to get to where we are going......

Interceptor · 03-11-2006, 06:22 PM

i just wanna see the first few people that crash from fatigue band together and sue the NT government for all they've got claiming the new speed limits caused the crashes...... and for a decent, speed loving NT judge to give them the win........

rodderz · 03-11-2006, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fantz

i drive up to albury and back once per week - that gets pretty boring and tiring as well at 110km/h. Granted it's only 3 hours one way, but it'd still be heaven at 130km/h ;p

I agree, for me the most dangerous part of the Hume Hwy between Melbourne and Sydney is the strech between say Benalla and Albury, where the road is all relatively straight. At night, sitting on 110 you soon start getting tired from the constant same dotted lines and straight road. I dont know about anyone else but if I were able to sit on 130 I'de be much more alert

And as someone else said, you have a bingle at 110 you're stuffed anyways

new2ford · 03-11-2006, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodderz

I agree, for me the most dangerous part of the Hume Hwy between Melbourne and Sydney is the strech between say Benalla and Albury, where the road is all relatively straight. At night, sitting on 110 you soon start getting tired from the constant same dotted lines and straight road. I dont know about anyone else but if I were able to sit on 130 I'de be much more alert

And as someone else said, you have a bingle at 110 you're stuffed anyways

I had a classic example of this years ago travelling Sydney to Melbourne when the Victorian limit was 100. I got to Albury in the evening and should have made it to Melbourne by bedtime (before I got too tired to drive). The starter motor jammed in Albury and it took me an hour or so to get everything going. I then had to set off and keep going because I didn't want another failure in the middle of nowhere and the spare parts were in Melbourne. So I pushed along at 110 to shorten the time and was pulled over and booked by one of the fine Victorian constabulary. For a horrible moment I thought he was going to ask me to stop the engine he was that nasty about it. So the rest of the journey was at a mesmerising 99kph and boy did I struggle to keep awake. Got to Melbourne about 3am and found I needed a new starter motor, it wouldn't start again. If I'd stopped on the way I would have been stuft (the car was an auto). So I know all about speed limit mesmerisation.

TUF514 · 03-11-2006, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Outbackjack

This will now just be a memory.

http://s65.photobucket.com/albums/h2...gAnch=imgAnch2

Even at 160, it is hard to see how people in well maintained cars are driving dangerously. Sorry about the sound. It was a cheap little camera that couldn't keep up with the scenery refresh at 160.

Very sad day. Our only hope now is to elect the CLP. They have promised that if elected, they will re-introduce the (//) highways, with limits on known black spots.

What she fails to say is WHERE these deaths are occuring.

My dad lives in Alice Springs.

No ****, when your there, open the local paper and you are forever hearing about natives being hit, killed and maimed in driving accidents.

This happens every day.

How many people are killed and/or injured in the no speed limi zones?

Governments have no idea.

TUF514 · 03-11-2006, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interceptor

i just wanna see the first few people that crash from fatigue band together and sue the NT government for all they've got claiming the new speed limits caused the crashes...... and for a decent, speed loving NT judge to give them the win........

Id like to see that.

But the popo will put out more speed cameras to recoupe the losses.... :(

Can the majority beat the minority?

Not in this country.

fmc351 · 04-11-2006, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stugots

those bread slicers (or cheese cutters) are a disgrace. They've erected them on The M4 near Penrith to "reduce damage to cars".

:

They work for cars very effectively. Theres some footage of them in use in Europe v Armco and the difference in impact and their effectiveness was remarkable. It reduces impact by absorbing shock and guiding the car back onto the side of the road as opposed to stopping it from exiting and rebounding back onto the road as with armco. Leading to less injury to people if you happen to hit it. Armco has been known to cause serious damage and injury, ones that wouldnt necessarily have occurred without it. The posts holding the wire actully pull out of the ground during an impact and the wire gently guides the car along the side of the road. Well, sort of gentle, it wont buff out. Thats what the footage showed anyway.

If Im riding, I dont want to hit armco either, you could always try ducking the wire as you slide on your ar5e. :1syellow1 Either way, it wont be good on a bike

v1p3r · 04-11-2006, 05:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fmc351

They work for cars very effectively. Theres some footage of them in use in Europe v Armco and the difference in impact and their effectiveness was remarkable. It reduces impact by absorbing shock and guiding the car back onto the side of the road as opposed to stopping it from exiting and rebounding back onto the road as with armco. Leading to less injury to people if you happen to hit it. Armco has been known to cause serious damage and injury, ones that wouldnt necessarily have occurred without it. The posts holding the wire actully pull out of the ground during an impact and the wire gently guides the car along the side of the road. Well, sort of gentle, it wont buff out. Thats what the footage showed anyway.

If Im riding, I dont want to hit armco either, you could always try ducking the wire as you slide on your ar5e. :1syellow1 Either way, it wont be good on a bike

gently my a$$!!! My BA ute has just gone through $13000 worth of repairs due to those things, I was travelling along a WA freeway when I left the road on a slight curve due to tiredness. Those wires and poles ripped my wheel sideways, backwards & upwards into my wheel arch, even causing slight damage to firewall, my front panel and door were a mess and my window shattered, as the car continued to slide back onto the freeway and stopped just off the shoulder of the other side of the road(!!!) in a rather precarios position due to the lack of a front right wheel!!!

Needless to say I'm not a fan

kempster1 · 04-11-2006, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by v1p3r

gently my a$$!!! My BA ute has just gone through $13000 worth of repairs due to those things, I was travelling along a WA freeway when I left the road on a slight curve due to tiredness. Those wires and poles ripped my wheel sideways, backwards & upwards into my wheel arch, even causing slight damage to firewall, my front panel and door were a mess and my window shattered, as the car continued to slide back onto the freeway and stopped just off the shoulder of the other side of the road(!!!) in a rather precarios position due to the lack of a front right wheel!!!

Needless to say I'm not a fan

Wrong

You got $13000 worth of damage becaise you fell asleep at the wheel, what you hit is the result of you being stupid was not the problem

krt10 · 04-11-2006, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fantz

i have an idea. how about you stop every couple of hours and get out of the car, stretch your legs, have a coffee or something, like the rest of aus does

i was trying to have a go at the NT government. why? because i think speed limits on some of those roads is stupid.
of course i would stop and rest im not that dumb

Keepleft · 04-11-2006, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by v1p3r

gently my a$$!!! My BA ute has just gone through $13000 worth of repairs due to those things, I was travelling along a WA freeway when I left the road on a slight curve due to tiredness. Those wires and poles ripped my wheel sideways, backwards & upwards into my wheel arch, even causing slight damage to firewall, my front panel and door were a mess and my window shattered, as the car continued to slide back onto the freeway and stopped just off the shoulder of the other side of the road(!!!) in a rather precarios position due to the lack of a front right wheel!!!

Needless to say I'm not a fan

Ignorant dope, Your are at fault, *you* - you stuffed up.

In your cloud of ignorance I presume you think steel guardrail would have yeilded better cost result.

The impact from steel guardrail is far more rigid and unforgiving, you'd have been sent deflected at much great power than wire-rope absorbtion.

Just so you know Joey - steel guardrail is banned from roaside installation in over 7 US states, they use wire-rope instead.

We *will* have it on our freeway medians full-length, BEFORE we ever raise a speed limit.

Don't drive tired, how many times do fools have to be told?? Go ring Dr Karl and ask him about 'micro-sleep' and distance travelled whilst so and its relativity to speed, it really is quite simple.

Outbackjack · 04-11-2006, 01:41 PM

here are the percentages......
Quote: Appendix 1: Tables - analysis of crash statistics, Table 9: Speed - fatalities and serious injuries.

In the period between 2000 and 2005, there were a total of 299 fatalities, of which 50 were speed related (17%). There were 2696 serious injuries, of which 371 were speed related (14%).

In the period, 19 fatalities occurred in unlimited areas (38% of speed-related)), whereas 31 occurred in limited areas (62% of speed related).

Of the speed related serious injuries, 113 occurred in unlimited (30%) and 258 (over double) occurred in limited (70%).

Logic concludes that the majority of speed-related accidents occur on roads where a speed limit is imposed.

Lets take this a bit further shall we. Of the 299 fatalities, only 6.3% of speed related fatalities occurred in unlimited, whereas 10.3% of speed related fatalities occurred in limited.

Of the 2696 serious injuries, only 4% of speed related serious injuries occurred in unlimited, whereas 9.5% of speed related serious injuries occurred in limited.

For the record, "serious injuries" is defined as "injuries serious enough to
be admitted to hospital". Therefore, a small bump on the old noggin (which is enough for you to be admitted to hospital for observation) is a serious injury. "

Also the definition of speed almost always "probable speed related" not "actual speed related"

The word probable does not relate to "fact" only "might be" or "likely"

"these are not my figures, I got them from another forum"

nobbystang · 04-11-2006, 03:14 PM

From what I read in the report it seems that NT drivers have a problem remaining sober?? With so many people being caught over the limit, surely that has to factor into the majority of accidents. Did I miss something or did they not say what the %'s were when looking at accident causes. Would be curious to see a state/territory by state/territory comparison on just what was causing accidents. Unfortunately, stupidity wouldn't be listed!!

Outbackjack · 04-11-2006, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keepleft

Ignorant dope, Your are at fault, *you* - you stuffed up.

In your cloud of ignorance I presume you think steel guardrail would have yeilded better cost result.

The impact from steel guardrail is far more rigid and unforgiving, you'd have been sent deflected at much great power than wire-rope absorbtion.

Just so you know Joey - steel guardrail is banned from roaside installation in over 7 US states, they use wire-rope instead.

We *will* have it on our freeway medians full-length, BEFORE we ever raise a speed limit.

Don't drive tired, how many times do fools have to be told?? Go ring Dr Karl and ask him about 'micro-sleep' and distance travelled whilst so and its relativity to speed, it really is quite simple.

I fear that these micro sleeps might be a new feature out here in the NT now. People will push on through the night and for many more hours because the $100 plus accomodation costs are more then their budget will hold. That is another thing that non Territorians probably are not aware of. The cost of a night in a two star shack out here is horendous. Food is also through the roof.

kyro_02 · 04-11-2006, 06:55 PM

yeah i've had plenty of 'micro sleeps' where you're crusing a long .. then realise.. ahh crap bit scary .... an sort of can't remember the minute before hand. (unless i'm losing my mind and they weren't micro sleeps :P :P)

Keepleft · 04-11-2006, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Outbackjack - here are the percentages......
Quote: Appendix 1: Tables - analysis of crash statistics, Table 9: Speed - fatalities and serious injuries.

In the period between 2000 and 2005, there were a total of 299 fatalities, of which 50 were speed related (17%). There were 2696 serious injuries, of which 371 were speed related (14%).

In the period, 19 fatalities occurred in unlimited areas (38% of speed-related)), whereas 31 occurred in limited areas (62% of speed related).

Of the speed related serious injuries, 113 occurred in unlimited (30%) and 258 (over double) occurred in limited (70%).

Logic concludes that the majority of speed-related accidents occur on roads where a speed limit is imposed.

NOW, take the total NT geographical landmass as a total figure, then from that the total subtract a figure for all "built-up areas". These are where speed limits apply.

THEN consider that the much larger land mass figure has NO absolute speed restriction, and it puts an even better result on (//) per capita when compared to speed limited zones, a much smaller amount of space.

The offest in favour of the built-up area speed-limited zones in this formula is the population density.

But then you take the non restricted figure, per capita the total result in relation to traffic density data and apply:-)

NOW, if it were the case, that the majority of geographical NT had a speed-limit, and that (//) was simply applied to a length of road, AND IF the (//) zones were found THEN to have a high crash rate, THEN I'd have concerns with (//) allowance.

When is NT's next election due??

The reports RED dots are dramatic, frighten people, and we can all nod and agree it looks all so hideous (and it is for survivors and family), but it hides key causative reason WHY a crash happened in the first instance, only a study of police investigations can help yeild cause, and result in response.

v1p3r - has given one very clear insight into WHY some crashes happen. And I am sorry for being stroppy in my earlier response - but sweet Jesus, I'll defend that which is right and proper.

v1p3r · 04-11-2006, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kempster1

Wrong

You got $13000 worth of damage becaise you fell asleep at the wheel, what you hit is the result of you being stupid was not the problem

Fair call, not saying it wasn't my fault, however i didn't say I fell asleep, just driving tired, my car just left the road in nealry a straighline along side these poles that are supposed to crumple and although i was onto the situation as soon as possible the car seemed to be held by these things (they were in rough terrain not concrete) and they had the ability to totally smash up my front wheel, I still don't know how, even though I was awake.

v1p3r · 04-11-2006, 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Keepleft

Ignorant dope, Your are at fault, *you* - you stuffed up.

In your cloud of ignorance I presume you think steel guardrail would have yeilded better cost result.

The impact from steel guardrail is far more rigid and unforgiving, you'd have been sent deflected at much great power than wire-rope absorbtion.

Just so you know Joey - steel guardrail is banned from roaside installation in over 7 US states, they use wire-rope instead.

We *will* have it on our freeway medians full-length, BEFORE we ever raise a speed limit.

Don't drive tired, how many times do fools have to be told?? Go ring Dr Karl and ask him about 'micro-sleep' and distance travelled whilst so and its relativity to speed, it really is quite simple.

Sorry bad choice of words, yes my fault, just wanted to illustrate that even though my car barely left the road in a straight line up against the side of these things they still caused a lot of financial damage (sorry haven't had any other accidents to compare!)

And yes bad error of judgement deciding to make the long trip home after a late shift, I just wanted to get to my partner and also had the early shift the next morning so thought my job depended on it. Obviously when life is involved it doesn't, and I kick myself every day over it.

:

Anyway I didn't want to hijack the thread, back to the topic...

Keepleft · 04-11-2006, 08:50 PM

Oh well, we can all relax a lot more and lighten up.

THIS Victorian related link will help you all unwind, enjoy!
http://www.carpoint.com.au/car-news/...=5470&R=ce5470

MO · 04-11-2006, 09:50 PM

Now given the stats that have been posted from reports...shall we care to break it down into black and white!!!

Outbackjack · 04-11-2006, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MO

Now given the stats that have been posted from reports...shall we care to break it down into black and white!!!

It would seem that (//) does not cause more deaths and serious accidents when correctly applied. I did notice on my earlier post the lack of accidents on the Tanami hiway. That is one of the most facinating pieces of road in Australia. But sadly one of the worst pieces of road in Australia. Bugger all maintenance over the last 5 years. Now, does that tie in some place. The first time I traveled the Plenty hiway it was a bit bumpy but 90 kph was quite safe, that was 5 years ago. I did the trip about 12 months ago, the roads are now pox. if you are doing more than 60 kph it gets dangerous. According to the guys at Tobermorey Station, there hasn't been a road crew out there in 3 years...... Where is all the NT's road funding being spent?

MO · 04-11-2006, 10:15 PM

Now without being prejudicial and remembering black and white from stats....does community housing ring a bell.

Outbackjack · 04-11-2006, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MO

Now without being prejudicial and remembering black and white from stats....does community housing ring a bell.

A question raised by a true Territorian. Community housing in the remote areas are starved of funding, hence the constant arrival of itinerantes into Alice. Apparently, according to Fran Killgarith, by the year 2010 Alice Springs will be a 50/50 town. I will be long gone by then!!!!

The Darwin water front has drained funds from every where in the NT.

MO · 04-11-2006, 10:23 PM

Why is it when I read this I think of the Berrimah line..which now is more likely the Palmerston line?

Outbackjack · 04-11-2006, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MO

Why is it when I read this I think of the Berrimah line..which now is more likely the Palmerston line?

Not an un-reasonable thought...... It is now a case of the tail wagging the dog.

MO · 04-11-2006, 10:44 PM

I'm not sure if you are avoiding the question or you missed it...however without being delicate and not wishing to offend...'what is the breakdown of dui,death and serious injury in black as compared to white'..in the stats on road incidents in the N.T..

Just had a thought the stats don't allow for differences...

I think you know where I'm coming from now.