Speeding On The M5 & M7

[Redback]

Subject: SPEED CAMERAS. NO CHANCE OF AVOIDING A FINE IF YOU
SPEED ON M5 & M7
M5 and the M7 are now equipped with Point to Point speed
devices. Once
You enter the M7 for instance you pass the etag and it beeps.
At the same
Time a camera takes a photo of your car and records the exact
time. For those
Who have exited the M7 they would be aware that upon exit the
etag system
Beeps again as you leave.
At the same time another camera at that point takes a photo of
the car
And the time. Then the computer calculates the time it has
taken you to
Travel between the two points and calculates your speed. If you
have completed
The clocked journey too fast you are given a speeding ticket.
At the present time the speed limit is 100K.P.H. and you have a
Tolerance of 102 and no more. One fraction over that speed and
you are issued with a
Fine automatically.
Also remember that school zone cameras are not speed tolerant.
Anything over, even 41, is a fine. This means people will be
doing 38 to
avoid any differences in their speedo readings. Remember, this
is going
to be a very costly experience for some drivers. It is also
going to mean
vehicles will be travelling at 95 in order to ensure that no
ticket is
issued.
What a shock some drivers are going to have when they have used
this
roadway
for a week and get a weeks tickets BOTH WAYS.
Of course your license will also be recalled for three months
and you
Know the rest. Take the advice and if you ignore it remember
this email when
You pay all those fines.
Also, remember that now with the new legislation, fighting a
speed
Camera fines is almost impossible.
You must prove the device is faulty and if you are not a
technician
Working on them, you have no chance of beating the fine.
The Pacific Highway has a set and these are recognised as large
steel
Frames over the lanes with a speed camera and some distance up
the road is
Another large metal frame with a speed camera.
These new point to point systems are being put onto any
expressway or
highway where vehicles are not able to exit between those
points.

[hiline]

oh what joy it is :(
the ways of the modern world ;)

[grumpybastard]

Yep .... where you spend 90 % of your time checking the speedo and 10% looking where you are going..

Victorians are pretty used to this now!

Victoria, where dangerous driving is okay just as long as you aren't speeding when you're doing it. :wasntme:

[spudboy]

You need to fit some "James Bond" rotating number plates!

Go through the first camera with one plate, then flick to the 2nd plate for the exit camera....

[Ben]

Or Johnny English camera-seeking missiles :)

[GEK064]

Is there s sign to mention the point to point system before entry? I thought speed 'traps' had to be signed?...for such a beautiful and free country we sure do live in a police state....:-(

[redfender]

speed cameras need to be signposted 3 times by law
they cannot even set up a mobile without a sign

if it is slightly true i think we will all get off

[Discopug]

even in victoria they tell ( warn you ) about the point to point speed detection on the hume hwy just north of melbourne. So I would be surprised if nsw felt that it wasn't a requirement.
Having said all that they would have to give more than 2% tollerance for speed variation because none of these are on straight stretches of road and you dont have to be a rocket scientist to know that if one takes the outside of every corner their distance will be more ( signifcantly more than 2% ) than one who takes the inside of every corner.
To test this theory I drove at my standard 110kmh into melb where the posted speed is 100kmh and I am yet to recieve a fine ( that was easter ) . Yes when my speedo reads 110kmh I am going at that speed.
I wish the guy that went on a rampage recently in a tank and knocked over telecomunications towers had a beef with speed cameras. If they had to be repaired all the time then they may not be such a lucrative source of income.

[p38arover]

Baz, from where did the story come?

It appears to be a hoax and has done the rounds of a lot of Aussie car fora.

See this from the M7 website:


These are the standard speed camera signs seen on roads across the state and do not mean that any new or secret speed system operates on the Westlink M7. ...

Ron

[jsp]

We allready have a system in Australia, its in SA, WA, NSW, VIC and I think NT as well, its a point to point system with at least 40 points around the country, and they are not signed. Its quite impressive, I have had the pleasure of supporting bits of it and seeing it in action. Currently it only monitors heavy vehicles but seeing it running in real time all they have to do is click the "all moving things" type check box and even the blow flies would get tickets!

[vnx205]

When they were installed on the Hume Highway at Gundagai, the official explanantion was that they were there to monitor heavy vehicle speeds and hours between breaks.
The story was that they were set to ignore anything smaller than little trucks and were then able to focus on the number plate which is an area of high contrast.
There always were suspicions among the more paranoid that they would be used on all vehicles one day.

[p38arover]

I think the NRMA would have made a song and dance if they were in general use.

Ron

[Redback]

Baz, from where did the story come?

It appears to be a hoax and has done the rounds of a lot of Aussie car fora.

See this from the M7 website:



Ron

Work Email, originally sent from Parramatta council.

[p38arover]

From M7 website: http://www.westlinkm7.com.au/news-Detail.asp?NewsID=80


Media Westlink Dismisses Hoax Email
19/7/2007

Westlink M7 has dismissed a hoax email currently circulating that claims that the motorway has implemented a secret speed fine based on the time a vehicle enters and exits the motorway.

Rachel Johnson, General Manager of Westlink M7, said that the email was a hoax and that no secret speed enforcement system operates on the Westlink M7.

Westlink supports safe driving and urges all motorists to comply with posted speed limits.

“However, the secret speed fine system detailed in the hoax email does not exist,” Ms Johnson said.

“Speed limits are enforced on the Westlink M7 through the normal policing measures that operate on all NSW roads.”

“Westlink meets regularly with the NSW Highway Patrol.”

Westlink has installed signs that remind motorists that speed cameras are used in NSW.

These are the standard speed camera signs seen on roads across the state and do not mean that any new or secret speed system operates on the Westlink M7.


Ron

[barryj]

From M7 website: http://www.westlinkm7.com.au/news-Detail.asp?NewsID=80



Ron


Yeah, and men in black don't exist either :cool: :bat:.

[Redback]

I'm emailing this to work now.

[solmanic]

When they were installed on the Hume Highway at Gundagai, the official explanantion was that they were there to monitor heavy vehicle speeds and hours between breaks.
The story was that they were set to ignore anything smaller than little trucks and were then able to focus on the number plate which is an area of high contrast.
There always were suspicions among the more paranoid that they would be used on all vehicles one day.

I thought they also got a shot of the actual driver so they could check if more than one driver was being used in a vehicle or not.

It's not possible for these heavy vehicle cameras to detect speeding cars. Over a long distance (say 500km) if a car is doing 130km/h all the way vs 100km/h it makes up about an hour on the journey. Once you factor in corners, a rest/food/refuel stop and traffic and towns and roadworks you pretty quickly remove any risk of being able to detect a breach in speed limit.

The point-to-point systen has to assume that a vehicle is only actually "speeding" if it gets between the traps faster than if it was doing the exact posted speed limit all the way (which is possible in theory but unlikely in practice). Even then it can't ever work out where the breach occurred and hence what the penalty should be.

Since there are not yet any laws governing private drivers and rest breaks, these cameras can only focus on heavy vehicles.

[Quiggers]

You need to fit some "James Bond" rotating number plates!

Go through the first camera with one plate, then flick to the 2nd plate for the exit camera....

Cool stuff and I'll have the DB5 as well:D:D:D
and the ejector seat, machine guns behind the front indicators, anti missile screen and the oil dropper (was the DB5 made by LandRover?:twisted::twisted:)
and the axle extensions...perfect!

GQ

[Mick-Kelly]

The technology is already in place in a lot of areas. If you drive from the NSW border to the North side of Brissy using the highways your car is under cameras the whole way. The cameras can zoom to rego plate level. Expect speed to become a big political hot potato over the next few years. I dont know if you saw the paper the other day. 210 dead in 210 days on Qld roads this year. 18% of fatals are bike riders who make up around 1% of road users etc. etc.

[5teve]

i'll probably be unpopular with this... but they use this kind of system (apart from probably a little less stealthed) in the UK.. and to be fair it is the ONLY method that they have used that works. People cannot speed as they get nailed between the points.

the fixed cameras they use in the UK generally dont work as people slow down through them then speed up, many a time causing an accident when they slam their anchors on before going through them! the average speed cams reduce this considerably, and they seemed to help the flow of traffic.

the cameras were only really used over short distances, had a bit more of a tolerance (after a bit of debate and the cheif of police saying that it scared him stupid that people would be watching their speedo rather than the road) i think the tolerance is about 10%.. inline with speedo tolerances.

i dont like speed cameras at all... especially stealthed ones, but if we have to have them i would prefer the average ones as everyone has to obey the rules along that stretch of road. not just at a fixed point..

Thanks

steve

[jsp]

The story was that they were set to ignore anything smaller than little trucks and were then able to focus on the number plate which is an area of high contrast.
There always were suspicions among the more paranoid that they would be used on all vehicles one day.

They can pick up and register in realtime something like 30 cars a second traveling upto 360k's an hour or something stupid, I know there's not a production car which can outrun it, and there's 3 camera's per lane, one with a wide overall shot, one with a license plate shot, and one with a driver shot. The software is very good, it only had a bug where it had issues with the OCR of certain color plates, which has now been fixed but for a while you couldn't register a heavy vehicle with a red background plate.

They pick up anything with movement so motor bikes the lot, and its just the software being set to not notice cars etc, which it by default monitors in real time anyway, it just doesn't collect the data and save it.

I am prolly gonna get shot for breaching a confidentiallity thing for work or something :)

[100I]

....(after a bit of debate and the cheif of police saying that it scared him stupid that people would be watching their speedo rather than the road) i think the tolerance is about 10%.. inline with speedo tolerances.


Interesting point that one. This is most people's grizzle with speed related issues, commonsense is disappearing fast here in Australia.

[cartm58]

have to wonder why motorists aren't using the Canadian research that proved that speed cameras have no deterrent affect on driver behaviour and were merely revenue raisers whihc forced the Canadians to remove them from use and go to a ssytem of improved driver education, re-engineering of black spots on road network and improving traffic flows as only means which effectively reduces road toll.

I mean the Govt own adverts show motor vehicles kill at 60kph

[Mick-Kelly]

I am generally not a fan of speed cameras. Cameras get the complacent people who get behind the wheel switch of brain and engage drive. The problem needs a much more holistic approach. That said however there are some really scary things happening on the roads out there. The amount of people doing 150kph plus keeps me awake at night. The vast majority of people seem to drive around with there heads shoved firmly up their arses until something goes wrong. Problem is it goes wrong really quickly and you cant react if your singing along to robbie williams etc.etc. Awareness of what's going on around you is seriously lacking and of course all series landy drivers are aware because you cant hear anything else over the engine and the road noise :)

[Landy110]

It's good to see that no-one here is really whinging about speed camera's. I know they don't really effect me because the fender doesn't go too fast anyway.
But I get annoyed with the "revenue raising" argument. Speed cameras are not revenue raisers, they are an opprtunity for you to make a donation to the gov't. No-one has to take up the kind offer to donate!
Yes, fixed cameras only catch the brain dead drivers but they are a danger all on their own anyway!
A point to point system would be good as long as it allows for a 10% or so tolerance.
I like the idea of getting to my destination without being written off by some moron in a fast car.

[solmanic]

i'll probably be unpopular with this... but they use this kind of system (apart from probably a little less stealthed) in the UK.. and to be fair it is the ONLY method that they have used that works. People cannot speed as they get nailed between the points.

You're right but they are only on motorways and over relatively short distances - a mile or two. I have only ever seen them installed at roadworks where the limit is dropped to about 40-50mph. They just don't work on any road with changes in speed limit as they cannot then determine where the limit was breached and by how much.

[solmanic]

The problem needs a much more holistic approach. That said however there are some really scary things happening on the roads out there. The amount of people doing 150kph plus keeps me awake at night. The vast majority of people seem to drive around with there heads shoved firmly up their arses until something goes wrong.

Well for the more "holistic" approach - I firmly believe that ALL NEW VEHICLES SHOULD BE SPEED LIMITED TO 120kmh!!! It's not that hard to do and trucks have had limiters fitted for years. If someone is caught speeding in excess of this then their car is immediately impounded as defective. With the exception of NT, our maximum national limit is 110kph so 120 gives a bit of room for "emergency" maneuvers.

For older cars, if you are caught speeding three times after introduction of this law then you are issued with an order to have a limiter fitted to your car at your own cost. Again, if you are caught speeding in an un-limited vehicle and found to have been ordered to have a limiter fitted, then your car is towed.

There is little or no cost to the government to implement this. The cost to car manufacturers would be small and would be easily absorbed in the purchase price. It will probably reduce warranty claims a bit since no-one will be going out to "test" their new wheels at 200kph. And if you have an older car, there is no need to pay to fit a limiter unless you are stupid and a habitual speedster. Of course, cars which could, for whatever technical reason, not have a limiter fitted would be exempted but still subject to strict impounding for 3-6 months if they are repeatedly caught.

I have given this a lot of thought and can only assume the government, which is always spouting rhetoric about the dangers of speeding and the cost to the community, does not pursue this course of action is -
1. It will be unpopular with some sections of the community (just like gun control is).
2. It will potentially reduce revenue from speeding infringements.

-END RANT-

[Quarks]

Actually, speed was being discussed at dinner last night and would you believe it - speed limiting cars was one suggestion (limit wanted was 110, but I think 130, since it's the max in the NT).

The other part to the speed limiters is to fit lower scaled speedo's - 100km/h looks like a lot faster when the needle is 30degrees above horizontal on the right! It also means that you can pick your speed easier since there's more difference in the angle between 50 and 60 km/h for example.

I personally don't mind point-to-point cameras, nor speed cameras in general - if everyone obeyed the law, then the government would be wasting money on them, not making a profit!

[jsp]

Hmmm I wonder if you can prove your car can't do 130 if you could get away without a limiter ;)


This is our Oz system, the truckscan ones are cool as they have sensors in the road to do on the fly weighing as well.

http://vision.cmit.csiro.au/project/stc/

They had to change the types of poles etc they put the camera's on as too many truckies were pulling over and reversing into them :eek: we put the gear in concrete bunkers now

[Ben]

I firmly believe that ALL NEW VEHICLES SHOULD BE SPEED LIMITED TO 120kmh

My previous vehicle was speed limited, to an acceptable 250km/h, and I certainly never hit that speed on public roads. (Driver days at Eastern Creek would be a little less thrilling when you're crawling down the straight at 120km/h.)

Besides penalising good practice and reducing personal accountability, I imagine limiters/restrictors would be worked around by the very people you are wanting to limit/restrict. The chronic offenders who have already lost licences, vehicles and possibly loved ones.

[vnx205]

I have some doubts about just how much difference speed limiters would make.
They only come into effect at 120 or 130 or whatever speed they are set at. They have no effect at lower speeds, yet there are plenty of situations where 100, 80 or even 60 is way too fast.
I know a lot of accidents are caused by people driving too fast, but what constitutes excessive speed varies according to the prevailing conditions.
Don't a lot of accidents, injuries and fatalities occur at speeds below 100?
I also wonder how many people would believe that a speed limiter made their car safer and would consequently drive more dangerously. What prompts me to suspect that might happen is a memory I have of my own experience from 1963. I had just got my licence and was driving very cautiously, but when I came to a corner, I went around it faster than was comfortable. The problem was that I had a false sense of security because I was driving slowly, probably about 40mph, but I should have slowed to about 30mph to negotiate the corner.
I can imagine a similar false sense of security being induced by a speed limiter with some people just keeping "on the limiter" when they should slow down a bit.

[solmanic]

Driver days at Eastern Creek would be a little less thrilling when you're crawling down the straight at 120km/h.

It would make sense to have concessions for clubs etc. But once again, if you have an older, non-limited car you get three strikes before you are forced to have one fitted.

And in response to vnx205's comment about how much good it might actually do - well it sure as hell can't hurt. At least there will be fewer 200kph brain-dead idiot single car smashes like we get on the Pacific Motorway. Sure, the dangers of exceeding lower speed limits are relative to the prevailing conditions, but on the open highway we see far too many high-speed crashes where some sh*t-for-brains decides his new Commodore or Falcon is good for the double-ton and ends up in a tree with his girlfriend in the passenger seat decapitated!

[solmanic]

I can imagine a similar false sense of security being induced by a speed limiter with some people just keeping "on the limiter" when they should slow down a bit.

Of course the existing enforcement of lower limits would have to stay - this is just an idiot-proof backstop.

[Merv]

Speed cameras havent reduced the road toll. I dont feel limiting a vehicles speed will lower the road toll either.

No doubt if it was introduced and the road toll kept climbing there would be no reversal of the speed limiter, they would be there to stay.

I hope they dont get introduced.

[mudmouse]

I can't see limiters being effectively introduced either. As soon as there's a techno thingy built to do something, another techno thingy is built to over-ride it. It would be almost impossible to regulate nationwide. Imagine a 900cc (plus) roadbike ? it would only have 1st gear.

No, I think all Land Rover owners should be exempt from rego and given the Order of Australia for services to reducing the road toll...or not speeding (much).

Speed Cameras:mad: Since when to they detect a driver who is unlicensed, disqualified, suspended, unregistered, uninsured, p#ssed or driving a stolen car etc..rant, rant , rant. They're crap and do NOTHING to help reduce road trauma.

[UncleHo]

G'day Folks :)

I have been reading this thread with interest, and am of the conclusion that there is no substitute for VISABLE POLICE PRESENCE ON THE ROAD as that is the only thing some drivers recognise.:nazilock:

Speed cameras have no effect on someone that earns $1000 a day, but are searched for by somebody on say $450 a fortnight, who drive looking anywhere but the road.

cheers

[incisor]

G'day Folks :)

I have been reading this thread with interest, and am of the conclusion that there is no substitute for VISABLE POLICE PRESENCE ON THE ROAD as that is the only thing some drivers recognise.:nazilock:

Speed cameras have no effect on someone that earns $1000 a day, but are searched for by somebody on say $450 a fortnight, who drive looking anywhere but the road.

cheers

yes rocket... visible police presence didnt slow you down :P

sorry, couldnt resist, i will crawl back under my rock now...

[solmanic]

Of course there will be people who would get around the mechanics of a speed limiter, but I come back to my main point - it can't hurt to have them! There is simply no logical reason to have cars for sale that are capable of 200+kph when the legal maximum (except NT) is 110kph. It defies logic.

It's got to be relatively easy to do and, like I have said all along, for existing cars without limiters, you get three strikes then pay to have one fitted or lose the vehicle.

All over the news and current affairs programs the last couple of nights has been the story of the drag racers on the Great Western Highway who took out an elderly couple. You can't tell me that 120kph limiters mightn't have changed the outcome of that tragedy. Who knows, with limiters the concept of street drags might eventually disappear.

My other car, an Alfa, is ten times more fun going around corners than flat out in a straight line anyway.

[solmanic]

Imagine a 900cc (plus) roadbike ? it would only have 1st gear.

It would make them cheaper then too.

[100I]

My other car, an Alfa, is ten times more fun going around corners than flat out in a straight line anyway.
You've just unravelled all your hard fought campaigning..

[solmanic]

The speedo in the Alfa reads so high it's almost impossible to get a ticket in it.

[akelly]

Getting back to the heavy vehicle monitoring system - my SIII wagon got its picture taken by the one near Gundagai back in the mid 90's. I noticed the flash as I went under the boom - has anyone else had their landy, or other large 4WD, snapped? I figured the large, flat roof area may have been a trigger?

Cheers.

[grumpybastard]

The speedo in the Alfa reads so high it's almost impossible to get a ticket in it.

Is that called Italian optimism?

[jsp]

Getting back to the heavy vehicle monitoring system - my SIII wagon got its picture taken by the one near Gundagai back in the mid 90's. I noticed the flash as I went under the boom - has anyone else had their landy, or other large 4WD, snapped? I figured the large, flat roof area may have been a trigger?

Cheers.

The system thats in now has only been operational for 3 or 4 years and doesn't have flashes.

:confused:

[Bigbjorn]

I wpuld have no problems with speed limits and speed cameras if only the politicians and bureaucrats had increased the speed limits in line with the vast improvements in roads and vehicles over the last fifty years.

I got my first learners permit in 1957. The speed limits then were 30mph (48kph) in built up areas and 50mph (80kph) outside built up areas. Cars then had poor brakes, indeed many vehicles from the 20's through to the early 50's still on the road had mechanical brakes, vague steering, poor handling, poor tyres. Steering often had a couple of inches or more of play, bald tyres were common, & "wear them down to the canvas" was a common attitude. Retreads were in almost universal use. Heavy trucks, like many cars, had very poor brakes. Seat belts were in race cars and aeroplanes. Roads, if bitumened, were narrow, bumpy, and had rough unsealed shoulders with often a deep drop-off from the bitumen to the shoulder. Most highways in Qld outside the South-east corner were unsealed.

Fifty years later with the vast improvements in roads and vehicles, our speed limits are 40kph & 50kph in urban areas and 100kph elsewhere, with a few 110kph stretches. Our major highways are quite suitable for increased limits of 120-140 and higher in appropriate places.

The road toll, taking into account the numbers of vehicles, licenced drivers, population, and vehicle usage, has declined dramaticaly since its peak in the early 60's. Seat belts, collapsible steering columns, good brakes and tyres, vastly improved roads, and the near elimination of high alcohol drink driving as a result of both enforcement and a change in community attitude, have all contributed to the decline in the road toll.

So why can we not have modernised speed limits? Revenue from fines?

[solmanic]

Our major highways are quite suitable for increased limits of 120-140 and higher in appropriate places.

You reckon?

I have to say that having travelled extensively, our road system is pretty damn poor! The only stretches of road we have that are built for speeds in excess of 110kph generally have too much traffic to be safe. Any two-way outback stretch of road which may be capable of sustained high-speed cruising only remains safe until the first bit of wildlife runs in front of you or a tyre blows-out.

Besides all that, in a country like this that relies so much on heavy vehicle cargo transportation, to have cars zipping around at 140kph on mostly two-way roads with trucks and busses all crawling along at 100 would have to end in tears and bent metal.

The best roads, by far, that I have ever travelled on are in Germany. Whilst 200 on the Autobahn is great fun, have a look at the spectacular accidents they also have. Our highway system is generally up-the-duff and not even as good as the Czech Republic FFS! As far as I'm concerned, our best bits of freeway don't come anywhere near the quality of European motorways - and most of them are limited to 130kph.

If the government can't find the cash to bring the roads up to a safe standard, then surely they can reduce the problem slightly by making sure cars can't go too fast.

By the way, I am aware that this argument only relates to straight-line speed and we are not addressing the issue of cornering on slower sections of road - but there weren't any corners involved in the incident on the Great Western Highway the other night.

[solmanic]

Is that called Italian optimism?

No, it's called Italian build quality.

[spudboy]

I have to say that having travelled extensively, our road system is pretty damn poor!

I've got to disagree a bit with this statement. We have a huge country with very few people to pay for roads, and generally you can get anywhere you want at a good speed.

You can't compare Aust and Germany for population and distance.

The infrastructure here is really very good. Bridges that don't fall down. Proper drainage. Proper signage, etc etc.

I've driven through a lot of Morocco, Kenya, Malawi, Zimbabwe, and even parts of Spain and Portugal where you really see what poor roads are.

[solmanic]

I've driven through a lot of Morocco, Kenya, Malawi, Zimbabwe, and even parts of Spain and Portugal where you really see what poor roads are.

Point taken. I was really referring to "developed" countries and high-speed capability. You are right about our population and distances. The road system is probably about as good as it can be given these factors - which still makes it pretty damn poor for high-speed driving in my opinion.

Like I said, our best bits of road are still way below the standard in Europe.

[100I]

This is my opinion as well. Not enough emphasis is put on driving to the conditions of your vehicle and surrounds. Sometimes I overtake, sometimes I'm tailgated.

On a suitable motorway in a suitable vehicle it is entirely reasonable to travel at 160kph in RELATIVE safety. When overtaking it is far safer to use a burst of speed to be on the wrong side of the road as little as possible and let others also overtake, say in the case of a line of traffic behind a slow caravan or truck. Conversely I firmly back the reduction of suburban areas from 60 to 50 and 40 around schools. Incidently, a particular pet hate of mine is speedsters in carparks.

And you have to ask yourself the question, which is more dangerous, 20k over on a good motorway with light traffic, or 20k over the posted recommended corner speed on a back rd road thru the mountains (yet still under the speed limit)? Or to make the comparison more palatable substitute with 10 percent over. What constitutes a safe speed?

Mandatory speed restrictions do nothing to foster commonsense. Mark my words, in another 30yrs the accident rate will not be any improved from what it is today. Drivers by then will have no concept of what it is to think for themselves and drive to the conditions, so long as they obey the rules to the letter.

We are already there. It's a Brave New World.

[Bigbjorn]

You reckon?

I have to say that having travelled extensively, our road system is pretty damn poor! The only stretches of road we have that are built for speeds in excess of 110kph generally have too much traffic to be safe. Any two-way outback stretch of road which may be capable of sustained high-speed cruising only remains safe until the first bit of wildlife runs in front of you or a tyre blows-out.

.

Yes, I do reckon. Main roads in the outback are now damn good. I can see no problems in increasing the speed limit from say Morven through Winton to 150-160, or Morven through Charleville. Wide straight roads, flat terrain, good visibility, light traffic, no houses or villages. When you consider I regularly brought cars from Sydney to Brisbane in the early 60's in twelve hours or less via the Putty Road and New England Highway. (twelve was the benchmark we were expected to achieve) and now with the speed limits you can barely do it any better with the cars and roads improved out of sight.

[solmanic]

We obviously disagree then on what constitutes a suitable standard of highway for high-speed cruising. I don't think that Australia's outback highways are really all that safe for the kinds of speeds you are proposing.

The accident risk increases more than exponentially to the increase in speed. Here's just one example of this kind of study:
http://casr.adelaide.edu.au/ruralspeed/RURALSPEED.PDF

Take a look at the graph Figure 3.6 on page 24.

Even a perfectly formed rural road without traffic in Australia carries particular risks.
1. Most, if not all rural roads in Australia are not fenced for wildlife (I'm talking about roos here).
2. The extremely long distances people generally travel in Australia make drivers highly suceptible to fatigue.
3. The hot climate places additional stress on tyres thereby increasing the risk of blowouts.

The bottom line is that as speed increases, you are more likely to end up in the morgue than a hospital when something goes wrong. Keeping speeds down is more about managing the risk than the reality. Remember the lessons learned in the early days of motoring have resulted in better vehicle and road design and reduced the number of fatalities. Boosting speeds back up just because modern cars and roads are capable of it is certainly NOT going to reduce the road toll any further.

[spudboy]

Conversely, I have seen a study in the US where raising the speed limit on a particularly long dull stretch of highway decreased the accident stats.

The police postulated that people got bored at the lower speeds and did other things that stopped them concentrating on their driving.

[100I]

Conversely, I have seen a study in the US where raising the speed limit on a particularly long dull stretch of highway decreased the accident stats.

The police postulated that people got bored at the lower speeds and did other things that stopped them concentrating on their driving.

Scrabble is popular..

[solmanic]

Oh well, in the not-too-distant future we will all be driving radar guided, cruise-controlled vehicles courtesy of Mercedes Benz trickledown technology. We will then have dynamic speed control where the car gets speed limit advice from external monitors and weather sensors which set the car to travel at the optimum speed for the prevailing conditions and magic sidelines which keep the vehicle on the road...

la la-la la-la :wacko: