Thread: Speed limits different for different drivers and other thoughts.

I have no objection to people not wanting to do the speed limit, or being in something that is incapable of doing so, such as tractors. Having a speed differential mandated is another thing entirely. 90 for P platers on the open road, what does it teach them? Nothing, except that they are in the way. Seriously, do they have a licence or don't they? Why set out to teach them to be at best an inconvenience, or at worst a menace? IMO, forcing someone to do 90 when everyone else is doing 110 is idiotic and dangerous. This also applies to transport companies that set their truck limiters to 90. It's ok if you are in a modern car, and a breath on the loud pedal and you are 'round, but not so good when you are in a heavy. Or a D4 with a big camper and a month of supplies.

I agree that problems can be caused by huge speed differentials. It could become as dangerous as the Irish proposal to have a 12 month trial of cars driving on the right hand side of the road. If it was a success they planned to get trucks and buses to do the same the following year.

However, I wonder if 10 km/h difference in speed is enough to cause inconvenience or danger. That sort of difference is quite common. It could be caused by someone thinking they are sitting close to the speed limit when their speedo is about 5% optimistic while the majority of drivers, either with more accurate speedos or a GPS speed readout are assuming they probably won't get pulled up if they sit on 105.

Where is the evidence that these differences in speed, which I believe are quite common even without the P plate limit, are causing great inconvenience or danger?

If you plan on commenting on the inconvenience, then I hope you won't do what most people do when they complain about their journey taking longer than it should because they were stuck behind a driver 10 km/h under the limit.

Their argument usually goes something like this, "I can do my 200 km journey in just over two hours if no-one holds me up. If I get stuck behind a grey nomad with a caravan doing 80 km/h, then it takes me an extra half an hour."

Their calculations are always based on the most unlikely assumption that they will be stuck behind for the whole 200 km. What is actually much more likely is that they will be stuck behind for a kilometre or two, so their total travel time will be extended by 15 seconds or 30 seconds. If it happened five times on the trip that would still add only 75 seconds or 150 seconds.

I know there are roads that have 110 km/h speed limits where red P platers might be up to 20 km/h slower, but I only get to drive on them when I am a long way from home. The highways near me have a 100 km/h limit with a lot of 85 km/h bends.

Did a trip to Waikiki today and apart from not seeing a cop in all of the about 200 kay trip, the biggest hold up was an old UK Atlantean bus doing about 70 where the limit is 100.
This was not only annoying but dangerous as most drivers here seem to only look as far as the end of the bonnet and ended up stuck real close behind this thing before swerving out around it.
When on the open road towing the van I usually sit on 95 or very close to and that gives cars 15 kay extra to get past without a problem. Or at least it should do.
So many times you'll get a turkey sit close behind you and keep coming out for a look then getting back in behind you again. This makes the distance another vehicle has to travel to get past both vehicles much further and increases the likelihood of someone coming the other way.
Then the tailback gets longer and who gets the blame? The bloody poor old van tower when it should be the incompetent idiot who can't get past either because they're blind or **** scared of getting a ticket if they should exceed the limit by a bit doing it safely.
If it's a truck behind me then I'll make every effort to make it easier for him to get past quickly.
Then there's the idiots who overtake then take their foot off the throttle and drop back to a lesser speed than I'm doing forcing me to drop off as well.... and who gets the blame? Me! The van tower again!
Useless incompetent ignorant idiots. Them I mean not me.....
AlanH.

Originally Posted by vnx205

I agree that problems can be caused by huge speed differentials. It could become as dangerous as the Irish proposal to have a 12 month trial of cars driving on the right hand side of the road. If it was a success they planned to get trucks and buses to do the same the following year.

However, I wonder if 10 km/h difference in speed is enough to cause inconvenience or danger. That sort of difference is quite common. It could be caused by someone thinking they are sitting close to the speed limit when their speedo is about 5% optimistic while the majority of drivers, either with more accurate speedos or a GPS speed readout are assuming they probably won't get pulled up if they sit on 105.

Where is the evidence that these differences in speed, which I believe are quite common even without the P plate limit, are causing great inconvenience or danger?

If you plan on commenting on the inconvenience, then I hope you won't do what most people do when they complain about their journey taking longer than it should because they were stuck behind a driver 10 km/h under the limit.

Their argument usually goes something like this, "I can do my 200 km journey in just over two hours if no-one holds me up. If I get stuck behind a grey nomad with a caravan doing 80 km/h, then it takes me an extra half an hour."

Their calculations are always based on the most unlikely assumption that they will be stuck behind for the whole 200 km. What is actually much more likely is that they will be stuck behind for a kilometre or two, so their total travel time will be extended by 15 seconds or 30 seconds. If it happened five times on the trip that would still add only 75 seconds or 150 seconds.

I know there are roads that have 110 km/h speed limits where red P platers might be up to 20 km/h slower, but I only get to drive on them when I am a long way from home. The highways near me have a 100 km/h limit with a lot of 85 km/h bends.

Evidence? I have none that would stand up, as it's hearsay. Experience? An absolute wealth of it.

Try a trip from the East of Melb, to Brisbane. You get dual carriageway for maybe 100k at the Victorian and, and the M2 near Ipswich at the Qld end. It happens far more than five times, and you can be stuck for over a hundred ks in some places if the one you are stuck behind is particularly ignorant. I'm talking about in a heavy. Overtaking lanes are far too short for something at 60 tonne to get up to a speed to get past safely, and the P plater has NOT been taught to consider other road users ( you can't plan, you have just caught up and are now doing 90 ). Multiply that by the distance from Melb to Brisbane ( about 1700 Km ) and go figure.

Now, I can't think of a more frustrating experience, save for the ones who do 90 until they hit an overtaking lane and then speed up. If there's something we don't need more of on our roads it is frustration. The most dangerous time on a highway is overtaking, especially for the inexperienced, so why deliberately create a circumstance where people are desperate to do so? It is madness.

BTW, not everybody is out there doing what you do. Some are out there in their workplace.

can we make the limit 130 please

Originally Posted by Eevo

can we make the limit 130 please

Can we have roads that make a 130 limit possible please?

Originally Posted by vnx205

Can we have roads that make a 130 limit possible please?

plenty around that are.
more or less, any highway build, upgraded, or resurfaced in the last 20 years is built to a 130 spec.

Some of the roads I drive on regularly are two lane roads with a speed limit of 110 and substantial traffic, with few passing lanes. Very few curves with advisory speeds below the speed limit, and towns a long way apart.

Certainly there will always be slow vehicles, but it seems counterproductive to add a very large class of them unnecessarily (and I say unnecessarily, because other states do not believe that there is an advantage in restricting novice drivers to a lower speed limit, and I have yet to see statistics supporting the difference). Worth noting, that only about twenty years NSW removed the speed limit of 80kph on trailers over 750kg to improve traffic flow (despite it being a nice little earner on unsuspecting interstate caravanners!). This is especially the case where the roads where this is the major concern are also roads where the major factor in accidents is generally considered to be fatigue. With most trips on these roads being long ones, adding 20% to the travel time for novice drivers does seem a bit counter-productive.

There is also the training effect on new drivers - faced with travelling at their legal speed and being a traffic holdup, or ignoring your 'special' speed limit and travelling at the same speed as everyone else, how many novice drivers will maintain their resolve to remain law abiding, especially after a few tens of kilometres with a B-double a few metres from there rear bumper. The reality is that most of these novice drivers will, by the time they get off their Ps, be thoroughly trained to ignore speed limits, hardly a desirable outcome.

Certainly, these issues do not show as significantly east of the dividing range, but then, when has the NSW government ever cared about anyone west of the sandstone curtain?