Thread: Potential Changes to NT road rules

welcome to big brother mate

i spose they are a bit slow on the revenue up take thing

Originally Posted by rangieman

welcome to big brother mate

i spose they are a bit slow on the revenue up take thing

They have speed camera's and red light camera's (at least in Darwin, last time I got there). So we have all the modern revenue raisers, just like down south. Makes the tourists feel at home.

That's really bad news...

Time to get a lobby group which pushes the reasons to maintain the current road situations...

Question 1, minister: what is the reason behind the (potential) change to the NT highway spped limit?

(Having been in the lobby game, I'll tie you up for years with questions if you need).

Limits in the NT are not acceptable.

If you're really concerned, let us all know, so we can lobby - there's a big civil liberties issue here.

GQ

Originally Posted by dm_td5

They have speed camera's and red light camera's (at least in Darwin, last time I got there). So we have all the modern revenue raisers, just like down south. Makes the tourists feel at home.

Will it really effect you? I don't think they even have a roundabout in Gove do they?

Originally Posted by dobbo

Will it really effect you? I don't think they even have a roundabout in Gove do they?

We have A roundabout! Just no traffic lights

Someone should do an injury severity graph for travel speed which shows probability of fatality or serious injury (according to available data) for a given speed.

this I'm sure they already have....... but

then there should be a graph on probability of fatality or serious injury for a given travel time. (relates to fatigue and extra time spent on the road).

Overlay the two sets of data, and then compare the risks in the NT given the distances between major towns.

The faster you travel, the less time you spend on the road, which is a dangerous place to be....

Airlines skew the data similarily to show how safe air travel is. It's safer per km travelled, not per journey. The fact that one journey is equivalent to several thousand car journeys is not mentioned.

Originally Posted by Michael2

Someone should do an injury severity graph for travel speed which shows probability of fatality or serious injury (according to available data) for a given speed.

this I'm sure they already have....... but

then there should be a graph on probability of fatality or serious injury for a given travel time. (relates to fatigue and extra time spent on the road).

Overlay the two sets of data, and then compare the risks in the NT given the distances between major towns.

The faster you travel, the less time you spend on the road, which is a dangerous place to be....

Airlines skew the data similarily to show how safe air travel is. It's safer per km travelled, not per journey. The fact that one journey is equivalent to several thousand car journeys is not mentioned.

Actually, in Australia for example, travel by major airline is far safer even on a per journey basis than car travel - there has never been a fatality in Australia with a scheduled jet airliner (although there have been some close calls), and this record goes back forty years. And when you include smaller aircraft the journeys get a lot shorter, so the per journey risk is probably not very different from car travel. But your point is well made about selecting the statistics to suit the point you want to prove. A good example is the case yesterday where the statistics show that the gun buy-back had no effect on gun deaths - prompting an immediate response that there have been no mass murders using guns since the buyback (these were always a rare event). Whether the buyback was successful then depends simply on how you use the statistics.
John

gonna make travelling time unacceptable and double the uni degreed coppers up there as they will have to use radar...