Thread: Speeding On The M5 & M7

Originally Posted by 5teve

....(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.

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

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

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by Mick-Kelly

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-

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!

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 we put the gear in concrete bunkers now