50kmh INTERSECTION speed limit??????

[sarrge2001]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/expert...-1226005061715

Surely they didn't pay this idiot to come up with this rubbish????

[Matt47569]

yeah that'll be great for fuel consumption, slowing down and speeding up constantly what a joke.. shouldnt have a problem at intersections unless people are running red lights...

[Linkachu]

Best way to make the roads safer. Ban cars.

[Jim Goose]

If an intersection is signed "give-way" or "stop" or controlled by traffic light and everyone follows the road rules there is no need to "slow down" when approaching unless you intend to stop.
If the lights are green then why slow down? because you expect people running a red light?
If you come to an intersection and you dont have a stop sign but there is a stop sign on your left or right why are slowing down for? because you expect someone to drive through the stop sign?

The SIMPLE concept is... follow the damn road rules.
Not creating more crap like, duh slow down at an intersection???

For 3 days here in Townsville the traffic lights (as well as street lights) didnt work.
The majority of drivers knew what to do when approaching the intersection, that was to slow down and give way to the right. (there was the usual brain dead idiots who simply sped through at extreme high speed without even bothering to look, others sat at the intersection for ten minutes waiting for gaps large enough to fly a 747 through because they were too scared to drive through).

Wonder how much this "expert" was paid to consult?

[AWD Chaser]

Isnt this similar to what ALOT of people have been saying for years?

"I learnt the word 'hoon' here. The main picture people brought to me was that the problem was with extreme driving behaviour (but) road safety also has to do with human beings making errors in traffic."

He said a governing body that brought together agencies involved in road safety and enforcement would be a way to ensure all authorities were working towards the same goals.

[kenz]

"The Dutch academic visited three times over three months researching SA's approach to road safety"

I don't see how that makes him an expert about our intersections

[sudszy]

Hang on a moment.....there was a thread recently where many were commenting on how the government message is "drive at the speed limit and all will be right" and how people "blindly" drive at the speed limit in all conditions.

here is an expert telling us that perhaps we need to moderate that message/law for some intersections(I agree) and people are screaming?

The stats, hopefully not another "govco" conspiracy, tell us a very high proportion of collisions happen at intersections, wouldnt it make sense to have lower speeds in these high risk areas?, where there are vehicles slowing down, turning, merging to avoid parked cars etc.

In a perfect world we'd all be able to not give intersections a thought, but as TA put it, s.... happens, why not go with reality here.

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by Matt47569

shouldnt have a problem at intersections unless people are running red lights...

Not sure about other states but in NSW they have new cameras in intersections that get red light & speeding.. And the speeding part is all the time, even when the light is green.. Learnt that one the hard way, but lucky for me the camera was new & I only got a letter..

[Oriory]

Originally Posted by sarrge2001

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/expert...-1226005061715

Surely they didn't pay this idiot to come up with this rubbish????

Funny thing is they more than likely paid him quite a bit of for that trollop.....

[AussieAV]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Hang on a moment.....there was a thread recently where many were commenting on how the government message is "drive at the speed limit and all will be right" and how people "blindly" drive at the speed limit in all conditions.

here is an expert telling us that perhaps we need to moderate that message/law for some intersections(I agree) and people are screaming?

The stats, hopefully not another "govco" conspiracy, tell us a very high proportion of collisions happen at intersections, wouldnt it make sense to have lower speeds in these high risk areas?, where there are vehicles slowing down, turning, merging to avoid parked cars etc.

In a perfect world we'd all be able to not give intersections a thought, but as TA put it, s.... happens, why not go with reality here.

It seems a sensible approach on the face of it, but here is one problem I see with it.

For an accident to occur at an intersection, at least one driver involved has to be inatentive and breaking the law. Now if they are approaching the intersection inatentively, they aren't going to be slowing down anyway, so you just end up with law biding citizens doing 50 getting nailed by the people not paying attention.

Here's something else to think about too, by travelling through the intersection at 50km/hr (instead of 60km/hr), the person doing the right thing spends 20% more time in the intersection, thereby becoming 20% more likely to be hit. (Now I said this tongue-in cheek, but there is some truth to it)

This solution is like saying the way to stop burglary is to pass a law that all houses have to have monitored security alarms and bars on their doors and windows. Everyone is inconvenieced and the burglars will still find a way in.

On the road, no matter what you do bad drivers will still crash. Making more and more laws for the good drivers to follow, will not stop the bad ones from causing accidents!!!

Address the real problem, improve the driving skills of the motoring public, and don't treat licenses like everyone's god given right. Some people just shouldn't be on the road, but driving tests are so easy to pass, almost everyone is.

[Silentsfastcar]

the guy is obviously moronic.. the southern expressway is a well constructed road. Not going into why its a crap road as ppl who use it know why!

[vztrt]

Why are all the moronic suggestions soming from SA at the moment. Is the dope really strong this year?

[JUZXR8]

Professor ****man - "Modern cars are made so that if you have a 50km/h impact, you can survive that as a driver."

Yeah thats great....if every car on the road was a modern car fitted with all the latest safety features

[Streets]

Originally Posted by JUZXR8

I re-read the article because of that just to see if that was his actual name. Professor ****man would be an awesome name.

[Matt47569]

i think people panic braking when they forget the intersection is 50 and try to slow down suddenly will cause some accidents

[FgNewbie]

Originally Posted by Jim Goose

If an intersection is signed "give-way" or "stop" or controlled by traffic light and everyone follows the road rules there is no need to "slow down" when approaching unless you intend to stop.
If the lights are green then why slow down? because you expect people running a red light?
If you come to an intersection and you dont have a stop sign but there is a stop sign on your left or right why are slowing down for? because you expect someone to drive through the stop sign?
*snip*

I agree except at blind intersections where I drive to the conditions.

I've seen too many fools illegally run intersections locally, some advertise "Taxi".

Very late at night with few cars on the road, there is one intersection in particular that I slow down for if cars are not stationary. I can't see cars coming in the cross street, due to street lighting I can't see headlights coming either.

It's a 60 zone, the amount I slow down depends on what I'm driving. I don't care about being in the right, I just want to have some control of the outcome if something goes wrong and get home safely.

Reminds me of the old joke about the taxi driver than runs the red but slams the brakes on for the green... his brother might be coming the other way.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by JUZXR8

Yeah thats great....if every car on the road was a modern car fitted with all the latest safety features

I fink your comment a little puzzling?

You'd like the limit lowered below 50km/h to cater for not so safer older vehicles? or are you happy for it to remain at 60km/h and have no chance in an older vehicle?

Judging from the comments and Wegmans comment about 50km/h many think the risk of collisions at intersections is all about someone coming through a red light and wiping out someone innocently passing through on the green, which Id anticipate would only be a tiny fraction of the collisions at intersections. Being tboned by a larger vehicle on the driver's door still isnt going to be survivable.

The linked article doesnt go into specifics here, however, my interpretation is that its more about all the other things that go on at intersections(which I did allude to previously), judging the speed/placement of oncoming vehicles while turning,
turning against the amber while oncoming vehicles are trying to race it,
keeping an eye out for pedestrians legally crossing into the road you are turning into,
merging due to parked vehicles nearby, especially on busy corners where shops may be present,
I could go on,

but Im sure you can all think of a host of other scenarios that present themselves at intersections.

Im not sure of the exact stats in SA, but universally 1/3 of accidents happen at intersections, but in total they only make up a tiny % of the time and distance of road we travel, statistically they are incredibly hazardous, why js lowering speed there for a few seconds of your journey so ridiculous.

[aussie muscle]

i've noticed a lot of intersections in Canberra the speed limit drops to 60, particularly on 80kph parkways. i'd imagine this will spread to other cities. then they can stick a speed camera to catch you not slowing through the intersection.

[sarrge2001]

Originally Posted by sudszy

.....Im not sure of the exact stats in SA, but universally 1/3 of accidents happen at intersections, but in total they only make up a tiny % of the time and distance of road we travel, statistically they are incredibly hazardous, why js lowering speed there for a few seconds of your journey so ridiculous.

Maybe because it's a knee jerk ill-thought out solution that doesn't address the root cause. It's cheap and easy and the masses will grumble but like everything else, will accept it because "they have no choice".

Whereas a campaign of increasing driver training to try and reduce trauma on the all of the road (not just where they intersect) would cost $$$

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by sarrge2001

Whereas a campaign of increasing driver training to try and reduce trauma on the all of the road (not just where they intersect) would cost $$$

so what would be your response when the advanced driving course does all the stopping distance things from different speeds and recommends that you do go slower through intersections.?

Looking at an approach that targets 1/3 of known accidents and would cost next to nothing to implement wouldnt be worth the trouble? life is cheap for some.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by sudszy

so what would be your response when the advanced driving course does all the stopping distance things from different speeds and recommends that you do go slower through intersections.?

Looking at an approach that targets 1/3 of known accidents and would cost next to nothing to implement wouldnt be worth the trouble? life is cheap for some.

What is your response to the difference in stopping distances of performance vehicles and those of "budget" and "green" vehicles?

[AussieAV]

^^ +1

Not to mention the improvement in stopping distances some of us gain in buying high performance tyres.

Why does'nt the government publish a set of performance figures for the various tyres on the market so that the public can make an informed decision on the quality of the rubber they put on their cars? Oh, thats right does'nt make money. Can't fine someone for buying cheap tyres, can only fine them for exceeding 50 km/h.

Would'nt be at all surprised if difference in stopping distances between best and worst performing tyres, at any size, would be greater than a drop of 5 km/h in speed.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by AussieAV

Can't fine someone for buying cheap tyres, can only fine them for exceeding 50 km/h.

.

Geez, that's a logical response for not having lower limits at intersections.


Are you going to fine the population for not all buying the best braking porsche to go with the more expensive tyres too?

[gtxb67]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Geez, that's a logical response for not having lower limits at intersections.


Are you going to fine the population for not all buying the best braking porsche to go with the more expensive tyres too?

i think as a road user, that i should be able to expect our government to ensure a certain competance level from other users and also to make sure their cars are capable of responding to their competance. this alone will not stop accidents from happening, but it could go along way to helping the problem of the road toll

unforntunately virtually anyone can get a license, because it is considered a right - not a priviledge

while the government hands out licenses at will, accidents will always happen. instead of raising driving standards, the powers that be look at the easy answer of speed cameras and probably now limiting intersection speeds to 50 kph. they will be considering the 50 kph limit because quite simply there is no way to police it - except with speed cameras

[Ben73]

You can go 20, 50 or 80 though and intersection, but when a car comes out of nowhere through red light and slams into you door you will be ****** no matter how fast you were going.


If someone is stupid enough to run a red light(or stop sign), why do you think they would be obeying the speed limit?

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Ben73

You can go 20, 50 or 80 though and intersection, but when a car comes out of nowhere through red light and slams into you door you will be ****** no matter how fast you were going.


If someone is stupid enough to run a red light(or stop sign), why do you think they would be obeying the speed limit?

Ben, did you read the earlier posts? I personally thought that I'd addressed part of the issue you raise, perhaps have another look?http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...8&postcount=17

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by gtxb67

while the government hands out licenses at will, accidents will always happen. instead of raising driving standards, the powers that be look at the easy answer of speed cameras and probably now limiting intersection speeds to 50 kph. they will be considering the 50 kph limit because quite simply there is no way to police it - except with speed cameras

While everyone here would like to see better trained drivers on our roads, most perhaps would accept that there is most likely not going to be any change to the level of training in the near or long term.

Given that reality, would you be against lowering the intersection speed limit(for next to no investment cost) if it were going to lower the number of road accidents/deaths.

[AussieAV]

Originally Posted by sudszy

While everyone here would like to see better trained drivers on our roads, most perhaps would accept that there is most likely not going to be any change to the level of training in the near or long term.

Given that reality, would you be against lowering the intersection speed limit(for next to no investment cost) if it were going to lower the number of road accidents/deaths.

Do you have blinders on???

Road rules already exist that will completely prevent any accidents from happening on all our roads.

Accidents are caused by failures to adhere to these rules. How does adding more rules address this??

You are like the NRA in America. 30,000+ gun deaths a year, but's it not letting everyone have a gun that's the problem. They just need better rules about how they are used.

I don't know what the figues are, but a certain number of accidents I'm sure will be caused by people failing to stop at "stop" signs. If they won't stop for a stop sign, please explain the logic that tells you they will adhere to a 50 km/h limit approacning the intersection??

Oh, and also please explain the benefit of having people approach intersections (which you've agreed are dangerous) watching their speedos to see if they've slowed enough instead of watching for hazards in the intersection!!

[AussieAV]

[QUOTE=AussieAV Can't fine someone for buying cheap tyres, can only fine them for exceeding 50 km/h.
[/QUOTE]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Geez, that's a logical response for not having lower limits at intersections.


Are you going to fine the population for not all buying the best braking porsche to go with the more expensive tyres too?

Oh, and don't take words out of a paragraph and deliberately use them out of context to try and make someone look foolish.

Its the lowest tactic you can use in a forum debate. Frankly until now I admired the way you were supporting your point of view, but resorting to these sort of tactics just makes you look like someone trying to cause trouble.

Clearly I was making the point that giving people worthwhile information about the abilities of tyres on the market would help them make better informed purchase decisions. I said the government probably wasn't doing this because they could'nt fine anyone. I never suggested they should, so your comment about the porsche is just juvenille.

Instead of just continually poking the fire, how about actually answering some of the questions I've asked, and only respond to points we've actually made. Not ones you've conjoured and twisted to inflame the situation

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by sudszy

I fink your comment a little puzzling?


Judging from the comments and Wegmans comment about 50km/h many think the risk of collisions at intersections is all about someone coming through a red light and wiping out someone innocently passing through on the green, which Id anticipate would only be a tiny fraction of the collisions at intersections. Being tboned by a larger vehicle on the driver's door still isnt going to be survivable.

The linked article doesnt go into specifics here, however, my interpretation is that its more about all the other things that go on at intersections(which I did allude to previously), judging the speed/placement of oncoming vehicles while turning,
turning against the amber while oncoming vehicles are trying to race it,
keeping an eye out for pedestrians legally crossing into the road you are turning into,
merging due to parked vehicles nearby, especially on busy corners where shops may be present,
I could go on,

but Im sure you can all think of a host of other scenarios that present themselves at intersections.

People racing yellow lights are normally not obeying the speed limit in the first place, so why would they obey the 50 limit.
The people who turn in front of them shouldn't be turning if the gap is not sufficient. That has nothing to do with the speed limit.

Looking out for pedestrians on the road you are turning onto??? Whats that got to do with it. You don't turn at the speed limit. You slow down to 10-20 km/h Whatever is safe for that particular corner. And if you are indicating and braking the car behind you must slow down as well and leave a safe gap. They don't just slow down to 50, but whatever speed you are turning at. Anyway most major intersections have designated turning lanes.

Merging mid intersection is something I don't see often. And when I do see it it is often at 20-30km/h as people move off from a stop.
If it is causing such a problem with merging cars at a particular intersection then the road should be changed which makes no need to merge mid intersection. I.e Have the left lane turning left only and not allow cars to have the option to merge.