Speed kills?

[troppo]

In light of the closure of the other thread and the fact there were a few statements directed at me which I think deserve a response, is it Ok with admins if we discuss whether the statement is fact or myth in a dedicated thread?

[4Vman]

Do we need to go down this track again and again...?

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Do we need to go down this track again and again...?

Only if we go very slowly while wearing space helmets and wrapped in cotton wool.......

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by flappist

Only if we go very slowly while wearing space helmets and wrapped in cotton wool.......

and at a speed appropriate to the conditions...

[troppo]

Lets follow it all the way to the end for once so we can stop wondering what's there....

[Paxton]

In your state, no. Only speeds above 130 Hurt. In mine, its 110. In Victoria, it is anything 3Kms over the Posted Speed limit.

In my Experience, no, Speed Doesn't kill. It is the Quick Stop at the end that does all the damage.

[paulvdb]

I am saddened that the Pollies and Press have pretty much convinced main-stream Australia that speed kills. To me this just shows that the average Australian is stupid (and yes, I'm Australian). Anyone who believes what they are told without applying even a spot of logic is, in my judgement, stupid.

110 in a 110 zone in the rain in a 1970's Sigma is dangerous (and yes I owned one of these)
110 in a 110 zone in the rain in a BF XR6T with good tyres is safe
80 in a 110 zone in the rain in a BF with dodgy tyres and distracted driver is dangerous.
130 in a 110 zone in the dry in a BF on a good road with good tyres and focused driver is safe.

Fact - speed plays no part at all. The fixation on speed limits to save lives is purely simplistic rubbish.

The key to safety is always dependant on the skills of the driver, their ability to drive with their eyes open and brains turned on, the quality of car setup and tyres, and the prevailing conditions. Speed can make a poor situation worse but it doesn't CAUSE the problem.

It p!$$es me off no end that the public now believes retiring pen-pushing policemen who've been pentioned out of the way of real police, idiots like the RTA, idiots like Scruby, politicians that you wouldn't trust with anything else, and the press (never let the truth get in the way of a good story).

This sort of lunacy has led to my favourite motorway (M2 in Sydney) now including 70/80/90/100 zones, stupid lane merges, and a speed camera in a road that was originally designed to be consistent 100kph the whole way. I'm noticing lots of other roads going down the same path - safe at 80 but sign-posted for 60.

[SVTVNM]

Originally Posted by paulvdb

I am saddened that the Pollies and Press have pretty much convinced main-stream Australia that speed kills. To me this just shows that the average Australian is stupid (and yes, I'm Australian). Anyone who believes what they are told without applying even a spot of logic is, in my judgement, stupid.

110 in a 110 zone in the rain in a 1970's Sigma is dangerous (and yes I owned one of these)
110 in a 110 zone in the rain in a BF XR6T with good tyres is safe
80 in a 110 zone in the rain in a BF with dodgy tyres and distracted driver is dangerous.
130 in a 110 zone in the dry in a BF on a good road with good tyres and focused driver is safe.

Fact - speed plays no part at all. The fixation on speed limits to save lives is purely simplistic rubbish.

The key to safety is always dependant on the skills of the driver, their ability to drive with their eyes open and brains turned on, the quality of car setup and tyres, and the prevailing conditions. Speed can make a poor situation worse but it doesn't CAUSE the problem.

It p!$$es me off no end that the public now believes retiring pen-pushing policemen who've been pentioned out of the way of real police, idiots like the RTA, idiots like Scruby, politicians that you wouldn't trust with anything else, and the press (never let the truth get in the way of a good story).

This sort of lunacy has led to my favourite motorway (M2 in Sydney) now including 70/80/90/100 zones, stupid lane merges, and a speed camera in a road that was originally designed to be consistent 100kph the whole way. I'm noticing lots of other roads going down the same path - safe at 80 but sign-posted for 60.

I fully agree with the above statement, There a to many factors other than speed the contribute to the majority of accidents. To me the most dangerous drivers out there are the what I call "nervous' drivers the very unpredictable ones( moving around lane alot, varying speed, slow speed etc..)

[paulvdb]

Originally Posted by SVTVNM

I fully agree with the above statement, There a to many factors other than speed the contribute to the majority of accidents. To me the most dangerous drivers out there are the what I call "nervous' drivers the very unpredictable ones( moving around lane alot, varying speed, slow speed etc..)

Lots of those around now in Sydney. The cameras and RTA have scared everyone so much they all drive like nannies now. It's not even worth picking on older people and Volvo drivers now - there's no real difference. Lots of these nongs think it's much safer to driver 20k under the speed limit just in case they have a horrid crash. Plus this gives them more time to make phone calls, read the paper, fix their makeup.....

[gz1]

Best post so far. Totally agree.

Originally Posted by paulvdb

I am saddened that the Pollies and Press have pretty much convinced main-stream Australia that speed kills. To me this just shows that the average Australian is stupid (and yes, I'm Australian). Anyone who believes what they are told without applying even a spot of logic is, in my judgement, stupid.

Originally Posted by paulvdb

110 in a 110 zone in the rain in a 1970's Sigma is dangerous (and yes I owned one of these)
110 in a 110 zone in the rain in a BF XR6T with good tyres is safe
80 in a 110 zone in the rain in a BF with dodgy tyres and distracted driver is dangerous.
130 in a 110 zone in the dry in a BF on a good road with good tyres and focused driver is safe.

Fact - speed plays no part at all. The fixation on speed limits to save lives is purely simplistic rubbish.

Could not agree more, However the cynic in me insists that there is more to it than just ignorance. The more the pollies convince everyone that speed regardless of anything else is the leading cause, the more they increase their revenue base.

Originally Posted by paulvdb

The key to safety is always dependant on the skills of the driver, their ability to drive with their eyes open and brains turned on, the quality of car setup and tyres, and the prevailing conditions. Speed can make a poor situation worse but it doesn't CAUSE the problem.

It p!$$es me off no end that the public now believes retiring pen-pushing policemen who've been pentioned out of the way of real police, idiots like the RTA, idiots like Scruby, politicians that you wouldn't trust with anything else, and the press (never let the truth get in the way of a good story).

This proves my point above. Speed is lowered, people slow down, revenue drops, speed is lowered again speed camera put in place. It won't be that long before the M2 will be restricted to 50km/hr.

Originally Posted by paulvdb

This sort of lunacy has led to my favourite motorway (M2 in Sydney) now including 70/80/90/100 zones, stupid lane merges, and a speed camera in a road that was originally designed to be consistent 100kph the whole way. I'm noticing lots of other roads going down the same path - safe at 80 but sign-posted for 60.

Instead of providing better driver training which costs money, lowering the speed limit brings in money. So the speed has to be lowered for the lowest common driver. Why is it not required to refresh your drivers license? A pilot, even a private pilot needs to have a certain minimum number of flights otherwise he needs to go for a dual check ride with an instructor. And regardless of what else a pilot needs to have a check flight with an instructor every two years anyhow. When was the last time you had a check ride as a driver?. I got my license over 30 years ago and have never been re-tested or even sent an information booklet on any new laws. I find it very hard to believe there are no new laws in over 30 years.
Why are car drivers allowed to never have a re-test? A far better system would be if all car drivers (not just those over 80) had to have compulsory driver training and had to re-do a driving course at least every 5 years.
But doing that would not raise anywhere near the revenue, would it?

[troppo]

Well, everyones been behaved so far and the thread hasn't been locked yet so, proceeding with caution....

Originally Posted by Paxton

It is the Quick Stop at the end that does all the damage.

Interesting point...and yet, there's a little more to it than that as well. Consider when and why speed doesn't kill, Hammond on Top Gear survived a very high speed crash...

[paulvdb]

Originally Posted by troppo

Well, everyones been behaved so far and the thread hasn't been locked yet so, proceeding with caution....

Interesting point...and yet, there's a little more to it than that as well. Consider when and why speed doesn't kill, Hammond on Top Gear survived a very high speed crash...

But keep in mind that he didn't hit a tree and didn't have a sudden stop so.... if the conditions had been slightly different he would've been dead. Looking at the show it was clear that the tyre was either a dud or not suited to the task - he's a dill for driving such a fast car without knowing what the limits were.

If you had a chance to drive a car fast like that you do so knowing that there's a MAJOR risk of death. It basically still comes down to driver choices - not the speed itself.

[GasoLane]

If speed kills how come all the racing drivers aren't dead ?

[Nostalgia]

"Speed Kills" As do alot of other drugs. Keep away from em.

[Nostalgia]

Nah seriously i agree that its not the speed, its the moron behind the wheel acting like a tool that kills.

[troppo]

Originally Posted by paulvdb

But keep in mind that he didn't hit a tree and didn't have a sudden stop so.... if the conditions had been slightly different he would've been dead. Looking at the show it was clear that the tyre was either a dud or not suited to the task - he's a dill for driving such a fast car without knowing what the limits were.

Exactly, proving there is some truth to Paxton's statement. Hammonds crash was distinctly lacking the sudden stop, making it survivable.

[HLC]

Originally Posted by paulvdb

But keep in mind that he didn't hit a tree and didn't have a sudden stop so.... if the conditions had been slightly different he would've been dead.

his head did hit the ground at 200mph though.

thats what, 320kph.

whether he stopped or not, having your head hit the ground at that speed is sure to hurt.










and it all goes back to that saying, "Guns dont kill people, it's the person pulling the trigger that does"

[Barry_v]

in any given accident if all the involved parties were doing 20kmph less the accident would be less severe. speed does kill.

now there are a lot more factors in every accident and its not always practical or desirable to lower speed limits. but to say that speed plays no part at all is absolute rubbish.

[paulvdb]

Originally Posted by Barry_v

in any given accident if all the involved parties were doing 20kmph less the accident would be less severe. speed does kill.

now there are a lot more factors in every accident and its not always practical or desirable to lower speed limits. but to say that speed plays no part at all is absolute rubbish.

0KPH is safer than 100kph. That doesn't mean we should all be travelling at 0kph.

They key issue being raised, I believe, is the current fixation on "speed kills" despite facts that show that speed is only a partial contributor at best. There are no real press concerns about bald tyres, soft tyres, old bombs, cars in many states never getting retested - but the instant a P-plater goes 10k over their limit everyone goes wild about the lunatics who would dare risk everyone's lives.

In Sydney you also now have cameras in locations that "might" be dangerous in the future, even though they are only meant to be installed in KNOWN black spots. These cameras get installed as a default in every new road project - this means the designers are making roads that they know are dangerous (shouldn't this be a chargeable offence?)

[AWD Chaser]

No matter how hard we try, this topic will always blow out.


Speed doesn't kill, and limiting speed zones don't neccesarily save lives.

Nothing more to discuss.

[Green X]

Well look if you want to spend you life worrying about what might happen you should life in a padded room with filtered air and never set foot outside ever again.

I have seen the Video tapes heard the storeys and there are 2 common factors
1. Not paying attention.
2. acting like tools.

Speed is just easy to blame isn't it, How many crashes take place due to just Speed alone??

yes if they were going slower is would have not been as bad, but get rid of point 1 and 2 and it would have never happened

we need to stop shifting the blame and get the massage across, Speed isn't the problem it's acting like a F***head behind the wheel well driving at speed is the is the cause.

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by Green X

1. Not paying attention.
2. acting like tools.

Speed isn't the problem it's acting like a F***head behind the wheel well driving at speed is the is the cause.

Summed up nicely.

[TheSneakiness]

Like a few people touched in the other thread, if speed killed, travelling at 30km/h, you'd drop dead.

All comes down to experience, concentration and attitude behind the wheel.

[boss 300]

agree whit green x is the joker in controll of the car,that is the problem.

[Ives]

Driver's lack of skill... kills.

[Auslandau]

Yes, no, maybe.

Just wanted to get in before the thread goes of the rails ........



| [/url] |

[Nostalgia]

Originally Posted by auslandau

Yes, no, maybe.

Just wanted to get in before the thread goes of the rails ........

Bwahahahahahah Thats why i posted twice !!!!!!!!! :

[IDT]

I don't know if anyone remembers back when speed camera's 1st hit the scene in a big way. A story was on TV where a reporter put a black card board box and a dummy sign on the side of the road as a decoy speed camera. He hid a real camera in the bushes and filmed driver response. When he came back and checked the box was obviously vandlised but on film they recovered some footage. There were 2 or 3 minor incidents of people losing control of their cars (reaction to spotting the decoy) but there was also one where some bloke lost it completely. They had one of those black and white lines set up in the back ground so they could work out the speed. None of the drivers were over the speed limit. But in reality any one of the incidents could have resulted in something a lot more serious. I would like to see that pulled out of the vault and shown again. But who wants to take on the anti everthing brigade. That proved to me without doubt. Its not speed that kills people. Its how prepared we are, how we react and the design and condition of our roads.

[thefargo]

I agree it is the inappropriate speed that kills. here in south oz, it also tends to be the large, solid objects way too close to the roadside that claim most lives. Electricity poles, trees, even sign posts actually touch the bitumen on some roads. try building a formula 1 track with those hazards on the circuit. I am a believer in wider roads and (say) a 5 metre safety zone either side of the road. It will never happen, but I would be interested in the stats if it did.

[[Tonko]]

But the problem with 'driving to the conditions' is that, some people are too stupid/arrogant to have the decision left to them....
An Example:
Hume highway at 3am. There are still a few cars out, but not many...
A bloke in an old corolla decides 130km/h is safe.
Another in a VN Commo creeps up until he feels the 'safety limit' which, if he is a stupid person may be 170km/h. In a VN, 170 is almost definately suicide.
Or Someone else, might decide to try to break the land speed record in his brand new skyline. Hey, it would be legal under the 'conditions' law...
You could do 140 in the wet, most wouldnt, but some would because they think they are speedracer...