New 60km/h speed limits in NSW forest roads!! was 100.

[EDManual]

Came across new signs down dirt roads today where I travel often.

Would you believe the speed limit has dropped from 100 to a flat 60 everywhere in forest areas in NSW!!

Is absolutely rediculous!

Last month I was able to safely travel at speeds varying from 30 to 100 or so depending on the conditions. I watch the road, not my speedo. Some parts you go slow as there are bumpy corners, some parts are massive wide smooth roads as big as freeways (just happen to be dirt) with no trees nearby for even a roo to jump out of behind) down hill you might even happen to hit 106! oooh!.

Now if I do 100 its :

More than 30 km/h but not more than 45 km/h over limit, 5 points $710, 3 month licence loss


and if 106km/h its : More than 45 km/h 6 points, $1,915, 6 month licence loss


Seriously what is going on!!

[jpd80]

This from 4WD Action, October 2010:

LINK
Forests NSW have introduced a 60km/h on all unsealed gravel roads, unless otherwise signposted. This new limit is an effort to enhance the road safety of all users. Forest NSW says lower speeds mean drivers have more time for decision making; vehicles have a shorter stopping distance and crashes that do occur result in less severe injuries because of the lower impact.

Signs will be erected in the next few months to remind people driving on Forest NSW roads of the new speed limit.

So apparently the fun days are over.......

[Ben73]

But now if you drive 65 you are now an idiot because you are doubling your risk of crashing

But seriously, what is a forest road technically?

[Jim Goose]

Originally Posted by Ben73

But seriously, what is a forest road technically?

Its a road in a forest....

[Ben73]

As in a road in a National park, or just any road with trees next to it.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by EDManual

Came across new signs down dirt roads today where I travel often.

Would you believe the speed limit has dropped from 100 to a flat 60 everywhere in forest areas in NSW!!

Please advise which.

Watagans have posted "40 AREA" signs near the camping grounds, and "END 40 AREA" signs where the rural default then reapplies. Realistically, they should have used "END 40", dropping the word - area.

At the end of this 60km/h zone HOW is that zone 'ended'? It has to be signaled by sign UNLESS it's the literal end-of-the-road!

Last month I was able to safely travel at speeds varying from 30 to 100 or so depending on the conditions. I watch the road, not my speedo. Some parts you go slow as there are bumpy corners, some parts are massive wide smooth roads as big as freeways (just happen to be dirt) with no trees nearby for even a roo to jump out of behind) down hill you might even happen to hit 106! oooh!.

I expect the rural default will drop, via the ARR process to 80km/h or 90km/h, or both vis; sealed and unsealed.

100km/h arrived as the rural default purely to lessen backlash after speed derestriction (//) was removed in NSW 1979,- by the Wran Bolshie government. It should have adopted derestrictions prima facie 80km/h, but as a max.

Let me know the state forrest or park, often a government agencies responsible for their various lands, believe they have legal control of speed zoning on it. They do not, and old RTA can order such limits removed.

Get back to us.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Keepleft

P
Let me know the state forrest or park, often a government agencies responsible for their various lands, believe they have legal control of speed zoning on it. They do not, and old RTA can order such limits removed.

Get back to us.

So Forrest NSW does not have the right to reduce speed lilmts,
what if they put their case to RTA and had them drop it instead?

[Simple6]

Its a lot like rural roads that have been reduced recently in NSW.

Road into Warnervale (Central Coast) gone from 90km/h down to 80km/h. Why?

Road into Port Stephens (Richardson Rd way?) changed from 100km/h down to 80km/h. Why? Its a good condition surfaced road, that in some parts are dead straight and at. (now) 80km/h is a crawl.

Why are limits reduced when a cars road roadholding ability has increased incredibly over times when older cars could go faster?

A 1961 Falcon at 100km/h on a 2-way rural road or a 2011 Falcon at 80km/h on a 2-way rural road. Does that make sense?

[Luke Plaizier]

They should block the roads off and stop cars travelling there are all. That will make them evensafer again!


Lukeyson

[EDManual]

The Baccleugh state park is the area, and it is a fairly main way to drive from Tumut to Canberra over the Brindabella ranges (about 50km dirt). The road just happens to go through this NSW Forest and they have dropped the speed limit here. There is no End 60 sign when out of the forest and out the other side either. (still dirt, when not in NSW Forest)

Makes my blood boil to think I could have a $2000 fine, lose my licence for 6 months for doing safely what I was doing last month!!!
And they think its safer? Instead of watching the road and edges you watch your speedo, get bored, fall asleep, start playing with radio ipd gps etc. One thing I love about driving on dirt roads that arent restricted like this is you have the opportunity to concentrate on driving.
I didnt bother to slow down too much, still doing 100ish a fair bit but sure wouldnt want to get caught!

Forest NSW shouldnt be able to change speed limits on roads that are a through road. Ok maybe single lane log truck roads that go nowhere, but not roads like this.

Keepleft, see what you can do.

Thanks

[Corzza]

Not a bad thing. Should be more I say 70 or 80km/h but what can you do

[RHR]

SO how many highway cars do you think we're gonna on the forrest DIRT roads. Im thinking bugger all.

They are a lot lower especially in the back due to all the crap they have to lug around.

Cant see them enforcing the limit

[El Venom]

The foresty and national park tracks near me have had signs stating that the maximum speed you can do is 60km/h for over 12 months. No big issue at all

[TheInterceptor]

Cool, more shiney signs to ignore.

I like the "drive to the conditions" sign that they have on a dirt road near Nowra.. I havent been over 60 on that road as it just doesnt allow for it imo.

[2011G6E]

I've been on some beautiful dirt roads near here and further out west, posted at 100kph, but when you top a slight rise and see some guy who doesn't know how to handle dirt coming your way, using all of his side and some of yours, maybe a bit slower would be a good idea...

[flappist]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

I've been on some beautiful dirt roads near here and further out west, posted at 100kph, but when you top a slight rise and see some guy who doesn't know how to handle dirt coming your way, using all of his side and some of yours, maybe a bit slower would be a good idea...

Yes may not be a bad idea up here either. I have had the odd brizzo outback hero (you can tell by quickly counting, well to the nearest hundred, the number of ARB catalogue farkles and the shiny factor) coming around a blind corner sliding onto my side of the road on the forestry tracks in Cooloola.
Far too many urban cowboys seem to fantasise that their patcruisjero is an off road race vehicle and they are somewhere between Paris and Dakar......

[MarkAW]

Shouldn't all roads be judged on a set of principles or in work speak they should all be risk assessed and the llowable speed based on the assessment outcome?
The condition of the road including the geology (if its a graded road), the width, the type and shape of corners, the lane separation, the risk of leaving the graded area ie flat farm land, huge unbending trees or plummeting cliff sides etc.

[EDManual]

You guys are wrong, there should be no speed limit. People should be able to judge what is safe. This doesnt allow for safe areas where faster is fine.

This is more and more dumbing down of the population. That means we all become worse and worse drivers as we dont have to think, and when something pops out we have no idea what to do.

I am not saying you should be sideways around every corner and flat out up every straight, but driving safely doesn't mean slow.

I'll tell you what will happen, around corners where you will do less than 60 anyway, people will do 60 and crash as thats the limit. 100 was obviously at a speed limit where you have to think.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Originally Posted by EDManual

You guys are wrong, there should be no speed limit. People should be able to judge what is safe.

flawed thinking.

Jack Reasonable asserts that 110 is safe for his car, skill level and conditions.
Jill Scaredypants asserts that 45 is safe for her '92 Festiva, her skill level and the conditions.

Jack Reasonable meets Jill Scaredypants around a long, wide corner with trees blocking full view, at a *slowed down* 50KM/h speed differential.

Jack and Jill roll down the hill

Ideal world and all, fine, but it isn't.

[The G6ET Spot]

Did you really think that the NSW government would turn off certain speed cameras, then sit back and take a loss of revenue.

Think about it. First they announce the turning off of the cameras, then announce that speed zones will be changed in certain areas.

There has yet to be one zone where the speed increased. King Georges road for instance has gone from 70 to 60kph and haven't the coppers been giving it a hiding since it happened.

Speeding fine revenue will increase. mark my words.

There are rumours that Cumberland Highway will be reduced to 60kph as well.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

flawed thinking.

Jack Reasonable asserts that 110 is safe for his car, skill level and conditions.
Jill Scaredypants asserts that 45 is safe for her '92 Festiva, her skill level and the conditions.

Jack Reasonable meets Jill Scaredypants around a long, wide corner with trees blocking full view, at a *slowed down* 50KM/h speed differential.

Jack and Jill roll down the hill

Ideal world and all, fine, but it isn't.

Actually that is incorrect. In that in this scenario Jack cannot see far enough ahead to brake safely should he have to then he has misjudged the safe speed of 110.

On the other hand if there was a sign that said 110 then it MUST be safe at 110 or they would not have put the sign there to tell you how fast to drive.....

Either way there may be a splat although in one situation Jack's estate solicitor can argue that there was a duty of care on DMR to post the safe speed because drivers are not capable of judging safe speeds for conditions.

The idea of judging safe speed in an open zone is not go 300km/h everywhere which seems to be the fear of the anti (//) brigade, it is to travel at a safe speed. I have never overtaken anyone at more than 30 or 40km/h faster (unless they were parked off the road) and always slowed down when there was oncoming traffic as I know what will happen if two cars pass at 500km/h.

In saying this I have no problem with a low limit inside forestry areas as the roads are not maintained and you are likely to meet tractors, trucks and all sorts of big nasty things in dust clouds, trees across roads and off cambre slippery corners next to cliffs.

[EDManual]

The thing is, on the roads I am talking about these are main roads that go from somewhere to somewhere up to an equivalent of 4 lanes across!. Not dead end logging tracks.

I dont know about you all, but I drive at a speed (if I am the one who gets to think) where I watch everything and have time to slow down if anything comes into view. If a logging truck is coming down a straight, i will slow down. If a logging truck comes round a corner, I have already slowed down before he is even there. These cars and trucks dont just appear from nowhere!

But if you put, and they have, a low speed limit, the less experienced driver will just do 60 everywhere, thinking 60 is safe to pass an oncoming truck and the cloud of dust that follows, as well as any corner that might pop up.

On the goat tracks that are thought of in forests, are we not already doing 60 or less?! I'd say we are.

There is a difference in roads. Thats the problem. One speed limit doesnt apply to everything. Thats why there shouldnt be one, or just a high one that everyone knows is too fast for many areas, and therefore you watch the road.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Originally Posted by flappist

Actually that is incorrect. In that in this scenario Jack cannot see far enough ahead to brake safely should he have to then he has misjudged the safe speed of 110.

On the other hand if there was a sign that said 110 then it MUST be safe at 110 or they would not have put the sign there to tell you how fast to drive.....

Either way there may be a splat although in one situation Jack's estate solicitor can argue that there was a duty of care on DMR to post the safe speed because drivers are not capable of judging safe speeds for conditions.

The idea of judging safe speed in an open zone is not go 300km/h everywhere which seems to be the fear of the anti (//) brigade, it is to travel at a safe speed. I have never overtaken anyone at more than 30 or 40km/h faster (unless they were parked off the road) and always slowed down when there was oncoming traffic as I know what will happen if two cars pass at 500km/h.

In saying this I have no problem with a low limit inside forestry areas as the roads are not maintained and you are likely to meet tractors, trucks and all sorts of big nasty things in dust clouds, trees across roads and off cambre slippery corners next to cliffs.

it being incorrect is a matter of opinion. The point i was trying to get across is if the 'safe speed' is left to the everyday man/woman to decide for themselves on unsurfaced roads, you will get wildly varying opinions on what that is. Some will drop to ridiculously low speeds while some will not think at all, and do stupid things. It's a completely different kettle of fish from sealed, unlimited roads.

Not everyone is level headed and/or thinks like a 'driver'. That is what would cause the problems.

I am not in the anti-unlimited brigade by any stretch. Quite the opposite. I'm referring to generalised human (stupid) nature.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Originally Posted by EDManual

The thing is, on the roads I am talking about these are main roads that go from somewhere to somewhere up to an equivalent of 4 lanes across!. Not dead end logging tracks.

I dont know about you all, but I drive at a speed (if I am the one who gets to think) where I watch everything and have time to slow down if anything comes into view. If a logging truck is coming down a straight, i will slow down. If a logging truck comes round a corner, I have already slowed down before he is even there. These cars and trucks dont just appear from nowhere!

But if you put, and they have, a low speed limit, the less experienced driver will just do 60 everywhere, thinking 60 is safe to pass an oncoming truck and the cloud of dust that follows, as well as any corner that might pop up.

On the goat tracks that are thought of in forests, are we not already doing 60 or less?! I'd say we are.

There is a difference in roads. Thats the problem. One speed limit doesnt apply to everything. Thats why there shouldnt be one, or just a high one that everyone knows is too fast for many areas, and therefore you watch the road.

yes point taken, i'm sick of the limits going down, down, especially where i grew up in a more rural area. The Black Spur in melbourne is now 80 the whole way through, used to be 100. Most of the roads from the outer NE Vic towns to the suburbs are now 80. It's only going to get worse.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by EDManual

You guys are wrong, there should be no speed limit. People should be able to judge what is safe. This doesnt allow for safe areas where faster is fine.

This is more and more dumbing down of the population. That means we all become worse and worse drivers as we dont have to think, and when something pops out we have no idea what to do.

I am not saying you should be sideways around every corner and flat out up every straight, but driving safely doesn't mean slow.

I'll tell you what will happen, around corners where you will do less than 60 anyway, people will do 60 and crash as thats the limit. 100 was obviously at a speed limit where you have to think.

Perhaps in a perfect world that would work...but while you have fallible humans behind the wheel, you need to give people prompts not to do stupid things.
Would you feel comfortable driving along the highway in your amazingly infallible manner, while other people of questionable driving skills are coming the other way towards you and your family "doing what they think is safe"?
It would worry the buggery out of me if everyone was just allowed to do as they pleased on the roads...it'd certainly get a lot of people into public transport...me being one of them...

You're making a huge sweeping generalisation that everyone out there on the road has a "personal limiter" built in...but they don't. The majority of drivers will, but there is a massive and significant number of drivers who will believe they are far better than they are, and when they run out of talent, they will usually take other people with them...

[Serial_Fool]

Good to see the change in NSW government has done much to alleviate the shake down of motorists for money...

Oh wait.

[GREGL]

Originally Posted by EDManual

Came across new signs down dirt roads today where I travel often.

Would you believe the speed limit has dropped from 100 to a flat 60 everywhere in forest areas in NSW!!

Is absolutely rediculous!

Last month I was able to safely travel at speeds varying from 30 to 100 or so depending on the conditions. I watch the road, not my speedo. Some parts you go slow as there are bumpy corners, some parts are massive wide smooth roads as big as freeways (just happen to be dirt) with no trees nearby for even a roo to jump out of behind) down hill you might even happen to hit 106! oooh!.

Now if I do 100 its :

More than 30 km/h but not more than 45 km/h over limit, 5 points $710, 3 month licence loss


and if 106km/h its : More than 45 km/h 6 points, $1,915, 6 month licence loss


Seriously what is going on!!

Do these penaltys apply to a QLD driver ? I ask this as we holiday in N.S.W and the idiots on the pacific hwy are shockers , 80-90 on single lane ,110 on the overtaking lanes EVERY TIME . Big line of traffic built up and you reach a overtaking lane and everyones trying to pass a idiot at slightly above the limit .
So if I get pinged for doing say 131 to pass this particular person do these penalties apply?

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by EDManual

The Baccleugh state park is the area, and it is a fairly main way to drive from Tumut to Canberra over the Brindabella ranges (about 50km dirt). The road just happens to go through this NSW Forest and they have dropped the speed limit here. There is no End 60 sign when out of the forest and out the other side either. (still dirt, when not in NSW Forest)

In which case ED - the '60km/h limit continues to legally apply, until another speed restriction sign is posted, or the road reaches a dead-end, the end of the road! Or their is an END 60 sign, this would signal the rural default. Simply leaving the State Forest does not cease the posted or implied 60 km/h limit.

Can you name the road and shire? Will need to determine if a Council or state Forrest chap is responsible. I'd be surprised RTA did this, they prefer to fall to the rural default UNLESS there are exceptional circumstances, in that they'd post a slower limit than that, IF they do, they will then post an END 60 ( in your example) sign, or another limit.

Simply removing 60km/h signs defaults the road to the rural default. Are their REPEATER 60km/h signs?

Do these 60 signs use the word AREA?

NSW State Forest on the matter
This should be an interesting legal one IF it was done without RTA authority, or that expressly of parliament. Government agencies often create and enforce "policies", but as parliament has sometime reminded public service employees, it is parliament that makes enforceable law, not agencies acting on policy.

http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/forests/re...ivities/safely

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

yes point taken, i'm sick of the limits going down, down, especially where i grew up in a more rural area. The Black Spur in melbourne is now 80 the whole way through, used to be 100. Most of the roads from the outer NE Vic towns to the suburbs are now 80. It's only going to get worse.

You are simply being prepared for an eventual reduction of ARR's rural default to 80km/h, or 90km/h sealed.

Rural default should never have been 100 km/h, that arrived after the removal of (//), in VIC back in the 60's ; to avoid backlash.

The upside, will be an eventual 130-130km/h per CIR 206 of ATSB for freeway.

[Professor Farnsworth]

i'm talking about fully sealed highways though, not dirt. They're the ones that have come down to 80 from 100.

130 on the freeway would be nice. Is that definitely coming? The code is lost on me at this time of night