Plater Clocked at Insane speed!!! (2 Viewers)

[Ritard_]

fucken freeway =/= outback highway you clueless fucking cunt

freeways have the fastest design speeds
people sit on 130km/h

cars are limited to 130km/h

this affects anyone how?

 

[scuba_steve2121]

fucken freeway =/= outback highway you clueless fucking cunt

freeways have the fastest design speeds
people sit on 130km/h

cars are limited to 130km/h

this affects anyone how?

well your saying that people should stick to 110/100 when they should be able to go 140-150 and people on these roads already go 120-130 and even 140 when overtaking

 

[Ritard_]

well your saying that people should stick to 110/100 when they should be able to go 140-150 and people on these roads already go 120-130 and even 140 when overtaking

who says? you? why should they?

RTA civil transport engineers disagree

 

[ClockworkSoldier]

so? if a crash into a wall going 100km im gonna die

everybody already goes 120-130 on a freeway and 100's of people aren't dying on these freeways everyday so your argument is flawed, look at the outcome not the intention

Going 100km/h on a freeway, you're unlikely to hit a wall head on.

Slamming a wall with the side of your car is often not going to instantly kill you at 100km/h, it is the resulting after effects. At 150km/h, your car is practically going to disintegrate as soon as you touch the wall.

There are many more scenarios where there is less chance of fatality at 100km/h. 120km/h and above is almost guaranteed death.

You have more chance of surviving a crash on a freeway at 100km/h as opposed to higher speeds.

 

[scuba_steve2121]

who says? you? why should they?

RTA civil transport engineers disagree

because people can do it and not die

if you're a shit driver go in the left lane and go 100/110 but if you are experienced you should be able to go at faster speeds. i don't give a flying fuck what the rta says. they have just set a rule up that will equalise the speeds drivers can go because maybe 5/10 % of people can't handle going 130-140.

im not saying 140 all the way im aware there is some places were it is not possiable to go 140 without facing immediate injury

but come on you are on a road that is pracitcally striaght for the next 50/100ks just let people go faster

 

[ClockworkSoldier]

because people can do it and not die

if you're a shit driver go in the left lane and go 100/110 but if you are experienced you should be able to go at faster speeds. i don't give a flying fuck what the rta says. they have just set a rule up that will equalise the speeds drivers can go because maybe 5/10 % of people can't handle going 130-140.

im not saying 140 all the way im aware there is some places were it is not possiable to go 140 without facing immediate injury

but come on you are on a road that is pracitcally striaght for the next 50/100ks just let people go faster

Dude, they have qualified engineers that have determined the safest, optimal speed for a car to travel at on each road. They determine this speed due to the road's quality/condition, car handling capabilities etc.

You have no grounds to argue on other than personal opinion, which has no proof or credibility.

 

[aussie-boy]

fucken freeway =/= outback highway you clueless fucking cunt

freeways have the fastest design speeds
people sit on 130km/h

cars are limited to 130km/h

this affects anyone how?

I'm not against a technical limit per se, however I have to take you up on this point.

Design speed of the road between Syd and Canberra is 130; i.e. safest speed to negotiate the tightest turn on the road

Its extremely important that cars can speed up quickly, e.g:
-Someone merging from the left who you dont see, need to get out of the way ASAP
-If you cut someone off (obviously stupid behaviour, but it happens, and if the idiot in the car in front cant speed up enough to get a distance a crash might happen)
-Speeding up to overtake if an emergency vehicle is behind you
-etc

The limit would have to be at least 20km-30km above the speed limit. The speed limit should be the road's design speed.

 

[aussie-boy]

Dude, they have qualified engineers that have determined the safest, optimal speed for a car to travel at on each road. They determine this speed due to the road's quality/condition, car handling capabilities etc.

You have no grounds to argue on other than personal opinion, which has no proof or credibility.

Speed limit = design speed - politically driven deduction to push 'speeding kills' message

 

[Ritard_]

speed limit should not equal design limit you twat

you have to leave leeway for human error

speed limits are conservative for a reason

fuck

 

[Ritard_]

I'm not against a technical limit per se, however I have to take you up on this point.

Design speed of the road between Syd and Canberra is 130; i.e. safest speed to negotiate the tightest turn on the road

Its extremely important that cars can speed up quickly, e.g:
-Someone merging from the left who you dont see, need to get out of the way ASAP
-If you cut someone off (obviously stupid behaviour, but it happens, and if the idiot in the car in front cant speed up enough to get a distance a crash might happen)
-Speeding up to overtake if an emergency vehicle is behind you
-etc

The limit would have to be at least 20km-30km above the speed limit. The speed limit should be the road's design speed.

guess what

speed limiting doesnt affect acceleration (up to the limit)

you can still have a ferrari that will do 100-130 in 2 secs.

addtionally

in all of the scenarios you posted, the average cars acceleration is not going to be enough to get you out of the situation lol

a camry isnt going to *accelerate* out of someone merging into you, or if you cut someone off lol, and why would you accelerate if there was an emergency vehicle behind you

???

speed limits are set lower than design speeds, because design speeds are theoretical and do not take into account

- driver fatigue
- crash severity
- human error
- mechanical failure
- unforseen risks such as animals etc

 

[Ritard_]

because people can do it and not die

if you're a shit driver go in the left lane and go 100/110 but if you are experienced you should be able to go at faster speeds. i don't give a flying fuck what the rta says. they have just set a rule up that will equalise the speeds drivers can go because maybe 5/10 % of people can't handle going 130-140.

im not saying 140 all the way im aware there is some places were it is not possiable to go 140 without facing immediate injury

but come on you are on a road that is pracitcally striaght for the next 50/100ks just let people go faster

what what

people can shoot themselves in the head and not die

you are literally the dumbest cunt i have ever encountered

stop fucking posting

 

[ClockworkSoldier]

guess what

speed limiting doesnt affect acceleration (up to the limit)

you can still have a ferrari that will do 100-130 in 2 secs.

addtionally

in all of the scenarios you posted, the average cars acceleration is not going to be enough to get you out of the situation lol

a camry isnt going to *accelerate* out of someone merging into you, or if you cut someone off lol, and why would you accelerate if there was an emergency vehicle behind you

???

speed limits are set lower than design speeds, because design speeds are theoretical and do not take into account

- driver fatigue
- crash severity
- human error
- mechanical failure
- unforseen risks such as animals etc

Also, emergency vehicles travel at around 130-150km/h when in traffic on the freeway.

If we raise the speed limit to around that point, the emergency vehicles would have to travel at what? 200km/h? Is that feasible? I don't even know if Ambulances could go 200km/h safely, and I doubt it. Same with fire engines.

Somehow I don't think so.

 

[Ritard_]

The risk of death and severe injury is a direct exponential function of speed, not speed differences.

Speeding research

"In NSW speeding is a factor in about 40 per cent of road deaths."

Speeding

http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/downloads/nsw_sza.pdf

read that you fucking morons

 

[Ritard_]

people that are arguing with me are arguing with years of traffic engineering science and research and are comparible to muslims ignoring science as well

 

[Ritard_]

"The design speed of a road is the maximum speed at which a motor vehicle can be operated safely on that road in perfect conditions."

~yes that sounds reasonable~

 

[aussie-boy]

people that are arguing with me are arguing with years of traffic engineering science and research and are comparible to muslims ignoring science as well

Because you've been fucking brainwashed by the RTAs backwards policies

Your "evidence" was shit...

*First site:
-Its relative to a 60 zone, of course 10 extra ks in a 60 zone are much worse than 10 extra ks in a 110 zone
-The stats in themselves are BS because people who "speed" are more likely to have dangerous driving behaviour in general. If you told all those people driving 1-2ks under the speed limit to drive 10ks faster, the 'relative crash risk' would immediately decrease

*2nd site:
-the RTA conducts speed testing on roads to det new limits: of course this wont work, the drivers are already sticking to a speed limit! A rule for speed limits is they should be set at the 85th percentile of natural traffic speed (ie w/o a limit)... with the current review procedure it is impossible for the RTA to even determine this
-then they "consult with stakeholders," = political influence

Of course speeding is dangerous. But "speeding" is not the same as exceeding the speed limit - it's driving faster than is appropriate for the conditions; and conditions on certain Australian roads justify speeds far in excess of the limit

The is cliche, but a good example - autobahn.
Mercedes just came out in disagreement of our government's approach to speed - they've been making cars since before the RTA existed

 

[aussie-boy]

guess what

speed limiting doesnt affect acceleration (up to the limit)

you can still have a ferrari that will do 100-130 in 2 secs.

addtionally

in all of the scenarios you posted, the average cars acceleration is not going to be enough to get you out of the situation lol

a camry isnt going to *accelerate* out of someone merging into you, or if you cut someone off lol, and why would you accelerate if there was an emergency vehicle behind you

Any car has sufficient acceleration to turn a merging impact from rear door to boot

If you were in the third lane of the fwy, with 2nd and 1st lanes occupied, on the limit and with an ambulance behind you should be able to accelerate in order to get in front of the car on your left

Acceleration is just important as braking in terms of safety; if you're sitting on 130ks (the limit) you simply can't accelerate anymore = DANGER

 

[Riet]

ye except the limit shouldn't be 130 it should be 110 because we have shit driver training compared to europe.

 

[JohnMcGee]

"The design speed of a road is the maximum speed at which a motor vehicle can be operated safely on that road in perfect conditions."

~yes that sounds reasonable~

country roads and shit are also calculated according to 5 second visibility, safe stopping if you run off the road etc, where available.

it's hard to argue against the speed limits we have imo. the risks of increasing it to allow hoons to get their rush are far greater than the limits on liberty they impose. i'm all for them.

only place they seem overly restricted is on motorways. BUT there are a lot of learners and P platers on the motorways and slow cars + fast cars in only two lanes seems dangerous.

 

[Riet]

country roads and shit are also calculated according to 5 second visibility, safe stopping if you run off the road etc, where available.

it's hard to argue against the speed limits we have imo. the risks of increasing it to allow hoons to get their rush are far greater than the limits on liberty they impose. i'm all for them.

only place they seem overly restricted is on motorways. BUT there are a lot of learners and P platers on the motorways and slow cars + fast cars in only two lanes seems dangerous.

agreed, though with motorways there is an (imo obvious and beneficial) solution. Firstly there should simply be better driver training. Highway driving should be a requirement of the getting a licence, after this there would be no lower speed limit imposed on P platers as in my opinion the difference in speeds below the limit does increase the likelihood of accidents as it leads to more overtaking.

Secondly sticking to the left needs to be much better enforced. Thirdly, on 3 lane roads trucks should only be allowed in the left 2 lanes.

Imo if these conditions were in place then we could allow 120 on motorways and perhaps even eventually 130 as the standard of driving improved.