Another speed camera rant, anyone had a Reminder Notice recently?

[peasea]

Oh, well if its all about kinetic energy then since a motorbike carries a lot less than a car at 100kph perhaps bikes should be allowed to go faster and for that matter maybe trucks should be required to go slower.

However, they recently upped the limit for truck and trailer to 90kph didn't they? That means you gotta go another 10kph minimum to get past the rolling bricks. Sounds like entrapment to me, but then I'm a conspiracy theorist.

[scumdog]

However, they recently upped the limit for truck and trailer to 90kph didn't they? That means you gotta go another 10kph minimum to get past the rolling bricks. Sounds like entrapment to me, but then I'm a conspiracy theorist.

I agree.

Shoulda been lft as it was -or bumped up to 100kph like all the other traffic.

[Patrick]

the number of deaths does not decrease as a result of a drop in the average speed of the vehicle fleet.

Yeah it does, they have the figures somewhere.... The speed average has lowered as have the death rates, even though there are more cars/people on the roads. But then the other side is that cars are safer with airbags, abs etc etc. Speed alone isn't the problem, but it is a problem... Always amazes me how no one does stupid overtaking shit when there is a marked patrol car around....

[wickle]

speed limit or just above what about those crawlers on the open road sometimes they are just as bad and danrerous as the GO FAST BOYS

[Sanx]

Soooo... The road toll would not increase at all if the speed limit was raised?

Regardless, the sheer number of vehicles on the road at present combined with population growth and paltry ineffective Court imposed penalties in addition to a drivers licence that is wayy too easy to get (and at too early an age) are going to make sure not many undertakers will go bankrupt.

Sadly for some.

Examine the statistics of road toll vs average open road speed for the years between 1999 and 2005 (2005 being the latest year they're available). Now add hospitalisations into the mix. Now look at how the number of speed-related tickets has quadrupled in that time.

Look at all the figures, conveniently supplied by the government, and unless you're particularly stupid or a politician, you come up with the interesting statistic that in New Zealand, average road speed dropped and the road toll increased slightly and serious injuries went up by about 12%.

Now examine the road toll is those states in the US where they raised the speed limit in 1995. Oooh, look! They fell. Yes, we don't have US Interstate-class highways in NZ but as a demnstration of how if average road speed increases the road toll drops, it's a good one. It's also about the only place in the word where the speed limit HAS increased in recent years.

Lowering road speed does not lower road toll. Increased speed enforcement does not lower road toll. There's not a western country on the planet where that's the case. Victoria, often hailed by NZ as the road saftey poster-child, has exactly the same problem but, like NZ, they still think that even harsher enforcement is the answer. All the evidence from the UK, would suggest that strictrer enforcement equals higher road toll. The best police area in the UK when it comes to road toll is County Durham. They have just one speed camera.

So who's the blame? The government for being incredibly greedy and simply using speeding-fine revenue as a stealth tax, or the Police for being incredibly stupid and going along with whatever the government say? Take your pick. They're both equally culpable in my eyes.

[Sanx]

Yeah it does, they have the figures somewhere.... The speed average has lowered as have the death rates, even though there are more cars/people on the roads. But then the other side is that cars are safer with airbags, abs etc etc. Speed alone isn't the problem, but it is a problem... Always amazes me how no one does stupid overtaking shit when there is a marked patrol car around....

Wrong, Mr Patrick. The road toll has not lowered consistently since 2001, when the current speed-above-all-else focus came in. There was a steady year-on-year downward trend between 1990 and 2001. Since then, the trend has reversed. The figures are the government's, not some pressure groups, so one cannot be accused of massaging them.

And the problem isn't, and never has been, exceeding the speed limit. Even the government, in a desperate attempt to justify their demonstrably failing tactics, deliberately do not break down accident causes into "speed to fast for the conditions" (always dangerous) and "speed in excess of the posted limit" (never dangerous, unless also too fast for the conditions). They lump them together as one.

I can't be bothered to type them all out again, so here's a link to a quick precis of the statistics:
http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...97#post1538097

[mashman]

The thing that irks me the most is that the data is available to a select few. Before I came over to Nz i worked at a small company in the UK who started providing the online "Check your car sites". The only way to substantiate the condition of a car was to compare the DVLA record to the ABI (Association of British Insurers) record. Now this ABI data wasn't overly comprehensive, but it did contain dates and times of crashes. After pithin about for a while finding out which CC range was most likely to have an accident (125 - 250 ... huh wonder why!!!) I decided to have a look at the seasonal aspects. I wish I could remember the exact figures, but from September to February the number of crashes rose drastically, about 26 percent sticks in my head for some reason)... anyhoo, that autumn coming into winter... the sun is lower in the sky when commuting (granted more cars on the road during peak hours and nose to tail was top of the list), but at those times of year, when the sun isn't their, the roads get greasy, temperatures are minus in the evenings, roads ice etc... I'm sure you can see where I'm going with that... It was literally 4 agencies in the UK that had this information... Shame we never mined the information and lobbied with it as it was an eye opener and needed more quantifying... but the company went bust not being able to keep up with the big boys... There'll be a database somewhere that contains this information and I despare at the lack of use on this information when it comes to policy making... I blame the insurance companies first for not providing an analysis that's useful for the politicians to actually make a decent policy with (same can be said for most policies, commissions full of idiots that don't really know what they're looking for, trying to squeeze the facts to fit the policy) blah blah rant rant... it's annoyed the shit out of me for years and it's all coming out, waaaaaahhh, i feel so alone and lost in the lonely blackness pass me a hammer!!!!

[scumdog]

So who's the blame? The government for being incredibly greedy and simply using speeding-fine revenue as a stealth tax, or the Police for being incredibly stupid and going along with whatever the government say? Take your pick. They're both equally culpable in my eyes.

Mwahaha...so you would be quite happy for Police to ignore what the Governement say AS LONG AS IT SUITED YOUR AGENDA???

The 'increase in the road toll' in the main can be attributed to the ongoing stupidity, drunkeness and outright dangerous driving (yes, at times that includes speeding) by the majority of those that cause crashes, sure, enforcement ain't going to STOP it, maybe just keep a relative lid on it.

But I'm waiting for YOUR 'silver-bullet' answer to the road toll.

[mashman]

The silver-bullet is being developed... It takes the drivers out of the loop and replaces it with computers... Might be worth extending the driving test to include a trip around a skid pan so that drivers get the idea behind dry and wet as well as different road surfaces... Driver education may well not be a silver bullet, but until you've experienced varying road conditions and learn to drive in them and how they affect the cars handling blah blah blah

[Sanx]

Mwahaha...so you would be quite happy for Police to ignore what the Governement say AS LONG AS IT SUITED YOUR AGENDA???

Of course I'd be happy with that. People are happy with governments that do things they agree with and don't do things they don't agree with. Why should this be any different?

The 'increase in the road toll' in the main can be attributed to the ongoing stupidity, drunkeness and outright dangerous driving (yes, at times that includes speeding) by the majority of those that cause crashes, sure, enforcement ain't going to STOP it, maybe just keep a relative lid on it.

But it isn't keeping a relative lid on it, is it? A massive increase in enforcement has resulted in an increase in the road toll and serious injuries, despite lowering of average road speed. Over-zealous enforcement, concentrating on the wrong areas, has not kept a lid on anything, it's become a large part of the problem.

But I'm waiting for YOUR 'silver-bullet' answer to the road toll.

Give me the silver bullet and you'd end up with a very high road toll -stupid / slow drivers shot for being too stupid or indecisive or slow or having daft bumper stickers or riding Suzukis or any other of a whole raft of reasons made up on the spot. Trust me, it'd sort out a lot of problems.

Back back in a world where I'm not allowed to summarily execute people I don't like, I don't have all the answers. In fact, I don't have many of them. But given that the current tactics are demonstrably failing miserably (unless the aim of them was to increase government revenue), surely the government and other interested parties should be encouraging debate on possible alternative solutions.

But since you ask, here's my quick list of solutions:

• Build some decent fucking roads. Ban further use of chip-seal immediately. Investigate plans to four-lane between Auckland and Wellington and fast-track it though the RM process.
• Introduce compulsory retesting every five years, and make the testing and retesting procedure much more rigorous. Tests and retests can only be conducted in English; no translators allowed. Included in the test is a confidence-in-vehicle component. Anyone who drives excessively slowly or indecisively fails.
• Lower the amount of time one's allowed to drive on a foreign licence down from a year to three months. Make presentation of a licence a pre-requisite of registration of a vehicle.
• Increase open road speed limits to 110kph and 130kph on motorways.
• Allow speeds up to 130kph whilst overtaking either in overtaking lanes or on single-lane roads. Ban trucks from overtaking in overtaking lanes.
• Enforce the drive in the left-hand lane unless overtaking on motorways rule.
• Remove all speed cameras unless they're directly before accident blackspots. These figures to be published. All fixed speed cameras to be clearly visible and advertised no more than 100m in advance. Adopt the Queensland and NSW tactic of making the cameras visible. They work as a deterrent when people can see them clearly, so make them visible unless you wold prefer people to speed and pay fines.
• Get rid of camera vans. Cops not allowed to run stationary speed traps.
• Put more red light cameras in, especially at junctions where past history would indicate it's a problem. Also look at phasing and timing of lights (especially in Auckland City) where the light phasing seems to be designed to ensure as much congestion as possible. Better phasing would automatically result in fewer people running red lights.
• Introduce a power-to-weight restriction for learner and restriced licence holders, similar in concept to the soon-to-be-introduced LAMS list for motorbikes.

[Ixion]

But since you ask, here's my quick list of solutions:

• Build some decent fucking roads. Ban further use of chip-seal immediately. Investigate plans to four-lane between Auckland and Wellington and fast-track it though the RM process.

..

I disagree. Roads are too good nowdays. Build some crappy roads. One reason for the high toll is that the standard of roads has improved more than the standard of driving. Back when roads really were bad only good drivers/riders went fast. The bumpy, narrow roads made Ethel and Mabel and Stan uneasy. They drove slowly. Now the surface is so good, the ride so smooth, the road so wide that it all seems effortlessly easy. So their speed goes up. All well and good, until something goes wrong. Then they're still Mabel and ethel and Stan withtheir 40mph abilities.

Make roads that feel dangerous, but are actually safe. Instead of raods that appear safe and are actually not so.

[scumdog]

I disagree. Roads are too good nowdays. Build some crappy roads. One reason for the high toll is that the standard of roads has improved more than the standard of driving. Back when roads really were bad only good drivers/riders went fast. The bumpy, narrow roads made Ethel and Mabel and Stan uneasy. They drove slowly. Now the surface is so good, the ride so smooth, the road so wide that it all seems effortlessly easy. So their speed goes up. All well and good, until something goes wrong. Then they're still Mabel and ethel and Stan withtheir 40mph abilities.

Make roads that feel dangerous, but are actually safe. Instead of raods that appear safe and are actually not so.

Ixion has a good point - that's why on the motorway near Dunedin boiracers (and a few others) are constantly loosing their licences at the side of the road.
Nice clear straightish road , two lanes each way with cheese-cutters deviding them.
So these guys ae 'cruising' down it at 190+km weaving through the traffic on a wet Saturday night....

Catch 22 :
- 'we need better roads, they're unsafe'

Roads get fixed up

-'the speed limit should be raised, the roads are so good they're capable of having a higher speed limit'.


then down the track a few years: "these roads aren't that safe for these speeds, they need to be upgraded".

[scumdog]

Wrong, Mr Patrick. The road toll has not lowered consistently since 2001, when the current speed-above-all-else focus came in. There was a steady year-on-year downward trend between 1990 and 2001. Since then, the trend has reversed. The figures are the government's, not some pressure groups, so one cannot be accused of massaging them.

So can you obtain the figures for vehicle numbers increase, population increase and death/injury increase.

And put it together in a per capita form so we can look at any year and compare it with any other year and say "Ah yes, it was better/worse back then".

I'm sure there is a relationship between the increases in crashes, injuries, deaths and the increase in vehicle numbers and population growth.

And how would the figures compare to the 'before air-bags etc' era??

[SPman]

So can you obtain the figures for vehicle numbers increase, population increase and death/injury increase.

And put it together in a per capita form so we can look at any year and compare it with any other year and say "Ah yes, it was better/worse back then".

I'm sure there is a relationship between the increases in crashes, injuries, deaths and the increase in vehicle numbers and population growth.

And how would the figures compare to the 'before air-bags etc' era??

I believe the worst year, on a vehicles per head of population vs miles driven etc etc, was around 1938. After that (from what figures are available), until the late 90's, the trend was steadily down. On 1938 figures, we would currently have 2500-3000 deaths a year!

[Sanx]

So can you obtain the figures for vehicle numbers increase, population increase and death/injury increase.

And put it together in a per capita form so we can look at any year and compare it with any other year and say "Ah yes, it was better/worse back then".

I'm sure there is a relationship between the increases in crashes, injuries, deaths and the increase in vehicle numbers and population growth.

And how would the figures compare to the 'before air-bags etc' era??

Yes - you can obtain those figures, together with things like average age of the road fleet. I haven't got tome to find them now, however. There may well be a correlation between population growth and road toll. The 'normal' method of measuring comparitive road safety is to look at deaths per million km driven which is a statistic that copes with increases in population and the vehicle fleet. Simply concentrating on road toll alone (which is the government's method) is overly simplistic.

However, the period I'm interested in is the one between 2001 and 2007; the period in which the government got a hard-on about speed and concentrated on that to the exclusion of almost everything else. For comparison, take the 7 year period immediatelybefore it. Population growth spiked in the period between 2002 and 2004, peaking at 1.8% annual growth in 2003. However, there was a similar spike in 1995, 1996 and 1997; years where the road toll and injuries continued the then-present trend and dropped.

The vehicle fleet also rose by a similar amount, though I can't find exact figures from a two minute search. Nearest I could get are the tables here. Vehicle fleet tends to following population size. Interestingly, slide 5 from the page linked above shows historical trend for vehicle kilometres travelled. The fastest increase was between 1990 and 1999; a period in which road toll and injuries consistently dropped, year on year. In 2000 and 2001, the figure flatlined and was followd by a slight rise in 2004 and 2005. It was during this time, the road toll and injuries rate rose.

You would expect that the deaths per million km rate to stay even, given external factors such as road quality, safety of vehicles, etc staying the same. Given that the safety features in vehicles have massively increased over the past 7 years, you'd expect the figure to go down. Except it hasn't. It's gone up.