4kmh tolerance for Waitangi Weekend until 29 February?

[Bassmatt]

all these circles making me dizzy

[pritch]

I get a strong impression from things I've read and seen that the British Traffic Police are rather higher trained than ours. BIKE magazine made an inquiry under their equivalent of the Official Information Act, and speed ranked actually seventh as a cause of accidents.

The six causes that preceded speed would probably not even be considered in this country. Every time I hear a Police spokesman (sorry, spokesperson) on TV say, "Speed was a factor". I think, "Maybe, but this spokesperson needs training."

[Zedder]

all these circles making me dizzy

If you mean the question marks, I was writing in FJRider text to assist in the comprehension. Apologies to all others.

[Bassmatt]

If you mean the question marks, I was writing in FJRider text to assist in the comprehension. Apologies to all others.

this speed/speeding thread and the others like it end up going round and round in circles.

[Zedder]

this speed/speeding thread and the others like it end up going round and round in circles.

Gotcha. It's probably because some of the people involved aren't telling the whole/truthful story.

I hear what you're saying as well Pritch.

[Gremlin]

I get a strong impression from things I've read and seen that the British Traffic Police are rather higher trained than ours.

For car pursuits, the officers are graded according to achieved levels. ie, each officer can pursue up to a certain speed, and has to pass tests to be allowed to pursue at higher speeds. I doubt NZ has anything like that? Yes, lot of training there.

UK also has many more bike police than NZ, and also seems to actively promote their use much more. Ambo bikes more heavily used as well.

All NZ training I believe comes from the UK stuff (police and general) and in some areas they run days where the bike police are the trainers, giving feedback to the normal motorcyclists but they have quite a few motorcycle cops attending). I'm certainly jealous at the training opportunities etc, that they have...

[Zedder]

For car pursuits, the officers are graded according to achieved levels. ie, each officer can pursue up to a certain speed, and has to pass tests to be allowed to pursue at higher speeds. I doubt NZ has anything like that? Yes, lot of training there.

UK also has many more bike police than NZ, and also seems to actively promote their use much more. Ambo bikes more heavily used as well.

All NZ training I believe comes from the UK stuff (police and general) and in some areas they run days where the bike police are the trainers, giving feedback to the normal motorcyclists but they have quite a few motorcycle cops attending). I'm certainly jealous at the training opportunities etc, that they have...

Yes, but you're mainly talking about Police on motorbikes and in cars being trained to perform certain enforcement tasks. I, and probably others too, would like to hear from a member of the Serious Crash Unit for example to get their perspective.

[steve_t]

I get a strong impression from things I've read and seen that the British Traffic Police are rather higher trained than ours. BIKE magazine made an inquiry under their equivalent of the Official Information Act, and speed ranked actually seventh as a cause of accidents.

The six causes that preceded speed would probably not even be considered in this country. Every time I hear a Police spokesman (sorry, spokesperson) on TV say, "Speed was a factor". I think, "Maybe, but this spokesperson needs training."

I always wonder what the criteria for "speed was a factor" are. If the finding was that the car was travelling at 101km/h in a 100 zone when or before it crashed, was speed a factor?

UK also has many more bike police than NZ, and also seems to actively promote their use much more. Ambo bikes more heavily used as well.

There's a show on UK TV that follows biker ambos. They typically get to the scene in about 3 minutes which is way faster than the regular ambos. It's good watching!

[FJRider]

Were You reading the same article as everyone else....? Did You read the paragraph starting with "Unexpected findings...."?? It goes on to state "the relative unimportance that speeding plays....? The article wasn't just about fatal accidents it was about how accidents happen in general.... You focused on the fatality aspect....? Guilty conscience? Trying to justify something perhaps?

Actually I read it a few times ... the "unexpected findings" WERE about fatal accidents. Not accidents in general.

It stated Quote: But illegal speeding – when drivers exceed the posted limit – accounts for only 13.9 per cent of fatal accidents. Which is what I stated. Going too fast for the conditions does not mean over the posted speed limit.

Perhaps YOU better read it again. But dont stop reading after "the realitive unimportance of speed" bit ....

[Zedder]

Actually I read it a few times ... the "unexpected findings" WERE about fatal accidents. Not accidents in general.

It stated Quote: But illegal speeding – when drivers exceed the posted limit – accounts for only 13.9 per cent of fatal accidents. Which is what I stated. Going too fast for the conditions does not mean over the posted speed limit.

Perhaps YOU better read it again. But dont stop reading after "the realitive unimportance of speed" bit ....

Rubbish, the "Unexpected findings" paragraph also included injury accidents.

I reiterate that the wholearticle was about, and I quote, "How do accidents happen?"

Anyway, as I wrote earlier I'd like to hear from a member of the Serious Crash Unit for a change.

[Pedrostt500]

4kmh = 4000m/hr / 60 = 66.666 reacuring m/minute = /60 = 1.111 reacuring meters per second, yep even a fat bastard like me can walk that fast.
10kmh = 10000 m/hr /60 = 166m/minute = /60 2.777 m/second.
I have no problem paying a speeding ticket if I am caughtdoing more than 10kmh over the posted speed limit, but when that tolerance is only walking speed, then there is no way that I can judge the speed diference of 1.111 meters per second when I am doing 100kmh, wich is 27.777 meters per second, I doubt I could tell the difference between 27.7 m/sec and 28.8 m/sec, yes I could buy a gps, but there are far to many distractions in riding and driving as it is.

[BoristheBiter]

I always wonder what the criteria for "speed was a factor" are. If the finding was that the car was travelling at 101km/h in a 100 zone when or before it crashed, was speed a factor?

Speed is always a factor, if it wasn't you wouldn't be moving.

[oneofsix]

Speed is always a factor, if it wasn't you wouldn't be moving.

And if you or the other object isn't moving then you can't collide. Makes it a rather meaningless phrase don't you think?
But, to look at it another way, even standing still you are moving and faster than your bike can ever go relative to the ground it is passing over. Just happens to be that the planet you are standing still on is whizzing through space at thousands of kilometres an hour and also spinning on its axis faster than your bike can propel you across it's surface.
Speed is relative term with no bearing which makes it great for propaganda

[BoristheBiter]

And if you or the other object isn't moving then you can't collide. Makes it a rather meaningless phrase don't you think?
But, to look at it another way, even standing still you are moving and faster than your bike can ever go relative to the ground it is passing over. Just happens to be that the planet you are standing still on is whizzing through space at thousands of kilometres an hour and also spinning on its axis faster than your bike can propel you across it's surface.
Speed is relative term with no bearing which makes it great for propaganda

sorry, sarcasm smiley needed.

[oneofsix]

sorry, sarcasm smiley needed.

Not really. I just wanted to build on your theme.

The whole 4 k tolerance thing is a joke. Right now it has shock value and people get nervous and slow down but once they make it standard the human reaction will be to adapt and ignore, as we do with living on earthquake faults or volcanoes or even inside volcanic craters. It will become a case of "in for a penny, in for a pound". So I get a couple of demerits and a fine for 5k over or I get a few more demerits and pay a bit more for 10k over either way I stand no more chance of being pinged than before so what f.... and if the choice is between watching the needle as I go over the raise or watching out for the hidden driveway, parked car, or u-turning cop (had to have a dig) the speedo comes last.