Mobile Speed Cameras

[zebra]

Just to add.

Say you are doing 120km/h in a 80 zone because you deem it to be be safe.

And some half wit drunk idiot is coming the other way on the wrong side of the road doing 80km/h and you hit head....think you will survive?

This is why we have speed limits so bloody low....I dont like it either but its the idiots that ruin it for those of us that want to do the right thing.

[Daleo]

Just to add.

Say you are doing 120km/h in a 80 zone because you deem it to be be safe.

And some half wit drunk idiot is coming the other way on the wrong side of the road doing 80km/h and you hit head....think you will survive?

This is why we have speed limits so bloody low....I dont like it either but its the idiots that ruin it for those of us that want to do the right thing.

So to paraphrase; what you're saying is, if you're both doing 80km/h, the effective closing speed is 160km/h. You will automatically survive this impact because you were doing the speed limit. Whereas a closing speed of 200 km/h (120km/h +80km/h) will result in automatic death.

I put it to you, that you would die in both instances. And surely the issue in this instance is the "halfwit drunk idiot" on the wrong side of the road? If he wasn't on the wrong side of the road, the other driver could be doing 400km/h and NOTHING would happen.

Instead we screw the speeding driver by making allowances for the drunk driver. THAT doesn't make any sense. But there's more money in penalising and villifying speeders than automatic 10 year jail terms for drunk drivers who cause accidents.

When the "Hoon" confiscation laws were introduced there was a proposal to confiscate cars from habitual drink drivers. It was voted down . Much safer to leave cars in the hands of drunken idiots than in the hands of teenagers doing a skid at Macca's

The points being made are;

1: That doing the speed limit is not a guarantee of safety as so many mindless drones believe.

2: Speeding does not automatically end in death.

3: Arbitrarily low speed limits do not necessarily make roads safer (research has shown that the opposite is often the case)

The whole "don't speed, you won't get caught" argument is a cop out. If the speed limit was higher, would you still drive slowly? I very much doubt it, any non wowser understands that most of the roads we use can easily handle more speed, and the cars, most assuredly can.

I'm not talking about suburban streets. 50 km is plenty fast enough for built up areas. I'm talking about arterial roads where there are multiple lanes and no stereotypical, pull at the heart strings "kiddies running after a ball", if children are playing near a multi lane road, there are other issues to deal with..

Edited January 12, 2011 by Daleo

[zebra]

Im not saying you would 100% survive...im saying that the chances of survivings would be much better colliding at 160km/h over 200km/h.

I'm all for a raised speed limit on freeways or at least a high speed lane for those licenced to do so (ala Germany)

[MBS206]

The whole "don't speed, you won't get caught" argument is a cop out. If the speed limit was higher, would you still drive slowly? I very much doubt it, any non wowser understands that most of the roads we use can easily handle more speed, and the cars, most assuredly can.

I'm not talking about suburban streets. 50 km is plenty fast enough for built up areas. I'm talking about arterial roads where there are multiple lanes and no stereotypical, pull at the heart strings "kiddies running after a ball", if children are playing near a multi lane road, there are other issues to deal with..

Actually, with so many old cars on the road, and even new cars in bad shape, as our "registration check" system is such a dodgy piece of shit too, with so many cars that don't even get CHECKED, having flogged out bushes, bad suspension, rusty structural items etc, allowing them to do 150KM/H is quite alot more dangerous.

Don't know if you've ever taken an old VN that's just been driven and serviced every 10 000KMs at say 140-150KM/H, but most of them start to get death wobbles and shakes at this speed...

I've even driven 2005 model cars that have the death wobbles at 110KM/H! If you want to raise the speed limit to "stop speeding" then you're going to need to replace 75% of the cars on the road.

And Australia does have an attitude of "Oh, so that's the 'limit', well there'll be heaps of safety built into that 'limit' so I can go 10 - 20KM/H above it" and you'll still have people speeding.

Until you FORCEFULLY limit cars from being able to break the limit, people will always speed.

If you don't want to pay the fine, DON'T GET CAUGHT SPEEDING!

If you're so worried about getting caught and having to pay the fine, THEN DON'T SPEED!

Seriously, is it that hard to understand? If you speed, there is a chance you will have to pay a fine!

[MBS206]

AWESOME SKILLS! Pity your speedo is within 10%, the needle of your speedo is 2km/h in width and your reaction time is probably pretty average. So out with it..........You drive like a granny

So now who's criticising people without knowing them?

I drive with in the law (Most of the time). And my reactions are pretty darn quick, with decent ability to throw a car around... (To put it to you this way, I borrowed a friends car at a motorkhana I'd NEVER driven before, and ran 4th quickest on the day for that track... And the three people quicker were guys who compete/win at state/national Motorkhana level). And you know what, there's NO ROOM for these skills on the road, except when someone puts you in an emergency situation. (Of which, smart driving, not fast driving, avoids most of these )

But I have an understanding, then when I step outside the law, I have the ability to get nabbed by a mobile speed camera, fixed speed camera, or a Police Officer. I know what the law is, I don't bitch about it when I break it...

And the occurances on my licence I've never complained about them... Why? I WAS IN THE WRONG! (To give you a hint, I have 1 point on my licence... From speeding... But you will see my argument the WHOLE WAY THROUGH this thread is if you DON'T WANT TO GET CAUGHT DON'T BREAK THE LAW!

TBH: I used to be a constant speeder etc, I did some driver training, got out on the race track, do the SAU NSW motorkhanas, and now, I'm very calm and 99% of the time, a law abiding citizen on the road...

[fatz]

physics poeple f**k

80 v's 80 you may just live

as soon as one of the f**kers is doing more it gets a whole lot more ugly

ive drunk 6 beers to night and you people hurt my brain

to cars crashing at 80 km/h each doesnt = a 160km/h nerds its = a 80 km/h crash

f**k computer nerds need to do more maths

[Daleo]

Actually, with so many old cars on the road, and even new cars in bad shape, as our "registration check" system is such a dodgy piece of shit too, with so many cars that don't even get CHECKED, having flogged out bushes, bad suspension, rusty structural items etc, allowing them to do 150KM/H is quite alot more dangerous.

Don't know if you've ever taken an old VN that's just been driven and serviced every 10 000KMs at say 140-150KM/H, but most of them start to get death wobbles and shakes at this speed...

I've even driven 2005 model cars that have the death wobbles at 110KM/H! If you want to raise the speed limit to "stop speeding" then you're going to need to replace 75% of the cars on the road.

And Australia does have an attitude of "Oh, so that's the 'limit', well there'll be heaps of safety built into that 'limit' so I can go 10 - 20KM/H above it" and you'll still have people speeding.

Until you FORCEFULLY limit cars from being able to break the limit, people will always speed.

If you don't want to pay the fine, DON'T GET CAUGHT SPEEDING!

If you're so worried about getting caught and having to pay the fine, THEN DON'T SPEED!

Seriously, is it that hard to understand? If you speed, there is a chance you will have to pay a fine!

Matt, seriously I get it.

I have sped I've been caught,and I've paid the fine; not happily, but as an adult I accept the repercussions of my actions.

That doesn't mean the prevailing govenment wisdom is correct. Raising speed limits is only a small part of the puzzle, it needs to be teamed with better training and better roads. And some personal responsibility.

Do we get any of this? NO! All we get is stupid slogans and more cameras, and more roads that have their speedlimits dropped by 20km/h for no reason.

physics poeple f**k

80 v's 80 you may just live

as soon as one of the f**kers is doing more it gets a whole lot more ugly

ive drunk 6 beers to night and you people hurt my brain

to cars crashing at 80 km/h each doesnt = a 160km/h nerds its = a 80 km/h crash

f**k computer nerds need to do more maths

Fatz,

If you ran into a stationary object and you were moving at 80km/h; that would be an 80km/h impact.

If that object is moving towards you at 80km/h, and you are moving toward it at 80km/h, the relative speeds of BOTH objects must be added together. Therefore, the effective impact speed IS 160km/h.

I left school in year 10, so no computer nerd here

[MBS206]

Matt, seriously I get it.

I have sped I've been caught,and I've paid the fine; not happily, but as an adult I accept the repercussions of my actions.

That doesn't mean the prevailing govenment wisdom is correct. Raising speed limits is only a small part of the puzzle, it needs to be teamed with better training and better roads. And some personal responsibility.

Do we get any of this? NO! All we get is stupid slogans and more cameras, and more roads that have their speedlimits dropped by 20km/h for no reason.

I have put in italics the biggest things that need to occur from our government, and I have bolded the main item that is wrong with our society.

People are too quick to blame someone else for their f**k up. (Sure, there may be a step there that I should have looked at, but you didn't highlight it with yellow paint and flashy lights, there fore you're the one who is to blame for my broken leg... Not my ignorance and stupidity).

This is why our government makes draconian rules and enforces them like they do with a good sized voluntary tax.

Basically, what needs to happen, is delete all the road rules, and the mentality people use to drive. Scrap all the cars for brand new items, and start perfectly fresh, teaching everyone how to drive PROPERLY, not to pass a test... I could go on, as it just doesn't stop here...

[fatz]

sorry dude i just assume averyone on here is a it nerd ( mainly just to rub them up the wrong way)

each vehicle only has a 80km/h of energy so total energy from the crash from both cars= about half of teh same car doing 160km/h

crash a car into a wall at 80km/h

crash two cars head on into each other both doing 80 km/h and the damage is almost the same

so it only = 80 km/h

[wht510]

I drive with in the law (Most of the time). And my reactions are pretty darn quick, with decent ability to throw a car around... (To put it to you this way, I borrowed a friends car at a motorkhana I'd NEVER driven before, and ran 4th quickest on the day for that track... And the three people quicker were guys who compete/win at state/national Motorkhana level). And you know what, there's NO ROOM for these skills on the road, except when someone puts you in an emergency situation. (Of which, smart driving, not fast driving, avoids most of these )

.....

TBH: I used to be a constant speeder etc, I did some driver training, got out on the race track, do the SAU NSW motorkhanas, and now, I'm very calm and 99% of the time, a law abiding citizen on the road...

This is the worst sort of driver IMHO. The person who thinks they know it all, thinks they have experience because they fanged someone elses car around motorkhana (not caring for the car because it's not yours?)

Then you say there's no room for these skills on the road....... "except in an emergency" - which would I would hazard a guess and say there is room for skills like these on the road.

Driver training/track work/motorkhanas etc. etc. etc. isn't going to save you when you aren't concentrating. You aren't invincible because you are driving below the speed.

Personal responsibility yes.

Driver courtesy would be another too.

My argument has been and always will be the same as Daleo. The enforcement of these rules is too draconian, with no leeway. with some idiot behind a desk coming up with a speed limit for the road they have never seen. Even some of the systems are prone to error (C'mon... Datsun 120Y at 170km/h?? BAHAhahahhahah)

I will always agree with anyone who says some dude doing 30km/h over the speed limit deserves some fine (unless it wasn't them and the camera malfunctioned, or it was someone else in the photo, or they were overtaking a 'hazard') etc. etc. you get the point....

Edited January 12, 2011 by wht510

[spranga]

Technology exists to make it impossible for modern cars to exceed the posted limit using GPS data and ecu control. Governments will never introduce these measures because it would instantly put a big hole in state revenues and expose the fact that many deaths have nothing to do with speed. The longer they don't introduce these measures the more it is clear that collecting revenue from speeding is the focus rather than people actually speeding.

Surely if you believe that an end to speeding will stop most people dieing on our roads then you would also support speeding controls on cars?

[wht510]

Back to school for you guys

I'll try and explain it to you guys It's based on momentum and impulse energy. Forgive me if it all starts getting too complicated.

Momentum is mass times velocity.

So for example:

2 cars weigh 1000kg ea.

Both are going at 80km/h

Therefore the momentum of each car is:

Mo1 = M1 x V1

Mo2= M2 X V2

Where:

Mo = momentum (in kg m/s)

M1 = Mass of first car = 1000kg

V1 = 80km/h which 22.22 m/s)

M2 = 1000kg

V2 = 80km/h which is 22.22 m/s)

The direction they are going has no relevance, as they are both going 80km/h (or one is going -160km/h if the other was stationary)

Momentum for each car is 22,200 kg m/s

I think you will agree if the other car is going faster, the momentum is higher.

What does this mean? Well when you CHANGE the momentum, you get Impulse. Impulse is the change in momentum over time and this is the killer.

Therefore:

I = M x DeltaV OR F x DeltaT (for a car hitting a wall for example)

In the case of two cars it would be:

I = M1 x DeltaV1 - M2 DeltaV2

Where:

I = impulse

M = mass in kg

DeltaV = the change in velocity (m/s) of the respective car, noting that the velocity of the other has to be negative due to the direction traveling.

F = Force in Newtons

DeltaT = change in time in seconds.

So if your accident occurs over 1 second (ie it takes 1 second for the car to go from 80km/h to zero) then impulse will be greater than impulse over 2 seconds (hence crumple zones/airbags and anything else which cushions the impact)

Combine the two cars going at 80km/h and you have doubled the impact speed because both cars combined are carrying twice the energy = Bad.

So to explain to those who are struggling:

Car doing 80km/h hitting another car doing 80km/h head on = game over. I've seen the crashes, i've studied the photos and it's very rare for a survivor to live or not have very serious injury (ie paraplegic etc.)

car doing 120km/h vs car doing 80km/h. Strangely, the car doing 120km/h is slightly better off than the poor bastards in the 80km/h car, as the energy of the 120km/h car is transferred into the 80km/h car. (kinetic energy) Kind of like the billiard/snooker ball example. Regardless, it's still a high speed crash, and game over. Survival is again pretty rare. Of course there is a great deal of luck (such as the car not hitting head on but grazing down the side etc.)

[wht510]

sorry dude i just assume averyone on here is a it nerd ( mainly just to rub them up the wrong way)

each vehicle only has a 80km/h of energy so total energy from the crash from both cars= about half of teh same car doing 160km/h

crash a car into a wall at 80km/h

crash two cars head on into each other both doing 80 km/h and the damage is almost the same

so it only = 80 km/h

Read above.. Car crashing into wall at 80km/h isn't the same as car crashing into another moving object traveling in the opposite direction.

I guess that makes me a nerd , or someone who just happened to be 'gifted' at school...

Regardless, you can't argue with physics

[Cassbo]

oh lawd...

The government put a line in the sand. One side is legal, the other is illegal. Dance on the line and you run the risk of being found and chraged for doing something illegal, it really is that simple! Either accept the risk of a potential fine, ensure you follow the road rules 100% of the time or get off the road!

It would be like complaining that I got charged for stealing $4. I mean it's not like I stole $40 right?

I completely agree that it is revenue raising, but other than money what is going to stop people from breaking the law?

[fatz]

so 510

you would rather be in a stationary car and hit by someone doing 160km/h

or a head on at 80km/h?

[wht510]

oh lawd...

The government put a line in the sand. One side is legal, the other is illegal. Dance on the line and you run the risk of being found and chraged for doing something illegal, it really is that simple! Either accept the risk of a potential fine, ensure you follow the road rules 100% of the time or get off the road!

It would be like complaining that I got charged for stealing $4. I mean it's not like I stole $40 right?

I completely agree that it is revenue raising, but other than money what is going to stop people from breaking the law?

Not really. It's like complaining that you are allowed to 'steal' $3, when previously the limit allowed you to steal $13 (ie changing the speed limit from 50 down to 40). Then the government measurement device to find how much you stole is inaccurate. That's more like it.

[wht510]

so 510

you would rather be in a stationary car and hit by someone doing 160km/h

or a head on at 80km/h?

Umm.... None?

Regardless, both have fairly similar energy. Variables make the difference though.

What about you? Which one would you rather be hit by? Either way we'd be dead. Perhaps the 160km/h would be more spectacular and better for spectators?

[fatz]

ill take the 80 head on

far less energyif i had a choice

[wht510]

ill take the 80 head on

far less energy if i had a choice

You be dead then mang!

Fatz it's not "far less energy", read the post a couple above on the formula, and figure it out that both have exactly the same energy (one is doing 160km/h, and the other is doing a difference of 160km/h)

There ain't no difference in an ideal world. Although like I said previously, variables make results slightly different. Static friction is greater if the car is at standstill, so technically a bees knee difference between the two. There's more though...I wont detail them here. For all intents and purposes, they are the same.

[wht510]

So now who's criticising people without knowing them?

Honestly... I was calling you a granny driver because it sounded like you drive like one. I didn't call you an F&*king w&*ker or anything like you have been throwing around like a young punk.

Don't take it personally mate, I was merely suggesting you get your eyes checked, and put some blue rinse through your hair (KIDDING!!! Just kidding... I wouldn't suggest this, as it sounds like you are competent, just we have different opinions)