Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Canberra’s most creative
residential property specialists

And we’re back to speeding in April

By johnboy 3 April 2013 45

ACT Policing will be targeting speeding motorists during the month of April as part of its multi-agency road safety strategy.

At different periods during the year, the strategy targets specific issues and behaviours which contribute to death and serious injuries on Canberra’s roads, with speeding among those concerns.

Police issued a total of 593 Traffic Infringement Notices (TINs) for speeding and 198 cautions during the month of February.

Some 311 drivers were caught travelling more than 15km/h but less than 30km/h over the speed limit. A further seven drivers were caught travelling over 45km/h.

Traffic Operations Superintendent Kylie Flower said drivers who willfully speed were gambling with their own lives, the lives of other drivers and passengers, and the lives of children, pedestrians and cyclists.

“Speeding is a choice people make and they can just easily make the choice to slow down and save lives.”

“The message is simple, don’t speed. Otherwise you may find yourself with heavy fines, loss of your driver’s license or even imprisoned. More importantly help us make our roads safer.”

“What does it take for people to understand that speeding is extremely dangerous? The chances of surviving a collision when travelling at such speed are marginal at best,” Superintendent Flower said.

Fines for speeding range from a minimum of $167 and the loss of one demerit point to over $1,800 and the loss of six demerit points for each offence.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
45 Responses to
And we’re back to speeding in April
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
bundah 2:15 pm 06 Apr 13

Some of you may recall Stephen Corby’s effort circa 2000 as CT’s motoring editor when he reported clocking 270 km/h down the Monaro Hwy on a Fireblade.Stanhope was so shocked that he wrote a letter to the editor expressing his disgust.Although i suspect the Crimes gave him the shove it doesn’t appear to have hurt his career as i believe he’s now Wheels editor.

tim_c 3:12 pm 04 Apr 13

Alderney said :

… And bikes take longer to stop because they have less tyre on the road and therefore less grip with the road surface. …

Er, it’s not quite that simple, not that I’m advocating that motorcyclists should be allowed to speed, but significantly, a motorbike also weighs a lot less than a large car, and even if the contact area is less, the mass of the object being stopped is also significant. This is also why 470cc engine powered to 1x 150mm wide tyre can accelerate a motorbike much faster than a 4700cc engine powered to 4x 285mm wide tyres can accelerate a Toyota Landscruiser!

tim_c 3:00 pm 04 Apr 13

“What does it take for people to understand that speeding is extremely dangerous? …” Superintendent Flower said.

I don’t know, perhaps a Police force that actually understand it themselves, rather than typically driving at around 20km/h (or more) over the posted speed limit.

bundah 2:33 pm 04 Apr 13

@ Brownstreak69

Almost 4 million kms in 40 years including 400 to 500 trips(not the acid variety) from Canberra to South Coast alone is all the evidence i need!

Solidarity 2:06 pm 04 Apr 13

Driving a car is dangerous, regardless of whether you’re obeying the speed limit or not.

Thinking you’re safe simply because the number in front of you matches one on a sign is probably even more dangerous….

Tenpoints 1:49 pm 04 Apr 13

harvyk1 said :

Tenpoints said :

One school of thought is that if a motorcyclist is speeding they are essentially making a choice taking their life into their own hands.

and every body elses as well… Yes typically in an accident between a motorcycle and another road user, the motorcyclist will come off second best, but this is in no way a guarantee. It’s also no guarantee that in an accident between a motorcyclist and another road user that the other road user will suffer no injury and no loss what so ever.

Plus it’s not just road users who could be affected by the motorcyclists poor choices, motorcyclist loses control of said bike at high speed in a suburban setting, kids out front of house playing but well away from road, I’m sure it doesn’t take a genius to connect the dots…

Yes, acknowledged. May I direct you to the actual point of my previous comment which argues that the Landcruiser in that situation will – in most cases- result in greater all-round carnage than the motorcyclist. “Landcruiser driver loses control of said vehicle at high speed in a suburban setting, kids out front of house playing…” No guarantees.

goggles13 1:11 pm 04 Apr 13

“What does it take for people to understand that speeding is extremely dangerous? The chances of surviving a collision when travelling at such speed are marginal at best,” Superintendent Flower said.

I’m not sure that the second half of this quote really follows the first half. what speed is Supt Flower referring to in the second half of the quote?

another example of “good” grammer from our police press release writers

Tenpoints 12:42 pm 04 Apr 13

Skidbladnir said :

Tenpoints said :

I’d say statistically that’s relatively good news..

Ignoring the bad methodology you used, pg27 wholeheartedly disagrees with you:
? ?Motorcycle riders make up 22 per cent of serious casualties, yet motorcycle usage accounts for one per cent of vehicle-kilometres travelled.
? ?Motorcycling activity has grown rapidly %u2014 motorcycle registrations increased by 56 per cent between 2005 and 2010.
? ?Between 2000 and 2010 the number of motorcyclist deaths increased by 17 per cent.
? ?Single vehicle crashes account for 42 per cent of motorcyclist deaths.

So perhaps better news that might otherwise have happened, but relatively better is still far from objectively good.

(By the way, one of the Strategy’s recommendations was a three-year-plus duration crackdown on motorcycle safety…)

I was simply pointing out a fact that people might overlook, not saying “Look, less deaths per capita= no problem!”

What bad methodology did I use?
The numbers don’t technically matter, just the percentage change. 86% more registered motorcycles, 17% more fatalities. Make some random assumptions (or in my case, realistic assumptions based on the data sourced) about the initial data, input percentages, get percentage out. Please explain the flaw(s) in my methodology.

I wouldn’t say I’m happy with the road system either, and what’s your definition of objectively good?

It would be incorrect of you to think I’m not keen on increasing motorcycle safety. I never implied that because there are less deaths per capita on motorcycles than 2000 that we could kick back and enjoy the good life.

The fact that there are more motorcyclists on the roads does indeed warrant more investment in motorcycle safety.

harvyk1 12:35 pm 04 Apr 13

Tenpoints said :

One school of thought is that if a motorcyclist is speeding they are essentially making a choice taking their life into their own hands.

and every body elses as well… Yes typically in an accident between a motorcycle and another road user, the motorcyclist will come off second best, but this is in no way a guarantee. It’s also no guarantee that in an accident between a motorcyclist and another road user that the other road user will suffer no injury and no loss what so ever.

Plus it’s not just road users who could be affected by the motorcyclists poor choices, motorcyclist loses control of said bike at high speed in a suburban setting, kids out front of house playing but well away from road, I’m sure it doesn’t take a genius to connect the dots…

Skidbladnir 12:13 pm 04 Apr 13

Tenpoints said :

I’d say statistically that’s relatively good news..

Ignoring the bad methodology you used, pg27 wholeheartedly disagrees with you:
? ?Motorcycle riders make up 22 per cent of serious casualties, yet motorcycle usage accounts for one per cent of vehicle-kilometres travelled.
? ?Motorcycling activity has grown rapidly %u2014 motorcycle registrations increased by 56 per cent between 2005 and 2010.
? ?Between 2000 and 2010 the number of motorcyclist deaths increased by 17 per cent.
? ?Single vehicle crashes account for 42 per cent of motorcyclist deaths.

So perhaps better news that might otherwise have happened, but relatively better is still far from objectively good.

(By the way, one of the Strategy’s recommendations was a three-year-plus duration crackdown on motorcycle safety…)

Tenpoints 12:12 pm 04 Apr 13

Alderney said :

wildturkeycanoe said :

nathan said :

Tenpoints said :

Speeding also increases the kinetic energy (exponentially) that you bring to the accident

[p]Indeed! The GVM of a LandCruiser is 3300kg [a href=”http://www.mynrma.com.au/motoring/reviews/car-reviews/toyota/landcruiser-200-series-1000km-road-test.htm”]per NRMA[/a].
The GVM of my motorbike is around 300kg. Since e = 1/2mv^2, the kinetic energy of my bike surpasses that of the 4WD at 100km/h only when I reach 332km/h.[/p]

[p]For the record, I wholly support Tenpoints’ proposal for the speed limit for motorcycles to be raised to 331km/h.[/p]

100% agree. Also, motorcycles accelerate much faster than cars, thereby getting to said speed limits faster, reducing travel time and exposure on the road. Unfortunately there are dimwits who do not realize this and selfishly use the right hand on dual lane roads and still drive 10km/h below the speed limit. This does not allow anybody to overtake who is driving at the speed limit, therefore creating slow moving traffic and congestion on our roads. Fair enough if they turn right at the next intersection but after 3 or 4 sets of roundabouts or lights the person stuck behind can get quite infuriated. THIS can lead to wild behavior and cause accidents. One person’s selfishness or lack of knowledge of the road rules clogging up our thoroughfares.

I’m not sure where a lack of knowledge of the road rules is in effect here, other than yours.

Firstly, you won’t find a road with roundabouts where the speed limit is greater than 80 km/h. This is the speed where one is compelled by law to not be in the right hand lane unless overtaking. The caveat of course is unless sign posted.

nathan said :

Tenpoints said :

Speeding also increases the kinetic energy (exponentially) that you bring to the accident

[p]Indeed! The GVM of a LandCruiser is 3300kg [a href=”http://www.mynrma.com.au/motoring/reviews/car-reviews/toyota/landcruiser-200-series-1000km-road-test.htm”]per NRMA[/a].
The GVM of my motorbike is around 300kg. Since e = 1/2mv^2, the kinetic energy of my bike surpasses that of the 4WD at 100km/h only when I reach 332km/h.[/p]

[p]For the record, I wholly support Tenpoints’ proposal for the speed limit for motorcycles to be raised to 331km/h.[/p]

Your calculations are incorrect because they do not take into account the kenetic energy experienced by the flesh and bone of the motorcylce rider as opposed to the metal of the Land Cruiser. After all, it’s the flesh and bone of the person riding the bike that wears the impact rather than the shell of a motor vehicle.

And bikes take longer to stop because they have less tyre on the road and therefore less grip with the road surface. Unless your bike has air brakes 🙂

I am a motor cycle rider.

One school of thought is that if a motorcyclist is speeding they are essentially making a choice taking their life into their own hands. One could then regard the motorcyclist as having accepted that risk. If you then view the speeding motorcyclist as a person who has made a choice to gamble with their lives then the whole human issue of tragic life lost on the rider’s behalf can be set aside.

We can then compare the kinetic energy of the motorcyclist with the landrover unequivocally. If a landcruiser and motorcycle impacted other vehicles in the same manner (two separate but similar accidents), it is not hard to envisiage which accident would be more damaging to the law-abiding occupants of the vehicle.

Put simply, a large vehicle driven at speed is a greater risk to everyone than a motorcycle driven at speed.

But then I wouldn’t say we live in a society where people are responsible for their actions…

Tenpoints 11:55 am 04 Apr 13

nathan said :

Thanks Skidbladnir. I note that the paragraph prior to that which you quoted reports motorcycle/scooter vehicle kilometers travelled as growing 82% in the same time frame that rider fatalities increased 17%.

I’d say statistically that’s relatively good news compared to a 1 to 1 increase in fatalities that you might expect if nobody learned how to deal with motorcycles. It would be unrealistic to expect that you would get a negligible change decrease in fatalities for a road group that almost doubled in size. Shows that there is more awareness out there than there was last century.

Making some estimations:
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/9309.0/
Let’s say 350K motorcycles on the road in 2000, based on a ballpark 651K registered in 2010
ATC NRSS says motorcycles account for 16% of fatalities, also ~1600 fatalities across all classes roughly averaged over the last 10 years looking at the graph p7 (though the trend has slightly decreased overall).
16% of 1600 is 256 in 2010, which means 219 fatalities in 2000.
Taking those numbers you then have 62 motorcycle fatalities per 100K in 2000 and 39 motorcycle fatalities per 100K in 2010.

Effectively this means as a motorcycle rider, you are 37% less likely to die on Australian roads in 2010 vs 2000. Good news!

Solidarity 11:52 am 04 Apr 13

It’s just common courtesy to travel in the left lane if you’re not turning or overtaking, regardless if the law directly calls for it or not.

Alderney 11:41 am 04 Apr 13

wildturkeycanoe said :

nathan said :

Tenpoints said :

Speeding also increases the kinetic energy (exponentially) that you bring to the accident

[p]Indeed! The GVM of a LandCruiser is 3300kg [a href=”http://www.mynrma.com.au/motoring/reviews/car-reviews/toyota/landcruiser-200-series-1000km-road-test.htm”]per NRMA[/a].
The GVM of my motorbike is around 300kg. Since e = 1/2mv^2, the kinetic energy of my bike surpasses that of the 4WD at 100km/h only when I reach 332km/h.[/p]

[p]For the record, I wholly support Tenpoints’ proposal for the speed limit for motorcycles to be raised to 331km/h.[/p]

100% agree. Also, motorcycles accelerate much faster than cars, thereby getting to said speed limits faster, reducing travel time and exposure on the road. Unfortunately there are dimwits who do not realize this and selfishly use the right hand on dual lane roads and still drive 10km/h below the speed limit. This does not allow anybody to overtake who is driving at the speed limit, therefore creating slow moving traffic and congestion on our roads. Fair enough if they turn right at the next intersection but after 3 or 4 sets of roundabouts or lights the person stuck behind can get quite infuriated. THIS can lead to wild behavior and cause accidents. One person’s selfishness or lack of knowledge of the road rules clogging up our thoroughfares.

I’m not sure where a lack of knowledge of the road rules is in effect here, other than yours.

Firstly, you won’t find a road with roundabouts where the speed limit is greater than 80 km/h. This is the speed where one is compelled by law to not be in the right hand lane unless overtaking. The caveat of course is unless sign posted.

nathan said :

Tenpoints said :

Speeding also increases the kinetic energy (exponentially) that you bring to the accident

[p]Indeed! The GVM of a LandCruiser is 3300kg [a href=”http://www.mynrma.com.au/motoring/reviews/car-reviews/toyota/landcruiser-200-series-1000km-road-test.htm”]per NRMA[/a].
The GVM of my motorbike is around 300kg. Since e = 1/2mv^2, the kinetic energy of my bike surpasses that of the 4WD at 100km/h only when I reach 332km/h.[/p]

[p]For the record, I wholly support Tenpoints’ proposal for the speed limit for motorcycles to be raised to 331km/h.[/p]

Your calculations are incorrect because they do not take into account the kenetic energy experienced by the flesh and bone of the motorcylce rider as opposed to the metal of the Land Cruiser. After all, it’s the flesh and bone of the person riding the bike that wears the impact rather than the shell of a motor vehicle.

And bikes take longer to stop because they have less tyre on the road and therefore less grip with the road surface. Unless your bike has air brakes 🙂

I am a motor cycle rider.

Aeek 11:37 am 04 Apr 13

wildturkeycanoe said :

Unfortunately there are dimwits who do not realize this and selfishly use the right hand on dual lane roads and still drive 10km/h below the speed limit. This does not allow anybody to overtake who is driving at the speed limit

The rule against overtaking on the left (except for bicycles) is when in the SAME lane. It is legal to overtake in the left hand lane. Extra care is recommended.

Aeek 11:28 am 04 Apr 13

nathan said :

The GVM of my motorbike is around 300kg. Since e = 1/2mv^2, the kinetic energy of my bike surpasses that of the 4WD at 100km/h only when I reach 332km/h.[/p]

[p]For the record, I wholly support Tenpoints’ proposal for the speed limit for motorcycles to be raised to 331km/h.[/p]

My bicycle is about 7.5kg. 100kg is a common rider weight restriction for high end bicycle companents, so call it 110kgm. 546 km/h does seem unrealistic.

nathan 11:09 am 04 Apr 13

Skidbladnir said :

One of the source of increased fatalities on Australian roads over the last decade was a combination of the increasing number of motorcycles on roads and failure to correctly manage the impact of increased numbers of motorcycles on overall safety.

Thanks Skidbladnir. I note that the paragraph prior to that which you quoted reports motorcycle/scooter vehicle kilometers travelled as growing 82% in the same time frame that rider fatalities increased 17%.

thebrownstreak69 10:48 am 04 Apr 13

bundah said :

milkman said :

bundah said :

milkman said :

johnboy said :

Speeders are clearly poor drivers because they can’t control the speed of their car.

A task that can be completed with one foot! And beyond them!

You shouldn’t confuse ‘can’t’ with ‘aren’t’.

Perhaps you would be good enough to explain how he has confused can’t with aren’t which is nowhere to be seen?

Clearly, the assumption that people speed because that CAN’T control the speed of their car. Plenty of people drive at a different speed (e.g. a few kms above), because they AREN’T trying to drive right on the limit, for whatever reason.

Ok while i don’t necessarily agree with JB’s view that speeders are poor drivers what is clearly obvious is that many drivers CAN’T maintain a relatively constant speed on the open road or anywhere else for that matter.So it’s not that they AREN’T trying it’s more that they CAN’T because they ARE poor drivers.

Evidence?

Grimm 10:33 am 04 Apr 13

Maybe ACT policing should target their unmarked silver SS commodore that I saw speeding its arse off down belco way thismorning. I was doing 60 and he went past me like I was standing still, then proceeded to tailgate a motorcycle. Setting a great example there boys.

Skidbladnir 10:14 am 04 Apr 13

Hate to be the guy that points out that most of your opinions are anecdotal… but –

On highway or >80kph situations:
Crash involvement decreases as speed increases until 105kph, then increases again.
Overall crash involvement risk decreases as vehicle speed relative to median traffic speed increases (but the impact of this weakens, and risk increases again at speeds in excess of 15-20kph from traffic median)
Source: United States Government, Federal Highway Administration, “Synthesis of Safety Research Related to Speed and Speed Management”, July 1998, Publication Number: FHWA-RD-98-154

More science, fewer anecdotes.
(Australia doesn’t model road safety quite along these lines, but this paper is the US reference standard, and Germany takes the idea to a whole new level)

As far as overall road fatality prevention goes, most of the low-hanging fruit was picked back in the 70s and 80s with introuction of breathalysing and RBTs.
However, despite the National Road Safety Strategy for 2011-2020 identifying that the major safety factors that need to addressed in order were:
Roads, Vehicles, Speeds, and Road User Behaviour…, State Governments continue to focus on the two lower priority ones, because they generate revenue.

For Nathan and Wildturkeycanoe:
One of the source of increased fatalities on Australian roads over the last decade was a combination of the increasing number of motorcycles on roads and failure to correctly manage the impact of increased numbers of motorcycles on overall safety.
“The rapid expansion of motorcycling activity — reflected in both VKT (vehicle kilometers travelled) estimates and new motorcycle sales data — was unforeseen at the start of the decade and contributed to a 17 per cent increase in annual rider fatalities between 2000 and 2010.”
(National Road Safety Strategy 2011–2020, Pg12)

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site