I’ve written up another article re the GDE speed limit, with a table comparing road characteristics of the GDE, with others around the territory. Read on if interested:
I have not heard much on the GDE speed limit front. Last time I drove the road, the speed limit continued to be 80 km/h. Travelling at 80 km/h without cruise control is difficult without slipping over every now and then, after all, the brand new road was designed to cater for a speed limit of 90 km/h, thus the road encourages high speed.
Point to Point speed cameras are still on the way too. The situation is arguably absurd, the majority of people I speak to about the issue seem to agree.
To highlight the inconsistency of the 80 km/h speed limit of the GDE compared to other roads in the A.C.T, I have put together a table for you.
Have a look, and decide for yourself if this particular combination of near freeway quality road, an 80 km/h speed limit, and impending point to point cameras, is about safety or revenue?
Image: The Gungahlin Drive Extensions speed limit of 80 km/h is incredibly inconsistent when compared to other roads in the A.C.T, and yet the road has had point to point speed cameras planned even prior to it opening. Click the table to enlarge it.
Loading ...
Interesting how this item quickly attracted comments…a great number. None of them address climate change or the fallacy of so-called speed in the carist world. Really it would be fascinating if not so scary.
Wonder if a camera on the GDE (or the new point-to-point on Hindmarsh, over Red Hill) could break this record!
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-12-22/freeway-camera-catches-thousands-in-first-week/3744260
Bluey said :
The Dunning-Kruger Effect is on prime display here.
I think it would be perfect if this thread sat forever with (90) next to its name.
Oops, I ruined it.
luther_bendross said :
Actually, yes you are. Keep left unless overtaking, sitting on 80kph youre not going to overtaking anyone. So stay left and let everyone overtake. Basic courtesy.
AUSTRALIAN ROAD RULES – REG 130
130—Keeping to the left on a multi-lane road
(1) This rule applies to a driver driving on a multi-lane road if:
(a) the speed-limit applying to the driver for the length of road where the driver is driving is over 80 kilometres per hour; or
(b) a keep left unless overtaking sign applies to the length of road where the driver is driving.
luther_bendross said :
Its called driving courtesy.
No, there is no requirement for you to drive in the left lane on these roads but for what possible reason would someone drive in the right lane if they didn’t have to? You’re not the police, you don’t need to control how other people drive and you’re probably increasing your risk of having an accident by doing so. Now that accident may not be your fault, but I’d ask again why would you want to put yourself in that position?
The thing i’ve found is that the people that do drive in the right hand lane for no reason are often the worst and most inattentive drivers. They often don’t check their mirrors at all and can mostly be oblivious to the fact that there are other drivers on the road.
Women driving 4WD’s and old people are highly represented in this group.
Classified said :
No, it’s not that I don’t like the left lane. I mean realisitcally if all areas, no matter the speed limit, were ‘keep left’ then at least we’d have some consistency. In practice, this is how I drive.
The reason I posed the question though was that I’m not breaking any laws when I keep right, yet when I impede others from breaking the law I’m the villain. As I said in my first post, this was a bit of a social experiment, and I think I’ve found my answers given this poorly-articulated, tightly-wound, incorrect slop of verbal diarrhea from Henry:
HenryBG said :
It seems to be the noise issue stopping the speed limit being raised on GDE, seriously what difference in noise is there between a car doing 80 and a one doing 90? Most modern cars are very quiet anyway, it’s only the occasional hoon with a loud exhaust.
luther_bendross said :
What business is it of yours if you think people are breaking some petty law? You’re almost certainly wrong about the speed you think you’re driving at, for starters. Then there is the well-established fact that the law is an ass.
If you want to drive slowly, get in the &*%^#$ing left lane, you inconsiderate bastard.
luther_bendross said :
That’s fine, and I not suggesting that those people speeding are not doing the wrong thing, but driving in the right hand lane if you aren’t overtaking or turning is increasing the risk for both you and others around you.
Is there a particular reason you don’t like the left lane? Just curious.
Classified said :
Yeah yeah I get what you’re saying, but I’m asking why? If people need to overtake me by breaking the law (i.e. speeding), then I’d argue that they’ve waived their right to dictate which lane I drive in for their convenience.
chewy14 said :
Surely you’re implying that the speed limit should be decreased? 😉
luther_bendross said :
The idea is that people should be overtaking on the right, and not on the left. By traveling below the prevailing traffic speed in the right hand lane (and not overtaking) you are creating a situation where people will overtake on the left rather than the right, and thus traffic starts weaving across lanes.
Use the left hand lane if you’re not overtaking, it makes it easier and safer.
For another question/social experiment: If I’m going under the speed limit, why must I keep left? Of course if I’m in a zone >80km/h or there’s a sign telling me to then I will, but in zones <80km/h, there's no legal reason for me to keep left.
Case: The northbound stretch of the Monaro between the speed camera and AMC is an 80km/h zone. I'd estimate I'm overtaken by 90% of drivers along that stretch. If I sit on 80km/h in the right lane, I'm breaking no laws (happy to be corrected) but am abused frequently for doing so.
There was a cool experiment done in Europe. Open the road with no posted limits, take away your outliers and everyone else will tell you exactly what the limit should be.
HenryBG said :
So your rates are paying for these machines which have been referred to earlier as being “revenue raising”? Even blind freddy could see that a speed camera pay’s for itself plus some. What’s the issue with the government “raising revenue”? What do you think payed for that nice new road that cuts out a dozen sets of traffic lights and a half hour of congestion on your morning commute. It wasn’t the tooth fairy.
As for travelling a bit under the limit, why can’t people choose to do it? I’ve got some old cars that are much more comfortable at 70 than they are revving their nuts off at 80, and my truck fully loaded would take half the length of the GDE to get up to 80, assuming I haven’t done a precautionary braking maneuver for speedy gonzales swerving about intimidating other motorists in order to save himself 5 hours per year (no doubt 5 hours he would have spent playing with himself).
Apart from the odd exception like Wentworth Avenue we have some of the best roads around. Sit back and enjoy the drive. If 90 seconds a day is so precious to you then maybe you need to think about living a bit closer to work.
stormboy said :
I think that’s the point of his table…
OK so the people who feel that safe driving is driving 10 km/h under the limit regardless of conditions. Fine do that, just stay in the left lane and don’t obstruct traffic flow. But driving 10km/h under the limit has nothing to do with being a safe and/or good driver. I see plenty of elderly doing that, because thats probably their personal limit. Which is good to see, and thats the safe speed for them to drive at.
The issue with the GDE is not about saving a few seconds. Its about safety. A lot of people drive to the road conditions. I know I do and one of those conditions is the speed limit, however, if the speed limit is lower than what the road can sustain you are going to get a far larger number of speeding drivers. So it seems reasonable to me by raising the speed limit, you’ll get more drivers doing a consistant similar speed, thus resulting in less crashes. Yep you can argue they’ll still speed regardless of the limit, but surely less would speed.
The stubborn attitude that people are breaking the law so fine them just doesn’t work. If a road has a high incident of speeding, then looking at the speed limit is just as appropriate action as is speed cameras. I, like most people would have no issue with speed cameras on roads where the speed limit is set to match the road conditions in dry clear weather.
Also speeding on main arterial roads to me should be a far lower priority than, speeding in suburban streets, which is far more dangerous and likely to kill someone. We just need common sense applied and this tit for tat argument or those who think speeders are always wrong and book them with those less conservative on the matter won’t achieve anything. At least the OP has put effort into fixing an issue with constructive table of information. He is trying to present some facts.
While I think the GDE should have its speed limits raised there is a stretch of road at Erindale that needs the speed limit dropped before someone gets killed just near the woolies servo. There needs to be a consistent standard applied, because while everyone should pay attention to the limit signs, its not going to happen 100% of the time ever, regardless of what some my think or say, so if the speed limits are more consistently applied, you’ll have a far less likelyhood of speeding IMO.
p1 said :
Not sure why, GPS speed calculation when travelling in a linear instead of rotation manner is very accurate. While they are only accurate to 15m, the difference in accuracy between two points in a short space of time wouldn’t be great. And when you take enough readings, enough times in different conditions, the errors would average out.
No Ex-Vectis,
what I am saying is that the people who think that driving slower on these roads, necessarily makes them safer drivers are wrong.
Variation from the mean speed of traffic is a risk factor.
If speed limits are set correctly then this usually isn’t a problem, but that’s a big IF.