The totally off-topic thread

[Steady]

I use cruise control wherever I can.

It's the best vehicle innovation in a long time and I am amazed at the number of highway drivers who do not/will not use it.

Sure there are still cars out there that do not have cruise control fitted but it is obvious there are still a lot of cars not using it. Imagine if everyone set their cruise control on 100/110. Not much need to change lanes or overtake.

I even use it in some 60 zones.

Once set you can concentrate on the road with less need to glance at the speedo

I'm with you on this

 

[anat0l]

I use cruise control wherever I can.

It's the best vehicle innovation in a long time and I am amazed at the number of highway drivers who do not/will not use it.

Sure there are still cars out there that do not have cruise control fitted but it is obvious there are still a lot of cars not using it. Imagine if everyone set their cruise control on 100/110. Not much need to change lanes or overtake.

I even use it in some 60 zones.

Once set you can concentrate on the road with less need to glance at the speedo

Cruise control is mainly only effective on long stretches that don't have many "interruptions", including off/on ramps, corners, traffic lights and the like.

Cruise control is rarely effective in metropolitan areas because you have to stop or slow down a lot of the time. By the time you do all of this, the system hardly gets used (even if your system "auto resets" the speed back to the set point), and you end up wasting more fuel. And at least in Brisbane which is quite hilly, the system fares even worse in such conditions.

On the highway, you can certainly do it, as long as your section of road is not peppered with too many exits or high traffic zones.

Finally, cruise control only attempts to control your speed where it can. If you're going down a hill, your speed will increase and cruise control won't be able to do much to contain that. If you get a ticket, you can't go and blame the car company because your cruise control was meant to keep you under (or at) a certain speed.

All said and done, I use cruise control, mainly on the highways. Not only does it help maintain a speed, but it takes pressure off the accelerator foot / leg.

 

[coriander]

My car has adaptive cruise control, so will slow or accelerate to keep a safe distance behind traffic moving at differing speeds. It also applies brakes if going downhill to keep car within about 4km/h of set speed. I use it all the time in the city as well as on country trips.

 

[love_the_life]

I suppose I'm a bit of a control freak - I hate cruise control. The very idea of not having my foot on the accelerator fills me with horror.

 

[RAM]

Over the years I have met/known many people who have been involved in car accidents.

Provided nobody was killed/seriously injured I always manoeuver the conversion to "How much over the speed limit do you normally drive".

It is no exaggeration to say that 24/25 say 5-10km over - 5,000m/hr = 83 m a minute, or nearly 1.5m per second, at 10,000 m/hr that's 3 m/second.

So distance covered before braking takes effect (and allowing extra time for cutting speed the extra 5 or 10 kmh) is the difference in virtually EVERY case to avoiding hitting the car/truck/bus/bike.

That is a fact not made up. For example in a school zone, the difference from 40kmh to 50kmh on a wet road is over 45 metres travelled.

That can be the difference between putting a 7yr old in hospital (or the ground).

Have you ever met anyone who speeds that says they:

1. Are bad driver?
2. Only do it on 'good' roads?
3. Know someone or a family that has suffered a death/severe injury from a car accident?

Just saying...

 

[blackcat20]

Finally got my nailed tyre replaced this morning. Nice to be able to do the speed limit rather than crawling along the freeway at 80. Though Im amazed how many people will just sit behind you doing 80 when the other lanes are all clear and doing 100.... No wonder we get traffic jams on the freeway.

 

[medhead]

I suggest you get off you high horse.

So you disagree that radar detectors are illegal in most Australian states?

My comment about hills, that you quoted, was made only about RADAR, not LIDAR. But just on the LIDAR, my comment was that they are difficult to aim. That comment is not about how they operate, or what they measure. Of course, I have to wonder about the point of that little lecture, all speed detection technology is fundamentally measuring timing difference to calculate speed. Yet it is still referred to as speed detection.
BTW I'll certainly take the word of someone I know in real life in the AFP.

I did not say to change lanes for radar. Not sure why you suggested I did. Failure to read? Or just a desire to attack my character.

Now getting back to the downhill thing, made in relation to RADAR, for those who fail basic reading comprehension. I did not suggest it was ok to speed downhill. (Reading comprehension!) So just get off the high horse ranting on that point. The way RADAR works means that the reading can be inaccurate, confused, by solid non moving objects that are providing a RADAR return behind the moving object. That is precisely what happens when the beam is not parallel to the road surface - like placement at the base of a hill. It is just basic physics. The fact that police think it is acceptable to operate RADAR incorrectly disproves your claims of an "extremely high standard". The public certainly do deserve protection from police who do the wrong thing to catch people out as part of some crusade "to save" people.

On another point of correct operation, I've had a little look at the induction loops for fixed speed cameras. In theory, these should be a fixed distance a part to get an accurate measure for calculating speed. Yet either side of the induction loop is not visibly parallel. That's not an "extremely high standard".

As for codswallop - I was doing 70 on a road that had a 70 kph speed limit not so long ago. It is in a long established area with no new development, the road was design for 70, nothing has changed. Yet they reduced the limit. Then there is King William Road between CBD and Adelaide.
Another prime example of revenue raising the Spit Water bridge area in Sydney - highest earning fixed speed camera in NSW/Australia. So they installed another one 500 m up the road. Why do they need another camera within 500m? If the first one isn't preventing accidents what do they think 2 are going to do. Clearly not about accident prevention. Which leaves blatant revenue raising.

while they are focusing on collecting lots of money from these fixed cameras. I've spent months waiting to pick up the kids from school watching cars flying through a 25 kph zone - including one knob doing at least 80. Multiple complaints to police and pollies - where were they? Nowhere. In fact I reckon I saw a copper doing 60 in normal traffic through the school zone.

medhead, sorry to disagree, but I simply must on a couple of issues.

Speeding fines are source of much angst by members of the public. Essentially they hate getting caught doing the wrong thing, they feel embarrassed, and they try to justify anything to get out of that.

Road speed limits are set for the single concept of reducing the incidence or severity of accidents. They are not set to raise revenue. That is just codswallop invented by people to try to not feel they are naughty. Not a single person involved in setting those limits gets any benefit from fines from those who are careless and exceed the limit.

But because people get caught out, and try to save face, they often contest tickets in the forlorn hope of redeeming themselves, even if undeservedly. And our legal system works heavily in their favour as we have a system making it almost bulletproof against failure. Any doubt and a ticket gets thrown. But they almost NEVER do. Both the equipment and the procedures in using them have been developed to an extremely high standard.

The laser speed detection equipment you refer to (LIDAR) is amazing. I know it very very well. You say someone said it is hard to aim??? What??? No it is not. And the suggestion to change lanes?? Do you mean if you are breaking the law you are advising methods to try to escape punishment? Do you want speeding people who think they see a radar to suddenly veer across the road?????? Very low moral ground.

People carp on with all sorts of nonsense and urban myths. Reflections from the road surface? A simple but important concept with LIDAR is that it does not measure speed. It measures distance. It measures this multiple times in a very brief period and using the differences in distance it CALCULATES the speed. If you do not get the importance of this you cannot grasp why they are so accurate. And they have imbedded a zillion fail-safe internal tests so that if anything at all is not coherent in the data they ditch the lot and give you the benefit of the doubt. The accuracy of the equipment is phenomenal - the same equipment as used by Qld Police is used in the space effort - they use it for space docking procedures.

As for being hard to aim, yes, it is nice to support the equipment against a pole or similar, much like using a rifle. But it is not hard. But the area of targetting is small and so accurate. I always used to take the speed from the front of the helmet of motorcyclists. Or the rego plate on a car.

As for the downhill thing, what on earth makes you think it is ok to speed downhill? Yes, I know that we all gain a little speed going downhill, but we need to be conscious of this and correct it. It takes longer to brake going downhill. Very basic physics.

And finally, you find it sad that it is illegal in most places to have gear that helps people to avoid being caught speeding? Again, very shaky morally. What next, a police detector so thieves can avoid them?

Australia is very tough on road safety. Yes, we have all got tickets and feel bad about them, because we all "know" we are good drivers and not dangerous.

Most fatal crashes are caused by average, "good" drivers, who in that moment made a small mistake. And so the law trys to hammer everyone in to being very conscious. Causes many fines to otherwise good people, but it also saves massive amounts of lives and injury.

But always we will have people who think that their "minor" transgressions are just that - insignificant. But they are not.

Go to a few fresh crashes and see and feel and smell the result.

Sorry, talking as an ex crash investigator who literally had to pick up the pieces

 

[Cossie]

...
On another hand, maybe we should be much, much more discerning about who gets to obtain a licence to drive, and who gets to retain/keep their licence, particularly those who have gone before a court and shown that their ability to continue to be a responsible driver is of considerable question.

Completely agree with this, a license is a privlege not a right, some of the cough I see on the road annoys me beyond belief, example, I was pulled up at a set of lights behind a car with learner plates a couple of days ago, lights went green and as I guess a lot of new drivers do, they were a little slow off the mark, the clown behind me tooted his horn, for what, maybe the 5 seconds time it cost him. He seemed to be in his late 40's or early 50's, grey beard and receding hairline, so not young, you would think people his age would have a little more consideration.

I'm willing to bet that a lot of accidents these days are caused by people being distracted, by whatever. Speed is only one possible factor. From what i've heard, it is quite easy to get a license these days, certainly in the ACT, fewer tests and longer periods being monitored. I mentioned this experience before on this forum, I was passed by a learner driver doing way over the speed limit which was 80kph, the required licensed passenger was either asleep or was reading as their head was facing downwards. People learn a lot from watching others and also peer pressure, if this person thinks they are doing the learner any favours, they are delusional.

Back to speed cameras in the ACT, there never seems to be any cameras around school zones near us when parents are dropping off and picking up their kids, many doing more than 40kph. Nearby there is a very good dual carriageway, limit 80, but there is quite often a camera at the bottom of the hill, in all honestly I can't say I've ever seen an accident at that location, but it's very easy to go over the limit here without 'riding' your brakes.

Whilst checking some info about Slovakia, I was surprised to see this, imagine that working in Australia:

• Eating and other activities interrupting driving are not allowed.
• Using mobile phone or smoking during the driving is forbidden.
• Children with age less than 12 have to sit in the rear seat.

I dislike seeing road rules being broken, who on this forum can say they have never answered a non hands free phone whilst driving, not many I bet, however I'm still convinced speed cameras are a cash cow, easy to enforce, reaping huge monetary gain. Put cameras at black spots, how hard can that be?

if I get caught speeding, so be it, I'll wear it, I won't grumble and feel sorry for myself, because I very rarely speed, as I said earlier I hate giving the government anymore money than I have too.

Drive to the conditions and within your ability.

 

[medhead]

I dont speed anymore. Hate giving the scummy government coffers more money for them to waste!

Unfortunately in SA, the placement of radar in non accident locations along with general confusion in SA about speed zones, plus the failure of road workers to remove their signs when the day is done, makes SA motorists simply angry. Last Sunday week along Hackney Road, no road work being done at the time but on a two lane road, 25 k signs out. And hidden away, a radar. Out and out robbery.

Great story about Sth America.

Don't get me started about road works. The best was seeing an Altus ute flying through our school zone. Sadly I didn't get a picture. to those reading at home Altus are one of 2 main contractors for traffic control around road works in Adelaide.

Thanks juddles. I too have been to my share of accidents. It is quite simple - speed kills.

Please. Don't. Speed.

That's a gross simplification for nonsense advertising purposes. I don't die when doing 110 on the highway. It's all about driving to the road conditions. That Australia doesn't have drivers who are capable of judging the road conditions is a failure of the licensing system. Perhaps they should stop wasting money on "speed kills" ads and invest in driver education.

Speed/Red light cameras are the lazy way of policing.

On the road, the amount of poor driving and total lack or ability to follow rules is astonishing.

Regularly I see cars pulling over/turning without blinkers. If your going to pull over to the side, please use your left blinker or at least turn your lights off. I don't know if you re coming or going.

One guy today pulled over in a clearway zone and put his hazards on, so he could catch a pokemon.

In just 20 minutes of driving tonight I saw at least 3 drivers with lights that were too strong. 2 xenon and 1 halogen, however it's mainly the xenon that causes the most problems, with it either either being poorly designed, installed or headlight wattage. I even saw one car with 1 xenon and 1 halogen.

More then two lights or fogs lights in the city? Really?

What is it with bike riders using lights so strong they give you sunburn? I ride sometimes at night and don't need much light to see or to be visible.

Indeed, there is a general lack of consistent adherence to basic road rules to be observed in Australian drivers.

I use cruise control wherever I can.

It's the best vehicle innovation in a long time and I am amazed at the number of highway drivers who do not/will not use it.

Sure there are still cars out there that do not have cruise control fitted but it is obvious there are still a lot of cars not using it. Imagine if everyone set their cruise control on 100/110. Not much need to change lanes or overtake.

I even use it in some 60 zones.

Once set you can concentrate on the road with less need to glance at the speedo

I'm with you on this

My car has adaptive cruise control, so will slow or accelerate to keep a safe distance behind traffic moving at differing speeds. It also applies brakes if going downhill to keep car within about 4km/h of set speed. I use it all the time in the city as well as on country trips.

Another who uses cruise control. The only hassle is having to set it at 41 because it doesn't work at a lower speed on my car. I'll set it at 50/60 and even 70 when I'm driving to the airport at 4 am -

Yes, to those who disapprove; When there are 3 other cars on the road at 4am I drive to conditions - even if I'm doing more than the posted speed limit.

Cruise control is mainly only effective on long stretches that don't have many "interruptions", including off/on ramps, corners, traffic lights and the like.

I totally disagree. Maybe it's all the long straight roads around Adelaide. But cruise control is very effective in the city area, it also helps reduce fuel usage by maintaining a constant speed. It's amazing the number of other drivers who are incapable of sticking to a fixed speed over 1 km of straight road.

Whilst checking some info about Slovakia, I was surprised to see this, imagine that working in Australia:

• [-]Using[/-] Touching a mobile phone or [-]smoking[/-] during the driving is forbidden.
• Children with age less than 12 have to sit in the rear seat.

these are rules in Australia.
Having said that I saw some research a few years ago that found it was the conversation on a mobile phone that distracted the driver. In that case then all talking, music, radios should in cars should be banned. Perhaps even put the driver in the cone of silence.

 

[froggerADL]

If governments are only interested in revenue raising and not road safety I suggest they stop deducting demerit points. It's hard to contribute when you haven't got a licence.

 

[Major]

My car has adaptive cruise control, so will slow or accelerate to keep a safe distance behind traffic moving at differing speeds. It also applies brakes if going downhill to keep car within about 4km/h of set speed. I use it all the time in the city as well as on country trips.

So has mine. It is so easy to use and become accustomed to. You can change speed or cancel with the touch of the thumb.

Surely those who can use a smart phone can handle cruise control.

 

[anat0l]

I totally disagree. Maybe it's all the long straight roads around Adelaide. But cruise control is very effective in the city area, it also helps reduce fuel usage by maintaining a constant speed. It's amazing the number of other drivers who are incapable of sticking to a fixed speed over 1 km of straight road.

This.

Filler text - nothing to see here...

 

[Pushka]

Don't get me started about road works. The best was seeing an Altus ute flying through our school zone. Sadly I didn't get a picture. to those reading at home Altus are one of 2 main contractors for traffic control around road works in Adelaide.

Bloody Altus. Did you by chance drive Rundle Road say about 2 months ago? There were speed restrictions in place and people were following those limits. An altus guy had his lollipop at the ready, his job to stand there. He abused everyone that he thought was speeding - but we could see by our speedoes they weren't. Our office is nearby and each one of us reported multiple instances where this guy went off his nana at motorists doing the right thing.

 

[docjames]

I was trying to bite my tongue but i'll post a couple of data points:

If it's all about speed, i'd review the numbers for Germany and Australia in this table (accepting the driving conditions are different, but so is driver training and attitudes to driving).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate


IME - Alcohol (and drugs) are far more represented in Australian hospital-attendees following car (and motorbike) accidents than any other major factor. A chunk of these were also speeding. There aren't massive numbers of attendees where it was speed over the speed limit as the primary cause of the accident.


I completely accept speed cameras in known blackspots and intersections (both are the last place people should be speeding) but the whole system including road design needs reviewing. Upgraded roads with the same or lower limits makes no sense to me. But the speed camera is the "easy and cheap" solution compared ot roadworks / road design improvement.

 

[Foreigner]

One Italian, potty chef's view on vegans:

Chef Gianfranco Vissani compares vegans to a sect and says they should be 'killed' | Stuff.co.nz

 

[Flying mermaid]

On another hand, maybe we should be much, much more discerning about who gets to obtain a licence to drive, and who gets to retain/keep their licence, particularly those who have gone before a court and shown that their ability to continue to be a responsible driver is of considerable question.

I got my licence for the first time driving a manual car in Sydney, lasted a year and gave it up. Had another go at around 40, driving an automatic. After a year stopped driving again. I was an accident waiting to happen and I felt the responsible thing was to stop driving. As soon as people hear you don't drive, you get a lot of disbelief and sometimes thinly veiled contempt, but I feel strongly that there are many people like me who should not be driving!

 

[TomVexille]

I got my licence for the first time driving a manual car in Sydney, lasted a year and gave it up. Had another go at around 40, driving an automatic. After a year stopped driving again. I was an accident waiting to happen and I felt the responsible thing was to stop driving. As soon as people hear you don't drive, you get a lot of disbelief and sometimes thinly veiled contempt, but I feel strongly that there are many people like me who should not be driving!

Most sensible thing I've read today

 

[love_the_life]

So has mine. It is so easy to use and become accustomed to. You can change speed or cancel with the touch of the thumb.

Surely those who can use a smart phone can handle cruise control.

Yes, I can handle cruise control (as in set it etc) but I just don't like it.

 

[Pushka]

I got my licence for the first time driving a manual car in Sydney, lasted a year and gave it up. Had another go at around 40, driving an automatic. After a year stopped driving again. I was an accident waiting to happen and I felt the responsible thing was to stop driving. As soon as people hear you don't drive, you get a lot of disbelief and sometimes thinly veiled contempt, but I feel strongly that there are many people like me who should not be driving!

My elderly neighbour started to drive at the age of 69 when her husband died. She drove like a person with no lateral vision; if it was not straight ahead it did not exist. And she drove FAST.

One Saturday morning (she was now 89) I heard a very loud bang. Then forgot about it. Seems she had pressed reverse, hard, thinking it was forward. Veered across our road and straight through the neighbours brand new electronic gates which fell on top of her car. She wasn't injured but the car was a write off. It was owned and insured by her son (whom I dislike intensely). Thank god there was no one walking their dog (happens a lot on our street) at the time. When I went in to see her, her youngest son was there (she has 12 grown up children) and I said to him that if she got another car I would report her to the Police. They did not report the accident to the police - repairs to the fence were handled by Insurance though. Needless to say the community bus now takes her everywhere. She was so damn lucky. Oh, and the sons hate me even more as they have to collect her these days when needed although they rarely visit her.

 

[JohnK]

Life can be cruel at times. Keep the boot in while you're down. Hope there's some light on the other side.