RTA to reduce speeding tolerance to 4km/h

[moconn20]

http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/latest/7564793/fines-for-4km-h-over-speed-limit/

Interestingly they have also named the type of vehicles to be used in the new mobile speed camera setups.



Senior NSW police say the Roads and Traffic Authority is considering plans to reduce the amount of leeway given to speeding motorists to as low as 4 km/h.

The proposal, which would follow a similar take-no-prisoners approach by the Victorian government, has drawn criticism from senior highway patrol officers, who believe the margin for error is too small, The Sun-Herald says.

The reduced tolerances are part of a tougher stance on speeding adopted by the NSW government, which includes six mobile speed cameras appearing on Sydney streets from July 19.

Driving fines are expected to rise by $137 million in the next year, partially because of mobile speed cameras, the state budget reported.

The cameras, which can fine six drivers every second, will be set up in white Ford Territory vans operated by RTA-contracted company Redflex. Signs will inform drivers they have been "checked" after they pass the vans, which also shoot video.

One senior Sydney policeman told The Sun-Herald, on condition of anonymity, that a 4 km/h tolerance is so small that a new set of tyres or the width of a speedometer needle could land motorists on the wrong side of the law. He said some radars have an error margin of plus or minus 3 km/h, while most police allow a margin of 8 or 9 km/h at 60 km/h.

The RTA is responsible for the limit on fixed cameras, as well as those in the new mobile vans.

An RTA spokeswoman said: "The RTA does not discuss enforcement thresholds on road safety grounds." But she did not deny the hardline approach is being considered, the paper says

Discuss.

[Micks]

Seen this shite & if I get supposedly booked by these vans will be contesting it in court. :flipoff:
This Govt must go..Now:vpo:

Cheers
VYT

[moconn20]

...if I get supposedly booked by these vans will be contesting it in court.

This Govt must go..Now


Contest based on what? If you were speeding you were speeding... theres just more chance of getting caught now.

And $50 says the Liberal's will keep the vans when they win the election.

[Micks]

Contest based on what? If you were speeding you were speeding... theres just more chance of getting caught now.

And $50 says the Liberal's will keep the vans when they win the election.

Yeah but how they execute six offenses @ any given time is debatable. Also agree the Libs will keep them.

Cheers
VYT

[BEARWOOD]

Fu(k me what a joke! Between watching the speedo & the thousand road signs you must obey you might get a chance to have a quick look at whats on the road now and then!!
Coming back from Melbourne a few weeks ago i went under a speed check which told me i was doing xxx km/h but my speedo told something different and the sat nav was different again so how the fu(k are you not going to get booked??

[Knight Phlier]

Does the ADR spec for Radar/Laser detection state that there is a tolerance and margin of error of +/- 10%?

This wouldn't be so bad if the RTA also increased the speed limit to the 10km/h that Sydney drivers generally cruise at in any given zone.

[duke5700]

You guys are missing the point. It is obviously more important to look at your speedo every 2 secs than actually watch the road around you. You all know speeding kills right.

.
.
.
.
.

Cocksuckers.. Much easier to enforce stupidity than it is obviously to increase driver skill. WTF. Ok less bitching on the forum and everyone write a letter to you local member. I'll even draft a letter and put it up so all you have to do is sign it and email it.

[v8dude78]

Yep it sucks guys ive been done for 104 in a 100 zone and 54 in a 50 zone revenue raising at it's best :flipoff:
Sure there are plenty of other Victorians on here with the same story

[BEARWOOD]

I don't know if it will help but it's worth a try. Do it as a petition style, get all the signatures then send it on to the wanks at the RTA or whoever is pushing for it. It's a good idea to include such things as the amount of time a driver has to spend looking at everything but the road these days.

[rgmast]

Am I missing something we have had these in SA for 10-15 years I dont see the point why u would get angry if u speed u get caught(yes occasionaliy I might speed and yes occasionally I get caught)

Only in the last few years they took demerit points off for getting caught by a speed camera before then u could speed to u had enough cash to pay the fines

[seedyrom]

I don't know if it will help but it's worth a try. Do it as a petition style, get all the signatures then send it on to the wanks at the RTA or whoever is pushing for it. It's a good idea to include such things as the amount of time a driver has to spend looking at everything but the road these days.

I dare say online petitions are a waste of electrons.

An email or penned letter to your local representative (or even the opposition member) would have a LOT more impact.
They have to represent you, and should at least acknowledge (respond to) your letter

[HSV271]

Contest based on what? If you were speeding you were speeding... there’s just more chance of getting caught now.

And $50 says the Liberal's will keep the vans when they win the election.

Base on what...How about this below:- Taken from here!!!!----> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speedometer




Most speedometers have tolerances of some 10% plus or minus due to wear on tires as it occurs.[citation needed] Additional sources of error are tire diameter variations due to temperature, pressure, vehicle load, and nominal tire size.

Excessive speedometer error after manufacture can come from several causes but most commonly is due to nonstandard tire diameter.

International agreements
In many countries the legislated error in speedometer readings is ultimately governed by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Regulation 39[3] which covers those aspects of vehicle type approval which relate to speedometers. The main purpose of the UNECE regulations is to facilitate trade in motor vehicles by agreeing uniform type approval standards rather than requiring a vehicle model to undergo different approval processes in each country in which it is to be sold.

European Union member states must also grant type approval to vehicles meeting similar EU standards. The ones covering speedometers [4] [5][6] are similar to the UNECE regulation in that they specify that:

The indicated speed must never be less than the actual speed, i.e. it should not be possible to inadvertently speed because of an incorrect speedometer reading.
The indicated speed must not be more than 110 percent of the true speed plus 4 km/h at specified test speeds. For example, at 80 km/h, the indicated speed must be no more than 92 km/h.
The standards specify both the limits on accuracy and many of the details of how it should be measured during the approvals process, for example that the test measurements should be made (for most vehicles) at 40, 80 and 120 km/h, and at a particular ambient temperature. There are slight differences between the different standards, for example in the minimum accuracy of the equipment measuring the true speed of the vehicle.

The UNECE regulation relaxes the requirements for vehicles mass produced following type approval. At Conformity of Production Audits the upper limit on indicated speed is increased to 110 percent plus 6 km/h for cars, buses, trucks and similar vehicles, and 110 percent plus 8 km/h for two or three wheeled vehicles which have a maximum speed above 50 km/h (or a cylinder capacity, if powered by a heat engine, of more than 50 cc). European Union Directive 2000/7/EC, which relates to two and three wheeled vehicles, provides similar slightly relaxed limits in production.

Australia
All vehicles manufactured on or after 1 July 2007, and all models of vehicle introduced on or after 1 July 2006, must conform to UNECE Regulation 39.[7]

The speedometers in vehicles manufactured before these dates but after 1 July 1995 (or 1 January 1995 for forward control passenger vehicles and off-road passenger vehicles) must conform to the previous Australian design rule. This specifies that they need only display the speed to an accuracy of +/- 10% at speeds above 40 km/h, and there is no specified accuracy at all for speeds below 40 km/h. All vehicles manufactured in Australia or imported for supply to the Australian market must comply with the Australian Design Rules.

The state and territory governments may set policies for the tolerance of speed over the posted speed limits that may be lower than the 10% in the earlier versions of the Australian Design Rules permitted, such as in Victoria. This has caused some controversy since it would be possible for a driver to be unaware that he is speeding should his vehicle be fitted with an under-reading speedometer.

United Kingdom
A speedometer showing mph and km/h along with an odometer and a separate 'trip' odometer (both showing distance travelled in miles).The amended Road Vehicles (Construction and Use) Regulations 1986 permits the use of speedometers that meet either the requirements of EC Council Directive 75/443 (as amended by Directive 97/39) or UNECE Regulation 39.

The Motor Vehicles (Approval) Regulations 2001 permits single vehicles to be approved. As with the UNECE regulation and the EC Directives, the speedometer must never show an indicated speed less than the actual speed. However it differs slightly from them in specifying that for all actual speeds between 25 mph and 70 mph (or the vehicles' maximum speed if it is lower that this), the indicated speed must not exceed 110% of the actual speed, plus 6.25 mph.

For example, if the vehicle is actually travelling at 50 mph, the speedometer must not show more than 61.25 mph or less than 50 mph.

United States
As of 1997, Federal standards in the United States allowed a maximum 5% error on speedometer readings.[13] Aftermarket modifications, such as different tire and wheel sizes or different differential gearing, can cause speedometer inaccuracy.



In the end when you have Car manufacturers stating there could be up to a 10Km/h difference is shown speed on the speedometer to the actual speed being done due to number of factors that are in no way the control of the car/driver/operator of the vehicle... the Police & Local authorities/governments will be swamped with lawsuits IMHO.

I'm not saying about contesting a speed of 100km/h in a 60km/h zone... but when you have pigs pulling you over for doing 64km/h in a 60 zone, well that in my books is a fracken joke and nothing more than a money revenue exercise.

/end rant.

P.S Good point duke5700 about watching the speedo than the road.

[pro-logic]

According to the SMH article, the coppers radars have a tolerance of +/- 3km/h so, if you get cough you can claim that you were going only 1km over...

smh.drive.com.au/roads-and-traffic/fines-for-4kmh-over-limit-20100710-104t1.html

4 km/h is a ****ing ridiculous tolerance, I bet that's the difference between a new old set of tires on a speedo.

[mustanger]

A 10% tolerance is needed :teach:.......Start annoying your local MPs :flipoff::flipoff:

If the manufacturers are saying there may be a difference of 10% , then how can you get booked for anything under that :confused:

[duke5700]

Well so far I have..

To the Honourable (INSERT LOCAL MEMBER),

I am writing to you in regards to the new proposal of draconian speed enforcement that the NSW State Government is introducing.

[XUV]

It's their grand plan http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/aboutthecentre.html

and they're getting away with it , with every '' Well , if ya don't speed ''

They take , take , take and give back nothing .

[Devil CV8]

Does the ADR spec for Radar/Laser detection state that there is a tolerance and margin of error of +/- 10%?

This wouldn't be so bad if the RTA also increased the speed limit to the 10km/h that Sydney drivers generally cruise at in any given zone.
There are different Australian standards for Radar and Lidar. I have a copy of the radar one, and it does not mention tolerance in your context. It does however mention where radar should be setup and operated and to avoid certain conditions. BUT it is a guide only and each police state have their own guidleines for operating Radar and Lidar.

For example, the Australian standard says mobile mode should not be used in metro areas. It also states that 200metre between target vehicles. Can anyone tell me that these 2 guidelines are used now? My experience says no.

[Jac001]

The ADR that governs speedo's can be found here:

http://www.comlaw.gov.au/ComLaw/legislation/LegislativeInstrument1.nsf/0/3E2C9248B201A54FCA25716700806A2F/$file/ADR+18-03+[FINAL+FRLI].pdf

Australian Design Rule 18/03 Instrumentation

5.3. The speed indicated shall not be less than the true speed of the vehicle. At the test speeds specified in paragraph 5.2.5. above, there shall be the following relationship between the speed displayed (V1 ) and the true speed (V2).

0 ≤ (V1 - V2) ≤ 0.1 V2 + 4 km/h


If your speedo reads lower (v1) than your actual speed (v2) then it does NOT need the ADR.

However it can read higher than the actual speed (ie you are travelling slower than what your speedo says but only by 10% of your speed + 4km.

This is tested at a number of different speeds as per the link.

Addition: this is what manufactures need to meet for new cars released after 1st July 2006.

[mad_industries]

in victoria weve had these rules for as long as i can remember.

our tolerance is 3km/h and they seem to stick to it rather tightly.
mobile speed cameras are a joke as here there is no warning apart from the flash of motorists headlights.

not even do fixed cameras here have warning signage like you in NSW do and the government have no intentions on changing this.

[seedyrom]

It's their grand plan http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/roadsafety/aboutthecentre.html

The centre became operational from January 1, 2008 with four divisions:

Behaviour <-- Fine the drivers
Vehicles <-- Fine the drivers
Technology <-- Fine the drivers
Road Environment <-- Do nothing

[duke5700]

This is as far as I have got. I'm not happy with it yet, possibly to emotional and not enough simple fact. Some proofing would be nice as well.

To the Honourable (INSERT LOCAL MEMBER),

I am writing to you in regards to the new proposal of draconian speed enforcement that the NSW State Government is introducing. The continual lack of thought process in regards to road laws and policy is disturbing to say the least. Instead of focusing on driver training and improving roads you are opting for the easy way out. All this new policy does is encourage drivers to spend more time looking at their speedometer needle than paying complete attention to the situation around them.

If the enforcement of these fines lies within the outlined range it will be in contradiction to the MOTOR VEHICLE STANDARDS Act 1989, A national standard determined under section 7 of the Act, AUSTRALIAN DESIGN RULE 18/03, INSTRUMENTATION.

Annex 3 clearly outlines what the tolerances for passenger vehicles within Australia.

The variations between tyres degradation, speedometer calibration and measuring equipment accuracy will lead to many motorists being fined unnecessarily. All this action will bring is to fill state coffers and will make no impact on the road toll.

The continual blatant disregard to improve road safety but continue with the vote grabbing policy decisions shows how out of touch the government currently is.

If this does not change I will use my power as a voting citizen to see that someone with common sense and the drive to do the right thing is put into power.

[duke5700]

0 ≤ (V1 – V2) ≤ 0.1 V2 + 6 km/h; is for passenger vehicles

[Avalanche]

The centre became operational from January 1, 2008 with four divisions:

Behaviour <-- Fine the drivers
Vehicles <-- Fine the drivers
Technology <-- Fine the drivers
Road Environment <-- Do nothing

I notice that they also state that their aim is to convince drivers that speeding is socially unacceptable. WTF???

So it isnt anything to do with safety. They just want to alienate you if you stray over the limit when watching the raod instead of the speedo. Jeez, what will i do if the latte sipping, tree hugging, climate changing, eco terrorist, do gooding wowsers look down on me??? i certainly wont be going out & buying a prius. Looks like i will be socially unacceptable for a long time yet.

When all the pollies & senior beaurocrats are made to drive their own cars all the time, then i will agree with it.

[Micks]

They know it's just another great screw of the motorist.
I wouldn't mind if the money was used for a good intention instead of being wasted or squandered by Public servant's :flipoff:

Cheers
VYT

[ssv402]

How would we go about getting a few hundred or even several thousand people to take this to a court of sorts to contest (however we go about contesting)? Gather as much evidence against it as we can and hope that peoples disapproval is also a sway, may even be able to stir up some media support and get some experts on the issues?

Could even get holden and ford to comment on the issue publicly?

Obviously a rough thought but who would be for something like this? How would we even start to contest a government issue?

[pro-logic]

How would we go about getting a few hundred or even several thousand people to take this to a court of sorts to contest

Class actions are tricky, you'd need to get in contact with somebody like Slayter & Gordon who love their class actions.

If you look at the SMH article, it appears senior coppers are strongly against this because even their equipment is not designed for this tolerance.

The issue is in Australia you can't contest a law based on the fact its a dumb law, it's a sad state of affairs but what can you do. You can only contest a law based on its effect on you (indirectly anyway)

I mean, if you look at the SMH article, the radars are configured for +/- 3km/h so for a copper to be 100% sure you are breaking the speed limit in a 60 zone, the radar has to read 67km/h.

If you got booked for 64km/h you could easily claim you were doing 61 and the radar got it wrong.

The only way to 'contest' this law would be to get a whole punch of people that got done for the 4km-7km over the speed limit and get them to claim it was a police instrument error. If they then won the case, the goverment would need to give back money + costs + interest, it would then likely be shamed into removing the law.

In Germany for example you can take a dumb law to court, because you feel it make have an impact on you, and best of all its free.

[XUV]

The more ya dig , the more you find ..........


The more they fiddle, the longer the road toll stays the same
source: Harold Scruby - 16/11/06

Back in 1995 the premier Bob Carr, and his roads minister, Carl Scully, proudly launched their ambitious program called "Road Safety 2000" stating that New South Wales would have the safest roads in the world with less than 500 deaths and 5500 injuries on the roads each year.

When the millennium came around, the NSW annual road toll was in excess of 600 fatalities.

Scully quietly dumped the Road Safety 2000 program faster than a extraterrestrial explanation given by Moulder and launched "Road Safety 2010" campaign instead, boasting a saving of 820 lives by the year 2005 and 2000 lives by the year 2010.

Yet by the end of 2005 the road fatalities in NSW had not dropped below 500.

Now, not only has the NSW Government moved the goal posts but they have changed their shape too!

The NSW Government have benched the globally agreed "deaths per hundred thousand of population" measurement and instead have committed to reducing "vehicle crash deaths per 100 million vehicle kilometers travelled".

This clever little change has given the government some extra variables that will artificially change the results they are promoting. For example with petrol prices rising, people will travel less or use more public transport, so there will be a fall in the number of road deaths, even though there has been no change in road safety trends.

In 2003, the year of the most recent data available from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau, the NSW rate of motor vehicle crash fatalities per 100 million kilometres travelled by vehicles was 0.89, which is the second highest of all Australian states and higher than the overall Australian average rate of 0.81

There are other suspect practices by the government, in NSW for example, the RTA and police have a nice little arrangement called the "enhanced enforcement program" or EEP. Last year the RTA gave the NSW police approximately $8 million dollars to pay for their overtime whilst the police conducted road safety enforcement operations - in other words speed enforcement, random breath testing and other traffic duties

Now whilst it's agreed the police should be paid for their overtime, heck they deserve a pay rise I say, but such suspect payments compromise the independence of the police and how and where they carry out their duties.

These payments in effect, enable the Minister for Roads to dictate how, when and where the police operate these traffic duties. The effectiveness of these methods has not been independently investigated.

Of course the police won't criticize the Road Traffic Authority because actually getting paid for your overtime is appealing, particularly when their pays are in desperate need of review.

The payment for overtime should come from the Treasury, not the RTA and the high road fatalities can in theory, be partly blamed on the NSW Police association due to its opposition to modern work practices and technologies that would reduce road trauma significantly and improve the safety of its members.

[taner]

i would be more than happy to have these ridiculous laws changed.

Surely there are more people against this sort of shit than there is supporting it. Its just that no one will do anything or better still most people dont know how to go about doing something about it.

What i want to know is how do these people or better yet how are they allowed to make such laws it blows my mind, seems to be if your a w@nker you get to make bullshit decisions where people inevidably have to bend over and take it. It goes to show that the marketing campaign of convincing/ brainwashing the general idiotic public into believing that speeding is socially unacceptable has or is working, why dont they brainwash people into safer driving habits, driver awareness, people these days still dont know how to Fin merge if they spent more time on driver awareness we wouldnt have Fwits with their cruise controls set to 100 sitting in the right lane of a motorway.

end rant.

[1BEAST2NV]

didnt they do tests a while back on speedo and calibration for all makes and models and to find that nearly every make i.e toyota, nissan, holden, ford, hyundai, mitsubishi etc..... and that next to none of them were the exact same reading at a certain speed when they had the radar set up on it.???? Cant remember where I saw it, was definetly on the TV

They had a radar set up, then drove the car a say (60km/h for example) and they all had different readings on the radar, some read more than 60, some read less... but the cars speedo's all said 60km/h

So if they make this new 4km/h crackhead tolerance, they best make sure the cars are manufactured perfectly or the manufacturer can foot the fine for making a "dud" speedo...

[pro-logic]

how to go about doing something about it.

Like I said, in Australia the only way you can contest a law is if it first screws you over... most people won't bother suing the government for a $150 fine. After a year of such a law, you could potentially start a class action.

[ssv402]

Appears the speeding kills campaign is working, the speed limit on the hume is 125 isnt it? Its what everyone sits on.

Thank you pro-logic for your reply, its certainly food for thought. I may have to have an extensive look into it. :)

[taner]

F3 is 130 isnt it.?

[moconn20]

F3 is 130 isnt it.?

only for p platers

[pah]

Hi Guys,

SBS news tonight reported that the NSW Labor Gov't is considering a reduction of the speed tolerance to as little as 4 km/h over the posted limit. This is nothing more than a revenue raising trick by the NSW Labor Gov't. There are several very good reasons why the current tolerence should be left in place:

* NSW motorists should not be unfairly used to line the pockets of the NSW Gov't.
* The 10% speed tolerance is there for GOOD reasons. It compensates for speedo inaccuracies and tyre wear etc.
* It compensates for speed variation when using cruise control.
It enables drivers to watch the road more than their speedo.
* Police acknowledge that a 4 km/h tolerance is blatant revenue raising.
* The Vic road toll has gone up in spite of its draconian 4 km/h tolerance.

Please email Barry O'Farrell using his web page seeking information on his stand on this point.

http://www.barryofarrell.com.au/

Let's hope the NSW Libs have no intention of persecuting NSW motorists.




PAH

[moconn20]

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=138217

[Tyre biter]

There are different Australian standards for Radar and Lidar. I have a copy of the radar one, and it does not mention tolerance in your context.


in victoria...our tolerance is 3km/h and they seem to stick to it rather tightly.

There are two separate used for the term tolerance when discussing radar or laser/lidar speed measurement.

Firstly is the 'tolerance' of the device - its accuracy. Radar +/-2km/h mobile and +/- 1km/h stationary unless you are in some jurisdictions that take no heed from the manufacturer (NSW for example) where they use +3/-2km/h because the book published in the US says so. Laser/Lidar is ordinarily +/-2km/h.

The second meaning of the term 'tolerance' pertains to what speed in excess of the speed restriction you will be pinged for. Different in every jurisdiction and even from Constable to Constable however I believe many jurisdictions work on 10% plus the accuracy tolerance before you go in the book. So (for example) a 67/60 could get you into the book for a stationary radar but not a mobile radar or laser.

Finally, I'd suggest the proposed 4km/h 'tolerance' will most very likely apply only to camera devices and not Laser/Radar operated by a human being. What (thankfully) has been identified by some here is that a speedo won't under measure your speed but rather over measure it - this is why your Commodore will generally read 110 when actually doing 106 or a tad less - owners of TomToms and the alike will appreciate this, as will coppers when motorists tell them they set their cruise control to x and can't for the life of them understand how they got pinged for y, thereby blaming their speedo/cruise control...

Cheers, TB

[pah]

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=138217

Thanks moconn20,

Missed that one. However, I think it would be useful for as many as possible to email Barry O'Farrell to let him know what the LS1 community thinks of draconian laws.

If we shut up and say nothing, there's no point whinging WHEN we get pinged.




PAH

[ssv402]

This thread is good, thank you :)

[ACT_Cross8]

The more ya dig , the more you find ..........

Harold Scruby + 1 fax machine = "The Pedestrian Council"

"The Pedestrian Council" = Motorist's Worst Nightmare!

[ti0350]

Sent a real long email tonight to my local member giving her my thoughts on not only the new speed enforcement prosals, but the use of mobile speed cameras and the lack of driver training will you guys know if I actually get a response from her.

[moconn20]

Sent a real long email tonight to my local member giving her my thoughts on not only the new speed enforcement prosals, but the use of mobile speed cameras and the lack of driver training will you guys know if I actually get a response from her.

care to put it up here for others to model their letters off?

[smokey777]

LS1 is getting as bad as "street commodores forum" :confused:

[Micks]

LS1 is getting as bad as "street commodores forum" :confused:

Care to explain? Don't frequent there.

Cheers
VYT

[smokey777]

Care to explain? Don't frequent there.

Cheers
VYT

there is no reason to whinge about these things as its done so whats the use? me personally i just cant see the point in worrying

[Micks]

Largest problem in Sydney mate is getting from A to B in a reasonable amount of time. I average in speed around here is 32 Kmh. If this shit is put on us the average my guess will be 5-7 Kmh slower. :spew:
I also don't have a problem accepting my fines & paying them, as mentioned previously would appreciate these monies spent on worthwhile projects.

Cheers
VYT

[pah]

there is no reason to whinge about these things as its done so whats the use? me personally i just cant see the point in worrying

Can't agree with you there Smokey,

The NSW Labor Party is almost dead in the water. The NSW opposition has been saying it's just a revenue grab.

Ask a Victorian what it's like to be done for 106 kmh in a 100 zone because your cruise control let your car creep over the limit down a hill. We use cruise controls so we can shift our focus to the road where it should be.

All NSW members should send Barry O'Farrell a quick online response to let him know what we think of speed tolerance BELOW THE NATIONAL STANDARD - 10%

http://www.barryofarrell.com.au/

PAH

[Brendan]

Sent a real long email tonight to my local member
Now try it again by printing it out and signing it and mailing it.

Emails, electronic petitions etc are useless.

Fax or mail it.

[HEKYEH]

I'm yet to see proof that speed cameras and fines actually save lives and reduce our road toll.......

Anyone have any evidence of that....anywhere....?

[VX2VESS]

I'm yet to see proof that speed cameras and fines actually save lives and reduce our road toll.......

Anyone have any evidence of that....anywhere....?

officially the road toll is going down due to it.

nothing to do with safer cars of course

i like the bit in the Sunday paper, it proven that in victoria they reduce the road toll, but this year they have the most deaths recorded, lol. thats proof the state with the most speed cameras has the highest toll.

better get some more

[BEARWOOD]

Can't agree with you there Smokey,

The NSW Labor Party is almost dead in the water. The NSW opposition has been saying it's just a revenue grab.

Ask a Victorian what it's like to be done for 106 kmh in a 100 zone because your cruise control let your car creep over the limit down a hill. We use cruise controls so we can shift our focus to the road where it should be.

All NSW members should send Barry O'Farrell a quick online response to let him know what we think of speed tolerance BELOW THE NATIONAL STANDARD - 10%

http://www.barryofarrell.com.au/



PAH

I just sent Baz an online response but i'm going to do up a letter when i get a chance and send it to everyone and anyone that i can think of. This shit really bothers me!

[Knight Phlier]

officially the road toll is going down due to it.

nothing to do with safer cars of course

i like the bit in the Sunday paper, it proven that in victoria they reduce the road toll, but this year they have the most deaths recorded, lol. thats proof the state with the most speed cameras has the highest toll.

better get some more

I had thought better roads = less deaths...
But given this statistic - and given Vic has much better road surfaces then NSW (At least the ones i have frequented) then this theory is also questionable.

[Hi Octane]

Anyone know of a one lane hi way we can do a speed limit cruise on, In our stockers of course.

[SS Enforcer]

It's simple really if no one paid the fines and elected to take them to court, courts would get totally clogged up to the point where they would become unworkable. If the public refuse to accept a new law there isn't anything the govt can do about it.

Don't pay the fine and go to court instead.

cheers

[GODSMACK]

Id laugh at anyone who gets caught by one.. For those of you who saw them on the news, they stick out like a sore thumb... They have camera's/lasers etc stuck all over the roof...

The ACT ones are a little more subtle, sure there is a sign on top of the roof warning you that your speed has been checked, but all the fancy gear is in the back!! Still, you can see one from a mile away!!!

[dawkinsdisciple]

theres nothing to indicate them here in QLD until youre right next to them. if only we had the high vis signage you guys did re cameras ahead...

contact MP's all you want, they'll sight the revenue when they get in and won't say no. the best they'll do is scale back the publicity attached to it. roll back something earning the government millions in revenue? i hope your joking people. i'd be interested to see if victoria ever gets rid of the 4kmh limit despite increasing tolls - always the same. if it goes up, ratchet down harder, if it goes down, were doing a good job, we'll keep it up. likewise with the coppers disagreeing - disagree all you want, you're not the ones making the final call regarding new legislation and only one cop i've ever run into showed discretion and even then i still copped a fine and points...

SS offers the best suggestion - why hasn't the civil disobedience angle been tried? beacuse paying $150 is easier then going to court? organised en masse, it is something that would fairly overwhelm the capacity of an already pretty strained court system. best bet as far as i see

bitching on a forum makes you feel better, thats about the extent of it...

[mac06]

Let me see if I've got it right. Speedos are allowed to be up to 10% out, but always over-reading rather than under-reading? In other words at a real 60km/h your speedo reads 66km/h at 10% and in the Commodore at 3% your speedo reads 61.8km/h (62) when you're actually doing 60km/h. Then the RTA allows a 4km/h leeway which means you won't get fined if you are doing 65.8km/h up to 70km/h on your speedo. How do we find out how much our speedo is out if we don't have sat nav? Plus how much variance will there be for worn tyres? I suppose if we take it the speedo is correct even when we know it's not, then we'd be always erring on the side of caution.

[throttlehappy]

well i guess no one has to worry about tuffie getting caught, he plays nice all the time

[Vulture]

Article in the SMH about the issue. LINK (http://smh.drive.com.au/roads-and-traffic/speed-rules-make-money-but-not-safer-roads-20100710-104t2.html) It would be nice to see some journalists doing a more comprehensive expose of the swindle behind aggressive enforcement of low speed limits. The added danger of the constant glances down at the speedo is difficult to quantify but must add up over the national fleet. Driving in the country, it is not always practical to use the cruise control, hence the speedo image is burned into my retina and my eyes must be off the road for a total of many minutes per trip. Safety? :flipoff: BS. sadly the focus of driving nowdays is a constant battle to remain alert at mind-numbingly low speed limits whilst trying not to stray over these arbitrary numbers for the purpose of not losing one's licence. Shouldn't the focus be on driving safely?

[moconn20]

there is no reason to whinge about these things as its done so whats the use? me personally i just cant see the point in worrying

If you bothered to read the article its a proposal, its not "done"

[SEMPER FI]

Purely a revenue raiser, what a scam by the Gov't to fill it's coffer's !!

How about fixing the roads, it's like driving on third world country:flipoff: roads.

[VX2VESS]

Purely a revenue raiser, what a scam by the Gov't to fill it's coffer's !!

How about fixing the roads, it's like driving on third world country:flipoff: roads.

nah cost too much 1 mill per metre, ripoff..

anything that involves he gov't at any level is a rip off..schools etc are local centre got a new hall thing 9 million, not much bigger than a large house must be 8.5 million in palm offs there. need a gov't that doesn't pat 100 times what it should cost for anything

[dawkinsdisciple]

nah cost too much 1 mill per metre, ripoff..

anything that involves he gov't at any level is a rip off..schools etc are local centre got a new hall thing 9 million, not much bigger than a large house must be 8.5 million in palm offs there. need a gov't that doesn't pat 100 times what it should cost for anything

... which is why you should be very suspicious when the government resorts to any line for extra revenue raising - they've got a lot of extra fat to lose first... always be suspicious of your government, so many of them so filthy with lies...

this topic is a bang on perfect example.

[Avalanche]

This is the whole problem with road safety. They are never going to be interested in lowering the road toll, as there is no money in doing it right.
Tell me why Macquarie Bank is making a bid for the company that has the contract to supply the camera cars. Gee is there a percentage per fine that they are getting as a bonus for supplying the cars???
As if there is not a massive conflict of interest. I can feel the pollies rubbing their hands together already. If every cent went into driver training or better roads, most people wouldnt care. But it never will.
While ever there is a financial gain, the problem will not go away.

[King Nothing]

Fact 1 - ADR 18/02 states in section 18.5.1.1.2 that

"[Speedometers] indicate the actual vehicle speed, for all speeds above 40
km/h, to an accuracy of ± 10 per cent."

Which means that your speedo can read 10% either way. ADR 18/02 applies to all cars manufactured up to July 2006.

Fact 2 - ADR 18/03 applies to all cars from July 2006. Section 5.3 states;

"The speed indicated shall not be less than the true speed of the vehicle. At the test speeds specified in paragraph 5.2.5. above, there shall be the following relationship between the speed displayed (V1 ) and the true speed (V2).
0 ≤ (V1 - V2) ≤ 0.1 V2 + 4 km/h"


So if your car was made after July 2006, the speedo will not read slow, i.e. you don't have an excuse for speeding. If your car is pre-July 2006, then it can be out by up to 10% and still meet design requirements.

A copy of my letter sent to the roads minister, shadow roads minister, and my local member (who is labor). Feel free to copy/past/edit.



I am writing in regards to the story on the Sydney Morning Herald website
on the 11th of July 2010 regarding the NSW RTA considering lowering the
tolerance for speed limits to 4km/h.

Is the NSW RTA, or your office, aware of the Australian Design Rule
Vehicle Standard (Australian Design Rule 18/02 - Instrumentation) 2006
Legislative Instrument - F2006L02738? This regulation is applicable to all
vehicles manufactured up to June 2006, after which ADR 18/03 applies.

ADR 18/02 states the following in section 18.5.1.1.2.-

"[Speedometers] indicate the actual vehicle speed, for all speeds above 40
km/h, to an accuracy of ± 10 per cent."

How is it then, that the NSW RTA can expect a tolerance less than that the
vehicle was manufactured under? If a driver is travelling at an indicated
50 km/h, then under ADR 18/02 their vehicle may actually be travelling up
to 55 km/h and still meet requirements. Under the new tolerances reportedly
being considered by the NSW RTA and State Government, they would be
considered speeding and incur a penalty. Despite travelling at what they
understand is the speed limit.

Similarly, if a driver is doing what they believe is below the speed
limit, at an indicated 105 km/h in a 110 km/h zone, they may in fact be
travelling up to 115.5 km/hr and incur a penalty whilst the vehicle still
meets the ADR it was designed and manufactured under.

How then, is this reported proposal any more than a blatant cash grab from
NSW drivers, and how will it save lives? How can any penalties be
considered fair and reasonable when roadworthy cars will show displayed
speeds greater than the tolerance proposed?

I look forward to your reply

[pro-logic]

This may be a silly question, but what is the 'tolerance' now? Is it +10%?