New SA country road speed limits - Reminder

Submitted: Monday, Dec 19, 2011 at 12:37

ThreadID: 90724 Views:3266 Replies:1 FollowUps:10

This Thread has been Archived

Charlie B2

Hi folks,

The Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure released the following, today:

"Road users are reminded about the reduced 100km/h speed limit now in force on 45 rural road sections within a 100 kilometre radius of Adelaide and on Yorke Peninsula.

With school holidays starting today road users travelling to holiday destinations in the coming weeks are urged to familiarise themselves with the reduced speed limit in that inner circle regional road network.

The action has been taken because over the past five years almost one fifth of all fatal and serious injury crashes in South Australia occurred within a 100 kilometre radius outside of metropolitan Adelaide.

Records show there were 290 casualty crashes recorded on 52 roads identified for a speed limit reduction in the five year period (2006-2010). These crashes resulted in 22 fatalities and 121 serious injuries.

Analysis of this crash data indicates that if the speed limit on all these rural roads is reduced to 100 km/h, there’s the potential for 12 less casualty crashes each year.

In July 2003, speed limits on 1100 kilometres of rural roads in South Australia were reduced to 100 km/h, resulting in 20 per cent fewer casualty crashes on those roads.

The State Government is continuing to negotiate with councils on the other seven local government road sections within 100 kilometres of Adelaide and on Yorke Peninsula, which have also been identified for the speed limit reduction.

So far this year the road toll is showing an improvement on last year’s figures, but as we enter a high-risk period, there’s no room for complacency.

One death or serious injury on our roads is one too many.

The speed limit reductions are part of the Road Safety Strategy 2020 – Towards Zero Together Action Plan released last month, which has a target of reducing the road toll by at least 30 percent - to less than 80 fatalities and 800 serious injuries by the end of the decade.

Further information and a list of the roads affected by the speed limit changes available on sa.gov.au/roadsafety"

Just hope this saves your hip pocket, if not a life.

Regards,

Charlie

Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator Share

Reply By: Fab72 - Monday, Dec 19, 2011 at 14:29

Monday, Dec 19, 2011 at 14:29

At the risk of sounding all political Charlie, and I understand that the above is information only and not your personal opinion, but I believe the whole speed reduction has come about out of necessity due to that lack of proper road maintenance.

The road between Yacka and Gladstone (for example) is a death trap. Even 100 is too fast in some sections of that road. Where as the road between Port Wakefield and Kulpara is actually pretty good these days (not so 10 years back).

Lower speeds can lead to fatigue and complacency. So to can our cars. They're super quiet, have comfortable seats, allow very limited fresh air into the cabin when the Recirc function is selected and have so many gadgets that driver feedback is minimal.

The cars won't change so why not fix the roads and allow people to get to where they are going quicker.

Fab.

AnswerID: 472901

Follow Up By: Brian Purdue - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 08:36

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 08:36

Why not fly. That is quicker. Telephone is almost instant. Fab, many people travel to see the country-side. I find 85 kph is a nice speed to travel and if you see something worthwhile you can stop in a reasonable distance to walk back and have a look. I am flying to Adelaide from Perth in early February because I have an urgent appointment there. If I was to be driving it would take me about 10 days if I hurried. If you want to go somewhere take your time and enjoy the trip - that is what life is all about.
Brian

FollowupID: 747767

Follow Up By: Fab72 - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:06

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:06

My in laws live in Wallaroo. There is no airport there or anywhere near there for that matter, and we've travelled that road so many times over the last 17 years, there is nothing worth stopping for.

Flying in principle is good if (A) there is an airport, and (B) you don't need your car once you get there.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a big advocate of taking ones times when on holidays, but when travelling for necessity, there's nothing worse than dragging it out for longer than it needs to.

Fab.

FollowupID: 747779

Follow Up By: get outmore - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 13:18

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 13:18

ah for the good old days in south australia. high way 1 was lucky to be 2/3 the width it is now - no passing bays and very poor shoulders if you went off onto the dirt 9actually a very common cause of accident back then) you had to very carefully negotiate back on off of the very thin rubble strewn verge with a 4 inch rise for the bituman.

FollowupID: 747781

Follow Up By: Charlie B2 - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 13:44

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 13:44

Hi Fab & Brian,

Having just sat through a presentation on the South Australian Government's "Towards Zero Together" - "Road Safety Action Plan 2011-2012" and "South Australia's Road Safety Strategy 2020", this morning, I have some sympathy for both viewpoints.

Locals who have no alternative to using these roads don't need (or want) to sightsee as they travel - they've already been there, done that, often hundreds of times - while many interstate visitors, who may elect to fly - as for your urgent appointment, Brian, - are equally anxious to reach a particular destination without unnecessary delay or impediment. Having flown into Adelaide Airport, though, if you needed to head to Wallaroo for that same appointment, you'd have precious little choice regarding which road you could take to get there.

Equally, there are always SA and interstate visitors who DO want to take their time when travelling, whether towing a caravan/camper trailer or "bareback" and I certainly don't have any problem with that, and neither should anyone else.

I have, quite deliberately, not indicated my own view on these changes - as Fab said, my post was for information only and it is up to each of us, and the depth of our respective pockets, to make his/her own decisions regarding compliance. That's not to say I don't have an opinion - it's just not relevant here.

However, I do feel that 240kmh is far too fast on a road, away from the more controlled conditions of the racetrack.

Keep the comments coming.

Regards,

Charlie

FollowupID: 747783

Follow Up By: Fab72 - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 15:25

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 15:25

Jeepers Charlie,
Do I know you?
The reason I ask is that in my line of work, I used to be involved with Engineering evaluations of new (pilot) vehicles. Your 240kmph comment was bang on. One test trip I was on involved high speed work where we often hit the 245kmph mark for extended periods in the NT - before the 130kmph limit came in. Did we get fatigued? No. We covered the mandated (by employer) 500km daily limit in no time at all.

However, I also moonlight on weekends as a truck driver through the Mid-North. So I've experienced first hand extended periods at 100kmph - well before the new changes were implemented. In fact, sometimes even 80-90kmph if heading into a strong head wind.

My opinion is that the greatest danger is not so much the actual speed, but the speed differential bewteen vehicles travelling in the same direction. This is not an easy problem to address. It leads to impatience resulting in risks being taken to overtake slow vehicles such as trucks, caravans, scooters etc or even high speed rear enders when Granny is driving on the highway at 40kmph (I've seen plenty of these in my time).

The solution.... and I get back to my original comment. Fix the roads. Now this doesn't ultimatley mean make auto bahns with 200kmph capable roads, it could be as simple as more over taking lanes and slow vehicle turn outs (such as in the Adelaide to Melbourne road). Televised awareness for drivers to use these and fines for failing to do so. Why not even extend the SAFE T CAM technology to cars, whereby tracking elapsed time between fixed postions using number plate recognition.

The 100kmph reduction is a knee jerk reaction and only a countermeasure. The root cause and solution still needs to be looked at.

I'm loving this discussion, so please...anyone/everyone, disagree, agree or put forward your opinions too. I'd love to hear from people in the NT and Vic. Obviously one has been through a significant speed enforcement but still maintains a higher allowable limit, and the other has been living with 100kmph for a great number of years now.

Fab.

FollowupID: 747789

Follow Up By: Brian Purdue - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 18:28

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 18:28

TWO HUNDRED AND FORTY KILOMETRES AN HOUR? What, pray, were you driving? My Mercedes is electronically governed at the factory to 214 kph and I have never exceeded 175 kph and that was for a "try-out" on the long straights betweenCarnarvon and Northampton. It was TERRIFYING!!!!! Stock crosses the roads, tyres blow and another fatality is recorded. Anyone who exceeds 120 kph anywhere (except in a properly prepared and approved "race car' on a race circuit) is a fool and deserves whatever happens to them.

FollowupID: 747805

Follow Up By: Shaker - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 19:03

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 19:03

It is often the people that regularly travel well known roads that have the accidents, as they tend to get blasé about it & drop their guards.

FollowupID: 747810

Follow Up By: Fab72 - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 20:26

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 20:26

Yeah I know Brian, and I sure as hell don't condone it either. Hind sight is a wonderful thing and I would refuse to do it these days even if my job depended on it. I'll cop the fool comment because I agree it is well deserved.

I guess one thing it taught me was that there are "straight off the show room floor" cars out there that are capable of these speeds. Despite all my high speed driver training, I still look back and think what a Richard Head I was.

Never again.....but 100kmph? I still think it's a cop out for not fixing the roads.

Fab.

FollowupID: 747821

Follow Up By: Brian Purdue - Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 20:57

Tuesday, Dec 20, 2011 at 20:57

My final post, Fab. I was told many years ago (I am 79) that the most important part of the car is the nut that holds the steering wheel. Merry Christmas to you and happy and safe motoring.

FollowupID: 747826