Speeding penalty's in Victoria increase coming (again)

[Mercury Bullet]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

When im overtaking a caravan doing 90 in a 100 zone, im going to get round it and back into my lane as fast as possible. If that means doing 150 then so be it.
It's far safer for me to be doing that than to be overtaking at 105kmh spending in inordinate amount of time in the wrong lane.

That's where road trains are handy... I can get up to 190.

[FG50T]

The best thing you can own in Victoria is a radar and laser detector. I don't care how illegal it is, you don't realise how many times it can save or warn you and as far as I'm concerned - it has me not touching my phone and doing the speed limit more than it would without it.

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by FG50T

The best thing you can own in Victoria is a radar and laser detector. I don't care how illegal it is, you don't realise how many times it can save or warn you and as far as I'm concerned - it has me not touching my phone and doing the speed limit more than it would without it.

The problem with many detectors I've heard, is by the time they warn you of the radar, it's already too late.

[Ben73]

At least Vic is pretending to care.
Few years ago NSW dropped the amount of demerit points you get for speeding so they can get more revenue out of you before you lose your license.
You can now get 13 minor speeding fines before losing your licence. What was it before about 4 minor fines and you lose it?

[YarravalleyXR8]

what annoys me is the focus that speed is the only factor in crashes and fines & punishment is the only approach to reducing the road toll.

where is the education? where are the repairs to broken roads? Where are the enforcement of keep left unless overtaking? I know they wont educate us because it would cost money and we would demand changes to the road rules. They wont build better roads as that costs money and cops coudnt be bothered pulling over that a$$hat who thinks doing 95kmh in the right hand lane or those that speed up at overtaking lanes causing frustration while they are breaking the law.

Its BS that you can be pinged for being 3kmh over with speed cameras.

As someone said above its lazy policy

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

When im overtaking a caravan doing 90 in a 100 zone, im going to get round it and back into my lane as fast as possible. If that means doing 150 then so be it.
It's far safer for me to be doing that than to be overtaking at 105kmh spending in inordinate amount of time in the wrong lane.

A big problem when overtaking another car here in Victoria, is the car being overtaken often speeds up as soon as you pull out to overtake. So you are then compelled to put the foot down when committed to overtaking, otherwise the oncoming cars will arrive before you can get back into your lane. This is where a speeding infringement if detected becomes absurd. And there is no leniency for this situation. Go figure.

[Adamz Ghia]

If you’ve lost your licence chances are you’ve been driving like a moron for a while, you deserve what you get. It’s not like they’ve jacked up fines for going one or two clicks over. Driving between Geelong and Melbourne every day you see some unreal things on the road, these people deserve everything coming their way.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Mercury Bullet

That's where road trains are handy... I can get up to 190.

Mercury, Your starting to sound like one of those Monfort lane stories I keep hearing from the U.S.

[Pooka]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

When im overtaking a caravan doing 90 in a 100 zone, im going to get round it and back into my lane as fast as possible. If that means doing 150 then so be it.
It's far safer for me to be doing that than to be overtaking at 105kmh spending in inordinate amount of time in the wrong lane.

150km/h on the wrong side of the road, just because you have to drive 10km/h below the posted limit for a bit!??? I guess we will see you on the news soon enough, dead, or have killed another innocent driver because of your impatience.

[Express]

Originally Posted by Uncle Doddy

150km/h on the wrong side of the road, just because you have to drive 10km/h below the posted limit for a bit!??? I guess we will see you on the news soon enough, dead, or have killed another innocent driver because of your impatience.

I read the context of his post as being the need to speed up to quickly pass a vehicle when overtaking to reduce the lingering time for safety sake more than just a straight out lets go into orbit approach.

Most modern cars in the hands of a reasonable driver should be able to safely quickly increase speed for this purpose otherwise it shouldn’t be on the road to start with.

I’m not advocating speeding but I do believe in a common sense approach to using the vehicle’s capable power where the government has taken the extreme other side of ‘speed kills’ which does at times appear to be revenue raising as much as anything while paying lesser attention to other distracting activities during driving that contribute to accidents.



.

[ford71V8]

I'll take my chances and speed past the slower car/caravan.
Sitting beside them for minutes at 102km/h is far more unsafe than a handful of seconds at speed.
Nobody can argue that sitting in the wrong lane for more time than needed is safe

[FoxtrotGolfXray 5.0]

Originally Posted by Express

I read the context of his post as being the need to speed up to quickly pass a vehicle when overtaking to reduce the lingering time for safety sake more than just a straight out lets go into orbit approach.

Most modern cars in the hands of a reasonable driver should be able to safely quickly increase speed for this purpose otherwise it shouldn’t be on the road to start with.

I’m not advocating speeding but I do believe in a common sense approach to using the vehicle’s capable power where the government has taken the extreme other side of ‘speed kills’ which does at times appear to be revenue raising as much as anything while paying lesser attention to other distracting activities during driving that contribute to accidents.



.

Of course, the flip side to that argument is that, if the speed gap between the slower car and the speed limit is small, such that it would be unsafe to overtake within the posted speed limit, then don't overtake and wait until such time as it is safe to do so.

There really is no excuse for exceeding the posted speed limit by that much. Not even in the name of 'safety'.

[BENT_8]

You know what i love about the whole excuses for speeding idea, people trott out exaggerated examples for why they should be able to.

Lets consider the caravan doing 90km/hr in the 110 zone.
A caravan travelling at 90km/hr will travel 1.5km in 60 seconds, or 150m in 6 seconds.
A car travelling at 110km/hr will travel 1.84km in 60 seconds or 184m in 6 seconds, a difference of 34 meters for every 6 seconds of travel.
So how much time does it take to overtake a vehicle moving 34m/6seconds slower than you?

Alot of this has to do with how you approach the situation, if you sit right up the vans **** before you overtake you need to factor in the time it takes to accelerate up to 110 from 90, if you're sitting back 50m behind them you will already have that speed increase made before you pull out, so with that in mind, using the latter approach, how much time would you need to spend on the wrong side of the road to pass a vehicle you're travelling at 34m/6s faster than.

You pull out 20m behind the vans rear, pass the 15m of combined tow vehicle and van and pull in 40m in front, a total of 75m is all that you must cover more than the vehicle you are passing.
And how long does it take to cover that additional 75m over the slower moving vehicle...13 seconds.

In that 13 seconds at 110 you will have travelled 400m and the van at 90 will have travelled 325m.

If you pull out to pass a van doing 90 in a 110 zone and you havent allowed 13 seconds of safe passage to make the pass within the limit, it says more about you the driver than the speed limit or reprocussions.

[GO FURTHER]

I love having a car infront of me on the highway doing my speed...
They become my radar shield.

[marty351]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

I love having a car infront of me on the highway doing my speed...
They become my radar shield.

And an effective bumper bar.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Uncle Doddy

150km/h on the wrong side of the road, just because you have to drive 10km/h below the posted limit for a bit!??? I guess we will see you on the news soon enough, dead, or have killed another innocent driver because of your impatience.

Or the inconsiderate caravanner could just pull over and let faster traffic banking up behind pass - but no lets blame the person doing the overtake for the dangerous situation.

You know how many times I've seen this happen? None because its not illegal to be an inconsiderate **** so mr and mrs caravan do 70 in a 100 zone while 25 cars bank up behind and have to leap frog each other to get past - exactly like this:



Theres maybe 4 or 5 opportunities to overtake safely in 30km of that road, as soon as someone does the old overtake the car doing 75 at 80km/h trick and takes up the whole overtaking lane you're ****ed.

[solarite_guy]

LOL, I shouldn't laugh because of the frustration levels, but this all brings back some memories which were frustrating at the time, but a little funny now.

Then, it was an "old man in a hat", chomping and puffing a cigar, going 20 or 30 under in the fast lane, in his metallic brown Buick with tan interior and turn indicator blinking endlessly off into the grass.

That was it 9 times out of 10.

[Express]

Originally Posted by psychobimbo

Of course, the flip side to that argument is that, if the speed gap between the slower car and the speed limit is small, such that it would be unsafe to overtake within the posted speed limit, then don't overtake and wait until such time as it is safe to do so.

There really is no excuse for exceeding the posted speed limit by that much. Not even in the name of 'safety'.

Sure you need to exercise common sense and I’m not condoning doing 150km/h to overtake.

Even though the figure quoted is extreme, I only read XR Martin’s post as making a point that exceeding the speed limit on some occasions isn’t instant death to all members of the public within a 100 mile radius as the government would like us to believe.

150km/h still can be save for some vehicles and their drivers but in reality it’s unnecessary and is deserving of punishment.

As others have already pointed out, I see courtesy as being the key, I grew up in the bush and in the old days if you couldn’t keep up with the flow of traffic you pulled over or partly to the side at the next convenient clearing and let the traffic behind you pass.

Simple really and everyone outside of the truly intolerant are happy and in return should give you a friendly wave of appreciation.

Maybe the government should start airing ads that push courtesy as a part of their safety initiative and stop just relying on scare tactics and fines to get the message across as that on their own doesn't seem to be working.



.

[arronm]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

You know what i love about the whole excuses for speeding idea, people trott out exaggerated examples for why they should be able to.

Lets consider the caravan doing 90km/hr in the 110 zone.
A caravan travelling at 90km/hr will travel 1.5km in 60 seconds, or 150m in 6 seconds.
A car travelling at 110km/hr will travel 1.84km in 60 seconds or 184m in 6 seconds, a difference of 34 meters for every 6 seconds of travel.
So how much time does it take to overtake a vehicle moving 34m/6seconds slower than you?

Alot of this has to do with how you approach the situation, if you sit right up the vans **** before you overtake you need to factor in the time it takes to accelerate up to 110 from 90, if you're sitting back 50m behind them you will already have that speed increase made before you pull out, so with that in mind, using the latter approach, how much time would you need to spend on the wrong side of the road to pass a vehicle you're travelling at 34m/6s faster than.

You pull out 20m behind the vans rear, pass the 15m of combined tow vehicle and van and pull in 40m in front, a total of 75m is all that you must cover more than the vehicle you are passing.
And how long does it take to cover that additional 75m over the slower moving vehicle...13 seconds.

In that 13 seconds at 110 you will have travelled 400m and the van at 90 will have travelled 325m.

If you pull out to pass a van doing 90 in a 110 zone and you havent allowed 13 seconds of safe passage to make the pass within the limit, it says more about you the driver than the speed limit or reprocussions.

There is NO way iam staying on the wrong side of the road for 13 seconds. Look at your watch and count 13 seconds , it's a LONG time.

When I overtake I floor it, get past and pull back in then straight back to speed limit.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Y and pull in 40m in front,

Talk about exaggerations. Most people pull back in about 5m in front of the car they over take. That saves a few seconds.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by arronm

There is NO way iam staying on the wrong side of the road for 13 seconds. Look at your watch and count 13 seconds , it's a LONG time.

When I overtake I floor it, get past and pull back in then straight back to speed limit.

Lol, is that what you took out of it

The point is, people are trying to justify excessive speed because they dont want to spend anything up to 'minutes' on the wrong side of the road, i was simply making a mathematical equation which proves that without breaking the 110km/hr speed limit it takes no longer than a fraction of what they are trying to suggest.
If you increase your overtaking speed by another 5-10k it brings the time down even further, if you cant make a safe overtake manouvre in around 10 seconds you are taking unnecessary risks.
You certainly dont need to be doing 130, 140, 150km/hr to get the job done safely and if you do then you are an idiot and deserve what you get.

Capiche?

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Talk about exaggerations. Most people pull back in about 5m in front of the car they over take. That saves a few seconds.

Sorry, i was talking about people with common sense and courtesy at play, but you are quite correct, the less room you give the person you've just passed, the less time you are on the wrong side of the road.
Combining lets say 5k over the posted 110 limit and only 40-45m in total to make up, you'll be back on the right side of the road in around 10 seconds and i say again, if you cant make a safe pass at 115 in 10 seconds you are taking unnecessary risk.

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by roKWiz

Mercury, Your starting to sound like one of those Monfort lane stories I keep hearing from the U.S.

Trust me, he's worse!

[FoxtrotGolfXray 5.0]

Originally Posted by Express

Sure you need to exercise common sense and I’m not condoning doing 150km/h to overtake.

Even though the figure quoted is extreme, I only read XR Martin’s post as making a point that exceeding the speed limit on some occasions isn’t instant death to all members of the public within a 100 mile radius as the government would like us to believe.

150km/h still can be save for some vehicles and their drivers but in reality it’s unnecessary and is deserving of punishment.

As others have already pointed out, I see courtesy as being the key, I grew up in the bush and in the old days if you couldn’t keep up with the flow of traffic you pulled over or partly to the side at the next convenient clearing and let the traffic behind you pass.

Simple really and everyone outside of the truly intolerant are happy and in return should give you a friendly wave of appreciation.

Maybe the government should start airing ads that push courtesy as a part of their safety initiative and stop just relying on scare tactics and fines to get the message across as that on their own doesn't seem to be working.



.

Hey Express, all good, I should have pointed out that I wasn't specifically replying to your post, more so the theory that it is justified to speed when overtaking because it makes it safer.

Agree tho, courtesy is something that should be practiced by all road users.

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Talk about exaggerations. Most people pull back in about 5m in front of the car they over take. That saves a few seconds.

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Sorry, i was talking about people with common sense and courtesy at play, but you are quite correct, the less room you give the person you've just passed, the less time you are on the wrong side of the road.
...

Are you serious? So is that why drivers these days are cutting back in only around one car length in front of me after having just been overtaken?

Not courteous at all to the overtaken car driver trying to maintain at least a three car distance from the vehicle in front. Especially if they have adaptive cruise control which will cause it to hit the brakes only because of the thoughtlessness of the overtaking driver cutting in front of them.

Maybe that's why I see cars lately speeding up as soon as they see they are about to be overtaken, and the amount of aggro on the roads that I've never seen before in over 45 years of driving.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Not courteous at all to the overtaken car driver trying to maintain at least a three car distance from the vehicle in front. Especially if they have adaptive cruise control which will cause it to hit the brakes only because of the thoughtlessness of the overtaking driver cutting in front of them.

Or the fool on the freeway that cuts in front of my truck only to take the next exit. Sometimes so tempted to try the pit manoeuvre.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Are you serious? So is that why drivers these days are cutting back in only around one car length in front of me after having just been overtaken?

Not courteous at all to the overtaken car driver trying to maintain at least a three car distance from the vehicle in front. Especially if they have adaptive cruise control which will cause it to hit the brakes only because of the thoughtlessness of the overtaking driver cutting in front of them.

Maybe that's why I see cars lately speeding up as soon as they see they are about to be overtaken, and the amount of aggro on the roads that I've never seen before in over 45 years of driving.

No, im not serious, i was saying that he was quite correct that by cutting back in early he would indeed reduce his time on the wrong side of the road, that is fact.
Is it smart practice or curteous, no, but not many drive with those factors at play anymore.

Perhaps if you read my first post in the thread you'll see where i suggest 40m is more appropriate.

[GO FURTHER]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Maybe that's why I see cars lately speeding up as soon as they see they are about to be overtaken, and the amount of aggro on the roads that I've never seen before in over 45 years of driving.

Obviously, the increased traffic on our roads, especially in Victoria over recent years and the slower commute times have added to driver frustration and the increasing road rage.

However, what I also believe is contributing to this aggresive behaviour, is that more people are driving SUV's and utes today than sedans.

When people are 'elevated' and are in a higher driving position than a sedan, they feel slightly more invincible and have more 'Dutch' courage and bravado.

However, most people are cowards by nature, take away the 'metal armour' that surrounds them and they become as weak as p*ss.

Put those same people on foot in a crowd on the footpath and there is much less aggressiveness.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by GO FURTHER

Obviously, the increased traffic on our roads, especially in Victoria over recent years and the slower commute times have added to driver frustration and the increasing road rage.

However, most people are cowards by nature, take away the 'metal armour' that surrounds them and they become as weak as p*ss.

Put those same people on foot in a crowd on the footpath and there is much less aggressiveness.

Nupe, after 35 years of cycling all over Oz both MTB and road, those same people are just as aggro on the bike paths, trails and cycle lanes.
(walking or cycling that is)

[Silver Ghia]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

No, im not serious, i was saying that he was quite correct that by cutting back in early he would indeed reduce his time on the wrong side of the road, that is fact.
Is it smart practice or curteous, no, but not many drive with those factors at play anymore.

Perhaps if you read my first post in the thread you'll see where i suggest 40m is more appropriate.

So why are you suggesting this practice then, when you then say its not smart practice or courteous?

And I shouldn't have to go back to your first post in this thread to recall what you wrote back then to piece together what you're really trying to say.