Little Things You Hate

[Elbo]

S. and others are exactly right about the arbitrary nature of speed limits. And speed limits have more effects that we don't often consider. A friend who lives in the Northern Territory was telling me about the effects he has seen since the new (2006) 130km/h limit was introduced. Now it takes twice as much time and distance to be able to pass a road train, so people are forced into dangerous situations. It takes longer to get where you are going so fatigue becomes more of a problem, and because people want to get where they are going, they choose to continue to drive into the night, battling fatigue and increasing the chances of hitting an animal or veering off the road. He said, in the past, most people would do about 150-170km/h comfortably and get to where they needed to be in good time and arrive fresh not fatigued.

And to those who still can't see how illogical it is that the tolerance for government regulated speed cameras is less than the tolerance for error of many government regulated speedometer's out there, your foolishness is further proved by the fact that even after having this pointed out to you, you still defend the government's failure in this area by accepting the responsibility of calibrating your own, already regulated speedometer, so that the end result is you practically flogging yourself whilst repeating "the government can never be wrong."

 

[MTB Wanabe]

S. and others are exactly right about the arbitrary nature of speed limits. And speed limits have more effects that we don't often consider. A friend who lives in the Northern Territory was telling me about the effects he has seen since the new (2006) 130km/h limit was introduced. Now it takes twice as much time and distance to be able to pass a road train, so people are forced into dangerous situations. It takes longer to get where you are going so fatigue becomes more of a problem, and because people want to get where they are going, they choose to continue to drive into the night, battling fatigue and increasing the chances of hitting an animal or veering off the road. He said, in the past, most people would do about 150-170km/h comfortably and get to where they needed to be in good time and arrive fresh not fatigued.

In some cases a speed limit is inappropriate, such as in the NT, and the registered road toll actually went up when that speed limit was introduced, some suggested this was circumstantial, you be the judge. But speed limits are there for a reason and even when there is a safety reason for taking it slowly such as the areas around schools, people are still caught substantially exceeding the limits here also. People cannot help themselves.

And to those who still can't see how illogical it is that the tolerance for government regulated speed cameras is less than the tolerance for error of many government regulated speedometer's out there, your foolishness is further proved by the fact that even after having this pointed out to you, you still defend the government's failure in this area by accepting the responsibility of calibrating your own, already regulated speedometer, so that the end result is you practically flogging yourself whilst repeating "the government can never be wrong."

But what of a second hand car, do you know whether or not the indicated speed shown is correct? Did the previous owner change something on the vehicle and now the speedo is reading in such a manner which would set off a speed camera? The vehicle was manufactured according to the regulations but whose responsibility is it now that you are caught speeding? Don't you think it is in your own best interests to be aware of the speed you are actually doing?

Until we stop funding the speed cameras, eg stop exceeding the speed limit, we will see more of them. Personally, I would rather see more cops on the road as that would be more effective at slowing people down but speed cameras are not for that, we all know they are for revenue raising. If they stop raising revenue then they will be removed from service. Yes I accept they are there but I don't fund their existence.

I am happy to be foolish in your mind but I consider not knowing what the actual speed I am doing as ignorance as I am aware there could be an error. I never said the government is right, what I am saying is don't rely on the government regulations to protect you as they will shaft you as quick as look at you. Inform yourself and you will possibly save yourself a lot of heartache.

 

[hach_bee]

Blatant immaturity.

 

[wombat]

Which is why now, I believe, by ADR, a speedo can read faster but not slower than you are actually going. So theoretically you should never be caught speeding if you are at or below the prescribed limit.

I think you missed the point Steve made about that law not being retrospective (due in no small part to the fact that retrospective design is inherently difficult). There are plenty of cars on the road which were produced before the ADR was adjusted, and as such could be reading as much as 10% lower than the actual speed, without being in breach of any rule that was in place when they were manufactured.

It's all well and good to ask people to be responsible for their own actions, but asking them to do so without the proper tools is like setting a 0.1mm tolerance on a part and then sacking your toolmaker because he wasn't accurate enough with the dodgy plastic ruler that you got him from the $2 shop.

 

[S.]

My opinion is, that it indicates a speed, how accurate it is to how fast you are actually going is what the operator should determine.

Impractical. Most people have not even the faintest idea of this, and want to be able to purchase a car the gubmint has deemed roadworthy and drive it on the road.

Simple, so they can travel as fast as they are legally allowed to or can get away with.

I also work with calibrated pieces of equipment, Eddy Current test instruments, Ultrasonic Flaw Detectors, X-Ray generators, etc, so what is your point?
As you are a test engineer at a NATA laboratory you should also be aware of how to deal with an item which is capable of giving accurate repeatable results that is unable to be recalibrated but is required to give an accurate result of a test, which is to determine the error and apply the error when and where required.

You seem to be unaware of the difference between accuracy and precision. If an instrument, including its signal generation and its readout are not sufficiently precise (not showing significant drift like vehicle speedos can), you will not be able to obtain an accurate error - especially when you aren't able to constantly monitor the readout without distraction, in an environment where the input parameters are required to be constantly changing. Everything you've put forward about here is entirely unrealistic for the general population - hell if two reasonably well qualified and experienced people can't even agree on this then how are the general public expected to understand what's going on?

How do you know no one does it and blindly accepts that their vehicle is accurate in all facets of it's operation? I for one do not.

I would suggest that you are the exception rather than the rule.

They expect you to obey the road rules and not exceeding the speed limit is one of the rules. How close you go to this limit is determined by the accuracy of your speedo. You exceed this limit due to not knowing the actual error of your speedo then that is your fault not the regulator.

Which is why now, I believe, by ADR, a speedo can read faster but not slower than you are actually going. So theoretically you should never be caught speeding if you are at or below the prescribed limit.

Yep, if your car was manufactured after June 2006. Mine was made 14 years earlier.

Yes, Victoria enforce their rules to the absolute extreme. However, if you want to avoid getting booked in Vic, don't travel at the speed limit, travel at 5kph below the posted limit, simple really. Their real motivation is possibly to raise revenue, so what, don't like it, lobby your local minister to change the limit.

For the record, I have only ever been booked speeding twice in 17 years of driving. The speedo in my Subaru Liberty reads +8% error. My first car was in miles per hour, so guess what, I had to work out what the kph equivalent speed was in mph. No regulatory body told me I had to do this but because I didn't want to get booked I went and found out the accuracy of my speedo and converted it to kph. If you are not smart enough to work it out then ask someone that is.

My point is if you get done for speeding don't blame your equipment and know what your equipment is doing.

I've done my share of lobbying on this topic actually (very out of character for me given my general disdain for protesting students/hippies), but given the generally tightarse nature of the country, I'm planning to simply go somewhere I like better instead of trying to change the minds of the rest of the country, though I do enjoy having a good whinge in the meantime

In all honesty, the technicalities of speedos don't bother me because at least 95% of cars on the road read a higher-than-actual speed, they're just a technically valid argument against the ridiculously extreme tolerances on the limits here in Vic. The most relevant points are nothing to do with technical details (see previous posts) and everything to do with the fact that there are a million factors involved in road safety and trying to peg everything on just one easily-policeable aspect of it is so clearly criminalising the entire population that it's retarded. If exceeding the already extremely conservative speed limits was even one tenth as dangerous as the government here pretends it is, the road toll per capita in pretty well all of Europe would be about 10 times what ours is... which it isn't.

 

[moorey]

Blatant immaturity.

Your mum is

 

[knob scortcher]

i hate it when im riding at night and a small moth flys into my eye. its stings like all f!@* and makes my eye water.:sorrow:

 

[Mattydv]

I've just finished reading a novel where the wrongs in the story were not righted, but in fact more wrong in conclusion than at the start. Additional to this, a character which you connected with, and wanted to live happily ever after, was brutally murdered and raped.

I always say I wish the bad guy would win once every now and then, but now it's happened I just feel so...dirty.

 

['Ross]

Blatant immaturity.

Story of your life.

 

[hach_bee]

Story of your life.

Exhibit C.

 

[rabatt]

I've just finished reading a novel where the wrongs in the story were not righted, but in fact more wrong in conclusion than at the start. Additional to this, a character which you connected with, and wanted to live happily ever after, was brutally murdered and raped.

I always say I wish the bad guy would win once every now and then, but now it's happened I just feel so...dirty.

I hate how pretty much every movie/book it looks like the bad guy will win but they don't. other then horror movies mayb.

its so predictable.

 

[g-fish]

Trifle. It's the most anti-climatic dessert. Jelly, cake and fruit bonded together by a plethora of whipped cream sounds like it would be the best thing since sliced bread, but everytime I eat this demon dessert I am always let down. Even my own mothers cooking abililty cannot save the trifle.

 

[moorey]

Trifle. It's the most anti-climatic dessert. Jelly, cake and fruit bonded together by a plethora of whipped cream sounds like it would be the best thing since sliced bread, but everytime I eat this demon dessert I am always let down. Even my own mothers cooking abililty cannot save the trifle.

Your mums cooking bites. Trifle rocks. Up the custard factor.

 

[rone]

Your mums cooking bites. Trifle rocks. Up the custard factor.

Agreed. I would be half the man I am today without my mums trifle as a kid. Er, hang on...

 

[cam-o]

Your mums cooking bites. Trifle rocks. Up the custard factor.

+1 - A good trifle owns.
Had an epic Pav at Christmas too, that was a pretty damn fine dessert.

 

[PINT of Stella. mate!]

+1 - A good trifle owns.
Had an epic Pav at Christmas too, that was a pretty damn fine dessert.

Ahh trifle, the mere mention of it brings back memories of countless disappointing birthday parties where it would often be served up with shitty, dry cake and orange cordial that's so diluted you could sell it as a fancy mineral water!

It's the dessert that is the living embodiment of the disparity between the mouth-watering photos in fast-food restaurant menus and the woeful tasteless crap that actually gets served up. On the ladder of desserts, I'd probably put it one rung above Pavlova but one rung below a kick in the knackers!

-1 for trifle

 

[moorey]

That's a trifle harsh of you, mate:clap2:

 

[cressa]

Officer Haveachat making small talk about my bike in the back and riding while at the same time handing me a $300 fine for driving while talking on my hand held device.

I'm sure you are a nice guy, but you are off my Christmas card list bud.

 

[Bjorn]

Soak dry, stale cake in spirits before making trifle. It's still disappointing but at least you don't care.

 

[g-fish]

Your mums cooking bites. Trifle rocks. Up the custard factor.

woah, woah, woah. You're talking about the woman who was responsible for raising a child who won a farkin iron chef round. Ease up,

For the record, pav kicks ass. But the cream to pavalova ratio must be at least 5:1