Australia, New Zealand & the South Pacific - Northern Territory - Axing of Unlimited Speeds

Unlimited speeds in NT axed
The Age | Thursday 2 NOV 2006

For drivers on Northern Territory roads, the days of hitting the accelerator and forgetting the speedometer are over.

Clare Martin's Labor government today announced it would introduce a 110kph speed limit on all open roads, following the release of damning statistics by an expert taskforce.

The NT is the only place in Australia, and one of the few places left in the world, which has no speed limits and no demerit points, introduced in most Australian states in 1969.

But now the territory will toe the line.

Along with speed limits, the government will introduce a demerit system, heftier fines, a gradual roll-out of red light cameras and a greater police presence.

(Article continues... (http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/unlimited-speeds-in-nt-axed/2006/11/02/1162339979281.html))

And, if the experience of the UK is anything to go by, we can all sit back and watch accident rates stay exactly where they are at the moment.

It's actually probably quite a sensible option and highlights the stupidity of road rules in Australia. Roads in the NT are never much more than paved country roads which are arbitrarily described as highways and on which you can choose your speed. But then on highways which could easily take higher speeds drivers are limited to an insane 110 or even lower, IME driving faster keeps you more alert.

This change is pretty silly for the outback but the good news is that they would have to add a whole lot of policeman, way more than fines would subsidize, to cover the roads in NT.

The bad news is that they probably will focus on the Stuart highway (which connects Darwin with Alice Springs) and the road from Darwin to Kakadu, which probably are the main highways that any tourist driving in the NT will spend time on.

Four main highways - the Stuart, Arnhem, Barkly and Victoria - will have limits of 130kph.

On holiday long weekends etc the road toll for fatal motor vehicle accidents the Northern Territory is invariably less than five (and that's during the Xmas holdiay period) and yet the other States with a maximum freeway speed of 110kph often has between 20 and 30 fatalities over that same period.

I appreciate that the population is greater in the other States, and that speed & alcohol contribute to the majority of fatal accidents, but with the NT having an open speed limit (and having less fatalities) maybe it should remain as is.

I for one am not happy about this. More rules in this country is the last thing we need. I will be very supprised if this helps the road toll.

If you’re interested in the statistics of speed the US has a long history of looking at this. In the 1970's the federal government instituted the 55 mph maximum speed limit on all federally funded roads and highways (except Montana which had no speed limit on many highways though now it is inline with the rest of the states). The campaign was called "55 Saves Lives" and was introduced to save both lives and gas.

After about 5 years of this campaign the feds tossed it in the trash heap with a lot of other good intentions. It turns out that 55 didn't save any lives and in fact may be responsible for many deaths. What was learned is that speed doesn't kill, rather it is speed variance that kills. If you had 90% of drivers traveling within +-5 of 55 and 10% going +10 mph or greater more accidents would result. This data was corrected for historical accident prone areas, population growth, car safety improvements and several other variables.

I found the info more then plausible and rather enlightening and obviously so did our government legislators. The study is more then 25 years old now but it might be possible to find in on the web somewhere.

Most US speed limits outside of cities and metro areas are 65 or 70 mph with a few at 75. These seem to be rates that most feel comfortable driving at and will minimize speed variance.

Good luck with the new changes in the NT.

Personally I feel 110 is bit too tight... considering the enforcement in Australia.

In US, the tolerance is rather high. Even if the speedlimit is 65-70mph, you can
easily exceed the limit by 10-15Mph without risking tickets (in most cases)

while in Australia, I've observed the enforcement to be very strict.


I would have settled with 120kph (about70 mph)

Oops, Dudemon! ;)
In the dark days of the Federal 55 MPH (88km/h) speed limit, even Montana was forced to toe the line. 'Twas after the first Energy Crisis of 1973 when Congress passed a bill denying ALL Federal highway funding to any State that refused to lower the limit to 55 on ALL its roads! :eek: In 1986-7 the law allowed 65 MPH on Interstate & equivalent freeways ( = UK Motorways) outside of "urban counties."
Finally circa 1997, the law was repealed & States were totally free to set their own limits, so Montana brought back its pre-1974 "Reasonable & Prudent Speed" signs. A few years later that was rules unConstitutionally vague, so now Montana has Speed Limit 80 MPH (=129 km/h) signs.

In between, Montana & a few other Outback-ish States gave nominal tickets carrying a five-dollar fine & no demerit points to violators < 80 or so MPH--within the letter but against the spirit of the Federal mandate!

Most US speed limits outside of cities and metro areas are 65 or 70 mph with a few at 75. These seem to be rates that most feel comfortable driving at and will minimize speed variance.

To be more precise, in the western half of the US there are great swaths of 75 mph (120 km/h) speed limits, and Texas has raised the limit on large stretches of I-10 and I-20 in west Texas to 80 mph (130 km/h).

Even with speed variance, on these open roads you often have a half-mile or more to note that you're overtaking a car or truck and move to the passing lane.

I've driven on quite a few real outback roads over the past 4 decades and they certainly are a vast improvement these days. :)

The popular triangle Darwin-Kakadu-Katherine-Darwin is what most tourists would use and they are quite good. Often as good or better than lightly populated parts of the USA and Canada where I drive several times each year for weeks on end.

Missed hitting quite a few roos on the Kakadu - Katherine road tho, in broad daylight.

Hit (and killed) a dingo in daylight last year driving from Broome to Adelaide River, that cost me $2750 in car rental excess.

This photo I took of the ex-Dingo clearly shows the road - perfectly acceptable for a road in that part of the world:

http://www.glenstephens.com/tr-Dingo%20at%20sunset%20near%20Broome.jpg

On much outback road there is low scrub or no scrub, so a 100K limit is pretty silly I'd have to agree. The traffic is often very sparse so a higher speed is quite safe.

However, 57% more deaths occurred on NT roads in 2005 than 2004 and that might be behind this.

.

On much outback road there is low scrub or no scrub, so a 100K limit is pretty silly I'd have to agree. The traffic is often very sparse so a higher speed is quite safe.



AFAIK the speed limit is being set at 130km/h which seems fine to me, and don't get me wrong I'm always happy to drive fast, I love nothing more than sitting on 160/170 down the Autostrada I will get my chance later in the week too:D , but by the same token I would not dream of doing that on anything but a proper motorway.

Unless I am mistaken the Stuart Highway is where the Cannonball Run deal takes place, where they have Ferrari's and Poshes etc doing 200-300 kph?

I recall a Ferrari crashed a couple years back and killed some bystanders so maybe the event does not occur any more?

Have driven on it 130 seems pretty much on the low side for much of it as that is only 80mph.

Have driven on it 130 seems pretty much on the low side for much of it as that is only 80mph.

Remember though that 130 may seem slow in a Porsche or Ferrari, but in a 30 year old Datsun is probably not to safe. Speed limits are designed for the lowest common denominator (cars and people;) )

We have the best highways in Australia if you only knew it.

Sure thing. Whatever you say. :confused:

The AAA are lying too I guess?

==================

Tuesday, January 9, 2007

Major NT highway sections unsafe, AAA says:


An assessment of Australia's roads has rated sections of major Northern Territory highways as being 'high risk' and in need of immediate repair.

The Australian Automobile Association's (AAA) road assessment program has rated one third of the Stuart Highway as unsafe.

The program has also found road safety along the Victoria Highway between Katherine and the Western Australian border as high risk.

The AAA's John Metcalfe says the Territory Government needs to do more than just introduce speed limits on open highways.

"Line marking clearly is a low cost measure that's important," he said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200701/s1823779.htm

Having travelled Darwin-Kakadu and Darwin-Litchfield return over this weekend, I do support the 130Km/H speed limit for certain sections of the roads.

Not all of the roads... Some roads would easily support 150Km without any issues.

There are parts of the Stuart highway that I saw that had sharp drops on the edge of the road. That is not suitable for high speed travel IMHO. Nor are other parts of highways where roadworks or other dramas mean there is only just one lane in either direction. Line marking was also an issue in certain places - especially with the sun in your face.

The Kangaroos and dingos were an issue but none hopped my way. Even the birds eating roadkill mostly got out of the way (although I also didn't want to hit any of them and crack my windscreen). I would hate to hit a roo (or have to take defensive action) when travelling at over 150Km/H.

That said, I am a possibly a lawbreaker at times and my speedo perhaps did wind up a little. I felt pretty much safe with the road conditions -except when Road trains passed.