Add 5 for sane speed limits.

[Ext User(Bernd Felsche)]

For a little while (seconds), I was rather peeved at the presence of
a large number traffic qualifiers (meters that count vehicles and
their speeds) suddenly popping up... one even on the crest of a long
hill ... but then I forged a cunning plan:

Speed up (reasonably!) before getting to the double speed-sensing
strips so that a speed higher than the stupidly-low posted one will
be registered by the qualifiers. Consider it voting for a higher
speed limit. I voted 6 or 7 times on Friday. :-)

This is generally only possible in heavier traffic if you keep your
distance. In a quick-ish car, 3 seconds is enough of a gap to see
the strips and plant your foot to add at least 5 km/h to your speed.
Avoid running into the car in front by backing off again after
crossing the strips.

See; amother good reason to try to maintain a large gap between
cars!

Beware though: Some council "engineers" have never heard of
observer effect and will set up the traffic qualifiers where they
know that speed cameras are deployed. The "engineer's" excuse is
that it's not in the regulations (at which point I had to hang up
the phone because I was going to say something extremely
complimentary about lower life forms).
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | The object of life is not to be on the side of
X against HTML mail | the majority but to escape finding oneself in
/ \ and postings | the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

[Ext User(Athol)]

Bernd Felsche <bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:

> Speed up (reasonably!) before getting to the double speed-sensing
> strips so that a speed higher than the stupidly-low posted one will
> be registered by the qualifiers. Consider it voting for a higher
> speed limit. I voted 6 or 7 times on Friday. :-)

Consider that qualifier data is also used for selecting sites for
speed cameras and artifical limit lowering.

For example, I know of one location where they did the survey just
before installing traffic lights just over a crest, and again
shortly after. The consequence was that they moved the transition
from 70 to 60 further away from the lights to increase the slowing
distance to get the traffic down to 70 by the lights...

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

[Ext User(DalienX)]

Bernd Felsche wrote:

> In a quick-ish car, 3 seconds is enough of a gap to see
> the strips and plant your foot to add at least 5 km/h to your speed.


3 seconds is ages, if for example we are talking a 60k zone here, plant
the foot at 60 in my car for 3 seconds and it will be nearing 100ks

[Ext User(RainbowWarrior)]

"Bernd Felsche" <bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote in message
news:56hpf4x087.ln2@innovative.iinet.net.au...
> For a little while (seconds), I was rather peeved at the presence of
> a large number traffic qualifiers (meters that count vehicles and
> their speeds) suddenly popping up... one even on the crest of a long
> hill ... but then I forged a cunning plan:
>
> Speed up (reasonably!) before getting to the double speed-sensing
> strips so that a speed higher than the stupidly-low posted one will
> be registered by the qualifiers. Consider it voting for a higher
> speed limit. I voted 6 or 7 times on Friday. :-)
>
> This is generally only possible in heavier traffic if you keep your
> distance. In a quick-ish car, 3 seconds is enough of a gap to see
> the strips and plant your foot to add at least 5 km/h to your speed.
> Avoid running into the car in front by backing off again after
> crossing the strips.
>
> See; amother good reason to try to maintain a large gap between
> cars!
>
> Beware though: Some council "engineers" have never heard of
> observer effect and will set up the traffic qualifiers where they
> know that speed cameras are deployed. The "engineer's" excuse is
> that it's not in the regulations (at which point I had to hang up
> the phone because I was going to say something extremely
> complimentary about lower life forms).

Excellent! If enough people do it they will determine traffic is flowing
well enough and veto any improvements for that section of road that year and
the Police will determine its a good site for a speed camera :P
Better off slowwing to a crawl so it seems the road is clogged :)

> /"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
> \ / ASCII ribbon campaign

And you do realise ASCII ribbon printers aren't going to make a
comeback.................



| The object of life is not to be on the side of
> X against HTML mail | the majority but to escape finding oneself in
> / \ and postings | the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

[Ext User(Alan K.)]

On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:46:13 +0800, Bernd Felsche
<bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:

>For a little while (seconds), I was rather peeved at the presence of
>a large number traffic qualifiers (meters that count vehicles and
>their speeds) suddenly popping up... one even on the crest of a long
>hill ... but then I forged a cunning plan:
>
>Speed up (reasonably!) before getting to the double speed-sensing
>strips so that a speed higher than the stupidly-low posted one will
>be registered by the qualifiers. Consider it voting for a higher
>speed limit. I voted 6 or 7 times on Friday. :-)

I'd love the idea if it worked, but I've got to go with a couple of
other posters in this thread. I always slow down when I see those
freakin' things because it has never occurred to me (and regrettably
still doesn't) that The Authorities' (TM GovCo) reaction to an average
speed of 80 in a 70 zone would be "Hmmm, the average speed is 80, and
there have been no accidents along this stretch, perhaps the limit is
too low".

Policy by sound-bite is an extremely difficult form of inertia to
overcome and as "everybody knows", because "it's not rocket science",
"speed kills". Hence the reason that there are hundreds, nay thousands
of bodies piled alongside the unrestricted sections of German
Autobahns on a daily basis.

The official reaction is therefore more likely to be "Oh! My! God!!!!
People are SPEEEEEEEEEEEDING!!! This must be stopped! Not only will
they kill themselves, they'll murder (yes MURDER I SAY!!!) thousands
of Widows and Orphans!!!! We must install speed cameras and radar
traps IMMEDIATELY!!!!"

This is also known as the Tripodi response. People are dying on the
Pacific Highway, so the solution is:
(a) Build better (and dual carriageway) roads; or
(b) Install speed cameras.

No prizes for guessing which "solution" is chosen. Option (a) is, of
course, un-viable because you can't expect governments to spend
taxpayer money on things like infrastructure when there are so many
unfunded ex-politician superannuation pensions and overseas
"fact-finding" trips to be paid for.

Aside from which, they haven't yet found a way for Macquarie Bank to
turn a profit on upgrading the Pacific Highway, so that rules that
option out from the start.

Speed cameras also afford the opportunity for Assistant Commissioner
(Traffic) Fred Nerk to appear with an appropriate level of
hand-wringing on the eve of a long weekend and lament that 57 people
were photographed doing 78 in a 70 zone, that "we just have to get the
message out for drivers to slow down", and that the government's
recent decision to impose quadruple, nay, make it quintuple demerit
points for any day with a "y" in it shows that Something Is Being Done
(also TM GovCo) to help win The War On Speed.

(Actually I'm surprised that I haven't yet heard that last expression
as part of government policy. Give it time, though...)

[Ext User(Athol)]

Alan K. <No@spam.for.me> wrote:

> This is also known as the Tripodi response. People are dying on the
> Pacific Highway, so the solution is:
> (a) Build better (and dual carriageway) roads; or
> (b) Install speed cameras.

(c) Fix the railway bottlenecks that prevent a significant number of
trucks on the Pacific Hwy being replaced by freight trains.

Did you know that the biggest impediment to rail freight doubling its
market share between Sydney and Brisbane is the fact that the Sydney
rail network prohibits freight movement during the morning and evening
peak times? Northbound freight should be leaving Sydney around that
time to be in BRIS next morning. Similarly, southbound freight should
be arriving in Sydney around that time of the morning. Instead, they
get parked in sidings until the (IIRC) 3 hour morning or 4 hour evening
"curfew" finishes, making them uncompetitive for overnight freight.

Here's something I prepared recently because of this:
http://cust.idl.com.au/athol/download/Northern%20Beaches%20Rail.pdf

The problems for southbound freight to Melbourne is similar, but they
are looking at building a dedicated freight line between the passenger
lines from Botany to Macarthur. "The South Sydney Freight Line" or
SSFL for short. I think that the plan is to not electrify this line,
so that the cityrail passenger trains can't "borrow" it. They do
expect it to be shared with XPTs, though.

Imagine putting the same curfew on trucks in Sydney. It'd grind to a
halt!

All the effort being put into upgrading the Pacific Hwy, without the
corresponding effort on rail and the New England Hwy is just going to
make the problems on the Pacific worse. It's flatter than the New
England and they are bypassing towns at a phenomenal rate. It's
inducing more and more trucks to use it.

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

[Ext User(Ron)]

Athol <me@privacy.net> wrote in news:1177201632.406556
@idlwebserver.idl.com.au:

> Alan K. <No@spam.for.me> wrote:
>
>> This is also known as the Tripodi response. People are dying on the
>> Pacific Highway, so the solution is:
>> (a) Build better (and dual carriageway) roads; or
>> (b) Install speed cameras.
>
> (c) Fix the railway bottlenecks that prevent a significant number of
> trucks on the Pacific Hwy being replaced by freight trains.
>
> Did you know that the biggest impediment to rail freight doubling its
> market share between Sydney and Brisbane is the fact that the Sydney
> rail network prohibits freight movement during the morning and evening
> peak times? Northbound freight should be leaving Sydney around that
> time to be in BRIS next morning. Similarly, southbound freight should
> be arriving in Sydney around that time of the morning. Instead, they
> get parked in sidings until the (IIRC) 3 hour morning or 4 hour evening
> "curfew" finishes, making them uncompetitive for overnight freight.

I had no idea that was happening!

>
> Here's something I prepared recently because of this:
> http://cust.idl.com.au/athol/download/Northern%20Beaches%20Rail.pdf
>

Bloody good idea, Athol!

Now all you need id for some prick to act on it, and that WILL be the
problem.
If a train could get there quicker than trucks, rail would be used more
and the traffic 100% better on the highway.


> The problems for southbound freight to Melbourne is similar, but they
> are looking at building a dedicated freight line between the passenger
> lines from Botany to Macarthur. "The South Sydney Freight Line" or
> SSFL for short. I think that the plan is to not electrify this line,
> so that the cityrail passenger trains can't "borrow" it. They do
> expect it to be shared with XPTs, though.
>
> Imagine putting the same curfew on trucks in Sydney. It'd grind to a
> halt!
>
> All the effort being put into upgrading the Pacific Hwy, without the
> corresponding effort on rail and the New England Hwy is just going to
> make the problems on the Pacific worse. It's flatter than the New
> England and they are bypassing towns at a phenomenal rate. It's
> inducing more and more trucks to use it.
>

Ain't that the truth...

Ron

[Ext User(atec77')]

Athol wrote:
> Alan K. <No@spam.for.me> wrote:
>
>> This is also known as the Tripodi response. People are dying on the
>> Pacific Highway, so the solution is:
>> (a) Build better (and dual carriageway) roads; or
>> (b) Install speed cameras.
>
> (c) Fix the railway bottlenecks that prevent a significant number of
> trucks on the Pacific Hwy being replaced by freight trains.
>
> Did you know that the biggest impediment to rail freight doubling its
> market share between Sydney and Brisbane is the fact that the Sydney
> rail network prohibits freight movement during the morning and evening
> peak times? Northbound freight should be leaving Sydney around that
> time to be in BRIS next morning. Similarly, southbound freight should
> be arriving in Sydney around that time of the morning. Instead, they
> get parked in sidings until the (IIRC) 3 hour morning or 4 hour evening
> "curfew" finishes, making them uncompetitive for overnight freight.
>
> Here's something I prepared recently because of this:
> http://cust.idl.com.au/athol/download/Northern%20Beaches%20Rail.pdf
>
> The problems for southbound freight to Melbourne is similar, but they
> are looking at building a dedicated freight line between the passenger
> lines from Botany to Macarthur. "The South Sydney Freight Line" or
> SSFL for short. I think that the plan is to not electrify this line,
> so that the cityrail passenger trains can't "borrow" it. They do
> expect it to be shared with XPTs, though.
>
> Imagine putting the same curfew on trucks in Sydney. It'd grind to a
> halt!
>
> All the effort being put into upgrading the Pacific Hwy, without the
> corresponding effort on rail and the New England Hwy is just going to
> make the problems on the Pacific worse. It's flatter than the New
> England and they are bypassing towns at a phenomenal rate. It's
> inducing more and more trucks to use it.
>
How and or why does this impediment to rail transit exist ?

[Ext User(Athol)]

atec77' <""atec77 \"@ hotmail.com"> wrote:

> How and or why does this impediment to rail transit exist ?

The rail "curfew" in Sydney is a "solution" to an inadequate railway
network that is unable to effectively move sufficient numbers of
passenger trains around during peak times due to a long term under-
investment in infrastructure. Their "solution" was to park all of
the freight trains in sidings during peak times to reduce the number
of junction conflicts.

It's really about grade separation or lack thereof. Just like roads,
railways run into limitations due to "at grade" intersections.

The "clearways" project, http://www.cityrail.info/news/clearways.jsp
is an inadequate response. It's direction is right in principle, but
it doesn't go close to providing the level of rail infrastructure
needed in Sydney. Even if the timetable for additional links such as
Epping to Parramatta and the Castle Hill line hadn't been pushed back
decades, they'd still be inadequate.

Things that they seem incapable of thinking of include using a large
open area that was formerly the Berowra toll plaza (bypassed years
ago but is just a few seconds off the F3 freeway) as a "park and
ride" area. The majority of trains that could go to Berowra don't.
Instead, they start and terminate a few km down the line at Hornsby,
where there is totally inadequate parking and *no* reasonable access
from the F3. So, add a covered walkway with a couple of "travelators"
and turn the trains around at Berowra...

Oh, and state wide, they're not keeping up.

http://www.railcorp.info/__data/assets/file/677/Capacity_Map.pdf

The MELB-BRIS study makes interesting reading:

http://www.auslink.gov.au/publications/reports/north_south_corridor.aspx

IIRC, Bob Carr opposed a study even being done, on the basis that there
"was nothing in it for NSW".

And people wonder why the roads are so fecking crowded!

--
Athol
<http://cust.idl.com.au/athol> Linux Registered User # 254000
I'm a Libran Engineer. I don't argue, I discuss.

[Ext User(The Nerk)]

On Apr 22, 10:10 am, Alan K. <N...@Spam.For.Me> wrote:
>
> Aside from which, they haven't yet found a way for Macquarie Bank to
> turn a profit on upgrading the Pacific Highway, so that rules that
> option out from the start.
>
> Speed cameras also afford the opportunity for Assistant Commissioner
> (Traffic) Fred Nerk

Oy!!! Leave me out of this.

The Nerk

[Ext User(atec77')]

Athol wrote:
> atec77' <""atec77 \"@ hotmail.com"> wrote:
>
>> How and or why does this impediment to rail transit exist ?
>
> The rail "curfew" in Sydney is a "solution" to an inadequate railway
> network that is unable to effectively move sufficient numbers of
> passenger trains around during peak times due to a long term under-
> investment in infrastructure. Their "solution" was to park all of
> the freight trains in sidings during peak times to reduce the number
> of junction conflicts.
>
> It's really about grade separation or lack thereof. Just like roads,
> railways run into limitations due to "at grade" intersections.
>
> The "clearways" project, http://www.cityrail.info/news/clearways.jsp
> is an inadequate response. It's direction is right in principle, but
> it doesn't go close to providing the level of rail infrastructure
> needed in Sydney. Even if the timetable for additional links such as
> Epping to Parramatta and the Castle Hill line hadn't been pushed back
> decades, they'd still be inadequate.
>
> Things that they seem incapable of thinking of include using a large
> open area that was formerly the Berowra toll plaza (bypassed years
> ago but is just a few seconds off the F3 freeway) as a "park and
> ride" area. The majority of trains that could go to Berowra don't.
> Instead, they start and terminate a few km down the line at Hornsby,
> where there is totally inadequate parking and *no* reasonable access
> from the F3. So, add a covered walkway with a couple of "travelators"
> and turn the trains around at Berowra...
>
> Oh, and state wide, they're not keeping up.
>
> http://www.railcorp.info/__data/assets/file/677/Capacity_Map.pdf
>
> The MELB-BRIS study makes interesting reading:
>
> http://www.auslink.gov.au/publications/reports/north_south_corridor.aspx
>
> IIRC, Bob Carr opposed a study even being done, on the basis that there
> "was nothing in it for NSW".
>
> And people wonder why the roads are so fecking crowded!
>
SO basically if the N.S.W Govern-not-ment installed some of the money
being dumped into roads into additional rails the road wouldn't be
required quite as soon and congestion from trucksand other large space
wasters would be reduced... good reason not to do it .( typical
unionised twonks)

[Ext User(Albm&ctd)]

In article <462a6a17$0$4613$61c65585@un-2park-reader-
01.sydney.pipenetworks.com.au>, somewhere@earth.com says...
> Bernd Felsche wrote:
>
> > In a quick-ish car, 3 seconds is enough of a gap to see
> > the strips and plant your foot to add at least 5 km/h to your speed.
>
>
> 3 seconds is ages, if for example we are talking a 60k zone here, plant
> the foot at 60 in my car for 3 seconds and it will be nearing 100ks
>
The Lada only changes exhaust note.

Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html

[Ext User(Albm&ctd)]

In article <3YvWh.17473$M.17192@news-server.bigpond.net.au>,
paulie@pizza.com.nz says...

> Better off slowwing to a crawl so it seems the road is clogged :)
>
So now you've become senile and own an Avalon?

Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html

[Ext User(Albm&ctd)]

In article <1177201632.406556@idlwebserver.idl.com.au>, me@privacy.net
says...
> Alan K. <No@spam.for.me> wrote:
>
> > This is also known as the Tripodi response. People are dying on the
> > Pacific Highway, so the solution is:
> > (a) Build better (and dual carriageway) roads; or
> > (b) Install speed cameras.
>
> (c) Fix the railway bottlenecks that prevent a significant number of
> trucks on the Pacific Hwy being replaced by freight trains.
>
> Did you know that the biggest impediment to rail freight doubling its
> market share between Sydney and Brisbane is the fact that the Sydney
> rail network prohibits freight movement during the morning and evening
> peak times? Northbound freight should be leaving Sydney around that
> time to be in BRIS next morning. Similarly, southbound freight should
> be arriving in Sydney around that time of the morning. Instead, they
> get parked in sidings until the (IIRC) 3 hour morning or 4 hour evening
> "curfew" finishes, making them uncompetitive for overnight freight.
>
> Here's something I prepared recently because of this:
> http://cust.idl.com.au/athol/download/Northern%20Beaches%20Rail.pdf
>
> The problems for southbound freight to Melbourne is similar, but they
> are looking at building a dedicated freight line between the passenger
> lines from Botany to Macarthur. "The South Sydney Freight Line" or
> SSFL for short. I think that the plan is to not electrify this line,
> so that the cityrail passenger trains can't "borrow" it. They do
> expect it to be shared with XPTs, though.
>
> Imagine putting the same curfew on trucks in Sydney. It'd grind to a
> halt!
>
> All the effort being put into upgrading the Pacific Hwy, without the
> corresponding effort on rail and the New England Hwy is just going to
> make the problems on the Pacific worse. It's flatter than the New
> England and they are bypassing towns at a phenomenal rate. It's
> inducing more and more trucks to use it.
>
>
Would you trust road or rail to deliver valuable goods?
My biased opinion against rail freight is based on old experiences and
observations. Maybe things have changed in 30 years?

Al
--
I don't take sides.
It's more fun to insult everyone.
http://kwakakid.cjb.net/insult.html

[Ext User(Bernd Felsche)]

Athol <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>Bernd Felsche <bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:

>> Speed up (reasonably!) before getting to the double speed-sensing
>> strips so that a speed higher than the stupidly-low posted one will
>> be registered by the qualifiers. Consider it voting for a higher
>> speed limit. I voted 6 or 7 times on Friday. :-)

>Consider that qualifier data is also used for selecting sites for
>speed cameras and artifical limit lowering.

Speed cameras are already used in those areas. all bar one of the
sites was freeway.

>For example, I know of one location where they did the survey just
>before installing traffic lights just over a crest, and again
>shortly after. The consequence was that they moved the transition
>from 70 to 60 further away from the lights to increase the slowing
>distance to get the traffic down to 70 by the lights...

Just today; qualifier located immediately prior to speed limit
increase sign... departure side of traffic-light controlled
intersection (<200m).

They'd get exactly the results that they want from that location!

Second qualifier on the same road after a blind bend on one side and
crest on the other.

There's a nice 800m or so straight down the road a little before the
blind bend side.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | The object of life is not to be on the side of
X against HTML mail | the majority but to escape finding oneself in
/ \ and postings | the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

[Ext User(Bernd Felsche)]

Alan K. <No@Spam.For.Me> wrote:

>On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 21:46:13 +0800, Bernd Felsche
><bernie@innovative.iinet.net.au> wrote:

>>For a little while (seconds), I was rather peeved at the presence of
>>a large number traffic qualifiers (meters that count vehicles and
>>their speeds) suddenly popping up... one even on the crest of a long
>>hill ... but then I forged a cunning plan:

>>Speed up (reasonably!) before getting to the double speed-sensing
>>strips so that a speed higher than the stupidly-low posted one will
>>be registered by the qualifiers. Consider it voting for a higher
>>speed limit. I voted 6 or 7 times on Friday. :-)

>I'd love the idea if it worked, but I've got to go with a couple of
>other posters in this thread. I always slow down when I see those
>freakin' things because it has never occurred to me (and regrettably
>still doesn't) that The Authorities' (TM GovCo) reaction to an average
>speed of 80 in a 70 zone would be "Hmmm, the average speed is 80, and
>there have been no accidents along this stretch, perhaps the limit is
>too low".

Oh they _know_ about the 85th percentile speed. That's why they need
to measure the way that they do.

>Policy by sound-bite is an extremely difficult form of inertia to
>overcome and as "everybody knows", because "it's not rocket science",
>"speed kills". Hence the reason that there are hundreds, nay thousands
>of bodies piled alongside the unrestricted sections of German
>Autobahns on a daily basis.

I look forward to seeing that in 4 weeks.

Unfortunately, I had a few nasty reminders that low speeds can be
lethal... on Saturday, shopping "just around the corner", I pulled
out of the parking space and onto the priority through road of the
paring lot... I looked to the right and it was immediately apparent
that the Astra coming from my right had absolutely no intent to slow
from 30 km/h in order to give way to me!

I'd have stopped and given him a piece of my mind but he probably
wouldn't have a clue what to do with it.

Second reminder a couple of hundred metres down the road which
was a reminder of the near-death experience I had in 1998. Car pulls
out from side road and stops on dual carriageway to block both lanes
right in front of me.

Third reminder today; 4WD on side road with boat on trailer pulls
out in front of me to turn right; requiring _heavy_ braking to avoid
a collision.

Fourth reminder;

..... this is so sad and frustrating.... I don't want to remind even
myself of this and the four or five more reminders I've had in two
days on the road... with a total of less than one hour in traffic.
That's one on average every 5 to 6 minutes on the road.

IME, the speed limits are irrelevant. People like that are dangerous
at any speed.
--
/"\ Bernd Felsche - Innovative Reckoning, Perth, Western Australia
\ / ASCII ribbon campaign | The object of life is not to be on the side of
X against HTML mail | the majority but to escape finding oneself in
/ \ and postings | the ranks of the insane. -- Marcus Aurelius

[Ext User(reg-john)]

"Athol" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:1177217671.800441@idlwebserver.idl.com.au...
> atec77' <""atec77 \"@ hotmail.com"> wrote:
>
> Things that they seem incapable of thinking of include using a large
> open area that was formerly the Berowra toll plaza (bypassed years
> ago but is just a few seconds off the F3 freeway) as a "park and
> ride" area. The majority of trains that could go to Berowra don't.
> Instead, they start and terminate a few km down the line at Hornsby,
> where there is totally inadequate parking and *no* reasonable access
> from the F3. So, add a covered walkway with a couple of "travelators"
> and turn the trains around at Berowra...

this is being devleoped into the Hornsby RFS Centre shortly.