Odd speed zoning *shrug*

[Justin Thyme]

Perhaps someone can explain to me the logic of this.
On the Warrego Highway/A2 whatever it's called these days, between brissy &
toowoomba, eastern end of the Gatton bypass, near where the road from Gatton
merges with the main highway.
There is an 80 zone for a few hundred yards.
Did they put the 80 zone around the large and busy service
station/mcdonalds, where cars regularly cross the highway and there is no
merge lanes or deceleration lanes to speak of? No.
Did they put the 80 zone in the area where the traffic from Gatton & Esk
merges with the main highway, so that the merge is at a bit lower speed? No.
Instead, they put the 80 zone so that it starts just at the exit for Gatton
& Esk, and continues to just past the overpass. The 100 zone begins again
just before the merging traffic joins the highway. During the last phases of
construction of the road, I thought that possibly this illogical application
of speed limit reduction was to do with the roadworks, but they are long
since finished so I am at a loss to explain this speed zone. The exit lanes
and exit roads are long enough that traffic could exit at 100 then slow to
80, then to 60 as needed, there is no need to slow the whole highway to 80
for the benefit of the exiting traffic. An "exit speed 80" would suffice, or
even an 80 sign once the road has exited (there is one anyway). Perhaps
they want the traffic to be at 80 as it goes under the over-pass - for
safety in case someone hits one of the pylons, but there are plenty of trees
and other solid objects closer to the highway in other areas, than the
pylons holding the overpass up. I really can't see a reason for having the
reduced speed limit where it is - if anything having it where it is makes
the road more dangerous, as the limit goes back to 100 just before the
merging traffic joins the highway, so the merge is with traffic that is
accelerating - surely that can't be safe. Logic says that it is much easier
and safer to merge at lower speeds, and at constant speeds - attempting to
merge with traffic that is accelerating is a recipe for disaster.
In my opinion, if road safety was the issue, the 80 zone would encompass
where the traffic is merging onto the highway, and/or would cover the area
around the service station, so that when cars cross the highway they are
contending with slower traffic.
After wondering about this everytime I drive that stretch, a few days ago I
saw what I can see as the only viable reason that the 80 zone is where it
is - there hidden nicely from view by one of the pylons for the overpass,
was a photographic wallet emptier. Would the queensland government really
put an illogically lower speed limit on a section of highway purely for the
purpose of maximising revenue? It would certainly seem that way.
Perhaps someone else familiar with this bit of bitumen may be able to give
me a logical reason why the speed zone is where it is.

[veritas]

No, the Queensland government wouldn't do that! Just like they wouldn't book drivers for doing
60 in a 50 zone - then lift the speed limit to 60 the next week - on the very same piece of road.

Complain to Premier Pete and he will apologise profusely and fix it. But you will have to get
the media snapping at his heels first. It's called management by crisis.

Cheers

Justin Thyme wrote:
> Perhaps someone can explain to me the logic of this.
> On the Warrego Highway/A2 whatever it's called these days, between brissy &
> toowoomba, eastern end of the Gatton bypass, near where the road from Gatton
> merges with the main highway.
> There is an 80 zone for a few hundred yards.
> Did they put the 80 zone around the large and busy service
> station/mcdonalds, where cars regularly cross the highway and there is no
> merge lanes or deceleration lanes to speak of? No.
> Did they put the 80 zone in the area where the traffic from Gatton & Esk
> merges with the main highway, so that the merge is at a bit lower speed? No.
> Instead, they put the 80 zone so that it starts just at the exit for Gatton
> & Esk, and continues to just past the overpass. The 100 zone begins again
> just before the merging traffic joins the highway. During the last phases of
> construction of the road, I thought that possibly this illogical application
> of speed limit reduction was to do with the roadworks, but they are long
> since finished so I am at a loss to explain this speed zone. The exit lanes
> and exit roads are long enough that traffic could exit at 100 then slow to
> 80, then to 60 as needed, there is no need to slow the whole highway to 80
> for the benefit of the exiting traffic. An "exit speed 80" would suffice, or
> even an 80 sign once the road has exited (there is one anyway). Perhaps
> they want the traffic to be at 80 as it goes under the over-pass - for
> safety in case someone hits one of the pylons, but there are plenty of trees
> and other solid objects closer to the highway in other areas, than the
> pylons holding the overpass up. I really can't see a reason for having the
> reduced speed limit where it is - if anything having it where it is makes
> the road more dangerous, as the limit goes back to 100 just before the
> merging traffic joins the highway, so the merge is with traffic that is
> accelerating - surely that can't be safe. Logic says that it is much easier
> and safer to merge at lower speeds, and at constant speeds - attempting to
> merge with traffic that is accelerating is a recipe for disaster.
> In my opinion, if road safety was the issue, the 80 zone would encompass
> where the traffic is merging onto the highway, and/or would cover the area
> around the service station, so that when cars cross the highway they are
> contending with slower traffic.
> After wondering about this everytime I drive that stretch, a few days ago I
> saw what I can see as the only viable reason that the 80 zone is where it
> is - there hidden nicely from view by one of the pylons for the overpass,
> was a photographic wallet emptier. Would the queensland government really
> put an illogically lower speed limit on a section of highway purely for the
> purpose of maximising revenue? It would certainly seem that way.
> Perhaps someone else familiar with this bit of bitumen may be able to give
> me a logical reason why the speed zone is where it is.
>
>

[Knobdoodle]

Is that about where that car-load of Asian students got creamed a year or
two back?
It's probably a dumb knee-jerk "safety initiative" (which just happens to
be a very handy revenue-raiser too!)
--
Knob
"Although I'm making an exception in this case, the reason I don't respond
to you is...."
Diesel Dumbo showing how clever he is with aus.cars trolls.

"veritas" <veritas@coldmail.com> wrote in message
news:IL%Kd.141055$K7.76884@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> No, the Queensland government wouldn't do that! Just like they wouldn't
> book drivers for doing 60 in a 50 zone - then lift the speed limit to 60
> the next week - on the very same piece of road.
>
> Complain to Premier Pete and he will apologise profusely and fix it. But
> you will have to get the media snapping at his heels first. It's called
> management by crisis.
>
> Cheers
>
> Justin Thyme wrote:
>> Perhaps someone can explain to me the logic of this.
>> On the Warrego Highway/A2 whatever it's called these days, between
>> brissy & toowoomba, eastern end of the Gatton bypass, near where the
>> road from Gatton merges with the main highway.
>> There is an 80 zone for a few hundred yards.
>> Did they put the 80 zone around the large and busy service
>> station/mcdonalds, where cars regularly cross the highway and there is
>> no merge lanes or deceleration lanes to speak of? No.
>> Did they put the 80 zone in the area where the traffic from Gatton & Esk
>> merges with the main highway, so that the merge is at a bit lower speed?
>> No.
>> Instead, they put the 80 zone so that it starts just at the exit for
>> Gatton & Esk, and continues to just past the overpass. The 100 zone
>> begins again just before the merging traffic joins the highway. During
>> the last phases of construction of the road, I thought that possibly
>> this illogical application of speed limit reduction was to do with the
>> roadworks, but they are long since finished so I am at a loss to explain
>> this speed zone. The exit lanes and exit roads are long enough that
>> traffic could exit at 100 then slow to 80, then to 60 as needed, there
>> is no need to slow the whole highway to 80 for the benefit of the
>> exiting traffic. An "exit speed 80" would suffice, or even an 80 sign
>> once the road has exited (there is one anyway). Perhaps they want the
>> traffic to be at 80 as it goes under the over-pass - for safety in case
>> someone hits one of the pylons, but there are plenty of trees and other
>> solid objects closer to the highway in other areas, than the pylons
>> holding the overpass up. I really can't see a reason for having the
>> reduced speed limit where it is - if anything having it where it is
>> makes the road more dangerous, as the limit goes back to 100 just before
>> the merging traffic joins the highway, so the merge is with traffic that
>> is accelerating - surely that can't be safe. Logic says that it is much
>> easier and safer to merge at lower speeds, and at constant speeds -
>> attempting to merge with traffic that is accelerating is a recipe for
>> disaster.
>> In my opinion, if road safety was the issue, the 80 zone would encompass
>> where the traffic is merging onto the highway, and/or would cover the
>> area around the service station, so that when cars cross the highway
>> they are contending with slower traffic.
>> After wondering about this everytime I drive that stretch, a few days
>> ago I saw what I can see as the only viable reason that the 80 zone is
>> where it is - there hidden nicely from view by one of the pylons for the
>> overpass, was a photographic wallet emptier. Would the queensland
>> government really put an illogically lower speed limit on a section of
>> highway purely for the purpose of maximising revenue? It would certainly
>> seem that way.
>> Perhaps someone else familiar with this bit of bitumen may be able to
>> give me a logical reason why the speed zone is where it is.

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 16:49:38 +1000, Justin Thyme wrote:

> Would the queensland government really
> put an illogically lower speed limit on a section of highway purely for the
> purpose of maximising revenue? It would certainly seem that way.

<Ding!>

Go to the top of the class.


--
Toby
quidquid latine dictum
sit, altum viditur

[veritas]

Knobdoodle wrote:
> Is that about where that car-load of Asian students got creamed a year or
> two back?
> It's probably a dumb knee-jerk "safety initiative" (which just happens to
> be a very handy revenue-raiser too!)

NO
> --
> Knob
> "Although I'm making an exception in this case, the reason I don't respond
> to you is...."

Why start now - it seemed to be working so well!

> Diesel Dumbo showing how clever he is with aus.cars trolls.

I have no idea what you are on about - but I am overawed about you concession though....
>
> "veritas" <veritas@coldmail.com> wrote in message
> news:IL%Kd.141055$K7.76884@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>>No, the Queensland government wouldn't do that! Just like they wouldn't
>>book drivers for doing 60 in a 50 zone - then lift the speed limit to 60
>>the next week - on the very same piece of road.
>>
>>Complain to Premier Pete and he will apologise profusely and fix it. But
>>you will have to get the media snapping at his heels first. It's called
>>management by crisis.
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>Justin Thyme wrote:
>>
>>>Perhaps someone can explain to me the logic of this.
>>>On the Warrego Highway/A2 whatever it's called these days, between
>>>brissy & toowoomba, eastern end of the Gatton bypass, near where the
>>>road from Gatton merges with the main highway.
>>>There is an 80 zone for a few hundred yards.
>>>Did they put the 80 zone around the large and busy service
>>>station/mcdonalds, where cars regularly cross the highway and there is
>>>no merge lanes or deceleration lanes to speak of? No.
>>>Did they put the 80 zone in the area where the traffic from Gatton & Esk
>>>merges with the main highway, so that the merge is at a bit lower speed?
>>>No.
>>>Instead, they put the 80 zone so that it starts just at the exit for
>>>Gatton & Esk, and continues to just past the overpass. The 100 zone
>>>begins again just before the merging traffic joins the highway. During
>>>the last phases of construction of the road, I thought that possibly
>>>this illogical application of speed limit reduction was to do with the
>>>roadworks, but they are long since finished so I am at a loss to explain
>>>this speed zone. The exit lanes and exit roads are long enough that
>>>traffic could exit at 100 then slow to 80, then to 60 as needed, there
>>>is no need to slow the whole highway to 80 for the benefit of the
>>>exiting traffic. An "exit speed 80" would suffice, or even an 80 sign
>>>once the road has exited (there is one anyway). Perhaps they want the
>>>traffic to be at 80 as it goes under the over-pass - for safety in case
>>>someone hits one of the pylons, but there are plenty of trees and other
>>>solid objects closer to the highway in other areas, than the pylons
>>>holding the overpass up. I really can't see a reason for having the
>>>reduced speed limit where it is - if anything having it where it is
>>>makes the road more dangerous, as the limit goes back to 100 just before
>>>the merging traffic joins the highway, so the merge is with traffic that
>>>is accelerating - surely that can't be safe. Logic says that it is much
>>>easier and safer to merge at lower speeds, and at constant speeds -
>>>attempting to merge with traffic that is accelerating is a recipe for
>>>disaster.
>>>In my opinion, if road safety was the issue, the 80 zone would encompass
>>>where the traffic is merging onto the highway, and/or would cover the
>>>area around the service station, so that when cars cross the highway
>>>they are contending with slower traffic.
>>>After wondering about this everytime I drive that stretch, a few days
>>>ago I saw what I can see as the only viable reason that the 80 zone is
>>>where it is - there hidden nicely from view by one of the pylons for the
>>>overpass, was a photographic wallet emptier. Would the queensland
>>>government really put an illogically lower speed limit on a section of
>>>highway purely for the purpose of maximising revenue? It would certainly
>>>seem that way.
>>>Perhaps someone else familiar with this bit of bitumen may be able to
>>>give me a logical reason why the speed zone is where it is.
>
>
>

[Knobdoodle]

"veritas" <veritas@coldmail.com> wrote in message
news:8t0Ld.141122$K7.123747@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Knobdoodle wrote:
>> Is that about where that car-load of Asian students got creamed a year
>> or two back?
>> It's probably a dumb knee-jerk "safety initiative" (which just happens
>> to be a very handy revenue-raiser too!)
>
> NO
>
You sure? It must be pretty close.
--
Knob
"I am overawed about you concession though" (Veritas not sure how to spell
"ewe"...)

[veritas]

Knobdoodle wrote:
> "veritas" <veritas@coldmail.com> wrote in message
> news:8t0Ld.141122$K7.123747@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>>Knobdoodle wrote:
>>
>>>Is that about where that car-load of Asian students got creamed a year
>>>or two back?
>>>It's probably a dumb knee-jerk "safety initiative" (which just happens
>>>to be a very handy revenue-raiser too!)
>>
>>NO
>>
>
> You sure? It must be pretty close.


Positive. Check your thread continuity - I doubt that we are on the planet and diccussing the
same subject.

I refer to Webb St., Loganlea...... ;-)

[sheik yerbouti]

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 07:10:32 GMT, veritas <veritas@coldmail.com>
wrote:

>No, the Queensland government wouldn't do that! Just like they wouldn't book drivers for doing
>60 in a 50 zone - then lift the speed limit to 60 the next week - on the very same piece of road.

bastards. i wish pollies would man the cameras in victoria, i'd have a
few words to say to them. i guess being a larger state the govt
outsources it to contractors mostly.


---
vn commodore transmission swap online manual
http://www.freewebs.com/sheik_yerbouti

[Wild Wizard]

"Justin Thyme" <pleasedontspamme@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:1s%Kd.575$t57.20734@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> Perhaps someone can explain to me the logic of this.
> On the Warrego Highway/A2 whatever it's called these days, between brissy
> & toowoomba, eastern end of the Gatton bypass, near where the road from
> Gatton merges with the main highway.
> There is an 80 zone for a few hundred yards.
> Did they put the 80 zone around the large and busy service
> station/mcdonalds, where cars regularly cross the highway and there is no
> merge lanes or deceleration lanes to speak of? No.
> Did they put the 80 zone in the area where the traffic from Gatton & Esk
> merges with the main highway, so that the merge is at a bit lower speed?
> No.
> Instead, they put the 80 zone so that it starts just at the exit for
> Gatton & Esk, and continues to just past the overpass. The 100 zone begins
> again just before the merging traffic joins the highway. During the last
> phases of construction of the road, I thought that possibly this illogical
> application of speed limit reduction was to do with the roadworks, but
> they are long since finished so I am at a loss to explain this speed zone.
> The exit lanes

That limit existed long before any roadworks began there, it's for the old
merging
lanes (if you could call it that)

The entire bypass is undergoing a speed review for 110 anyway which will see
that little 80 section removed (once the fat cats finish the paper work)

As for the speed camera site you can blame the fool who killed themselves by
crashing their car into a parked semi at 100kph at the begining of the old 4
lane
section there (they were heading east and crossed all 4 lanes before hitting
the truck)

[Knobdoodle]

"veritas" <veritas@coldmail.com> wrote:
> Knobdoodle wrote:
>> "veritas" <veritas@coldmail.com> wrote:
>>>>Is that about where that car-load of Asian students got creamed a year
>>>>or two back?
>>>
>>>NO
>>
>> You sure? It must be pretty close.
>
>
> Positive. Check your thread continuity - I doubt that we are on the
> planet and diccussing the same subject.
>
> I refer to Webb St., Loganlea...... ;-)
~
Which of course you didn't mention anywhere in your post on the thread
about the Gatton speed zone ...... (which is where a car load of Asian etc
etc etc)
Was I supposed to specifically remove your comments when I joined the
discussion was I?
--
Knob
"I am overawed about you concession though" (Veritas not sure how to spell
"ewe"...)

[Toby Ponsenby]

On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 19:29:54 +1000, Wild Wizard wrote:

> As for the speed camera site you can blame the fool who killed themselves by
> crashing their car into a parked semi at 100kph at the begining of the old 4
> lane
> section there (they were heading east and crossed all 4 lanes before hitting
> the truck)

Needless to say, said fool wouldn't have been able to do that if
they'd been preceded by a gent waving a tiny red flag.

--
Toby
quidquid latine dictum
sit, altum viditur

[veritas]

Knobdoodle wrote:
> "veritas" <veritas@coldmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Knobdoodle wrote:
>>
>>>"veritas" <veritas@coldmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Is that about where that car-load of Asian students got creamed a year
>>>>>or two back?
>>>>
>>>>NO
>>>
>>>You sure? It must be pretty close.
>>
>>
>>Positive. Check your thread continuity - I doubt that we are on the
>>planet and diccussing the same subject.
>>
>>I refer to Webb St., Loganlea...... ;-)
>
> ~
> Which of course you didn't mention anywhere in your post on the thread
> about the Gatton speed zone ...... (which is where a car load of Asian etc
> etc etc)
> Was I supposed to specifically remove your comments when I joined the
> discussion was I?

Don't have a cow man :)

[Justin Thyme]

"Wild Wizard" <haha@yea.right.com> wrote in message
news:71muc2-om4.ln1@server.techdrive.foo...
>
> As for the speed camera site you can blame the fool who killed themselves
> by
> crashing their car into a parked semi at 100kph at the begining of the old
> 4 lane
> section there (they were heading east and crossed all 4 lanes before
> hitting the truck)
Sounds like the sort of accident that would be caused by fatigue more than
speed. Just like the 4 asians that were killed on that road, and almost
every other accident that i've heard of on there. How do we treat fatigue
problems in QLD? Lower the speed limit so it takes even longer to drive
through the trouble spot.
In the early days of the gatton bypass the catch-cry was "no smokies" - this
was when it was only one lane each way, and it was quite common to find
traffic doing 120-140 on it (not in peak times mind you, then you were lucky
to get 80). Accidents were pretty much non-existent. It only seems to be
after the area became a target for speed traps and no-one was game to do
101, that the accidents started happening. The majority of accidents seemed
to occur late at night.
>
>

[Justin Thyme]

"Wild Wizard" <haha@yea.right.com> wrote in message
news:71muc2-om4.ln1@server.techdrive.foo...
> The entire bypass is undergoing a speed review for 110 anyway which will
> see
> that little 80 section removed (once the fat cats finish the paper work)
I hope they don't stop at the bypass and apply it on the entire highway from
withcott to blacksoil. Unfortunately some of this road isn't suitable for an
increase in speed limit. Fly-overs, exits and merge lanes need to be built
for plainlands, lowood exit, laidley exit etc - these are all spots that are
currently 80, and despite that still have accidents. BTW, these spots quite
frequently have accidents, yet I rarely see radar operating within these 80
zones. Instead the radar hotspots are the gatton bypass (yes accidents are
common, but are fatigue related not speed related), between withcott &
gatton (never known an accident in this area), haigslee (likewise). What do
these spots have in common? easy hiding places. A number of vehicles seem to
do 105 in the 100 zones, but don't even slow down for the 80 zones - most of
which are there for a VERY good reason. Policing these areas may not make as
much profit, but it would certainly improve road safety.

[Steve Wright]

between withcott &
> gatton (never known an accident in this area),

Before the roadworks that now see the four lanes there were numerous fatal
accidents (usually head ons) along this stretch. I would imagine that most,
if not all were fatigue related. If I remember correctly the 2 lane road
originally had a 100 limit but that was dropped to 80 because of the deaths.

Steve

[Justin Thyme]

"Steve Wright" <sw@itee.uq.edu.au> wrote in message
news:newscache$9vg5bi$rel$1@lbox.itee.uq.edu.au...
> between withcott &
>> gatton (never known an accident in this area),
>
> Before the roadworks that now see the four lanes there were numerous fatal
> accidents (usually head ons) along this stretch. I would imagine that
> most, if not all were fatigue related. If I remember correctly the 2 lane
> road originally had a 100 limit but that was dropped to 80 because of the
> deaths.
oops - i meant between withcott & the start of the gatton bypass. the gatton
bypass has seen a number of fatalities, pretty well all fatigue related. it
was dropped to 80 for the entire 20km bypass for a while when the roadworks
to duplicate it were started (this didn't involve any works on the main
road, the roadworks were beside the highway). The roadworks company went
bust and it was at least another year before roadwork started again. All
this time, the limit was left at 80, and it was heavily enforced. There were
a couple of fatigue related fatalities during this period also. How to fix
fatigue in QLD - lower the speed limit so people take longer to drive the
trouble spot, and then enforce the speed limit with an iron fist. One sunday
while it was 80 on that stretch I counted 2 speed cams, and 4 other handheld
operations - 6 speed traps on a 20km straight stretch of road.
>
> Steve
>

[Michael C]

"Justin Thyme" <pleasedontspamme@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:P9cLd.711$t57.25586@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> Sounds like the sort of accident that would be caused by fatigue more than
> speed. Just like the 4 asians that were killed on that road, and almost
> every other accident that i've heard of on there. How do we treat fatigue
> problems in QLD? Lower the speed limit so it takes even longer to drive
> through the trouble spot.
> In the early days of the gatton bypass the catch-cry was "no smokies" -
> this was when it was only one lane each way, and it was quite common to
> find traffic doing 120-140 on it (not in peak times mind you, then you
> were lucky to get 80). Accidents were pretty much non-existent. It only
> seems to be after the area became a target for speed traps and no-one was
> game to do 101, that the accidents started happening. The majority of
> accidents seemed to occur late at night.

The is a lot of "seems"

Michael

[Allan]

"Justin Thyme" <pleasedontspamme@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:1s%Kd.575$t57.20734@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
> Perhaps someone can explain to me the logic of this.
> On the Warrego Highway/A2 whatever it's called these days, between brissy
&
> toowoomba, eastern end of the Gatton bypass, near where the road from
Gatton
> merges with the main highway.
> There is an 80 zone for a few hundred yards.
> Did they put the 80 zone around the large and busy service
> station/mcdonalds, where cars regularly cross the highway and there is no
> merge lanes or deceleration lanes to speak of? No.
> Did they put the 80 zone in the area where the traffic from Gatton & Esk
> merges with the main highway, so that the merge is at a bit lower speed?
No.
> Instead, they put the 80 zone so that it starts just at the exit for
Gatton
> & Esk, and continues to just past the overpass.

I wonder if its there so the Speed camera Van can park under the shade of
the overpass...??


Allan