Prev: Proposed NSW Fines for 4Km/h over limit.
Next: Worth a look - Pissed but not in charge?
From: Feral on 11 Jul 2010 18:13
Jason James wrote:

> Morris Nomad wasnt it? :-) Which was an OHC. BMC finally catch-up !

Reliant Regal Supervan III

Beans green mini would have been OK.

Fawlty's .. not too sure, 'cause it was a fecking wreck. ;-)

--
Take Care. ~~
Feral Al ( @..@)
(\- :-P -/)
((.>__oo__<.))
^^^ % ^^^
From: Feral on 11 Jul 2010 18:32
Feral wrote:
> Jason James wrote:
>
>> Morris Nomad wasnt it? :-) Which was an OHC. BMC finally catch-up !
>
> Reliant Regal Supervan III
>
> Beans green mini would have been OK.
>
> Fawlty's .. not too sure, 'cause it was a fecking wreck. ;-)
>
and it was an 1100.

--
Take Care. ~~
Feral Al ( @..@)
(\- :-P -/)
((.>__oo__<.))
^^^ % ^^^
From: Sylvia Else on 11 Jul 2010 20:21
On 12/07/2010 7:02 AM, Jason James wrote:

> On a related note, who decides what speed advisory speed is posted on the
> approach to corners? I have noticed that virtualy everyone ignores these
> signs. If they did, you'd have a dramatic slowing of highway traffic. It
> seems they are posted for the benifit of low-loaders carting half a house
> :-)
>

It's true they're very conservative, but they're also, as you point out,
only advisory. I suspect they're based on a maximum lateral force, and
are in that sense reasonably objective once the acceptable force has
been decided. I actually tend to abide by them more or less in the
country (where I'm less familiar with the appearance of bends than in
town). Doing so makes for a more comfortable ride.

However, I tend to be somewhat concerned about the ramifications of one
getting knocked down. People may get so used to being warned they'll
take what appears to be an unmarked bend at the speed limit (or higher).

Sylvia.
From: D Walford on 12 Jul 2010 01:28
On 12/07/2010 10:21 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 12/07/2010 7:02 AM, Jason James wrote:
>
>> On a related note, who decides what speed advisory speed is posted on the
>> approach to corners? I have noticed that virtualy everyone ignores these
>> signs. If they did, you'd have a dramatic slowing of highway traffic. It
>> seems they are posted for the benifit of low-loaders carting half a house
>> :-)
>>
>
> It's true they're very conservative, but they're also, as you point out,
> only advisory. I suspect they're based on a maximum lateral force, and
> are in that sense reasonably objective once the acceptable force has
> been decided. I actually tend to abide by them more or less in the
> country (where I'm less familiar with the appearance of bends than in
> town). Doing so makes for a more comfortable ride.
>
> However, I tend to be somewhat concerned about the ramifications of one
> getting knocked down. People may get so used to being warned they'll
> take what appears to be an unmarked bend at the speed limit (or higher).
>
The problem with those signs is their inconsistency, plenty can be
ignored completely whilst you only ignore others at your peril but the
trouble is without local knowledge you don't know which is which.
One in particular comes to mind as being particularly wrong, in Melb.
exit the Westgate Fwy onto the Western Ring Road Nth bound and the
advisory sign says 80kph yet I have gone around there many times in a
fully loaded semi on a wet day at 100kph without the slightest problem.



Daryl
From: Sylvia Else on 12 Jul 2010 01:36
On 12/07/2010 3:28 PM, D Walford wrote:
> On 12/07/2010 10:21 AM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> On 12/07/2010 7:02 AM, Jason James wrote:
>>
>>> On a related note, who decides what speed advisory speed is posted on
>>> the
>>> approach to corners? I have noticed that virtualy everyone ignores these
>>> signs. If they did, you'd have a dramatic slowing of highway traffic. It
>>> seems they are posted for the benifit of low-loaders carting half a
>>> house
>>> :-)
>>>
>>
>> It's true they're very conservative, but they're also, as you point out,
>> only advisory. I suspect they're based on a maximum lateral force, and
>> are in that sense reasonably objective once the acceptable force has
>> been decided. I actually tend to abide by them more or less in the
>> country (where I'm less familiar with the appearance of bends than in
>> town). Doing so makes for a more comfortable ride.
>>
>> However, I tend to be somewhat concerned about the ramifications of one
>> getting knocked down. People may get so used to being warned they'll
>> take what appears to be an unmarked bend at the speed limit (or higher).
>>
> The problem with those signs is their inconsistency, plenty can be
> ignored completely whilst you only ignore others at your peril but the
> trouble is without local knowledge you don't know which is which.
> One in particular comes to mind as being particularly wrong, in Melb.
> exit the Westgate Fwy onto the Western Ring Road Nth bound and the
> advisory sign says 80kph yet I have gone around there many times in a
> fully loaded semi on a wet day at 100kph without the slightest problem.
>
>
That seems to contradict my lateral force hypothesis. Have you
considered advising the RTA that the indicated speed is too low? Clearly
one wants consistency in these signs.

Sylvia.
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Proposed NSW Fines for 4Km/h over limit.
Next: Worth a look - Pissed but not in charge?