Prev: Proposed NSW Fines for 4Km/h over limit.
Next: Worth a look - Pissed but not in charge?
From: Toby on 12 Jul 2010 03:06
On Mon, 12 Jul 2010 08:32:03 +1000, Feral wrote:

> 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.

The Austin variety..
--
Toby.
Caveat Lector
From: D Walford on 12 Jul 2010 03:24
On 12/07/2010 3:36 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> 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.

I wouldn't waste my breath talking to an organisation that isn't
interested in any opinion other than their own.
Agree for those signs to be useful they need to be consistent but in Vic
at least they are far from it.


Daryl
From: Doug Jewell on 12 Jul 2010 04:56
D Walford wrote:
> On 12/07/2010 3:36 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
>> 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.
>
> I wouldn't waste my breath talking to an organisation that isn't
> interested in any opinion other than their own.
> Agree for those signs to be useful they need to be consistent but in Vic
> at least they are far from it.
That's my experience in QLD too - some of the corners you
can take comfortably at Sign+20 and still have a wide margin
of safety, yet others I've found are positively hairy at the
signed speed, and you probably want to do at sign-10 or
sign-20 to have a comfortable margin of safety.

I _suspect_ they base the signage on the tightness of the
corner as based on a drawing of it, but don't allow for
camber. So a well cambered road can be taken faster than
signed, but if it has negative camber (which is quite
common, especially in the lane on the outside of the curve),
things get very hairy at the signed speed.
>
>
> Daryl


--
What is the difference between a duck?
From: Sylvia Else on 12 Jul 2010 06:18
On 12/07/2010 6:56 PM, Doug Jewell wrote:

> I _suspect_ they base the signage on the tightness of the corner as
> based on a drawing of it, but don't allow for camber. So a well cambered
> road can be taken faster than signed, but if it has negative camber
> (which is quite common, especially in the lane on the outside of the
> curve), things get very hairy at the signed speed.

If they're not allowing for camber, then they're just incompetent.

Sylvia.
From: Doug Jewell on 12 Jul 2010 08:59
Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 12/07/2010 6:56 PM, Doug Jewell wrote:
>
>> I _suspect_ they base the signage on the tightness of the corner as
>> based on a drawing of it, but don't allow for camber. So a well cambered
>> road can be taken faster than signed, but if it has negative camber
>> (which is quite common, especially in the lane on the outside of the
>> curve), things get very hairy at the signed speed.
>
> If they're not allowing for camber, then they're just incompetent.
I can't be 100% sure that's what's happening around these
parts, but I suspect it may be the case. There seems to be
no consistency with the accuracy of the signs.

Qld main roads incompetent? wow, who'd have thunk it?
>
> Sylvia.


--
What is the difference between a duck?
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Proposed NSW Fines for 4Km/h over limit.
Next: Worth a look - Pissed but not in charge?