Road transport

Something must be done to stop stupid people doing stupid things

I don’t wish to make light of the potential tragedy of having your kid bowled by a car, and thank goodness it looks like he’ll make a full recovery, but why is it always someone else’s fault when people do stupid things, and why is it always the case that “something must be done”?

Then yesterday morning as I was driving to work I saw a nearly identical situation. Where a girl jumped out from her mother’s car, run around the back of it and across the lane of oncoming traffic without even looking, right outside Remuera Intermediate. She ran right in front of a 20 tonne truck who slammed on his anchors and nearly clipped her. She just kept on running and her mother drove off. The look on the truck driver’s face was something to behold. He nearly killed that girl, it was just a matter of a few inches…and she just walked on, and will probably do it again today. I felt for the truck driver because there was no way it was his fault.  Read more »

Greens vs Labour, both hate roads, just different ones

The road hating Green Taliban reckons we should cancel transmission gully to pay for Len’s Rail loop.

Meanwhile, David Shearer doesn’t agree, and favours canceling the State Highway One Upgrade north of Auckland to pay for Len’s loop.  This is about the millionth reannouncement of this policy. BTW they have said they’d use that money for loads of other things too.

Shearer told talkback in Wellington today that Transmission Gully was way more important than the so-called ‘Holiday Highway’:

Read more »

Why do Labour and the Greens care so much about Huntly?

There is further confirmation that Labour and the Greens do not want to complete the Waikato Expressway.

Should they win the next election, we could see the most major intercity highway in the country detour into a 2 lane highway through the shittiest town in the country.

NZTA’s Waikato-Bay of Plenty regional director Harry Wilson said the agency had spent $28.9m buying properties along the designated route of the Tamahere-Cambridge section.

The agency has a total purchasing budget of $50.3m and, to date, had made both full and partial property purchases.  Read more »

The bleeding hearts find something else to complain about

The jobsworths are complaining again.

“A couple who reported a man driving with an open bottle of beer in Nelson were dumbfounded to be told by police he wasn’t breaking the law.”

“Road safety campaigner Clive Matthew-Wilson, who also edits car review website, dogandlemon.com, was shocked to learn the practice was legal and called for a law change.

Is he really that thick? It would appear so.

“It’s completely crazy. I just can’t believe our lawmakers are that stupid,” he said. “It’s like saying you’re allowed to drive carrying a handgun as long as you’re not shooting anyone.

Errrm, you can as long as you have the correct firearms licence and are heading to the shooting range or the gun shop.  Read more »

Technology makes a big difference

The road toll is about as low as we are going to ever get it. Last year 306 people died on the roads

The 2011 toll is the lowest since records began in 1952.

“Although the 2012 toll is one of the lowest on record, I’m saddened that it is an increase on the 2011 toll,” Associate Minister of Transport Simon Bridges said.

“While the full reasons behind the 2012 toll won’t be known for some time, we do know that both the number of crashes with multiple fatalities and the number of motorcyclist fatalities increased.”

The number of crashes in 2012 with three or more fatalities was eight (resulting in 30 deaths) compared with one (resulting in three deaths) in 2011.

The number of motorcyclist fatalities increased from 33 in 2011 to 45 in 2012. That equated to 15 per cent of all road deaths in 2012.

Read more »

People are Stupid, Ctd

People are Stupid, like cyclists who run red lights:

“Why do cyclists run red lights?” a friend asked me recently.

It’s a contentious issue in the so-called war between motorists and cyclists (most of whom, curiously, are also motorists) – and a question worth addressing.

But first, a clarification. Are we talking about “running” a red light – flying through at maximum speed, even though the light has changed?

This is, of course, the most dangerous way to go through an intersection, especially if you are driving a one-tonne vehicle. As vulnerable road users, however, any cyclist who goes full tilt against the lights through intersections probably won’t last very long.

Most cyclists who “run” red lights are in fact treating them as give way or stop signs – they lose much, if not all, of their momentum, make sure the way is clear, and then cycle through.

Such behaviour is illegal and can be very costly – for example, the offence carries a whopping $352 fine in Victoria.

So why do some cyclists do it?

Simple really…Because they are stupid. The article give a whole lot of mainly gay reasons, but the real reason is that cyclists in the main are stupid…just look at Trevor Mallard…stupid personified.

Pissing off tree huggers

Some sensible people in NSW have worked out that “other people” do not exist, and they wont use public transport because they don’t exist to begin with.

The Infrastructure NSW report is unashamedly supportive of more investment in roads, including bus services, rather than rail or other dedicated public transport corridors. The report argues against the idea new motorways create congestion.

Maybe we could send Len on a fact finding trip to work out how the public don’t like public transport.

Sign post them

I agree with the AA, speed cameras should be sign posted. When I drove around Australia speed camera areas were clearly signposted. By clearly sign posting speed camera areas it removed the charge that the government is simply trying to increase revenue gathering and focuses the campaign clearly on road safety.

The Automobile Association has dismissed concerns plans to double police use of speed cameras is a revenue-gathering move, but says fixed cameras should be signposted to alert motorists to their use.

The National Land Transport Programme 2012-15 announced yesterday included a “reserve allocation” of $10 million “to support the increased use of technology to manage speed”.

New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) spokesman Andy Knackstedt confirmed the money was earmarked for additional speed cameras.

Associate Transport Minister Simon Bridges indicated the money could pay for more than 60 new cameras. There are 55 currently in use.

I think some of the locations need to be assessed too. There is a speed camera on Waipuna Road in Auckland. It was put there before the South Eastern Highway existed and was needed as that road was the main arterial to Eastern Suburbs. However since the SEH opened Waipuna Road is pretty much a desert…though the speed camera remains. It can only be for revenue gathering purposes.

300,000 Miles Logged, Not a Single Accident Under Computer Control

The Atlantic

On a day where public transport chaos caused by unions affects Auckland we can see the future in an article at The Atlantic. Google’s self driving cars have now logged more than 300,000 miles of driving without a single accident.

The future isn’t rehashed 19th century technology confined to rails and loops, rather it is ubiquitous information highways and computer controlled self driving cars.

Len Brown can moan all he likes about his multi-billion dollar millstone of a rail loop, but he would be better advised to invest in communications infrastructure to support driverless cars and then turn Auckland into a truly spectacular liveable city. He could even drop the $400 million notes required for the Pacific Fibre and pop that into the infrastructure development for the city, it would certainly be more beneficial over a longer term than a stupid rail loop.

Ever since Google began designing its self-driving cars, they’ve wanted to build cars that go beyond the capabilities of human-piloted vehicles, cars that are much, much safer. When Sebastian Thrun announced the project in 2010, he wrote, “According to the World Health Organization, more than 1.2 million lives are lost every year in road traffic accidents. We believe our technology has the potential to cut that number, perhaps by as much as half.”

New data indicate that Google’s on the right path. Earlier this week the company announced that the self-driving cars have now logged some 300,000 miles and “there hasn’t been a single accident under computer control.” (The New York Times did note in a 2010 article that a self-driving car was rear-ended while stopped at a traffic light, so Google must not be counting the incidents that were the fault of flawed humans.)

For comparison, in the United States in 2009 there were 10.8 million traffic collisions, according to the Census Bureau. That same year, American cars logged some 2.954 trillion miles, for a collision rate of about .365 per 100,000 vehicle miles traveled. Now, you can’t directly compare the two figures. Google’s cars have been tested in pretty hospitable conditions, not facing, for example, the rigors of a New England winter. And, as Google engineer Chris Urmson, writes, they still “need to master snow-covered roadways, interpret temporary construction signals and handle other tricky situations that many drivers encounter.” Additionally, the cars are still driving with “occasional” human control. But at the very least, the Google cars are slowly building a pretty good-looking driving record.

This technology is still at its very early stages and 300,000 miles is not all that big of a sample. According to a “cursory” analysis by Bryant Walker Smith of Stanford Law School, “Google’s cars would need to drive themselves (by themselves) more than 725,000 representative miles without incident for us to say with 99 percent confidence that they crash less frequently than conventional cars. If we look only at fatal crashes, this minimum skyrockets to 300 million miles.” We’re still a long way away from there.

 

Nevada licences driverless cars

The Telegraph

Len Brown should be looking at this initiative in Nevada instead of wasting billions on a silly trainset:

Driverless cars are to be allowed on the roads of Nevada, which has become the first state in America to allow the vehicles to licence their use.

Google which has embarked on an extensive testing programme of the cars secured the approval of the state’s Department of Motor Vehicles.

Motor manufacturers have been working on taking human error out of driving for more than a decade with innovations such as lane departure warning, self applying brakes and cars which park themselves.

Google, however, has come up with the ultimate version of cruise control, by removing the driver completely with the help of video cameras, lasers and radar sensors.

It relies on mapping which is created by Google’s own staff who drive the route filling in the location of lane markings and road signs.

Despite being controlled by a computer, two people must sit in the car at all times.

They will be held responsible for the car’s behaviour. As the vehicle will only be able to break the speed limit if the driver takes control, he or she would receive the speeding fine.

But he or she will be able to spend the journey on the phone or even texting without putting other road users at risk.

A test car, which has already been tested in California, has already covered 140,000 miles without any mishap – apart from being nudged from behind at a set of traffic lights.