ANother Example of the Decrepid RTA's Abilities

04-08-2005, 04:29 PM

Well, after my last drum on the RTA and the incredulous lack of talent in their ranks regarding road safety, I offer their latest crowning achievement.

The P Plater vehicle restrictions.

We all know what a crock these are and the best example is probably that if you have a Merc C180 (110kW) your P plater can't drive it, but if you have a Merc C320 (190 odd kW) - basically same car much more power they can. because the ban is on supercharged cars and the like - not anything about performance.

So, as yet unpublished information will be of interest to some of you. Sensing just how pointless and poorly developed these bans are the Staysafe Committee brought senior RTA people to Committee (3rd or 4th July 2005 from memory) and after swearing them in the first question was basically along the lines of "What research/proof/data/information has been used to develop/justify/implement these bans and show they will achieve any benefits in road safety (in terms of death/injury etc)?"

The RTA in their usual mystified fashion could only answer that they had none of the above (interesting especially since Victoria has had bans on high performance cars for many years and therefore by inference has no data to prove these bans save lives or reduce crashes). Apparently Staysafe seriously considered ending the meeting at that point however without seeing the as yet unpublished reports the RTA elected to continue with their usual dribble. However, Staysafe is reportedly very unimpressed with the bans themselves, as well as the inability to even enforce these bans (for example, the Police DO NOT have the power to simply pull over a P plate driver and ask for a licence and cross check against the vehicle's exemption if any).

It is a sad world when idiots such as those that populate the RTA Road Safety management ranks are allowed to bring in baseless policies that penalise people for no gain. Remember, these are the same people who have been PROVEN to have previously developed road safety policies including speed camera programs when they did not even collate or publish the data they said they were using to justify the programs (refer my previous thread http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=7330 and the staysafe website reports).

I hope our old mate John Cadogan gets onto this because it's time we shamed these incompetent lowlifes masquerading as Road Safety experts.

regards,
AP>

04-08-2005, 04:32 PM

Delete.

4.9 EF Futura · 04-08-2005, 04:42 PM

Prime example of a knee jerk reaction huh?

Unfortunately one gets the impression that the "experts" at your RTA consider reasearch to be a sensationalised story on Today Tonight. Such research is taken to be evidence when "confirmed" by A Current Affair.

irsa76 · 04-08-2005, 09:13 PM

A Current Affair+Today Tonight+select members of the public=RTA cracking down on "hoons" with as much thought as a Lemming jumping off a cliff. All I can say is I'm glad I'm well beyond my P plates. An example of the stupidity of these laws, I know of a 19 year old in Sydney who owns a Golf R32. For those who don't know, it is a small hatchback with 177+kw, I say + as simply opening the second tailpipe gives approx 5kw. He can legally drive this 230km/h performance car yet by the letter of the law a P plater can't drive a Diahatsu Copen.

MRJUCY · 04-08-2005, 09:20 PM

It is a seriously idiotic move that has had no research to appease one idiotic tabloid

b2tf · 04-08-2005, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Stationwagon

He can legally drive this 230km/h performance car yet by the letter of the law a P plater can't drive a Diahatsu Copen.

Copens are exempt

:.

galaxy xr8 · 04-08-2005, 09:26 PM

Yes well it does make the mind boggle doesn't it.

**M&Ms** · 05-08-2005, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by back2thefutura

Copens are exempt

:.

Copens may be exempt, but the Golf GTi isn't, and that's a fair bit slower than the R32

Des · 05-08-2005, 08:20 AM

Another way for the idiots who are appointed by the government to ruin a good idea. Placing restrictions on the types of cars L & P platers can drive is a great idea, but they've gone down the wrong road again. NSW government actually had a "moment of clarity" when they adopted a "power to weight ratio" ruling for motorcycle licensing here. Basically you have a very wide choice of motorcycles up to 650cc for L & P platers to legally use. Imagine a 120kg bloke trying to ride a ****y little 250cc bike? The same ideal should be applied to cars all over Oz. That way you still have an extremely large choice of vehicles to drive and shouldn't restrict to many peoples lifestyles.
I reckon you'd use a ratio of 100kw per 1000kg's (flywheel vs dry weight). This shouldn't restrict people from gaining truck licenses either. It's not right that a 16/17 year old can get their license, walk outside jump into the worlds most powerful car and kill an entire family. Don't reckon it happens? Take a close look at all of news bulletins nightly and see how many young people in their Grey Import turbo kill each other and innocent families.

Good idea? Yes/No?

Shonky · 05-08-2005, 08:55 AM

Good Idea? = Yes.

The power to weight ratio idea is much more practical than the "lets ban all cars that may or may not be performance cars"

What about V8 Landcruisers and the like? Can you honestly call that a performance vehicle? Of course not...

This is all about the government satisfying the various bleating mothers groups and tabloids.

Something to chew on... How many XW GTs have you seen with P plates wrapped around telegraph poles? How many LTDs/Fairlanes?

The fact is... the majority of P plate road fatalities involve WRXs, Supras and Skylines etc... So where is the evidence to say they should ban V8s?

Also most of these accidents have been the results of the drivers doing stupid things. Like that blue Skyline that disected itself into a telegraph pole, after the owner tried doing 130 down a suburban street... My mums Hyundai could do that, and it's certainly not a performance car.

These idiots who continously do stupid things and pay the ultimate price are going to continue being foolish, just not in such nice cars...

As has been said in other threads, driver training would be the most effective solution, but that would cost money. Why do that when they can impose a stupid restriction and then fine all who do not comply.

Spend Money / Make Money?

Road safety my ****.

merlin · 05-08-2005, 09:09 AM

I still don't see whats wrong with the whole concept - the law has only just come in, I am sure it will be refined over time with loopholes being closed.

Although Aussie Pete you said the police DONT have the power to pull over P platers and fine them for driving a vehicle they are restriced from - how so?

05-08-2005, 09:17 AM

You see all the jap cars wrapped around poles coz they play need for speed underground and belive they can handel the car in the real world, then all of a sudden sidways, driver panics, into a pole.

jmc-007 · 05-08-2005, 10:32 AM

DAM351 this is the exact problem.

they think its like the computer game, only to find out there is no Reset and the only off button is death.

: :lookedat:

And then you have idiodic knee-jerk reactions like this.

:

Same happens at work. must be a govt thing eheheh.

merlin · 05-08-2005, 10:40 AM

All I can say is that the "knee jerk" reaction is just POLITICS. Like any government department the RTA just does (usually) what the Minister wants and what the Minister wants (usually) is what he thinks the people want (as he wants to be re-elected). What do polls about the new rule indicate? (I bet a majority of people are in favour)

So endith the State Government Lecture...

:

RED_EL_XR8 · 05-08-2005, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by back2thefutura

Copens are exempt

:.

I cannot believe anyone was interested enough to check..

e

TE50pilot · 05-08-2005, 11:07 AM

http://www.smh.com.au/news/news/path...143994578.html
This article is well worth the read to show what the RTA is waisting it's time on. The article is in the Sydney Morning Herald. Just makes you feel angry I suppose when you know they have not researched any thing.

RED_EL_XR8 · 05-08-2005, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Young 'un

What about V8 Landcruisers and the like? Can you honestly call that a performance vehicle? Of course not....

Nope hardly performance, but I can honestly say its not the sort of vehicle I want to see inexperienced scrotes driving in city traffic!!!

pauljh74 · 05-08-2005, 12:20 PM

The idea was sound - to keep novice drivers out of high performance cars. The implementation however leaves alot to be desired

Shonky · 05-08-2005, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RED_EL_XR8

Nope hardly performance, but I can honestly say its not the sort of vehicle I want to see inexperienced scrotes driving in city traffic!!!

Agreed... but you get the gist.

I was seriously looking at a DF LTD for $9000... but I had to ditch that idea when I got my licence. Shame... What a beautiful car.

Oh well. would have drank fuel like a b!atch and I probably would've gone broke trying to insure it anyway...

RED_EL_XR8 · 05-08-2005, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Young 'un

Agreed... but you get the gist.

I was seriously looking at a DF LTD for $9000... but I had to ditch that idea when I got my licence. Shame... What a beautiful car.

Oh well. would have drank fuel like a b!atch and I probably would've gone broke trying to insure it anyway...

The DF I'd have been a lot more comfortable with, a pretty safe forgiving motor car. Pauljh74's post sums it up pretty well.

MITCHAY · 05-08-2005, 01:16 PM

Lol move to ACT. Less demerit points, less speed cameras, less cops, less traffic and most importantly BUY WHATEVER CAR YOU WANT!!!!! Plus its a nice place to live.

05-08-2005, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Des

Another way for the idiots who are appointed by the government to ruin a good idea. Placing restrictions on the types of cars L & P platers can drive is a great idea, but they've gone down the wrong road again. NSW government actually had a "moment of clarity" when they adopted a "power to weight ratio" ruling for motorcycle licensing here. Basically you have a very wide choice of motorcycles up to 650cc for L & P platers to legally use. Imagine a 120kg bloke trying to ride a ****y little 250cc bike? The same ideal should be applied to cars all over Oz. That way you still have an extremely large choice of vehicles to drive and shouldn't restrict to many peoples lifestyles.
I reckon you'd use a ratio of 100kw per 1000kg's (flywheel vs dry weight). This shouldn't restrict people from gaining truck licenses either. It's not right that a 16/17 year old can get their license, walk outside jump into the worlds most powerful car and kill an entire family. Don't reckon it happens? Take a close look at all of news bulletins nightly and see how many young people in their Grey Import turbo kill each other and innocent families.

Good idea? Yes/No?

Well youd be limiting them to really old cars and a few new 4cylinder hatches. The 250cc motor bike restrictions still let people own a nice sports bike where as your rule would make them drive a very boring car for a long time.

They arnt driving "the worlds most powerful car" most of these performance cars everyone whines about are only 10-30% more powerful than your average sedan. I can't believe that theres actualy people like you that think what accidents are shown on the news are an accurate guide to what types of cars are crashing. A while ago there was a p plate skyline crash here in vic an it was on the news for days, yet the older guy who had killed himself in his xr8 doing about 200km/h on the same night didn't even make the news.

MITCHAY · 05-08-2005, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lizardmech

A while ago there was a p plate skyline crash here in vic an it was on the news for days, yet the older guy who had killed himself in his xr8 doing about 200km/h on the same night didn't even make the news.

Oh they dont want that shown on the news because it would damage the crap they dish out.

The RTA needs to show the proof that your more likely to die in a performance car than a normal car. Yes they show proof that younger people are over represetated in the road toll but weigh up how many died in high performance cars and POS cars. That would be a more accurate approach.

RED_EL_XR8 · 05-08-2005, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Lol move to ACT..... Plus its a nice place to live.

If your a Kangaroo, with thermals!

05-08-2005, 02:51 PM

The thread is meant to discuss the motives of the changes, not the detail. Anyhow, as an FYI the Minister involved in this circus is one of the people questioning the whole RTA thing. Unfortunately or not (TBD), NSW has a new Minister under Iemma that has been in the job two days as I type so we'll see what happens.

What's distressing is that the Minister, and Staysafe all believe the RTA changes are a crock yet they still go ahead. What sort of government is that?

Shonky · 05-08-2005, 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Lol move to ACT. Less demerit points, less speed cameras, less cops, less traffic and most importantly BUY WHATEVER CAR YOU WANT!!!!! Plus its a nice place to live.

Not to mention legal X rated movies and fireworks!

RED_EL_XR8 · 05-08-2005, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aussie Pete

The thread is meant to discuss the motives of the changes, not the detail. Anyhow, as an FYI the Minister involved in this circus is one of the people questioning the whole RTA thing. Unfortunately or not (TBD), NSW has a new Minister under Iemma that has been in the job two days as I type so we'll see what happens.

What's distressing is that the Minister, and Staysafe all believe the RTA changes are a crock yet they still go ahead. What sort of government is that?

The sort people voted in! But I think the voting public are starting to catch on and may have different ideas next time round.

As to the motives , I'd say it was just another well intended ill conceived attempt to solve a much bigger problem. That and an attempt to keep sides with populist media. What they perceived as a quick easy fix has turned out to be mightily complicated.

MITCHAY · 05-08-2005, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Young 'un

Not to mention legal X rated movies and fireworks!

Yeah that too. You can buy your fireworks while pickin up a p0rno. Fantastic. Its sure is great to live here even though im freezin my **** of now and it will be boiling in summer.

On topic again

As for voting. I see very little point. Yeah you have your say but since when is it ever heard. I think its all rigged anyway.

RED_EL_XR8 · 05-08-2005, 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

Yeah that too. You can buy your fireworks while pickin up a p0rno. Fantastic. Its sure is great to live here even though im freezin my **** of now and it will be boiling in summer.

On topic again

As for voting. I see very little point. Yeah you have your say but since when is it ever heard. I think its all rigged anyway.

If you vote but remain alone with your point of view then you are officially a minority. Possibly even a noisy one.

merlin · 05-08-2005, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aussie Pete

The thread is meant to discuss the motives of the changes, not the detail. Anyhow, as an FYI the Minister involved in this circus is one of the people questioning the whole RTA thing. Unfortunately or not (TBD), NSW has a new Minister under Iemma that has been in the job two days as I type so we'll see what happens.

What's distressing is that the Minister, and Staysafe all believe the RTA changes are a crock yet they still go ahead. What sort of government is that?

Perhaps the Minister (do you mean Watkins or the new Premier?) is just saying that to play both sides - i.e. people who like the law are pleased that it is in place, people who don't like it are also pleased (oh look the minister is on our side)

POLITICS I tell you - I'm up to my neck in them at the moment - all it is is VOTES (and ego's)..la la la la la la..