www.news.com.au/national/western-australia/speed-limit-slashed-on-indian-ocean-drive/news-story/d9cc43f1fb710c675b325c9808bcbc4e
What a joke our government is right now..... 
Spewin! An extra ten minutes added to the journey to Lano.
Next they'll only be serving mid-strength at the pub.
Seen the forecast for Sunday? 
Trust me this road drives me nuts sharing my time between Leeman and Perth I drive this road a couple of times a week and I don't think its a bad idea.
The majority of frustration is by tourist, vans etc driving 90 in a 110 zone thus forcing dodgy overtaking due to lack of patience (myself included) But if the speed is 100, then 90 wont feel as bad.
It will only add an extra 5 minutes but should save a accident.
Ideally the road needs to be updated but no government could justify the massive cost for a few piss ant towns between Perth and Gero.
To add to to the above I rounded two corners in the past month to find an oncoming car on my side along double white lines. Too close too many times.
Select to expand quoteGazuki said..
To add to to the above I rounded two corners in the past month to find an oncoming car on my side along double white lines. Too close too many times.
This is what I'm getting at rather than the speed,(as if 10k is going to make a diff in a head on anyway) I have had the same happen to me and seen it happen up the road in front of me. Also people going too slow as 70-80k in 110k zones, its a joke...
Speed is not the issue. There was a heap of bad prangs in the first couple of years it opened, then nothing for about 4yrs and now there is another bad patch.
Either something has changed or it is random clumping (which happens with any stats form time to time). The speed limit has not changed, its not the fault of 110.
The issues I see on IOD:
Lots of bogans going to Lano to party, they leave tired after work and go hard all weekend then drive back hungover. You can't have stuff-all sleep, 30 beers and ride a quad for 12hrs a day and then drive well. Duh. Same goes for the bucks nights, fishos, jetski types etc etc. Its party town.
Slow campers / oldies /etc making people frustrated. Trucks add to that frustration at times
Tons of asian tourists who are totally clueless, many are tired trying to do Pinnacles in a daytrip. Failing that they just can't drive anyway.
Add all that together and I reckon its a bit unique. Same issues were on Old Coast Road a few years back and now its Forrest Hwy built to freeway quality the problem has eased.
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..
Speed is not the issue. There was a heap of bad prangs in the first couple of years it opened, then nothing for about 4yrs and now there is another bad patch.
Either something has changed or it is random clumping (which happens with any stats form time to time). The speed limit has not changed, its not the fault of 110.
The issues I see on IOD:
Lots of bogans going to Lano to party, they leave tired after work and go hard all weekend then drive back hungover. You can't have stuff-all sleep, 30 beers and ride a quad for 12hrs a day and then drive well. Duh. Same goes for the bucks nights, fishos, jetski types etc etc. Its party town.
Slow campers / oldies /etc making people frustrated. Trucks add to that frustration at times
Tons of asian tourists who are totally clueless, many are tired trying to do Pinnacles in a daytrip. Failing that they just can't drive anyway.
Add all that together and I reckon its a bit unique. Same issues were on Old Coast Road a few years back and now its Forrest Hwy built to freeway quality the problem has eased.
Bang on!
Select to expand quoteAUS1111 said..
Spewin! An extra ten minutes added to the journey to Lano.
Next they'll only be serving mid-strength at the pub.
Seen the forecast for Sunday?
Select to expand quoteMark _australia said..
Speed is not the issue. There was a heap of bad prangs in the first couple of years it opened, then nothing for about 4yrs and now there is another bad patch.
Either something has changed or it is random clumping (which happens with any stats form time to time). The speed limit has not changed, its not the fault of 110.
The issues I see on IOD:
Lots of bogans going to Lano to party, they leave tired after work and go hard all weekend then drive back hungover. You can't have stuff-all sleep, 30 beers and ride a quad for 12hrs a day and then drive well. Duh. Same goes for the bucks nights, fishos, jetski types etc etc. Its party town.
Slow campers / oldies /etc making people frustrated. Trucks add to that frustration at times
Tons of asian tourists who are totally clueless, many are tired trying to do Pinnacles in a daytrip. Failing that they just can't drive anyway.
Add all that together and I reckon its a bit unique. Same issues were on Old Coast Road a few years back and now its Forrest Hwy built to freeway quality the problem has eased.
Can it be determined by the recent spike in accidents, if the problem vehicle (Cause of accident) which direction they are traveling, IE coming from Lano or heading too
That would help confirm your observation..
It would be interesting to also get a correlation between the amount of accident to how many people actually drive that stretch. Really more cars would also have an increase in accidents..Is it possible that is the change..
I think the speed may not be the issue, but i don't think it will hurt, often its not just the speed, but the reaction around corners and if people are driving 10km slower, it will make a difference, after all the police do say to "drop 5 to save lives.."
Personally i would like to see more over taking lanes, that "should" help, but in reality they also cause different issues. WA drivers are just stupid..
Either way, its good the issue is bing addressed..
This is the Australia way of doing things...
Accidents happening in a stretch of road due the bogan/road warrior behaviour of the '' licensed motorists'' in Perth.
BLAME THE ROAD ! We WA driver's are the best in the world, its not our fault.
Gov reduces the speed limit and now lead foots complaining about someone doing 20km less than the speed limit been the cause of the accidents...
There is no minimum speed limit for these roads apart from the Freeway with 2 or more rolling lanes per direction.
What a joke...
It doesn't matter what the speed limit is, some people (tourists, day-dreamers, old folks and IanK) will always drive 10-20km/h under it. 
Therefore dropping the speed limit does nothing to reduce overtaking. It's just the cheap cop out way of dealing with a perceived problem.
The problem persists at a 10km/h slower speed.
Whether two cars are coming at each other overtaking at 200km/h or 220km/h is hardly going to make the difference the authorities are seeking.
It needs a dual carriageway noth sides and needs to go to Kalbarri.
I do the east coast every couple years yes the motorway works were painful for a year or two but now you get to Sydney from brissie in 8 hours or less....
We need better roads it's our only coast road and it's an hour from perth amd one lane.
idiot humans
Select to expand quoteRazzonater said..
It needs a dual carriageway noth sides and needs to go to Kalbarri.
I do the east coast every couple years yes the motorway works were painful for a year or two but now you get to Sydney from brissie in 8 hours or less....
We need better roads it's our only coast road and it's an hour from perth amd one lane.
idiot humans
Yes that is a nice stretch of road between Sydney and Brisbane but remember those two city's combine have more than 7 million people. Our stretch of road has less than 7000. As much as I would like it too happen its kind of hard to justify spending billions of dollars to keep 7000 people happy/safe.
This is a brand new road!
Passing lanes few and far between, load of bends. Clearly, it wasn't engineered to mitigate this problem.
It was supposed to be the "scenic" drive, which means that people are going to be going slower on it, rather than using the Brand Hwy. (which suffers from the exact same problem but with more hills)
Someone designed it, knowing how the road would be used with all the factors on road use being known and up to date (speeds, usage, growth). ie They weren't trying to shoehorn a new design over a crappy old roman road.
I remember the first time I used that road not long after if was finished. I was travelling out of peak usage just before holidays and could see the problem even without other cars on the road.
90,100,110,130 - it aint gonna make much of a difference in a head on. 
Sure, say it adds 10 min to the trip or blame impatient/crap drivers all you like - people are people - the problem was entirely foreseeable and if the Govt truly believed in their Towards Zero strategy then the road would've been build with engineered controls in place from the outset - not trying to bandaid it after the fact.
A more cynically minded person would figure that the revenue collected from the now "speeding" motorists would pay for the band aids.
Select to expand quoteRazzonater said..
We need better roads it's our only coast road and it's an hour from perth amd one lane.
Its not the "only" coast road Perth to Dongara...
Last couple of trips I used the Midland road, flatter and faaaarrrr less dickheads.
Plus you have right of way at the T junction at the northern end near Dongara - no more queuing.
Shhh
Select to expand quoterod_bunny said..
This is a brand new road!
Passing lanes few and far between, load of bends. Clearly, it wasn't engineered to mitigate this problem.
It was supposed to be the "scenic" drive, which means that people are going to be going slower on it, rather than using the Brand Hwy. (which suffers from the exact same problem but with more hills)
Someone designed it, knowing how the road would be used with all the factors on road use being known and up to date (speeds, usage, growth). ie They weren't trying to shoehorn a new design over a crappy old roman road.
I remember the first time I used that road not long after if was finished. I was travelling out of peak usage just before holidays and could see the problem even without other cars on the road.
90,100,110,130 - it aint gonna make much of a difference in a head on.
Sure, say it adds 10 min to the trip or blame impatient/crap drivers all you like - people are people - the problem was entirely foreseeable and if the Govt truly believed in their Towards Zero strategy then the road would've been build with engineered controls in place from the outset - not trying to bandaid it after the fact.
A more cynically minded person would figure that the revenue collected from the now "speeding" motorists would pay for the band aids.
You contradict yourself in the message above. It sounds your are part of the 'Blame the road'' team, however admitting it is a ''scenic drive'', for Farks sake I will take my slow effen VW 1200cc kombi van and tag along at 50km/h ...
Then what would happen? The impatient boofhead WA drivers will honk, give me the bird, push me out of the road, expel their vitriolic comments, and guess what imprudently pass where they are not permitted and potentially head on crash. Then they will blame me (or a tourist going slow), or blame the road for their limited driving skills where best judgment, common sense are required to make you arrive in one piece....
To be honest, the government should paint solid lines all along and make passing in that stretch completely illegal if its a scenic drive. Maximum Speed limit is not also minimum you can be at this road.
If you are in such a rush to get to your destination to change your soiled underwear my suggestion to you:
-LEAVE EARLIER
-Use an alternative route where you can speed with the other Mad Max's wannabes
-Change your nappies and avoid Mexican food before going on a long drive
I have a dream!!! Where everyone drives at the speed limit and is courteous to others.
Then I woke up in WA - land of the inept driver
Select to expand quoterod_bunny said..
This is a brand new road!
you sure ?
All these accidents have happened on the OLD section of IOD , not north of lanno .
brand suffers none of the **** IOD does . Show me one section of brand that has the amount of twisty, hilly sections with no overtaking chances that you see on IOD all the way between yanchep and lanno . Brand is pretty straight for long stretches with minimal twisty dangerous sections
IOD is and has been **** for many years , best thing ever to happen to brand is now all the numpties, grey nomads and tourists use IOD and it leaves brand to just trucks and speed demons . Also minimal cops on brand as well . Brand is heaps quicker getting to any coastal town north of yanchep
Hilly, courteousy goes both ways. Just as is discourteous to tailgate, abuse other drivers and overtake in an unsafe way, it is equally uncourteous to sit 20-30kms under the posted speed limit and see how many angry drivers you can bank up behind you!
There is nothing wrong with that road i have driven plenty worse, ignorant drivers who do not give a toss are a danger any where, unfortunately I could be named in that category at times in my younger days glad I never learnt the hard way better late than never.
How many remember the amount of ****wits on the old coast road trip down south on a weekend let alone a long weekend many a near miss.
Select to expand quotenovetti said..rod_bunny said..
This is a brand new road!
Passing lanes few and far between, load of bends. Clearly, it wasn't engineered to mitigate this problem.
It was supposed to be the "scenic" drive, which means that people are going to be going slower on it, rather than using the Brand Hwy. (which suffers from the exact same problem but with more hills)
Someone designed it, knowing how the road would be used with all the factors on road use being known and up to date (speeds, usage, growth). ie They weren't trying to shoehorn a new design over a crappy old roman road.
I remember the first time I used that road not long after if was finished. I was travelling out of peak usage just before holidays and could see the problem even without other cars on the road.
90,100,110,130 - it aint gonna make much of a difference in a head on.
Sure, say it adds 10 min to the trip or blame impatient/crap drivers all you like - people are people - the problem was entirely foreseeable and if the Govt truly believed in their Towards Zero strategy then the road would've been build with engineered controls in place from the outset - not trying to bandaid it after the fact.
A more cynically minded person would figure that the revenue collected from the now "speeding" motorists would pay for the band aids.
You contradict yourself in the message above. It sounds your are part of the 'Blame the road'' team, however admitting it is a ''scenic drive'', for Farks sake I will take my slow effen VW 1200cc kombi van and tag along at 50km/h ...
Then what would happen? The impatient boofhead WA drivers will honk, give me the bird, push me out of the road, expel their vitriolic comments, and guess what imprudently pass where they are not permitted and potentially head on crash. Then they will blame me (or a tourist going slow), or blame the road for their limited driving skills where best judgment, common sense are required to make you arrive in one piece....
To be honest, the government should paint solid lines all along and make passing in that stretch completely illegal if its a scenic drive. Maximum Speed limit is not also minimum you can be at this road.
If you are in such a rush to get to your destination to change your soiled underwear my suggestion to you:
-LEAVE EARLIER
-Use an alternative route where you can speed with the other Mad Max's wannabes
-Change your nappies and avoid Mexican food before going on a long drive
Woah. Hold your high horses there sunshine... I blamed the road design... they KNOW that "people are people"; that's one of the factors in the design decisions. The speed limit for cars towing a trailer is 100 so there is already an issue of differing speeds regardless of boofheads that are allowed to do 110.
Being force to drive 10-20kph under the limit for the 10min trip to work isn't a bad thing. Doing it for hours at a time? Not so much.
My normal trip up north is 900km. At 110kph it would take just on 8 hours, at 80kph its 11.25 (in your kombi its 18hrs) - are you seriously advocating that we all just go at the slowest pace? That we all just "LEAVE EARLIER" by 3 hours!?!?? (or 10 in your case )
Part of the rationale for the IOD was to take a load off the heavy haulage route of the Brand Hwy - to stop the mixing of heavy & light vehicles. (If memory serves IOD isn't open to heavy vehicles) The nomads and trailer towers et all flocked to that road because it doesn't have the hills (which screw up fuel consumption) and trucks that they either cant overtake OR the trucks are fair up their arses of them on the uphills sections.
This ^ is all known, entirely foreseeable and therefore preventable. Roads are 'designed' with people in mind. They end up getting built with those controls removed - because it costs more. Its costs even more to go out and fix the problem afterwards. That's wasted taxation .
PS I drive a troopy... I don't go anywhere in a hurry, when I'm towing the boat its pretty much maxed out at 100, downhill, with a tailwind.
Select to expand quotehilly said..
I have a dream!!! Where everyone drives at the speed limit and is courteous to others.
Then I woke up in WA - land of the Wobbly
Fixed that for you...
Select to expand quoterod_bunny said..
90,100,110,130 - it aint gonna make much of a difference in a head on.
That's right, maybe, if neither party gets to touch the brakes.
But if you do get the brakes on for a couple of seconds that 130 will turn in to a 90 head on. All dead probably.
If you get the brakes on for that same couple of seconds from 90 you both will have stopped before colliding, got out, apologised and be on your way.
Kinetic energy is proportional to velocity squared. You lose energy with the brakes on proportional to the distance you slide while locked up. 130^2 - 90^2 = 8,800. Compare that with the bare square of 90. 90^2 = 8100 . Work it out more precisely if you like, for specific speeds and braking times, it's just year 12 kinematics.
As they said in that ad, knocking off even 5 kph from the top end makes a much bigger difference in the final collision speed if you get the brakes on for a bit.
Select to expand quotehilly said..
I have a dream!!! Where everyone drives at the speed limit and is courteous to others.
Then I woke up in WA - land of the inept driver
Drive at the speed limit. Now there's a fckn good idea.
ps I live in Mandurah, the land of the totally inept drivers in the land of the inept drivers.
Select to expand quoteIan K said..rod_bunny said..
90,100,110,130 - it aint gonna make much of a difference in a head on.
That's right, maybe, if neither party gets to touch the brakes.
But if you do get the brakes on for a couple of seconds that 130 will turn in to a 90 head on. All dead probably.
If you get the brakes on for that same couple of seconds from 90 you both will have stopped before colliding, got out, apologised and be on your way.
Kinetic energy is proportional to velocity squared. You lose energy with the brakes on proportional to the distance you slide while locked up. 130^2 - 90^2 = 8,800. Compare that with the bare square of 90. 90^2 = 8100 . Work it out more precisely if you like, for specific speeds and braking times, it's just year 12 kinematics.
As they said in that ad, knocking off even 5 kph from the top end makes a much bigger difference in the final collision speed if you get the brakes on for a bit.
Yep, simple Physics. But I didn't see in your year 12 kinematics any variables for, overloaded van/boat trailer, crap tyres, tired/distracted driver, no ABS, Large 4wd plus van, impatience quotient, drug/alcohol impairment, weather, dirty windscreen, deficiencies caused by mechanical wear & tear.............
In theory the people who have been killed must have all been travelling at >130 then? 'Cause they sure as **** aren't out apologising to each other....
Ever wonder why almost all crash testing is done at >60kph? The vast majority above this are fatal.
If dropping 5 was such a huge factor... why didn't road fatalities drop significantly when the 60 was dropped to 50 for residential areas?
Select to expand quoterod_bunny said..Ian K said..rod_bunny said..
90,100,110,130 - it aint gonna make much of a difference in a head on.
That's right, maybe, if neither party gets to touch the brakes.
But if you do get the brakes on for a couple of seconds that 130 will turn in to a 90 head on. All dead probably.
If you get the brakes on for that same couple of seconds from 90 you both will have stopped before colliding, got out, apologised and be on your way.
Kinetic energy is proportional to velocity squared. You lose energy with the brakes on proportional to the distance you slide while locked up. 130^2 - 90^2 = 8,800. Compare that with the bare square of 90. 90^2 = 8100 . Work it out more precisely if you like, for specific speeds and braking times, it's just year 12 kinematics.
As they said in that ad, knocking off even 5 kph from the top end makes a much bigger difference in the final collision speed if you get the brakes on for a bit.
Yep, simple Physics. But I didn't see in your year 12 kinematics any variables for, overloaded van/boat trailer, crap tyres, tired/distracted driver, no ABS, Large 4wd plus van, impatience quotient, drug/alcohol impairment, weather, dirty windscreen, deficiencies caused by mechanical wear & tear.............
In theory the people who have been killed must have all been travelling at >130 then? 'Cause they sure as **** aren't out apologising to each other....
Ever wonder why almost all crash testing is done at >60kph? The vast majority above this are fatal.
If dropping 5 was such a huge factor... why didn't road fatalities drop significantly when the 60 was dropped to 50 for residential areas?
Mate................... Just put your foot down and goooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. The sooner you loose your licence the better, you're clutching at straws with you're argument.
For those that think its a new road, its not. All the fatal and serious crashes getting the attention are on the old section between Military Road and Lancelin. That road has been around in some form since the 1950's and 60's and was never engineered to the same standard as the truly new road between Lancelin and the Pinnacles.
Prior to the road going through the original road would cary maybe a couple of hundred car movements on a busy day, now it's expected to carry many, many thousands per day on peak weekends. If it was straightened and widened to the standard of the new section through Nambung NP it would be a dream run, but it's not so people just need to drive to the conditions of the road they do have and be patient.
There's no particular reason for the crashes, except the driver. Mobile phones, fatigue, dodgy overtaking, speed, heart attacks, you name it, each crash along there is different except people are ending up on the wrong side of the road when they shouldn't be. I know this because I've been to many of them as a first responder, or know the other responders that have gone to every one of them.
Dropping ten km/hr might not reduce the number of crashes, but if someone is going a little bit slower it will make a massive difference to the severity of any crash that does happen. Thank Christ I don't live there anymore, I've been to enough of the bad ones, plus almost all the responders that go to these things are volunteers, I reckon they've had enough too. So chill on the slightly lower speed limit, it will only add a few minutes.
