Canada's Worst Driver clocked at 180 km/h on Stoney

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by Swarly

The only reason they set up on Stoney at all is $$$$.

Good, good. It's about time they put in extra tolls and taxes for all you suburban parasites!

[jwslam]

Originally Posted by Mazrim

Stoney Trail is what happens when you take the design standards, apply a factor of safety to them, then apply generous clear zones to ensure a barrier free environment. It "feels" better to drive on because the maximum grades, maximum curve radii (horizontal and vertical), and maximum grade changes are all set very high, and it's wide open. The overdesign is really noticable on the East side of the city where you have rail crossings at 16th Avenue and 114th Avenue, and the fills are huge because the vertical curves have to be so gentle and the maximum grade so low.

In BC where they upped the speed limit by 10 km/h, the old "I can drive 10km/h faster than the speed limit" doesn't work on many curves anymore, because now you're at that design limit. Suddenly that curve isn't too comfortable to drive on. You've hit that point where the superelevation of the curve and the combination of friction and gravity no longer do enough to help your car around the corner. It's caused some nasty accidents in the winter when people aren't slowing down for the weather as well. Most of my family and friends in BC don't actually like driving 130 km/h on the Coquihalla or 97C after trying it a couple times (especially in the lower section near Hope). They generally set the cruise control to 120 km/h and they're fine.

Doesn't really matter what you set the limits to: people drive at speeds they're comfortable with. In the case of Deerfoot you have the youngster trying to rip up at 150kph because that's what he's comfortable with, and then the old lady merging at 40kph because that's what she's comfortable with. The lack of driver training for the old lady to understand that merging at 40kph when everyone else is averaging 100kph is NOT safe: that's where the underlying issue is.

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

The reason roads are set to lower speed limits is because almost everyone speeds. If it is set to 100, the general population will probably go 110-120. But if you set the limit to 140, then people will go like 160. Do you really want that?

Yes, yes I do. As long as A--hats follow the 'right except to pass' there is no problem setting cruise that high. I find most people get to the right when I'm on Stoney (non rush hour times).

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by jwslam

Doesn't really matter what you set the limits to: people drive at speeds they're comfortable with. In the case of Deerfoot you have the youngster trying to rip up at 150kph because that's what he's comfortable with, and then the old lady merging at 40kph because that's what she's comfortable with. The lack of driver training for the old lady to understand that merging at 40kph when everyone else is averaging 100kph is NOT safe: that's where the underlying issue is.

Wait....The old lady going 40 isn't safe, but the kid weaving in and out of traffic/cutting people off/slamming on his breaks (all assumed since he would have to be to go 150 on Deerfoot) is safe?

[Mazrim]

Originally Posted by jwslam

Doesn't really matter what you set the limits to: people drive at speeds they're comfortable with. In the case of Deerfoot you have the youngster trying to rip up at 150kph because that's what he's comfortable with, and then the old lady merging at 40kph because that's what she's comfortable with. The lack of driver training for the old lady to understand that merging at 40kph when everyone else is averaging 100kph is NOT safe: that's where the underlying issue is.

The road design is to help the idiots going way over the speed limit...hence the wide open design of Stoney. Generally it's some inflated sense of "I'm so badass" that causes someone to do that on Deerfoot of all places, but nontheless, if he leaves the road on Deerfoot at that speed, he's probably dead. That's expensive to the road's owner (currently the Government of Alberta). If he leaves the road on Stoney, his chances of dying are pretty low due to the lack of things to hit, the relatively flat shoulders, and the forgiving design of the corridor. It may cost more initially, but it's cheaper than dealing with a fatality.

Driver education is the only way to fix someone (I've seen middle aged guys go just as slow as an old lady onto Deerfoot) who can't or won't accelerate onto a highway. They tried putting the 100 km/h speed signs on the on-ramps on Anthony Henday and it hasn't made a difference. Something more needs to be done.

[polak]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Wait....The old lady going 40 isn't safe, but the kid weaving in and out of traffic/cutting people off/slamming on his breaks (all assumed since he would have to be to go 150 on Deerfoot) is safe?

I'd say he's safer than the old lady going 40.

Also, if people would move out of the left lane like they're supposed to than the kid wouldn't have to weave.

[Acey]

Yeah but Calf Robe at 150 isn't reliably safe in anything but an Audi R8 et al... and once it's wet or cold/snow forget it. That's my beef. Stoney SE, sure.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Acey

Yeah but Calf Robe at 150 isn't reliably safe in anything but an Audi R8 et al... and once it's wet or cold/snow forget it. That's my beef. Stoney SE, sure.

Furthermore, Acey old chum, I have every belief that this individual will be driving a vehicle of the highest quality both in parts and maintenance, I mean what could go wrong..

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Furthermore, Acey old chum, I have every belief that this individual will be driving a vehicle of the highest quality both in parts and maintenance, I mean what could go wrong..

Are you suggesting my rusted out 97 Grand Am can't handle a little bit of speed?

[polak]

Originally Posted by Acey

Yeah but Calf Robe at 150 isn't reliably safe in anything but an Audi R8 et al... and once it's wet or cold/snow forget it. That's my beef. Stoney SE, sure.

Yeah no, that's obvious.

Although I still think merging onto deerfoot at 40 is probably more dangerous.

[jwslam]

Originally Posted by Hockeyguy15

Wait....The old lady going 40 isn't safe, but the kid weaving in and out of traffic/cutting people off/slamming on his breaks (all assumed since he would have to be to go 150 on Deerfoot) is safe?

Yes, in relativity. Because if the kid at 150 hits a guy going 110, the speed differential is only 40km and less lethal, vs if the same guy hits the old lady, that 110km speed differential would probably mean she dies from whiplash.

If he's able to weave without causing any accidents, clearly he has SOME skill over the old lady who won't merge even when there's 20 car lengths open

[Jude]

That's a weak argument. What if the kid hits someone pulled over in the shoulder at 150 vs the old lady who would only hit them at 40? Both are in the wrong and both probably shouldn't be driving.

Also in your first case there is a thing called inertia. "Only 40km/h difference", doesn't necessarily mean less lethal: A crash between two cars going 150 and 110 in the same direction isn't going produce anything close to a crash between a car going 40 and zero despite having the same velocity differential.

[RogerWilco]

Originally Posted by jwslam

Yes, in relativity. Because if the kid at 150 hits a guy going 110, the speed differential is only 40km and less lethal, vs if the same guy hits the old lady, that 110km speed differential would probably mean she dies from whiplash.

If he's able to weave without causing any accidents, clearly he has SOME skill over the old lady who won't merge even when there's 20 car lengths open

You are asuming that after the initial contact with a differential of 40 kph that one of the vehicles doesn't hit a concrete barrier at 110kph and the other traffic on the other side head on going 150 kph.

Also, ask Paul Walker how much a professional driver and a great car keep you safe at high speeds.

[Acey]

Originally Posted by llwhiteoutll

I assume there is an actual document backing up a 110km/h design limit on Stoney?

Stoney Trail SE - 200.2.2 Geometric Design (Design Speed and Radii on pg 2) (10 pages)
Stoney Trail SE - Complete Technical Requirements (522 pages)

[BlackArcher101]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Its been finished since Nov 2013.

Originally Posted by Nyah

I use SE Stoney all the time. It's great. What mess are you talking about?

The work around the road still doesn't look complete. Such as final grading, seeding, painting and final cleanup. To top it off, it has to be one of the bumpiest new construction roads I've driven on.

When the government threatened the contractor with penalties they did some mad rushing during bad weather, but after they finally agreed to open it, they disappeared.

[Acey]

Seems mostly fine. WB-SB flyover was pretty jacked up when it opened, they closed it and fixed it a couple days later. Horrible bump northbound in the right most lane Deerfoot right before the exit for the NB-WB loop, and there was a potentially wheel destroying hole in the SB-EB loop. Both have likely been fixed. I saw crews there every single time I was in Calgary throughout 2014, so they definitely didn't vanish. There was no "threat" for penalties, from day one the contract was for money to be paid for every single day the road wasn't open past Oct 1 until the winter relief clause kicked in. They didn't make it to that.

[4X4]

Originally Posted by BlackArcher101

The work around the road still doesn't look complete. Such as final grading, seeding, painting and final cleanup. To top it off, it has to be one of the bumpiest new construction roads I've driven on.

When the government threatened the contractor with penalties they did some mad rushing during bad weather, but after they finally agreed to open it, they disappeared.

Either I'm blind, or you're a tough crowd, but I've driven the whole south/east/north length at least 300 times, and I have nearly zero complaints about bumps (some have appeared and been fixed within weeks), or landscaping (who really cares when you're zooming by?).

Stoney is the best thing ever. Now all I wish for is the SW leg.

[Acey]

^ And I'm pretty sure they had a year after traffic availability to finish tidying up and do landscaping, etc, though I can't find proof of this in documentation... so that would be the end of this past November.

[driveway]

There's no correlation between speed and frequency of accidents. The correlation is with the severity of accidents.

You're just as likely to experience an accident at 30 or 40 kph as you are at 110 or even 150 kph.

However, the consequences of those accidents are obviously very different.

[Acey]

Frequency of accidents is probably more closely tied to driver education and enforcement, given that fewer are killed in Germany (per 1B vehicle/km, trusting Wikipedia here), where there is strict prohibition of undertaking/cruising in the left lane, than in the US.

Also, for what it's worth without looking too deep into the specs, the big curve down at the 22X/88 St interchange has too small a radius for anything higher than 100 posted (it's ~600 m, needs 950 m for a higher speed), and it makes sense that they'd want the limit to be the same for the whole leg. The hills on either side going down onto the bridge over the Bow between Sun Valley and McKenzie would also fail for being too steep. From what I can tell, the segment between 130 Ave and Peigan at least passes the 120 design spec and could be posted at 110.