Bad road times here...

[Coaster]

I nearly had a serious crash yesterday. Riding my bicycle, coming up to a roundabout I slowed down, there was a commodore slowly coming up to the roundabout on the left, so I thought he'd seen me and I made my way through the roundabout. Except the commy kept going through! It was a matter of inches between my bike and their bumper, luckily they saw me at the very last moment. I had to stretch my bike as far out of the way as possible, I really thought they were going to hit me, I was just waiting for the crunch.

The number of times I have nearly been hit by cars not paying attention when they pull out from intersections and roundabouts beggars belief. And I always present myself front and centre coming up to the roundabout with a bright red t-shirt on with a big gold star on the front.

I have learnt to establish eye contact with drivers as they pull up to these places so I know they've seen me, but with window tinting that is impossible sometimes. It's only for the fact that I have pre-empted the sloppy skills of drivers that has kept me from being hit by other road-users.

This story is symptomatic of the poor attention of many drivers that invariably lead to crashes with all manner of transport on the road.

[mikinoz]

I am really moved by the Tasmanian road toll this year.

Statistically, it is far less than in the pre 1970's where over 100 people a year died in Tasmania - but this drives home a real point that there are issues.

My brother in law has been a driving instructor for the RACT for 5 years and now is on the Transport licence testing team - who do your testing for 'P' plates etc. He has told me that he has made a personal decision to be more diligent at making sure that those that should not be getting their provisionals fail their test - and make sure that they are aware that they are not invincible from the get go.

I used to drive the highway that the fatalities occurred on 2 time a week for 3 years and the number of near misses I had in peak times went beyond 2 hands. In the end I travelled after 10pm to have the road to myself.

9 people in a population of 500K is a considerable toll for a single day - I hope there are moves to improve transport in the state.

Take care Andrew.

[gtimk5]

Interesting statistic in the paper here yesterday,
If the same percentage of population died in one day in NSW then that would equate to 126 lives.
And to the number on the Midlands hwy, if it happened on the M3, I think it was, which is roughly the same distance then it would equate to 89 lives in a single day.
Sort of puts things in perspective and I am sure you all can feel the grief going on down here.
The police and the local radio stations are now having a "dob in stupid behaviour" with a dedicated phone line for the police to monitor.
With an AFL game going on up north today I imagine there will be a huge police presence on the highway.
High visibility police cars rather than having them hidden behind trees with cameras would help a bit.
It is interesting that with all the narrow windy roads down here most of the accidents are on straight boring roads......
All said though, its no use blaming any one problem, it should be a combined effort by everyone, from politicians and police to every individual driver to work on this problem.....
Andrew

[h100vw]

Agreed! The complete lack of any proper training before getting a licence in Australia is pathetic! It costs about the same as $12,000 AUD for the required training in a lot of European countries before you get a licence. Makes for safer roads because the drivers are better trained.

It's no where near that in the UK. I know Germany is harder but doubt it's anywhere near as much.

I reckon some time on a motorbike would change the standard of driving. You certainly consider the road surface and conditions more.

Eyeballing car drivers at junctions works for me, in the car and on a push bike. It's much harder for them to pull the didn't see you card when you know full well they looked right at you.

I am stunned that Australian society hasn't called for a change in the rules, preventing young kids going out in anything with rear wheel drive.

When I learnt to drive, no one could afford to drive anything that was remotely considered to be performance oriented. You never saw someone at Uni in a VR6 Golf or Polo GTI( or the equivalent from 20 years ago) they'd be walking or taking a bus.

There's more cars on the road now and if miles travelled were taken into consideration then the toll has most likely reduced overall. That doesn't mean it's at acceptable level as far as the public is concerned.

Awareness and anticipation will go a long way to preventing accidents/crashes but will never eradicate them.

Gavin

[Maverick]

I don't see the point in overtaking if you're already going the speed limit...

The whole idea of overtaking is to pass slower moving vehicles like trucks, caravans and old people.

Let's assume a truck doing 90kph in a 100kph zone. You want to overtake this truck legally by not exceeding 100kph. How many kilometres of clear road will this require?

~2kms

Or the same truck that is doing 95kph.

~4 kms

90kph is 25m/s
100kph is 27.8m/s

Distance to pass:[/B] 90m
2 seconds gap from truck is 50m
Car is 5m
Truck is 25m
Allow 10m clearance in front of truck to pull back in
That's 90m you have to cover on the wrong side of the road
Time to pass is: 90m divided by 2.8m/s = 32.1 seconds
Distance to pass: 27.8m/s times 31.2s = 867m
Allowance for oncoming traffic doing 100kph: 867m
Distance required to pass (867 + 867 + 10% safety margin): 1900m.

Let's break the law and overtake at 120kph and it's a completely different scenario.

120kph = 33.3m/s
Time to pass is: 90m divided by 8.3m/s = 10.8 seconds
Distance to pass: 33.3m/s times 10.8s = 359m
Allowance for oncoming traffic doing 120kph: 359m
Distance required to pass (359 + 359 + 10% safety margin): 789m.

Let's move into the lose your license scenario and overtake at 140kph and it's a completely different scenario again.

140kph = 38.8m/s
Time to pass is: 90m divided by 13.8m/s = 6.52 seconds
Distance to pass: 38.8m/s times 6.52s = 252m
Allowance for oncoming traffic doing 140kph: 252m
Distance required to pass (252 + 252 + 10% safety margin): 554m.

And let's face it, speed cameras are only there to raise money. If they weren't, they wouldn't use black vans at night and almost hide them so they're invisible on the aide of the road.

They're not black but navy blue!

[Maverick]

It's no where near that in the UK. I know Germany is harder but doubt it's anywhere near as much.

~$2000-$3000 in Germany depending on if you have a license from another country etc etc.

I am stunned that Australian society hasn't called for a change in the rules, preventing young kids going out in anything with rear wheel drive.

Those rules restricting the type of cars do nothing at all, put them in a lower powered car and they can go just as fast but generally don't have the suspension or the brakes to cope. It doesn't matter if you hit a tree at 150 in a VL commodore turbo or at 110 in a Datsun, the end result is you're still dead. Of course the VL commodore one will hit the paper and have all the idiots jumping up and down.

There's more cars on the road now and if miles travelled were taken into consideration then the toll has most likely reduced overall. That doesn't mean it's at acceptable level as far as the public is concerned.

I don't see that we can reduce the road toll much more given the state of the roads, the state of the cars and the total idiots on the road. Personally I think we need to stop focusing on every car death and look at the number of people that kill them selves every day (and some of these are by car), and the number of deaths from alcohol, drugs and smoking as these are all things that if they spent some money on could make a massive dent in the number of deaths each year.

At the end of the day people die every day and only a tiny percentage in car accidents/crashes/stupidity so the spotlight and limited resources should be directed elsewhere and suicides are a logical place to start along with alcohol, drugs and smoking.

[qsilverza]

Nice numbers. And I agree, thank god I wasn't given a WRX or something similar when I was younger to drive ! In South Africa the best you could hope for if your parents weren't crazy was maybe a citi golf 1.6 or more than likely a 1.3. I used to drive a civic 1.6 with FWD and yes there are always hairy times but in australia your average P driver is driving a holden commodore or Ford falcon with a BIG six and rwd. Not really an ideal combination is it ? I think the chances are you can easily wind the other way round if you are being young and ignorant !

The whole idea of overtaking is to pass slower moving vehicles like trucks, caravans and old people.

Let's assume a truck doing 90kph in a 100kph zone. You want to overtake this truck legally by not exceeding 100kph. How many kilometres of clear road will this require?

~2kms

Or the same truck that is doing 95kph.

~4 kms

90kph is 25m/s
100kph is 27.8m/s

Distance to pass:[/B] 90m
2 seconds gap from truck is 50m
Car is 5m
Truck is 25m
Allow 10m clearance in front of truck to pull back in
That's 90m you have to cover on the wrong side of the road
Time to pass is: 90m divided by 2.8m/s = 32.1 seconds
Distance to pass: 27.8m/s times 31.2s = 867m
Allowance for oncoming traffic doing 100kph: 867m
Distance required to pass (867 + 867 + 10% safety margin): 1900m.

Let's break the law and overtake at 120kph and it's a completely different scenario.

120kph = 33.3m/s
Time to pass is: 90m divided by 8.3m/s = 10.8 seconds
Distance to pass: 33.3m/s times 10.8s = 359m
Allowance for oncoming traffic doing 120kph: 359m
Distance required to pass (359 + 359 + 10% safety margin): 789m.

Let's move into the lose your license scenario and overtake at 140kph and it's a completely different scenario again.

140kph = 38.8m/s
Time to pass is: 90m divided by 13.8m/s = 6.52 seconds
Distance to pass: 38.8m/s times 6.52s = 252m
Allowance for oncoming traffic doing 140kph: 252m
Distance required to pass (252 + 252 + 10% safety margin): 554m.



They're not black but navy blue!

[Rocket36]

I get sick of the argument about performance cars... Cars don't kill people, people kill people. You can cause just as much damage in a Hyundai Excel as you can in a HSV. It's about driver training and some serious attitude adjustments, NOTHING MORE!

Anyone should be allowed to drive whatever they want provided they pass very strict testing, both for road rules, car control and attitude - which can be assessed by means of a pych test.

[Greg Roles]

Having had both ends of that spectrum mate, that's a load of bullocks. My first car couldn't make 100kph, nor get up the local mountains, and it kept me alive. My BA GT allowed you to go stupid speeds quite quickly, and I overcooked it on more than one occasion. Just like your car, in young hands, you're going to get into trouble a whole lot faster. My kids will be starting out in something very pathetic.

For once I agree with the government policy of restricting power for younger drivers, and even the recent changes to motorcycle laws is a similar move in the right direction. Far more useful than making us adhere to pushbike speeds around the suburbs.

I also agree that to continue to drive, you should be re-tested every three years, and complete harder tests as you head up the performance / mass scale. Make those SUV Mum's work for it.

[mikinoz]

So instead of debating in here over what should be done, how about if you are passionate about your position you draft a letter to your local roads authority and place a copy here - letting us know what feedback you get from your input.

In reality, I nor anyone else here makes the decisions, so maybe we should put the money where the mouth is so to speak and then we may move forward.

Likewise - my first car was humble 875cc and could barely get up a steep hill with 3 people in it. I kept it the right side up and also out of trouble. My next car was 1600cc more powerful - I got myself in to more trouble with that on gravel and in the wet than the previous car despite having more than 4 years experience. I think that with age comes maturity and experience and new drivers should be like motorcyclists and restricted for 4 years to sub 100KW cars, NA, and made to pass benchmarks at each year of their provisional licence to ensure as they progress to a full licence holder that they are worthy.

[gtimk5]

The subject of my thread here did not involve drivers under 28 yo.
There were no high powered cars involved....
This is not a debate over what we need to get changed, its a thread to remind every member or visitor here to take care. No matter who you are, you are not invincible. I know this as I am a victim of this sort of stupidity having lost my dad to a red lighter when I was 11yo....
And while I am driving down the Hume on monday week in my highly visible new Caddy van, I will be looking out!!! I want to enjoy this vehicle!
Andrew

[Satanstoenail]

Agreed, all the governments have done is create a bunch of drivers who only know how to watch their speedo and drive at whatever speed is indicated on a sign. The only solution is to make drivers responsible for their actions and make them capable of thought and this can only be done be removing draconian speed restrictions, stupid "safety" campaigns like "every K over is a killer", the removal of speed cameras and replacement with more police on the road looking for stupid idiots not someone going 10kph over, proper driver training including retesting every 5 years and the stupid mindset that a drivers license is a right.

The driver training should be more like Germany, make it cost a few thousand dollars and make the drivers understand how to drive not just pass a test. Germany also requires you to attend a first aid course as part of the process and mandatory vehicle inspections.

Totally agree with all of this. Can't see any of it happening any time soon though unfortunately.

Crashes... Not accidents. Accidents implies they're not avoidable, which they are....

....Again, you mean CRASH.

Actually the word accident by definition implies that an incident was unintentional, not unavoidable. If a driver wasn't trained well enough or wasn't concentrating hard enough it doesn't mean they meant to crash, it is still an accident. Getting caught up on terminology is unnecessary. Crash or accident, it's all the same result.

[mikinoz]

And while I am driving down the Hume on monday week in my highly visible new Caddy van, I will be looking out!!!

Have you gotten it? I missed that thread...

[gtimk5]

No missed thread Mik, its been a long 6 weeks of negotiating and I fly up to Sydney on thursday to pick up my Caddy, bright as orange! 5th visit up there since last christmas.
I havent said much about buying this van due to all the uncertainty with finance companies but once its in my possession this thursday you will all know about it. It stands out with the extras and colourcoding ect...
Look out Preeny! Going to convert him to colourcoding soon!!