Sick of hearing about it!!!

Ghiadude · 07-01-2006, 10:12 PM

see here
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17750497%255E2702,00.htm l

so now what do we do? the cameras have failed to deliver once again!!
innocent lives have needlesly(sp?) been lost again and its high time somebody did something about it.

Im off to have a lay down!!

Bossxr8 · 07-01-2006, 10:35 PM

Speed cameras save lives, the numbers prove it don't they. Oh wait a minute, the road toll is higher now than it has been for the last few years, despite all the so called safety cameras that have gone up across the country. All it proves is that they only collect revenue. How can coping a fine in the mail weeks later save lives. Driver training is the only solution you idiot politicians.

Blue Oval Mopar Man · 07-01-2006, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Speed cameras save lives, the numbers prove it don't they. Oh wait a minute, the road toll is higher now than it has been for the last few years, despite all the so called safety cameras that have gone up across the country. All it proves is that they only collect revenue. How can coping a fine in the mail weeks later save lives. Driver training is the only solution you idiot politicians.

I will back you up on that stance Boss , 100% ! The polies realy do need to look at the hard line instead of the easy financialy rewarding steps they make , just so it looks like they are serious.

While I realise the that the cost of proper driver training and education will be passed onto the public, What price do we put on the lives of the loved ones lost each year because of avoidable crashes ! Not accidents , as "REAL" accidents are "UNAVOIDABLE" ! Incedents due to carelessness, stupidity and incompetance are crashes ! I aslo beleive that some of these should not be delt with by charges of mansluaghter , but MURDER !

**GasoLane** · 07-01-2006, 10:58 PM

Three things stand out in that page.
1# Nobody died on the road in the ACT (because they all left town to see the real world?.)
2# The only state with no speed limits (NT) was also death free, gotta be a moral there somewhere.
3# An ad for wine on the same page as the road toll stats!

Speed does'nt kill people. Lack of driver education does.

Des · 08-01-2006, 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Three things stand out in that page.
1# Nobody died on the road in the ACT (because they all left town to see the real world?.)
2# The only state with no speed limits (NT) was also death free, gotta be a moral there somewhere.
3# An ad for wine on the same page as the road toll stats!

Speed does'nt kill people. Lack of driver education does.

Here, Here!! Words of wisdom....

Josh_XC · 08-01-2006, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Three things stand out in that page.
1# Nobody died on the road in the ACT (because they all left town to see the real world?.)
2# The only state with no speed limits (NT) was also death free, gotta be a moral there somewhere.
3# An ad for wine on the same page as the road toll stats!

Speed does'nt kill people. Lack of driver education does.

GasOLane, i coulnt have put that better myself.

Diver education is the main reason for deaths on our roads, im a green p plater and i know many of my friends that shouldnt even be near a car, let alone drive them. Advanced driver trainning is a must, i took one in canberra and i loved it, i just wish more people take advanced driving classes.

Deadman · 08-01-2006, 10:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josh_XC

Advanced driver trainning is a must, i took one in canberra and i loved it, i just wish more people take advanced driving classes.

Agreed. These should be one of the things the government either funds, or makes mandantory for ALL new drivers.

But wait a second - that would cost the government money instead of making them money ...

:

Des · 08-01-2006, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deadman

Agreed. These should be one of the things the government either funds, or makes mandantory for ALL new drivers.

But wait a second - that would cost the government money instead of making them money ...

:

In the end it would actually save the government (read community as a whole) money, as the higher trained drivers would be involved in a lower number of severe accidents.
Remember the cost of severe road trauma is measured in the high 100's of million if not (and more than likely) billions.
My numbers are probably a fair way off, (not sure where to get actual figures) but consider this.
Let's say there's 15 million drivers in Oz. The government pays $100 of each driver's course. Initial cost would be $1.5 billion, but the ongoing cost would be considerably less, say 2.5 million new drivers = $250 million ongoing costs. Now without the actual road trauma dollar costs (to the community), I think it's safe to assume that the total price the community will have to pay over a 10 year period would be less with compulsary and government supported advanced driver training.

Keepleft · 08-01-2006, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Three things stand out in that page.
1# Nobody died on the road in the ACT (because they all left town to see the real world?.)
2# The only state with no speed limits (NT) was also death free, gotta be a moral there somewhere.
3# An ad for wine on the same page as the road toll stats!

Speed does'nt kill people. Lack of driver education does.

Remember though one should remember to compare ACT's geographical entity to other jurisdictions like NT. Such a small area as ACT has less geographical crash exposure risk when compared to NT. Offsetting that is ACT's larger population and resultant traffic densities which in turn increases that exposure, albiet in a much smaller area.

Psycho Chicken · 07-01-2006, 11:05 PM

The only reason the road toll is going down over time is because safety is better. I bet if you look at the number of accidents it's skyrocketing.

AnthonyQLD · 07-01-2006, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psycho Chicken

The only reason the road toll is going down over time is because safety is better. I bet if you look at the number of accidents it's skyrocketing.

Agreed

Redrum · 07-01-2006, 11:10 PM

I agree also. The congestion on roads, the state of the roads and peoples attitudes in relation to drink driving and merely driving whilst half asleep are the real factors.

Falchoon · 08-01-2006, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psycho Chicken

The only reason the road toll is going down over time is because safety is better. I bet if you look at the number of accidents it's skyrocketing.

Probably because there are more drivers on the road (population increase).

There does need to be better driver education. IMO that is the biggest reason for so many crashes. Go to your local shopping centre/shopping mall one day and observe for 15 mins the incompetent drivers that are around. Woman in small 4cyl cars that can't get into a space that a Mack truck would fit in, scraping other cars/poles. Not that car parks have much to do with road toll but if people can't control their vehicles properly at 20km/h what hope have they got at 120km/h?

Psycho Chicken · 08-01-2006, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Falchoon

Probably because there are more drivers on the road (population increase).

There does need to be better driver education. IMO that is the biggest reason for so many crashes. Go to your local shopping centre/shopping mall one day and observe for 15 mins the incompetent drivers that are around. Woman in small 4cyl cars that can't get into a space that a Mack truck would fit in, scraping other cars/poles. Not that car parks have much to do with road toll but if people can't control their vehicles properly at 20km/h what hope have they got at 120km/h?

Yes the extra congestion on the roads would be a factor, but I think you've nailed the main cause in the second half of your post, people can't drive!

Think about it for a second. 30 years ago we had giant metal boxes with heavy chrome bumpers, crumple zones were only just being introduced, inertia real seat belts were only just coming about, steering columns were solid, cars had 14x5 inch wheels wrapped with crappy bias ply tyres, side impact protection was unheard of.

Now days we've got air bags front and side, seat belt pretensioners, crumple zones that would write a car off in a 50 kph crash, doors that weigh twice as much due to side impact protection, ABS, traction control, power steering standard on everything, road tyres that have more grip than slicks of the 70's, etc, etc, etc.

Look at all that, factor in the number of accidents today and it's a wonder anyone drove a car in the 70's and lived to tell the tale.

AUIII XR8 MAN · 09-01-2006, 01:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psycho Chicken

Think about it for a second. 30 years ago we had giant metal boxes with heavy chrome bumpers, crumple zones were only just being introduced, inertia real seat belts were only just coming about, steering columns were solid, cars had 14x5 inch wheels wrapped with crappy bias ply tyres, side impact protection was unheard of.

Now days we've got air bags front and side, seat belt pretensioners, crumple zones that would write a car off in a 50 kph crash, doors that weigh twice as much due to side impact protection, ABS, traction control, power steering standard on everything, road tyres that have more grip than slicks of the 70's, etc, etc, etc.

Look at all that, factor in the number of accidents today and it's a wonder anyone drove a car in the 70's and lived to tell the tale.

Back in the 70's people didn't have all these "safe cars" so they drove a little more carefully. Now days people have all these "safe car" & think "i be right this car can protect me from anything i hit" attitude.

Outbackjack · 09-01-2006, 04:01 AM

Hi all, thought I would chime in here. I live in the NT. Have done for about 5 years. It is true that the road toll out here over the chrissy period was zero. That is a good thing. We do have fatalities out here, but not too often. But in almost every fatal accident there are a few common themes. Quite often we hear of a camper troopie swerving off the road and rolling a few times taking out a couple tourists. What seems to happen here is the tourist driver gets all exited about being able to "speed" and not get a ticket. Problem is they are not well versed in the skill of driving quickly on open roads. And a troopie is not the kind of vehicle to do any more than 100k anyway. Once you put two wheels into the gravel on the side of the road you are in a very dangerous situation.

Another common themes is the 1980's vintage ford (sorry guys, the community people out here love them) that never sees any maintenance somehow finds itself on its roof. These cars are almost always over loaded. I have seen 11 people get out of a 5 seater car!! So often these rollovers are caused by thread bare tyres that explode with devistating results. Alcohol is also a common factor with these people.

Of couse there many other types of accident out here, but these type mishaps are by far the most common.

Where I work, there many "high performance" cars and bikes owned by the people I work with. We have everything from 350Z's (about 6 of them) and countless XR8's, SS comodo's, moonaros, vintage mustangs, one of the nicest original XY GTHO's I have ever seen. There has never been a serious accident involving any of these cars, ever. Up until recently we had about 5 klms of "open" speed limit on the drive to work. It was always awsome fun to push the go pedal down this nice long wide stretch of highway. About 4 or 5 months ago the local gov posted the open highway at 100klms per hour. Why? you guessed it. We had two of our people killed one night turning off the highway onto our access road. They were in a rented camry, they were taken out by a troopie and another car coming the other way. Both travelling at crazy speeds. It was just on dusk.

From my experince, accidents happen because of ignorance and lack of skill. When in-experienced people get behind the wheel of ANY car and drive beyong their ability there are going to be accidents.

Statements that advocate the governing of vehicle speeds is just plain simplistic and silly. Mandatory driver training is part of the answer. Proper licence programs, like pilot training, should be introduced. But I dont know of any politician that has the guts to introduce it. And of course the cost should be carried by the budding driver.

BTW, you can be booked out here for speeding in the open sections of highway.... They call it "dangerous driving". But then it is incumbent on the cops to prove you were driving dangerously. I have never heard of anyone getting booked for this. Also the NT cops have XR8 persuit cars. They look kinda cool.....
Just my 2cents. More education and less legislation.

XAGSV8 · 09-01-2006, 07:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AUIII XR8 MAN

Back in the 70's people didn't have all these "safe cars" so they drove a little more carefully. Now days people have all these "safe car" & think "i be right this car can protect me from anything i hit" attitude.

But back then the cars would have been safe for their times. If you have heard some stories I have about the driving back then I think you would disagree about people driving safer. Remember back then you could get away with things more so people "played up " a little more.

Gammaboy · 10-01-2006, 11:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AUIII XR8 MAN

Back in the 70's people didn't have all these "safe cars" so they drove a little more carefully. Now days people have all these "safe car" & think "i be right this car can protect me from anything i hit" attitude.

Bah, I sdhould read a whole thread before replying... :P

I have to say, sitting in a car with no seat belts and knowing there's a "Zulu spear" (non collapseable steering column) pointing straight at your heart is scary as hell, and makes you drive insanely carefully after years of driving "modern" (post 1970) cars....

Gubas · 08-01-2006, 02:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tx3dude

see here
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17750497%255E2702,00.htm l

so now what do we do? the cameras have failed to deliver once again!!
innocent lives have needlesly(sp?) been lost again and its high time somebody did something about it.

Im off to have a lay down!!

Sure the road toll is high, and we can claim speed camera's arn't working, but I wonder what the toll will be without camera's. Fair enough people can speculate, but there is only one way to find out.

The Monty · 08-01-2006, 08:22 AM

Speed camers dont save lives. They slow you down for about 200 metres and thats it. The only thing that would completely slow me down is if there was about 20 times more cop cars on the road. Just my 2 cents.

HOON69 · 08-01-2006, 08:29 AM

camera's dont save lives

police presence needs to be higher

road safety and maybe driver education and higher standards in our licencing system might be needed for new drivers

but all in all im also sick of them pumping the death toll down our throats
not all the accidents are young ppl nor are they drink or drug related yet thats all they seem to want to say and think so they can feel better with themselves and make excuses to bring out new laws to pump more money into their pockets and not into bettering our roads etc.

honestly i dont think much has changed this xmas from last except one thing,alot more ppl were travelling and when that happens so does accidents.

The Monty · 08-01-2006, 08:57 AM

And maybe worse roads due to them not being fixed and worse weather.

flappist · 08-01-2006, 11:31 AM

The problems from a political view are simple:

1) Cameras earn a lot of money which has already been spent in future budgets.
2) A number of highly paid academics and advisers have promoted the idea of cameras and "road trains" and for them to admit it was not the best idea would weaken their personal position and therefore WILL NEVER HAPPEN.
3) Most politicians will do or say whatever they think will keep them in power.

While the current governments and their advisers are in power we are buggered. This has nothing to do with party politics, even internal revolutions change more than the faces you see.
It will be sorted eventually (I hope)

XAGSV8 · 08-01-2006, 12:49 PM

What they should start is when you are in year 12 there should be one class a week called drivers ed.

old fordnut · 08-01-2006, 01:15 PM

I think they should start driver ed a lot earlier than year 12. People are alreadfy getting licenses and L permits long before then. Getting back to the road toll in the NT, the only reason there are deaths up here is from drink driving and hippies who cant cope driving their bloody rusted bombs on the posted open speed limits.

cogdoc · 08-01-2006, 02:38 PM

And make people pass an advanced course every 5 years. I have to say at 35 and doing 50,000 plus k's a year I figured I drove OK, but at the FPV day I realised I wasn't as hot as I thought! We always focus on "P-plate" drivers, and with much validity, but what about all the older people, who now pilot high power / huge 4x4's and truely have lost the edge?!

naughtyfalcon · 08-01-2006, 03:41 PM

the only real way to lower the death tole on the roads is to stop makeing cars faster and limit them to a maximum 110 kph and if the driver tries to over speed then the engine is knocked down to idle speed till the speed of the vehicle is lowered.

i am in the emergancy services and have seen devistating accidents on perfectly good roads and on sunny clear days,why?,because one or both drivers were exceeding the posted speed limit.

just on news years eve up here we responded to an mva and the driver of one of the vehicles was still trapped in his ute.it was all related to speed.

i laugh at some people around these forums and some times wonder why they are looking for more and more power and speed from these vehicles which were not designed for drag racing and what ever else they do.

if you ignore the speed limit or alter a car in a way it was not intended for then you get what you deserve.i just hope that no one here ever kills another person because of alterations they have made to a car that weren't needed.

naughty

Deadman · 08-01-2006, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naughtyfalcon

the only real way to lower the death tole on the roads is to stop makeing cars faster and limit them to a maximum 110 kph and if the driver tries to over speed then the engine is knocked down to idle speed till the speed of the vehicle is lowered.

rubish. 110 km/h is still a fatal speed. cars can loose control at 60 km/h and end up in a very dangerous situation.

the problem is drivers aren't trained well enough to drive in the particular circumstances and the quality control of cars on our roads is horrible.

so a untrained driver in a barely road-legal car with a smuged windscreen doing 100 km/h in the rain - is safter than a trained driver in a well maintained vehicle doing 115km/h in good conditions? of course the second driver would get 'limited' under your idea, the first one wouldn't. i know which car I'd rather be in.

speed limiting cars is another futile attempt like speed cameras. it doesn't address the problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by naughtyfalcon

just on news years eve up here we responded to an mva and the driver of one of the vehicles was still trapped in his ute.it was all related to speed.

can you please indicate how it was "all related to speed" ? accidents may happen at speeds above the 'speed limit' - it doesn't mean speed was the reason the accident happened.

not to mention, there are many areas where the speed limits are to high (the bribie island turn off in QLD is 80 km/h when it's a 360 degree turn - and the freeway is 100km/h) - but if there was an accident on that segment of road when the driver was doing 75km/h - it wouldn't be attributed to speed would it? because he was under the 'speed limit'. the truth is - taking that corner any faster than 65km/h is dangerous.

forget about speed limits and drive to the conditions.

the NT has areas with no speed limit - yet there were no fatalities.

the Autobahn in Germany is another good example of how drivers can drive to the conditions (and follow simple rules like 'keep left') and exceed speeds of 130km/h safely - and the Autobahn also has the lowest fatality rate of any roads in Germany!

mickey t · 09-01-2006, 03:29 PM

Speed perse does not cause crashes. Never has. If it did, there wouldn’t be a live race driver or fighter pilot on the planet.

If a car is doing 40, 60, 100 or 200km/h on a straight road with no camber, there is no physical or mechanical reason why that car will alter its course and run into something. Of course increased speed can increase the forces in any resultant impact, and cut down reaction times, but the mistake has to be made before any of this becomes pertinent.

You see, there is no such thing as an accident. If a car hits something, it’s because its operator has done something incorrectly or made a mistake (or, most frequently, a series of mistakes).

Cars are inanimate objects. A car does not: “leave a road and hit a tree”. It gets driven off the road by its operator.

The time has long since past when the trained mind accepts the simplistic government implication that you cannot possibly die or be injured in a car if you drive beneath all speed limits, stay sober and have a kip now and again. It is not only wrong, it is dangerously wrong and encourages people to ignore their own inadequacies.

I cannot tell you how many people on both the Pacific and New England highways over the Christmas period drove on two-lane roads at 70-80km/h in 100 zones. Tell me this isn’t a recipe for disaster? And these people are driving under the (government-advertised) assumption that if 100 is safe, then 70 must be 30 percent safer.

It is a nonsense to suggest that survival-oriented advanced driver training causes more problems than it cures. Were that true, the training of pilots would be over in minutes, rather than days.

And why are fatal crashes examined in such cursory fashion? So few people die in plane crashes here (sorry to harp on about planes, but they are the only comparable type of fatal incident, with potentially fast machinery often mismanaged by human intervention), yet each and every crash is investigated by a team of experts who claw over every scrap of evidence until they know exactly what happened and why. This does not occur in car crashes and you won’t ever get to the root causes until it is.

My suggestion to you is that the reason for all car crashes is very simple. People make mistakes. That’s why they crash.

And the mistakes they make more often relate to operators not actually knowing the skill sets that could save them in the first place, rather than mis-applying them.

It truly scares me that so few people know how best to stop a car in a straight line. Please tell me you concur that this would be a skill advantageous for all licenced drivers to acquire. Vital, even.

Even less know how to sit in one so that they can operate the controls in the most effective manner. Why don’t we talk about this?

Throttle and steering inputs are never, ever raised as causes of crashes. It’s just far easier to justify government inaction by blaming people – and how often do politicians come out and say irresponsible people have caused this or that crash before the investigation has even started?

Please can we put away the psychological assassination of motorists and focus on some realities. Can people be given a proper understanding of how to control the tools at their disposal? Can we teach them to look at where they want their cars to go instead of looking at the thing they’re trying to avoid? Can we get them to regularly check their tyre pressures – because they have no other contact with the road.

Can we give people a braking technique?

Can we move back to speed limits set to the 85th percentile, rather than seemingly nonsensical engineering requirements that so few Australians regard as credible. Can we stop dumbing down what is, after all, a difficult craft. It will never be less difficult, so tackle it properly, in schools, for starters. A pass mark should be far, far higher and if you can’t pass it, you don’t drive. Simple.

And if that’s too expensive to test for, make the licences more expensive. I cannot tell you how many taxi drivers in this country make me fear for my life, but I’d estimate it at four out of five. And none of them scare me because they drive above the speed limit. It’s because they’re simply appalling drivers with no skill or craft.

Not that I have an opinion…

Keepleft · 09-01-2006, 03:51 PM

Blue Opal - I'd suggest the contestants on that TV show behaved worse than they actually are, since 'driving bad' against each other was necessary to win the car! Even accepting that the ultimate 'loser' would have their car crushed.

Another TV 'driver' show of absolute ignorance, this time on the part of producers was "Test Australia".

Mightyfalcon: - You can forget ANY speed limiter idea, particularly the lunatic 110km/h suggestion you make. Australia *must* accept speed as a 'given' and work with it on that basis.

The cause of the pro-speed limiter argument was made in 2004 by Gibson, Chairman of NSW Parliamentary Staysafe Committee AND INCLUDED a 140km/h speedometer proposal. Both suggestions were knocked stone-dead on the head by then Deputy PM Anderson, Canberra December 15, with roads and transport industry backing his position. The Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries will continue, rightly, to resist any such move.

Remember that 80% of crashes occure below the speed limit, but most in some way are 'speed-related', that said, crashes are multi-factoral in nature, speed may or may not be the initiating factor of the crash. Yes, accepting that higher speed crashes mean a greater impact and are spectacular for TV.

Australia has since harmonised out speedometer design rule (18) fully - with latest UNECE regulation. Basically our speedometers are to be 100% compliant in reading at 100km/h, but above that measure - could read up to PLUS 10% and 4km/h. They will NOT under-read @ 100km/h.

The old had a 10% plus or minus allowance AND 4 km/h. All issues to do with National Metrology.