Police slam 130km/h Hume Hwy stunt By WHEELS Magazine

[K_Man]

That has hit the nail on the head, laziness.

Mandatory professional lessons are good, but from my experience (a while ago) they teach you how to pass the test, and not much else. Having the 'vicroads' way of doing a 3 point turn drummed into me was painful. I suppose if I ever have to do it between 2 brick walls I guess I am set.

"Why cant I just use a driveway to turn around?"
"Its not like that on the test."

And so on.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by FNQracing

Although I'd love a 130 limit on major highways, all that will happen is that it will mean you'll catch the slower traffic much faster, and with limited overtaking areas, you'll be stuck behind a convoy of snails. I don't see it happening with our somewhat unique condition of so many gawd damned trucks on the highways.

In my own experiences, when I "speed" on the highway, I just catch the trucks and caravans faster and end up getting frustrated sooner, rather than kicking back a little going with the flow. Raising the limit in restricted areas only, means in all reality, the trip time between major sections won't change diddly squat.

Well I don't think many are suggesting 130 for single lane roads. I thought this 130 was aimed at muti laned express ways with median strips, barriers, on and off ramps and no cross streets.

[Kowalski]

Good God......
I just did the visa-run from Dubai to Oman & back today.
Sitting on 130 most of the way & was getting passed like I was standing still.
And, I was driving a poxy Hyundai Tucson with zero go. If that thing can be as comfortable at 130 today, in crappy desert/mountain roads, then our roads in Aus are sadly under-utilized by this focus solely on speed.....

Note, trucks/buses limited to 80 also. Might think that's a problem, but in actual fact you are around them so quickly that you're never in danger of getting it wrong when passing like at home either.

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by prydey

thats called experience, and its the same for everyone. you can't 'teach' or 'learn' experience.

the system is fine in my opinion. kids can't even learn bad habits off parents anymore as i believe it is mandatory to have a minimum number of lessons with a qualified instructor.

the reason you see so much poor driving behaviour is because for years now the authorities have focused too heavily on only 1 area - namely enforcing speed limits. this has created the lazy attitude toward most other rules. if people get picked up now for failing to indicate, right lane hogging, driving without due care etc, they think they are hard done by and being targeted.

I think the system is sorely lacking a great deal. The observations of the posters here is testament to that. Even those in favour of the higher limits have reservations about an immediate introduction due to the average driver's poor behaviour on the roads.

I did a few calculations using a trade certificate as a baseline.

Before a person can be called trade qualified they are required to do an apprenticeship for four years. Working 35hrs per week for 48 weeks per year rounds out to 6720 hrs of largely supervised training. Included in this training is one day per week for three years of theory pertaining to the trade of choice which is around 1000hrs and is under the direct supervision of a qualified tutor.
This is the passing on of knowledge gained from experience, which gives the apprentice the benefit of other peoples experience and prepares them well for the future in the trade.

To become a qualified driver 120 hrs of supervised training is required and it can be provided by any qualified driver. It can be mum or dad and it can also be someone who obtained their licence thirty years previously and have never opened a road rules book since and who may only travel 500klm per year around their home suburb. It can also be a person who has no qualifications in tutoring or any kind of teaching.
This scenario is somewhat successful in giving learners enough information to pass a licence test. A test that is pretty basic and doesn't come close to assessing how well one can control a vehicle is real life situations.
The driver then becomes provisional for three years. Apart from an assessment after their first year the three years are done with out any supervision by anyone. The hours involved here are around 2000 including the initial 120hrs allowing for driving an average of 2hrs per day for 300 days per year. A bit of experience is gained during this period the driver is then classified as qualified.

Is it just me or is this all out of whack!!

The risk of death or injury to a tradesperson or their customers is a lot less than the risk of death or injury to new drivers or the other road users, yet they are allowed to go about gaining experience unsupervised.

A woman wrote in to the local paper here a few years back about aquaplaning in the wet and hitting a rock face on the F3 on her way to work and the point of her letter was that a similar scenario happened to her again a few weeks later and she said she would have crashed again if her father hadn't told her to turn into the skid.

I say Whhoooaah!! what the .....! You've got to be kidding!!!
The trouble is we keep churning out drivers of this competence level by the thousands every year.

Raise the limits where its appropriate but the subject of driving in Australia needs to be looked at with a holistic approach not just one thing in isolation.

[prydey]

noflac52 - how did you obtain your licence?

[noflac52]

How I obtained my licence is irrelevant as it was a long time ago and things were very different then.

What is relevant is the fact that I have since undertaken advanced driving theory and practical techniques in cars, trucks and on motorcycles as an ongoing thing with the aim of improving my driving / riding, and not stagnating and becoming complacent about something as important as surviving on our roads. Lots of hours of practical and theory.

Still, I don't see how that changes any of the stuff I wrote in my previous post. We still have a system that is woefully inadequate at training new drivers to a level that can be considered good before they are released onto the roads to hopefully gain experience before they suffer injury or death.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by noflac52

How I obtained my licence is irrelevant as it was a long time ago and things were very different then.

What is relevant is the fact that I have since undertaken advanced driving theory and practical techniques in cars, trucks and on motorcycles as an ongoing thing with the aim of improving my driving / riding, and not stagnating and becoming complacent about something as important as surviving on our roads. Lots of hours of practical and theory.

Still, I don't see how that changes any of the stuff I wrote in my previous post. We still have a system that is woefully inadequate at training new drivers to a level that can be considered good before they are released onto the roads to hopefully gain experience before they suffer injury or death.

no - it makes you a hypocrite, thats all.

and thats my point. most people that whinge about the licencing system, went through an even easier system to get their own.

any training you do after that has nothing to do with the licencing system.

[noflac52]

Your one eyed approach makes me laugh. Forty years ago the country was a different place than it is today. Most things were easier but " experience" has shown us that there are better ways to do a lot of things we took for granted back then. You are right in saying that any training done after getting a licence has nothing to do with the licencing system but it has everything to do with staying alive. I'll leave it up to you to decide which is the most important of the two.

I get the innuendo, that because I did not have to reach a high standard to obtain my first licence that I have no right after my many miles, kilometres and years of professional driving and learning that I have no right to suggest that the people going for a licence today have to reach a higher standard than we did back then. That's absolute rubbish!!!

So you are suggesting that all we have learnt in the past forty years is of no value. That the only way to get education and experience is to do it yourself and the opinions of others with education and experience are of no value.

I ask you to point me to any other facet of our lives where this is the norm or even accepted?

I won't accuse you of being a hypocrite because I make posts relevant to the subject and not relevant to the person posting them but I will point out that your own post is a little hypocritical as you make the assertion that the system is good and experience is gained more by doing the kilometres than during training and then you dismiss experience as having little value to anyone.

So if we act on the idea that you have put forward that the system of licencing is so good maybe we should just raise the limits and see what happens because everybody is already up to standard and don't need anymore training. I think not! I'm all for raising limits to sensible speeds for suitable roads and I would welcome it tomorrow but I am not under any illusion that the standard of many drivers will make the grade atm but I do think that I have a much better chance of survival than the drivers of basic licence grade.

Bring on the higher speed limits!!!

Even in racing after you get a licence its not a free for all. Newer drivers are restricted until they can demonstrate that they are capable of making the cut and not unduly endangering others.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by K_Man

That has hit the nail on the head, laziness.

Mandatory professional lessons are good, but from my experience (a while ago) they teach you how to pass the test, and not much else. Having the 'vicroads' way of doing a 3 point turn drummed into me was painful. I suppose if I ever have to do it between 2 brick walls I guess I am set.

"Why cant I just use a driveway to turn around?"
"Its not like that on the test."

And so on.

When I went for my test in 2010 they changed the rules so you could use a driveway, if they had of given me the reverse park I would have failed, lol.

Originally Posted by noflac52

Before a person can be called trade qualified they are required to do an apprenticeship for four years. Working 35hrs per week for 48 weeks per year rounds out to 6720 hrs of largely supervised training

Yeah right, I'm 4th year and I've been supervised for probably 6 months during my entire apprenticeship, most of those 6 months being with a 3rd year apprentice at the time and I've been training other apprentices.

The whole system sucks, this isn't the one to quote for this example lol.

[Franco Cozzo]

Post of the double kind.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by noflac52

So if we act on the idea that you have put forward that the system of licencing is so good maybe we should just raise the limits and see what happens because everybody is already up to standard and don't need anymore training.

oh noes, won't somebody think of the children...

pretty sure L drivers and P drivers still have speed restrictions on their licence.

Originally Posted by noflac52

but I do think that I have a much better chance of survival than the drivers of basic licence grade.

that assumes that all fatalities are the people at fault doesn't it? a little short sighted.


you are right though. things have changed in 40 years. these days you don't get to drive down to the local cop shop unlicenced, do a lap with the officer, and then drive home with a licence. you have to do a little bit more than that, including a little bit of theory.

the other point i would like to make, all the people you see with poor behaviour on the road, what percentage of them are young inexperienced drivers, and what percentage is older drivers (mid 20's +)? i would suggest the highest number of offenders is the older category, not the younger.

[hedgehobb]

First of all, straight off the bat, you can't compare Countries. Saying: "I just came back from [INSERT COUNTRY THAT HAS SLIGHTLY HIGHER SPEED LIMITS] and it was like, totally cool!" doesn't count.
Why? Because the average Aussie and his/her tainted way of understanding road rules has been heavily influenced by Govco.

And secondly, for that sole reason alone, is why this argument is futile, pointless, and will never end.

Personally, I just accept it and move on. No point dwelling on a subject that is out of all our hands.

[Rockape]

It is in our hands. The Gov work for us.

[Buntz]

The problem is the morons who make legislation and enforce it. They still think it's the 1970's... and cars will be found on the side of the road with only a dented chrome bumper and a blood splatter inside.

Truth is cars are very safe these days, and more than capable of those speeds. Infact, it's the speed I've observed people doing now anyways.

[LTDHO]

I didn't realise that 'Wheels Magazine' were that stupid.
Not for doing the stunt (I agree that speeds on all highways should be increased)
The fact they think that the government would actually consider increasing the speed limit. Tools!

It will not happen. Pure and simple

[Matty4]

Originally Posted by prydey

pretty sure L drivers and P drivers still have speed restrictions on their licence..

Ummm....no.
Unlike other states that restrict new drivers and force them to become rolling roadblocks, here in Vic the posted limit is for all, even L and P drivers, which is a good thing.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by prydey

no - it makes you a hypocrite, thats all.

and thats my point. most people that whinge about the licencing system, went through an even easier system to get their own.

any training you do after that has nothing to do with the licencing system.

well said Prydey, you must be reading my posts too much - LOL

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by noflac52

Forty years ago the country was a different place than it is today.

40 years ago the road toll in Victoria alone was 1034 per year, last year was less than 300, so your point is?

I am 56 years old and I remember.

Originally Posted by noflac52

So you are suggesting that all we have learnt in the past forty years is of no value. That the only way to get education and experience is to do it yourself and the opinions of others with education and experience are of no value.

You have had your 40 years to get the experience yet you criticise the young who have not got there yet, your comments are a little dated my friend


And remember I have been a professional truck driver, a professional (post licence) driver trainer and a licence tester (for a private provider), been a SES volunteer pulling bodies from cars for 13 years and I own and drive a race car, so do I qualify to pass comment?

[new2ford]

Having read the article in Wheels now, especially the commentary by the English driver, I think it has considerable substance. A bit cheap of Wheels though to headline the fact that there was no radar interception. That would only inflame the police and distract the discussion from the genuine issues.

They mention the problem of bunching and the fear-induced creep-overtaking that comes from the rigidly-enforced uniform speed limit. And the fact that the UK has the same sort of speed limits but the police/lawmakers aren't so inflexible. Nothing wrong with a sudden burst of speed to safely clear an obstacle for instance.

As for speed/distance/fatigue, anybody here who's only driven in Australia can argue all the theory they like. I've driven heaps both here and in Europe over the years and driving in Europe at those higher speeds is definitely less tiring, safer and vastly less stressful.

Coming back here to drive is so downright unpleasant that I'd give it up, if the public transport wasn't so crap (i.e. not up to European standards either)!

I wonder how many deaths in Australia are attributable to highway hypnosis that is a consequence of the "speed kills" regime? Personally I think that regime has been killing people, not saving them. It needs some research but of course they won't do that because it might reveal inconvenient truths.

[noflac52]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

40 years ago the road toll in Victoria alone was 1034 per year, last year was less than 300, so your point is?

I am 56 years old and I remember.

Congratulations!


You have had your 40 years to get the experience yet you criticise the young who have not got there yet, your comments are a little dated my friend

An interesting assumption on your part. I don't think I mentioned the young anywhere. My point is that experience is what people like you and I can pass on to new drivers to bring them along quicker and lessen the risk factor in their first years on the roads. New drivers come in all age groups. It would benefit the debate if you read the posts carefully before responding


And remember I have been a professional truck driver, a professional (post licence) driver trainer and a licence tester (for a private provider), been a SES volunteer pulling bodies from cars for 13 years and I own and drive a race car, so do I qualify to pass comment?

Not to skite but just so you may understand why I make the comments about the system. I have done all of the above and I still do. I had a 27 yr full time professional career doing rescue work and unlike you I saved the vast majority of the victims I encountered although there were some that were beyond any ones help.

The dramatic line " pulling bodies out of cars " doesn't do any thing for me. Its a bit like the line "won't somebody think of the children"

I don't actually own a race car atm so I suppose I'm not qualified ( until I get another one )to comment on such in depth things as road safety.

Originally Posted by prydey

oh noes, won't somebody think of the children...

Is this the best intelligent counter point you can come up with. I think some one else has already used it in this thread.

pretty sure L drivers and P drivers still have speed restrictions on their licence.

Correct!



that assumes that all fatalities are the people at fault doesn't it? a little short sighted.

You assume that! I don't! So your assessment might be true. Maybe you are a little short sighted but that's not for me to say.


you are right though. things have changed in 40 years. these days you don't get to drive down to the local cop shop unlicenced, do a lap with the officer, and then drive home with a licence. you have to do a little bit more than that, including a little bit of theory.

Your time frame here is way out. That's not how I obtained my licence at all!

the other point i would like to make, all the people you see with poor behaviour on the road, what percentage of them are young inexperienced drivers, and what percentage is older drivers (mid 20's +)? i would suggest the highest number of offenders is the older category, not the younger.

This may be a fair assessment but you are categorising drivers into brackets. My point is to raise the standards of all drivers, not any particular section of road users and I would be one of the first to put my hand in my pocket and pay for a refresher advanced driving course if it were mandated by the authorities. Even though I have done so before, but I would want trade offs from the govt in relation to the draconian speed limits we now have.

Calling me names ( hypocrite )instead of debating the subject is a cop out!

I don't want anyone to do anything that I am not prepared to do myself ( first if it was necessary to get the ball rolling ) so how can that be construed as hypocritical?

Come on come up with some well thought out counter points instead of muck raking.

[noflac52]

[


Yeah right, I'm 4th year and I've been supervised for probably 6 months during my entire apprenticeship, most of those 6 months being with a 3rd year apprentice at the time and I've been training other apprentices.

The whole system sucks, this isn't the one to quote for this example lol.[/QUOTE]

Point taken Damo!

I suppose it depends on who you work for during your apprenticeship but most traineeships, university courses etc etc have a much higher supervision level than driving in the first few years. So you get my drift!

Maybe you're just a prodigy and learn so fast that you can pass your knowledge on a lot quicker than most others. lol!

[Trevor 57]

If you think that the road safety measures in Australia don't work, have a read:
http://www.photius.com/rankings/road...ings_2009.html

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

If you think that the road safety measures in Australia don't work, have a read:
http://www.photius.com/rankings/road...ings_2009.html

But this is a discussion about raising the limit on certain classes of road (notably motorways) to 130. In that table, just at a glance, I can see at least three "first world" countries with a lower death rate / 100,000 than Australia: Germany, France and Netherlands. They all have 130 limits yet their road safety measures also seem to have worked - even better than Australia's.

It doesn't look like the upper speed limit is much of a factor and maybe their drivers don't suffer highway hypnosis and their traffic doesn't bunch so much at high speeds as a result of unreasonable enforcement.

So the point you're trying to make?

[prydey]

Originally Posted by noflac52

Come on come up with some well thought out counter points instead of muck raking.

regardless of what we may witness in our daily drives, or what is reported on the news, the fact is that we are talking about a very small minority when you consider the amount of cars on the road, and the relative minor number of incidents/accidents.

many of the people that come to grief aren't obeying any laws anyway, so what difference is changing legislation going to have? laws only affect the honest people.

also, grab yourself a dictionary and look up 'hypocrite'.


getting back to the original topic, as a few others have mentioned, it will likely be a cold day in hell before limits get raised on any sections of road. it would be akin to someone in govt admitting they got it wrong, and that will never happen. they have invested far to much in to telling people how bad 'speed' is so to backflip on that would leave too much egg on their face.

[noflac52]

Fellas I really don't care if the licencing system is improved or not its just so obvious that it can be improved a fair bit for every one's safety especially if we will have higher limits!

As to "hypocrite". I don't think I'll bother to look it up. It seems that I have no idea what it means so I'll just live in the belief that you were paying me a compliment instead of calling me something derogatory.

[nstg8a]

Coming back from the Gold Coast yesterday it seemed like everyone already thinks the limit is 130ish

I got myself in the middle of a bunch of about 8-10 cars and I just kept pace with them, most of the time I had cruise set at 125 with just the occasional +/- 5kmh. All the way from the goldie till I turned off close to the cbd.

Never saw a cop, barely had to change lanes. Was probably the best drive I've had since being here. Funniest bit was at the 110/100 Kms transition, everyone slowed to 95 for about 5km then just sped right back up again. Guess not as many are caught by those cameras anymore.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by new2ford

But this is a discussion about raising the limit on certain classes of road (notably motorways) to 130. In that table, just at a glance, I can see at least three "first world" countries with a lower death rate / 100,000 than Australia: Germany, France and Netherlands. They all have 130 limits yet their road safety measures also seem to have worked - even better than Australia's.

It doesn't look like the upper speed limit is much of a factor and maybe their drivers don't suffer highway hypnosis and their traffic doesn't bunch so much at high speeds as a result of unreasonable enforcement.

So the point you're trying to make?

Licensing, that our stats aren't as bad as everyone makes out, considering our licensing system could be better, we aren't doing too bad by world standards, so something must be working

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by Trevor 57

Licensing, that our stats aren't as bad as everyone makes out, considering our licensing system could be better, we aren't doing too bad by world standards, so something must be working

Possibly because, despite what govco tries to tell us, we're not actually as stupid as they would like us to be..,

[MAD]

Originally Posted by nstg8a

Possibly because, despite what govco tries to tell us, we're not actually as stupid as they would like us to be..,

But we do roll over like a well trained dog

[nstg8a]

Originally Posted by MAD

But we do roll over like a well trained dog

Apathy is the biggest issue facing the average joe.