Does anybody know (or care) about how to merge on a freeway

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

I have driven in every capital city in Australia and in large cities overseas, and the only place where I feel that I am taking my life into my own hands every time I get behind the wheel is Melbourne.

Its the rude and arrogant ones that know better and still do the wrong thing that get me. When I first moved to Melbourne I used to hate how people changed lanes without indicating. Then I got sick of how often when I did indicate that I was changing lanes and the asre in the car I was about to merge in front of suddenly accelerates to stop me from changing lanes. Now I know why they don't indicate when changing lanes.

And why WHY WHY do they back into car parking spaces? I don't mean a parallel reverse park, I mean the ones in the supermarket car parks. They back into a narrow gap towards another vehicle, which they hit far more often than they should, then drive straight out into a wide space when leaving. THey should drive in forwards and back out where there is plenty of room for error if they cant see well out the back. I am sick of waiting while they have the lane blocked off while the go backwards and forwards 10 times until they are in the parking spot. they could drive straight in in one go and back out in one go and not inconvenience anyone. I know it is part of the Victorian driving test to back into a car parking spot but surely this is a test of your ability to manouvre a car in reverse, not a recommendation that you should actually continue to do such a stupid and inconsiderate thing after you have gotten your license.

---

Hi Doug,

I can certainly relate to the first two paragraphs in the quoted text. I moved down from Sydney quite a few years ago and I never really noticed any of the stuff which seems absolutely rampant in Melbourne. Seemed the minute I started driving in Melbourne I was always getting infuriated at the dangerous things many of the drivers were doing. There seems to be a lot of anger and aggressiveness here.

On the other side of the coin I'm very surprised at your intense dislike of reversing into car parking spaces. I regularly reverse into car parking spaces for the following logical reasons:
1) I can reverse into a car parking space quicker than I can reverse out. When reversing out my veiw is heavilly blocked and generally too many drivers aren't courtious to those backing out of a parking space. It is therefore safer and easier for myself to reverse in and drive out forwards.
2) I have full view everywhere when reversing in, the opposite of reversing out. I have to reverse one time so I may as well choose the easier one.
3) There is a sum total of 2 possible drivers waiting for you: one when you are going in and one when you are going out. The sum total of these two drivers waiting time is less because the much lengthened time of me carefully backing out due to a blocked view is much longer than the time it takes me to back in. The driving forwards out of the space is about the same as what would be the driving forwards into the space so they just cancel each other out.

If a drivers skills are pretty bad then perhaps part of what you say makes some sense. Reversing into a parking space would probably be a lot more difficult and take a lot more time for them than reversing out into the open traffic area. I think I too would get a bit cheesed off with them taking forever to reverse in because their bad skills.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beefy

I think I too would get a bit cheesed off with them taking forever to reverse in because their bad skills.

---

About a week ago I was caught up behind a driver who decided to back in to a car park at the station. I had to wait while they attempted to back in 14 times (yes I counted them, I wish I had videoed it). I could have posted it on here to prove the point. I probably would have gone viral on youtube. When they finally got the car in they hit the car behind hard enough to move it and were parked so close to the one next to it that the driver of it would have had no hope of getting in through the driver's door if the car that just reversed in did not go first. Then they just left without even looking to see what damage they did to the car behind or even their own car.

I left a note on the car behind advising the registration number of the vehicle that hit them and my contact details as a witness and took some photos. Don't ask me to post them here because I will not for the privacy of the people concerned. I had already missed my train while waiting for the person to park, so I had plenty of time to leave the note and take photos while waiting for the next train.

Ok that was an extreme example but it happens to a lesser extent all the time. I have a back problem and my girlfriend does not drive so I often take her to do the shopping and sit in the car. I have lost count of the number of times people have backed into my car while I have been sitting in it, then either drive straight out again before they get caught or just park, get out and walk away seemingly oblivious to the fact that they have hit another vehicle.

They either hit the bullbar or the tow-bar so they do more damage to themselves than they do to me. I have heavily tinted windows so they often just assume that the vehicle is unoccupied and think they have gotten away with it until I get out of the car and call out to them. Then they start out telling me they didn't hit me and it must have been a gust of wind that moved the car or other even more incredible things.

Not once while I have been sitting in the car has anyone driving in FORWARDS ever hit me.

Circumstances can vary in different circumstances and I have, on very rare occasions, backed into a car park myself. I find it quite easy to do and so obviously do other contributors here, but stand in a shopping centre carpark for 10 minutes and watch and you will see that it is something beyond the skill level of a lot of drivers who still insist on doing it.

Cheers

Doug

I think that there is a good percentage of licensed drivers who should have their license taken away. Because they are so physically uncoordinated that driving safely is beyond them, or because they consistently ignore the rules of the road. I think that 20-30% of drivers are actually incompetent to the point of being dangerous. I have been in cars driven by such people (young and old - I'm not referring to only aged drivers here), and been in fear of my life. The driving tests are way too easy to pass. Many more people are killed by cars in this country than are killed by firearms - yet it is much more difficult to get licensed to possess firearms than it is to be legally able to drive a car. A car is a deadly weapon. We put them in the hands of people that we would never allow to own a gun and when they kill someone we call it an "accident". In my experience that percentage goes up enormously amongst people under 25 and over 50. I drive about 300kms a week, most of it on motorways. I've driven in the UK extensively, and throughout Europe, and drive in Sydney regularly. And a quarter of the people driving on the road (or more) shouldn't be there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Poppa

. . . . .. A car is a deadly weapon. We put them in the hands of people that we would never allow to own a gun and when they kill someone we call it an "accident". In my experience that percentage goes up enormously amongst people under 25 and over 50. .

---

Your statements about drivers over 50 does not agree with statistics for accidents.
The rate of accidents goes down with age until about 65 years of age and then it starts to come back up again.

What is also very interesting is, experience is much less of a factor than age for men.
A male drivers in their 50's with no more than two years driving experience have the same accident rate as 27 year old males who has been driving for 12 years.
In contrast female drivers in their 50's with no more than two years driving experience have the same accident rate as 18 year old female drivers.

Data taken from Catchpole's article on NSW drivers.
Youth Injury Prevention : Motor Accidents Authority

Love your posts BobL!! It's very difficult to argue with scientific data!!:2tsup::2tsup::2tsup:

In my 30+ years of driving, I have learned to "read the traffic" to avoid the issues of cars merging into traffic on freeways....that is the best way to avoid it.
We can do a lot to make people better drivers, but the fact of the matter is everyone is different, and skills vary. There will always be good and bad drivers.

In my 30+ years, I have only been involved in 3 accidents, all of them from people rear ending me while I'm stopped at traffic...the last one was recent, I was 'rear ended' by a chap from Afghanistan, with an international drivers license, and no insurance.

The witnesses spotted him "texting" on the phone moments prior to him hitting me....I was not impressed, I was driving my wife's 5 month old car.

I know the constabulary did their bit to make sure he wouldn't drive again. Its just as well they got to him before I did. :;

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris Parks

Like Rome or Paris, startling evidence that good driving does not start in all of Europe. In Freeway conditions most of Europe leads for good driving but only because they have 50 years lead, we didn't see freeways until the 1970's and a lot of people did not drive on them until the 80's. I anticipated that my post would lead to strong rebuttal from some, in fact I would have bet a year's wages on it. Why don't people merge properly, some are s**T scared of driving on freeways, none have been trained to do it properly and a smaller proportion should not be driving. As to Fred's point for teaching, we all have at one stage or another taught people to drive, did anyone admit that they may not be qualified to do that? we do not have a credential but we in general are all prepared to do it. I have seen this debate in many other places and to a man no one points the finger at themselves before criticising others. To prove how good we all are, we are conceited enough to teach someone to drive exactly the same way we do and not by best practise. It is reality and human nature to do so. I know it is a touchy subject, ask yourself why.

---

I got as far as teaching my kids to stat the car and engage the clutch, after that I said my job is done, off to the driving instructor you go !
I thought I'd give the road rules test a go when the kids were studying, and failed miserably. So much has changed over the years. :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GTVi

. . .In my 30+ years, I have only been involved in 3 accidents, all of them from people rear ending me while I'm stopped at traffic...the last one was recent, I was 'rear ended' by a chap from Afghanistan, with an international drivers license, and no insurance.

---

My last accident was this time last year was being sideswiped by a large kangaroo.
All 4 panels (both driver side doors) were replaced on that side- $8k for that little bingle
Attachment 293789

And the one before that was with a driver with an international drivers licence and no insurance who committed fraud by taking out insurance the day after the accident and want me to fake the date of the accident.
The driver was texting while driving in a 40 zone and was driving in the middle of the road I tooted repeatedly and finally he looked up and swerved at the last min - I was basically stopped.
Both cars totalled in this one.

Attachment 293788

The one before that was another kangaroo!

The last one that was was my fault was 1975 - motor bike - gravel road - too fast - didn't make the turn, lost a bit of skin. Didn't do that one again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by doug3030

Well since I was 19 I have held a HR license (it was class C then) and got my car license at 17. I am 54 now so that is 37 years driving experience.

That's 37 years of driving cars and trucks in all six states and two territories of Australia as well as New Zealand, Malaysia, Bruneii, Indonesia, Singapore and Thailand.

Yes I would say I am qualified.


Doug

---

Wow. You have 10 years more than me of driving rigid vehicles but I'll raise you motorcycle and semi. You've taken two driving tests in your 37 years? Motorcycle (two separate examinations required to get UK open license), car, heavy rigid and semi in the UK. Car, motorcycle and Medium Rigid in Aus. Individual licenses held for the UK and three states and one territory of Australia (Vic, NT, WA, QLD). And all driving tests pread out pretty evenly between 1986-2010. Experienced in driving in the UK, New Zealand, US, Canada, France, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Poland, Belgium, Italy, Sri Lanka, Cyprus, Greece, Djibouti, Kenya, Egypt, Gibraltar, Hong Kong, the Canary Islands, Majorca, Aruba, Curacao, Trinidad, Singapore, Thailand, Saudi Arabia, the Sultanate of Oman, The United Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Bahrain. In either a car, a motorcycle, truck or a semi. Or all. LH and RH drive; often the wrong way round ie British semi driving on the RH side of the road throughout most of Europe; European and US cars in Aus, NZ, Gib and HK. Unless you've actually lived in any those countries you mentioned I'll wager your experience consists of a couple of weeks on holiday with a hire car; I've driven THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of miles spread over the countries I've listed above in either a semi, a truck, car or bike, or a combination of all.

All licensed drivers are "qualified", but some of us have more qualifications than others.

Most of us are "experienced", once again; some of us are more experienced than others and over a significantly wider range.


I love your comment; "Not once while I have been sitting in the car has anyone driving in FORWARDS ever hit me." By some remarkable coincidence, I have also never seen someone smash into another car whilst driving forwards either into or out of a parking space. I have seen a few people hit cars reversing into spaces, and many people hit oncoming cars, shopping trolleys and pedestrians reversing OUT of a parking space because they were couldn't see where they were going; usually because someone in a Landcruiser with tinted windows and a lift had parked on their left, facing forwards because they were either too lazy or inept to reverse park and knowing full well that with their elevated driving position they can see OVER the cars parked on either side and can therefore justify to themselves their decision to drive into a space.

Your opinions and views on this matter would appear to based on personal belief with little or no physical supporting evidence; merely heresay And just in case you consider British taught drivers to be at best your equal I recommend you check out BOBL's link that clearly show Australian drivers are more likely to either have an accident, or to kill, or be killed on the roads. Which compared to UK roads are really wide, really flat, generally really straight and don't have any appreciable traffic worth bothering with.

I'm sorry Doug; but you're wrong. Please learn to live with it; counselling can be arranged if necessary to help you cope with the crushing disappointment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

I love your comment; "Not once while I have been sitting in the car has anyone driving in FORWARDS ever hit me." By some remarkable coincidence, I have also never seen someone smash into another car whilst driving forwards either into or out of a parking space. I have seen a few people hit cars reversing into spaces, and many people hit oncoming cars, shopping trolleys and pedestrians reversing OUT of a parking space because they were couldn't see where they were going; usually because someone in a Landcruiser with tinted windows and a lift had parked on their left, facing forwards because they were either too lazy or inept to reverse park and knowing full well that with their elevated driving position they can see OVER the cars parked on either side and can therefore justify to themselves their decision to drive into a space.

Your opinions and views on this matter would appear to based on personal belief with little or no physical supporting evidence; merely heresay And just in case you consider British taught drivers to be at best your equal I recommend you check out BOBL's link that clearly show Australian drivers are more likely to either have an accident, or to kill, or be killed on the roads. Which compared to UK roads are really wide, really flat, generally really straight and don't have any appreciable traffic worth bothering with.

---

My only personal experiance was an old lady who reversed out of a parking space and straight into the front of our car, then proceeded to drive off like nothing had happened :U. Our car only had a scratch on the bumper and we felt sorry for her so let her go to find someone else to bump into.

I've got good mechanical aptitude which really helps with manoevering and reversing a vehicle. I've always found reversing into a space far easier and safer than reversing out. With the wing mirrors I can see the space between my car and the one at the side so I have control. Plus I'm coming into the space parallel for the most part of it. In contrast when reversing out I can only guess what the space is from the front corner of my car and the side of the car next to me, and I'm reversing out at an angle, much harder. And if someone comes and parks close to you while you're gone, things just got a lot harder. For those drivers that can reverse proficiently all the facts that I can see point to reversing in / driving out to be the fastest, easiest and safest way of parking. I would actually say that when it comes to lack of consideration, that would be applied moreso to drivers NOT reversing into a space.

I get a feeling that it's just become culture thought that someone should quickly get out of the road and drive forwards into the space, but it's grudgingly accepted that they have to reverse out so what can other drivers do but wait. A few years ago I had one of the great many Melbourne driver experiences. I swing out to the left in preparation to reverse into the car park space, then as I start reversing into the space the car behind me (4WD with enraged lady driver) comences to drive behind me in the open car parking spaces. Well she didn't make it and she actually wanted to start a PHYSICAL fight. I've also had inumerous experiences of drivers behind me getting angry when you slow down to turn left. Maybe I should have took the sharp right hand turn at the 60 or 70 speed limit. A lot of drivers here have a hard time dealing with slowing down or God forbid the dreaded stopping. I think this creates a lot of pressure on many drivers to just drive forward into a car parking space when they may prefer to reverse in.

Regarding the UK thing. I recently talked to a guy from the UK who has his driving instructor license (i.e. UK license). He said something along the lines of UK instructors go through special training to get licensed, whereas here that's not the case. Is that true ?? He's driving trucks here at the moment but says he wants to get into driver instructing here because it's such a doddle. I've done car tests in the UK and Australia, and I've had plenty years experience on both roads. I don't know what the rest of Australia is like but as far as Melbourne goes, give me UK roads anytime, I don't feel so in danger. It was previously mentioned that in Europe they have much more experience there and that's why the driving is better. Very sorry but I absolutely don't buy that as a reason for the better driving. Australia is not in the dark ages. Attitude, proper training, and importantly law enforcement is more the problem. Experience has nothing to do with dumping what has been taught, it has nothing to do with anger, or aggressivenes, general wreckless driving, etc, etc. That comes from attitude, and it's what I see everyday on Melbourne roads. In the UK I found drivers EXPECT other drivers to drive properly and give order to driving (they go apeshit when someone is blocking an overtaking lane for instance). Anger seemed to be targeted at drivers doing the wrong thing. In Melbourne I find the opposite, anger is more common from bad attitude, aggressive drivers and is often targeted at the good drivers doing the right thing. That's not an experience problem it's an attitude problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

Experienced in driving in the UK, New Zealand, US, Canada, France, Spain, Portugal, Germany, Poland, Belgium, Italy, Sri Lanka, Cyprus, Greece, Djibouti, Kenya, Egypt, Gibraltar, Hong Kong, the Canary Islands, Majorca, Aruba, Curacao, Trinidad, Singapore, Thailand, Saudi Arabia, the Sultanate of Oman, The United Arab Emirates and the Kingdom of Bahrain. In either a car, a motorcycle, truck or a semi. Or all. LH and RH drive; often the wrong way round ie British semi driving on the RH side of the road throughout most of Europe; European and US cars in Aus, NZ, Gib and HK.

---

Mate no wonder you are so confused, All those years of experience but all so broken up on such vastly different things. What a pity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

Unless you've actually lived in any those countries you mentioned I'll wager your experience consists of a couple of weeks on holiday with a hire car; I've driven THOUSANDS and THOUSANDS of miles spread over the countries I've listed above in either a semi, a truck, car or bike, or a combination of all.

---

Well lets see, two years in Indonesia, two and a half years in Malaysia, six months in Bruneii and 9 months in PNG; passed the tests for the licenses in all of these countries in their national languages and drove there incident-free for the duration of my stay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chief Tiff

Your opinions and views on this matter would appear to based on personal belief with little or no physical supporting evidence; merely heresay.

---

So do yours, mate. By the way the correct spelling is "hearsay".

Cheers

Doug

Gentlemen, could we please not let this thread degenerate in to personal attacks?

Let's play the ball and not the man.

Driving trucks etc has everything to do with merging - they have to do it right otherwise carnage ensues and if you are on a bike then you generally lose big time. I've generally found truckies in most places in the world are much better at merging than car drivers and those many wayward car drivers could learn a lot from watching them.

How about the eeddjets that overtake using the white marked areas and/or safety lanes on freeways?
My favourite was the Transam that overtook us during a traffic jam on an LA freeway.
We were bumper to bumper stationary on the outside lane.
The freeway had a useless half car width safety lane and concrete barrier that curved upwards smoothly to a height of about 2m.
The Transam had two wheels in the half safety lane and two wheels up on the barrier and a bunch of arms hanging out the windows sporting various 1 and 2 finger waves.
We had to laugh - it looked like it was straight out of movie.

Having worked in high population areas, Jakata and Manila mainly, although never dared to drive in these cities, however I studied the traffic and they use the "water flow" principle. Those who have not ventured outside of Australia would not understand it until your in it. :) In that time I never witnessed a car accident amongst what appears to be total chaos. But their method of merging system works well. "If there is a gap, then its quickly occupied, without any road rage".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GTVi

Having worked in high population areas, Jakata and Manila mainly, although never dared to drive in these cities, however I studied the traffic and they use the "water flow" principle. Those who have not ventured outside of Australia would not understand it until your in it. :) In that time I never witnessed a car accident amongst what appears to be total chaos. But their method of merging system works well. "If there is a gap, then its quickly occupied, without any road rage".

---

I worked with a Sri Lankan lady who was an excellent driver. She told me that when she visits home, it takes her about 3 days to revert to driving Sri Lankan style, and the same to revert to driving Australian style when she returns. She also informed me that the seemingly pointless beeping and light flashing are actually systematic signals that convey meaning to the local drivers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexS

I worked with a Sri Lankan lady who was an excellent driver. She told me that when she visits home, it takes her about 3 days to revert to driving Sri Lankan style, and the same to revert to driving Australian style when she returns.

---

I reckon that is a problem whenever sides of the road are changed and drivers think - I know this, I don't need to think about it. After spending a couple of years in the US and coming back to Oz the next morning I took off down the road and had gone 100 m before I realised I was on the wrong side.

The reverse happened to me in Europe. I arrived in Venice and immediately drove a hire car to a resort in Bavaria. Then the car sat in the car park for a week. I then took off down a quiet country backroad at 5am in the morning heading for Geneva- it was summer so daylight but it was foggy - I saw a set of headlights coming straight towards me - then I realised I was on the wrong side of the road and managed to get to the other side before a big semi swept past.

Interesting thread started by (hold on I'll just have to look back) Beefy and now morphing into general discussion on motoring behaviour and drving skill in general. I would like to earn some (much needed) goodie points and bring it back on track (rolleyes, daren't use the smilies as the computer freezes).

I believe there are two scenarios with merging. One is on the rural motorways and the other on urban motroways. In general, match speed, indicate and move onto the freeway with care. In other words check that there is actually somewhere to go and if not you may have to back off. The driver already on the motorway also has some obligation (although arguably not by law) to allow a vehicle travelling at a similar speed to join the motorway. If at all possible the driver on the motorway should move across to the next lane to the right (normally the middle lane) to allow easy entry for the merging vehicle.

Some of this is less easy during congestion, particularly on the urban sections. However, if each person allows one vehicle to merge in front of them this too can be acceptable. For me it is just down to courtesy.

If I may get off track (more rolleyes) for a moment my personal hobby horse is slow drivers hogging the middle and/or outside lanes when nearside lanes are clear. This also encourages the crime (in my view) of passing on the inside. I become particularly incensed by drivers passing me on the inside at speeds in excess of the speed limit as I am attempting to move into the slow lane at 100kph or 110kph as allowed.

Could I also ask a question as to why the authorities keep maintaining that speed kills and this is why the speed limits are being reduced? I don't think this is the case and in fact I checked BobL's statistics. Here are some to show comparable counties. Those with higher speed limits tend to have lower fatalities.

I agree that in the UK where their open road speed limit is 70mph the police will not book you under 85mph so they are travelling significantly faster. In continental Europe motorway discipline tends towards exemplary and in complete contrast to their urban driving where Rafferty's rules prevail. My last circumnavigation of the roundabout at the top of the Champs Elysees about forty years ago still stands in my mind as one of the most frightening driving experiences of my life and I don't suppose the situation has changed very much.

Without claiming to be a better driver than anybody else my credentials are (while touching wood, smiley face inserted here) that my last driving infringement was recorded in 1981 and I have had one other before that which should also be taken into consideration.

Regards
Paul

Country	Deaths per 100,000people	deaths per 100,00 vehicles	deaths per billion vehicle/kms	total fatalities
Australia	6.1	8	5.8	1,281
UK	2.75	5.1	3.6	1,754
USA	10.4	15	8.5	33,808
Germany	4.4	6.9	7.2	3,600
France	6.4	9.57		3,645

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

I believe there are two scenarios with merging. One is on the rural motorways and the other on urban motroways. In general, match speed, indicate and move onto the freeway with care. In other words check that there is actually somewhere to go and if not you may have to back off. The driver already on the motorway also has some obligation (although arguably not by law) to allow a vehicle travelling at a similar speed to join the motorway. If at all possible the driver on the motorway should move across to the next lane to the right (normally the middle lane) to allow easy entry for the merging vehicle.

Some of this is less easy during congestion, particularly on the urban sections. However, if each person allows one vehicle to merge in front of them this too can be acceptable. For me it is just down to courtesy.

---

Bushmiller,

I like your attitude and way of thinking. I'm in complete agreement with one small exception.

I've often moved over to the right hand lane to help out a merging vehicle. But often my reward for that is I end up stuck in that lane for a while. If I was in my little truck I couldn't go fast enough so I become a lane hogger in the faster lane, likewise in my car when doing heavy towing. Or if I am travelling at 100, the vehicle I let out is now at my left side and in order not to break the speed limit I have to slow down in the faster lane in order to try and find a gap behind him and get back into the left lane. It seems more times than not drivers have some reasoning in their head that they should merge at 80 even though their vehicles can get to 100 in a heartbeat. I know this because most times once they have "merged" onto the freeway they immediately floor it to 100. So they basically made the freeway traffic slow down by 20k just so they can merge. This action is what often causes me to get stuck in the right lane. I move over to the right because I'm going way faster than the merging vehicle but I can see we are on a collision coarse. The merging driver comes onto the freeway at 80, immediately speeds up to 100 and is now at my left. They don't wait to see if the vehicle which just let them out wants to come back to the left hand lane. All of this because the merging driver made no attempt to merge properly, AS THEY WERE TAUGHT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmiller

Could I also ask a question as to why the authorities keep maintaining that speed kills and this is why the speed limits are being reduced? I don't think this is the case and in fact I checked BobL's statistics. Here are some to show comparable counties. Those with higher speed limits tend to have lower fatalities.

Country	Deaths per 100,000people	deaths per 100,00 vehicles	deaths per billion vehicle/kms	total fatalities
Australia	6.1	8	5.8	1,281
UK	2.75	5.1	3.6	1,754
USA	10.4	15	8.5	33,808
Germany	4.4	6.9	7.2	3,600
France	6.4	9.57		3,645

---

The speed comparator can be a bit misleading. Cars on freeways in these countries may be travelling at what we consider amazing speeds but for every car on a freeway there is at least a car stationary in choked roads in cities, towns and village. OK maybe not standing still but they move at much lower average speeds than in our cities. The average speed of traffic in all of London is only 39 kph. Sydney has an average of 30 kph during the rush hours, Melbourne is apparently worse - but this is only during the rush hours. The risk of death at low speeds is equally lower than the increase at higher speed,s so if a sizeable fraction of a countries car fleet is crawling there will be less lives lost.

The deaths per 100,000 people and deaths per 100,00 vehicles are not very good comparators - you can probably work out why for yourself.

The one to look at is deaths per km and here we fare much better except for the UK (and Sweden and Norway) where they have better roads and no outback and in Scandanavia they have MUCH tougher DD laws.

The countries we should compare ourselves with are countries like Canada and the US because of the size of the country and similar suburban sprawled cities and DD laws.
Here we come out much better almost certainly because we have more space between cars.

When a lot of these factors are put into the mix it turns out we're not as different as we think.

And for all you lay back Lennies and dawdlers who insist on travelling too slowly, look up this Solomon curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have a statistic for you all. Very few accidents happen at over 160kph so we should all drive at that.

On that note, it will be interesting to see the outcome of this trial:

Northern Territory returns open speed limits in road safety trial | CarAdvice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Shed

On that note, it will be interesting to see the outcome of this trial:

Northern Territory returns open speed limits in road safety trial |#CarAdvice

---

Yeah go for it - NT already has ~5x more deaths per 100,000 people and ~6x more deaths per 100,000 vehicles compare to the rest of Australia

I have seen and participated in this discussion many times. Everyone has to accept one thing and that is the government's primary aim in road legislation is revenue. Victoria is an absolute prime example, the revenue dropped so the tolerance band of non compliance dropped to effectively zero. Queensland is heading the same way from what I can see.

On another note those that quote an unblemished or near unblemished driving record as an example of good driving are not on a safe thing. My driving record is millions of kilometres in heavy vehicles as well as cars with no accidents but to me it does not mean a thing. It is the skills that produced that record that are important. There are those who indeed have an unblemished driving record and who have caused accidents or frustration on the roads and go one their merry way. It is a bad indicator in all respects. The only way to become a good driver is to practise the specific skills required to do that and to be very aware of practising and also of their surroundings at all times. How many of us do that? I think the answer is zero. The problem is as a general rule none of us even know the skills we need let alone practise them. Getting in a car and keeping a safe distance is only one thing of the skill set required and the government has no intention to show us any more. Perhaps that is unfair ion the authorities but they are the ones who profess to be our guardians in road safety so I think it is only fair that they educate us in all aspects of safe driving. Safe by the way does not in my book mean slow, quite the opposite in fact. Slow only extends journey times and increases fatigue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobL

Yeah go for it - NT already has ~5x more deaths per 100,000 people and ~6x more deaths per 100,000 vehicles compare to the rest of Australia

---

But somehow I don't think those statistics are related to a sealed bitumen road which hasn't had a speed related fatality in 10 years.

It is more a factor of the NTs demographics and the number of unsealed roads being driven on by old cars at an unsafe speed. Some of these roads (tracks) are basically unsafe at any speed.

What is the saying? It is not speed that kills, it is the sudden stop at the end:rolleyes:

How many times are you driving in autopilot and then suddenly you realise the last 10 minutes is a complete blank? I find this quite scary and as work/home pressures build up I found this happening more and more often.

When I did my driving instructors course the instructor taught us to constantly verbalise our actions and observations (e.g. checking mirrors, distance scan, check speed, local scan, passing traffic lights ahead, check mirrors, applying brakes, check mirrors etc . . . . ) and after about 15 minutes we'd pull over and he would tell us what we'd missed. After 5 weeks we had to do a driving test for 30 minutes test where we did nothing but this - to pass the test you had to get 95% ie you could afford to miss 5 in 100 things. To get to this level we had to practice out of class time I'd do this every time I drove and continued to do this mentally for many years afterwards. I should start doing that again as I found it really increased my attention to what is going on. It's not a cure but it the best way I know of self-honing what I do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris Parks

I have seen and participated in this discussion many times. Everyone has to accept one thing and that is the government's primary aim in road legislation is revenue. Victoria is an absolute prime example, the revenue dropped so the tolerance band of non compliance dropped to effectively zero. Queensland is heading the same way from what I can see.

On another note those that quote an unblemished or near unblemished driving record as an example of good driving are not on a safe thing. My driving record is millions of kilometres in heavy vehicles as well as cars with no accidents but to me it does not mean a thing. It is the skills that produced that record that are important. There are those who indeed have an unblemished driving record and who have caused accidents or frustration on the roads and go one their merry way. It is a bad indicator in all respects. The only way to become a good driver is to practise the specific skills required to do that and to be very aware of practising and also of their surroundings at all times. How many of us do that? I think the answer is zero. The problem is as a general rule none of us even know the skills we need let alone practise them. Getting in a car and keeping a safe distance is only one thing of the skill set required and the government has no intention to show us any more. Perhaps that is unfair ion the authorities but they are the ones who profess to be our guardians in road safety so I think it is only fair that they educate us in all aspects of safe driving. Safe by the way does not in my book mean slow, quite the opposite in fact. Slow only extends journey times and increases fatigue.

---

A lot of good points Chris. I think I've made it quite clear that I think a stinking attitude has a lot to do with the problems on the roads. When the government themselves act like crooks, using the law to squeeze more cash out of motorists pockets, while doing little to increase driving skills and road safety, drivers attitudes can be expected to be less than perfect. There's probably little revenue to be raised by having plain traffic-police cars targetting all the a*****e drivers out there too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chris Parks

. . . . . Safe by the way does not in my book mean slow, quite the opposite in fact. Slow only extends journey times and increases fatigue.

---

That Solomon curve really is pretty scary when it is examined closely.

https://www.woodworkforums.com/attach...d=293998&stc=1

Quote:

---

When I did my driving instructors course the instructor taught us to constantly verbalise our actions and observations (e.g. checking mirrors, distance scan, check speed, local scan, passing traffic lights ahead, check mirrors, applying brakes, check mirrors etc . . . . )

---

Bob, I believe that is based on the way London police were (are?) taught to drive. I learned about it when I was about 19, and gave it a try. I found it greatly improved my awareness and improved my driving habits. Ever since then, I have, from time to time, practiced it (the verbalisation) again just to maintain the habit. While I'm sure this is not as useful as doing it under test, I'd recommend everyone to try it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AlexS

Bob, I believe that is based on the way London police were (are?) taught to drive. I learned about it when I was about 19, and gave it a try. I found it greatly improved my awareness and improved my driving habits. Ever since then, I have, from time to time, practiced it (the verbalisation) again just to maintain the habit. While I'm sure this is not as useful as doing it under test, I'd recommend everyone to try it.

---

It's something that is probably best taught after the driver has gained a bit of experience - so they even know what to look for. I've shown a few people and most of them thought I was nuts but it really does sharpen up sloppy driving behaviour.

A little bit off topic but something to be aware of. Some years ago I was working about a 5 hr drive from home. I filled up in the morning and spotted a book on tape (yes, quite a few years ago) in the servo. That looks alright, I'll give it a try.
The book was quite good, about an assassin at a sporting event, but when the story finished I looked up and had no idea where I was. I was still on the right track but I had zero recollection of the previous 2 hrs of driving. I had driven on Auto Pilot, into, through and out of Melbourne. I could not remember a single traffic light or intersection and I didn't recall interacting with any other cars or trucks. I don't think I caused any accidents but I can't be certain.:no: I related the experience to my boss when I got to site. He wasn't too concerned and asked to borrow the tapes so he could listen on the way home.
He listened for about half an hour, realised he couldn't remember anything about the last half hour of his trip so turned it off.
Has anybody else had that experience? While merging (just to keep on topic :wink:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NCArcher

. . . . .Has anybody else had that experience? While merging (just to keep on topic :wink:)

---

Yep I know the problem very well, with and without audio books. I'm a keen audio book listener I listen to about a book every 2-3 days and often listen while I'm driving. If the plot is too complex/intense and the traffic is too dense I find I have to switch to a lighter book because I can't drive and absorb the plot. I typically will have several books I switch in and out of, including one that is easier to drive by.

SWMBO is a librarian and recommends books for older kids and young adults often finds me a half decent book that are not too kiddie but not too complex and a great for driving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Shed

On that note, it will be interesting to see the outcome of this trial:

Northern Territory returns open speed limits in road safety trial |#CarAdvice

---

Hope they have a good stock of body bags for when a car comes round a bend at speed and finds granma doing 60 or 80 less.
Heading back to Merredin in WA one night, lightning in the distance but no rain so I left the cruise control on 115, came round a bend to find Ma and Pa Kettle doing 40 - ABS, horn and finger all got plenty of work.
This is what will happen in the NT.

As for merging, the on ramp is your acceleration area and when you get to merge point your speed should be close if not matching the speed of the existing traffic so you can slide in without anyone having to brake.
It's not that hard.

Quote:

---

As for merging, the on ramp is your acceleration area and when you get to merge point your speed should be close if not matching the speed of the existing traffic so you can slide in without anyone having to brake.
It's not that hard.

---

Spot on.:2tsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smidsy

Heading back to Merredin in WA one night, lightning in the distance but no rain so I left the cruise control on 115, came round a bend to find Ma and Pa Kettle doing 40 - ABS, horn and finger all got plenty of work.
This is what will happen in the NT.

---

Actually the roads in the Territory are mostly pretty straight with bends about every 60 to 100 km or more. And if you are doing 115 km/h up there the local Ma and Pa kettles will be blowing the horn and raising the finger at YOU for going too slow.

Cheers

Doug

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smidsy

As for merging, the on ramp is your acceleration area and when you get to merge point your speed should be close if not matching the speed of the existing traffic so you can slide in without anyone having to brake.
It's not that hard.

---

Exactly, it's actually very simple yet for some reason I can't fathom, many drivers only go to an absolute max of 80 when the freeway traffic is doing 100, very very stupid, and not what is taught in the Victorian Road Rules handbook.

The worst part of all is when I am prevented from merging properly and effortlessly because the idiots in front of me won't speed up to match the speed of the traffic on the freeway. The last one was at 60 for the full length of the merging lane then decided to accelerate to a wopping merging speed of 70. Then to rub salt in the wound they accelerate to 100 once they are out on the freeway. IDIOTS.

How can so many do exactly the same wrong thing when what is taught is different.

Almost as bad as those who stop at the end of the ramp and wait for a 200m gap before moving.:no:

Followed one the other night... was overtaken by 'em (we were doing 110kmh) along the side road before they cut in front of us and slowed to 90... then braked all the way down the on-ramp until they sat at 60 in the centre lane of the freeway!! :oo::no:

I've no idea how long they sat at 60, as we'd had enough and got as far away as we could from 'em asap.

There is a lot of arrogence on the roads, about a year ago I took a 8m 3.5T boat up to Yeppoon and back and when traveling back across a mountain range I was nearly wiped out twice by wittless and inconsiderate truck drivers. Yes I know that when in an overtaking lane going up a hill the drivers going up the fast lane have the right of way, however when you go into the left lane to let faster vehicles overtake you eventually run out of road and you have to merge back into the single lane crossing the broken line. What happenned to me was when I was approaching the end of the left lane I indicated that I was merging back in and twice some semi driver insisted on accellerating past me even though I had no where to go except straight into them or the side of the hill and then bounce off into them as well, which would result in us both being wiped out and probably killed. I hit the brakes and fortunately just made it before running out of road and swerved back with a few feet to spare behind the semi-trailer.

These drivers would know and see I had no more room and still insisted on not letting me in and being ahead of me was much more important even though there was a 95% chance of a major accident. So If I do it again I will not be moving over to let the slightly faster vehicles go past as I won't take the chance that I will be let back in, incidently I was doing about 90-95Km/hour up the hill. Yes it is not right but was other choice is there? I will probably get horn blasted but better that than being killed. Oddly though during the day it wasn't a problem but at sunset the truckies seem to change behavior and become suicidal.

Just my 2 cents worth!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed..

There is a lot of arrogence on the roads, about a year ago I took a 8m 3.5T boat up to Yeppoon and back and when traveling back across a mountain range I was nearly wiped out twice by wittless and inconsiderate truck drivers. Yes I know that when in an overtaking lane going up a hill the drivers going up the fast lane have the right of way, however when you go into the left lane to let faster vehicles overtake you eventually run out of road and you have to merge back into the single lane crossing the broken line.

---

Yep, and when the lane ends you give way. So where is that arrogant on behalf of the road users who have right of way?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed..

What happenned to me was when I was approaching the end of the left lane I indicated that I was merging back in and twice some semi driver insisted on accellerating past me even though I had no where to go except straight into them or the side of the hill and then bounce off into them as well, which would result in us both being wiped out and probably killed. I hit the brakes and fortunately just made it before running out of road and swerved back with a few feet to spare behind the semi-trailer.

---

Ed, get off and stay off the roads if that is your attitude to driving before YOU do kill someone. They had right of way p you didnt. You should have let them past ands merged in behind them. You even admitted in your last pos tthat they did have right of way. Trying to force in over someone who has right of way is inviting an accident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ed..

These drivers would know and see I had no more room and still insisted on not letting me in and being ahead of me was much more important even though there was a 95% chance of a major accident. So If I do it again I will not be moving over to let the slightly faster vehicles go past as I won't take the chance that I will be let back in, incidently I was doing about 90-95Km/hour up the hill. Yes it is not right but was other choice is there? I will probably get horn blasted but better that than being killed. Oddly though during the day it wasn't a problem but at sunset the truckies seem to change behavior and become suicidal.

---

Sorry, Ed but you are the problem.

Cheers

Doug

Really, I am the problem? at what point of the left hand lane would you, if you were in my situation, would you attempt to go back into the fast lane, just as the overtaking lane starts, half way up the hill or when you are nearing the end when you see the sign to merge right. If you have traffic behind you and start indicating that you are merging and then see the semi still accelerating just behind you on your right which doesn't let you in then you would have to slow right down or stop, causing a backlog of vehicles behind you to do the same. Slowing down or stopping with a 3.5t load behind you going up a hill would take a fairly long time to build up speed which would cause a massive build up as all the either vehicle would also have to build up speed.

If you were the driver of that semi, common sense and courtesy should prevail that if the vehicle just in front of you and on your left is running out of room and indicating that it needs to merge into the remaining lane and an accident will happen if you don't let it in, then you're the one who shouldn't be driving. As a driver you should take all steps to avoid making an accident whether you have the right of way or not. I stayed in the overtaking lane as long as possible to let as many vehicles go past as possible before the lane runs out but at some point you do have to merge back in and indicating that I am going to go back should indicate to the other drivers behind me to slow down a bit and let me in and not continue trying to over take when a dangerous situation is developing, pretty much common sense!

Or are you suggesting that I suddenly stop at the top of the overtaking lane and wait till no one else is in the right hand lane before moving from a standing start. From what you have written this sounds like you could be one of those drivers that I am referring to and this is what you normally do. Just cause the driver has a 40 ton rig and is much bigger than my setup doesn't give them the right to do what they like (nor any sized vehicle for that matter), as a driver you have a responsibility to prevent potential accidents, whether you have right of way or not! At the end of the day most of us just want to get home in one piece.

You stated that I should have slowed down and let the semi pass then merged behind them, how would I even be able to see what was behind a 40ft rig on my right side just behind me, for all I knew there could have been another 2 or 3 semis behind him and then where would that place me? travelling forward, vehicles behind me, semi on my right and a hill on the left and no where to go. All this because the semi driver didn't have the brains or cared and wanted to get in front of me at all costs? If I had bounced off the hill and into him we would have both been killed, my rig under his wheels and him at the bottom of a very steep hill on the right hand side with his rig on top of him.

There are rules of the road but they don't always work 100% in practice, as in the original post, merging on to a highway is fine in medium traffic, you speed up going down the ramp and zipper in with the main traffic, doesn't always work however when the highways is chockers and you are on the ramp speeding up to merge, with vehicles behind you doing the same thing and you get towards the end and no vehicle on the highway lets you in, the only thing you can do is hit the brakes otherwise you will have an accident. Not all ramps give you a clear view of the traffic until almost at the point of no return. So common sense should prevail, the drivers on the highway should be aware of the conditions and adjust their speed either faster or slower to allow the vehicles to merge in safely or move over a lane to make more room if possible, unfortunately they don't always do that, the vehicles behind at the back of the highway merge ramp will most likely be cursing but most likely will not know the situation as to why the first vehicle stopped. There will always be a bunch of drivers who think that they have the right of way no matter what the situation or the consequences. Truck drivers should be more aware than most drivers about situations but some don't give a s##t putting it bluntly! from your post I think that you are one of them!! Who in their right mind would keep accelerating to overtake a vehicle on the right when the vehicle ahead is indicating that they are turning right??

So get off your high horse, get some brains and have some consideration and awareness of other drivers and the road conditions, I think that you're the one who needs to rethink your driving habits before you get someone killed, and I say that in the nicest possible way.

Cheers

Ed.