Truck Driver Tailgating?,...in the "Nanny State"..Yeah right.

[Pickles2]

Just seen a news clip on TV,.. a truck driver SAID to be tailgating a car, down Geelong Rd???
There's a small car driving down Geelong Rd, in the MIDDLE lane, a truck immediately behind him. The left lane is vacant, but the car does not move over, although He could,....but He just sits there with a big semi about 6' behind him, obviously wanting to overtake, so WHY wouldn't the car driver move to the left. So, the truck driver illegally goes into the right hand lane, obviouusly out of frustration, to overtake,...someone's filmed all this, the Police have the tape, and and say the Truck driver will probably be charged??!!.....all because the car driver wouldn't move over.
No-one has yet said what speed the car driver was doing, but I'll bet it was under the speed limit,...see what you can find out.
I reckon the car driver should be charged for stupidity,...I mean, all He would have been able to see in his R.V. mirror would be a truck grill badge,...so why not move over?!
Truck driver to be charged?....Ridiculous,....Surely only in the Nanny State, Pickles.

[Tombie]

Impede flow of traffic for the car (if warranted)

[Pickles2]

Impede flow of traffic for the car (if warranted)
Definitely,.......but probably not, in "The Nanny State"?
Pickles

[Xtreme]

In Europe the keep left rule is strictly enforced ............... and the traffic flows extremely smoothly.

The guy in the car would be charged without hesitation.

[Mick_Marsh]

What could the driver be charged with? The car was not in the r/h lane. The car was entitled to be in any lane other than the r/h lane.
This is the law of unintended consequences in action. A law was recently passed prohibiting trucks from driving in the r/h lane.

One wonders what was preventing the truck moving to the left.

[Chops]

Was that on the main hwy to Geelong from Melb(?), I'm not sure if there isn't a ruling that trucks aren't allowed in the right hand lane down there (??). So either way, the truckie will be buggered,, in the wrong lane or undertaking [bighmmm]

[3toes]

In Europe the keep left rule is strictly enforced ............... and the traffic flows extremely smoothly.



For trucks this only applies where there are 3 lanes. To complicate matters here cars and trucks have different speed limits for the same road. Results in many crazy over taking efforts by cars who are held up behind slow moving trucks. Adding to this is that the roads tend to be narrow and were drawn into the plans freehand by someone with Parkinsons so straight stretches where overtaking can be completed safely are few and far between.

[101RRS]

Car was doing the speed limit - the truck driver was trying to intimidate the car by sitting on its tail - no sympathy.

The truck driver should have done what I have to so when driving up the Hume and all three lanes are taken up with B doubles side by side doing 60kph - sit and wait until clear and safe to move on.

[Pickles2]

Car was doing the speed limit - the truck driver was trying to intimidate the car by sitting on its tail - no sympathy.

The truck driver should have done what I have to so when driving up the Hume and all three lanes are taken up with B doubles side by side doing 60kph - sit and wait until clear and safe to move on.
Who said the car was doing the speed limit,....have you info on that,...I do not.
Pickles.

[101RRS]

It was in all the news reports that were shown on tv with the video. Clearly the car is going at a reasonable speed and the truckie just had no patience.

[Tombie]

Or he was going at the speed his speedo says is the speed limit and was 6km under!!!!

And Mick - it’s impeding the flow of traffic - and is an offence.

I was charged with it years ago whilst doing 120km/h (speeding) and a mate and I had blocked in a bloke driving a Porsche who raced up behind us.

He was done for dangerous driving and we got the other...

[trout1105]

Travelling at 6k under the speed limit is Not impeding traffic, However here in the West travelling in the left lane is enforced and old mate should have been either In the left hand lane or moved into it to let the truck through.
Old Mate is in the wrong But If trucks are banned from the right hand lane on this stretch then he is also in the wrong as well.
Common curtesy Should have prevailed with the car moving to the left But it didn't But that doesn't excuse the truck driver from using the right hand lane out of frustration.
In reality both drivers did the wrong thing.

[Pickles2]

It was in all the news reports that were shown on tv with the video. Clearly the car is going at a reasonable speed and the truckie just had no patience.
I asked you how fast the car was going. If He was travelling at a true 100KPH, then of course, the truck driverr is at fault, but if not, if He's travelling under, and the truckie simply wants to maintain 100KPHi, then I say, maybe not you, but I say, a sensible driver would move over,.....IF He was travelling under the limit,....if He wasn't, my argument is rubbish.
Pickles.

[Mick_Marsh]

And Mick - it’s impeding the flow of traffic - and is an offence.
Yes, but, he wasn't in the r/h lane, the r/h lane was available for other vehicles to overtake, so that charge wouldn't fly.

[Tombie]

Yes, but, he wasn't in the r/h lane, the r/h lane was available for other vehicles to overtake, so that charge wouldn't fly.

Doesn’t require lanes...

[Wraithe]

I was in Melbourne only a month ago, and went out to Geelong area, a couple of times...

Its 100 along there except where the barrier is being worked on... Trucks not allowed in right lane, signs all along...

Trucks have speed limiters, some states allow them to be set as high as 103 kph...Thus a bit hard for a truck to be exceeding the speed limit to overtake...

One thing I did learn about freeways, every one I have been on in Australia, have idiot drivers that have no concern for anyone else... Right hand lane when they are travelling slower than the rest, blocking others from overtaking, cutting others off, and above all else, taking on trucks as if they are driving a dozer...

It amazes me how others on the roads know more about what trucks are allowed to do and take it into there hands to cut trucks off...

One thing I have been abused for is sitting on the speed limit and overtaking a car, car driver came up and informed me that "trucks are not allowed to overtake and they must be 20 k under the speed limit"...
Sadly she didn't try stopping in front of me but she did cut me off to turn onto Toodyay rd...Pity, I could have had a pancake flattened by 50 tyres, that day...

[V8Ian]

The truck driver should have done what I have to so when driving up the Hume and all three lanes are taken up with B doubles side by side doing 60kph - sit and wait until clear and safe to move on.
Are you also driving half a million dollar vehicle that has to make a return on investment?

[Mick_Marsh]

(1) This rule applies to a driver driving on a multi-lane road if:
(a) the speed-limit applying to the driver for the length of road where the driver is driving is over 80 kilometres per hour; or
(b) a keep left unless overtaking sign applies to the length of road where the driver is driving.
Note 1 Length of road and multi-lane road are defined in the dictionary.
Note 2 Part 3 deals with speed-limits.
(2) The driver must not drive in the right lane unless:
(a) the driver is turning right, or making a U–turn from the centre of the road, and is giving a right change of direction signal; or
(b) the driver is overtaking; or
(c) a left lane must turn left sign or left traffic lane arrows apply to any other lane and the driver is not turning left;
or
(d) the driver is required to drive in the right lane under rule 159; or
(e) the driver is avoiding an obstruction; or
(f) the traffic in each other lane is congested; or
(g) the traffic in every lane is congested; or
(h) the right lane is a special purpose lane in which the driver, under another provision of the Australian Road Rules, is permitted to drive; or
(i) there are only 2 marked lanes and the left lane is a slow vehicle turn out lane.

(3) A keep left unless overtaking sign on a multi-lane road applies to the length of road beginning at the sign and ending at the nearest of the following:
(a) an end keep left unless overtaking sign on the road;
(b) a traffic sign or road marking on the road that indicates that the road is no longer a multi-lane road;
(c) if the road ends at a T–intersection or dead end — the end of the road.
Note Road marking, T–intersection and traffic sign are defined in the dictionary.
(4) In this rule:
lane, for a driver, means a marked lane for vehicles travelling in the same direction as the driver, but does not include a special purpose lane in which the driver is not permitted to drive.
Note 1 Marked lane and special purpose lane are defined in the dictionary.
Note 2 Rule 95 deals with driving in emergency stopping lanes, and Division 6 of this Part deals with driving in other special purpose lanes slow vehicle turn out lane means a marked lane, or the part of a marked lane, to which a slow vehicle turn out lane sign applies.
Note A slow vehicle turn out lane is designed for slow-moving vehicles to move into to allow faster vehicles to pass in an adjacent marked lane.

The car driver was diving in accordance with the road rules.

sourced from:

Australian Road Rules
As approved by the Australian Transport Council
Published by the National Road Transport
Commission
Maintained by the National Transport Commission
The Australian Road Rules were drafted by the
Office of Legislative Drafting,
Commonwealth Attorney General’s Department
February 2012 version
ISBN 0 7240 8874 1

If you have any road rule to the contrary, please post it up and reference it.

[Pickles2]

The car driver was diving in accordance with the road rules.

sourced from:


If you have any road rule to the contrary, please post it up and reference it.
It's easy to "quote rules", without giving an opinion as to how they apply in a particular circumstance. However,in view off what you have posted (thank You), it appears to me that if the car driver had, as stated in your rules, "kept to the left", there woould've been no issue.
Pickles.

[Mick_Marsh]

It's easy to "quote rules", without giving an opinion as to how they apply in a particular circumstance. However,in view off what you have posted (thank You), it appears to me that if the car driver had, as stated in your rules, "kept to the left", there woould've been no issue.
Pickles.
He did in fact, "keep to the left". He was left of the r/h lane. That is all that is required for that rule.
It's not his problem the truck was banned from the r/h lane.

Like I said, the rule of unintended consequences. They banned the trucks from the r/h lane because you frequently had trucks traveling three abreast on a three lane freeway so, a rule was made with no consideration of this particular circumstance. Unintended, I'm sure.

Oh, I had previously given an opinion. You obviously missed it.
The car driver was it the right. The truck driver was in the wrong.

[trout1105]

I was under the impression that the left hand lane is the lane furthest to the left, the middle lane is just that So it isn't the left hand lane at all. Regardless of if there are other lanes to the right of the vehicle the left hand lane is always the lane furthest to the left.

[V8Ian]

The car driver was diving in accordance with the road rules.

sourced from:


If you have any road rule to the contrary, please post it up and reference it.
Doesn't mean he's not a self centred jerk, though.

[Mick_Marsh]

I was under the impression that the left hand lane is the lane furthest to the left, the middle lane is just that So it isn't the left hand lane at all. Regardless of if there are other lanes to the right of the vehicle the left hand lane is always the lane furthest to the left.
I was under the impression speed limits were rubbery and advisory.
I read the road rules.

How wrong was I.

Hard to argue with the rules when they're in writing. The road rule does not say the driver must drive in the most left lane. It just says the driver must not drive in the right lane, which he wasn't.

[trout1105]

Hard to argue with the rules when they're in writing. The road rule does not say the driver must drive in the most left lane. It just says the driver must not drive in the right lane, which he wasn't.

This MAY be the case But if there was nothing preventing the car driver from moving into the "Other" left hand lane then at the very minimum if not illegal he was being a Right Royal Jerk.[bigwhistle]

[Mick_Marsh]

This MAY be the case But if there was nothing preventing the car driver from moving into the "Other" left hand lane then at the very minimum if not illegal he was being a Right Royal Jerk.[bigwhistle]
Yep. Unfortunately you can't charge a person for being a jerk. If you could, the associated fines would wipe out our national debt.

[Pedro_The_Swift]

Are you also driving half a million dollar vehicle that has to make a return on investment?

and yet the driver shows no patience and breaks the law,,

[Tombie]

Yep. Unfortunately you can't charge a person for being a jerk. If you could, the associated fines would wipe out our national debt.

I’d be broke!

[Denzo]

The truck apologists on here always make me laugh. I travel +50,000km / year and occasionally drive HR trucks, and see intimidation on the road constantly.
While the average car driver can be a jerk, they invariably are conforming to their "speed limit" - usually rigidly enforced by the nanny state highway patrol. I realise that this can vary due to speedo error. I usually have my GPS going, and generally see Bdoubles at 103-105km/hr in pedal to the metal mode.
I drive mainly in rural NSW, where there is usually a bit of latitude with the rozzers < 10km, but in Vic that leeway is usually not there. I tell my family that the only way to share the road with trucks out here is to travel at 110km/hr. or 90km/hr, and let trucks pass. The speed differentials are too small to allow for safe sharing the roads if you are not to come under notice of the revenue collectors.
I also drive in Europe, and feel much safer there than Aus. Much more intuitive (and fast) driving, BUT the trucks there are limited to 80km/hr, and the system works great for Autostrade and provincial roads. Dont worry about the cops on a multi lane road - get in the road of an Audi or Beemer driver on the LH (ie fast lane), and you will soon know about it.
If I was running the show, the trucks would all be limited to 90km/hr, (I can hear the howls now!!) and all car drivers would have to do the kind of licence process that they do in Europe. I notice in SA that road trains are legal at 100km/h. I consider myself a reasonable driver, but find myself white knuckling it on the Stuart Hwy, especially in a Land Rover.
The sense of entitlement from both sides of this debate needs to be educated out.

[Tombie]

Stuart highway is always a fun experience... [emoji6]

Did that drive every week for a year...

There’s a particular company that like to draft each other - great fun trying to pass 3 road trains nose to tail [emoji41]. Luckily the D4 makes light work of it; all be it ‘bending’ a few speed limits..

[Tombie]

Entertaining as it may sound - I enjoy driving in Thailand more than Australia..

Keeps you on your toes!

And nothing here becomes an issue after that experience!

[Fatso]

The sense of entitlement from both sides of this debate needs to be educated out.[/QUOTE]

X 2

[AK83]

Just seen a news clip on TV,.. a truck driver SAID to be tailgating a car, down Geelong Rd???
There's a small car driving down Geelong Rd, in the MIDDLE lane, a truck immediately behind him. The left lane is vacant, but the car does not move over, although He could,....but He just sits there with a big semi about 6' behind him, obviously wanting to overtake, so WHY wouldn't the car driver move to the left. ....

Been there, done that(except the 6" behind) .. far too many times.
Bloody annoying and I agree the car driver should be charged. (or else remove the right lane restriction).

The problem is as always about awareness ... the car driver isn't aware that the truck can't use the right lane legally.

[Chops]

Been there, done that(except the 6" behind) .. far too many times.
Bloody annoying and I agree the car driver should be charged. (or else remove the right lane restriction).

The problem is as always about awareness ... the car driver isn't aware that the truck can't use the right lane legally.


I think the the statement of being "aware" as far as trucks go in the right hand lane is not really right. You can be damn sure if the truck was in that lane,, every man and his dog would be up in arms about it,, including the clown he tailgated.

[BMKal]

Travelling at 6k under the speed limit is Not impeding traffic, However here in the West travelling in the left lane is enforced and old mate should have been either In the left hand lane or moved into it to let the truck through.
Old Mate is in the wrong But If trucks are banned from the right hand lane on this stretch then he is also in the wrong as well.
Common curtesy Should have prevailed with the car moving to the left But it didn't But that doesn't excuse the truck driver from using the right hand lane out of frustration.
In reality both drivers did the wrong thing.

Yeah !!!!!

I'll call bull**** on that statement. Never seen it enforced in more than 30 years of driving in this state. Perth drivers on the freeways down there are probably the worst I've ever come across in this respect - it's common knowledge that the left lane is the fastest lane to travel in - the slow ******* are always in the right lane. [wink11]

[BMKal]

The truck apologists on here always make me laugh. I travel +50,000km / year and occasionally drive HR trucks, and see intimidation on the road constantly.
While the average car driver can be a jerk, they invariably are conforming to their "speed limit" - usually rigidly enforced by the nanny state highway patrol. I realise that this can vary due to speedo error. I usually have my GPS going, and generally see Bdoubles at 103-105km/hr in pedal to the metal mode.
I drive mainly in rural NSW, where there is usually a bit of latitude with the rozzers < 10km, but in Vic that leeway is usually not there. I tell my family that the only way to share the road with trucks out here is to travel at 110km/hr. or 90km/hr, and let trucks pass. The speed differentials are too small to allow for safe sharing the roads if you are not to come under notice of the revenue collectors.
I also drive in Europe, and feel much safer there than Aus. Much more intuitive (and fast) driving, BUT the trucks there are limited to 80km/hr, and the system works great for Autostrade and provincial roads. Dont worry about the cops on a multi lane road - get in the road of an Audi or Beemer driver on the LH (ie fast lane), and you will soon know about it.
If I was running the show, the trucks would all be limited to 90km/hr, (I can hear the howls now!!) and all car drivers would have to do the kind of licence process that they do in Europe. I notice in SA that road trains are legal at 100km/h. I consider myself a reasonable driver, but find myself white knuckling it on the Stuart Hwy, especially in a Land Rover.
The sense of entitlement from both sides of this debate needs to be educated out.

You need to get out and about a bit more. Your idea might work alright in Europe where distances are short and roads are very much different to what they are here (yes - I've driven there too), and maybe even between Brisbane / Sydney / Melbourne. When you've driven across the Nullarbor at 90km/hr, or from Perth up to the North West at the same speed - come back and tell us about it................

[rangieman]

You need to get out and about a bit more. Your idea might work alright in Europe where distances are short and roads are very much different to what they are here (yes - I've driven there too), and maybe even between Brisbane / Sydney / Melbourne. When you've driven across the Nullarbor at 90km/hr, or from Perth up to the North West at the same speed - come back and tell us about it................
X2
I think the problem is these web experts have never driven or been for a trip in a big real truck yes a hr is a real truck [wink11]
Reducing the speed on truck`s to 90 or less is just Dumb and Dumber thinking .
Take a trip in a single or double any where any time and take note of the stupid spanker car drivers and the plan stupid things they do on the road with out any consideration for themselves or anyone else for that:bat:
I have noticed the quality or behaviour of drivers on the road`s has taken a massive downward shift over the years , I have my theory on this so dont start me on that one :soapbox:

[Fatso]

Does anyone know what speed the car was actualy doing ? , hard to comment without that piece of vital info . [tonguewink]

[Pickles2]

Does anyone know what speed the car was actualy doing ? , hard to comment without that piece of vital info . [tonguewink]
I would like that info too.
Surely it'll come up on the "Media" somewhere!
Pickles.

[Pickles2]

Just googled this matter,..located it on Ch 7's Facebook page, where it has already generated around ONE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED comments, overwhelmingly in favor of the Truckie, which is of course my view.
Pickles.

[Mick_Marsh]

What gets me is regularly you would see trucks three abreast doing their 100km/h or less on a freeway impeding cars.
There was an uproar. The government responded by introducing new laws.
Trucks : VicRoads (https://www.vicroads.vic.gov.au/safety-and-road-rules/road-rules/a-to-z-of-road-rules/trucks)

Truck lane restrictions on freeways

Trucks are not allowed to travel in the right hand lane on some of Victoria's freeways.

If there is a sign restricting trucks from driving in the right hand lane, drivers are not allowed to travel in the right hand lane of the freeway.

These restrictions apply to vehicles over 4.5 tonnes Gross Vehicle Mass except for:
•buses
•emergency vehicles
•vehicles under escort by a police officer or an authorised VicRoads officer.

Now that a truck driver has been charged under these new laws the public wanted, there is an uproar.

What was that line in that Monty Python movie? "There's no pleasing some people."
https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2017/10/114.jpg

[Denzo]

You need to get out and about a bit more. Your idea might work alright in Europe where distances are short and roads are very much different to what they are here (yes - I've driven there too), and maybe even between Brisbane / Sydney / Melbourne. When you've driven across the Nullarbor at 90km/hr, or from Perth up to the North West at the same speed - come back and tell us about it................

Well that drew the predictable response from the gallery. Those Bostrom seats must create ****ty livers!!
1. European distances - better get a map out - Check off the distance from Scandanavia to the Balkans - all with the same kitted trucks doing long haul at 80km.
2. The cowboy element in professional truck drivers has largely disappeared. I spent a lot of time travelling between the Riverland and Riverina in the bad old days - glad to not see that chaos again. The loose cannons are still out there though. A few months ago was dodging roos at +115km on the Kidman Way at night and got rounded up by a Bdouble passing and spraying rocks as he chewed up what is left of the pitiful road. Still have the crack in the windscreen as a trophy. Tuned up Ch40 - dont keep it on cause of the purile crap that you have to endure on it - and was told in no uncertain terms to reproduce myself, and that he had all the gear on board to detect the highway patrol, and that he would happily stop in the next town to sort the issue out. Geez, what an ambassador.
3. The main issue is differential speeds - no problem on the 110k sections where you can keep a good separation, but on the 100k sections, my beef is that trucks @ 100k is a problem when we have the siege mentality of the NSW highway patrol. We often have the HP running in tandem 5km apart here, and I know from a recent points loss that those guys have all had a humour bypass.
4. The original post re tailgating - still happens, and it is not pleasant. I can handle it - asked a truckie on a 100km / hr section of the Newell Hwy on Ch40 recently if he would like me do change out his driving light globes while we were travelling. He backed off with a laugh, and all was good. But how does the Hyundai Lantra driver handle the same situation. At least the Disco has a bit more of a chance.
5. Back to my original comment - the education of car drivers is abysmal - especially for the type of driving I do, which is mainly rural long distance. The trucking industry has improved out of sight in the past 20 years, but one clown will destroy a years worth of good will. I believe that this is true of the Geelong incident.
6. As a semi retirement project I intend to upgrade from HR to MC - and do some grain hauling. I am not down on the industry - the opposite, but to say that the industry is without issues is silly.

[trout1105]

If you were travelling on skinny bitumen at night at +115k's without slowing down to pass the truck then you most likely deserved the stones in the windscreen [bigwhistle]

[Denzo]

If you were travelling on skinny bitumen at night at +115k's without slowing down to pass the truck then you most likely deserved the stones in the windscreen [bigwhistle]

Ah NO - the truck passed me !!!!
See what I mean

[trout1105]

Ah NO - the truck passed me !!!!
See what I mean

Jesus, What sort of speed was the truck travelling at?

[Fatso]

Reading some of the posts here it is no wonder we have problems on our roads , it is illegal to tailgate . Why did the truck driver not just move into the vacant lane on the left and carry on .
Still no indication of the speeds envolved .

[Mick_Marsh]

Jesus, What sort of speed was the truck travelling at?
On the speed limiter?

[AK83]

Reading some of the posts here it is no wonder we have problems on our roads , it is illegal to tailgate . Why did the truck driver not just move into the vacant lane on the left and carry on .
Still no indication of the speeds envolved .

Note that I'm also a regular user of that road during the day in a HC too.
Firstly I don't speed, don't tailgate and always courteous. Being paid by the hour, I'm usually at about 90-ish k/h, but sometimes when a deadline is looming for a delivery you just have to sit at the 100k mark(which in reality on our trucks is about 97-98.

My thoughts as to why the truckie didn't just slip past in the left lane is simple and is an issue that's as common as H2O molecules ..
Car was probably sitting at about 95-ish and truck would have been catching them up along a dead straight section of road.
Truck probably slipped into the left lane and as it approached brain dead centre lane idiot, the chances that said idiot then started speeding up so as to not get passed by a truck sat at a faster than 95k/h speed .. and most likely at the same speed as the truck.
The what these idiots do is sit there along side you, and as you now(in the left lane) approach a slower vehicle you then move back into the middle lane behind them and they slow back down to their original 95 again.

If I had 20c for every time this has happened to me, I'd have retired years ago with a million dollar super package! :p

No exaggeration when I say this happens ALL THE TIME, not just maybe once or twice or every now and then, but every single drive no matter which freeway you drive on around Melbourne.
The only way around them(in my job) is you have to let them win. I just drop back to about 80k/h and annoy the crap out of everyone else around me, only keeping an eye out for other trucks coming up behind.
if you try to take them on, you simply lose your job(trackers and cameras) .. so let them win and tackle the issue the with the shoe on the other foot(noting that I'm getting paid '/hour').

On my recreational drives, I tend to sit at about 90-ish k/h day and night.
Always keeping an eye out for trucks coming up from the rear .. it's not like you can't see them! ;).
Given them a short flick of the right indicator to pass if it's safe, as they pass I back off even more allow them plenty of space and speed difference to get back into the correct lane ASAP.
Even tho I have the UHF, I tend to leave it off more than on due to the previously mentioned dross you hear on it most of the time.

Courtesy isn't hard, and awareness is easier than these idiots make it out to be.
For them it seems to be a race of some kind .. can't let a truck come past .. no way! [bighmmm]

[Gordie]

Dead right Ak83, saw it all the time as a truck driver, and see it all the time still, even today on the motorbike, come up behind a driver in RH lane on expressway, doing less than speed limit, I go to left lane so that I hopefully can draw it to his attention by passing him in left lane, with the hope of popping back into RH lane to overtake car in front of me....that car in RH lane speeds up to block the gap and stop me from that manoeuvre....I don't blame any truckie, or motorist, for getting frustrated by such brain dead "I must rule the road' twits, and taking appropriate action.

[Denzo]

On the speed limiter?

He actually boasted that he had the secret switch and alluded to the undetectable radar detector. Apparently was happy to show me the goods, along with his knuckles in Barellan !!!
I slowed to well under 100 as he passed, and the trailer was virtually fishtailing in the RH gravel. Still copped the rock.
Moron

[Saitch]

[QUOTE=Gordie;2726483] doing less than speed limit, I go to left lane so that I hopefully can draw it to his attention by passing him in left lane, QUOTE]

This is something I've thought for a long time. Surely, if you're tootling along in a middle lane and getting overtaken by vehicles in a lane to your left, you would have the nous to realise perhaps you should be in the far left lane.

Brissie to the Pyrites Coast is the perfect example with the far left "Slow" lane being almost empty. I use it the majority of the trip when forced to travel down there.

[Fatso]

Finaly got to see the footage of the event mentioned on the 7 news Melbourn . Apparently the car was doing the speed limit with the truck right up his/her clacker , finaly went around in the right lane , and as reported did the same to another car a bit further up thr road . Tool .

[Chops]

Jesus, What sort of speed was the truck travelling at?

They can go fast,,,
I've had a BD pass me on the Hume who was well over 145,,,

It amuses me how many car drivers are scared of trucks,, we can be following someone, cruising along at a respectable speed, two trucks will be in the #1 & #3 lanes (from the left on 4 lane sections),,, do we slip between them and keep moving on (?),,, naa, lets just wait and not pass at all. Even just a single truck, some just won't pass,, you'll see them move over another lane at least to make a pass.
I get not being a confident driver, I respect that,,, but if you can't handle the situations that arise, and either take some form of courteous action, or keep with the flow, then perhaps they shouldn't be there.

[CraigE]

I was in Melbourne only a month ago, and went out to Geelong area, a couple of times...

Its 100 along there except where the barrier is being worked on... Trucks not allowed in right lane, signs all along...

Trucks have speed limiters, some states allow them to be set as high as 103 kph...Thus a bit hard for a truck to be exceeding the speed limit to overtake...

One thing I did learn about freeways, every one I have been on in Australia, have idiot drivers that have no concern for anyone else... Right hand lane when they are travelling slower than the rest, blocking others from overtaking, cutting others off, and above all else, taking on trucks as if they are driving a dozer...

It amazes me how others on the roads know more about what trucks are allowed to do and take it into there hands to cut trucks off...

One thing I have been abused for is sitting on the speed limit and overtaking a car, car driver came up and informed me that "trucks are not allowed to overtake and they must be 20 k under the speed limit"...
Sadly she didn't try stopping in front of me but she did cut me off to turn onto Toodyay rd...Pity, I could have had a pancake flattened by 50 tyres, that day...

Sorry mate your section relating to speed limiters is not quite true. First they have to be fitted and working. They will allow short periods much more than 103kmph if fitted and working. Very easy to disconnect and fool and seems to be a lot of that. I have been passed by plenty of trucks doing well in excess of 100kmph and often well in excess of 110kmph. Also not using the left lane is rarely enforced here in WA, see it day in and day out on the Freeways. Frequently have to pull into the left lane to undertake a car doing 80 in the right lane.

[BMKal]

Well that drew the predictable response from the gallery. Those Bostrom seats must create ****ty livers!!
1. European distances - better get a map out - Check off the distance from Scandanavia to the Balkans - all with the same kitted trucks doing long haul at 80km.
2. The cowboy element in professional truck drivers has largely disappeared. I spent a lot of time travelling between the Riverland and Riverina in the bad old days - glad to not see that chaos again. The loose cannons are still out there though. A few months ago was dodging roos at +115km on the Kidman Way at night and got rounded up by a Bdouble passing and spraying rocks as he chewed up what is left of the pitiful road. Still have the crack in the windscreen as a trophy. Tuned up Ch40 - dont keep it on cause of the purile crap that you have to endure on it - and was told in no uncertain terms to reproduce myself, and that he had all the gear on board to detect the highway patrol, and that he would happily stop in the next town to sort the issue out. Geez, what an ambassador.
3. The main issue is differential speeds - no problem on the 110k sections where you can keep a good separation, but on the 100k sections, my beef is that trucks @ 100k is a problem when we have the siege mentality of the NSW highway patrol. We often have the HP running in tandem 5km apart here, and I know from a recent points loss that those guys have all had a humour bypass.
4. The original post re tailgating - still happens, and it is not pleasant. I can handle it - asked a truckie on a 100km / hr section of the Newell Hwy on Ch40 recently if he would like me do change out his driving light globes while we were travelling. He backed off with a laugh, and all was good. But how does the Hyundai Lantra driver handle the same situation. At least the Disco has a bit more of a chance.
5. Back to my original comment - the education of car drivers is abysmal - especially for the type of driving I do, which is mainly rural long distance. The trucking industry has improved out of sight in the past 20 years, but one clown will destroy a years worth of good will. I believe that this is true of the Geelong incident.
6. As a semi retirement project I intend to upgrade from HR to MC - and do some grain hauling. I am not down on the industry - the opposite, but to say that the industry is without issues is silly.

Well I can't see anything in here to refute the "predictable response". As I said, when you've driven a truck across the Nullarbor or up to the north of the country at 90 km/hr - we might take some note of your opinion. For the record - I HAVE driven trucks long distance at these speeds and lower (I used to work in heavy haulage) - so I do know what I am talking about. [wink11]

[350RRC]

I drive that section of road a bit and have seen what has happened since trucks were banned from the right lane.

It was done at the behest of motorists who felt intimidated, and there there was the occaisional thing, but trucks generally sat on the limit IME.

It must totally drive truck drivers mad that someone is swanning around in the middle lane, pacing themselves with someone in the left hand lane doing 95 or 98 and they have a job to do, yet can't legally pass on the RHS.

Who shot the footage from the LH lane, nicely keeping pace? Was it a setup?

DL

[V8Ian]

130494

[Roverlord off road spares]

Yeah !!!!!

I'll call bull**** on that statement. Never seen it enforced in more than 30 years of driving in this state. Perth drivers on the freeways down there are probably the worst I've ever come across in this respect - it's common knowledge that the left lane is the fastest lane to travel in - the slow ******* are always in the right lane. [wink11]

Actually the emergency stopping lane is the fast lane here sometimes , those drivers shouldn't have a licence :bat:

[Pickles2]

Finaly got to see the footage of the event mentioned on the 7 news Melbourn . Apparently the car was doing the speed limit with the truck right up his/her clacker , finaly went around in the right lane , and as reported did the same to another car a bit further up thr road . Tool .
" Apparently the car was doing the speed limit"?....where did you learn that?,..I haven't been able to CONFIRM what the car's real speed was.....but I'd like to.
Pickles.

[trout1105]

It is irrelevant what speed the car driver was travelling at, the speed limit is just that a limit Not a target.
What is relevant is the car drivers rudeness or ignorance by not moving over into the left hand lane and allowing the truck through.
It is also worth noting that tailgaiting is also a rude, ignorant and dangerous practice.

[101RRS]

It is also worth noting that tailgaiting is also a rude, ignorant and dangerous practice.

And is the only law being broken in the video.

[trout1105]

And is the only law being broken in the video.

Surely the car driver could also be charged with failing to keep left as well??

[AndyG]

Was that on the main hwy to Geelong from Melb(?), I'm not sure if there isn't a ruling that trucks aren't allowed in the right hand lane down there (??). So either way, the truckie will be buggered,, in the wrong lane or undertaking [bighmmm]

Is there an undertaking rule in Victoria/Australia ? Excuse my ignorance.

[Pickles2]

And is the only law being broken in the video.
Maybe, but haven't you ever heard of common sense. If there is EVER anybody behind me, that wants to get by, I wiill ALWAYS move over, especially if it's a large truck who are invariably wanting to travel quicker than I do in our Defender.
So, you're saying, in a similar situation, you would stay in the lane, and not move over, and allow the truck to pass, even if you could?
Pickles.

[Pickles2]

Surely the car driver could also be charged with failing to keep left as well??
Not in Vic, I believe, if you're on a laned road, but as I've said, in my book there's such a thing as common courtesy, or common sense,...but of course some drivers choose not to recognize these aspects of driving, maybe because they think it's "their right", "don't have to" (move over) or whatever,....it's definitely not my way of thinking..
Pickles

[trout1105]

Overtaking lanes on country highways in WA are few and far apart and it is not uncommon to have some tosser that stays in the right hand lane on these.
Usually a flash with everything you have will get these morons to move into the left hand lane so that you can pass, Failing that the only thing you can do is to wait until there is a clear straight stretch and overtake then.
Tailgating isn't an option as you have No idea how these sort of drivers are going to react.

[trout1105]

Not in Vic, I believe, if you're on a laned road, but as I've said, in my book there's such a thing as common courtesy, or common sense,...but of course some drivers choose not to recognize these aspects of driving, maybe because they think it's "their right", "don't have to" (move over) or whatever,....it's definitely not my way of thinking..
Pickles

I suppose it IS pretty tough to try and fix Stupid and it is unfortunate that some drivers consider that they "Own" the road and have no intention of sharing it with other users.
I am pretty sure that if the coppers really wanted to charge the car driver they would find something to pin on Him/Her.

[CraigE]

Overtaking lanes on country highways in WA are few and far apart and it is not uncommon to have some tosser that stays in the right hand lane on these.
Usually a flash with everything you have will get these morons to move into the left hand lane so that you can pass, Failing that the only thing you can do is to wait until there is a clear straight stretch and overtake then.
Tailgating isn't an option as you have No idea how these sort of drivers are going to react.

Yeah but that happens with both cars and trucks in overtaking lanes, freeways and 2 lane highways here. I see as many trucks doing this as I do cars. Have been forced off the road by more trucks than cars, trying to pass in inappropriate situations, that I can say for certain.

[Pickles2]

I suppose it IS pretty tough to try and fix Stupid and it is unfortunate that some drivers consider that they "Own" the road and have no intention of sharing it with other users.
I am pretty sure that if the coppers really wanted to charge the car driver they would find something to pin on Him/Her.
My thoughts exactly, and if the situation was reversed, ie, truck in lane holding up a car, my thoughts/reasoning would be exactly the same,..simply stupid, selfish driving by any driver who drives like this..
Pickles.

[Mick_Marsh]

Surely the car driver could also be charged with failing to keep left as well??
The car was keeping left of the r/h lane. How could the car driver be charged for doing nothing wrong?
Refer to my earlier post on road rule 130.

[Mick_Marsh]

and if the situation was reversed, ie, truck in lane holding up a car

If the situation were reversed, the car would have simply used the r/h lane and overtaken the truck.
All legally. No issue.

[101RRS]

Surely the car driver could also be charged with failing to keep left as well??

Keeping left means not allowed in the outside lane unless overtaking. You can still be in any other lane. And in that road the left lane is for slow vehicles, the middle lane where the car was is for normal speeds and outside lane is for overtaking - pretty common all over the country. Driving at 20kph in the centre lane might be considered impeding traffic but driving at 70, 80, 90, up to the speed limit in the centre lane is not impeding traffic - the truck driver was a total douche and should be penalised as such.

[Pickles2]

No such law. How could the car driver be charged for doing nothing wrong?
Refer to my earlier post on road rule 130.
I have seen signs, "Keep Left If Not Overtaking",..I cannot remember if I've seen them on Geelong Rd?
Pickles.

[101RRS]

I cannot speak for Vic but in most states the law says you must keep left (not in the right lane) unless overtaking where the speed limit is 90kph and above or where there are signs saying keep left unless overtaking. So signs are not always there.

[Mick_Marsh]

I have seen signs, "Keep Left If Not Overtaking",..I cannot remember if I've seen them on Geelong Rd?
Pickles.
Point me to the law that states the driver must drive in the left most part of the left most lane i.e. where the cyclists should be.

Read rule 130.

As part of the conditions for holding a Victorian drivers licence, you are required to have an understanding of the road rules. If you have a different understanding of this road rule, maybe it's time to hand in the licence.

[Fatso]

" Apparently the car was doing the speed limit"?....where did you learn that?,..I haven't been able to CONFIRM what the car's real speed was.....but I'd like to.
Pickles.

"By watching the Ch7 video" , the commentator said that the car was doing the speed limit and that the truck tailgated , i would asume from that that the truck was speeding , also it was reported that the truck driver did the same thing again a bit further up the road to another car .
I can only go on what was reported as I was not there , there was also another car in the left lane a bit further up the road doing what looked like the same speed as the car bieng tailgated and the car taking the vidio looked like it was in the left lane as well but just behind the truck which was in the middle lane . Cant really see why everone wants to hang the car driver but there you go .

[Mick_Marsh]

I cannot speak for Vic but in most states the law says you must keep left (not in the right lane) unless overtaking where the speed limit is 90kph and above or where there are signs saying keep left unless overtaking. So signs are not always there.
You'll notice I quoted from the national road rules. This same road rule should also apply in all the states and territories of Australia.

[trout1105]

This is for WA, I am not sure what weird rules apply in other States.

Road Safety Commission - Keeping Left (https://www.rsc.wa.gov.au/Road-Rules/Browse/Keeping-Left)

[Mick_Marsh]

This is for WA, I am not sure what weird rules apply in other States.

Road Safety Commission - Keeping Left (https://www.rsc.wa.gov.au/Road-Rules/Browse/Keeping-Left)

Nice graphic. Only two lanes shown. The driver on the video was keeping to the left of the r/h lane as your graphic depicts.
What is the problem?

Where is that road rule written in WA? That will either support or debunk your argument.

[trout1105]

Nice graphic. Only two lanes shown. The driver on the video was keeping to the left of the r/h lane as your graphic depicts.
What is the problem?

Where is that road rule written in WA? That will either support or debunk your argument.

That page is from the road safety commission of WA website.
It doesn't state stay in any lane other that the right lane it states stay in the LEFT lane , Simples [thumbsupbig]

[Mick_Marsh]

That page is from the road safety commission of WA website.
It doesn't state stay in any lane other that the right lane it states stay in the LEFT lane , Simples [thumbsupbig]
Yep. The left lane. Being the one left of the right lane.
I have no issue with that.

And the actual WA road rule with respect to the situation being discussed?

http://www.transport.wa.gov.au/mediaFiles/licensing/LBU_DL_B_DriveSafeFull_f.pdf

Ah, yes, and the appropriate disclaimer.

This handbook is a guide to safe driving and an interpretation of the law.
It is NOT the law, but a simplified version of the road law as defined in the Road Traffic
(Administration) Act 2008, including the Australian Road Rules that apply currently in
Western Australia. It does not include all the traffic regulations and is not intended to be
used as a legal document.

[101RRS]

In Multi Lane highways you will also see "slow vehicles keep to the left lane" as well as "keep left unless overtaking" - so slow in the left lane - normal speed in the centre lane and overtaking in the right lane - simples.

[Pickles2]

In Multi Lane highways you will also see "slow vehicles keep to the left lane" as well as "keep left unless overtaking" - so slow in the left lane - normal speed in the centre lane and overtaking in the right lane - simples.
So, in this case, if you were the driver of the car, and you were, as in this case, in the middle lane, would you move over to let the truck by?
A simple yes or no will do,...my answer would be "yes".
Pickles.

[trout1105]

After scrolling down forever I found this,


3.4.2 Roads with 2 or more lanes If the speed limit that applies to a road is 90km/h or higher or there are ‘KEEP LEFT UNLESS OVERTAKING’ signs installed, you are not permitted to drive in the right lane of these roads unless: n you are turning right or making a ‘U’ turn and giving a right turn signal; n you are overtaking another vehicle; n the adjacent left lane is a special purpose lane such as a bus lane or bicycle lane; n the left lane is a left turning lane and you are travelling straight ahead; or n the other lanes are congested with traffic.


In the situation presented in the original post the car was travelling in the Right hand lane as far as the truck is concerned because the truck was legally not allowed to use the right hand lane.

The interpretation of this rule is a bit "hazy" But any responsible driver would stay as far left as possible if they have no need to overtake, regardless of how many lanes are available.
Common sense and decency Should prevail But unfortunately on many occasions it simply doesn't.

[Mick_Marsh]

So, in this case, if you were the driver of the car, and you were, as in this case, in the middle lane, would you move over to let the truck by?
A simple yes or no will do,...my answer would be "yes".
Pickles.
Me. If I was in the car, I'd drive in any of the lanes to the left of the right hand lane. The law says I can. If I was in the truck, I'd move to the left and continue happily on my way.

To use the example some give here that the car should have been in the left most lane, why wasn't the truck in the left most lane? Had he have been, he would have enjoyed his drive unimpeded.

[Xtreme]

Yes

Irrespective of whether I was on a single, double or multi lane road, track, highway or expressway, if someone catches up to me then he is travelling faster than me and therefore if I let him pass safely he will soon be gone and I can continue without any worries.

[Mick_Marsh]

In the situation presented in the original post the car was travelling in the Right hand lane as far as the truck is concerned because the truck was legally not allowed to use the right hand lane.
But the car was "a car" so the truck rules didn't apply to the car. The car was driving within the rules that applied to the car.
See what happens when we have different rules applying to different entities using the same resource. (To be inclusive think motorcycles and bicycles here.)
The problem here is not the car, but the rules, and the rules that applied to the truck that the truck driver decided to ignore.

[AK83]

Yep. The left lane. Being the one left of the right lane.
...

Only problem with that is that it's so ambiguous that even a court wouldn't be in a position to deal with it.

if the rules say keep left, and there are middle lanes then a middle or central lane can't be consider The Left Lane.
if the middle lane was to be considered the left lane, then what's the definition of the lane to the left of this middle/left lane .. leftmost lane?

The situation would be insane.

Then you have to define left and right lane for the truck too. Considering that trucks are banned from using the right lane(definition here being that rightmost lane that trucks aren't allowed to use) .. so the right lane now from the point of view of the truck = the middle lane.
So now from the truck driver's perspective, the car driver isn't keeping left, as he's in the (truck) right lane!

The situation is so idiotic that they either need to remove the right lane ban for trucks.. so as to remove any possible ambiguity .. or left lane literally means left lane.
Middle lane can only come under a definition where it's called the middle lane, or central lane .. so 'keep middle or central' would have to become a new signpost to deal with the ambiguity.

A keep left sign by it's very definition literally means to keep left. Ie. if you can stay central, and there is a left lane available then they aren't keeping left .. not in the true sense of the meaning of the directions made by that sign.

I can't remember any signs saying keep left along the three lane section .. maybe further south at the two lane section .. but I don't regularly get that far down the road.

Which every way you look at it, the law isn't clearly defined and is much too ambiguous as it currently is.

That is, idf the law says keep left, and the meaning is really only meant to be keep left of the rightmost lane, then it should be clearly marked as such.
Keep left means move left, and if there is more left space to the left of that, then keep left again.

In those road rules posted earlier there is no clear cut stated requirement that keeping left is only applicable with respect to the rightmost lane.
The only reference to the right lane(ie. the right most lane) is that a driver must not use it unless .. all those considerations note down in the sub clauses.

if you take this silly ambiguity to it's fullest level of lunacy .. technically the driver of the car was using a right lane(as implied as a definition by your arguments).
That is, if there is a left most lane(here now described simply as the left lane) then the use of the middle lane ie. to the right of this left lane is maintaining extended use of a right lane.

And the situation had just deteriorated from a simple silly ambiguous one to a fully fledged idiotic confusion.

I think the best way to deal with the silly situation is that we need to collectively rally to have these stupid bans removed.
And this video only serves to highlight the reasons why.
People!
I've argued this in the speeding thread, people will always be people and they don't always adhere to social conventions(ie. in this case the truckie tailgating when we all know that this is a stupid practise)
if this ban didn't exist, the situation would have never arisen as an issue at all .. ever! in an ideal world where stupid road rules that make no difference to the movement of traffic(ie. right lane bans) the truckie woudl have simply sailed past the middle lane idiot in the far right lane and the guy taking the video wouldn't have possibly been speeding considering that the middle lane driver was at the speed limit and the video guy has caught up himself!

[trout1105]

But the car was "a car" so the truck rules didn't apply to the car. The car was driving within the rules that applied to the car.
See what happens when we have different rules applying to different entities using the same resource. (To be inclusive think motorcycles and bicycles here.)
The problem here is not the car, but the rules, and the rules that applied to the truck that the truck driver decided to ignore.

That May be the case But do you seriously think that the car driver was doing the "Right Thing" by Not moving over to the vacant left lane to allow the truck to pass regardless of the road rules ?
I am Not condoning or agreeing for one second that the truck driver was doing the "Right Thing" by tailgaiting But wouldn't it have been a safer and wiser option for the car to simply move over to the left?

[donh54]

Friend a few years ago was talking about issues with "fast" and "slow" lanes. The copper informed him, quite forcefully, that there are NO such things as fast or slow lanes. The same speed limits apply in all lanes.
This was before the relatively recent, over 90k keep left unless overtaking rule was introduced (at least here in Qld).

[Mick_Marsh]

That May be the case But do you seriously think that the car driver was doing the "Right Thing" by Not moving over to the vacant left lane to allow the truck to pass regardless of the road rules ?
I am Not condoning or agreeing for one second that the truck driver was doing the "Right Thing" by tailgaiting But wouldn't it have been a safer and wiser option for the car to simply move over to the left?
The car driver was not doing the wrong thing, according to the road rules. The car was not involved in any accident.
Your questions appear nonsensical to me. That is to say, what your questions ask did not happen.

[Pickles2]

That May be the case But do you seriously think that the car driver was doing the "Right Thing" by Not moving over to the vacant left lane to allow the truck to pass regardless of the road rules ?
I am Not condoning or agreeing for one second that the truck driver was doing the "Right Thing" by tailgaiting But wouldn't it have been a safer and wiser option for the car to simply move over to the left?
This is my view.
Pickles.

[trout1105]

The car driver was not doing the wrong thing, according to the road rules. The car was not involved in any accident.
Your questions appear nonsensical to me. That is to say, what your questions ask did not happen.

What part of my question was "Nonsense"?
Of course the driver of the car didn't move into the left lane, That is NOT what I was asking in my question.
I simply asked IF you considered the car drivers actions were the safest and politest option.
If you think that the car driver did the right thing and the safest thing by staying in the middle lane instead of moving into the vacant left lane Simply answer yes or no

[AK83]

Yes

Irrespective of whether I was on a single, double or multi lane road, track, highway or expressway, if someone catches up to me then he is travelling faster than me and therefore if I let him pass safely he will soon be gone and I can continue without any worries.

Feel free to spread some of that common sense around liberally.


....
The problem here is not the car, but the rules, and the rules that applied to the truck that the truck driver decided to ignore.

+1.

[Mick_Marsh]

What part of my question was "Nonsense"?
Of course the driver of the car didn't move into the left lane, That is NOT what I was asking in my question.
I simply asked IF you considered the car drivers actions were the safest and politest option.
If you think that the car driver did the right thing and the safest thing by staying in the middle lane instead of moving into the vacant left lane Simply answer yes or no
My answer is:

The car driver was not doing the wrong thing, according to the road rules. The car was not involved in any accident.
My yes/no question to you, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Answer "yes" or "no".
Now do you understand why to me your question is nonsensical?

[trout1105]

My answer is:

My yes/no question to you, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" Answer "yes" or "no".
Now do you understand why to me your question is nonsensical?

Are you a politician by any chance because it is extremely difficult to get a straight answer from you here? [bigwhistle]

[101RRS]

But do you seriously think that the car driver was doing the "Right Thing" by Not moving over to the vacant left lane to allow the truck

But the left lane was not vacant - it has the car that was filming in it.

[trout1105]

But the left lane was not vacant - it has the car that was filming in it.

So now we have 3x dimwits on the same bit of road.
The truckie tailgaiting , and Old Mate in the middle lane, that could have accelerated in front of the clown blocking up the left lane doing the video thing.
Thank Christ I don't live in the City with Peanuts like these on the road.

[101RRS]

Well no there was also another car in the far left lane just ahead as well.

With the exception of Mick - you lot need to accept that the bad guy is the truck driver - everyone else is abiding by the law and doing what they should - except the truck driver - tailgating, intimidation - and the cops agree and are looking for the truck driver not the car driver.

[biggrin]

[trout1105]

Well no there was also another car in the far left lane just ahead as well.

With the exception of Mick - you lot need to accept that the bad guy is the truck driver - everyone else is abiding by the law and doing what they should - except the truck driver - tailgating, intimidation - and the cops agree and are looking for the truck driver not the car driver.

[biggrin]

I suppose the right hand lane was blocked as well [bigwhistle]

[Mick_Marsh]

I suppose the right hand lane was blocked as well [bigwhistle]
So, what are you saying now, the car should have moved to the right so the truck could pass in the left?

[Mick_Marsh]

Are you a politician by any chance because it is extremely difficult to get a straight answer from you here? [bigwhistle]

You have a straight answer. Just not the one you wanted.
Oh, I've noticed you have avoided answering my question.

[101RRS]

I suppose the right hand lane was blocked as well [bigwhistle]

Have you actually looked at the footage - or just commenting on hearsay.

[AK83]

I don't think anyone commented that the truck driver didn't do the wrong thing.. both tailgating and using the right lane.
But the middle man could have easily averted an aggro maniac getting more aggro and doing what he did.

Now the aggro truckie is going to pay for not keeping his cool, so 'another one bites the dust' as they say.
He'll probably lose his job(at least as a driver) if his employer has any self respect too.

Doesn't mean that someone can't sympathise with the truck driver tho.

[Fatso]

Well no there was also another car in the far left lane just ahead as well.

With the exception of Mick - you lot need to accept that the bad guy is the truck driver - everyone else is abiding by the law and doing what they should - except the truck driver - tailgating, intimidation - and the cops agree and are looking for the truck driver not the car driver.

[biggrin]

And Fatso .

[trout1105]

You have a straight answer. Just not the one you wanted.
Oh, I've noticed you have avoided answering my question.

I have never beaten my Wife, Happy?

[Pickles2]

Are you a politician by any chance because it is extremely difficult to get a straight answer from you here? [bigwhistle]
Lol!!
Nothing unusual about that,...go back through this thread and you will see that there are a few, and particularly one, who fall into that category.
Like the car driver, right or wrong, they feel it is their "right" to be that way,.....fair enough, but it ain't mine!!
Pickles.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

There are bad truck drivers but far more bad an inconsiderate car drivers. For the last few days I've been helping out a mate and AULRO member by driving his 13 tonne curtainsider pantech. Yesterday in the M5East tunnel I'm in lane 2 as an onramp merges from left. Traffic stopped as it moves ahead a space opens in front of me as the truck is changing up through the gears then two cars jump into my braking space. There was only room for 1 at the same moment the 2nd came into view below my windscree he hit the LH corner of the bullbar. I had no ability to stop something like 14 tonne of truck and load. Then he continued through the tunnel and multiple streets before Iost him.
Now tell me that truck drivers are at fault! You'll get no agreement frkmm me.

[Pickles2]

There are bad truck drivers but far more bad an inconsiderate car drivers. For the last few days I've been helping out a mate and AULRO member by driving his 13 tonne curtainsider pantech. Yesterday in the M5East tunnel I'm in lane 2 as an onramp merges from left. Traffic stopped as it moves ahead a space opens in front of me as the truck is changing up through the gears then two cars jump into my braking space. There was only room for 1 at the same moment the 2nd came into view below my windscree he hit the LH corner of the bullbar. I had no ability to stop something like 14 tonne of truck and load. Then he continued through the tunnel and multiple streets before Iost him.
Now tell me that truck drivers are at fault! You'll get no agreement frkmm me.
No disagreement from me.
I've never driven a truck, never owned one, never had any connection with one.
However, I love driving, done lots of it, "I've been ön the road", for a very long time, probably longer than most, and I tell you what, I believe the quality of car driving has decreased a guzillion percent sinse I got my license, whereas, "ïn my day", there were LOTS of "rogue truckies",.....they are now virtually gone,.....I see plenty more bad car drivers than I've ever seen, but "truckies",...virtually never see any bad behaviour.
Pickles.

[trog]

I have given this a bit of thought , having watched the behaviour of drivers on the gateway between toombul rd and mt Gravatt road , of which I traverse three round trips per working day. Sure there are idiots in trucks cars and motorbikes. But only L and P drivers seem to get the attention. So as there have been calls for different plates for visitors , oldies and caravans , why not one for every driver. Rounded to the closest five years , it could display their experience. Not displaying the plate gives the cops a reason to pull them over to check credentials. And web reports can tell us about the "x" number plate who did something stupid.

[Chops]

Is there an undertaking rule in Victoria/Australia ? Excuse my ignorance.


Not exactly sure on this Andy, (there "maybe" in certain situations),, however, if the truck had undertaken the guy in the car,, you can be sure people would be saying "there goes some ****** truckie driving like an idiot again", so more hate for truckies.

My personal take on all this is that the truck/s should be allowed "to pass" using the right hand lane if needs be.
The only problem with this being, that as soon as they start to do this, the car will immediately speed up, screwing the truckie over for a passing maneuver, and no doubt, lack of attention/intelligence will at the same time, see some other clown move in behind the car that was being passed, and give the truck no where to go back into the lane from where he came.

There's a lot of rather bad and impatient truck drivers on our roads, but, in my own opinion, they are professionals, and basically are OK. On the other hand, from driving in and around Melbourne, there seems to be more woeful car drivers on our roads than ever before.
I think gaining a licence should have more theory in it, not practice. This theory should be the teaching of road manners and courtesy toward others on the road. Little things like, "its not my business if your speeding, but hey, maybe you've got an emergency, I'll move over and give you room",,, things like deciphering how fast a car is coming up behind you,, or how much room you need before you can pull out safely from a "T" intersection. If the guy coming has to brake fairly hard so he doesn't T-Bone you,, then you've ****ed up,,
Simple common sense stuff, needs to be taught. As a learner, 120 hours with a driver who's got no idea is more dangerous than not doing the hours,,, which I'm guessing a lot would probably lie about anyway.

[trog]

The new drivers should be taught by impartial professionals. Can't afford it well there is uber etc. I would hate to be tasked with teaching a kid. I haven't been assessed since getting my licence way back , who knows what my considered good driving really equates to ?

[CraigE]

The new drivers should be taught by impartial professionals. Can't afford it well there is uber etc. I would hate to be tasked with teaching a kid. I haven't been assessed since getting my licence way back , who knows what my considered good driving really equates to ?

Most of us would likely fail. Son did first driving test not in his car but in the driving instructor and he failed for not knowing where the demisters were quickly. 3 buttons/knobs to get demisters on. He reckons the windows were not even fogged.

[trog]

If you can't find the necessary controls without looking in a controlled environment , what will happen when needed in a situation. Part of the driving instruction I had was to find these controls with my eyes closed , and to practice this in any other vehicle. If you can't find the lights wipers or even the radio volume controls get off the road.

[Pickles2]

Not exactly sure on this Andy, (there "maybe" in certain situations),, however, if the truck had undertaken the guy in the car,, you can be sure people would be saying "there goes some ****** truckie driving like an idiot again", so more hate for truckies.

My personal take on all this is that the truck/s should be allowed "to pass" using the right hand lane if needs be.
The only problem with this being, that as soon as they start to do this, the car will immediately speed up, screwing the truckie over for a passing maneuver, and no doubt, lack of attention/intelligence will at the same time, see some other clown move in behind the car that was being passed, and give the truck no where to go back into the lane from where he came.

There's a lot of rather bad and impatient truck drivers on our roads, but, in my own opinion, they are professionals, and basically are OK. On the other hand, from driving in and around Melbourne, there seems to be more woeful car drivers on our roads than ever before.
I think gaining a licence should have more theory in it, not practice. This theory should be the teaching of road manners and courtesy toward others on the road. Little things like, "its not my business if your speeding, but hey, maybe you've got an emergency, I'll move over and give you room",,, things like deciphering how fast a car is coming up behind you,, or how much room you need before you can pull out safely from a "T" intersection. If the guy coming has to brake fairly hard so he doesn't T-Bone you,, then you've ****ed up,,
Simple common sense stuff, needs to be taught. As a learner, 120 hours with a driver who's got no idea is more dangerous than not doing the hours,,, which I'm guessing a lot would probably lie about anyway.
All very well mate, and no doubt true.
BUT, what has this to do with my thread,.....to put it bluntly,....if you were the car driver,....would you pull over to let him by, or......would you not?
Pickles.

[Chops]

All very well mate, and no doubt true.
BUT, what has this to do with my thread,.....to put it bluntly,....if you were the car driver,....would you pull over to let him by, or......would you not?
Pickles.


I've always pulled over,, even in the D4. If I'm on a go easy drive, (a Sunday drive, which could be whenever) if traffic starts to build up behind me, or a faster vehicle wants to overtake, I always give them room, one way or another.
It was something taught to me by my father,, common sense, manners and courtesy,, he was a truck driver.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

I have given this a bit of thought , having watched the behaviour of drivers on the gateway between toombul rd and mt Gravatt road , of which I traverse three round trips per working day. Sure there are idiots in trucks cars and motorbikes. But only L and P drivers seem to get the attention. So as there have been calls for different plates for visitors , oldies and caravans , why not one for every driver. Rounded to the closest five years , it could display their experience. Not displaying the plate gives the cops a reason to pull them over to check credentials. And web reports can tell us about the "x" number plate who did something stupid.

At first this seems like an idea with merit, but when you look at the details more closely gaping holes appear in the suggestion. Let's consider a 25 to 30 year old professional driver, possibly a truck driver, travelling professional, taxi driver or courier. They may drive hundreds of km per day 5 days per week and have better than a decade of driving experience under their belt.

Now let us consider a 35 to 40 year old office worker who catches public transport to work, may not own a car or drive at all each week. They would be wearing a plate indicating over 20 years of holding a licence but have less on road driving experience than the previous example gained in their first year of professional driving. More than that the 20 year licence holder takes time "refreshing" their driving skills every time they rarely get behind the wheel.

The other issue is the School Run Mums driving the family 4WD. Dad catches public transport to work every day while mum gains experience driving the 4WD in urban traffic 5 or more days per week. Yet when the family goes way on holidays or for the weekend, the parent with least experience in the 4WD is driving? (How many here are in this situation, I'd say a few)

[trog]

The post was meant to be as sarcastic as possible. I watch others on the road often with a degree of wonder , but just jumping on the visible minority's ,
L and P s does not do them justice with all the other idiots about.
If I had a dash cam the idiot drive along the cycle oath on Sandgate road would have garnered a few chuckles , though it did remind me of the news article of the driver in Mel who did actually target a cyclist on the seperate path. For the most part I see morons , self absorbed idiots and ignoramuses out there. It really has killed any enjoyment of driving for me. My young nephews don't want to drive for the same reasons . For them the bike or public transport is the better option.

[trout1105]

FFS, what happened here is two ignorant/aggressive drivers met on the same bit of road neither of them gave a rats arse about other road users, End of story [thumbsupbig]

[Mick_Marsh]

FFS, what happened here is two ignorant/aggressive drivers met on the same bit of road neither of them gave a rats arse about other road users, End of story [thumbsupbig]
There is no evidence to suggest the car driver was either ignorant or aggressive. He was driving according to and within the national and state road rules.
The driver of the truck was tailgating. Some consider that aggressive. If it is aggressive, then the driver of the truck was being aggressive.
The truck driver moved to the r/h lane to pass the car. If the truck driver didn't know of the rule that he was not to move into that lane, then he was ignorant. I suspect he wasn't ignorant and knew full well he was breaking that rule. Either way, because ignorance is no excuse (apparently), he should be charged.
I suspect the story will continue.

[Eevo]

i thought it was pretty simple.
if your tailgating me, your going too fast.
if im tailgating you, your going too slow.

[Milton477]

Might is usually right irrespective of who is wrong.

[Pickles2]

I've always pulled over,, even in the D4. If I'm on a go easy drive, (a Sunday drive, which could be whenever) if traffic starts to build up behind me, or a faster vehicle wants to overtake, I always give them room, one way or another.
It was something taught to me by my father,, common sense, manners and courtesy,, he was a truck driver.
Thanks Chops, that is EXACTLY what I do, also taught to me by my Mum & Dad.
Pickles.

[Fatso]

Go to Bali or Thialand and when you see a scooter weaving in and out traffic or trying to beat everyone else , 9 times out 10 it will an Australian , traffic is chaos over there and sometimes very slow but everything seems to flow and fit in with each other in a non aggressive way , well most of the time anyway .
Why is it that in Australia everyone has to be first or go off thier bannana when things dont go thier way ? , driving used to be reasonably safe and a pleasure once , what the hell happened ?. [bigsad]

[Chops]

Much the same in India too. They use their horns all the time too, but not in an aggressive way.
On the back of all the trucks over there is the phrase "Horn ok" or something similar. It helps you know what everyone's up to, be it overtaking or undertaking [bighmmm]

It doesn't mean there are no problems, but I think with the caos they live in as far as driving goes, it works well,,,,, even if it is scary to be involved in :eek2:

[DiscoMick]

Was the left lane blocked or clear?
If the left lane was blocked then the car driver couldn't go left, so was entitled stay in the centre lane at a reasonable speed. So the tailgating trucker was wrong.
If the left lane was clear then the driver could have gone left as a courtesy, but didn't have too as long as doing a reasonable speed. I probably would have moved left ad a courtesy.
But if the left lane was clear the truck could have gone left and the problem was solved.
Speed limits are a maximum not a minimum. Safe responsible driving is the number one priority, not speed.
That said, I know some trucking companies put their drivers under unreasonable time pressure.

[stealth]

I love these traffic related threads. There are two things that are guaranteed to follow.

1. Mick Marsh will always copy in the relevant Road Rule/legislation.

2. The person in the other car is always the idiot.

We are so lucky none of those idiots are on this forum.

[Mick_Marsh]

I love these traffic related threads. There are two things that are guaranteed to follow.

1. Mick Marsh will always copy in the relevant Road Rule/legislation.

2. The person in the other car is always the idiot.

We are so lucky none of those idiots are on this forum.
Sorry to say, the one in your first point is.

[ramblingboy42]

Dont think you are Pat Malone there Mick[bigrolf][bigrolf][bigrolf][bigrolf]

[CraigE]

If you can't find the necessary controls without looking in a controlled environment , what will happen when needed in a situation. Part of the driving instruction I had was to find these controls with my eyes closed , and to practice this in any other vehicle. If you can't find the lights wipers or even the radio volume controls get off the road.

To a certain extent, but he also had the sense never being shown the demisters whens asked pulled over safely so he could find. His own car is 1 button only (D2), this stupid car you had to activate 3 buttons/knobs and had never been shown them by the instructor as rarely assessed for the test. That aside he reckons the windows were not even fogged.

[Stuck]

I've always pulled over,, even in the D4. If I'm on a go easy drive, (a Sunday drive, which could be whenever) if traffic starts to build up behind me, or a faster vehicle wants to overtake, I always give them room, one way or another.
It was something taught to me by my father,, common sense, manners and courtesy,, he was a truck driver.
I'm with you on that Chops.My Dad's an old school Truckie too. Looking at that footage, I'm thinking that here's a bloke that's maybe running a bit late in getting to somewhere where he can stop for a spell with toilets, showers and maybe a feed (the stuff most others take for granted) before his logbook dictates, irrespective to how he's feeling and with no discretion, that he's too tired to continue his journey. For me, the only thing that could have made that scene more complete would have been if the "camera car" had of moved forward and caught old mate in the mobile chicane with his hoodie up and earphones in. There's a difference between entitlement and courtesy and in my opinion that's where the wheels are falling off.

[manic]

1 or 100 lanes:

KEEP LEFT UNLESS OVERTAKING

Why hold on to a lane when the left is clear?

Having come over to Australia from the UK with a good run of driving round the EU, let me tell you - Australians are the worst offenders on multicarriage ways I have come across!!

Are you guys taught the keep left rule in driver school? Is undertaking legal?

I understand the truck drivers frustration with the lane hogger but tailgaiting is far worse!

Ill admit I have flashed lights and even leant on the horn on approach (picked this up in Italy) but will fall back to a safe distance and take the next rest stop if needs be.

[Mick_Marsh]

1 or 100 lanes:

KEEP LEFT UNLESS OVERTAKING

Why hold on to a lane when the left is clear?

Having come over to Australia from the UK with a good run of driving round the EU, let me tell you - Australians are the worst offenders on multicarriage ways I have come across!!

Are you guys taught the keep left rule in driver school? Is undertaking legal?

I understand the truck drivers frustration with the lane hogger but tailgaiting is far worse!

Ill admit I have flashed lights and even leant on the horn on approach (picked this up in Italy) but will fall back to a safe distance and take the next rest stop if needs be.
This is Australia, mate. The particular incident was in Victoria.
Last I saw, Victoria was not a part of the UK or EU.
We have different road rules. If you are a resident of this great country, I suggest you read them.
As has been pointed out. the car driver was not breaking any road rules. (Read rule 130 quoted earlier in this thread.)
The truck driver, however, did.
This is supported by the fact the police want to charge the truck driver with driving offences and have shown no interest in the car driver.

I am amazed by the lack of understanding of the road rules by the number of participants in this thread. If we extrapolate the numbers to the wider driving community, there must be millions who have no idea what the road rules are.
Maybe we should have yearly drivers licence testing.

[JDNSW]

Yesterday I took my grandchildren to Molong to meet their father, and returned home via Dubbo. (in the rain)

The father was ten minutes later than forecast arriving, reporting getting stuck behind a red B-double travelling at 80 on the Lachlan Valley Way. After the handover I headed west on the Mitchell Highway. West of Wellington the speed limit is 110, and guess what I caught up with a bit further along. Yes, a bright red B-double, or rather the end of the queue behind it. It took a long time to get to the head of the queue (and I never did pass it), as this section of highway has few overtaking lanes and enough traffic to make it difficult to pass anything without one, let alone a B-double.

And this truck travelled at 80-90, except when we got to an overtaking lane, when it accelerated to 110. I was immediately behind it when we hit the 70 sign approaching Dubbo - it was a Ron Finemore vehicle.

[Xtreme]

It is quite obvious from the foregoing 133 posts that if Australia was to revise their 'lane rules' and, irrespective of the number of lanes or speed limits, simply adopted and enforced the one universal, simple rule of KEEP LEFT UNLESS OVERTAKING then -

1. Traffic flow would improve
2. Motorists would be less frustrated.
3. Motorists would be less stressed, happier and more relaxed.
4. Confusion caused by different rules applying to different areas would be eliminated.
5. Roads would be safer places.
6. Accidents would be reduced.

The only downside I can see would be that the State/National revenue would be reduced :whistling:

[Pickles2]

A day or so ago, I remembered something that happened to me in 1995. How do I remember it was 1995?..Because I had just taken delivery of my new company car, which was a new 1995 VS Commodore.
Anyway, on the very first business trip that I was on with this car, I was travelling up the Calder Highway, it would've been around 7.00am, it was a lovely day, a cloudless sky, no traffic anywhere close to me, I was in heaven, new car, nice driving etc,....and I was in the right hand lane,....less bumpy in that lane!!.....anyway, I see a car coming up behind me, so I move over to let him past when He gets close enough. Anyway, when He does get close,...on go the blue lights!!...it's an unmarked police car. This chap gets out of the car, he was immaculate, had his Police overcoat on, cap etc,....walked around the car, had a really close look at it,....don't know why,...it was just an ordinary 6 cyl VS.....and then booked me for not keeping to the left. I was dumbfounded. I told him I'd seen the keep left sign, but thought they were only advisory, He said No, they mean "Keep Left". There was not a single other car in sight when this happened,..straight road, Calder H'Way,...ya could probably see at least 5-6ks in either direction! Did this spoil my day,....it sure did! He said He'd been parked behind a bridge as I drove by in the right lane. I said to him something like " You'd get a few like this", or "There'd be a few like me" etc (it was a long time ago, I can't remember my exact words!). He simply said "Yes".
I was so upset by this that later on, when I saw a Highway Patrol Car on the side of the road, I pulled over & explained the situation to him. "Sounds a bit tough to me, I wouldn't do that", is what He said!
I'd actually forgotten about this incident, so there ya go!
Pickles.

[Tombie]

All the roads up here are single lane, so that becomes moot to us..

Having just driven home again yesterday what I would really like to see is increased “overtaking lane only” speeds.

Nothing worse than a string of vehicles pulling out to overtake and sitting at 110 passing something doing 100-105...

Means only 2 vehicles get by.

And for flip sake, learn to overtake where there are no overtaking lanes... a string of 1.9km of vehicles (held up by a 8m load) finally get the nod to go through and it took 100km to sort them out and pass the slower ones. [emoji48]

[DiscoMick]

More 'Keep left unless overtaking' signs would remind drivers.

[bee utey]

More 'Keep left unless overtaking' signs would remind drivers.

There used to be lots of these in SA, didn't do squat as far as I could determine. They need to be followed with one of these:

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2017/10/202.jpg

And a reminder of the size of the fine for disobeying the rules.

[Gordie]

There used to be lots of these in SA, didn't do squat as far as I could determine. They need to be followed with one of these

Here in SA...it would appear that the majority were never taught at school as to which is their right hand and which is their left.....

[CraigE]

The problem is each state has variations in the rules. Really time for national road rules, but not just adopting NSW's rules either.
In WA the keep left rule only applies in multi lane carriageways with a posted speed limit above 90kmph. 90 or below you can travel in either lane.
Above 90 eg highways and freeways becomes a little more clouded. The road rules state you must keep left when overtaking full stop and state you must keep as far left as practicable. In my interpretation that would be the far left lane. But there are legal exceptions to this as outlined in the WA road rules:
Penalties
Failing to keep left in a multi-lane road = 2 demerit points and $50 fine.
On single lane roads you must drive as far to the left as practical (except motorcyclists). On multi-lane roads if the speed limit is 90km/h or more you must drive in the left lane. This same rule applies to any road where there is a ‘keep left unless overtaking’ sign. On these roads you can only drive in the right hand lane if:


you’re turning right or making a U-turn;

you’re overtaking;

the left lane is a special purpose lane, e.g. bus lane, bicycle lane, slow vehicle turnout lane;

the left lane is a turning lane and you are going straight ahead;

you’re avoiding an obstruction;

you’re not driving a vehicle of a type that is prohibited from the right lane by way of signs (i.e. trucks);

the other lanes are congested with traffic.

What also may be open to interpretation is when are you actually passing eg. Is it safer for me to stay in the right lane when sitting on the speed limit and overtaking slower traffic with gaps of say 100m between cars? Or should I continually change lanes and end up weaving? IMHO the first option is the safer.

[Saitch]

This is Australia, mate. The particular incident was in Victoria.
Last I saw, Victoria was not a part of the UK or EU.
We have different road rules. If you are a resident of this great country, I suggest you read them.
As has been pointed out. the car driver was not breaking any road rules. (Read rule 130 quoted earlier in this thread.)
The truck driver, however, did.
This is supported by the fact the police want to charge the truck driver with driving offences and have shown no interest in the car driver.

I am amazed by the lack of understanding of the road rules by the number of participants in this thread. If we extrapolate the numbers to the wider driving community, there must be millions who have no idea what the road rules are.
Maybe we should have yearly drivers licence testing.

Mr Marsh

You read the rule as that the right hand lane is for overtaking so, any lane to the left of that lane is OK to drive in. However, as stated previously, we are driving in Australia so we are permitted to overtake on the left as well.
Seeing that this is the case then, if on a 3 lane or more highway, any lane, even the far left lane, can be deemed an "Overtaking Lane" hence the requirement to use the far left lane if not overtaking.

Even if you don't agree, which I'm sure you will [bigwhistle], common courtesy should prevail but seems to have gone on holidays with common sense.

I don't, in any way, condone the truckies driving, but nor can I see the rationale of the car driver. Even if the car driver was aware of the moot rules, they aren't much aware of how to drive in a safe manner!

[Mick_Marsh]

The problem is each state has variations in the rules. Really time for national road rules, but not just adopting NSW's rules either.
In WA the keep left rule only applies in multi lane carriageways with a posted speed limit above 90kmph. 90 or below you can travel in either lane.
Above 90 eg highways and freeways becomes a little more clouded. The road rules state you must keep left when overtaking full stop and state you must keep as far left as practicable. In my interpretation that would be the far left lane. But there are legal exceptions to this as outlined in the WA road rules:
Penalties
Failing to keep left in a multi-lane road = 2 demerit points and $50 fine.
On single lane roads you must drive as far to the left as practical (except motorcyclists). On multi-lane roads if the speed limit is 90km/h or more you must drive in the left lane. This same rule applies to any road where there is a ‘keep left unless overtaking’ sign. On these roads you can only drive in the right hand lane if:


you’re turning right or making a U-turn;

you’re overtaking;

the left lane is a special purpose lane, e.g. bus lane, bicycle lane, slow vehicle turnout lane;

the left lane is a turning lane and you are going straight ahead;

you’re avoiding an obstruction;

you’re not driving a vehicle of a type that is prohibited from the right lane by way of signs (i.e. trucks);

the other lanes are congested with traffic.

What also may be open to interpretation is when are you actually passing eg. Is it safer for me to stay in the right lane when sitting on the speed limit and overtaking slower traffic with gaps of say 100m between cars? Or should I continually change lanes and end up weaving? IMHO the first option is the safer.

Yep. That is the rule for single lane roads. Rule 112 in WA's road rules.

https://www.slp.wa.gov.au/pco/prod/filestore.nsf/FileURL/mrdoc_37027.pdf/$FILE/Road%20Traffic%20Code%202000%20-%20%5B05-d0-00%5D.pdf

This thread is about your rule 113.

113. Restriction on use of right lane
(1) In this regulation —
marked lane does not include —
(a) a lane set aside exclusively for vehicles making a left or right turn; or
(b) a special purpose lane; or
(c) any other lane that is not for the use of general traffic on the carriageway; or
(d) a slow vehicle turn out lane;
right lane, in relation to 2 or more marked lanes that are available exclusively for vehicles travelling in the same direction, means the marked lane that is further or furthest to the right side of the carriageway;
slow vehicle turn out lane means a lane or a part of a lane to which a “slow vehicle turn out lane” sign applies.
(2) This regulation applies to a driver driving on a carriageway that has 2 or more marked lanes available exclusively for vehicles travelling in the same direction where —
(a) the speed limit is 90 km/h or more; or
(b) a “keep left unless overtaking” sign applies to that part of the carriageway, or both.
(3) A driver shall not drive the vehicle in the right lane unless —
(a) the driver is turning right, or making a U turn from the centre of the road, and is giving a right turn signal; or
(b) the driver is overtaking; or
(c) a “left lane must turn left” sign or left traffic arrows apply to any other lane, and the driver is not turning left; or
(d) the driver is required to drive in the right lane under regulation 137; or
(e) the driver is avoiding an obstruction; or
(f) the traffic in each other lane travelling in the same direction is congested; or
(g) there are only 2 marked lanes and the left lane is a slow vehicle turn out lane.
Points: 2 Modified penalty: 1 PU
(4) A “keep left unless overtaking” sign applies to a length of carriageway beginning at the sign and ending at the nearest of the following:
(a) an “end keep left unless overtaking” sign;
(b) a road sign or road marking that indicates the carriageway is no longer a multi-lane carriageway;
(c) if the carriageway ends at a T-intersection or dead end — the end of the carriageway.
(5) The CEO, by notice published in the Gazette —
(a) may declare that this regulation does not apply to the driving of a vehicle on a carriageway described in the notice; and
(b) may vary or revoke a previous notice under this subregulation.
There it is again. The driver shall not drive in the r/h lane. Nothing about keeping to the left which is what you must do if it is a single lane road.

[CraigE]

Yep. That is the rule for single lane roads. Rule 112 in WA's road rules.

https://www.slp.wa.gov.au/pco/prod/filestore.nsf/FileURL/mrdoc_37027.pdf/$FILE/Road%20Traffic%20Code%202000%20-%20%5B05-d0-00%5D.pdf

This thread is about your rule 113.

There it is again. The driver shall not drive in the r/h lane. Nothing about keeping to the left which is what you must do if it is a single lane road.

The section I quoted is straight out of the learner driver handbook hard copy and electronic online. So I would say a combined and simplified version of both rules as it does state single and multi lane roads.

[Mick_Marsh]

Mr Marsh

You read the rule as that the right hand lane is for overtaking so,
Rule 130(2)(C) is the rule to read for this.

any lane to the left of that lane is OK to drive in.
Show me the rule that says you can't. I cannot find one, so it must be OK.
If I was to be caught driving in any other lane other than the r/h lane, what would I be charged with? What would I be fighting in court?

[manic]

This is Australia, mate. The particular incident was in Victoria.
Last I saw, Victoria was not a part of the UK or EU.
We have different road rules. If you are a resident of this great country, I suggest you read them.
As has been pointed out. the car driver was not breaking any road rules. (Read rule 130 quoted earlier in this thread.)


Did I say the middle lane driver was driving illegally. The keep left unless overtaking rule is common sense that goes missing round here.

Yes Australia is a great country, love it, but the drivers have been bloody slow to figure out benefits of KLR and very quick to pick up undertaking.

We even have stretches of motorway with huge signs that say KL and still you will find switched off cruisers side by side holding the right and middle lane with the left completely clear.

I admit, it irritates me more than it should.

[Mick_Marsh]

The section I quoted is straight out of the learner driver handbook hard copy and electronic online. So I would say a combined and simplified version of both rules as it does state single and multi lane roads.
You will probably find there is a disclaimer printed at the front of the handbook. There was in the one I looked up on line.

This handbook is a guide to safe driving and an interpretation of the law.
It is NOT the law, but a simplified version of the road law as defined in the Road Traffic
(Administration) Act 2008, including the Australian Road Rules that apply currently in
Western Australia. It does not include all the traffic regulations and is not intended to be
used as a legal document.
It's best to consult the rules. They're more comprehensive an the version that is used by the police and in the courts.

[Mick_Marsh]

Did I say the middle lane driver was driving illegally. The keep left unless overtaking rule is common sense that goes missing round here.

Yes Australia is a great country, love it, but the drivers have been bloody slow to figure out benefits of KLR and very quick to pick up undertaking.

We even have stretches of motorway with huge signs that say KL and still you will find switched off cruisers side by side holding the right and middle lane with the left completely clear.

I admit, it irritates me more than it should.
Yes, it would be good to see more common sense to be used in our road rules. The rules in relation to roundabouts would be the first ones I would apply this new common sense law to.
Unfortunately, we have what we have. To hold a licence in Australia you must know and understand these rules. If you can't, perhaps it's time to hand in the licence.

Oh, it doesn't irritate me. It's a circle of influence/circle of concern thing. (Thanks Gav.)

[trout1105]

I think that common sense and courtesy can be quite a different thing to the road laws/rules.
For instance it is Not illegal to tow a caravan at 70-80k's and choke up a highway and there is no "legal" obligation for the driver of the car towing the van to pull over and let the traffic go around But this happens quite often.
This is just one example of where common sense and courtesy comes into play, Unfortunately there are far too many self entitled jerks that can't or won't embrace the concept of using their common sense and being courteous to other road users.

[donh54]

So, in the final analysis, it appears that many headstones should include the line; "But s/he had right of way!" or "S/he wasn't breaking the rules!"

I would hazard a guess that more people on the roads die, or are injured through ignorance and stupidity, than most other causes.

And driving with headphones on should be immediate licence suspension and car crushing! :soapbox:

[Saitch]

Rule 130(2)(C) is the rule to read for this.

Show me the rule that says you can't. I cannot find one, so it must be OK.
If I was to be caught driving in any other lane other than the r/h lane, what would I be charged with? What would I be fighting in court?

Yea, it's hard but I reckon a bad-day Plod could consider that, even if you were left of the far right lane but there was also a lane to your left, you are failing to keep left.
All the keep left rules posted here seem to only cover a double lane scenario not multiple, like the M1, Brissy to Gold Coast, or am I missing something in the context?

[Mick_Marsh]

Oh, and as to overtaking on the left which so many think is illegal:

Read Rule 141(1)(a)

141 No overtaking etc. to the left of a vehicle
(1) A driver (except the rider of a bicycle) must not overtake a vehicle to the left of the vehicle unless—
(a) the driver is driving on a multi-lane road and the vehicle can be safely overtaken in a marked lane to the left of the vehicle; or
(b) the vehicle is turning right, or making a U-turn from the centre of the road, and is giving a right change of direction signal; or
(c) the vehicle is stationary and it is safe to overtake to the left of the vehicle.
Penalty: 5 penalty units.
Note
Bicycle, centre of the road, marked lane, multi-lane road, overtake, right change of direction signal and U-turn are defined in the dictionary.
(2) The rider of a bicycle must not ride past, or overtake, to the left of a vehicle that is turning left and is giving a left change of direction signal.
Penalty: 3 penalty units.
Note
Left change of direction signal is defined in the dictionary.
(3) In this rule—
turning right does not include making a hook turn;
vehicle does not include a tram, a bus travelling along tram tracks, or any vehicle displaying a do not overtake turning vehicle sign.
Notes
1 Tram and travelling along tram tracks are defined in the dictionary.
2 Part 4, Division 3 deals with making hook turns.
3 Division 7 of this Part deals with overtaking and passing trams (and buses travelling along tram tracks).
4 Rule 143 deals with overtaking or passing a vehicle displaying a do not overtake turning vehicle sign.
(4) This rule does not apply to the rider of a motor cycle engaging in lane filtering in the circumstances set out in rule 151B.
Note
Lane filtering is defined in the dictionary.
So, it is quite ok on a multi lane road.

[Mick_Marsh]

Yea, it's hard but I reckon a bad-day Plod could consider that, even if you were left of the far right lane but there was also a lane to your left, you are failing to keep left.
All the keep left rules posted here seem to only cover a double lane scenario not multiple, like the M1, Brissy to Gold Coast, or am I missing something in the context?
The keep to the left scenario is only valid for a single lane. There is a rule for that.
If you got a bad-day Plod, you could take it to court. How could you be charged with an offence that doesn't exist? That is why the rules are made.

[Mick_Marsh]

So, in the final analysis, it appears that many headstones should include the line; "But s/he had right of way!" or "S/he wasn't breaking the rules!"

I would hazard a guess that more people on the roads die, or are injured through ignorance and stupidity, than most other causes.

And driving with headphones on should be immediate licence suspension and car crushing! :soapbox:
What you or I think isn't the law. I think all trucks should be banned from freeways and all freight should be transported by rail using steam trains, coal fired, of course. I happen to like steam trains and think there should be more of them.

[CraigE]

You will probably find there is a disclaimer printed at the front of the handbook. There was in the one I looked up on line.

It's best to consult the rules. They're more comprehensive an the version that is used by the police and in the courts.

Mick, I agree. But then our law enforcement wonder why people misinterpret or miss understand actually road rules. This is what they are given and would believe to be gospel, when infact many sections do not reflect the entire road rule and even in some areas seem to contradict due to being excerpts.

[CraigE]

Oh, and as to overtaking on the left which so many think is illegal:

Read Rule 141(1)(a)

So, it is quite ok on a multi lane road.

That was my belief, done it many times due to excessively slow vehicles in the right lane (ok if turning etc, but annoys me greatly on a freeway where there are no right turns).
I think most will find while they may have been told they have been ticketed for undertaking or overtaking on the left the ticket would likely state something like driving with undue care. I know a couple of people that have received tickets for this so called offence, but never saw the actual ticket to confirm.

[CraigE]

I think that common sense and courtesy can be quite a different thing to the road laws/rules.
For instance it is Not illegal to tow a caravan at 70-80k's and choke up a highway and there is no "legal" obligation for the driver of the car towing the van to pull over and let the traffic go around But this happens quite often.
This is just one example of where common sense and courtesy comes into play, Unfortunately there are far too many self entitled jerks that can't or won't embrace the concept of using their common sense and being courteous to other road users.

On a highway you are correct on a freeway a bit different as you must not travel lower than 20kmph below the posted speed limit unless there are circumstances that prevent such as congestion, road works etc. Sometimes towing a caravan if you did you would spend more time pulling off than driving.

[weeds]

Geez glad you guys don't come up behind me.......I would do your head in. Although I seem to get along with all the other motorist.

Yesterday I drove from Gympie to Bracken Ridge in the right lane (2 to 3 to 4 lanes. 100+ kms. I sometime look in rear vision mirror and occasionally use indicators.

Although this thread is about tailgating, I nearly always keep mom three sec gap to the car in front and don't recall anybody tailgating me in the 100/110 zones, different story in the 80 zone around road works.

[Mick_Marsh]

On a highway you are correct on a freeway a bit different as you must not travel lower than 20kmph below the posted speed limit unless there are circumstances that prevent such as congestion, road works etc. Sometimes towing a caravan if you did you would spend more time pulling off than driving.
20km/h below posted limit? Where is that rule? I've never heard of it.
I've given you the rules for both WA and Vic. Should be there then.
This one concerns me at I drive the Perentie and 101 at 80km/h in the 110km/h zone. The Inter much slower.

[CraigE]

20km/h below posted limit? Where is that rule? I've never heard of it.
I've given you the rules for both WA and Vic. Should be there then.
This one concerns me at I drive the Perentie and 101 at 80km/h in the 110km/h zone. The Inter much slower.

The below quote is direct from the WA Police website, but only for freeways (which are generally 100kmph), where the confusion comes into play. People think it is the same on all roads but apparently not. I have had several WA police tell me this applies on all roads.
Is there a minimum speed limit?Traffic (https://www.police.wa.gov.au/FAQ?cat=Traffic&c=33af492f-3414-4630-b28c-e276d1ce2b14) Road Rules (https://www.police.wa.gov.au/FAQ?cat=Road Rules&c=74006a90-4d26-49cc-b368-3e31b1245e8e) Offences (https://www.police.wa.gov.au/FAQ?cat=Offences&c=f97bc406-de9f-49f4-9277-c179faf1db5e) Hazard (https://www.police.wa.gov.au/FAQ?cat=Hazard&c=fb519b88-6ac6-41d8-9ba0-d4c8c81067df)
Yes. If you are travelling on a Freeway you must travel no slower than 20km/hr below the speed limit unless there is traffic congestion or road conditions dictate.

[trout1105]

20km/h below posted limit? Where is that rule? I've never heard of it.
I've given you the rules for both WA and Vic. Should be there then.
This one concerns me at I drive the Perentie and 101 at 80km/h in the 110km/h zone. The Inter much slower.

I have also never heard of this rule, As far as I am aware the only time you can get charged regarding speed limits is if you exceed them.

[Mick_Marsh]

The below quote is direct from the WA Police website, but only for freeways (which are generally 100kmph), where the confusion comes into play. People think it is the same on all roads but apparently not. I have had several WA police tell me this applies on all roads.
Is there a minimum speed limit?Traffic (https://www.police.wa.gov.au/FAQ?cat=Traffic&c=33af492f-3414-4630-b28c-e276d1ce2b14) Road Rules (https://www.police.wa.gov.au/FAQ?cat=Road Rules&c=74006a90-4d26-49cc-b368-3e31b1245e8e) Offences (https://www.police.wa.gov.au/FAQ?cat=Offences&c=f97bc406-de9f-49f4-9277-c179faf1db5e) Hazard (https://www.police.wa.gov.au/FAQ?cat=Hazard&c=fb519b88-6ac6-41d8-9ba0-d4c8c81067df)
Yes. If you are travelling on a Freeway you must travel no slower than 20km/hr below the speed limit unless there is traffic congestion or road conditions dictate.
Ah. Rule 12.

12. Minimum speeds on freeways
In a freeway speed zone, a person shall not drive a vehicle at a speed that is more than 20 km/h below the speed limit unless —
(a) traffic congestion prevents the person from driving the vehicle at a speed that is within 21 km/h of the speed limit; or
(b) for any other reason, it is unsafe or imprudent for the person to drive the vehicle at a speed that is within 21 km/h of the speed limit.
Modified penalty: 1 PU
Looks as if I won't be visiting WA.

Oh, it's a local rule. Not in the national rules. Maybe it should be. That'd get the trucks off our roads for sure. I often sit behind trucks maxing out at 60km/h in a 110km/h zone up hills.

[trout1105]

Well that is something I didn't know [thumbsupbig]

[101RRS]

I have heard of this rule before via this website but only applies in WA. If it is on the police website but not in the legislation then probably does not apply - probably is the unreasonably hindering traffic law that does apply everywhere (driving real slow but not slow) and that 20kph thing is the police interpretation of that law.

However if it true how are many older vehicles allowed on 110kph zoned roads in WA. Versions of my Haflinger can only cruise at 50kph and mine will do 70kph - so by that law I cannot drive on 90/100 and 110kph roads - what nonsense.

Edit - just read Micks post - so I cannot drive my Haflinger on freeways in WA. Silly WA [wink11]

[Mick_Marsh]

I have also never heard of this rule, As far as I am aware the only time you can get charged regarding speed limits is if you exceed them.
There is this one:

125 Unreasonably obstructing drivers or pedestrians
(1) A driver must not unreasonably obstruct the path of another driver or a pedestrian.
Penalty: 2 penalty units.
Note
Driver includes a person in control of a vehicle—see the definition of drive in the dictionary.
(2) For this rule, a driver does not unreasonably obstruct the path of another driver or a pedestrian only because—
(a) the driver is stopped in traffic; or
(b) the driver is driving more slowly than other vehicles (unless the driver is driving abnormally slow in the circumstances).
Example of a driver driving abnormally slow
A driver driving at a speed of 20 kilometres per hour on a length of road to which a speed-limit of 80 kilometres per hour applies when there is no reason for the driver to drive at that speed on the length of road.

So, for Tombie to be charged for unreasonably obstructing drivers at 120km/h, the speed limit on that length of road must have been 480km/h or more.

[Mick_Marsh]

I have heard of this rule before via this website but only applies in WA. If it is on the police website but not in the legislation then probably does not apply - probably is the unreasonably hindering traffic law that does apply everywhere (driving real slow but not slow) and that 20kph thing is the police interpretation of that law.

However if it true how are many older vehicles allowed on 110kph zoned roads in WA. Versions of my Haflinger can only cruise at 50kph and mine will do 70kph - so by that law I cannot drive on 90/100 and 110kph roads - what nonsense.

Edit - just read Micks post - so I cannot drive my Haflinger on freeways in WA. Silly WA [wink11]
You're right. What nonsense.
WA have a number of silly rules.

[vnx205]

141 No overtaking etc. to the left of a vehicle
(1) A driver (except the rider of a bicycle) must not overtake a vehicle to the left of the vehicle unless—
(a) the driver is driving on a multi-lane road and the vehicle can be safely overtaken in a marked lane to the left of the vehicle; or
(b) the vehicle is turning right, or making a U-turn from the centre of the road, and is giving a right change of direction signal; or
(c) the vehicle is stationary and it is safe to overtake to the left of the vehicle.


It may be legal in those circumstances, but I still wonder if it is advisable.

The phrase can be safely overtaken in point(a) and it is safe to overtake in point (c) are a bit of a worry.

It seems to me that that could be interpreted as, "If all goes well, then it was legal. However, if it all goes pear shaped (maybe because the other driver suddenly decided to move left) then it was illegal because it didn't turn out to be safe".

I know there is another law about changing lanes safely but it also seems to me that some drivers would be less likely to notice in their mirrors that a vehicle was passing on the left.

[Fatso]

You're right. What nonsense.
WA have a number of silly rules.

If using the Freeway you abide by the speed requirements 100Kmh & no less than 80kmh , but thats only on a good day most times it is 100k long car park .
If you cant do 80Kmh you can use alternative roads .

[CraigE]

If using the Freeway you abide by the speed requirements 100Kmh & no less than 80kmh , but thats only on a good day most times it is 100k long car park .
If you cant do 80Kmh you can use alternative roads .

Especially the section Northbound from Thomas Road to Roe Hwy. More about people not being able to merge properly than anything else.

[101RRS]

If you cant do 80Kmh you can use alternative roads .

And if there are no viable alternatives - like Sydney to Central Coast and Canberra to Sydney - yes there are other roads but big distances.

[Fatso]

And if there are no viable alternatives - like Sydney to Central Coast and Canberra to Sydney - yes there are other roads but big distances.

No probs in Perth if you dont want to use the Freeway .

[101RRS]

No probs in Perth if you dont want to use the Freeway .

What you only have one in the whole state. [tonguewink]

[Tombie]

What you only have one in the whole state. [tonguewink]

And last time I was there it was free [emoji6]

[DiscoMick]

On a multi-lane road like the motorway to the Gold Coast I understood if you could safely travel at the speed limit on a left lane it was OK even if the middle lane was going slower and you pulled ahead.

[Fatso]

What you only have one in the whole state. [tonguewink]

Yep , you guys call them Tollways . [tonguewink][tonguewink]

[Eevo]

Yep , you guys call them Tollways . [tonguewink][tonguewink]
must be for all those toll delivery trucks

[CraigE]

What you only have one in the whole state. [tonguewink]

Well technically 2, but it is one stretch of road that runs North / South. Mitchell Fwy to the North, Kwinana Fwy to the South that turns into the Forrest Hwy near Mandurah. The rest in the state are Highways.

[donh54]

Well technically 2, but it is one stretch of road that runs North / South. Mitchell Fwy to the North, Kwinana Fwy to the South that turns into the Forrest Hwy near Mandurah. The rest in the state are Highways.
And don't they loose their lollipops if you take a wide load on them! [emoji12]

[101RRS]

Yep , you guys call them Tollways . [tonguewink][tonguewink]

No Toll ways where I live.

[trout1105]

What you only have one in the whole state. [tonguewink]

If WA and QLD didn't spend so much money propping up the other States I suppose we could have afforded more than 2 freeways here [bigwhistle]

[DiscoMick]

Actually WA was propped up by the other states until the late 90s.

[trout1105]

Actually WA was propped up by the other states until the late 90s.

I think that WA would have paid all that back in Spades by now [bigwhistle]

[Mick_Marsh]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2017/10/239.jpg

[Homestar]

I think that WA would have paid all that back in Spades by now [bigwhistle]

Maybe caught up - until recently as I think they are going backwards again...

[trout1105]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2017/10/239.jpg

[bigrolf][bigrolf][bigrolf]

[CraigE]

Actually WA was propped up by the other states until the late 90s.

Maybe in the 70's but certainly not in the mid 80's 90's 00"s and now. So much money has flowed out of WA from mining in the last 30 odd years I have worked in it.

[Wraithe]

This post has gone mad... A few days doing paperwork and I come back to read about WA being supported by the East...




Sorry mate your section relating to speed limiters is not quite true. First they have to be fitted and working. They will allow short periods much more than 103kmph if fitted and working. Very easy to disconnect and fool and seems to be a lot of that. I have been passed by plenty of trucks doing well in excess of 100kmph and often well in excess of 110kmph. Also not using the left lane is rarely enforced here in WA, see it day in and day out on the Freeways. Frequently have to pull into the left lane to undertake a car doing 80 in the right lane.

Firstly, all trucks with computerized engines has a speed limiter as part of the computer... You can even alter it to suit different tyre sizes, adjust the amount of throttle cut back when you reach certain revs, adjust the injectors, etc etc... Also the cruise control be set to operate from 0 k min to a maximum speed...

The law stated that a truck is to be geared to no more than 105kph, or a speed limiter fitted to be set at that speed...

Yes you can disable the electronic ones, but get caught your in the manure... On some trucks you can get a few extra k's by playing with the cruise control buttons and it confuses the speed limiter... ie 105 max, play with button you can get 108...

When a vehicle overtakes, they only need to be going 10kph more to safely overtake, that includes roadtrains... How do I know?, I apprenticed as a truck operator with operators that averaged 60+ year old, back in the late 80's... Sadly for me, a lot of them knew my family so I got my back side kicked if I did anything wrong... Couldn't even sneek off to a pub for a night without being found out... And about WA, where do you think I am from, I was born here, raised here, and probably die here...
I got to drive the Fitzroy to Halls creek road when it was dirt, before I drove trucks... I also ran across the Nullabor in 89 and then again in 91, before speedlimiters....


I have owned a truck that could do well over 160 kph... I have driven at that speed for more than 9 hours straight and another 10 hours on the speed limit, for a total of 19 hrs non stop, then 4 hrs sleep and do it all again.. No drugs, no roadhouse stops, just work for 6 days a week and a day at home... I have travelled on your highways in the East, roads where ok(better than the gravel tracks we have here) but your truck drivers are mad, even at a maximum of 100 kph there dangerous...

It dont matter what speed a truck is doing, if the driver has the skill and respects others, he is no more dangerous than a car driver, but if a moped rider has no respect for others then he can cause the death of others...

Ultimately it all comes down to respect for others and sharing with others, irrelevent of any laws or statute!!!

[Wraithe]

Well technically 2, but it is one stretch of road that runs North / South. Mitchell Fwy to the North, Kwinana Fwy to the South that turns into the Forrest Hwy near Mandurah. The rest in the state are Highways.

Actually your wrong, last time I went up that way I some how got onto the Kwinana parking lot and when I some how came through from Joondalup, I ended up on the Mitchell parking lot...

So I have decided that using bunnings carpark is faster...

Mitchell parkway and Kwinana Parkway, only good if your getting paid hourly!

Actually I did benefit from carting out of CSBP Kwinana, my truck was not allowed on the Kwinana Freeway npothbound, thus I had to use Thomas rd and Tonkin highway... Damn that was a quick run compared to the parking lot...

[CraigE]

Actually your wrong, last time I went up that way I some how got onto the Kwinana parking lot and when I some how came through from Joondalup, I ended up on the Mitchell parking lot...

So I have decided that using bunnings carpark is faster...

Mitchell parkway and Kwinana Parkway, only good if your getting paid hourly!

Actually I did benefit from carting out of CSBP Kwinana, my truck was not allowed on the Kwinana Freeway npothbound, thus I had to use Thomas rd and Tonkin highway... Damn that was a quick run compared to the parking lot...

What am I wrong about? A bit confused by that comment. We have 2 freeways that join and run north and south.
Depends on the time of day, the Tonkin can get quite congested and slow as well due to all the traffic lights now as well. Peak hour can take around the same. The Kwinana is just ridiculous now from Thomas to Roe. Used to be just at peak hours but is pretty much all day now from about 0530-1900.
Re you comments about speed limiters, I agree with you on how they are supposed to work and are supposed to be fitted. Commonly not the case however. When you are sitting bang on 100kmph (gps & speedo correction) or even heaven forbid doing 102kmph and a truck blows by you something obviously is not working. Not a day this does not happen on the freeways / forrest hwy. Also go's for 110kmph zones, have had plenty of truck blow by, even doubles, some easily doing in excess of 120-130.

[shanegtr]

I think that common courtsy should prevail on the roads - unfortantly its not all that common. Car driver was fine to sit in the middle lane, however it would be nice to other road users to be using the left hand lane if possible.

A few years ago I was driving home on a Sunday morning after a nightshift going up Greenmount hill. Bugger all cars on the road and Im doing 60km/h (the speed limit) in the LH lane. A truck (who is speeding) catches up to me and procceds to tailgate extremely closly. Truck driver is clearly putting the hammer down to get up the steeper section of the hill, but even thou the RH lane is completely void of all traffic he dosent overtake (trucks perfectly fine to use the RH lane here). Complete tool in my eyes and of course Im not intimidated by the move and I continue to sit at the posted speed limit. Later on when telling the story to some mates one of them gets in a rant and thinks I was in the wrong and I should have moved to the RH lane to let the truck overtake[bigrolf]

[Mick_Marsh]

I think that common courtsy should prevail on the roads - unfortantly its not all that common. Car driver was fine to sit in the middle lane, however it would be nice to other road users to be using the left hand lane if possible.

A few years ago I was driving home on a Sunday morning after a nightshift going up Greenmount hill. Bugger all cars on the road and Im doing 60km/h (the speed limit) in the LH lane. A truck (who is speeding) catches up to me and procceds to tailgate extremely closly. Truck driver is clearly putting the hammer down to get up the steeper section of the hill, but even thou the RH lane is completely void of all traffic he dosent overtake (trucks perfectly fine to use the RH lane here). Complete tool in my eyes and of course Im not intimidated by the move and I continue to sit at the posted speed limit. Later on when telling the story to some mates one of them gets in a rant and thinks I was in the wrong and I should have moved to the RH lane to let the truck overtake[bigrolf]
Shame on you. There are some here who may be of the opinion you should be hung, drawn and quartered, whipped and boiled.

I've been tailgated many times by trucks. Have you noticed trucks tend to tailgate each other as well.
Sometimes (more usually), they're quite happy. Reduces the frictional forces of the air i.e. slipstreaming. Just don't brake check them.

[CraigE]

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2017/10/239.jpg

I think I can see a couple of mine in there.[tonguewink]

[Milton477]

I think I can see a couple of mine in there.[tonguewink]

Take your pick then.

[CraigE]

Take your pick then.

How can I do that they are Spades Not Picks???[bigwhistle][bigsad]

[incisor]

My kingdom for a shovel!

[DiscoMick]

I was doing the 100 limit in the middle lane on the M1 northbound last night and a long Toll truck whistled past me in the inside lane.
Up the Gateway bridge he slowed so I just did the 80 limit and went ahead.
Back down in the 100 and he whistles past again.
Didn't do him any good because the 80 limit in the Nudgee roadworks got him.
He didn't cause a problem, but I don't think he gained anything by risking a fine. He might as well have just sat on the limit.

[trog]

It's been a long time since the radar has been on the bottom of the bridge. Always interesting when they are conducting lessons and a dozen units are watching the two northbound lanes at the toombul rd exit.

[Bigbjorn]

Look down and see the pedal on the right. Well put your right foot on it and press down and you won't be tailgated.

[Bigbjorn]

I think that WA would have paid all that back in Spades by now [bigwhistle]

We should have let them secede in the 1930's after their referendum. I was the WA Zone Manager for a heavy machinery company in the 70's. We used to call them the evenly balanced Australians. A chip on each shoulder.

[Mick_Marsh]

Look down and see the pedal on the right. Well put your right foot on it and press down and you won't be tailgated.

But those angry men will flash their lights at you and lighten your wallet.

[Fatso]

Look down and see the pedal on the right. Well put your right foot on it and press down and you won't be tailgated.

Tailgating is illegal !! :rulez:

[CraigE]

We should have let them secede in the 1930's after their referendum. I was the WA Zone Manager for a heavy machinery company in the 70's. We used to call them the evenly balanced Australians. A chip on each shoulder.

Yep and many want another crack at it.[bigwhistle] If WA did even now the rest of Australia would be bankrupt. You cant even get by without taking 65c in the $ of GST raised in this state, let alone mining royalties etc.
Time to shut the border.:bat:
Maybe we can get some ideas from Trumpy on how to build a wall.[bigrolf][bigrolf][bigrolf]

Hey I am originally from SA and even I can see WA gets the wrong end of the deal as far as tax distribution go's.

[DiscoMick]

It's a national formula designed to ensure every state has a minimum level of essential services such as schools and hospitals.
For most of its history the WA Government was subsidised by other state governments. The previous WA Government kept on spending and refused to balance it's budget. Now it's suffering the consequences.
The formula is averaged over three years, so it won't be long before WA is back in the beggar's queue.
It's NSW and Victoria which should be complaining because they have been subsidising the other states for a long time.

[101RRS]

Even at the height of the mining boom WA only provided 19% of GDP - it was still NSW and Vic that was supporting the country. WA was a party to developing the GST payback agreement, if it didn't like it it should not have signed up. They have been bludging on the rest of Australia for a century and for a couple of years things go against them, GST wise they start sooking.

Maybe in the boom times WA should have built a few more freeways so their truckies can get more tailgating and intimidation in. [thumbsupbig]

[JDNSW]

NSW and Victoria have been supporting WA (and the other states) since federation - but this was accepted as a reasonable price to pay for doing away with land customs borders, and having a captive market for those two states growing, heavily protected, manufacturing industries.

[DiscoMick]

Yes and now Queensland has joined NSW and Victoria in subsidising the others.

[BMKal]

:Rolling::Rolling::Rolling::Rolling:
Even at the height of the mining boom WA only provided 19% of GDP - it was still NSW and Vic that was supporting the country. WA was a party to developing the GST payback agreement, if it didn't like it it should not have signed up. They have been bludging on the rest of Australia for a century and for a couple of years things go against them, GST wise they start sooking.

Maybe in the boom times WA should have built a few more freeways so their truckies can get more tailgating and intimidation in. [thumbsupbig]

:Rolling::Rolling::Rolling::Rolling:

Took me a while to pick myself up off the floor after reading that one. But I guess it's the mentality I should have expected from someone living in the city that is the centre of parasites in this country. [bawl]

[101RRS]

But I guess it's the mentality I should have expected from someone living in the city that is the centre of parasites in this country. [bawl]

Please explain.

[Wraithe]

WA secede?? What a load of crap...

Read your history, the rest of Australia made loud and noisy promises for WA to join the rest as we where a self governed colony...
Lots of promises including a railway, well thats about all the arrived, the rest was take take take... WA needs to pay for all the protection that is it hasnt recieved...

Check out history, WA was going to be left for the Imperial Japanese to own, WA grows more serial crops than any other state, WA has more iron ore, more gold, more graziers, more foreign workers, especially from the East and more taken from here...

Why do we recieve less returns, because we have less population, thus less votes to care about...

If you dont want WA to be part of Australia, I would be happy to be seperated from the East... We already have the necassary industry to build our own Navy ships, and plenty of area to train a defense force, just need to put a wall up between Eucla and Kununara..

[Wraithe]

I think that common courtsy should prevail on the roads - unfortantly its not all that common. Car driver was fine to sit in the middle lane, however it would be nice to other road users to be using the left hand lane if possible.

A few years ago I was driving home on a Sunday morning after a nightshift going up Greenmount hill. Bugger all cars on the road and Im doing 60km/h (the speed limit) in the LH lane. A truck (who is speeding) catches up to me and procceds to tailgate extremely closly. Truck driver is clearly putting the hammer down to get up the steeper section of the hill, but even thou the RH lane is completely void of all traffic he dosent overtake (trucks perfectly fine to use the RH lane here). Complete tool in my eyes and of course Im not intimidated by the move and I continue to sit at the posted speed limit. Later on when telling the story to some mates one of them gets in a rant and thinks I was in the wrong and I should have moved to the RH lane to let the truck overtake[bigrolf]

First mistake, Greenmount...

East/west truck drivers are like the mouthy moron at the bar, thinks he owns the whole bar and can push anyone around... I can tell you, they get real upset when you overtake them going up a hill, because they are slowing you up too much, and they go ballistic when they find out you weigh twice the weight they do... Just nutters on that road, my advice(which is what I do) avoid Grt Eastern Highway, especially through the hills until Past Northam...

[Lotz-A-Landies]

If WA and QLD didn't spend so much money propping up the other States I suppose we could have afforded more than 2 freeways here [bigwhistle]

Others like JD have mentioned similar and it is well understood by some that GST distribution is based upon a complex formula that involves revenue raising from other taxes like stamp duty and mining royalties with consideration of population growth and infrastructure needs and are expressed in relativities. It has to be stated that in every year both NSW and Vic have received less than the average relativity of all states GST revenue. In the same 18 year period Qld has only been less than the average for 4 years and is currently about 20% above the average relativity.

The other state that is supposed to be "carrying the rest of the country" WA was at or above the average from 2000 to 2007 and only fell below NSW and Vic for the first time in 2008-9.

None of the other states/trritories have fallen below the average relativity in any year since 2000.

If you think that WA's share of GST revenue is unfair, perhaps you should be arguing that the NT, Tas, SA and the ACT should cough up some of their share.

Source: Commonwealth Grants Commission 2017 Overview (https://cgc.gov.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=260&Itemid=537)

[Lotz-A-Landies]

WA secede?? What a load of crap...

Read your history, the rest of Australia made loud and noisy promises for WA to join the rest as we where a self governed colony...
Lots of promises including a railway, well thats about all the arrived, the rest was take take take... WA needs to pay for all the protection that is it hasnt recieved...

Check out history, WA was going to be left for the Imperial Japanese to own, WA grows more serial crops than any other state, WA has more iron ore, more gold, more graziers, more foreign workers, especially from the East and more taken from here...

Why do we recieve less returns, because we have less population, thus less votes to care about...

If you dont want WA to be part of Australia, I would be happy to be seperated from the East... We already have the necassary industry to build our own Navy ships, and plenty of area to train a defense force, just need to put a wall up between Eucla and Kununara..

Some half truths in those statements:

There was a myth about a "Brisbane Line" where the early war Menzies Government would abandon northern Australia, a basic line across the continent from roughly Brisbane, which left Perth below the line. However no official plan or document was ever found and they even had a royal commission during the war to investigate if such a plan existed. A plan was never found although there were various plans to defend the more important regions and Fremantle and Perth were included in those important regions. Brisbane Line | The Australian War Memorial (https://www.awm.gov.au/index.php/articles/encyclopedia/homefront/brisbane_line)

WA has produced about:
2 1/2 times as much gold as the rest of the country this year.
220 times the amount of Iron Ore as the rest of the country, but didn't process any of it into steel.
42% of the wheat grown in Australia

Although WA only produced
1/70 the amount of lead as the rest of Australia
1/28 the amount of coal as either NSW or Qld (or 1/58 the amount as the rest of Australia)
1/20 the amount of copper as the rest of Australia
1/12 the amount of silver as the rest of Australia
0% of the uranium mined in Australia
1/21 the amount of tin mined in Australia
1/29 the amount of zinc mined in Autralia
1/3 the volume of barley as the rest of Australia.
1/10 the volume of triticale as the rest of Australia
1/681 the volume of grain sorghum as the rest of Australia
1/67 the volume of corn maize
0% of the 626kt of cotton seed as the rest of Australia
1/11 the dairy cows in Australia
1/30 the whole milk produced in Australia

I guess what I'm saying is that different regions produce according to the presence of minerals or their agricultural suitability. We are all better off as a single nation than as individual states.

Sources:
Department of Industry Chief Economists Resources and Energy Quarterly Report 2017 (https://industry.gov.au/Office-of-the-Chief-Economist/Publications/ResourcesandEnergyQuarterlySeptember2017/index.html)
ABARES Agricultural Commodity Statistics 2016 (http://data.daff.gov.au/data/warehouse/agcstd9abcc002/agcstd9abcc0022016_Sn9Dg/ACS_2016_v1.1.0.pdf)

[trout1105]

I would think that WA contributes to the National purse rather well considering that it only has a bit over 10% of Australia's population [bigwhistle]

[Chops]

Well,, there was this truck once,,,,,,,, [bigwhistle]

[donh54]

Some half truths in those statements:

There was a myth about a "Brisbane Line" where the early war Menzies Government would abandon northern Australia, a basic line across the continent from roughly Brisbane, which left Perth below the line. However no official plan or document was ever found and they even had a royal commission during the war to investigate if such a plan existed. A plan was never found although there were various plans to defend the more important regions and Fremantle and Perth were included in those important regions. Brisbane Line | The Australian War Memorial (https://www.awm.gov.au/index.php/articles/encyclopedia/homefront/brisbane_line)



Still a Myth?

A treasure trove of documents detailing how Australia was to be subjected to a scorched-earth policy if Japan had invaded 75 years ago has been uncovered in an amazing chance discovery.
Heritage consultant Sue Rosen, researching dusty Forestry Commission files held in the NSW State Records centre in western Sydney, stumbled across the files in 2012. After two years of digging for further files, she has published them in a book, Scorched Earth, to be released next Wednesday.
The files shed light on the controversial Brisbane Line — a reputed strategy of the wartime Menzies government to abandon most of Australia to the invaders and concentrate on defending the nation’s southeast, where most people lived and most industrial capacity was centred.
The 1943 federal election was fought on war policy and resulted in a record majority for Labor prime minister John Curtin, who called a royal commission to investigate the Brisbane Line allegations. It was never proved that the government was prepared to abandon towns and cities outside the southeast, but a popular belief lingered that this was so. The documents discovered by Dr Rosen will add to this belief.
Dr Rosen was researching the Murray River red gum forests of southern NSW when she came across the documents. Her job was to prepare signage and inform*ation plaques at public facilities managed by the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service.
Then she called up Forestry Commission File 3/5944. Instead of details of river red gums around Moama, she read phrases such as “Total War” and “Battle Stations for All”. “As I read on, it dawned on me I had found buried treasure,” Dr Rosen said.
“I couldn’t believe my eyes, nor could I get the smile off my face. This sort of find sets your heart racing and I could not let it go.”
The yellowing, tatty pages in the file were compiled by Harold Swain, the NSW Commissioner of Forests, who in 1942 chaired the scorched-earth sub-committee of the NSW government’s state war effort co-ordination committee.
Swain was a bluff, outspoken character, “with an ego the size of the Melbourne Cricket Ground”, who loved to get involved in fights with politicians and academics, according* to his biographer, Peter Holzworth.
The files first uncovered were incomplete, so Dr Rosen set off to find the missing parts, which she did by accessing documents held by other departments.
Soon she had the full scorched-earth plans, described by fellow historian and author Peter Grose as “a treasure trove, a goldmine, a cornucopia of rich Australian history”.
“We know that Sydney, *Melbourne, Brisbane and *Canberra were to be defended at all costs: too bad if you lived in Darwin, Perth, Adelaide or *Hobart, still worse if you lived in Alice Springs or Townsville,” Mr Grose writes in a foreword to Dr Rosen’s forthcoming book.
Publication comes between two of the most significant dates in World War II history: the Battle of the Coral Sea and the 75th anniver*sary of the Japanese submarine *attack on Sydney Harbour on the night of May 31, 1942.

Source: The Australian (http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/brisbane-line-no-myth-chance-find-proves-plan-to-sacrifice-north/news-story/9ab031c188b3b4a0fa57c2031df5113e)

[Fatso]

Australian Exports 2015/16 $312.3 Billion .

WA 35.2% @ $109.9 Billion

NSW 22.8% @ $71.1Billion

Q/land 20.01 @ $62.6 Billion

Vic 13.7 @ $42.4 Billion

SA 4.6% @ $14.4 Billion

Tas 1.2%

ACt 0.5% Probably hot air .

Think that just about says it all !! . [bigwhistle][bigwhistle]

[Redback]

OK that's enough please, if you want to talk about the GST and WA's share start another thread.

[shanegtr]

First mistake, Greenmount...

East/west truck drivers are like the mouthy moron at the bar, thinks he owns the whole bar and can push anyone around... I can tell you, they get real upset when you overtake them going up a hill, because they are slowing you up too much, and they go ballistic when they find out you weigh twice the weight they do... Just nutters on that road, my advice(which is what I do) avoid Grt Eastern Highway, especially through the hills until Past Northam...
Bit hard to avoid the hill when I lived in up near Mundaring - buggered if I was going to go home the long way after nightshifts. The particular truck that I was refering to was a BGC truck, no shortage of stories of crappy driving from those guys floating around on the local facebook pages......

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Lets recalculate that by land area:

Australian Exports 2015/16 $312.3 Billion .

WA 35.2% @ $109.9 Billion or $43.4408815 / sq km

NSW 22.8% @ $71.1Billion or $88.8038459 / sq km

Q/land 20.01 @ $62.6 Billion or $36.1714434 / sq km

Vic 13.7 @ $42.4 Billion or $186.4424667 / sq km

SA 4.6% @ $14.4 Billion or $14.6418541 / sq km

Tas 1.2%

ACt 0.5% Probably hot air .

Think that just about says it all !! . [bigwhistle][bigwhistle] Which makes another way of saying it all

Victoria much more efficient using their land than everyone else even NSW doubles the land use efficiency of WA. [bigrolf]

I don't know why we are discussing this ?

Yesterday I was driving the F3 southbound and there were cars pacing themselves adjacent in both lane 1 and lane 2 travelling 30 kph below the car speed limit and 20 below the truck limit with a tailback of 3 B doubles a couple of semis and the 6X4 rigid I was driving. Everyone was riding their brakes trying not to tailgate the cars, took about 5 km before the one in lane 2 moved to lane 1.

[Chops]

Interesting that on TV tonight, one of the regular traffic cop shows, they pulled over a driver doing around 80 clicks in the right hand lane of a 4 lane freeway in Melb. Pulled her over and gave her a warning, however, the cop stated he could have given her a ticket for impeding traffic flow.

She was traveling in the far right hand lane,, didn't give any other info about the other lanes though.

[Lotz-A-Landies]

Interesting that on TV tonight, one of the regular traffic cop shows, they pulled over a driver doing around 80 clicks in the right hand lane of a 4 lane freeway in Melb. Pulled her over and gave her a warning, however, the cop stated he could have given her a ticket for impeding traffic flow.

She was traveling in the far right hand lane,, didn't give any other info about the other lanes though.
It was reported in the local papers a couple of years ago of a granny travelling in lane 3 of the M5 toll road at 80kph and despite lights and sirens it took 28km before she pulled over for the Highway Patrol.

[V8Ian]

131208

[Pedro_The_Swift]

and which lane are those two trucks in Ian?

https://www.aulro.com/afvb/images/imported/2017/10/593.jpg

[Mick_Marsh]

Just a heads up for people who want to drive a truck on the Monash.
Right-hand ban for trucks on Vic freeway (http://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/right-hand-ban-for-trucks-on-vic-freeway/ar-BBHQkWv?ocid=ientp)

[ote]Victoria will ban big trucks from using the right-hand lane on Melbourne's Monash Freeway in a bid to reduce accidents.

The nine-month trial ban for heavy trucks travelling in both directions between Huntingdale Road at Mount Waverley and Jacksons Road at Noble Park will begin on February 5, the state government says.

"The expectation is this will provide better flow on the freeway because there will be less accidents, there will be less stoppages and people will get to and from work quicker and more easily," Roads Minister Luke Donnellan told reporters on Thursday.
[/quote]

[DazzaTD5]

Regardless of right or wrong....

As a driver its up to you to do the right thing.
As a driver it's NOT up to you to enforce road regs on other drivers.

tailgating, brake checking, cutting someone off, yelling out or abusing other drivers because you deem them to being doing the wrong thing is nothing more than intimidation.

Regards
Daz

[trout1105]

Regardless of right or wrong....

As a driver its up to you to do the right thing.
As a driver it's NOT up to you to enforce road regs on other drivers.

tailgating, brake checking, cutting someone off, yelling out or abusing other drivers because you deem them to being doing the wrong thing is nothing more than intimidation.

Regards
Daz
I agree.
Take the dashcam footage to the police and report the driver is much more effective.