Thread: P plates no high-powered cars

Originally Posted by rick130

.....Teach kids to drive and handle a car in an emergency, not just gain a license and they might have half a chance.

That and how to drive at speed safely. I don't mean how to exceed the speed limit, or how to push the boundaries of physics in a 15 year old Hyundai Excel, but correct motorway driving skills - keeping minimum distances, lane changing, lane discipline, observing other vehicles around.

So many times I have seen younger drivers join a 3 lane motorway, then head straight for the outside lane and then just sit there, meaning other drivers end up undertaking.
I wouldn't say that this age group are any more likely than any other to tailgate, but as far as they are aware, their 15 year old Hyundai Excel can brake from 110km/h to a standstill in half a car length.

I vaguely remember watching a program on new drivers in the US, where they were given the option of having a camera installed (and so reduce their insurance premiums). Whilst I wouldn't like to see this become mandatory, I'd like to see it as an option - a "if you install this system, then you can drive what you like" kind of thing.

Cameras in cars are only there to show who was at fault in an accident

They have no other purpose and are of no use in stopping fools being fools

HP, engine size or speed limiters are not worth a cent, people get killed in golf buggies, driver training and police visibility are the only way to possibly reduce the road toll. If the authorities were to base their figures on fatalities per 1,000,000 kilometers then we would see that the actual figure is quite low and reducing all the time. Better primary and secondary safety are the real reason the toll is effectively dropping, if you believe otherwise get your head out of the sand and start reading the goverment's own figures.

Rushy

Originally Posted by lovedayfun

100% with ya on that one.
when are people gona realise that its human nature to wana play and mess about in cars. Give them the option. Set up burnout pads for the city kids. Set circle work pads for the wana be country kids. and set up mad 4x4 tracks and rally tracks for country kids.
How can they justify a p plater not allowed to drive a little 3.5 rangie but can get straight into a injected 4.5 landcruiser.
the only problem we have is kids with the lack of driving skills. Just because when ya crash on the playstation ya car just pops back up perfect ready to go they for some reason dont get that real cars dont.

And after doing 20 years of road crash rescue I have only ever seen accidents through mainly driver error never a car mechanical failure.

I'll back you up on that mate,I too had the same experiences in my working days with Qld Fire and Rescue.Sometimes as OIC I just stood there with the ambo's and the coppers trying to work out how the hell this one and that one happened.

Originally Posted by Rushy

HP, engine size or speed limiters are not worth a cent, people get killed in golf buggies, driver training and police visibility are the only way to possibly reduce the road toll. If the authorities were to base their figures on fatalities per 1,000,000 kilometers then we would see that the actual figure is quite low and reducing all the time. Better primary and secondary safety are the real reason the toll is effectively dropping, if you believe otherwise get your head out of the sand and start reading the goverment's own figures.

Rushy

I don't entirely agree - while I agree, and have said above, that the level of road trauma is the lowest on record, I think the main reasons for the improvement are better roads and an overall better driver attitude - for example, very few today think drink driving is acceptable, where thirty years ago it was considered un-Australian not to drink and drive, and despite their shortcomings, most roads today are vastly better than they were thirty years ago. While the safety of cars has significantly improved, in my view this has been balanced by the increased power and insulation of the driver from what is happening. The evidence for this is that there is no statistical correlation between either accident rates or trauma and the safety features of cars.

John

Originally Posted by Disco44

I'll back you up on that mate,I too had the same experiences in my working days with Qld Fire and Rescue.Sometimes as OIC I just stood there with the ambo's and the coppers trying to work out how the hell this one and that one happened.

The big killer of all this is insurance and liability. Is a great idea and something we have tried for drag racing, but not if but when an incident does occur the person, body, group or government department can and will be sued. Its a bit like the indemnity signs at motorsport events, they have absolutely no basis or standing in a court of law and if there is an incident their insurance is still liable.
Rare, but I have seen mechanical failure as a cause. Usually at the end of the day it is lack of maintenance though.

Originally Posted by JDNSW

I don't entirely agree - while I agree, and have said above, that the level of road trauma is the lowest on record, I think the main reasons for the improvement are better roads and an overall better driver attitude - for example, very few today think drink driving is acceptable, where thirty years ago it was considered un-Australian not to drink and drive, and despite their shortcomings, most roads today are vastly better than they were thirty years ago. While the safety of cars has significantly improved, in my view this has been balanced by the increased power and insulation of the driver from what is happening. The evidence for this is that there is no statistical correlation between either accident rates or trauma and the safety features of cars.

John

John of course there is. How can you say that the implementation of seat belts, child restraints, air bags and ABS etc etc has not had an impact on road accident and fatality rates? It is extremely hard to quantify as you can never know how many incidents this equipment has prevented or lessened, that does not mean it has not. There are many studies done by motoring groups world wide that have supported this.

This is my own opinion. The reduction in the road toll since the peak in the early sixties is mainly due to the mandatory installation and use of seat belts, and the near disappearance of high level drunk driving.

I have a customer, a recently retired Inspector of Police, who says that he was a young copper when the breathalyser first came into use around 1968. At that time readings over .15 were so common as not to attract comment at the station. Readings at the high levels approaching .28 and over .30 were regularly seen and some stations were proud of having the record in the the police district for finding the driver with the highest alcohol level usually up towards or over .40. He tells me that nowadays readings over .15 are seldom seen and attract comment around the station. He also says that most infringements nowadays are in the lower of the range between .05 to .10 indicating community awareness and a concientious effort by drivers to stay legally sober.

The great reduction in instances of drunk driving took a concerted campaign of publicity and enforcement to bring about a complete change in community attitude.

There have also been exponential improvements in cars. Things like brakes, tyres, lights, steering and handling have all contributed. Although we like to complain about our roads, the older members of this forum can well remember the roads of the fifties and sixties where even the ones considered good roads then, would be considered appallingly bad and dangerous compared with todays roads.

A major help in reducing the rate has also been the collapsible steering column. The rigid steering column was once described as "the spear aimed at the driver's heart".