Thread: 1970 Declare War On Ten Thirty Four

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Don't need an annual vehicle check in Qld.

Dying ding ding we have a winner!

No annual rego safety check in QLD whereas in NSW your car is thoroughly inspected and brake tested to make sure it's road worthy. (Once past 3 years old)

Originally Posted by rick130

Dying ding ding we have a winner!

No annual rego safety check in QLD whereas in NSW your car is thoroughly inspected and brake tested to make sure it's road worthy. (Once past 3 years old)

And inspection stations make a nice little earner out of conning clients into unnecessary repairs. Qld. reg vehicles need a Safety Certificate to transfer registration into another name so they get inspected every few years on change of ownership.

Originally Posted by V8Ian

What about the residents with their Queensland regoed cars, to avoid annual inspections?

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Don't need an annual vehicle check in Qld.

Originally Posted by rick130

Dying ding ding we have a winner!

No annual rego safety check in QLD whereas in NSW your car is thoroughly inspected and brake tested to make sure it's road worthy. (Once past 3 years old)

I thought I explained that.

Originally Posted by Bigbjorn

And inspection stations make a nice little earner out of conning clients into unnecessary repairs. Qld. reg vehicles need a Safety Certificate to transfer registration into another name so they get inspected every few years on change of ownership.

My son has a 1974 vehicle that hasn't had a RWC since 1976, when Grandad bought it. No RWC required to transfer inherited vehicles.

The fact that there is no discernible difference in accident statistics between states with and without annual inspections shows just how useful they are! Very few accidents have any causal factors from vehicle deficiencies, and of those that do, most are related to tyres - which can go bad in far less than a year.

Originally Posted by V8Ian

I thought I explained that.

You did!

Originally Posted by JDNSW

The fact that there is no discernible difference in accident statistics between states with and without annual inspections shows just how useful they are! Very few accidents have any causal factors from vehicle deficiencies, and of those that do, most are related to tyres - which can go bad in far less than a year.

Although I suppose it could be argued that non fatal accidents aren't factored in, like the ones from sliding off a wet road due to insufficient tread depth, indicators or brake lights not working causing accidents, brakes pulling to one side, etc.

I like the idea of it as most of the driving public are mechanically inept, so it keeps their cars at least at a reasonable safe level to operate.

Originally Posted by rick130

Although I suppose it could be argued that non fatal accidents aren't factored in, like the ones from sliding off a wet road due to insufficient tread depth, indicators or brake lights not working causing accidents, brakes pulling to one side, etc.

I like the idea of it as most of the driving public are mechanically inept, so it keeps their cars at least at a reasonable safe level to operate.

While the argument is used that the death statistics do not measure injuries and non-injury accidents, the assumption that deaths are a good measure of overall accident trends. The really big advantage of deaths as a measure is that there is no question about the measure, and almost all deaths are recorded. There is a little uncertainty about deaths that only occur some time after the accident, or those that are suicides, but these are small uncertainties compared to trying to define what is an injury that should be included or not, and the fact that a lot of these are not reported.

Sliding off a wet road due to insufficient tread depth can be just as fatal as leaving the road due to looking at your phone, or having a few too many.

I call to mind two I actually witnessed -

No. 1 Bridge road Melbourne, wet evening peak. Rather sparse inbound traffic stopped, and one car (clearly with not enough tread) braked heavily, spun twice while moving onto the tram tracks, and had a head-on collision with the stationary car three in front of me and in the lane to my right. No, injuries, not a lot of damage, all speeds below 20kph.

No. 2 Barton Hwy, inbound (section now straightened), wet morning, possibly black ice . Car in front of me, left road on curve at 100kph, rolled, and came to a stop upside down, with four bald tyres clearly visible for all to see. Driver, only occupant, was protected by seat belt and airbags, but it could easily have been fatal if it had hit trees not soft earth.

Another interesting one I spotted in Dubbo's main street - police car angle parked nose in, with the LH front tyre in plain view - and bald. Pointed this out to the constable in the driver's seat, who said it was the workshop's responsibility, not hers!

The other thing to keep in mind, is the advancement in medical capabilities, not only in the hospital,but with the Ambos as well. Once they arrive, you have a very high chance of survival, much better than in the 70's.