If divers followed the following guidelines accidents would decrease dramatically ,There is no such thing as a Dangerous road if drivers obeyed some basic rules only dangerous drivers.

Unfortunately most of the comlaining drivers have been brought up to expect to be able to drive at whatever speed and conditions they want

If the Following were followed
1: Drive to road,traffic and weather conditions
2:Don’t drive if they have alchohol in the blood
3:Don’t drive with Drugs in the System
4:Don’t drive While tired
5: Don’t drive too long ,particularly after work but take frequent Breaks
IF these rules were followed the road fatalities would decrease dramaticarly

In closing Allen should go back to the country of his ancestors and see the roads they drive on ,many of them the width of one of our lanes

The road has signposted; “Emergency Service U-Turn” bays, that some drivers treat as ‘private intersections’, say to illegally turn into a business, or to do an illegal U-Turn, often across the path of much faster closing traffic, and sometimes with the need to then accelerate quickly ‘away’ from that closing traffic, as in the case of an illegal U-Turn. This is an incredibly selfish, dangerous behaviour.

The answer here is that RTA are studying ‘gatelock’ systems that would be installed on each U-Turn bay. This action would take years to implement at current funding levels.

Another issue, is the requirement for additional median barrier to prevent or reduce the likelihood of cross-over crashes. In my personal EU insight view, I’d have it so applied ‘full-length’, without fail.

Those observations can be applied to many sections of the NSW Hume (Pacific Hwy and F6), which are both ‘freeway’ and ‘dual carriageway’ class.

The ‘freeway’ category of course has, thankfully, ‘grade-seperated interchanges’, rather than a ‘dual-carriageways’ inherently more dangerous ‘intersections’! Here, a one-stop higher limit/allowance simply cannot be applied.

We then need to improve on what is ’standard, required equipment’ before contemplating a raise in speed-limit allowance, certainly as a whole-of-action behavioural program. This would mean adopting a hazard-warning triangle requirement for cars, vans and 4WD’s, certainly to the Euro/UN specification. (UNECE 27R).

Another, is to similarly adopt that those categories of vehicle also be required to carry, perhaps per passenger seat, (or at least ‘one’), a high-visibility ’safety vest’ to EN471 Specification or AS equivalent. Done,- to aid in pedestrian AND road-user safety when attending broken-down vehicles and crash scenes.

The triangle and safety vest items are in EU - *required items*, in ALL NEW and EXISTING vehicles.

Regulations in each EU state then stipulate ‘use’ of same. Indeed, China has adopted the EU/UN warning triangle (UNECE 27R) as a national standard.

The triangle and safety vest items form part of a newly developing “UN Convention on Road Traffic, Signs & Signals”, which will replace earlier versions of same (the 49′ and 68′ plus amendments).

Australia needs to remove all reference at ADR13, “Part 8.5.1″. This item runs contrary to road safety and its existence is to me both offensive and represents sheer negligence - in the area of traffic safety.

This action would effectively mandate the ‘rear fog’ item for most all NEW MARKET vehicle categories; done - for those severe weather and dust conditions that so easily render standard tail-lamps utterly worthless or pointless. Enforcement of use is simply a matter for police.

Australian reliance on the use of hazard-warning lamps (ARR 221[e]) as defacto rear fog lamps, runs directly contrary to the existing UN Road Traffic Conventions on the use of hazard warning signals.

One day in AUS, we might start getting these important finer, simpler things ‘right’.

Can’t take the place too seriously till we do. IF the Commonwealth agencies cannot achieve these basic ‘updates’, then a state parliament *shall* do it for itself, in time. The NRMA would do well to support same, without fail in my view.

All official emphasis is on speed limiting.
THE REAL CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS IS DUE TO ATTENTION (or lack of), DISTRACTION, OR LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.
We should drive according to the capability of our own skill and the handling ability of the vehicle. I favour advanced driving courses . (Our licensing system is totally unsatisfactory)
Basically all you have to do to hopefully survive on our roads is to STEER CORRECTLY to stay in the lane (look before you change lanes), and leaving sufficient BRAKING DISTANCE from the car ahead of you.
Many accidents reported in the news seem to be of single vehicles running off the road.
Reducing local speed limits will not stop drivers from falling asleep or steering off the road.
Motorists are faced with ever-changing speed limits .
DO WE NEED SO MANY DIFFERENT RESTRICTIONS: 30, 40, 50, 60,70,80,90,100, THEN FINALLY 110 ?

Many countries overseas (Europe & UK) have just two 60 & 100km/hr with unrestricted or 130km/hr on Motorways; They are true maximums for Urban, Rural and Motorways respectively.
Our limits are set as LOWEST POSSIBLE.

(Most motorists are suspicious of the application of school zones: especially speed cameras to fund flashing lights which shouldhave been provided to notify to drivers whether it is a school day or in school times)
Why have school zones where NO Children cross the road? The times of operation does not need to be 1+1/2 to 2 hours long.

FINAL COMMENT : WHAT ARE POLICE CARS DOING HIDING BEHIND SHRUBS WITH TOY PISTOLS ?
They should be checking out what stupidity is going on the roads…….

As a younger man, I was a sometimes aggressive driver; the truth is, it made very little difference to travel time - a few minutes over several hundred K, perhaps - but a lot of difference to my unhappy passengers, and other road users. Nowadays, my off-the-shelf car has better handling, brakes, tyres, power-to-weight, safety - etc etc - than I could afford then. Theoretically, I could go faster, safer - but I don’t; that’s my choice.

The biggest safety (or danger) feature in the car is me - the driver.

I’ve taught quite a few people to drive now, and one of the things I impress on them is this: ‘paranoia is a useful state for a driver: your idiot is out there, the one who unknowingly wants to kill you - and at least six seconds a year, it’s you.’

I learned a valuable lesson from a passenger years ago. I was driving along when some idiot with wide wheels cut us off in a screech of tyres and a noisy fart of exhaust. As I drew breath to let loose, she commented: “That was so important to him - probably made his whole day!” I laughed and learned and decided that one idiot on the road was better than two.

Since then I have concentrated on being courteous to other drivers - a thousand subtleties that enable both of us to get where we’re going. When overtaking, I seek a good opportunity, not the first opportunity. I suspect that my travel times differ by less than a single red light’s wait. And I let other people have the angst.

Do governments harvest money off the unwary? Of course - and can justify it with fine dialogue. But all those tax buses and fixed ‘pay troll’ points do calm the traffic. So: that’s what my cruise control is for - cop control, calm control, able to watch for hazards without watching the speedometer.

Think about it - most of driving is not about managing the vehicle itself, it’s about coping with other drivers; other hazards, pedestrians, wildlife - so: courtesy and calm. And just a little bit of discreet fun where the visibility is good and the cops aren’t there (I hope!).

Also have your regular stop for breaks and rehydration for long journeys, but most of all, you get to your destination when you get there, not ‘X’ amount of time.

Be an alert driver, be a comfortable driver, be a safe driver. Enjoy your driving journey and the scenery, especially in this great country of ours!

People are not taught anything about car dynamics, handling or what will happen when it goes pearshaped. Hey, they are not even taught to put on the brakes after an accident!

We should be promoting proactive driving NOT reactive driving!

Stop wasting our taxpayers money and build better roads and while we are at it stop dropping to the lowest common denominator (in other words lets raise the average driving standard) and make it compulsory for everyone to do a car control / advanced driving course. Next we need a highway / freeway standard. Why not? We have standards for everything else! Min 100kmh - max 130 kmh for drivers with more than (say) 10 years experience.

Introduce log books for all drivers so that you have to get a stamp at service stations (ok, so this is not a perfect solution) and those not clocking up a required number of kilometres a year - they get retested. The points are changed to also reflect this - people who drive 50,000 km a year get more points - people who drive 1000km a year get less! Why? I know people who have a “gold” license and NEVER drive - no exposure to the road means they will never loose any points!

Stop parents from training their youngsters for driving - unless they pass a more advanced driving test. Why? I see many people who are obviously themselves not a good driver and then they teach their kids - what? How to be a bad driver!

Speed limits to be enforced within say 10%, many many road incidents occur due to slower drivers. It is not unusual on the mid north caost to see people on a highway that is 100kmh doing 60 or 70 and in one extreme 40kmh! If these people cannot or will not stop being a mobile traffic jam they must be removed from our raods or forced to pullover at points to allow traffic to move on (this normally never occurs).

School zones - are purely a revenue earning exercise as most schools do not offload onto main roads. If they do - it should be changed not the raod. A highway must not have a school zone on it as highways should be treated as a national resource - see standards above!

Overtaking, I see a lot of near disasters occuring due to people overtaking and not gaining significant speed differential - in other words they go past at no more than 100kmh which is absolutely crazy! The law should allow for a (say) 25% increase in allowable speed for overtaking. Less time on the other side of the road means safer! (Then again if we had dual carriage roads it would not be necessary!)

sometimes the crash is caused by a fault in the vehicle. Especially if the car is not mainained properly by again “the driver”

Sometimes the road itself contributes to the crash, usually only if “the driver” does not drive to the conditions.

One of the main reasons for tail end collissions in this country is “tail gateing”

In Germany the speed cameras have been set up to catch tail gaters regardlees of speed.

It ia gainst the law in most state in Australia but I have never , never seen anyone booked for this. It is a major factor in many many crashes.