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

[beefy]

I'm absolutely gobsmacked by the massive number of drivers who can't or won't merge correctly into the traffic on a freeway. What makes it worse is the completely lawless attitude of many when I bring this matter up. Some simply don't know and some simply don't care. If the government would try sorting out the wreckless and lawless drivers here instead of collecting revenue with speeding fines, I'd love to be a traffic policeman and be part of getting some order on our roads.

I thought with the shear volume of this problem I must have it wrong so I've checked the matter out quite a bit and turns out I'm not.

Let's hear your thoughts on what is the correct way to merge onto a freeway (VICTORIA).

There was something on TV a few months ago about this problem. In Perth the findings of the study were that only 40% of drivers there merged properly. The figures for Victoria were better at 60%, but still that's 2 out of every 5 drivers not merging properly. I know it certainly feels worse than that.

[CMB]

I think you can put it down to a combination of arrogance, aggressiveness, incompetence, and overcrowded roads in the Greater Melbourne region. I lived in Brisbane/Gold Coast for two years from late 2007 to late 2009, and although far from perfect, commuting the Pacific Motorway was nothing short of a joy compared to the traffic here in Melbourne (can't comment on how it is now).

I don't think driving conditions anywhere are likely to ever improve, so brace yourself.

Craig

[Gra]

I love those idiots that stop to merge onto 80KPH traffic, on a freeway...... I get at least one a month in peak hour.

[Chesand]

Anyone who has driven overseas comes back knowing how to merge onto freeways and motorways. The other thing you quickly learn is to stay in the left lane (in UK) or right lane (in Europe) unless you are passing another vehicle.

[Scott]

Funny you mention this, yesterday I was attempting to merge onto the Eastern Freeway from the Burke Rd exit, Melbourne. The off ramp has two lanes to merge onto the freeway. The car in front of me was doing 60kmh on the ramp to the freeway down the MIDDLE of the two lanes. They then slowed to 40kmh as the freeway approached then STOPPED to wait for a clear lane to drive onto. The collection of cars behind them tooted madly. Upon getting a clear go at it, they then proceeded and did 40kmh on the freeway and took a good kilometre to get up to at least 80kmh (100kmh limit). The carnage behind of blocked lanes and furious drivers was palpable. I must admit, I don't get angry in the car but this one got me riled.

[Gra]

Funny you mention this, yesterday I was attempting to merge onto the Eastern Freeway from the Burke Rd exit, Melbourne. The off ramp has two lanes to merge onto the freeway. The car in front of me was doing 60kmh on the ramp to the freeway down the MIDDLE of the two lanes. They then slowed to 40kmh as the freeway approached then STOPPED to wait for a clear lane to drive onto. The collection of cars behind them tooted madly. Upon getting a clear go at it, they then proceeded and did 40kmh on the freeway and took a good kilometre to get up to at least 80kmh (100kmh limit). The carnage behind of blocked lanes and furious drivers was palpable. I must admit, I don't get angry in the car but this one got me riled.

Must be an eastern FWY thing, as that is where I get it the most, the enrty doesnt seem to matter, I have had it on all of them. The one that gets me is at the hoddle street end, comming onto the freeway Hoddle street gets its own lanes, yet people stop to give way to traffic comming through..., GAHHH.

[BobL]

I agree australians are pretty bad at this but I think Perth has the worst merging drivers in Australia.

The culprits should be sent to Italy to practice merging in lanes that are only 50 m long and into 130 km/hr traffic using a old Fiat Bambino.

[nrb]

I agree that a lot of drivers most likely don't know how to do it correctly,the number of people that will hold the left lane at an on ramp when there are clear lanes for them to move over and let others in and then don't adjust their speed to allow you in no matter how you try to adjust your speed makes it hard to understand it they ever think about anyone else.
Some years ago when our kids where learning that was the first thing we did after they had the basic skills,take them on to the on ramps and show then how easy it can be,as most on ramps have a clear view of what's coming and then match their speed as they get to merge.

[david.elliott]

And we're all is such a bl##$% hurry and cannot bear that thought that someone will actually be in front of us that we resolutely, stubbornly, flat out refuse to apply the "zipper" principle. I cannot believe that we do not know how to merge, how hard is it, rather we can't bear to let someone in in front of us...

I also have to travel on a stop start freeway of an afternoon, and in my little diesel I can place in 1st or second gear, foot off the accelerator and just "puddle' along. Maybe 20 or so kph. I generally have a biggish gap in front of me, so as the cars speed up and then jump on the brakes, I just puddle along. Good for the car and frustration levels. By the time I catch them up they've sprinted ahead another 100 or so metres, and jumped on the brakes. However the number of people behind me that see the gap, then speed up to get in front of me, then jump on the brakes, cracks me up. They're gonna get to where they're going a whole CAR length ahead of me: that's gotta be worth something...I guess

[A Duke]

It's another example of a fool proof idea breeding a new type of fool.

[Fuzzie]

There also needs to be a distinction made between the right (legal) way and the sensible/courteous way. If you are in a merging lane that makes you cross a dashed line to enter the next lane, you are obliged to give way. There is no zipper rule in Queensland at least and a person in the left lane is not obliged to move to the right lane nearing a merge point just to let people in. I think it was NZ that had merge like a zipper signs on some merge lanes, but I'm not sure if it is actually legislated there.

What I hate on suburban roads is idiots who use a short length of clear left lane (typically at lights) as an overtaking opportunity to get a few cars ahead and get irate when the clogged right lane won't let them back in at the dashed line end. What's perhaps even more annoying are the clueless that use the left lane that has become a bus lane at the lights then sit there when the bus lane light comes on. Should we also perhaps mention cyclists who have tunnel vision and seem to be color blind at intersections and merging lanes?

Learning to merge on European roads brings up the issue about what speed you should be doing in which lane. I recon a 4 lane highway in Italy carries twice as many cars smoothly as the 8 lane M1 between Gold Coast and Brisbane, because you can actually overtake a slow vehicle in the slow lane without fear of running up the back of an even slower car in the next faster lane or a rolling blockade of 4 cars abreast doing 100 or less in the 110 zone.

[BobL]

. . . . Learning to merge on European roads brings up the issue about what speed you should be doing in which lane. I recon a 4 lane highway in Italy carries twice as many cars smoothly as the 8 lane M1 between Gold Coast and Brisbane, because you can actually overtake a slow vehicle in the slow lane without fear of running up the back of an even slower car in the next faster lane or a rolling blockade of 4 cars abreast doing 100 or less in the 110 zone.

:2tsup:

Plus they have turn Right allowed on Red TL (That's a turn Left for us).
Every year at Xmas I argue this one with a BIL who is a chief traffic signals engineer for WA main roads.
His response is, Perth Drivers are too stupid and don't deserve it! :oo:

[beefy]

Wow, I'm not the only one who's frustrated, that kind of helps LOL. I was actually expecting a few to be having a go at me. I stand humbled.

Well officially here in Victoria, the merging driver is obligated to give way to traffic already on the freeway (assuming there's a broken white line to cross). Now if drivers already on the freeway blindingly took advantage of that and were complete arrogant pricks in heavy traffic when everyone is bumper to bumper, it would be literally impossible for the merging drivers to cross that broken line. I always open up a space for merging drivers in those conditions.

Funny thing is though a great many merging drivers seem to think they have right of way and I truly believe many would drive straight out into a vehicle already on the highway beleiving the guy on the highway is going to fit the bill. I regularly watch merging drivers very carefully and they are making no attempt whatsoever to check ahead, position themselves, and easily merge into one of many free spaces. They get right next to the broken line then start looking in the wing mirror, and never even look over their shoulder. Others seem to think that by following that unbroken white line to their left, as though it's a railway track, that the freeway drivers must let them out because the merging lane is finishing. They follow it to the end even when there are no cars whatsoever in the left lane of the freeway.

When I'm merging, as soon as I can see the freeway, even if that's right at the start of the merging ramp and I'm 150 metres away, I'm looking for my entry point, and keep looking until I'm on the freeway. Also as taught in the Victorian road rules book, I floor the throttle to get to the same speed as the traffic (not every vehicle can do that though). Why some idiots brain cells calculate that merging at 80 Ks when the traffic is doing 100 just boggles my brain, surely they must have experienced a hundred times the frustration of braking for people merging below speed. But then to add insult to injury the freshly merged driver immediately accelerates to 100 Ks AFTER they have entered the freeway. 20 K speed differential is not very good for merging.

From my "conversations" with a few people it's clear many think the freeway traffic should just "get out the road" of merging vehicles. I completely agree to this when there are no viable spaces for a car to merge into (heavy traffic or traffic jams), because under those conditions it's impossible for a car to merge. But when there are clearly plenty open spaces for the merging car to safely enter the freeway, it's just plain arrogance and lawlessness. Very often I correct their mistaken belief that the freeway drivers are legally obligated to move, then their true arrogance shows and they basically say they don't care.

I'm not finished yet ha ha.

Then there's the merging road train, and no I'm not talking about a truck. I'm talking about when all the merging cars are bumper to bumper effectively creating a solid line of cars that makes zipping just a tad impossible. I personally leave a decent gap in front when I'm merging so that zipping is possible with the freeway traffic. Of course then you've got the idiot behind who's cheesed off because he's angry that you are leaving a space in front of your vehicle.

I was driving home a couple of weeks ago on the freeway in the left lane which was quite empty. A merging vehicle made no attempt whatsoever to merge into the massive long spaces in front and behind me, and basically ended up right at the side of me and started the long horn beeping at me. I angrilly beeped back and held my (legal) ground. That driver obviously thinks that blindingly barging out onto the freeway is the correct and legal way as do a lot of others.

The way the rules are made actually makes sense to me. If the merging drivers take the effort to merge correctly (when possible), then they only have to put that effort in once. In contrast if the traffic on the freeway must give way, slow down, move over to the lane on the right, etc, they may have to do it at EVERY merging point.

If I had nothing better to do, I'd like to take an old vehicle, set it up with cameras, take some security guards with me :D, and see just how many merging drivers would just drive straight into me, and then start screaming their heads off at me for "causing" this accident. Then see if Today Tonight or 60 Minutes would be interested in airing the footage. Of course it would probably be considered illegal because despite me totally obeying the law, I was predicting that drivers would break the law and simply drive into me.

That's probably the longest rant I've done, but this is a "get it off your chest" part of the forum. Hope I didn't hurt your ears LOL.

There's been some other points brough up in this thread that I completely agree with, and it's clear there's a good deal of lawlessness and wrecklessness on the roads here. The main focus the police / government seem to have though is just collecting fines for speeding. Over in the UK the police publicly stated that they often turn a blind eye to drivers doing up to 90 miles per hour on the freeways (70 mph limit). Germany has its' high speed Autobarn and if the stories are true the high speeds themselves are not the cause of accidents. Moreso it's wreckless and irresponsible driving.

[rrich]

The amazing part is that here in the US it varies by area or region.

The concept of match the speed, find an opening and move in seems to be lost in the minds of drivers.

So many times you want to walk up to the other car, knock on the driver's window and ask, "What are you aiming at?"
Why? Because I want to be some place else.

[AlexS]

I love those idiots that stop to merge onto 80KPH traffic, on a freeway...... I get at least one a month in peak hour.
When I was driving to work, there was a merge from Pennant Hills Rd. (60 km/h) onto James Ruse Dve. (90 km/h). During the week, there was rarely a problem. On the ramp, drivers would accelerate to about 90, adjust so that they fitted between JR Dve. traffic and merge seamlessly. On the odd occasion that I use that ramp at weekends, some idiot will inevitably stop at the bottom of the ramp until there is sufficient gap in the traffic for him to accelerate for 0 to 90 without someone running up his backside - and that never happens.



Well officially here in Victoria, the merging driver is obligated to give way to traffic already on the freeway (assuming there's a broken white line to cross). Now if drivers already on the freeway blindingly took advantage of that and were complete arrogant pricks in heavy traffic when everyone is bumper to bumper, it would be literally impossible for the merging drivers to cross that broken line. I always open up a space for merging drivers in those conditions.

There is a difference between simply changing lanes and merging. In NSW:

3. Giving way when lines of traffic merge into a single line of traffic.
A driver in a line of traffic that is merging with one or more lines of traffic travelling in the same direction must give way to a vehicle in another line of traffic if any part of the vehicle is ahead of the driver's vehicle.

[artme]

First rule for merging onto a freeway:

** Thou shalt be talking on thy mobile whilst merging.

There are two versions of this;
a) phone held in right hand to obscure all possible viewing to the right.

b) phone held in left hand by placing arm across the body at neck level.
This will ensure minimal control of the steering during any attempt at merging

First rule for those on the freeway:

** Never, never, ever ever Move to the right hand lane next to you if it is vacant.

[Fuzzie]

There are two rules for merging and it all depends on the lane markings. Around here the lanes merging onto the freeway come to an end.
http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/Safety/qldroadrules/roadrulesrefresher/RoadRulesRefresherPocketGuide.pdf

[Chris Parks]

Nail it on th ramp and slide in between the cars, it's simple. The most frightening thing that ever happened to me in a wheeled vehicle and I have been upside down and over and off the road more times that I want to remember, was when I had to familiarise all our depot drivers on a new truck. We have a ramp in Wollongong down which every coal truck enters the F6 and they all accelerate to at least 100 to blend with the traffic. I was in the left hand seat and one of our "professional drivers" got to the bottom of the ramp and stopped!!! I nearly went beserk as I could imagine a B double coming down the ramp at over 100 KPH and me getting compo for the rest of my life. I cut short the drive and went back to the depot and refused to get back in the truck with him at any cost.

[beefy]

A bit different but that reminds me of the merging drivers who keep on braking when you've gave them a space to merge into. They either can't judge distance or they need about 50m of left lane to merge into. They come down the ramp at about 80, I can't get over to the left, so I'm forced to brake to let them out, and I give them a good size space to merge into. But they get all scared and just keep braking and slowing while on the merging ramp, and I have to do the same in order to maintain the merging space for them. AND THEY STILL DON'T LOOK OVER THEIR SHOULDER to get a REAL view of the available space, damn they love that wing mirror. Sometimes I just have to floor it and zoom past them because they are showing no sign of getting the confidence to merge. I think that one has to be the cause of the worst profanities from my gob, and the highest rise in blood pressure LOL.

Those drivers should be made to pay for some merging lessons, and prove that they have learned how to merge but more importantly prove they have gained the confidence to do so.

[Chesand]

Slightly off topic but a hobby horse of mine is that all drivers should be compelled to do a defensive driving course either just before or just after getting their licence.
Our current system teaches them how to get a licence but not necessarily how to drive.
I sent all my 3 children (now in their 40s) off on a three day defensive driving course shortly after getting their licences and they all admitted it was a great learning experience and in fact saved my son on one occasion.

[beefy]

Slightly off topic but a hobby horse of mine is that all drivers should be compelled to do a defensive driving course either just before or just after getting their licence.
Our current system teaches them how to get a licence but not necessarily how to drive.
I sent all my 3 children (now in their 40s) off on a three day defensive driving course shortly after getting their licences and they all admitted it was a great learning experience and in fact saved my son on one occasion.

Chesand,

I think you've nailed it on the head there. Also I think many have the attitude that whatever they learn in order to get their license is just a necessary evil, and once they've passed their test they make up their own rules that suit them better. Then the blind follow the blind and it gets worse. I mean how can so many be doing the same wrong thing when the Victorian Road Rules book teaches the opposite. An arrogant, don't care attitude has to play a large part.

[Gra]

** Never, never, ever ever Move to the right hand lane next to you if it is vacant.

Unless you wish to travel well under the speed limit then move to the far right lane and camp there

[Chris Parks]

Sigh, everyone thinks they drive better than everyone else. I bet that everyone who has contributed to this thread cannot envisage that they may have bad habits that others find annoying. In other words we are all perfect drivers? i don't think so. I have been a professional driver for most of my driving life and have seen first hand what happens on the road. In my earlier days I had a two month learn how to drive course from the army, taught advanced driving skills and smashed quite a few cars, both on the road and on the track and in the forests on rallies. I am still not a good driver, I tend to want to be at the front all the time and I get really P'd off if some nerd sits in the outside lane. I also have a car that is fairly quick and will use that power to my advantage which is not always the right thing to do. Others see this as an issue but I don't.

As for teaching skills beyond the requirements for getting a license, forget it. There are several issues, learned skills fade after a very short time unless practised, do you mind if I come out of a corner sideways while I practise or spin a car to stop it? all legitimate skills for the road. The biggest problem is that the average punter does not want to know. If I were to put some contributors here through a skills course and your license depended on it I bet you would not pass and I might not either though I had all these skills when I was younger and a lot more I might add but they fade over time, reality is a cruel thing.

[Gra]

Chris I never said I was a perfect driver, like you I know my limits and my bad habits. I tend to speed and can be impatient. Just because I am complaing about others doent mean I am perfect just means something has annoyed me and I am getting it off my chest.

I was just complaining of others bad habits, that I think are extreemly dangerous, for example stopping in the middle of the road in 80/100 KPH zones, were all other traffic is accelerating to this speed, for no logical reason, oh and I made a joke about the right lane campers that everyone seems to compain about.

My personal opinion is we should all be retested every time we renew our licence.

[Big Shed]

IMHO one of the biggest factors contributing to the overall poor driver skill set on our roads is that parents (or other non-professional driving instructors, eg family, friends etc.) can teach new drivers how to drive a car. Stick an L plate on the family car and away you go.:doh: You are free to pass on your bad driving habits to the next generation.

In most of Europe this is not on. You learn how to drive from a professional driving instructor in a dual control car and it takes a fair bit of time and a fair bit of money before you actually obtain a licence to drive a lethal object on your own.

You only have to drive in most of Europe to see how that improves the skill set of the average driver over there.

I agree that a defensive driving course is a very good thing to do and perhaps should be compulsory before obtaining a licence to drive a car.

Another one of my pet subjects is drivers towing caravans etc. You can go out and buy yourself a 3 ton caravan, hook it behind your car and inflict mayhem on our roads with impunity. No lessons needed, no exam to pass, just go for it! You don't even have to learn about towing weight limits etc in a theoretical exam.

And all the road safety ads hammer on about is speed and alcohol.

[Big Shed]

My personal opinion is we should all be retested every time we renew our licence.

Amen to that:2tsup:

Boy, how many of us would fail?:roll:

[beefy]

Sigh, everyone thinks they drive better than everyone else. I bet that everyone who has contributed to this thread cannot envisage that they may have bad habits that others find annoying. In other words we are all perfect drivers? i don't think so. I have been a professional driver for most of my driving life and have seen first hand what happens on the road. In my earlier days I had a two month learn how to drive course from the army, taught advanced driving skills and smashed quite a few cars, both on the road and on the track and in the forests on rallies. I am still not a good driver, I tend to want to be at the front all the time and I get really P'd off if some nerd sits in the outside lane. I also have a car that is fairly quick and will use that power to my advantage which is not always the right thing to do. Others see this as an issue but I don't.

As for teaching skills beyond the requirements for getting a license, forget it. There are several issues, learned skills fade after a very short time unless practised, do you mind if I come out of a corner sideways while I practise or spin a car to stop it? all legitimate skills for the road. The biggest problem is that the average punter does not want to know. If I were to put some contributors here through a skills course and your license depended on it I bet you would not pass and I might not either though I had all these skills when I was younger and a lot more I might add but they fade over time, reality is a cruel thing.

And your point being, regarding this thread ....................... ?????

Sounds like you are just saying don't whinge, but I don't hear anybody claiming to be the perfect driver. Well I'll tell you something there's a lot to complain about on the roads here. Downright dangerous aggressiveness, driving up your backside, erratic hurried lane changing to get one or two car spaces ahead, idiots in the fast lane going exactly at the same speed as the vehicle at the left and blocking the freeway, pratts shooting a cats whisker in front of you as they squeeze the last dregs out of the merging lane. The list goes on and it's all very common day in day out stuff. A lot of this is not "bad habits", it's arrogance, aggressiveness, complete stupidity, casting aside what they were taught because it doesn't suit them, etc. Australia is supposed to be a developed country yet the roads don't make it seem that way, far from it. As was said before a trip to certain European countries may open some eyes. An attitude of don't whinge just keeps things the way they are. I'll be teaching my kids about all the bad things I see so they don't contribute to them and help improve things for everybody. The more voices are raised about something the more the awareness about that problem grows. Even the powers that be clearly don't care about the low standards of driving, only squeezing more revenue out of drivers. I look at it as a form of legal corruptness, disguised & justified by their advertising campains of safety and speeding accidents.

I sometimes think we have too much of an attitude of don't be a whinger but saying nothing causes nothing, no change. Whingers also puts pressure on themselves to be better because they'll feel like idiots if they do the thing they complained about.

If I have a bad habit, I'd be happy for someone to point it out so I can improve myself. The difference with a lot of drivers is that they don't give a toss, I know this from face to face talks about the driving here.

[Chris Parks]

a trip to certain European countries may open some eyes.

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

[Gra]

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

My parents did some inital teaching, but I then got an instructor, the same with my sisters. This wasnt uncommon in my circles.

[Chris Parks]

And that scenario is not uncommon. It then leaves the professional to unlearn all the bad habits/skills that have been taught by the parent. I am with Fred, no uncredentialled driver should be allowed to teach a student initially. What I would like to see is that the student is taught as needed for an initial period then the parent take over to obtain the necessary huge number of hours needed these days. god help those who had twins or triplets as the financial and time impost must be huge. before the parent can supervise they too must have done some hours with the same instructor. It would lead to an overall lift in driving standards for the parents.

[BobL]

On a world wide scale we're not as bad as we think.
This list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-related_death_rate) is a pretty interesting and shows how bad things are elsewhere.
There are all sorts of reasons for the figures but there are lots of countries out there that would like our driving problems instead of theirs, which they often can't do much about. Eg fog, black ice and long dark winters.

I think selfishness is more of a base problem than ignorance.
I'm all for qualified instructors (yes I was once one too) doing the driver training but unfortunately just like most teaching they won't change anyone with a selfish attitude.

[Sturdee]

Let's hear your thoughts on what is the correct way to merge onto a freeway (VICTORIA).




The correct way according to Victorian law is:


Entering a freeway:
When entering a freeway, you are effectively changing lanes (across the dotted white line) and you must give way to vehicles already travelling on the freeway.

There are traffic lights at some freeway entrances to control the flow of vehicles onto the freeway when the traffic is heavy. When operating, the lights will change quickly, so that when the light is green only one vehicle in each lane will be able to enter the freeway.

Thus giving way to traffic that wants to enter the freeway, whilst it may be courteous, is not required by law. Giving way is also the cause of the frequent hold ups in peak traffic to those already on the freeway.

Fairly simply really.


Peter.

[Master Splinter]

Post deleted by author as edits to already deliberately obscured r**e w**ds destroyed my prose.
(I'm not against editing as long as the edited text is not attributed to me. It's like adding spelling or grammatical errors to a post).

[beefy]

Hi Master Splinter,

who could argue with you about the points you mentioned. I completely sympathise with you, and agree there are a lot of bad systems that could have been designed better. One thing that gets me is the damn trees blocking road signs, street names, etc.

Hopefully though, you don't wear your don't care T-shirt all the time. I don't blame anyone for not driving correctly when circumstances don't allow it but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about when the situation easily allows it. Like I said when driving conditions are crammed and there are no gaps in the traffic, I open one up to assist merging drivers.

We should all try and drive correctly when we can. Can you imagine how backwards and chaotic it would be if everyone just wore that t-shirt all the time.

[doug3030]

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

I can almost put up with the idiots. The world is full of them and they know no better, you just have to make allowances for them. One day the powers that be might set a decent license test and weed them out but until then we just have to make allowances for them.

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

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

While they are all in such a hurry to cut you off, take your right of way and generally seem to be in a hurry to go anywhere, what happens when the light goes green? Well they all sit there for ever before moving off. If the all moved forward when the light changed and all slowly spread out as they go forward like they do in civilised places we wouldn't be sitting at the lights for 2 or 3 changes to get through. Put your phones down and move when the light goes green PLEASE!

I have a 6 km drive home from the train station every evening after work. In that short distance almost every day I encounter people not giving right of way, cars pulling out in front of me without looking, pedestrians crossing the road in the face of oncoming traffic, expecting the traffic to stop for them. This is nearly every day and that is all before I get out of the station car park.

Cheers

Doug

[Master Splinter]

I wear my "I don't care" driving tee-sh**t* pretty much all the time.

Essentially, with the increasing automation of of the enforcement process (speed cameras, automatic number plate recognition, trip time cameras and that sort of stuff) I choose put my driving energy into those areas that are heavily enforced by technological means. (because, like, they are heavily enforced by technology cuz they are the critical ones for road safety, right, and not just the ones where the technology to enforce them is comparatively cheap and raises revenue, like).

So if I have a sudden "hang on, is this area a 70 or 80 zone?'" thought, I slow down to 50. The people behind me can just put up with it, as I've never seen them either offer to drive for me, or pay any fines I get when I do what they want. If they were smart, they'd have started their journey five minutes before I started mine.

That's because I don't have an automated system that is constantly scanning the road on my behalf and filing data away for a few months so it is still available if an infringement notice appears.

It's not even like a speed camera reverses operation every 100 or so "OVER SPEED LIMIT" shots and takes one of the next car travelling at or under the speed limit, and the driver of that car gets sent a "Congratulations on your good driving - here's a cheque for $150 to thank you" letter.

Nup, it's an asymmetric process - what I consider procedural unfairness, where the government has the benefit that one speed camera can catch all the people speeding past a point, but to provide evidence to the contrary or mitigating factors, every single car passing that spot would need certified speed recorders and 360 degree video coverage.

I don't want to waste an hour or two of my time going back after I receive an infringement notice to take a photo of a speed limit sign that's faded, vandalised or hidden by tree growth. I want to be able to argue my case on the spot, when it happens.

I don't want to stump up $40 just to get a copy of a photo that may or may not be of my car with someone who may or not be me driving it.

I don't care if I am fairly certain that an area is an 80 zone (because it was an 80 zone last time I travelled the road), because fairly certain still puts me out of pocket to argue, despite how many times I have not broken road rules.

So I drive like an old man with alzheimer's. And see how many f*******ks I give.**

*shirt
**firetrucks

[Chief Tiff]

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

Doug

Are you for real? When you REVERSE into a car parking space you can see the road ahead of you, the road behind you and the space you are aiming to park into. You have good all round vision, pretty much as good as when you drive forwards INTO a space.

However;

If you forward park then all you can see when trying to get OUT later on is the bit of road directly behind you, over your shoulder. You can't see traffic coming up. If a panel van or a big fourbie has parked on your left then 3/4 of your vehicle has to emerge from from the parking space before you have the slightest idea about what may be trying to travel down the road..and has the absolute right of way. Should the oncoming vehicle hit you; at the very worst it's a 50/50 fault according to insurance companies. Should the oncoming vehicle STOP and you hit it in reverse; guess who's fault it's 100% now?

How many kids are crushed by the family car every year because Mum/Dad drove into the driveway or garage and when they came to reverse out they couldn't see clearly? Yes; the road was clear when they walked up to the car but by the time they've got into the car, fastened their seatbelt, started the engine and put it into reverse enough time has passed for Little Johnny to come from the back yard and wander directly behind the car. Now tell me how many similar accidents occur reversing INTO the same area that they've just that second driven PAST and checked to be clear? I've never come close to hitting a car driving out of a space but I've lost count of the number of times I've been on the horn to stop a car reversing into my path because the driver couldn't see a bloody thing.

Yes there are some drivers who seriously need practice in reversing; there are also a large number of cretins who can't drive forwards either. I consider reversing into a space and driving out the safest way to achieve this, and so do all the issuers of all the driving licenses I've held in all the categories I've been passed out in in all the countries I've driven in. You want to experience real big city driving? Try London, Barcelona or Naples. Sydney and Melbourne rush hour traffic has similar traffic density to most small European cities. On a Sunday. At night. And out of interest; are you actually qualified to drive anything other than a car? I don't have bendy-bus, road train or tank but having held every other category either here or in Europe I feel I'm both qualified and experienced to fully support Vicroad's policy to "do such a stupid and inconsiderate thing" and actively encourage others to do so.

[AlexS]

Chief T is spot on.
Also, in my local car park, the lane between the parking spaces is pretty narrow, as are the parking spaces. To drive in forward means you are entering the parking space at an angle, and are likely to scrape the car next to you. If you reverse in, you enter it parallel.

Assuming, of course, that you are competent at reversing.

[Chesand]

I prefer to back in so that I can see what is in front of me when driving out. If you learn to back on your mirrors it is not that hard to do.

[doug3030]

And out of interest; are you actually qualified to drive anything other than a car?

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

In that time I have been in two accidents as the driver and 100% of the blame was attributed to the other driver in each case.

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

Yes I would say I am qualified.

As to the home driveway situation, I had only mentioned carparks so I am not sure why it was mentioned in he counter-argument, but I still maintain that it would be better to drive straight in and reverse out there too, even if just for the sake of the child running on to the driveway. "Little Johnny" is more likely to bolt into the driveway behind the car if he hears Daddy driving in. When you are leaving you are initially outside of the car and can take precautions to ensure that "little Johnny" is safe before entering the vehicle. How do you do that when you are backing in from the street?

Cheers

Doug

[beefy]

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

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

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


Hi Doug,

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

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

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

[doug3030]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cheers

Doug

[Poppa]

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

[BobL]

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

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

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

Data taken from Catchpole's article on NSW drivers.
Youth Injury Prevention : Motor Accidents Authority (http://www.maa.nsw.gov.au/default.aspx?MenuID=380)

[artme]

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

[GTVi]

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

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

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

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

[GTVi]

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

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

[BobL]

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

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

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

293788

The one before that was another kangaroo!

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

[Chief Tiff]

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

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

Yes I would say I am qualified.


Doug

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

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

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


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

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

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

[beefy]

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

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


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

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

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

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

[doug3030]

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

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


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

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



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

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

Cheers

Doug

[Big Shed]

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

Let's play the ball and not the man.

[BobL]

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

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

[GTVi]

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

[AlexS]

Having worked in high population areas, Jakata and Manila mainly, although never dared to drive in these cities, however I studied the traffic and they use the "water flow" principle. Those who have not ventured outside of Australia would not understand it until your in it. :) In that time I never witnessed a car accident amongst what appears to be total chaos. But their method of merging system works well. "If there is a gap, then its quickly occupied, without any road rage".
I worked with a Sri Lankan lady who was an excellent driver. She told me that when she visits home, it takes her about 3 days to revert to driving Sri Lankan style, and the same to revert to driving Australian style when she returns. She also informed me that the seemingly pointless beeping and light flashing are actually systematic signals that convey meaning to the local drivers.

[BobL]

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

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

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

[Bushmiller]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Regards
Paul

<tbody>
Country
Deaths per 100,000people
deaths per 100,00 vehicles
deaths per billion vehicle/kms
total fatalities


Australia
6.1
8
5.8
1,281


UK
2.75
5.1
3.6
1,754


USA
10.4
15
8.5
33,808


Germany
4.4
6.9
7.2
3,600


France
6.4
9.57

3,645

</tbody>

[beefy]

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

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

Bushmiller,

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

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

[BobL]

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

<tbody>
Country
Deaths per 100,000people
deaths per 100,00 vehicles
deaths per billion vehicle/kms
total fatalities


Australia
6.1
8
5.8
1,281


UK
2.75
5.1
3.6
1,754


USA
10.4
15
8.5
33,808


Germany
4.4
6.9
7.2
3,600


France
6.4
9.57

3,645

</tbody>


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

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

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

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

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

And for all you lay back Lennies and dawdlers who insist on travelling too slowly, look up this Solomon curve - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve)

[Chris Parks]

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

[Big Shed]

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

Northern Territory returns open speed limits in road safety trial | CarAdvice (http://www.caradvice.com.au/255573/northern-territory-returns-open-speed-limits-road-safety-trial/)

[BobL]

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

Northern Territory returns open speed limits in road safety trial |#CarAdvice (http://www.caradvice.com.au/255573/northern-territory-returns-open-speed-limits-road-safety-trial/)

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

[Chris Parks]

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

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

[Big Shed]

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

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

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

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

[BobL]

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

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

[beefy]

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

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

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

[BobL]

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

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

http://www.woodworkforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=293998&stc=1

[AlexS]

When I did my driving instructors course the instructor taught us to constantly verbalise our actions and observations (e.g. checking mirrors, distance scan, check speed, local scan, passing traffic lights ahead, check mirrors, applying brakes, check mirrors etc . . . . )
Bob, I believe that is based on the way London police were (are?) taught to drive. I learned about it when I was about 19, and gave it a try. I found it greatly improved my awareness and improved my driving habits. Ever since then, I have, from time to time, practiced it (the verbalisation) again just to maintain the habit. While I'm sure this is not as useful as doing it under test, I'd recommend everyone to try it.

[BobL]

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

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

[NCArcher]

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

[BobL]

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

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

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

[smidsy]

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

Northern Territory returns open speed limits in road safety trial |#CarAdvice (http://www.caradvice.com.au/255573/northern-territory-returns-open-speed-limits-road-safety-trial/)

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

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

[AlexS]

As for merging, the on ramp is your acceleration area and when you get to merge point your speed should be close if not matching the speed of the existing traffic so you can slide in without anyone having to brake.
It's not that hard.Spot on.:2tsup:

[doug3030]

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

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

Cheers

Doug

[beefy]

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

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

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

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

[AlexS]

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

[Skew ChiDAMN!!]

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

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

[Ed..]

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

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

Just my 2 cents worth!

[doug3030]

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

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




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

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


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

Sorry, Ed but you are the problem.

Cheers

Doug

[Ed..]

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cheers

Ed.

[smidsy]

Unfortunately in all professions you get the asshole element - in trucking it's those who believe they can do what they like because their size gives them an element of invincibility.
I witnessed this first hand as a 15 year old working around the corner from the Giacci depot in Maddington and watching their antics daily - these guys treated the road like a track, especially the Ryelane St/Marion Rd and Marion Rd/Stebbing St corners.
When you heard a truck coming (and you could because Giacci revved the nuts off their trucks) you went on the road at your own risk.

[beefy]

Ed,

I've been towing a heavy load for many years and I can't always get up to speed. Experience has taught me that you have to look after yourself first, because courtesy is seriously lacking here (Melbourne). I lived in Sydney for a few years before moving to Melbourne and was immediately shocked by the anger and aggression on the roads here, from all age groups. I had imagined Sydney would have been worse because of the greater traffic density, crap road system, etc, but that's not my experience.

I merge as soon as I possibly can and if I can possibly avoid it, never at the end of a merging lane. That means I'm at the mercy of the drivers who have the right of way.

There's a stretch of road, dual lanes, 100K limit, with several roundabouts in a row. I turn right at #4 but I always make sure I'm in the right lane BEFORE I pass roundabout #3. Too many times I've had close calls in peak hour when I've tried to get over into the right hand lane between roundabouts 3 & 4 (not enough distance between them). There's just too many ba****ds here (or inconsiderate drivers as we politely call them) who just won't help the drivers of vehicles that can't do 0-100 in 2 seconds. I end up with a lot of drivers overtaking me in the left hand lane before and after roundabout #3 but I'm not the one who made it that way. I tried doing the right thing for quite some time before throwing the toys out of the pram, and using the above method. It's sad but here you have to be very defensive when you don't have zoom zoom capabilities, and that does not always please the other drivers. If only they knew why we were doing it.

Keith

[Sturdee]

The trouble with this thread is that everyone who complains about drivers not allowing merging traffic into the highway/freeway are the ones that are breaking the law and then justify it by appealing to so called common sense, not real common sense but their own self serving notion of common sense.

The way driving should be is according to the road laws, which means that traffic wanting to merge right must give way to the right unless otherwise indicated. If you can't do that don't drive and don't whinge when others do obey the law and don't let you in.

I know of a driver applicant when going for a licence test failed because he did zip and forced into freeway traffic as he failed to give way and also immediately was considered tailgating.

Peter.

[DavidG]

Some posts are in moderation for administrive review.
Keep it nice please.

[beefy]

I'm the one who started this thread because I'm continuously infuriated by "merging" drivers. However, I have said words to the effect that merging drivers should make a good attempt to merge correctly WHEN POSSIBLE.

I think it's unfair to make things black and white, and to say the drivers on the freeway should never have to make any attempt to assist a merging driver. My anger is directed to the arrogant idiots who make no attempt to merge correctly when there is plenty opportunity to do so, and they still expect the drivers on the freeway to just move over for them. I have a huge chip on my shoulder with them.

There are however plenty occasions when the traffic is chockers, and there are no gaps to merge into, or for whatever other reason the vehicles are bumper to bumper for the window of opportunity a merging driver has. Under those conditions the merging driver is completely at the mercy of the ones in power, i.e. the drivers on the freeway who have right of way. Under those conditions no amount of driving skill can get you out on the freeway if no one lets you in. Then the only option a merging driver has is to stop in the merging lane and that is dangerous in itself. After all the merging lane is generally used to accelerate and get up to the speed of the freeway traffic.

If there's a way to merge under those conditions then I'd like someone to teach me the secret technique because I have no idea how to.

I have some sympathy with Ed, and I have been in situations several times with downright dangerous and aggressive truck drivers (in addition to the car ones). I don't know if it's the drugs some of them may take to help keep them awake for extended periods but some of them have a level of aggression that seems to make them oblivious to the potential outcomes of their action. They could easily go to jail for manslaughter. The differential of speed is what makes it so difficult when you are driving a slower outfit (Ed towing the boat). A continuous stream of traffic going past you while you are indicating that you want to pull out, and if there are any gaps it's too dangerous to pull out because of the speed difference. Regarding my previous post about the roundabouts this is the very reason I get in the right lane way way ahead of schedule. Hardly anybody wants to slow down to let a slower vehicle out in front of them. Most of the time they are wanting to shoot past you so they don't end up behind you. I think it's a safe bet that's what that truck driver had in mind, many of them hate slowing down. Ed could have come back into the fast lane far far away from where the 2 lanes become one, but then he'd be a prick for hogging the fast lane. He's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't.

Under certain conditions, despite what the law says, we should assist those who don't have right of way. There's legal law and what we could call moral law. Should we offer no assistance to someone in a genuinely difficult situation just because we legally don't have to.

Despite the chip on my shoulder with a lot of "merging" drivers, I always open up a gap for them when I'm in bumper to bumper traffic. It's the only way they can get out and not have to stop in the merging lane.

Keith.

[doug3030]

Under certain conditions, despite what the law says, we should assist those who don't have right of way. There's legal law and what we could call moral law. Should we offer no assistance to someone in a genuinely difficult situation just because we legally don't have to.

Despite the chip on my shoulder with a lot of "merging" drivers, I always open up a gap for them when I'm in bumper to bumper traffic. It's the only way they can get out and not have to stop in the merging lane.

Keith.

I doubt that I have done a single trip on the Melbourne road system when I have not adjusted my speed when I have right of way to help someone out, usually several times. That is just common sense. BUT, when they start expecting or demanding that I let them in when for some reason (like the example I mentioned earlier of another vehicle tailgating so it is not safe to slow down) that gets right up my nose.

If it is not your right by law, don't expect it and be grateful to the courteous drivers like myself who make allowances for this when practical to do so.

I still vividly remember what my driving instructor told me in 1977, that if you have right of way it is your responsibility to maintain your speed and direction so that other drivers can fit in around you. That makes sense because if you slow down to let in one driver you may be making it difficult for the driver behind him who has already committed to the gap behind you that you are about to close on him.

Roads are a lot more congested now than they were then but I still believe that principal applies and I will not slow down to allow entry for someone to get in front of me when they have not planned their entry if it makes things difficult for the person who has planned their merge correctly into the gap behind me. A good driver must have an awareness of all the vehicles in his vicinity and should not be expecting anyone else to allow them anything other than their legal entitlements, and should be grateful when they do.

Cheers

Doug

[doug3030]

I was sent this video today ans immediately I thought of this old thread and the flak I copped from members for saying this sort of thing happens.

I see things worse than this at least once a week, and this video was taken at my local shopping centre. Personally I would not have considered this exhibition of gross incompetent driving as worth recording compared to the other examples I see so often.

http://www.ntnews.com.au/news/epic-parking-fail-caught-on-camera-at-werribee-plaza/story-fnjbnts7-1227331083649

Cheers

Doug


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

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

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

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

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

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

Cheers

Doug

[Twisted Tenon]

Doug, that was excruciating. How did that numnut ever get their license?

TT

[doug3030]

Doug, that was excruciating. How did that numnut ever get their license?

them and about another two million of them on Victoria's roads :oo:

And having gotten their licences here, they are all entitled to drive to all the other states and do it there too. I do not think most of them are capable of managing to survive the journey, and even if they do it takes so long that hopefully they pick up some skills along the way.

Never mind "how do they merge on the freeway' - the real question is how do they make it to the on-ramp in the first place?

Cheers

Doug

[rrich]

I had to laugh. Today I had someone come down the on ramp. I lifted to give them room to merge. They slammed on the brakes and ducked in behind me. Well enough? Not really. Then they slipped into the next lane, sped up, pulled back into my lane and then exited the freeway.

So you don't have to ask.

BMW

[Twisted Tenon]

I had to laugh. Today I had someone come down the on ramp. I lifted to give them room to merge. They slammed on the brakes and ducked in behind me. Well enough? Not really. Then they slipped into the next lane, sped up, pulled back into my lane and then exited the freeway.

So you don't have to ask.

BMW

Not a Volvo? :D

TT