22 August 2011

Nasty roll on the parkway caused by jerk.

| johnboy
Join the conversation
180
rolled hyundai

ACT Policing is seeking witnesses to a collision on the northbound lanes of Tuggeranong Parkway, between Sulwood Drive and Hindmarsh Drive, earlier this morning (Monday, August 22).

The collision occurred about 10am when an unidentified driver slammed on the brakes of their car, causing the driver behind in a white Hyundai Getz to brake heavily, lose control and the car to roll a number of times.

The driver of the other vehicle left the scene without providing any details.

The woman from the Hyundai Getz was taken to The Canberra Hospital for treatment for possible back injuries.

The vehicle that left the scene is described as a small four-wheel drive, possibly white or silver in colour, about 5-10 years old with ACT registration.

The unidentified driver is described as female, Caucasian in appearance with blonde, bobbed hair, and a round face. She is approximately 22 years of age and of normal build.

Police are seeking information from anyone how may have witnessed the collision or who may have information of the driver involved in the collision.

Information can be provided via Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000, or via the Crime Stoppers website on www.act.crimestoppers.com.au. Information can be provided anonymously.

The Tuggeranong Parkway was closed between Sulwood Drive and Hindmarsh Drive, northbound, for approximately 3 hours while police conducted their investigation.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]

rolled hyundai

Join the conversation

180
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Okwhatever said :

shirty_bear said :

EvanJames said :

Aggressive and unskilled drivers are legion nowadays. Many of them carry an identifing label, a green or red P. But not always.

Alternate identification is by the hi-vis shirt, which serves at least as much purpose on the roads as on the job site.

Pull your opinionated head in, how the hell can you seriously believe that? Describe yourself and I am sure I can stereotype you as well and I am sure I will sound just as stupid.

I completely agree with his stereotype in regards to hi-vis, and have discussed it with others who agree as well. While it may be over-inflated in people’s minds due to the fact that a guy in hi-vis driving like a dickhead sticks out more in the memory than a guy in non-descript clothing driving like a dickhead, there are certainly a lot of guys in hi-vis in a rush to get somewhere.

I am a 30 year old white male with an office job btw. Yes I probably do drive like a grandpa.

Captain RAAF11:59 am 26 Aug 11

Jim Jones said :

Okwhatever said :

Captain RAAF said :

SO many posers on here sprouting off on how good a driver they are blah blah blah. So what?…….

Many years ago I had the good fortune of being in a go-kart race against a few notable V8 touring car drivers….kicked all their arses.

Posers you say?, So you had to join their ranks did you?

He didn’t just join the ranks – they made him Captain!!!

Every village needs it’s idiot. =-)

You’ve got everything I do.

No updates yet Johnboy?

I would be interested to know what happened here, could serve as a valuable lesson to road users.

Okwhatever said :

Captain RAAF said :

SO many posers on here sprouting off on how good a driver they are blah blah blah. So what?…….

Many years ago I had the good fortune of being in a go-kart race against a few notable V8 touring car drivers….kicked all their arses.

Posers you say?, So you had to join their ranks did you?

He didn’t just join the ranks – they made him Captain!!!

Captain RAAF said :

SO many posers on here sprouting off on how good a driver they are blah blah blah. So what?…….

Many years ago I had the good fortune of being in a go-kart race against a few notable V8 touring car drivers….kicked all their arses.

Posers you say?, So you had to join their ranks did you?

shirty_bear said :

EvanJames said :

Aggressive and unskilled drivers are legion nowadays. Many of them carry an identifing label, a green or red P. But not always.

Alternate identification is by the hi-vis shirt, which serves at least as much purpose on the roads as on the job site.

Pull your opinionated head in, how the hell can you seriously believe that? Describe yourself and I am sure I can stereotype you as well and I am sure I will sound just as stupid.

Gerry-Built said :

Captain RAAF said :

Since then, I have come to realise a few things, call them my tips to avoiding raod carnage;

1. Always be in front and by yourself. Allow no-one to be withing 50 metres of your car,
2. Everyone is out to kill you, treat them as the enemy.
3. Big, powerful cars own the road and people are scared of them and like to keep them at a safe, so drive the biggest, baddest car you can find.

I have a MUCH simpler plan, that works well for me… (well; let’s just say I have NEVER rolled a car or struck someone from following them too tightly)…

Share the road… allow others in… show patience… ignore cocks…

I completely agree, though i admit i may take the last part to far!

As i drive home along the kings (I live past braidwood) if someone tailgates me at night, I ignore them, COMPLETELY, which means i fail to acknowledge there existence when they overtake, and so my high beams tend to just stay on, as if no one were there!

Captain RAAF said :

Since then, I have come to realise a few things, call them my tips to avoiding raod carnage;

1. Always be in front and by yourself. Allow no-one to be withing 50 metres of your car,
2. Everyone is out to kill you, treat them as the enemy.
3. Big, powerful cars own the road and people are scared of them and like to keep them at a safe, so drive the biggest, baddest car you can find.

I have a MUCH simpler plan, that works well for me… (well; let’s just say I have NEVER rolled a car or struck someone from following them too tightly)…

Share the road… allow others in… show patience… ignore cocks…

Captain RAAF8:59 pm 25 Aug 11

screaming banshee said :

Captain RAAF said :

not long after this race I punted a GT Falcon at 100kmh into a head-on. Why didn’t my ‘fully sik’ racing abilities kick in?

Clearly the driver of the GT was at fault (for the head-on part), if they hadn’t turned their wheels until they where ready to move off they wouldn’t have ended up in a head-on it would have just been a rear-ender.

Umm…no actually, a guy driving a little 4WD did a right hand turn in front of me and that was that. The cops charged him with failing to give way and he almost left in the back of the paddy wagon due to his wife arriving and giving the coppers a mouthful.

screaming banshee7:58 pm 25 Aug 11

Captain RAAF said :

not long after this race I punted a GT Falcon at 100kmh into a head-on. Why didn’t my ‘fully sik’ racing abilities kick in?

Clearly the driver of the GT was at fault (for the head-on part), if they hadn’t turned their wheels until they where ready to move off they wouldn’t have ended up in a head-on it would have just been a rear-ender.

qbngeek said :

LSWCHP said :

Whenever I get the finger for obeying the speed limit I always respond with a friendly smile and a big wave. Life is short, cars are just for getting from A to B, and I don’t want to die in a puddle of blood in the middle of MacArthur Avenue.

I have taken to blowing kisses…seems to piss the boy racers off even more when they tailgate me, so I slow down (not a brake check, just take my foot off the accelerator), so they change lanes and come up beside me and start yelling at me and giving the finger, so I blow them a kiss and continue on my merry way.

Maybe its because I am 6’4″ and 120kg, am I not pretty enough 🙁

I knew a very tall girl from QBN once. You don’t have red hair, do you?

LSWCHP said :

Whenever I get the finger for obeying the speed limit I always respond with a friendly smile and a big wave. Life is short, cars are just for getting from A to B, and I don’t want to die in a puddle of blood in the middle of MacArthur Avenue.

I have taken to blowing kisses…seems to piss the boy racers off even more when they tailgate me, so I slow down (not a brake check, just take my foot off the accelerator), so they change lanes and come up beside me and start yelling at me and giving the finger, so I blow them a kiss and continue on my merry way.

Maybe its because I am 6’4″ and 120kg, am I not pretty enough 🙁

Captain RAAF said :

Many years ago I had the good fortune of being in a go-kart race against a few notable V8 touring car drivers….kicked all their arses. One of them (there were three or four) came up afterwards and congratulated me, said something like “You’re quite talented…” and then made his getaway, the rest were outta there like a shot.

I think you’ll find this is the first version of that particular story.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZ7ed_ODHNk

Henry82 said :

Have you ever seen someone say that they were a bad driver? (publicly)

I’m not a bad driver, however I do drive badly some times.

With over 6 pages of comments, I cannot understand why “The Infamous Silver Commodore of Tuggerangong” hasn’t been mentioned. Come on, he must have been involved, somehow?

Oh yeah, re the Getz, that will buff out.

Captain RAAF said :

I punted a GT Falcon at 100kmh into a head-on. Why didn’t my ‘fully sik’ racing abilities kick in?

“Fully sik” racing abilities do not make a “good driver”.

People who think they have “fully sik” driving abilities are usually the worst drivers and end up killing themselves and others in high speed collisions.

Rangi said :

triffid said :

Rangi said :

So someone exhibited bad/dangerous driving by tailgating you, so you got behind them and aggressively tailgated them? Great work champ. Way to keep those roads safe!

Yep . . . and I’ll do it again in a heart beat.

My point remains: the driver in question didn’t even notice that I was there. They were that oblivious to my presence in their mirrors that they didn’t get a hint, or glean any insight, or imagine for a micro second that they may have not so long ago been endangering my safety by doing the exact same thing.

But, you put me at risk with your behaviour and I’ll immediately switch into ‘sport’ mode. Keep it up and I will do whatever I need to, at the lowest threshold possible, to ensure my safety and that of my occupants. Your showing no regard for me will have me being completely diffident to you. Pretty simple.

Sorry I must be missing something, so let me just clarify here…someone drove badly near you, so you drove aggressively and dangerously back to them, but they were obivious to your actions, so you actually proved and achieved nothing, but you would do it again to ensure your safety and that of your occupants.

Jerk drivers are worse then stupid drivers, they will casue accidents but at least the stupid one didn’t do it on purpose, and will hopefully learn with experience a jerk will always be a jerk.

Your actions are probably worse than the tailgater, because their actions wern’t aggressive and deliberate, more just stupid, instead of staying calm and moving away from them, you got angry and had to try and teach them a leason. Extensive years of motorsport may help you handle a car better but all that skill amounts nothing if you have a bad attitude, or your passenger distracts your for a split second.

^^
What he said

triffid said :

Rangi said :

So someone exhibited bad/dangerous driving by tailgating you, so you got behind them and aggressively tailgated them? Great work champ. Way to keep those roads safe!

Yep . . . and I’ll do it again in a heart beat.

My point remains: the driver in question didn’t even notice that I was there. They were that oblivious to my presence in their mirrors that they didn’t get a hint, or glean any insight, or imagine for a micro second that they may have not so long ago been endangering my safety by doing the exact same thing.

But, you put me at risk with your behaviour and I’ll immediately switch into ‘sport’ mode. Keep it up and I will do whatever I need to, at the lowest threshold possible, to ensure my safety and that of my occupants. Your showing no regard for me will have me being completely diffident to you. Pretty simple.

Sorry I must be missing something, so let me just clarify here…someone drove badly near you, so you drove aggressively and dangerously back to them, but they were obivious to your actions, so you actually proved and achieved nothing, but you would do it again to ensure your safety and that of your occupants.

Jerk drivers are worse then stupid drivers, they will casue accidents but at least the stupid one didn’t do it on purpose, and will hopefully learn with experience a jerk will always be a jerk.

Your actions are probably worse than the tailgater, because their actions wern’t aggressive and deliberate, more just stupid, instead of staying calm and moving away from them, you got angry and had to try and teach them a leason. Extensive years of motorsport may help you handle a car better but all that skill amounts nothing if you have a bad attitude, or your passenger distracts your for a split second.

Tooks said :

That would make sense, except the Convoy thread has about double the comments of this thread.

Tooks, with 5 more days left before August ends, you don’t think it is possible to beat the number of convoy comments? 🙂
[gone to register platoon of profiles] 😀

Captain RAAF said :

SO many posers on here sprouting off on how good a driver they are blah blah blah. So what?.

Have you ever seen someone say that they were a bad driver? (publicly)

Captain RAAF8:49 am 25 Aug 11

SO many posers on here sprouting off on how good a driver they are blah blah blah. So what?

Many years ago I had the good fortune of being in a go-kart race against a few notable V8 touring car drivers….kicked all their arses. One of them (there were three or four) came up afterwards and congratulated me, said something like “You’re quite talented…” and then made his getaway, the rest were outta there like a shot. My point is, no-one who thinks they are the ducks guts behind the wheel can think they are prepared for anything, can react to anything because not long after this race I punted a GT Falcon at 100kmh into a head-on. Why didn’t my ‘fully sik’ racing abilities kick in?

Since then, I have come to realise a few things, call them my tips to avoiding raod carnage;

1. Always be in front and by yourself. Allow no-one to be withing 50 metres of your car,
2. Everyone is out to kill you, treat them as the enemy.
3. Big, powerful cars own the road and people are scared of them and like to keep them at a safe, so drive the biggest, baddest car you can find.

As for this accident involving the Getz, fair possibility it strayed too close to a big powerful car and decided that Sepuku was the only way out. It made the right decision I think, as we need to get these POS off my roads.

DUB said :

JB, as it is not the end of August yet, you should withdraw The Mully Cup for August 2011, that was awarded to Convoy of No Confidence, and award it to this thread instead.
P.S. Sorry for off topic.

That would make sense, except the Convoy thread has about double the comments of this thread.

Another incident in another part of the world.
Car Crash Caused by Woman’s Middle Finger Flip Off (Photo)

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474980026522

JB, as it is not the end of August yet, you should withdraw The Mully Cup for August 2011, that was awarded to Convoy of No Confidence, and award it to this thread instead.
P.S. Sorry for off topic.

screaming banshee said :

Hmm, when I read playboy89’s post I assumed this was the getz driver opening a defence at the pathetic driver argument but y’all seem to have gone the other way.

Perhaps he/she can give us their side of the story?

Unfortunately they rock up, register, post some strongly worded angry response and dissapear into the distance never to respond to the valid comments, criticisms and challenges on a post that ends up winning the Mulley Cup!

user_unknown11:09 pm 24 Aug 11

Hmm sounds like the result of this collision is how what I saw the other day could’ve ended. Stopped at lights in belco minding my own business on the way to work and we’ll call the car two ahead of me dumbarse 1 and the car in front of me dumbarse 2. Well DA1 leans out the car & yells “back the f-off!” so what does DA2 do? Tailgate even closer once the lights go green so DA1 slows way down to annoy DA2 and ends up making me angry as well – are you kidding me?! DA1 is obviously incredibly childish and DA2 is clearly stupid. Thats why collisions occur – they’re not accidents – it’s only an accident if it’s completely unavoidable. Collisions occur coz selfish people drive. For the record, I drive a Hyundai (not a Getz) and I don’t tail gate – why? Coz why would I want to damage my own property?

what_the said :

Its like they teach you with motorcycling, doesn’t matter who’s at fault if you’re dead. You have to do everything to avoid being in that situation in the first place.

Amen to that brother.

Some of the wisest words ever to appear on RA.

Whenever I get the finger for obeying the speed limit I always respond with a friendly smile and a big wave. Life is short, cars are just for getting from A to B, and I don’t want to die in a puddle of blood in the middle of MacArthur Avenue.

Relax, take it easy, and get to your destination in one peaceful piece. All else is rubbish.

screaming banshee9:30 pm 24 Aug 11

Hmm, when I read playboy89’s post I assumed this was the getz driver opening a defence at the pathetic driver argument but y’all seem to have gone the other way.

Perhaps he/she can give us their side of the story?

whoodzzz said :

shirty_bear said :

I’ve got a dollar that says this still ain’t the *whole* story.

mmmhmmm, so you are suggesting that you’ve never experienced road rage that was 1 sided in canberra?

I sure as hell have! The P platers and young drivers here are an absolute nightmare – and thats only in the carparks!

Sweet – my dollar’s safe. Way to respond without addressing the issue.

Even “1 sided” road rage is rarely unprovoked (at least in the eyes of the rager).

whoodzzz said :

shirty_bear said :

I’ve got a dollar that says this still ain’t the *whole* story.

mmmhmmm, so you are suggesting that you’ve never experienced road rage that was 1 sided in canberra?

I sure as hell have! The P platers and young drivers here are an absolute nightmare – and thats only in the carparks!

I’ve you’ve had multiple experiences of road rage against you, i think it’s fair to assume you would have some level of involvement. Not excusing the rage, but it’s about as likely as the people who claim, i was just having a few drinks and this guy just came up and punched me in the head for no reason! Yeah, it happens, rarely…

shirty_bear said :

I’ve got a dollar that says this still ain’t the *whole* story.

mmmhmmm, so you are suggesting that you’ve never experienced road rage that was 1 sided in canberra?

I sure as hell have! The P platers and young drivers here are an absolute nightmare – and thats only in the carparks!

EvanJames said :

Definitely sounding more and more like a road rage battle. I see crazed road ragers most days, and taking them on is to engage in a war. Since only speeding and drink driving and using phone are offences these days, nothing seems to happen.

Aggressive and unskilled drivers are legion nowadays. Many of them carry an identifing label, a green or red P. But not always.

However, Let me point out that not all P plater are a problem. in fact, many of them are out there doing the right thing. in fact, you dont tend to see them, becase they blend right in, so the only ‘P’ plates you spot, are on the idiots who stand out, this only increases the perception that all p platers are bad.

There is dangers in this perception too, back when i was a p plater, I recall one such incident.

Driving south on the monaro, just after the top of the hill at the start of the 100 zone, past the Issabella dr roundabout, as an ACT P plater, in the ACT, i was doing 100km.

I had do move off the road, as a car overtaking me swerved back into my lane (left) turned out the fella driving was having troble keeping to his lane, as he was trying to use his mobile to photograph me at the time.

I decided to see if he was going anywhere near where i was, and turned out we both pulled into the shops at calwell, where i asked him about the photographs, turns out, he thought the NSW 90km rule was a national rule, and he wanted to report me to the police for doing 100.

Not only was i not in the wrong, but even if i was in the wrong, this still shows how people think its ok to be even more stupid than the guy you think is wrong, just to prove a point.

triffid said :

creative_canberran said :

Fully sick bro, like, you race a car before and now you’re ace top gun on the public roads!

Stupidity is bad enough but arrogance too makes for a dangerous combination. If you think motor-sport experience plays any roll in driving on public roads, you need your head checked.

Hit some debris, hit some oil, skid on loose gravel… boom, you’re gone. And if you’re tailgating someone “safely” while doing that, all the skill in the world ain’t going to stop you cleaning them and whoever happens to be in the next lane up to.

Dead right. Especially since most of that experience is on gravel (rallying). Skid on loose gravel . . . pfft. Might interest you to know that you can pull a car up quicker from 160 km/hr on gravel than you can on tarmac, but only if you know what you’re doing.

You assume (incorrectly) that I don’t factor all that in; that I am sufficiently oblivious to the myriad of factors that make up the environment at that point in time. That I don’t read the road. That these aren’t skills learnt in competition. The fact that you don’t have a sufficient frame of reference or experience to be able to consider driving like that a doddle isn’t my fault. Tells me, though, that you’re probably one of those hubbards who is even more dangerous, a member of the “I know what’s best for you all” club, yet void of any experience to back it up.

Ever done any competition driving yourself? Ever done an advanced driving course? Ever ridden a motorbike? Ever done an advanced motorcycling course? Ever been over 160 km/hr on a gravel road? Ever sat inches from another vehicle while you’re both doing 200 km/hr? What’s that? You haven’t? Then how can you speak with any authority? What’s your ‘vehicle control’ and situational awareness frame of reference? Got it off the innannet?

Have you ever spent time in an infantry unit, son? Ever served in a forward area? Ever put your life in another man’s hands, ask him to put his life in yours?

EvanJames said :

Aggressive and unskilled drivers are legion nowadays. Many of them carry an identifing label, a green or red P. But not always.

Alternate identification is by the hi-vis shirt, which serves at least as much purpose on the roads as on the job site.

Definitely sounding more and more like a road rage battle. I see crazed road ragers most days, and taking them on is to engage in a war. Since only speeding and drink driving and using phone are offences these days, nothing seems to happen.

Aggressive and unskilled drivers are legion nowadays. Many of them carry an identifing label, a green or red P. But not always.

I wonder if the police have thought to check some of the ACTION bus fleet camera footage There is a camera pointing out the front windscreen of every bus. Route 60 from Woden to Tuggers and route 62 from Tuggers to Woden both go past there at around that time. That might help with a rego number.

shirty_bear said :

whoodzzz said :

Apparently the person who caused the accident severly tailgated this young lady then aggresively overtook and slammed the brakes on – causing that result…

I’ve got a dollar that says this still ain’t the *whole* story.

I’ve got 2 dollars. There’s no way the Getz isn’t somehow involved. Cars dont miraculously roll because someone slammed their brakes, especially when they haven’t made contact.

I’m guessing (yes guessing), said Getz travelling along in the right hand lane, fellow 22 yo gets impatient about sitting behind rolling roadblock Getz, Getz does a little brake tap, pisses off the other chick who then returns said brake tap favour, Getz then loses control and rolls. I wonder if we’ll ever find out?

Its like they teach you with motorcycling, doesn’t matter who’s at fault if you’re dead. You have to do everything to avoid being in that situation in the first place. Hopefully both drivers have learnt a lesson from this one (and the one who ran from the scene certainly will, although no doubt she’ll be lucky to even get a light slap on the wrist…).

PBO said :

Did no one follow the small 4WD after the accident or take note of what happened?

Are we really a city of “It does not concern me” types?

This should have been open and shut.

If it had happened in front of me then I’d be a lot more concerned with stopping and helping the occupant of the rolled car than chasing after the other driver.

whoodzzz said :

I’m not going to read the 5 pages of comments but I can say this..

my brother works with the unlucky lady who drove the above car. Apparently the person who caused the accident severly tailgated this young lady then aggresively overtook and slammed the brakes on – causing that result…

*shakes head*

So by chance, was your Brothers work friend not adhering to the ‘Keep LEFT unless OVERTAKING’ rule?

something I see all too often on the parkway, people sitting in the righthand lane on a casual 80km/h in a 100 km/h zone

Postalgeek said :

what_the said :

Postal, this is a silly argument. You’re saying that unless your as good as Dale Earnhardt then were just the same as the rest of you. I think you’re concentrating too much on one comment in this thread.

No. That’s not what I’m saying. Point to where I’ve said that motorsport experience doesn’t improve driving skills.

what_the said :

No one else is saying that motorsports experience allows you to ride arses, we’re saying it clearly gives you more experience in car control in more extreme situations. It would seem pretty silly to argue otherwise.

I’d point to triffid’s comment:

triffid said :

Rangi said :

So someone exhibited bad/dangerous driving by tailgating you, so you got behind them and aggressively tailgated them? Great work champ. Way to keep those roads safe!

Yep . . . and I’ll do it again in a heart beat. Why? Because I do happen to have the skills to do just that safely. It’s the sort of thing that you can’t help but pick up after over 30 years of motorsport competition (some at the national level).

I’m not denying motorsport skills. I’m saying some motorsport enthusiasts need a healthy dose of humility.

what_the said :

What is your motorsport experience by the way?

Not interested in motorsport. I do downhill mountain biking to test my reaction times.

Ok, clarified, I misunderstood your point. And by no one else, I actually meant no one else bar the person you’re referring to, ie Triffid. What I think he’s saying in some abstract way is that if you put up a standard driver vs a motorsport driver in a nose to tail situation, obviously the motorsport trained person will be able to handle the situation better, but yes, best to avoid that situation on public roads.

colourful sydney racing identity12:11 pm 24 Aug 11

Nasty roll on the parkway

I keep get visions of people being chased, harassed and intimidated by a large bun, possibly with salad coming out of it’s mouth.

Right, I just lost a mouthful of coffee. That is one new keyboard you owe me.

whoodzzz said :

Apparently the person who caused the accident severly tailgated this young lady then aggresively overtook and slammed the brakes on – causing that result…

I’ve got a dollar that says this still ain’t the *whole* story.

Nasty roll on the parkway

I keep get visions of people being chased, harassed and intimidated by a large bun, possibly with salad coming out of it’s mouth.

Hmmm, guess drug testing in the force was last week.

But seriously, how hard would it be to find the “perpetrator” when there are cameras along that road?

Did no one follow the small 4WD after the accident or take note of what happened?

Are we really a city of “It does not concern me” types?

This should have been open and shut.

whoodzzz said :

I’m not going to read the 5 pages of comments but I can say this..

my brother works with the unlucky lady who drove the above car. Apparently the person who caused the accident severly tailgated this young lady then aggresively overtook and slammed the brakes on – causing that result…

*shakes head*

This was guessed earlier on…

I’m not going to read the 5 pages of comments but I can say this..

my brother works with the unlucky lady who drove the above car. Apparently the person who caused the accident severly tailgated this young lady then aggresively overtook and slammed the brakes on – causing that result…

*shakes head*

hmmm….just like lots of things in life, some people will be capable of learning car control way better than others. The ability to teach physical skills of applying emergency crash avoidance techniques is giong to vary greatly throughout our population. In other words, an eighty year old grandmother is unlikely to gain the same physical ability as a 25 year old tradie. I am of the thinking that most eighty year old grandmothers have just as much right to be on our roads as most 25 year old tradies. I also believe 00davist and michcon (see #67) are spot on with regard to the possible downside to advanced driver training of young people.

A healthy driving attitude, on the other hand is something that everyone has the ability to posess. Part of having a healthy driving attitude is understanding that there will always be people on our roads that will not have, and never will have regarless of courses that may be pushed upon them, the ability to drive as well as others. I get the feeling that those who are pushing for mandatory advanced driver training courses are failing to acknowledge this basic principle.

Of course, a healthy driver attitude also involves displaying courtesy (indicators please, and turn your fog lights off at night), and a good knowledge and application of the road rules.

Thoroughly Smashed10:34 am 24 Aug 11

Motorsport skills? What the hell?

Driving on the road and driving on a race track are two entirely different things. On the road not everyone’s trying to get to the same place by the same means at the same speed, and not everyone knows what everyone else around them is planning (or trying) to do at a particular point in time or space. That’s why, among other things, road cars have signalling aids like indicators and brake lights.

And most importantly, being a racing driver or other elite athlete doesn’t improve a person’s reaction time. It teaches them to read cues from the other participant(s) in that particular sport or competition, and anticipate what they’re going to do early enough to get an advantage over them. Back in reality skills like this are not very useful.

Holden Caulfield9:51 am 24 Aug 11

MWF said :

So, did the police track down the female, Caucasian in appearance with blonde, bobbed hair and a round face, yet? And, is the female in question really playboy89’s “special friend” ?

Yeah, I’d like to hear more on this story too. The initial release obviously was a bit odd, really.

Henry82 said :

JC said :

So your suggesting that anytime you are being overtaken on a multilane road you should slow down, just in case the car overtaking wants to cut in front of you? Hmmmm, interesting driving theory there.

No i’m saying if a car cuts in front of you and you feel unsafe, you should drop back. Call me silly, but i prefer maximum distance from idiots on the road.

Well clearly you didn’t read what I wrote originally. Here is a reminder ” Bit hard to keep a safe distance if another car gets in that space and does something before you have time to back off to a safe distance” Has happened to me several times where a car has done just that, usually so they can make a left hand turn and decided it is smart to overtake then turn rather than coming in behind and then tuning. Luckily every time I have been able to brake before hitting them.

Lots of factors could be at play here which makes the driver of the rolled car and the driver that didn’t stop equally culpable. eg 1) Never ever go constantly below speed limit on the right lanes. Have the courtesy to drive at the left lane if you are female, Asian or driving a Toyota. 2) Never force yourself into a situation where you have to suddenly brake – SCAN WIDE AND FAR should be driving lesson #1. 3) If you are approaching a traffic light that is yellow – for God’s sake PLEASE continue at your normal speed. 4) If you have to swerve, do a quick check of all mirrors to see which way is best, and THEN swerve toward the direction with the least traffic, on the Parkway that usually mean towards the middle of the road with lots of trees…

So, did the police track down the female, Caucasian in appearance with blonde, bobbed hair and a round face, yet? And, is the female in question really playboy89’s “special friend” ?

what_the said :

[
Postal, this is a silly argument. You’re saying that unless your as good as Dale Earnhardt then were just the same as the rest of you. I think you’re concentrating too much on one comment in this thread. No one else is saying that motorsports experience allows you to ride arses, we’re saying it clearly gives you more experience in car control in more extreme situations. It would seem pretty silly to argue otherwise.

I think postalgeek’s argument boils down to the idea that having extensive motorsport experience doesn’t give you the right to deliberately drive aggressively on the roads and that, despite your experience, things can still go wrong on the roads and you might find out one day that you aren’t infallible.

Sounds like a more logical argument than, ‘I drive sports cars, so I’m invincible on the road.’

JC said :

So your suggesting that anytime you are being overtaken on a multilane road you should slow down, just in case the car overtaking wants to cut in front of you? Hmmmm, interesting driving theory there.

No i’m saying if a car cuts in front of you and you feel unsafe, you should drop back. Call me silly, but i prefer maximum distance from idiots on the road.

triffid said :

Ever done any competition driving yourself? Ever done an advanced driving course? Ever ridden a motorbike? Ever done an advanced motorcycling course? Ever been over 160 km/hr on a gravel road? Ever sat inches from another vehicle while you’re both doing 200 km/hr? What’s that? You haven’t? Then how can you speak with any authority? What’s your ‘vehicle control’ and situational awareness frame of reference? Got it off the innannet?

I went on some dodgem cars once at the Easter Show.

what_the said :

Postal, this is a silly argument. You’re saying that unless your as good as Dale Earnhardt then were just the same as the rest of you. I think you’re concentrating too much on one comment in this thread.

No. That’s not what I’m saying. Point to where I’ve said that motorsport experience doesn’t improve driving skills.

what_the said :

No one else is saying that motorsports experience allows you to ride arses, we’re saying it clearly gives you more experience in car control in more extreme situations. It would seem pretty silly to argue otherwise.

I’d point to triffid’s comment:

triffid said :

Rangi said :

So someone exhibited bad/dangerous driving by tailgating you, so you got behind them and aggressively tailgated them? Great work champ. Way to keep those roads safe!

Yep . . . and I’ll do it again in a heart beat. Why? Because I do happen to have the skills to do just that safely. It’s the sort of thing that you can’t help but pick up after over 30 years of motorsport competition (some at the national level).

I’m not denying motorsport skills. I’m saying some motorsport enthusiasts need a healthy dose of humility.

what_the said :

What is your motorsport experience by the way?

Not interested in motorsport. I do downhill mountain biking to test my reaction times.

Classified said :

Are people really trying to suggest that extensive motorsport experience doesn’t translate to better car control?

Think about what those drivers listed were doing when they died – they were riding the ragged edge trying to squeeze a few hundredths of a second out of their time. And not all of them were even on circuit racing when they died.

Nope, not at all. Of course if you’re a highly skilled motor sport driver, you have a mastery of car control that few other drivers on the roads have. How can you argue against that?

What annoys me though, is anyone who thinks that because they have all this experience, that they’re entitled to treat the open road like a race track – because you know, with all that experience, it’s not really dangerous for them. Bullsh*t. When you’re on the circuit, you’re driving alongside other drivers with similar experience. You can have the confidence to say that the person in front of you isn’t as likely to do anything too stupid. And if they do, you’re in a car that’s designed to be able to race – unlike your average vehicle.

For anyone to claim that because they have all this driving experience on the track, that it’s ok for them to drive with no margin for error on the road, is so stupid as to defy belief. Perhaps its the arrogance that highly competitive people often display. But if you want to tailgate someone, and you’ve got the skills to do it, don’t do it on the roads I’m driving on…no matter how justified you think it is.

Postalgeek said :

Classified said :

Are people really trying to suggest that extensive motorsport experience doesn’t translate to better car control?

Think about what those drivers listed were doing when they died – they were riding the ragged edge trying to squeeze a few hundredths of a second out of their time. And not all of them were even on circuit racing when they died.

To spell it out, the best drivers in the world make fatal mistakes, and no-one here is up to their standard, and that testing safety envelopes has no place on public roads.

So if amateur motorsport punters want to close their reaction gap from 3 seconds to 1 second by tailgating, they can knock themselves out doing it on closed circuits, and should have the humility to realize that better people than them have misjudged, and that the potential consequences of misjudgments on a public road are far greater than writing yourself off in a pine forest.

I’ve done some silly things in a car, but I’m not going to spin some bullshit line that it was okay to do so because I’m infallible.

I’m not suggesting for a second that anyone should drive on the public roads like they are racetracks. I’m simply opining that having extensive motorsports experience makes one a better driver.

I’ve no comment to make about whether this means we should change the gap from 1 second to 3 seconds, because I don’t think there’s a hard and fast rule. There are times when less than 3 seconds is fine, and times when 3 seconds is waaaay to close.

00davist said :

what_the said :

00davist said :

what_the said :

Call me crazy, but it seems I think we’re mostly in agreement here!! Pisspoor attitudes are definitely the biggest contributor, and yep, it’s definitely useless trying to incorporate advanced driver training in your Ls course for instance.

And oodavist, from the literature i’ve found it does tend to indicate what you’ve been saying. But it doesn’t seem that it’s the training that’s the blame, it’s the resultant hero status afterwards. Maybe its just a timing issue? Maybe these people were always bound to crash regardless of training? Who knows, not enough studies bizzarely enough.

I think you have it there mate, I’m not trying to have a shot at training here at all, I’m only sugesting pwople dont do it on there first day with the P’s, wait 6, maybe 8 months, and then it will not only have a better impact, but the experiences in that 6-8 months may help prevent the hero attitude!

Gotcha! Yep, something like a compulsory P’s off course, subsidised by speed camera revenue would be an excellent idea I think. From the standard of drivers we have now, it seems pretty damn clear that the current system isn’t producing a decent standard of driver.

That would be a good way to go, you have to wait for the P-off corse, and when I did it, I found it was a very well done corse, as it engaged everyone, as opposed to comming across like a lecture.

If you were to have something like that, 6 months after your p’s, and threw in some defensive driving, we just might be on the right track.

ACT seems to take an aproach that is too lenient, while over in NSW, they over legislate (Guess what, new rules dont help stop those already breaking the old rules)

We need to change Attitudes, and do so in a way that wont increase the young & mighty sensation, all it takes is a quick pause between starting, and further training, to get up a little respect for the roads.

I think the general theme across this is the need for an attitude shift?

Oh, and mate, you are crazy! (Not really, but you DID tell me to call you crazy)

Oooo, behavioural change, now that’s crazy taking that on!! 😉 Maybe some of the attitude stems from the fact that people see their license as a right rather than a priveledge?

Postalgeek said :

Classified said :

Are people really trying to suggest that extensive motorsport experience doesn’t translate to better car control?

Think about what those drivers listed were doing when they died – they were riding the ragged edge trying to squeeze a few hundredths of a second out of their time. And not all of them were even on circuit racing when they died.

To spell it out, the best drivers in the world make fatal mistakes, and no-one here is up to their standard, and that testing safety envelopes has no place on public roads.

So if amateur motorsport punters want to close their reaction gap from 3 seconds to 1 second by tailgating, they can knock themselves out doing it on closed circuits, and should have the humility to realize that better people than them have misjudged, and that the potential consequences of misjudgments on a public road are far greater than writing yourself off in a pine forest.

Postal, this is a silly argument. You’re saying that unless your as good as Dale Earnhardt then were just the same as the rest of you. I think you’re concentrating too much on one comment in this thread. No one else is saying that motorsports experience allows you to ride arses, we’re saying it clearly gives you more experience in car control in more extreme situations. It would seem pretty silly to argue otherwise.

What is your motorsport experience by the way?

Henry82 said :

Couple of issues there, the getz driver can immediately drop back (when overtaken), not slam on the breaks – but slowly drop back. A 4wd has a terrible breaking distance, meaning if you’re concentrating on the road, you should have more than enough time to break.And the Getz owner has added to the P plate stereotype.

So your suggesting that anytime you are being overtaken on a multilane road you should slow down, just in case the car overtaking wants to cut in front of you? Hmmmm, interesting driving theory there.

Classified said :

Are people really trying to suggest that extensive motorsport experience doesn’t translate to better car control?

Think about what those drivers listed were doing when they died – they were riding the ragged edge trying to squeeze a few hundredths of a second out of their time. And not all of them were even on circuit racing when they died.

To spell it out, the best drivers in the world make fatal mistakes, and no-one here is up to their standard, and that testing safety envelopes has no place on public roads.

So if amateur motorsport punters want to close their reaction gap from 3 seconds to 1 second by tailgating, they can knock themselves out doing it on closed circuits, and should have the humility to realize that better people than them have misjudged, and that the potential consequences of misjudgments on a public road are far greater than writing yourself off in a pine forest.

I’ve done some silly things in a car, but I’m not going to spin some bullshit line that it was okay to do so because I’m infallible.

00davist said :

On a side note, I’m surprised at how the Getz has held, Hyundai dont have the greatest track record for safty, but this one seems to have done OK.

It’s a pity so many people dont consider safety when chosing a car, I shudder when i see a great wall, ssangyong, or worst, Proton Jumbuck (With Death-Bar!)

Why are safety features often forgotten (and yes, I do realise that advanced saftey features can also contribute to the invicibility illusion, I’m still starteld by the list of prioritys often put before safety!)

Getz aren’t too bad on the safety front. Modern cars (any of them) are streets ahead of what we were driving in times gone by anyway.

what_the said :

00davist said :

what_the said :

Call me crazy, but it seems I think we’re mostly in agreement here!! Pisspoor attitudes are definitely the biggest contributor, and yep, it’s definitely useless trying to incorporate advanced driver training in your Ls course for instance.

And oodavist, from the literature i’ve found it does tend to indicate what you’ve been saying. But it doesn’t seem that it’s the training that’s the blame, it’s the resultant hero status afterwards. Maybe its just a timing issue? Maybe these people were always bound to crash regardless of training? Who knows, not enough studies bizzarely enough.

I think you have it there mate, I’m not trying to have a shot at training here at all, I’m only sugesting pwople dont do it on there first day with the P’s, wait 6, maybe 8 months, and then it will not only have a better impact, but the experiences in that 6-8 months may help prevent the hero attitude!

Gotcha! Yep, something like a compulsory P’s off course, subsidised by speed camera revenue would be an excellent idea I think. From the standard of drivers we have now, it seems pretty damn clear that the current system isn’t producing a decent standard of driver.

That would be a good way to go, you have to wait for the P-off corse, and when I did it, I found it was a very well done corse, as it engaged everyone, as opposed to comming across like a lecture.

If you were to have something like that, 6 months after your p’s, and threw in some defensive driving, we just might be on the right track.

ACT seems to take an aproach that is too lenient, while over in NSW, they over legislate (Guess what, new rules dont help stop those already breaking the old rules)

We need to change Attitudes, and do so in a way that wont increase the young & mighty sensation, all it takes is a quick pause between starting, and further training, to get up a little respect for the roads.

I think the general theme across this is the need for an attitude shift?

Oh, and mate, you are crazy! (Not really, but you DID tell me to call you crazy)

00davist said :

what_the said :

Call me crazy, but it seems I think we’re mostly in agreement here!! Pisspoor attitudes are definitely the biggest contributor, and yep, it’s definitely useless trying to incorporate advanced driver training in your Ls course for instance.

And oodavist, from the literature i’ve found it does tend to indicate what you’ve been saying. But it doesn’t seem that it’s the training that’s the blame, it’s the resultant hero status afterwards. Maybe its just a timing issue? Maybe these people were always bound to crash regardless of training? Who knows, not enough studies bizzarely enough.

I think you have it there mate, I’m not trying to have a shot at training here at all, I’m only sugesting pwople dont do it on there first day with the P’s, wait 6, maybe 8 months, and then it will not only have a better impact, but the experiences in that 6-8 months may help prevent the hero attitude!

Gotcha! Yep, something like a compulsory P’s off course, subsidised by speed camera revenue would be an excellent idea I think. From the standard of drivers we have now, it seems pretty damn clear that the current system isn’t producing a decent standard of driver.

Are people really trying to suggest that extensive motorsport experience doesn’t translate to better car control?

Think about what those drivers listed were doing when they died – they were riding the ragged edge trying to squeeze a few hundredths of a second out of their time. And not all of them were even on circuit racing when they died.

On a side note, I’m surprised at how the Getz has held, Hyundai dont have the greatest track record for safty, but this one seems to have done OK.

It’s a pity so many people dont consider safety when chosing a car, I shudder when i see a great wall, ssangyong, or worst, Proton Jumbuck (With Death-Bar!)

Why are safety features often forgotten (and yes, I do realise that advanced saftey features can also contribute to the invicibility illusion, I’m still starteld by the list of prioritys often put before safety!)

what_the said :

Call me crazy, but it seems I think we’re mostly in agreement here!! Pisspoor attitudes are definitely the biggest contributor, and yep, it’s definitely useless trying to incorporate advanced driver training in your Ls course for instance.

And oodavist, from the literature i’ve found it does tend to indicate what you’ve been saying. But it doesn’t seem that it’s the training that’s the blame, it’s the resultant hero status afterwards. Maybe its just a timing issue? Maybe these people were always bound to crash regardless of training? Who knows, not enough studies bizzarely enough.

I think you have it there mate, I’m not trying to have a shot at training here at all, I’m only sugesting pwople dont do it on there first day with the P’s, wait 6, maybe 8 months, and then it will not only have a better impact, but the experiences in that 6-8 months may help prevent the hero attitude!

p1 said :

00davist said :

I am discribing a pattern i have observed across a number of youg people who have attanded such courses, this has been observed over time, while involved with educating said young people about the dangers involved with driving.

You are discribing how it worked for you.

Yes, but you are seeing it from the way it appears to you? Young guy comes in. Does course. Leaves amped up and clearly more confidant (as 20ish males tend to be). You have no idea how they were driving Friday night the week before, and you have no idea how they will be driving a week later.

Essentially your argument is that there is no substitute for gaining real life driving experience when it comes to being a good, well rounded driver. I agree wholeheartedly.

That is not my entire argument, I am aslo sugesting that you should be having some of that experience before you complete your training.

Also, I do read the papers, and the trend i have noticed tends to end up there! so i do get an idea for how their habits continue!

Call me crazy, but it seems I think we’re mostly in agreement here!! Pisspoor attitudes are definitely the biggest contributor, and yep, it’s definitely useless trying to incorporate advanced driver training in your Ls course for instance.

And oodavist, from the literature i’ve found it does tend to indicate what you’ve been saying. But it doesn’t seem that it’s the training that’s the blame, it’s the resultant hero status afterwards. Maybe its just a timing issue? Maybe these people were always bound to crash regardless of training? Who knows, not enough studies bizzarely enough.

00davist said :

I am discribing a pattern i have observed across a number of youg people who have attanded such courses, this has been observed over time, while involved with educating said young people about the dangers involved with driving.

You are discribing how it worked for you.

Yes, but you are seeing it from the way it appears to you? Young guy comes in. Does course. Leaves amped up and clearly more confidant (as 20ish males tend to be). You have no idea how they were driving Friday night the week before, and you have no idea how they will be driving a week later.

Essentially your argument is that there is no substitute for gaining real life driving experience when it comes to being a good, well rounded driver. I agree wholeheartedly.

Holden Caulfield said :

00davist said :

As mentioned above, I have been extensivly involved in road saftey education, specifically family impact, and i have seen how photo’s, video’s and stories impact people, and the fact is, people are already alot more over exposed than you are expecting.

I fully support educating young people as to the risks, but seing a video does not provide the experience necisary to provide perspective to training.

While the training being discussed here, such as emergency breaking, may not seem like F1 race training, you must remember, you say that with the prespective that only experience can offer, if you have not really done much driving, how can you weigh up accuratly how basic or advanced the training you have had is.

Yeah, I can better see where you’re coming from here.

I would certainly advocate that driver training only form part of a broader approach to road safety, and not a whole approach.

Maybe you’re right that I can see the benefits of such training because I have been driving for longer, but I still can’t see how giving someone better exposure to practical skills should be ignored until they have more experience. Yes, perhaps a staged training process is required. All I would ask is:

When is enough experience? When is too soon? When is too late?

Like I said, I reckon more effort needs to go into improving driver attitudes; regardless of age.

I fully agree, Poor Driver attitude is the bigest killer on our roads.

The fact is, there are alot, and i mean allot of young people who walk away from even basic defensive driver corses with the thought “Right, Now I’m good to go”

You and I can take such a corse and see it as valuable training that will assist in an emergency situation, but we will also be able to realise there are situations, and pleanty of them, that fall outside the training course.

We know the limits of the course, becase we have experience, and understanding of how easy it is to end up in an emergency situation, and we also understand that no one rule applies to all emergencies.

Those who walk out having barely driven cannot draw the lines and relise the limits of the training, so they can easilly assume the training they have taken will be more far reaching than it really is.

It’s hard to say when is right, and that vary’s from driver to driver, I would say after 6 to 8 months, many people have at least some experience with emergency situations, and will be able to put the corse in perspective.

Also, the training itself can be better apriciated if you understand the situations it would be applicable to before hand.

The Idea, rahter than doing all training right on the first day, you break it up, there is training and testing involved with getting your P’s, take a while to let that sink in, and to get used to the roads, then take some more training, then maybe some more a little further down the track.

Holden Caulfield said :

00davist said :

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

I can sight accidents involving young people who have been over-trained and hit the roads with a full sense of immortality, look into the young fellow who died on range rd in mittagong a few years back, just downhill from the Webb st bend, His father was a damn defensive driving instructor.

If you assume you can handle anything, you will often come undone, if you take these courses after realising through experience how easy it is to come apart, you will realise they are simply helpfull lessons to make driving safer, and will not make you incapable of having an accident.

Way to miss the point about general driving attitude. Thankfully p1 and what_the understood.

Where did I ever claim that driver training is capable of making anybody think they can “handle anything”?

As I said, if anyone believes that or has “a full sense of immortality”, then I would question their entire attitude towards driving.

I’ve never left a defensive/advanced driver training course thinking I am invincible.

Some people might, I don’t deny that. But I would suggest any such person would come to that over-inflated opinion of their ability whether they did the course or not.

If anything, the courses I have attended have made me more aware of what can go wrong and to then drive with more caution, not less.

The difference here mate?

I am discribing a pattern i have observed across a number of youg people who have attanded such courses, this has been observed over time, while involved with educating said young people about the dangers involved with driving.

You are discribing how it worked for you.

Also, take note, I am not suggesting people do not take this training, simply that they hold off untill they have a little experience behind them, to help create perspective, and alow them to understand that no one training scenario can prepare you for every experience you will face on the roads.

Holden Caulfield3:18 pm 23 Aug 11

00davist said :

As mentioned above, I have been extensivly involved in road saftey education, specifically family impact, and i have seen how photo’s, video’s and stories impact people, and the fact is, people are already alot more over exposed than you are expecting.

I fully support educating young people as to the risks, but seing a video does not provide the experience necisary to provide perspective to training.

While the training being discussed here, such as emergency breaking, may not seem like F1 race training, you must remember, you say that with the prespective that only experience can offer, if you have not really done much driving, how can you weigh up accuratly how basic or advanced the training you have had is.

Yeah, I can better see where you’re coming from here.

I would certainly advocate that driver training only form part of a broader approach to road safety, and not a whole approach.

Maybe you’re right that I can see the benefits of such training because I have been driving for longer, but I still can’t see how giving someone better exposure to practical skills should be ignored until they have more experience. Yes, perhaps a staged training process is required. All I would ask is:

When is enough experience? When is too soon? When is too late?

Like I said, I reckon more effort needs to go into improving driver attitudes; regardless of age.

creative_canberran3:10 pm 23 Aug 11

triffid said :

Indeed! And all taken from us in . . . wait for it . . . competition and not on a public road. Don’t think many of them were only doing 60 km/hr at the time either.

lol, you’re screwing over your own argument.

Exactly, in a competition, with all traffic moving in the same direction, on a predetermined course with detailed safety notes and while concentrating on completing that set course with drivers of similar skill undertaking similar tasks. A relatively controlled environment… and yet they still got creamed.

triffid said :

Postalgeek said :

Ayrton Senna

Peter Brock

Mark Lovell

Dale Earnhardt

All of them far more accomplished than you at driving, triffid. And the list goes on…

Indeed! And all taken from us in . . . wait for it . . . competition and not on a public road. Don’t think many of them were only doing 60 km/hr at the time either.

I’m sorry, what a retard I am. Obviously a controlled circuit is far more unpredictable than a public road. I mean, all those intersections make the whole public road thing so much safer.

Holden Caulfield3:07 pm 23 Aug 11

00davist said :

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

I can sight accidents involving young people who have been over-trained and hit the roads with a full sense of immortality, look into the young fellow who died on range rd in mittagong a few years back, just downhill from the Webb st bend, His father was a damn defensive driving instructor.

If you assume you can handle anything, you will often come undone, if you take these courses after realising through experience how easy it is to come apart, you will realise they are simply helpfull lessons to make driving safer, and will not make you incapable of having an accident.

Way to miss the point about general driving attitude. Thankfully p1 and what_the understood.

Where did I ever claim that driver training is capable of making anybody think they can “handle anything”?

As I said, if anyone believes that or has “a full sense of immortality”, then I would question their entire attitude towards driving.

I’ve never left a defensive/advanced driver training course thinking I am invincible.

Some people might, I don’t deny that. But I would suggest any such person would come to that over-inflated opinion of their ability whether they did the course or not.

If anything, the courses I have attended have made me more aware of what can go wrong and to then drive with more caution, not less.

troll-sniffer3:03 pm 23 Aug 11

triffid said :

creative_canberran said :

Might interest you to know that you can pull a car up quicker from 160 km/hr on gravel than you can on tarmac, but only if you know what you’re doing.

?

To which anyone with even a tenuous grasp of physics would quite rightly say loudly and clearly: “bollocks”. There may be few specialised hard packed smooth dirt surfaces that provide a greater immobile contact surface than a bitumen road but I can’t think of any in this region.

One of course must invite you to back up such a controversial claim with some form of evidence, I for one await in anticipation.

what_the said :

p1 said :

00davist said :

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

While I agree that there is a risk involved, I think you are taking the completely wrong approach, The possiblity of young people being “over confidant” due to their excess training isn’t a reason not to do the training, it is a reason for the training to include as much education as possible aimed at removing this overconfidence. Some emergency braking where they can’t stop in time, some videos of the results of crashes.

When I was 17 I was pretty damn over confidant on the roads, and extra training could not possibly have made that any worse.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up.

The question is, had this particular woman had advanced driver training, I think there’s no question that her chances of rolling a car on a dead straight road would have decreased.

You could look at it that way, but can you provide any evidence that this p plater had not done such a course, and had it in htier head that they were therfore able to handle a stuation they did not have the experience to understand.

How do you know she had not done said corse, and decided therefore, she knew enough to get closer?

Postalgeek said :

Ayrton Senna

Peter Brock

Mark Lovell

Dale Earnhardt

All of them far more accomplished than you at driving, triffid. And the list goes on…

Indeed! And all taken from us in . . . wait for it . . . competition and not on a public road. Don’t think many of them were only doing 60 km/hr at the time either.

A bit of perspective wouldn’t hurt. And, if you don’t have sufficient confidence or ability behind the wheel to not feel the need to overreact with a tsk tsk and a know-it-all waving of your index finger, that’s not any of my fault. Where’s your experiential frame of reference?

Some of you folks need to go and read some Keith Code and, after that, figure out how much of your ‘budget’ to get from A to B is spent just operating the vehicle.

what_the said :

00davist said :

Holden Caulfield said :

In response to some of the defensive driver training comments that have been made I think a few people are getting mixed up as to what such courses actually entail.

The ones I have done have been about emergency braking, swerving and understanding the abilities and limitations of ABS/ESP systems. Even things most people would consider more mundane, such as seating position, steering wheel grip and so on. Don’t you think it is better to learn about this stuff sooner, rather than later? Hopefully doing so at a younger age can help prevent the onset of bad habits.

To me, it doesn’t matter what age you are, if you can’t gain any practical application or development from a reputable driver training course then I’d say your attitude is completely wrong.

A defensive driver training course is not about making you drive faster or turning you into the next Daniel Ricciardo. It’s about giving you the best opportunity to experience emergency situations in a controlled environment, that is as safe as can be expected. This is so that if you do ever find yourself in a nasty situation on the road you may be able to draw on the lessons you have learned/experienced.

Having said that, with the right attitude, some lessons and theories you learn for the track can also be very helpful on the road.

But, only if you have the right attitude.

And that needs to be right well before any driving course is taken, or at the very least, raised and discussed during said course.

Besides, if everyone had a better attitude on the road in the first place, then we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion at all.

I understand having the right attitude and keeping it can be a hard thing to do. I’m certainly not perfect by any means and I need to give myself a kick up the arse every now and then to readjust my approach to driving. Whenever I do, it’s funny how I find myself refer back to the things I have been taught by professional instructors and not what I read on the back of a Weeties packet or the internet.

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

I can sight accidents involving young people who have been over-trained and hit the roads with a full sense of immortality, look into the young fellow who died on range rd in mittagong a few years back, just downhill from the Webb st bend, His father was a damn defensive driving instructor.

If you assume you can handle anything, you will often come undone, if you take these courses after realising through experience how easy it is to come apart, you will realise they are simply helpfull lessons to make driving safer, and will not make you incapable of having an accident.

I have a feeling you haven’t actually done one of these driver training courses. If you were talking about the CAMS OLT license course I could understand your point because it teaches you to drive fast, but doing the emergency braking courses etc where they simulate emergency situations and break (or is that brake 😉 ) these situations to core components of how to handle the car etc, there’s no way that educating people can make things worse. I would suggest your anecdotal evidence would not weigh up against the benefits of advanced driver training.

Mate, what is your involvment in road saftey education for young drivers, becase my comments come from direct observation of the effects of condensed training on over-confidence!

This is not specific to the corse content, so the fact you think the material taught is to basic to contribute is irrelevent, the overall increase in risk taking is based on the fact the person assumes the corse is fully real-life applicable, and cannot aply situational context, therefore it increases there over-confidence.

p1 said :

00davist said :

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

While I agree that there is a risk involved, I think you are taking the completely wrong approach, The possiblity of young people being “over confidant” due to their excess training isn’t a reason not to do the training, it is a reason for the training to include as much education as possible aimed at removing this overconfidence. Some emergency braking where they can’t stop in time, some videos of the results of crashes.

When I was 17 I was pretty damn over confidant on the roads, and extra training could not possibly have made that any worse.

As mentioned above, I have been extensivly involved in road saftey education, specifically family impact, and i have seen how photo’s, video’s and stories impact people, and the fact is, people are already alot more over exposed than you are expecting.

I fully support educating young people as to the risks, but seing a video does not provide the experience necisary to provide perspective to training.

While the training being discussed here, such as emergency breaking, may not seem like F1 race training, you must remember, you say that with the prespective that only experience can offer, if you have not really done much driving, how can you weigh up accuratly how basic or advanced the training you have had is.

creative_canberran2:56 pm 23 Aug 11

triffid said :

Dead right. Especially since most of that experience is on gravel (rallying). Skid on loose gravel . . . pfft. Might interest you to know that you can pull a car up quicker from 160 km/hr on gravel than you can on tarmac, but only if you know what you’re doing.

Big difference between driving on gravel and suddenly hitting it doing 100+ on a tarmac road without warning.

creative_canberran2:55 pm 23 Aug 11

what_the said :

Really? You can’t make the link on this one? You dont think that it’s slightly easier to handle a car at 100km/h if you know how to handle it at 200km/h?

An airline pilot with a commercial licence knows how to fly a plane.

That doesn’t mean they know how to deal with every contingency. That’s why in simulators they face hundreds of scenarios. And despite the rigorous training, pilots have still faced situations they don’t know how to deal with, from the BA flight that hit volcanic ash to the Air Peru flight with blocked pitot tubes.

creative_canberran said :

Fully sick bro, like, you race a car before and now you’re ace top gun on the public roads!

Stupidity is bad enough but arrogance too makes for a dangerous combination. If you think motor-sport experience plays any roll in driving on public roads, you need your head checked.

Hit some debris, hit some oil, skid on loose gravel… boom, you’re gone. And if you’re tailgating someone “safely” while doing that, all the skill in the world ain’t going to stop you cleaning them and whoever happens to be in the next lane up to.

Dead right. Especially since most of that experience is on gravel (rallying). Skid on loose gravel . . . pfft. Might interest you to know that you can pull a car up quicker from 160 km/hr on gravel than you can on tarmac, but only if you know what you’re doing.

You assume (incorrectly) that I don’t factor all that in; that I am sufficiently oblivious to the myriad of factors that make up the environment at that point in time. That I don’t read the road. That these aren’t skills learnt in competition. The fact that you don’t have a sufficient frame of reference or experience to be able to consider driving like that a doddle isn’t my fault. Tells me, though, that you’re probably one of those hubbards who is even more dangerous, a member of the “I know what’s best for you all” club, yet void of any experience to back it up.

Ever done any competition driving yourself? Ever done an advanced driving course? Ever ridden a motorbike? Ever done an advanced motorcycling course? Ever been over 160 km/hr on a gravel road? Ever sat inches from another vehicle while you’re both doing 200 km/hr? What’s that? You haven’t? Then how can you speak with any authority? What’s your ‘vehicle control’ and situational awareness frame of reference? Got it off the innannet?

p1 said :

00davist said :

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

While I agree that there is a risk involved, I think you are taking the completely wrong approach, The possiblity of young people being “over confidant” due to their excess training isn’t a reason not to do the training, it is a reason for the training to include as much education as possible aimed at removing this overconfidence. Some emergency braking where they can’t stop in time, some videos of the results of crashes.

When I was 17 I was pretty damn over confidant on the roads, and extra training could not possibly have made that any worse.

Yep, that pretty much sums it up.

The question is, had this particular woman had advanced driver training, I think there’s no question that her chances of rolling a car on a dead straight road would have decreased.

Ayrton Senna

Peter Brock

Mark Lovell

Dale Earnhardt

All of them far more accomplished than you at driving, triffid. And the list goes on…

creative_canberran said :

If you think motor-sport experience plays any roll in driving on public roads, you need your head checked.
.

Really? You can’t make the link on this one? You dont think that it’s slightly easier to handle a car at 100km/h if you know how to handle it at 200km/h?

Having motorsport experience will not make you better in regards to road rule application, but it will certainly improve your skills at handling a motor vehicle. Or do you really think Skaifey is probably a pretty crap driver on the roads?

00davist said :

Holden Caulfield said :

In response to some of the defensive driver training comments that have been made I think a few people are getting mixed up as to what such courses actually entail.

The ones I have done have been about emergency braking, swerving and understanding the abilities and limitations of ABS/ESP systems. Even things most people would consider more mundane, such as seating position, steering wheel grip and so on. Don’t you think it is better to learn about this stuff sooner, rather than later? Hopefully doing so at a younger age can help prevent the onset of bad habits.

To me, it doesn’t matter what age you are, if you can’t gain any practical application or development from a reputable driver training course then I’d say your attitude is completely wrong.

A defensive driver training course is not about making you drive faster or turning you into the next Daniel Ricciardo. It’s about giving you the best opportunity to experience emergency situations in a controlled environment, that is as safe as can be expected. This is so that if you do ever find yourself in a nasty situation on the road you may be able to draw on the lessons you have learned/experienced.

Having said that, with the right attitude, some lessons and theories you learn for the track can also be very helpful on the road.

But, only if you have the right attitude.

And that needs to be right well before any driving course is taken, or at the very least, raised and discussed during said course.

Besides, if everyone had a better attitude on the road in the first place, then we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion at all.

I understand having the right attitude and keeping it can be a hard thing to do. I’m certainly not perfect by any means and I need to give myself a kick up the arse every now and then to readjust my approach to driving. Whenever I do, it’s funny how I find myself refer back to the things I have been taught by professional instructors and not what I read on the back of a Weeties packet or the internet.

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

I can sight accidents involving young people who have been over-trained and hit the roads with a full sense of immortality, look into the young fellow who died on range rd in mittagong a few years back, just downhill from the Webb st bend, His father was a damn defensive driving instructor.

If you assume you can handle anything, you will often come undone, if you take these courses after realising through experience how easy it is to come apart, you will realise they are simply helpfull lessons to make driving safer, and will not make you incapable of having an accident.

I have a feeling you haven’t actually done one of these driver training courses. If you were talking about the CAMS OLT license course I could understand your point because it teaches you to drive fast, but doing the emergency braking courses etc where they simulate emergency situations and break (or is that brake 😉 ) these situations to core components of how to handle the car etc, there’s no way that educating people can make things worse. I would suggest your anecdotal evidence would not weigh up against the benefits of advanced driver training.

00davist said :

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

While I agree that there is a risk involved, I think you are taking the completely wrong approach, The possiblity of young people being “over confidant” due to their excess training isn’t a reason not to do the training, it is a reason for the training to include as much education as possible aimed at removing this overconfidence. Some emergency braking where they can’t stop in time, some videos of the results of crashes.

When I was 17 I was pretty damn over confidant on the roads, and extra training could not possibly have made that any worse.

creative_canberran2:00 pm 23 Aug 11

triffid said :

Yep . . . and I’ll do it again in a heart beat. Why? Because I do happen to have the skills to do just that safely. It’s the sort of thing that you can’t help but pick up after over 30 years of motorsport competition (some at the national level).

Fully sick bro, like, you race a car before and now you’re ace top gun on the public roads!

Stupidity is bad enough but arrogance too makes for a dangerous combination. If you think motor-sport experience plays any roll in driving on public roads, you need your head checked.

Hit some debris, hit some oil, skid on loose gravel… boom, you’re gone. And if you’re tailgating someone “safely” while doing that, all the skill in the world ain’t going to stop you cleaning them and whoever happens to be in the next lane up to.

triffid said :

Rangi said :

So someone exhibited bad/dangerous driving by tailgating you, so you got behind them and aggressively tailgated them? Great work champ. Way to keep those roads safe!

Yep . . . and I’ll do it again in a heart beat. Why? Because I do happen to have the skills to do just that safely. It’s the sort of thing that you can’t help but pick up after over 30 years of motorsport competition (some at the national level).

My point remains: the driver in question didn’t even notice that I was there. They were that oblivious to my presence in their mirrors that they didn’t get a hint, or glean any insight, or imagine for a micro second that they may have not so long ago been endangering my safety by doing the exact same thing. I sat there for a good 10 seconds and not once did I see them do anything other than pretend to operate a vehicle like it was on an X Box, while also appearing to dance the macarena (as they had been doing while being so close to me before as to be rendered near invisible under my rear bumper).

Resultantly, I concluded them brain dead, hopped out of the throttle, took my left foot off from covering the brake (or is that ‘break’: groan) and backed way, way away (well over a three seconds gap).

I make no apologies. I typically drive like Hector the Safety Cat wearing a beige cardigan. But, you put me at risk with your behaviour and I’ll immediately switch into ‘sport’ mode. Keep it up and I will do whatever I need to, at the lowest threshold possible, to ensure my safety and that of my occupants. Your showing no regard for me will have me being completely diffident to you. Pretty simple.

I understand your point here mate, but there is an inherrant inpredictablitity to some of the idiots on our roads that you may not be factoring in, especially the type to initially tailgate you.

My preference is to make the situation safer, by lessening the possible colision damage, IE, if you want to tailgate, fine, but I’m going to drop 1/2 my speed, so if somthing jumps out in front of me, you won’t hit me so fast.

Sometimes, even slower than 1/2 works too, especially for the real clingy ones, I find a good mix on the stereo helps, Just sit back, relax, and enjoy the safty of making that XXXXX do 25k!

Holden Caulfield said :

In response to some of the defensive driver training comments that have been made I think a few people are getting mixed up as to what such courses actually entail.

The ones I have done have been about emergency braking, swerving and understanding the abilities and limitations of ABS/ESP systems. Even things most people would consider more mundane, such as seating position, steering wheel grip and so on. Don’t you think it is better to learn about this stuff sooner, rather than later? Hopefully doing so at a younger age can help prevent the onset of bad habits.

To me, it doesn’t matter what age you are, if you can’t gain any practical application or development from a reputable driver training course then I’d say your attitude is completely wrong.

A defensive driver training course is not about making you drive faster or turning you into the next Daniel Ricciardo. It’s about giving you the best opportunity to experience emergency situations in a controlled environment, that is as safe as can be expected. This is so that if you do ever find yourself in a nasty situation on the road you may be able to draw on the lessons you have learned/experienced.

Having said that, with the right attitude, some lessons and theories you learn for the track can also be very helpful on the road.

But, only if you have the right attitude.

And that needs to be right well before any driving course is taken, or at the very least, raised and discussed during said course.

Besides, if everyone had a better attitude on the road in the first place, then we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion at all.

I understand having the right attitude and keeping it can be a hard thing to do. I’m certainly not perfect by any means and I need to give myself a kick up the arse every now and then to readjust my approach to driving. Whenever I do, it’s funny how I find myself refer back to the things I have been taught by professional instructors and not what I read on the back of a Weeties packet or the internet.

No, I dont think it is better to learn that stuff early, Young drivers already have an issue relating to the fact they feel invincible on the road, if they take on further education as such, before they have a practical understanding of the danger of driving, they often start of with the “I have learnt x, so it cant happen to me” attitude.

I can sight accidents involving young people who have been over-trained and hit the roads with a full sense of immortality, look into the young fellow who died on range rd in mittagong a few years back, just downhill from the Webb st bend, His father was a damn defensive driving instructor.

If you assume you can handle anything, you will often come undone, if you take these courses after realising through experience how easy it is to come apart, you will realise they are simply helpfull lessons to make driving safer, and will not make you incapable of having an accident.

johnboy said :

*sigh*

let’s try “emergency braking” then?

C’mon, you can’t complain when you let everyone else do it…

Rangi said :

So someone exhibited bad/dangerous driving by tailgating you, so you got behind them and aggressively tailgated them? Great work champ. Way to keep those roads safe!

Yep . . . and I’ll do it again in a heart beat. Why? Because I do happen to have the skills to do just that safely. It’s the sort of thing that you can’t help but pick up after over 30 years of motorsport competition (some at the national level).

My point remains: the driver in question didn’t even notice that I was there. They were that oblivious to my presence in their mirrors that they didn’t get a hint, or glean any insight, or imagine for a micro second that they may have not so long ago been endangering my safety by doing the exact same thing. I sat there for a good 10 seconds and not once did I see them do anything other than pretend to operate a vehicle like it was on an X Box, while also appearing to dance the macarena (as they had been doing while being so close to me before as to be rendered near invisible under my rear bumper). Resultantly, I concluded them brain dead, hopped out of the throttle, took my left foot off from covering the brake (or is that ‘break’: groan) and backed way, way away (well over a three seconds gap).

I make no apologies. I typically drive like Hector the Safety Cat wearing a beige cardigan. But, you put me at risk with your behaviour and I’ll immediately switch into ‘sport’ mode. Keep it up and I will do whatever I need to, at the lowest threshold possible, to ensure my safety and that of my occupants. Your showing no regard for me will have me being completely diffident to you. Pretty simple.

Holden Caulfield12:31 pm 23 Aug 11

In response to some of the defensive driver training comments that have been made I think a few people are getting mixed up as to what such courses actually entail.

The ones I have done have been about emergency braking, swerving and understanding the abilities and limitations of ABS/ESP systems. Even things most people would consider more mundane, such as seating position, steering wheel grip and so on. Don’t you think it is better to learn about this stuff sooner, rather than later? Hopefully doing so at a younger age can help prevent the onset of bad habits.

To me, it doesn’t matter what age you are, if you can’t gain any practical application or development from a reputable driver training course then I’d say your attitude is completely wrong.

A defensive driver training course is not about making you drive faster or turning you into the next Daniel Ricciardo. It’s about giving you the best opportunity to experience emergency situations in a controlled environment, that is as safe as can be expected. This is so that if you do ever find yourself in a nasty situation on the road you may be able to draw on the lessons you have learned/experienced.

Having said that, with the right attitude, some lessons and theories you learn for the track can also be very helpful on the road.

But, only if you have the right attitude.

And that needs to be right well before any driving course is taken, or at the very least, raised and discussed during said course.

Besides, if everyone had a better attitude on the road in the first place, then we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion at all.

I understand having the right attitude and keeping it can be a hard thing to do. I’m certainly not perfect by any means and I need to give myself a kick up the arse every now and then to readjust my approach to driving. Whenever I do, it’s funny how I find myself refer back to the things I have been taught by professional instructors and not what I read on the back of a Weeties packet or the internet.

Holden Caulfield12:05 pm 23 Aug 11

frontrow said :

Does anybody else find it bizarre to have such a detailed description of the driver when they weren’t even sure what colour the car was.

Not really. When the girls at work tell me they saw an exciting car I reply with, “What was it?” and the reply usually follows, “I’m not sure, but it was red, I think. No maybe it was orange.”

Anna Key said :

But it shows that two young ladies can cause far greater traffic disruption than an organised convoy.

Girl power!

Haha, first class!

michcon said :

I’m sceptical of actual value offered by the advanced driver training in producing safer drivers. As a younger bloke with mates who undertook the course I would have to say that it only increased their appetite for risk.

It might be unpopular, but I would suggest that the laws are way too soft and don’t reflect the potentially deadly consequences for making a poor decision on the roads.

Honestly if the Getz had observed a 3 second clearance in front and had been alert to the driver in front breaking and had slowed with the traffic do we honestly think the situation would have resulted in the car bouncing down the road? – swerving or overtaking isn’t an appropriate reaction to slowing traffic – how could the Getz not know the driver in front didn’t slow for a kangaroo that the Getz could have then cleaned up?

I think people need to reflect more often that every time they get in the car they could end up killing themselves or someone else. Serious deterrents should be in place. Driving should be a citizen’s privilege, not a right and never something to be abused.

Maybe I’m just getting old now (28) but I hold my breath these days whenever I see people speeding and dodging in and out of traffic – it’s absolutely terrifying.

I agree with everything except for the driver training – it’s a bit like say sex education will cause youngins to go out and start rooting everything that moves. Fact is, they were probably going to go out rooting anyway, but at least they’re aware of the risks and are more likely to wear a condom. Had said Getz driver actually taken the course, emergency braking at 100m should be programed into her head without actual thinking required, only trained reflex (a bit hopeful I know, but you get the point).

johnboy said :

And if you’re not doing a mirror check after emergency breaking it’s time to return the licence.

After is too late – they’ve either hit you or they haven’t.

Does anybody else find it bizarre to have such a detailed description of the driver when they weren’t even sure what colour the car was.

triffid said :

I’ll bet (note the P plate) that it was a case of tailgating being tested with a brake check. I can recall a Getz — just like his one — checking the oil level in my rear diff the weekend before last. The driver remained oblivious to my left foot brake taps (just sufficient to get the brake lights lit up) and remained so even when I returned the favour (instead inspecting the rear windscreen wiper rubber) in spades (any closer and I’d have been bump drafting) later on down the road. And. I. Mean. Oblivious.

Report to teacher for a gold star all who suggest that this could have been prevented with proper driver training. Bring on the emergency stop from 240 km/hr in the wet I say.

So someone exhibited bad/dangerous driving by tailgating you, so you got behind them and aggressively tailgated them? Great work champ. Way to keep those roads safe!

It’s “BRAKES”, not “breaks”! That really gets up my goat.

Its P platers and drivers like this that make motorcyclists look good.

‘stir stir’ 🙂

JC said :

Everyone seems to be hammering the Getz driver for not keeping a safe distance. However has anyone thought that maybe the other car overtook the getz got in front of her and then slammed the brakes on? Bit hard to keep a sage distance if another car gets in that space and does something before you have time to back off to a safe distance. Happens all the time on our wonderful roads.

Couple of issues there, the getz driver can immediately drop back (when overtaken), not slam on the breaks – but slowly drop back. A 4wd has a terrible breaking distance, meaning if you’re concentrating on the road, you should have more than enough time to break.And the Getz owner has added to the P plate stereotype.

*sigh*

let’s try “emergency braking” then?

troll-sniffer9:47 am 23 Aug 11

johnboy said :

Diggety said :

“Nasty roll on the parkway caused by jerk. “

Which is the jerk johnboy? The one with no courtesy, or the one who can’t drive? Perhaps both?

Easy, the one who left the scene.

And if you’re not doing a mirror check after emergency breaking it’s time to return the licence.

So, Johnboy, this emergency breaking, is it a way to scatter one’s self around the scene of an accident, thereby avoiding more obvious trauma?

Epic stack on Pialligo Ave today, between Oaks Estate Rd and Fairbairn. I imagine the traffic is still banked up through Qbn. it was a rear-ender, a brown Volvo and it looked like it happened at high speed. When I crawled past (it took 45 minutes to get from the BP near Magnet Mart in Qbn, to the spot) the victim car was long-gone, but the volvo was still in the middle of the rd, being guarded by a flashing police car.

I know exactly what happened, sadly, as I’ve seen it before. The traffic starts to block up from the Fairbairn traffic lights, up that hill. Cars coming along observing the 100 km/hr limit there suddenly encounter the stopped line of cars and whallop. I haven’t seen such a high-speed one before though. The Volvo’s engine guts were strewn all over the road. I’m assuming there was some bad injuries or they’d have pushed the debris off the road.

Diggety said :

“Nasty roll on the parkway caused by jerk. “

Which is the jerk johnboy? The one with no courtesy, or the one who can’t drive? Perhaps both?

Easy, the one who left the scene.

And if you’re not doing a mirror check after emergency breaking it’s time to return the licence.

crackerpants9:30 am 23 Aug 11

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

Submitted by “playboy89″…let me guess, born in 1989, 22 years old, young enough to like playboy stickers etc…

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

The username says it all!

“Nasty roll on the parkway caused by jerk. “

Which is the jerk johnboy? The one with no courtesy, or the one who can’t drive? Perhaps both?

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

Sooo.. What type of car do you drive? Your post smacks of guilt.

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

Hmm, wonder who this is….

“The unidentified driver is described as female, Caucasian in appearance with blonde, bobbed hair, and a round face. She is approximately 22 years of age and of normal build.”

I’ll add my 2 cents…
I would agree with all who think that Getz was tailgating. As to why the other driver did not stop?
Well, I have seen plenty of times, when emergency vehicle with the lights and sirens on is driving right behind some car, driver of a car is failing to see and hear lights/sirens.And they have room to move.
50 per cent of Canberra drivers don’t use their rear view mirrors (well, maybe, only to check on their make-up when they stop at traffic lights) and young drivers especially-have music playing so loud, that you can hear it from 500 meters away.That is, perhaps, why the other driver did not see or hear the crash.
I too, sometimes, like to, LIGHTLY, press on my brakes, when some d*ckwit tailgates me.

michcon said :

I’m sceptical of actual value offered by the advanced driver training in producing safer drivers. As a younger bloke with mates who undertook the course I would have to say that it only increased their appetite for risk.

It might be unpopular, but I would suggest that the laws are way too soft and don’t reflect the potentially deadly consequences for making a poor decision on the roads.

Honestly if the Getz had observed a 3 second clearance in front and had been alert to the driver in front breaking and had slowed with the traffic do we honestly think the situation would have resulted in the car bouncing down the road? – swerving or overtaking isn’t an appropriate reaction to slowing traffic – how could the Getz not know the driver in front didn’t slow for a kangaroo that the Getz could have then cleaned up?

I think people need to reflect more often that every time they get in the car they could end up killing themselves or someone else. Serious deterrents should be in place. Driving should be a citizen’s privilege, not a right and never something to be abused.

Maybe I’m just getting old now (28) but I hold my breath these days whenever I see people speeding and dodging in and out of traffic – it’s absolutely terrifying.

My father died in a car accident when I was quite young, and this lead to my mum going into road safety education, and naturally, my exposure to the results of poor decisions.

What you have raised is a very good point, when i first got my licence, I suggested to my Mother that I take a Defensive Driving course, and i was surprised when she said no, I was not old enough.

The point behind it is that when you take all the courses at a young age, on your P’s, you get the education without the perspective, and you are left overestimating your ability’s, this can have disastrous consequences.

I will be taking a defensive driving corse soon, I have been driving for a number of years now, and experience has taught me the dangers of the road, I feel now I have enough respect for the inherent risks of driving, to be able to undertake such a corse, without it increasing the risks take, by lowering the perceived danger.

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

I say, Playboy89, your girlfriend isn’t possibly about 22, blonde, round faced and drive a 5-10 year old small white/silver 4WD by any chance…? Or was that you in drag??? Born in ’89 = 22 this year. Hmmm.

Jethro said :

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

7.5 for content, 9 for execution.

I’m not sure i agree with you there Jethro, i would say the execution carried well, but the landing was a little shaky, perhaphs if they had attempted a “SHUT UP UNIDUCATED PEPLES” they would have held out for a stronger score.

I’d mark them 7.7 for both!

Everyone seems to be hammering the Getz driver for not keeping a safe distance. However has anyone thought that maybe the other car overtook the getz got in front of her and then slammed the brakes on? Bit hard to keep a sage distance if another car gets in that space and does something before you have time to back off to a safe distance. Happens all the time on our wonderful roads.

Gerry-Built said :

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

weeeeeell… someone is new around here…

Personally, I blame Alan Jones and his convoy…

& gay marraige……

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

Somebody just placed a hand firmly on the Mully Cup. Come one love, elaborate, and get both hands on it.

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

7.5 for content, 9 for execution.

I’m sceptical of actual value offered by the advanced driver training in producing safer drivers. As a younger bloke with mates who undertook the course I would have to say that it only increased their appetite for risk. It might be unpopular, but I would suggest that the laws are way too soft and don’t reflect the potentially deadly consequences for making a poor decision on the roads.

Honestly if the Getz had observed a 3 second clearance in front and had been alert to the driver in front breaking and had slowed with the traffic do we honestly think the situation would have resulted in the car bouncing down the road? – swerving or overtaking isn’t an appropriate reaction to slowing traffic – how could the Getz not know the driver in front didn’t slow for a kangaroo that the Getz could have then cleaned up?

I think people need to reflect more often that every time they get in the car they could end up killing themselves or someone else. Serious deterrents should be in place. Driving should be a citizen’s privilege, not a right and never something to be abused.

Maybe I’m just getting old now (28) but I hold my breath these days whenever I see people speeding and dodging in and out of traffic – it’s absolutely terrifying.

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

Enlighten us then………….

BTW, this is a free & open forum. Just about ever person who has commented here has basically said that they are guessing at how the Getz ended up on it’s roof.

So we can’t have a conversation about an incident in Canberra? Sort of defeats the purpose of a forum doesnt it?

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

weeeeeell… someone is new around here…

Personally, I blame Alan Jones and his convoy…

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

Well given you know the story, how about setting us straight?

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

If you’re so knowledgeable, tell us the facts, because obviously you’re a police officer who was first at the scene. right? right??

playboy89 said :

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

Well, come on then, out with it!

(gets popcorn). I’m being quiet, with my mouth stuffed with popcorn. So what really happened?

to all u people who want to comment GET YOUR FACTS Straight and KEEP Your COMMENTS TO YOURSELF , until YOU KNOW the actual STORY until then be quiet

Henry82 said :

mooo_cow said :

A safe distance in ideal driving conditions is considered to be a 2 second gap.

RTA says 3 seconds, as a lot of time is “consumed” due to the reaction time

I used to ride a motorbike when I was young and bulletproof. An incident that results in a crunched Getz will result in a jellied human, so I learned very quickly that distance equals reaction time, which equals staying alive. After a very unpleasant incident that was not my fault, but was almost the end of me, I changed to a safer mode of transport, no doubt saving my life.

So it’s three seconds for me. If someone fills the gap I give them an effing and blinding that would melt bitumen, then drop back to give myself 3 seconds of reaction time. Once every couple of years it saves my arse, which makes it all worthwhile.

If you seen an old Camry motoring around town in a very sedate manner, like it’s being driven by a little old lady, and with a very big gap in front, that’s me.

colormonochrome9:37 pm 22 Aug 11

A few years ago I was in the position of the car in front. I wasn’t breaking, I was accelerating from 60-80km/h and the driver behind apparently felt I wasn’t doing this fast enough so ‘road-raged’ – finger out the window and then sped up to overtake me but oversteered and ended up rolling his car behind me. His car did not touch mine, and I had the radio on quite loudly, but the noise of the car leaving the ground and crashing back down and twisting all over the road was horrifying. Even if I hadn’t have glimpsed the car mid-air in my mirrors, there was no way I would have been oblivious to the incident. (The driver of the rolled car walked away, with similar damage to his vehicle as with the Getz)
In my opinion, the driver would have to have been completely deaf not to have noticed a car rolling behind her, so unless she was in fact deaf, there is no excuse for leaving the scene.

CanberraGirl19 said :

The driver of the car in front is not obligated to stop and exchange details if they were not involved in the collision, and indeed may not even have noticed that it happened.

If you jump on the brakes and the car behind you rolls… then yes, you were involved. The fact that you didn’t actually lose any paint is immaterial. Note “involved” doesn’t imply “at fault”.

I was once in the left lane behind a car in the middle lane when that car decided to turn left in front of me. I wasn’t tailgating. I did miss the car in front but lost control of my car trying to miss them and wrote my car off. I suppose the driver that cut me off wasn’t “involved” in the accident but they really should have stopped since they caused it. Unfortunately I was a bit busy at the time to note car details and facial feaures.

CanberraGirl199:14 pm 22 Aug 11

Henry82 said :

CanberraGirl19 said :

I fail to see how it is the fault of the car in front.

Nobody said it was. The main issue is he/she left the scene of the accident.

I for one would notice if a car slammed on their breaks behind me, swerved past, then flipped their car.

Apart from that section in the media release that states that the driver in front “slammed” on their brakes and “caused” the driver of the Getz to brake heavily and lose control of their vehicle.

Perhaps ACT Policing needs to learn to word their media releases better, since this makes it seem like the driver in front was the main cause of the collision. And while I agree that the driver in front should have stopped, it is not out of the realm of possibility that they did not notice what was going on behind them.

But it shows that two young ladies can cause far greater traffic disruption than an organised convoy.

Girl power!

CanberraGirl19 said :

I fail to see how it is the fault of the car in front.

Nobody said it was. The main issue is he/she left the scene of the accident.

I for one would notice if a car slammed on their breaks behind me, swerved past, then flipped their car.

Must have been too close, the main way you’d roll is if you locked your breaks, unless she nailed on them really far back. Whats to say the car infront wasnt stopping for someone else in front of them.

My money would be on the fact that the chick in the gets was checking out the chick in the other car and got distracted. Maybe the other car breaked to get a closer look and caused the getz to lock up.

The car in front probably thought they did nothing wrong, which they likely didn’t and if they stopped it would likely be taken as guilt so they drove on pretending they never saw it.

It would have taken the car infron a while to work out what was happening behind, I’m sure she wouldnt have believed it and taken a few seconds to sink in, at which time shes 100metres down the road.

Jethro said :

The trick when being tailgated is to turn your headlights on and off. It gives the tailgater the impression that you are braking and causes them to ease off a bit, without running the risk of you actually getting rear ended.

Added bonus is that the traffic coming towards you also slows down because they think you’re warning them of a speed trap ahead.

CanberraGirl197:40 pm 22 Aug 11

I fail to see how it is the fault of the car in front. If the car in front of you slams on their brakes and you lose control because you were too close and had to brake too hard and your brakes lock up, that’s your fault for failing to keep a safe traveling distance. The driver of the car in front is not obligated to stop and exchange details if they were not involved in the collision, and indeed may not even have noticed that it happened.

Yes, I agree that if you don’t notice a collision that bad happen right behind you then you probably shouldn’t be driving, and I really hope the driver of the Getz is okay, but if you lose control of your car then it’s no one’s fault but your own.

Hmm I don’t think it’s just Canberra drivers that don’t leave a huge gap. I’m pretty sure that driving around the streets of Sydney is just as likely to be bumper to bumper (or any city really).

Assuming there’s no road ragey tailgating braketesting situation going on (which you have all jumped to conclusions on) I think it’s a prick of an act to slam on the brakes in traffic. Even with everyone in this thread being the awesome drivers we know we are, most of us would probably come undone in some way if it happened in front of us.

screaming banshee7:37 pm 22 Aug 11

I think I might have seen the driver in question fishing at Lake Tuggers this morning. If anyone knows the driver of the Getz send them this link and see if this is the other driver

Call me ignorant on police reporting protocols, but if they know the appearance and ‘approximate age’ of the other driver – does that indicate to others like me that they may know exactly who it is but are not releasing it?

After seeing the gold standard theories RA readership provided re the Braddon stabbing, Ill withhold commenting on the incident whilst I eagerly await everyone elses wild theories, then of course, the truth

harvyk1 said :

Postalgeek said :

Hope the driver is okay, but aren’t drivers supposed to maintain a suitable distance to the car in front of them in case, say, the car in front slams on the brakes?

Yes, but the other driver leaving the scene is also considered a big no no…

You gotta remember this is Canberra where next to no one ever looks in there rear vision mirror, so to not see the accident behind is to be expected and if you don’t see it how do you know to stop?

The unidentified driver is described as female, Caucasian in appearance with blonde, bobbed hair, and a round face. She is approximately 22 years of age and of normal build.

p1 said :

It does raise the question of exactly what “leaving the scene of an accident” involves.

Did the fleeing vehicle stop, chat, then leave without giving their name? Or did they stomp the brake to avoid a ‘roo, then go back to listening to the radio without even noticing the carnage behind?

I assume the first, since the cops have a description

It also raises the question of who gave the description of age, hair, build, and facial features. The media report doesn’t give details if it was someone else, but it is possible the Getz driver saw this while tailgating…

Richo said :

p1 said :

It does raise the question of exactly what “leaving the scene of an accident” involves.

Did the fleeing vehicle stop, chat, then leave without giving their name? Or did they stomp the brake to avoid a ‘roo, then go back to listening to the radio without even noticing the carnage behind?

I assume the first, since the cops have a description… Might be hard for the police to pin anything on her if she simply says she witnessed the accident, stopped to render assistance then (no considering herself to be involved), went on her way. OR she could be a total Mully, unregistered, uninsured and stomped the brakes on purpose. Only time will tell.

I do not hear anyone stating where there is a LEGAL responsibility on her to stop? She wasn’t involved in the accident, she may not have even seen it!
Where does the owner of the Getz take responsibility in only driving their vehicle in a “safe and controlled manner”?
I really hope the injured girl is ok but she needs to take responsibility, no one else

Exactly. If someone has a stack behind me, what business of mine is it?

The trick when being tailgated is to turn your headlights on and off. It gives the tailgater the impression that you are braking and causes them to ease off a bit, without running the risk of you actually getting rear ended.

The stretch of road this happened on, is probably 1 – 2km from the traffic lights at the intersection of Drakeford and Sulwood drives. What strikes me about this whole thing, is that with no other witnesses mentioned aside from the driver of the Getz, the media release seems to have quite a detailed description of the other driver. Given this other driver was in the front car, it would be kinda difficult to get such a description…unless, for example, you were stopped next to each other at the lights, possibly had a few words to the other driver at the lights, took off up the hill hot on their heels, before the game ended with a heavy application of brakes…

In my mind, I’m picturing one looking at the other the wrong way, before a healthy game of ‘what are you looking at bitch?’ took place.

cynical_rendering6:54 pm 22 Aug 11

Female P-plater in a Hyundai Getz? Probably an apprentice hairdresser from Tuggeranong sitting 2″ of the rear bumper of the 4WD in question (a habit she may have picked up from her bogan tradie BF that owns a sick commodore with chromies).

Considering the girl driving the 4WD is still on the lam, the police only have one side of the story. I wonder if the AFP treatment of the incident would be any different if it was a middle-aged Asian man who rolled his Camry instead of the girl in the Getz.

creative_canberran5:52 pm 22 Aug 11

What an idiot. Should prove a useful wake up call as even with not enough distance, proper breaking technique shouldn’t roll a vehicle.

EvanJames said :

They are saying a collision, but reading the description, the Getz didn’t hit the car in front?

ACT Policing media have their own definition for collision, just as they have their own version of grammar.

They regularly report single vehicle collisions, so I suspect this ‘collision’ didn’t actually involve the car in front.

EvanJames said :

And the car in front might have been dealing with a tailgater, or she might have actually been avoiding something like an animal.

Or they saw the speed camera sign up ahead realised how fast they were going and hit the brakes.

mooo_cow said :

A safe distance in ideal driving conditions is considered to be a 2 second gap.

RTA says 3 seconds, as a lot of time is “consumed” due to the reaction time

ConanOfCooma5:12 pm 22 Aug 11

mooo_cow said :

Drivers already know this, they just chose to ignore it.

A safe distance in ideal driving conditions is considered to be a 2 second gap. A 2 second gap at 100 km/h will be 54 meters gap between the car in front and the one travelling behind. This is about the same distance as 2.5 cricket pitches.
From : http://www.buzzboxdrivingschool.com.au/drivingtips.html

Way to go, quoting the law there.

Oh wait, no, you didn’t…

I’m lazy so I’m not going to post a link here to something I already know…

Check it out, might save your life.

Hosinator said :

There is no such thing as a 54 metre gap in traffic in Canberra, nor any semblance of a safety gap. Canberra drivers simply do not allow for safety gaps to occur in our traffic, as we consider them to be a blight on our landscape.
Any Canberra driver knows that safety gaps between cars are to be eliminated. If you spot a safety gap it’s your duty to accelerate as hard and fast as possible, preferably in adverse weather conditions, and then slam on the breaks as you sharply veer into the aforementioned gap thus eliminating it from existence.
It is then your duty to aggressively tailgate the vehicle in front of you, attempting to force them into another lane or to simply encourage them to aggressively tailgate the vehicle in front of them in a futile attempt to encourage the traffic to go faster.

Brilliant! 😀

Like I said above, I can count the seconds before the gap I leave is filled… -_-

Wow! That Getz is kippered. I note the P plate (and immediately think, ‘hmmm’) and the flat driver’s side front tyre and the ‘scenery’ embedded around the passenger-side back window. I’d suggest the driver has tried the stomp-hard-on-the-brake-pedal-and-simultaneously-jab-the-steering-wheel-a-half-turn maneuver. That get’s things like Getzs high sided fairly respectably . . . reckon I could flop one at 80 km doing just that if I tried hard enough.

I’ll bet (note the P plate) that it was a case of tailgating being tested with a brake check. I can recall a Getz — just like his one — checking the oil level in my rear diff the weekend before last. The driver remained oblivious to my left foot brake taps (just sufficient to get the brake lights lit up) and remained so even when I returned the favour (instead inspecting the rear windscreen wiper rubber) in spades (any closer and I’d have been bump drafting) later on down the road. And. I. Mean. Oblivious.

Report to teacher for a gold star all who suggest that this could have been prevented with proper driver training. Bring on the emergency stop from 240 km/hr in the wet I say.

I agree with the tailgating comments. Why couldn’t the Getz driver come to a stop without losing control? Maybe the jerk was fed up with having someone on her arse.

Richo said :

p1 said :

It does raise the question of exactly what “leaving the scene of an accident” involves.

Did the fleeing vehicle stop, chat, then leave without giving their name? Or did they stomp the brake to avoid a ‘roo, then go back to listening to the radio without even noticing the carnage behind?

I assume the first, since the cops have a description… Might be hard for the police to pin anything on her if she simply says she witnessed the accident, stopped to render assistance then (no considering herself to be involved), went on her way. OR she could be a total Mully, unregistered, uninsured and stomped the brakes on purpose. Only time will tell.

I do not hear anyone stating where there is a LEGAL responsibility on her to stop? She wasn’t involved in the accident, she may not have even seen it!
Where does the owner of the Getz take responsibility in only driving their vehicle in a “safe and controlled manner”?
I really hope the injured girl is ok but she needs to take responsibility, no one else

If you haven’t noticed a car behind you rolling over it’s roof, then you dont deserve to be on the road. If you have seen it then continue on, you’re an @rsehole, it’s as simple as that. Whether you’re involved directly in the accident or not is irrelevant when someone could be injured, especially in a roll-over. Reminds of of the prick who actually mounted the gutter to drive around a motorcyclist sprawled across the roundabout (and yes I stopped, drove the poor bugger home as the engine case was leaking through the hole he scraped into it).

@EvanJames said “They are saying a collision, but reading the description, the Getz didn’t hit the car in front? “

Official police vocabulary guidelines mean we must refer to a traffic collision, not an accident. [with apologies to Hot Fuzz]

There is no such thing as a 54 metre gap in traffic in Canberra, nor any semblance of a safety gap. Canberra drivers simply do not allow for safety gaps to occur in our traffic, as we consider them to be a blight on our landscape.
Any Canberra driver knows that safety gaps between cars are to be eliminated. If you spot a safety gap it’s your duty to accelerate as hard and fast as possible, preferably in adverse weather conditions, and then slam on the breaks as you sharply veer into the aforementioned gap thus eliminating it from existence.
It is then your duty to aggressively tailgate the vehicle in front of you, attempting to force them into another lane or to simply encourage them to aggressively tailgate the vehicle in front of them in a futile attempt to encourage the traffic to go faster.

what_the said :

Classified said :

Don’t forget the also possible scenario of ‘you cut me off so I’ll honk the horn and try to get in front’, then ‘don’t do that to me bitch so I’ll get in front’, then … well, you get the picture.

On a road like the parkway in good conditions there’s really no excuse for this kind of ‘accident’ other than big time brain fade.

Yep, definitely seems like a two to tango situation.

I was concentrating on the “stomp the brakes (for whatever reason” scenario, and hadn’t really considered the “chopped in front of” option.

p1 said :

It does raise the question of exactly what “leaving the scene of an accident” involves.

Did the fleeing vehicle stop, chat, then leave without giving their name? Or did they stomp the brake to avoid a ‘roo, then go back to listening to the radio without even noticing the carnage behind?

I assume the first, since the cops have a description… Might be hard for the police to pin anything on her if she simply says she witnessed the accident, stopped to render assistance then (no considering herself to be involved), went on her way. OR she could be a total Mully, unregistered, uninsured and stomped the brakes on purpose. Only time will tell.

I do not hear anyone stating where there is a LEGAL responsibility on her to stop? She wasn’t involved in the accident, she may not have even seen it!
Where does the owner of the Getz take responsibility in only driving their vehicle in a “safe and controlled manner”?
I really hope the injured girl is ok but she needs to take responsibility, no one else

Classified said :

p1 said :

It does raise the question of exactly what “leaving the scene of an accident” involves.

Did the fleeing vehicle stop, chat, then leave without giving their name? Or did they stomp the brake to avoid a ‘roo, then go back to listening to the radio without even noticing the carnage behind?

I assume the first, since the cops have a description… Might be hard for the police to pin anything on her if she simply says she witnessed the accident, stopped to render assistance then (no considering herself to be involved), went on her way. OR she could be a total Mully, unregistered, uninsured and stomped the brakes on purpose. Only time will tell.

Don’t forget the also possible scenario of ‘you cut me off so I’ll honk the horn and try to get in front’, then ‘don’t do that to me bitch so I’ll get in front’, then … well, you get the picture.

On a road like the parkway in good conditions there’s really no excuse for this kind of ‘accident’ other than big time brain fade.

Yep, definitely seems like a two to tango situation.

mooo_cow said :

Drivers already know this, they just chose to ignore it.

A safe distance in ideal driving conditions is considered to be a 2 second gap. A 2 second gap at 100 km/h will be 54 meters gap between the car in front and the one travelling behind.

I always like to leave a gap.
Then I play a game counting the seconds until some idiot decides that it would be the perfect spot to move their car to while dodging in-n-out of traffic…

p1 said :

It does raise the question of exactly what “leaving the scene of an accident” involves.

Did the fleeing vehicle stop, chat, then leave without giving their name? Or did they stomp the brake to avoid a ‘roo, then go back to listening to the radio without even noticing the carnage behind?

I assume the first, since the cops have a description… Might be hard for the police to pin anything on her if she simply says she witnessed the accident, stopped to render assistance then (no considering herself to be involved), went on her way. OR she could be a total Mully, unregistered, uninsured and stomped the brakes on purpose. Only time will tell.

Don’t forget the also possible scenario of ‘you cut me off so I’ll honk the horn and try to get in front’, then ‘don’t do that to me bitch so I’ll get in front’, then … well, you get the picture.

On a road like the parkway in good conditions there’s really no excuse for this kind of ‘accident’ other than big time brain fade.

mooo_cow said :

Drivers already know this, they just chose to ignore it.

A safe distance in ideal driving conditions is considered to be a 2 second gap. A 2 second gap at 100 km/h will be 54 meters gap between the car in front and the one travelling behind. This is about the same distance as 2.5 cricket pitches.
From : http://www.buzzboxdrivingschool.com.au/drivingtips.html

The only time Canberra drivers leave a 50m gap is when taking off at traffic lights, then it’s a battle to catch up the fastest then proceed to jam on your brakes to avoid hitting the person in front causing a concertina effect through the traffic behind you.

Compulsory advanced driver training I mean.

Just more evidence that advanced driver training is required. Every driver should be able to handle stopping at 100kmh without rolling their car (which is bloody difficult to do on a dead straight road with no ditch.)

Drivers already know this, they just chose to ignore it.

A safe distance in ideal driving conditions is considered to be a 2 second gap. A 2 second gap at 100 km/h will be 54 meters gap between the car in front and the one travelling behind. This is about the same distance as 2.5 cricket pitches.
From : http://www.buzzboxdrivingschool.com.au/drivingtips.html

It does raise the question of exactly what “leaving the scene of an accident” involves.

Did the fleeing vehicle stop, chat, then leave without giving their name? Or did they stomp the brake to avoid a ‘roo, then go back to listening to the radio without even noticing the carnage behind?

I assume the first, since the cops have a description… Might be hard for the police to pin anything on her if she simply says she witnessed the accident, stopped to render assistance then (no considering herself to be involved), went on her way. OR she could be a total Mully, unregistered, uninsured and stomped the brakes on purpose. Only time will tell.

Holden Caulfield4:07 pm 22 Aug 11

EvanJames said :

And the car in front might have been dealing with a tailgater, or she might have actually been avoiding something like an animal.

So then why leave the scene?

Sounds like it may have been a case of nail files at 10 paces after an earlier incident to me. And when it went tits up the first madam thought “oh shit!” and did a runner.

I kind of hope the injured madam, who sounds like she will be okay, collided with the other car. I’d hate to think all it takes to roll a relatively common car like a Getz is some heavy braking.

on the plus side,,, looks like the Getz handled the rollover pretty well. I hope the driver was ok!. maybe a little extra room between vehicles next time!

harvyk1 said :

Postalgeek said :

Hope the driver is okay, but aren’t drivers supposed to maintain a suitable distance to the car in front of them in case, say, the car in front slams on the brakes?

Yes, but the other driver leaving the scene is also considered a big no no…

True.

bugmenot said :

Was the Getz driver tailgating at the time?

Red P plate on the bonnet. Not out of the realms of possibility. If the driver in front decided to demonstrate their displeasure through the medium of a brake pedal, I imagine the car behind them rolling might have freaked them just a little (speculative scenario divorced from reality #1)

EvanJames said :

And the car in front might have been dealing with a tailgater, or she might have actually been avoiding something like an animal.

She might, and if she hadn’t decamped then she would have had the opportunity to explain this.

Quite possibly the driver in front nailed the brakes and the Getz driver panicked, and tried to swerve out of the way. Of course, swerving hard at speed (especially in a short wheelbase vehicle) could well have caused the roll. Like others, I’ve noticed plenty of tailgating at speed locally.

Hope the driver of the Getz is OK, and the driver of the other vehicle is identified.

Oh, I saw a young woman driving a small four-wheel-drive erratically this morning. Oh wait, she had a triangular face. Carry on.

I shall no doubt go to hell, but when i read Getz… female driver… I had visions of where most Getzs driven by females I see on the road are, and it’s usually glued to my rear bumper, or someone else’s.

I have a shimmery vision in my mind of the 22 yo blonde round-faced female deciding to teach the Getz a lesson, but maybe hanging onto the braking a bit too long. Meanwhile the Getz locked up, swerved and rolled.

They are saying a collision, but reading the description, the Getz didn’t hit the car in front?

And the car in front might have been dealing with a tailgater, or she might have actually been avoiding something like an animal.

Waiting For Godot3:56 pm 22 Aug 11

“The woman from the Hyundai Getz”

“The vehicle that left the scene . . . The unidentified driver is described as female”

Say no more . . .

Postalgeek said :

Hope the driver is okay, but aren’t drivers supposed to maintain a suitable distance to the car in front of them in case, say, the car in front slams on the brakes?

Yes, but the other driver leaving the scene is also considered a big no no…

Hope the driver is okay, but aren’t drivers supposed to maintain a suitable distance to the car in front of them in case, say, the car in front slams on the brakes?

Aren’t you required by law to leave a safe distance between you and the car in front just in case something like this happens? I think you are.

Was the Getz driver tailgating at the time?

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.