Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

N/A | National Are U Turns Dangerous?

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by mjt57, Aug 14, 2012.

  1. I'm having a bit of a discussion about the merits or otherwise of U turns and the different rules that apply across state borders.

    I'm of the view that U turns should not be allowed unless clearly signposted.

    We're all familiar with the infamous case where a female police member did one because she forgot to bring cakes to work and a motorcyclist died (she got off).

    Should U turns be more highly regulated? Do many crashes, casualty/fatal occur because of people doing U turns without due care?

    And a quick poll (don't go googling it), what is the rule pertaining to giving way to traffic when doing a U turn?

  2. I don't see any reason why U-turns should be more heavily regulated. Indeed, a case could be made (but I can't be arsed) for the rules to be further relaxed.

    If the driver/rider actually opens their eyes and looks for traffic and engages their brain so as not to do it where visibility is inadequate, I see no reasion why the Uey should be any more hazardous than eg a right turn. I do realise that that's a big "IF", but if we ban all manouvers that could be hazardous if performed by a moron*, that pretty much fucks any possibility of any traffic movement whatsoever.

    *Admittedly this does seem to be the main thrust of road safety policy at the moment.
  3. "Thrust" being an appropriate word.
  4. In NSW U-Turns are prohibited over an unbroken line, over double unbroken lines (natch) and at any traffic lights.

    The problem isn't regulation, it's incompetent careless drivers.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. Due care being the important factor.

    Also if U turns are all banned, people will basically have to keep driving around till they can get back to the intersection going the other way. Not always easy and driving while doing this can be quite dangerous.
    • Like Like x 1
  6. This. Plus you need to give way to absolutely everyone.

    The issue lies in not looking, u-turns usually mean you have missed a turn and are in a rush to get somewhere, so people turn and accelerate hard without looking. Then BANG
  7. Same in victoria, but people just ignore it. All major shopping strips have unbroken lines down the middle.
  8. But you CAN do a U-Turn at some traffic lights in Vic, can't you? (or you used to be able to)
  9. Yes they have special u-turn arrows that go green.
  10. Yes. You just have to give way to left turning traffic in most cases. They have right away.
  11. U turn permitted, unless a 'no U turn' sign is present.
  12. I was just about to post the same titus. In VIC it's allowed except where expressly forbidden (afaik). However a u turning vehicle has to give way to all others, I believe.
  13. Yes, they have signs that specify whether or not you can.
  14. But they did introduce the law a year or two ago about unbroken lines. ie. most major shopping strips. These places are very dangerous as people are so focused on parking spots, they barely look around them.
  15. Wasn't the Cupcake incident over double whites anyway?

    If we banned u turns, I would be able to leave my street, but not get back in, so no, u turns should not be banned.

    It's a case of due care, like anything. Anything can be dangerous if you don't take due care.
  16. Except anyone that has a give way or stop sign, obviously.

    What I hate is when the engineers look at an intersection and think to themselves "Wow, there's no way a car could make a U-turn there, the road is too narrow," and whack up a "No U-Turn" sign.
    Obviously it might be too narrow for a car to U-turn, but not a bike.

    That's why I favour less prescriptive signage/policy, too.
  17. I have T boned a Bewah @ 60 because he made an illegal Uturn.
    My mud dwellers have dumped me because I have taken so long to jump through their hoops.
    It still hurts a fair bit and I'm not settling till my back is fixed or they start talking proper figures. I ride for a living ! In two different jobs and companies.

    But don't go with the regulate........... A committee is nothing more than a table full of drunk baboons trying to out smart themselves till they are totally brain dead, give up and go with the least argued motion.

    So for us it's tough luck, be well insured and take as little room to do your own as you can and try to keep Darwin and his theory out of the hit lists
  18. My last bike was written off as a result of a careless u-turn. I was lucky to come off unscathed.

    U-Turns in practice aren't a difficult nor dangerous manoeuvre if done with care. Most incidences involving a driver/rider performing a u-turn is a result of not taking proper care prior to or during the manoeuvre. I firmly believe u-turns should not be permitted in busy areas like school zones and shopping strips (My crash was in a school zone, I've been cut off in shopping strips plenty by people racing to get parking spaces on the other side of the road), EXCEPT at intersections.

    Having driven in NSW regularly over the past couple of years, and most of my driving life in Victoria, comparing the two it seems much safer to perform a u-turn at an intersection than it does to pass through the intersection then do it in the middle of the street. NSW's regulations don't make sense to me.

    Consider how people perform a u-turn. At an intersection they start in the right turn lane, and turn where the road is clear, only having to focus on oncoming traffic and possibly a vehicle turning left from the side road to their right. In comparison, turning in the middle of the street usually involves turning from the left curb, meaning the driver now needs to focus on traffic approaching from behind as well as in front. Now explain why NSW finds the first dangerous and inappropriate, but the latter perfectly acceptable. The rules need refinement and enforcement in both states, but when if I need to pick between the two, I'd rather be in Vic.