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.

I think drivers are definately getting dumber

Discussion in 'General Motorcycling Discussion' started by jd, Aug 10, 2006.

  1. Reading the local paper online and it seems another car has managed to collide with a train - that makes four in just 5 months. Thankfully no one was seriously hurt though some of the comments in the article like "I was driving at between 80kmh to 100kmh when I suddenly saw the train after I passed the trees" makes me wonder about some drivers. If you can't see the f*&%ing railway line then slow down. It's not like trains have a habit of hiding and leaping out in front of innocent motorists - though once again I see the driver and other people are blaming the railway crossing :roll: It worries me that if drivers aren't capable of seeing or hearing a train where they should expect one, on a railway line - then what are the chances of them spotting something smaller (like a motorcycle) when going through an intersection. Of course you also have to wonder about the rider that allegedly "goes across that crossing at up to 200kmh".

  2. of course every farmer has a radar gun :roll:

    Yep if it is an uncontrolled crossing bloody slow down and have a look and a listen it's not that hard people.

    I am glad the driver is OK but bloody hell, "oh I didn't see it," you didn't bloody well look for it!!!! :mad:
  3. If they wern't blaming the railway crossing then they would have to take responsibility for there actions. And news papers love listening the the side of the individule ofver the government, even if the individule is a moron.
  4. So how the hell do you manage to get 200 out of the Katana then, JD?

    If he's like most the farmers around that locality, he probably trundles around doing 40 in the 100 zones. No wonder everyone else looks like they're doing 200!!

    BTW, JD, I know that area pretty well but I can't pinpoint the exact spot this time. Any ideas?
  5. :oops: Double post!
  6. The drivers may well not see the trains if they aren't looking for them.
    The human brain, through the eye can only see very clearly straight ahead abd about 15 degrees I think it is either side.
    The human brain is trained to look for movement in teh peripheral vision, which is anywhere outside of the clear vision areas.
    Where it gets problematic is when an object is on a colission course with you, it appears STATIONARY, ie, it does not change position from you, if it's at 2 o' clock, it stays there till impact.
    So, your peripheral vision wil not pick it up.
    This is a problem caused by lazy drivers, who just look straight ahead (poor training) and poor training.
    It's also caused by poor training and laziness in driving habits, which can be attributed to poor training of drivers. I could also blame poor training.
    You have to scan, and on country roads, it will help you pick up things like roos etc in paddocks before they are a threat. And those pesky field trains that pop up out of nowhere.
    So, drivers suck, but blaming a train? It's what 3.5m high and at least 50m long? Look for it and you'll see it. Want to be seen on a bike? Move around! I deliberately ride like I do, it's a conscious thing to go from one side of my lane to another on long straight roads and approaching intersections. I try to do it quite sharply too. Movement is what humans respond to.
    Level crossings, even ones with gates and lights, make me slow down and look regardless.

    Regards, Andrew.
  7. Yeah just were the road crosses the railway line :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:
  8. I'd need a very steep hill :LOL:. I think the Gillies Road they're referring to is the continuation of Gillies Street it does change to Gillies Road after crossing the Western Highway and certainly runs most of the way to Creswick. So the railway would have been the Melbourne-Ararat line which is now getting a fair bit of use (also the same line where 2 of the other 3 crashes occured). Think the problem is that for a while this railway line wasn't used much. When it was reopened they put up signs at crossings telling people that is was again active, yet despite this people were still not slowing down even for crossings that had lights and bells going. The local cops had a blitz on this in Ballarat and booked a distubing number of drivers at just one railway crossing for failing to stop (and for speeding).
  9. Yeah JD, that's exactly what I was thinking. There's probably a whole generation of drivers that never saw a train on that line until recently. Wouldn't even even know know what one was if it leapt out and, er.... yeah.
    It's not new, though. There was just as many such incidents back in the 70s and 80s. Back then, everyone thought it was 'cos they were p!ssed.
    (And they were.)
  10. Yep, people's driving skills need vast improvements.
  11. Yeah I've lost track of the number of times I've slowed for an uncontrolled crossing and nearly been rammed by the idiot behind me - have had others overtake or abuse me too which really proves my theory of some drivers only focus on what's directly in front of them (not realising why I'm slowing down, just getting annoyed at the fact that I am). If the crossing is where I think it is it's not that far from home - might head out that way tomorrow morning to see these alleged, train concealing trees :).
  12. Now listen here, JD. I'm tired of cars always getting the blame. Look at the photo - there were no white lines - the driver has every right to pass the trees. How come it was his fault if the idiot train driver couldn't manage a perfectly simple avoidance maneuver like a swerve and recovery?

    And anyway - who's proved it was a car, huh? This is just the media beating up on cars because they're soft target. It could have been the Wiggles in the Big Red Car, it could have been John Deisel in the Green Limousine, it could have been Tom Waits in the Big Black Mariah. Or it could have been something completely different. Like...an escaped haystack. Or one of those things on Mt Hollowback.

    Clearly, the train is at fault -

    If locomotives are traveling that close together, they deserve whatever they get. I'm tired of locomotives tailgating one another - I see far too much of it at the Dynon Rd rail yards. All the ads say "keep a 2-seconds gap between vehicles" - what makes them think they're an exception?

    And don't trust eyewitnesses. I don't care if they saw a car and a train wrapped up in a ball near the crossing - the evidence is quite clear that eyewitnesses are unreliable - like this one...

    I find 200km/h perfectly believable, but here's an "eyewitness" to speeding that can see the speedo on the passing bike but still doesn't believe his own eyes. I look forward to hearing his sworn testimony.

    Give cars a break. Trains should be paying an extra $50 per year in safety levies, and the Victorian government should be sending every train driver a CD and a bumper-bar in the post so they can get the feel of what it's like to hit a car.

    *On a serious note, I have nothing but sympathy for any train driver that hits a vehicle.
  13. You are reckoning without the 'coocoon factor'; wind up the windows and have the radio on even a low volume and the sounds of the world outside just disappear.....
  14. Chairman: :rofl:

    That's golden!!!!

  15. Did decide to check out the crossing in question and yes I can see how trees might have obscured the view of the tracks. Although the big yellow signs warning stupid people that there may in fact be trains on the railway line in both written and pictorial form are kind of hard to miss. Another interesting thing is that the photo's been taken standing on the corner of what's essentially a T-intersection (actually a crossroad but the road that continues on is just a dirt track). So not a lot of room for a bike to be getting up to (or slowing down from) 200kph - only about 100 metres by my cars odometer. Also have to wonder how the car got up to 80-100 kph in the same distance without being hard on the accelerator or making a rather fast turn at the intersection :-k.
  16. Typical of you jd, just have to spoil the argument with facts don't you.....
  17. Ah, you see, those are pictures of steam trains. I don't believe the driver hit a steam train and, following on from Chairman's line of thought, this quite clearly was misleading information and therefore the governments fault.
  18. While agreeing that it is the governments fault, I disagree with your reasoning. Come on, everybody knows that there are no steam trains on that line.

    No, the real reason it's the governments fault is that the trains on those signs are both pointing in the same direction The driver therefore could not be expected to look for a train coming from the other direction could he, what reasonable person would?
  19. Actually on rare occassions they do actually run steam trains on that line :p.
  20. See, there you go again, facts are sooooo yesterday.... :p