Trees lining roadways

[Elks]

I think we are getting a little off topic here.

As stated in the OP this is not simply about last nights crash, although it was the promt.

Roadside furniture as the boffins call is an issue.

This is the 3rd crash like this in recent times in metro melbourne. 1 on westgate young folk going to fast on westgate freeway, loose it, hit tree, game over. Eastren freeway 4 am fell asleep apparently of the road hit tree all dead.

Yes people should not do 140 in a 60 zone, or drive when tired etc. And may be as noted in the other thread "natural selection"

But if you can though some infrastructure upgrade put saftey barriers etc to stop or more likely reduce the outcomes of peoples stupidity its a good thing.

My 2c

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by SM1DY

I was just trying to make the point that it is kind of harsh for people to place all the burden on the driver and that the passenger were effectively innocent casualties when there is absolutely no proof of this.

I agree with you to a degree, the car was overloaded which essentially means 6 people made a bad decision in that case. I don't think we will ever know what happened in that car but unfrotunetly the decisions the driver made vastly outweighed the decisions of everyone else in that car.

[Elks]

I think we are getting a little off topic here.

As stated in the OP this is not simply about last nights crash, although it was the promt.

Roadside furniture, as the boffins call is an issue.

This is the 3rd crash like this in recent times in metro melbourne. 1 on westgate young folk going to fast on westgate freeway, loose it, hit tree, game over. Eastren freeway 4 am fell asleep apparently of the road hit tree all dead.

Yes, people should not do 140 in a 60 zone, or drive when tired etc. And it may be as noted in the other thread "natural selection"

But if you can through some infrastructure upgrades put saftey barriers etc to stop, or more likely reduce the outcomes of peoples stupidity its a good thing.

My 2c

[chrisfpv]

Nevermind, already covered by 84ltd.

[Melz]

I think the fair majority of us are fairly good at avoiding trees at any speed...... a minority plays dumb and pays the price...

[DJR-351]

What a good idea, then when the trees have gone they can build runoff's and sand trap's....

Leave the trees out of it, there inanimate objects, and by the way, so are cars....

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by xr6turbo2005

I recall hearing about some studies being done on the subject of many deaths are caused by vehicles hitting unmovable objects such at trees, drain calverts etc. they have after all redesigned many of the road barriers so they crumple, wooden road post have been replaced by plastic ones etc, but nothing done about trees.

I believe it was sweeden that did the study and their solution was to relocate big poles, remove trees and put crash barriers in. In doing so they saw a big reduction in road deaths in the country.

[Walt Kowalski]

Originally Posted by xr6turbo2005

I

maybe it's about time governments spent some of the money raised from traffic fines into removing these in teh interest of safety.

This doesnt mean no trees at all, just not huge gums etc

Its a 60k zone

Better he hit a tree than a family playing in their front yard

If some moron drives at those speeds past my place I would prefer he hit a tree than my family

Playstatoion games have a lot to answer for with the Playstation generation who think they are invincible and think they can actually drive in reaL life.There's no reset button after a big crash in real life

If you want to go fast go to a trackday. Get off my road.

[FALCONXTV8]

Even if they did put barriers on this particular road,it would still have gaping holes in it everywhere for peoples driveways,etc.I for one would not appreciate the council building an ugly barrier in front of my home just because some people can't control themselves and there vehicle.

[4Vman]

Originally Posted by FALCONXTV8

Even if they did put barriers on this particular road,it would still have gaping holes in it everywhere for peoples driveways,etc.I for one would not appreciate the council building an ugly barrier in front of my home just because some people can't control themselves and there vehicle.

If it gets to the point where we have to remove solid objects from the roadside we might as well replace the roads with rails and convert every car to a mini train...
As others have said, stay on the black stuff and there's nothing to worry about!

[SM1DY]

Originally Posted by FALCONXTV8

Even if they did put barriers on this particular road,it would still have gaping holes in it everywhere for peoples driveways,etc.I for one would not appreciate the council building an ugly barrier in front of my home just because some people can't control themselves and there vehicle.

Oh, I didn't realize, i thought the houses backed onto the road. I suppose your correct, I wouldn't like a barrier going across my front yard either.

[BENT_8]

I tend to agree with the OP, but from a different angle.
There is no doubt the tree in this instance was able to prevent the vehicle from doing further damage, but so could half a dozen smaller trees without the Falcon being destroyed.
Im a firm believer that councils should remove any trees greater than 25cm from road sides to prevent serious results like this.
I recall about 8-9 yrs ago a woman was killed doing 80 on Main Nth road when her car was squeezed off the road where 3 lanes merged to 2.
She hit a large gum tree, the only 1 within 100mtrs and died.

A friend of mine fell asleep whilst travelling through a small country town and hit a palm tree in his EF XR6, there wasnt another large tree in sight.
Had he gone through the medium density scrub he'd proberbly still be with us.

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

A friend of mine fell asleep whilst travelling through a small country town and hit a palm tree in his EF XR6, there wasnt another large tree in sight.
Had he gone through the medium density scrub he'd proberbly still be with us.

I don't want this to sound the wrong way as you did lose a mate in that instance but had they made the choice not to drive while drowsy they may still be with us.

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by 84ltd

I don't want this to sound the wrong way as you did lose a mate in that instance but had they made the choice not to drive while drowsy they may still be with us.

No dramas mate, your spot on, but im talking about removing the contributing factors.
Accidents like this happen regularly on country roads, only 5km down the road from where my mate was killed another local met his maker.
He didnt fall asleep though, he had a heart attack and plowed into a large tree.
Wether the heart attack would have killed him is unknown by myself, but the massive piece of his skull missing from the tree didnt help.

Lets consider something were all familiar with, motor racing and DJ's trip through the scrub at the top of Conrod.
He walked away.
Compare that to Brock who hit one single large tree.
Not so lucky.

[rodderz]

The stretch of road where the accident occurred has housing estates lining each side of the road, probably 20m or so further away from the road from where the trees are. If the tree had not of been hit the timber and colourbond fences would of done nothing to stop a 160km/hr car going through to the houses.

There has to be responsibility put back onto drivers to drive safely, and as someone else mentioned, it's safer to run into an animal that wanders across the road.

Councils wouldn't allow the cutting down of trees anyway, most areas they require a % of trees to be planted per m², plus it gives areas a good visual aspect as well and buffers residents from traffic noise and accidents.

[XR6_661]

I didn't read most of this, but instead I'll post my own opinion.

Why should trees be removed from the sides of roads to make it safer for people who wish to speed and endanger their lifes as well as others?

[BENT_8]

Originally Posted by XR6_661

I didn't read most of this, but instead I'll post my own opinion.

Why should trees be removed from the sides of roads to make it safer for people who wish to speed and endanger their lifes as well as others?

Your looking at it from the wrong point of view, forget the speeding side of it and consider other situations where un preventable incidents have led to people hitting a tree and getting killed.

If you were driving down a road signposted 100 and an oncomming car veered into your lane forcing you to swerve which results in you hitting a large tree killing a loved one, are you at fault for not staying 'on the black stuff'?
No the other driver is, but that doesn't make YOUR loss any easier to swollow

[Auslandau]

I do agree ... there is a right and wrong time to discuss 'What ifs' and I do not think it is now. The other thread is becoming blurred into this one. There is a right and wrong time for this discussion but I do not think it is now .....



| [/url] |