More 4WD Misinformation Care of the ABC

Thank you Allan B, if this was done loaded there would be comments about an empty 4B, or that's a different vehicle to mine.

During these few weeks there is a lot being said about not driving through water, this is a timely reminder. It might get the message out and that's got to be a good thing.

That'd depend on a few things like is the fuel tank full or empty, but yes a loaded ute will fill quicker and sink faster generally. Empty Utes with empty fuel tanks and spares mounted under the tray will float the rear indefinitely.
Any given long weekend at rainbow beach rocks is a perfect time to test out these theories. Usually two seconds after the rear floats and tips the front in there is a puff of smoke as the engine takes a sip and it's all over bar the head scratching.

Na your wrong there I reckon.
Archimedes law.
A typical tray back ute unloaded might weigh say 800kg at the rear axle.
An empty 100 litre tank is 100kg of buoyancy and tyres?
I'd hazard a guess that's no more than 30 each nett.
The body will have less than half the volume for a dualcab and so would need to be twice as deep for the same buoyancy.

I was waiting for someone to raise this point. Most concrete causeways in the North have a good coating of algae after a few days of warmer weather, and water flowing across them. They then become deadly slippery.

The internet photos of the numerous road trains washed downstream are testament to the fact that you can have lots and lots of weight - and it does nothing for you, if the footing is greasy, and the water is moderate depth and the current has adequate speed.

Cheers, Ron.

This is all it takes! You wouldn't call this deep water!

Police Cruiser washed off causeway

Cheers, Ron.

Crikey, you blokes, you're making me scared!

In 2009 I crossed Ivanhoe in a Prado towing a Kimberley Karavan. Water was flowing but you could clearly see the grooves in the short bollards on the downstream side. We had been told that if you could see those, then all ok. Got out, had a look at the depth but didn't know enough to test traction and saw others making the crossing, so based on that off we went.

We got across ok, absolutely no dramas, but I had a tide mark half way up the drivers (upstream) door.

Until now I hadn't even thought about slippery algae. Had it been there, water pressure half way up the door could well have seen us swimming with the crocs.

Did those coppers book themselves?

Ha ha! - Yeah, what about them driving, wearing thongs? Seen people booked for that.
At the very least, there's got to be some job requirement for them to wear boots?
How are they going to kick ar$e, wearing just thongs? LOL

booked for wearing thongs?
Are you serious or joking?

No, I'm serious. I've known people who were booked for wearing thongs as they were deemed dangerous to drive in. "Inappropriate footwear for proper control of vehicle", as I understood it. Excessively high heels in the same boat.

Get a look at the instructions in the link below, when going for your practical driving test in QLD.
"Please wear enclosed shoes, no thongs or barefoot".

Practical Driving Test

Doesn't say anything about being illegal, just "please wear enclosed..."
I don't see how you could be charged on that basis for driving in thongs then or at any other time.

I agree that thongs can be 'messy on the pedals'.
But it seems every time I see a Truckie climb out of the cab, he is wearing thongs!

I've owned a pair of Reebok thongs that nearly killed me. They were made of a particularly hard-wearing type of plastic in the upper sole area (where your foots sits), and this surface became incredibly slippery when coated with red dust.

I went to take a shortcut down the rock embankment of the old single lane Ashburton River Bridge at Nanutarra (the original Nanutarra Bridge), on my way back to the caravan park at the Roadhouse, in 2012.

I put my right foot on a large raised rock at the edge of the embankment, and propelled myself up and over with my left foot, intending to do a "rock-wallaby hop" from rock to rock down the embankment.

As I propelled myself with my left foot, my right foot, which was now bearing all my weight, promptly slipped straight out backwards from the Reebok thong, like my foot had been greased.

I lost my balance completely and launched myself out over the rock embankment in a graceful arc, landing flat on my right side, on what was exceptionally fortunately, a fairly flat rock surface.

My right thigh took the full impact of the fall - however, there was a small pointed projection in the centre of the flat rock surface, which impacted on the outer muscles of my right thigh, tearing ligaments and bruising muscle - which was exceptionally painful - and which muscular damage saw me dragging myself around like a shot and wounded animal, for a full week.

The whole exercise could have easily been fatal - people have died from lesser falls - and the whole exercise brought home to me forcibly, how important it is to have "appropriate footwear" at all times, for the projected conditions.

I have no idea of the full circumstances of the people being booked for wearing thongs - no doubt the coppers involved were being "conchy" - the individual driver was possibly wearing some pretty scabby thongs - and perhaps giving some "lip" to the officer/s involved, thus creating an atmosphere where a reason to book them was dug up - when no other major reason could be found.

I have driven in thongs many a time - and I've also had thongs catch under pedals when they slipped off - with no major dramas, apart from a moments concern as I recovered them.
However, secure footwear when driving, is constantly mentioned in all driving advice, and many cheap thongs don't offer that necessary foot security.

Cheers, Ron.

.
Ron, the mind boggles!

That is a real conundrum , manufacturers and advertising companies could or dare I say it 'should' in some cases be held accountable when things go pear shaped , they do not give anywhere near real use information or stipulate that the wading depth is for totally calm non flowing water with a solid base , My handbook states 700mm [013 FJ Cruiser] but have a 2" lift + 20mm larger diameter tires ,Ergo my 'wading depth' should be increased to 760mm ?? Don't think so !!

I thought the wading depth was simply the height of water you could go through without fear of sucking some into places it shouldn't go, like air filters or diff and gearbox breathers. If the car starts floating you've gone way past that. In your case with the lift and tyres you probably are good for 760mm as far as those items above are concerned.

The floatation test appeared to me to show the patrol was partially boyant before the water level was above the tyres and slightly above the floor level. The woman reporter could push the patrol sideways at this point with one hand..

None of my patrols have floated when the water was above the tyre height...might have something to do with the gear inside..