4x4 safety - reverse parking

Submitted: Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 08:53
ThreadID: 27538 Views:4565 Replies:10 FollowUps:7
This Thread has been Archived
Howdy, John C made a very good point in a previous post regarding the ABC's report on the child vs car safety concerns and I thought it may be worth a seperate post.

He mentioned reverse parking and how it is compulsory on some minesites. I think this is a good policy to adhere to as well. Here's why.

1. As you drive up to a parking spot you have the 'swing around' to thoroughly scope out where you are heading.

2. When you leave you are facing forward. Good for quick getaways too:-)

3. It is much easier. Think of a forklift and how it steers from the back. The 'pivot' of a car is the rear wheels and for tighter spots it is by far the best way to manoeuvre.

A quick walk around inspection of any vehicle before you hop into it is always a good idea. I found truck driving and operating earth moving equipment make this second nature after awhile. This is drummed into you from day one for many very good reasons. FWIW I regularly check oil, water, belts too.

You'd be surprised what you pick up. This applies to ANY vehicle too. Don't want to sound like Constable Care or anything, just thought it might be something to keep in mind in light of recent tragic events.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: V8Diesel - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 08:57

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 08:57
Accidently left Geoff M's name out, no edit function on this list - sorry.
AnswerID: 136179

Follow Up By: Member - Willie , Epping .Syd. - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:58

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:58
Hi V8 ,

As Chrispy pointed out in the last post , Phil Kearns was driving forwards into his drive when the accident occurrred . His vision would have been even worse had he been backing , especially because the driveway sloped down after crossing the footpath .

I actually think that in this case , by the look of it when he crossed the footpath , he could not have seen anything over the bonnet in front of the car for some way before the back wheels actually got onto the slope and levelled out the car ( levelled it to the driveway not the horizon )
Anyway , he is a great guy and it's a bloody shame for him , his baby and his family .

I have exactly the same sort of driveway , so I know what it,s like .

I do not agree with you that backing into a driveway is safer . Going in forwards gives you better vision going in - at a time when you do not know where your kids are or where they might crawl out from . At least when you are leaving you can have done a check , so it would make sense then to use the more dangerouse option then .

Cheers ,

Willie .
0
FollowupID: 390000

Reply By: Member - Karl - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 08:59

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 08:59
I always reverse park or if possible find a drive through park so that I am facing out with my nose, even if it means that I park further from the door. My wife hates it, but I do it for safety reasons (and to annoy her - parking further from the door that is :-))

Karl
AnswerID: 136180

Reply By: porl - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:19

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:19
So what is the cheapest most effective rear vision equipment to set up in a 4WD? (other than walking round)
AnswerID: 136182

Follow Up By: Wombat - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:23

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:23
I think the Poron reversing camera and monitor is the cheapest of the options Porl. Member John (Vic) kindly organised a group purchase direct from the manufacturer recently.
0
FollowupID: 390039

Reply By: Member - Landie - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:24

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:24
This is a good suggestion. We try to do this whenever possible and always drive our vehicle out of our property forward facing to avoid reversing through the footpath area.

The debate on reversing cameras will no doubt hot up following the tragic accident that occured in Sydney. The question is; are they the solution?

Even Harold Scrubby acknowledges that there are plenty of sedans and station wagons that do not provide sufficient rear visibility, therefore if you require them in one form of vehicle, then it needs to be all vehicles that have a visibility problem.

Whilst anything that enhances safety is welcomed, let's make sure it is the right fix first. My point is that all the aids in the world, rear-vision mirrors, reversing cameras etc, will not assist if people do not take the right precautions in the first instance.

Driveway accidents involving toddlers and young children occur because of a lack of attention and due care, not because vehicles don't have the right aids. My sympathy goes out to anyone that has had a lapse and been involved in this type of incident, however there are far simpler solutions than reversing cameras.

Toddlers/cars/reversing/stop - go nowhere until you can account for where everyone is. We've exercised this approach diligently and without fail everytime we move a vehicle.

AnswerID: 136183

Reply By: PBob - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:26

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:26
I have an HSE disco TD% manual 2005 model. it is fitted with rear parking sensors. They are brilliant. Not only for not backing into humans, but posts gutters etc as well. you could back the car blindfolded if you wished (well almost!!).
AnswerID: 136184

Follow Up By: robak (QLD) - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:32

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:32
PBob

From what I know, the vehicle involved in that accident (VW) had parking sensors. Whether they pick up toddlers or not, is in this case irrelevent as the vehicle (as reported by the ABC) was driving forward at the time.

R.
0
FollowupID: 389997

Follow Up By: Member - Geoff M (Newcastle) - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:10

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 12:10
Hello Robak,
A guy I work with has a VW Touareg, base model 5cyl Turbo Diesel. His has parking sensors front and rear.
They look ahead and behind, not down. Seem to work Ok on cars, posts and gutters.
Technically very advanced car the Touareg.

See, VW Touareg

Geoff.
Geoff,

Grey hair is hereditary, you get it from children. Baldness is caused by watching the Wallabies.

Lifetime Member
My Profile  My Blog  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 390036

Follow Up By: robak (QLD) - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 13:08

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 13:08
I guess there's nothing that beats inspecting the car all around AND underneath as the height of most 4WD's allows kids to crawl and play there.

Yep.. The touareg is a nice car. Perhaps if I work really hard, I might be able to afford the 2005 model in about 15 years.
Just dreaming.....

R.
0
FollowupID: 390047

Reply By: PBob - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:47

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:47
Yes, point taken, he was driving forward. There are sensors that can be fitted front and back. Mine are only for reversing.
My other point made yesterday, was that in the true sense of balanced reporting, why don't journalists report when a car is in an accident " a 2 wheel drive was etc etc ".
I put this to the Herald in a letter to the editor, but they wouldn't give it a run.
AnswerID: 136189

Reply By: Gerhardp1 - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:56

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 09:56
I have the vague recollection of hearing somewhere in the past that reversing out of a driveway is illegal at any time. A bit like the supposedly still existing law that requires any vehicle going faster than 5mph (or was it 3?) to be preceded by a person waving a red flag.

Because we are humans who have accidents and mishaps, the tragedy of kids getting run over will never cease. Before the motor car kids got trampled by horses and died. Every now and then a know-it-all like Scruby will come along and evangelise that he/she has the answer to the problem.

The other night I almost got run over by a cyclist who didn't ring the bell (I wasn't looking either). I might contact Scruby so he can get bicycles eliminated after he finishes with the 4WDs

AnswerID: 136192

Follow Up By: ev700 - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 10:55

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 10:55
There is a lot of road abuse by pedestrians and cyclists that goes unreported, but results in injury and death.

Many cyclists do not accept they are in charge of a vehicle and must obey the road regulations.

Cyclists and pedestrians are on roads intoxicated.

Many pedestriand cross in dangerous situations, jay walk etc etc.

For convenience and cheap 'news'. the media labels groups, issues and so on for a bit of regular abuse whn time and columns need to be filled. Have a look at the media labelling of students, young people unemployed, pensioners etc etc.

What I'm saying is that it is just crappy journalism by a cynical media.
0
FollowupID: 390015

Reply By: Truckster (Vic) - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 10:17

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 10:17
I reckon we setup 200 cameras on every car - Make it law. punishment by death if you dont...., all piped into screens that drop down as you reverse..

That way you can see everything on earth around you.

Infact to make it safer, lets just ban anything bigger than rollerskates. Think of how good the traffic would be.
AnswerID: 136202

Reply By: Member - Willie , Epping .Syd. - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:17

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 11:17
Another fact that maybe distorting the 4WD figures are that they must , by definition , include all Subarus cars and wagons , many Audis and other 4 WD cars and cross over type vehicles .
However 99% of people hearing the statistic automatically picture a Landruiser type vehicle .
Cheers ,
Willie .
AnswerID: 136212

Follow Up By: Peter - Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 13:38

Tuesday, Oct 25, 2005 at 13:38
I believe the onus is on the driver no matter what vehicle is being driven. My 2 kids have survived my years of driving and my 2 grandkids as well. My whole family have been indoctrinated into a few simple steps:
1. If the kids are coming with us they are the first things that are strapped into the car
2. If they're not coming with us we know exactly where they are, if they insist on coming outside to wave goodbye (as kids are wont to do) then they stand on the front steps where they can be seen at all times and are supervised by an adult
3. Before I enter the vehicle I approach it from the direction I will be travelling (ie if I'm going to reverse I walk around the back of the car to get into it).
Unfortunately kids are kids and there's always a possibility that something will go wrong but I think if every precaution is taken then the accidents would be very far and few between.
One thing on Phil Kearns accident is I wonder how much worse his baby would have been had he been driving a much lower vehicle than the Toureg. A 4wd has much better ground clearance and therefore instead of crushing a toddler under the sump etc I believe the child would more likely to be dragged or rolled. If the tyres go over a toddler then I doubt the type of vehicle being driven would make no difference.
If nothing else at least this accident might raise the awareness of all vehicle drivers to take just a little bit more attention, kids are too precious to lose
Peter
0
FollowupID: 390055

Reply By: Skinny- Friday, Oct 28, 2005 at 13:56

Friday, Oct 28, 2005 at 13:56
Non of us get out of this life alive, we must slow down as a society. I get Oissed Pff by the speed those cars and city 4x4's zip around me in my 80 series STD , I am not in a hurry but they think if they crash into me it is my fault. 4 accidents in 26 years and each time I have been stationary. (two off them major damage to the cars and not a mark on the 4x4 I had at the time.

Most 4x4 's that are done up for off road seem the most curtious drivers on the road. I agree some drivers need training, far too many people stereo type all 4x4s as the same and the bigger the worse we are.

I think the biggest culprit is the busy life we lead many want ot blame the vehicle and not the driver.Beware the camera as it is yet another excuse for bad driving. Oops I forgot to turn it on, oops I forgot to look at the camera.

I ride a pushy to work half the week and the biggest risk to me are the people in a hurry , mum in the 4x4 or the taxi's the trades vans. Hurry hurry is the problem.

We are not mindful nor do we take the time to be often enough.

Guns don't kill people people kill people

substitute 4x4 for guns

Cheers Skinny (now getting off my soap box)

AnswerID: 136787

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (9)