57 per cent of fatal accidents road-system failures contributed

[Crisis63]

BETTER roads would cut the road toll more than driving crackdowns, a study commissioned by the State Government has found.

Based on Coroner's Court files, it found more effort should be made to stop fatal crashes caused by "unforgiving" road hazards, which caused the death and injury of good drivers only because they made mistakes.

Dr Lisa Wundersitz, of the Centre for Automotive Safety Research at University of Adelaide, studied drivers who were victims of bad road design, or "system failures", compared with those who caused accidents by their own extreme driving.

"Improvements to the road transport system can be expected to be much more effective in reducing crashes than concentrating on preventing extreme behaviours; such a strategy could reduce the incidence and severity of a large proportion of crashes in SA," the report found.

The RAA welcomed the report and has called for a review of the effectiveness of State Government road-safety advertising, which focuses on driver behaviour. Senior manager mobility and safety Wendy Bevan said there should be a co-ordinated road-improvement program throughout the state.

Dr Wundersitz said road-safety improvements included roadside barriers around hazards such as trees, divided roads, lower speed limits near intersections and skid-resistant pavement.

Extreme behaviour was defined as high blood-alcohol content, high speed and/or a combination of drug use, reckless behaviour, unlicensed driving or not wearing a seat belt.

What!? Not “creeping” 5 ks over the limt then?!!!

In the first study of its kind in SA, Dr Wundersitz looked at 83 road deaths and 453 injuries during 2008 and statistics from 1998-2000 and 2002-2005.
The study found in 57 per cent of fatal accidents, road-system failures contributed but extreme driving was only 43 per cent.In the non-fatal crashes studied by Dr Wundersitz, only 9.4 per cent were caused by extreme behaviour and 90.6 per cent by systems failures.

The report advocates a change to road safety adopted in some countries called Safe Systems, which emphasises safe road design as well as driver behaviour.Bad roads being blamed for fatal crashes | Adelaide Now


Boy did that backfire on the government. The government relies on the façade of road safety for billions in revenue and a report they commission reveals that it is not the “creepers” who are the main culprits.

[Stressball]

You say this as if it's news that doing 5kmh over doesn't murder newborn babies and torture the disadvantaged children in Africa

It won't mean much though, for every study that shows speed isn't causing accidents, there are 10 that say it is. Almost entirely funded by GovCo. They seem to operate under the assumption that "speeding before accident = speeding CAUSED accident". Never mind that fact that 90% of people speed almost constantly. If the majority of people speed, then the majority of accidents will involve at least one speeding vehicle. Doesn't mean the speeding caused the accident; but try telling that to the police commissioner.

[Jesterarts]

That is some very surprising figures I have to admit.

I have being involved in 5 non-fatal accidents in my life (both me driving and as passenger).

Not one of those was caused or could have been prevented by better roads.

3 of them were caused by people breaking a road law (not giving way, running a red and not doing a head check when changing lanes), one was caused by people not driving to the conditions (rear ended in heavy rain) and one was the driver being a ####ing twat and ####ing up a drift.

I mean, I guess we have to establish the definition of "system failures failures". Do they mean lights not working or do they mean a car rolling over a barrier?

For example, if someone was driving alone in heavy rain on a freeway at 100kmph when it was not safe to do so. Then lost control, smashed into a barrier which was supposed to prevent the vehicle crossing the median strip into oncoming traffic and had a head on with a B double. Would this be considered "system failure" or would it be considered "extreme driving" or whatever?

Interesting stats either way.

[minux]

3 of them were caused by people breaking a road law (not giving way, running a red and not doing a head check when changing lanes), one was caused by people not driving to the conditions (rear ended in heavy rain) and one was the driver being a ####ing twat and ####ing up a drift.

You should really do a driving course you are out of control

[87RB30VL]

one was the driver being a ####ing twat and ####ing up a drift.

If the road conditions were better, that guy would have probably pulled off the meanest drift ever, getting all 10's, and sliding sideway into the horizon.

Kidding, road conditions rarely contribute to accidents (I mean condition of the physical road, not like wet roads, oily roads etc I mean holes and rough roads)

[Drawnnite]

now if only better roads and a better licencing system would come of this.

it probably only cost us a few million of our taxpayer dollars to figure out the obvious.

[STEEV888]

better roads wont do shit people need to learn how to drive.

[sleek_vp]

naahhh, fudged roads dont cause accident (they fudge your car steering & suspension), in my whole 10 years of driving experience the ONLY thing that iv witnessed that causes fatalities (& near misses) is un attentive/ stupid or in experienced drivers, iv been reading alot about (on other forums as well) the european licencing system is very thorough and that people are much better on their roads, maybe we should do something similar- even if that meant open licence holders like myself doing re tests every few years or so then so be it.

[Crisis63]

That is some very surprising figures I have to admit.

I have being involved in 5 non-fatal accidents in my life (both me driving and as passenger).

Not one of those was caused or could have been prevented by better roads.

3 of them were caused by people breaking a road law (not giving way, running a red and not doing a head check when changing lanes), one was caused by people not driving to the conditions (rear ended in heavy rain) and one was the driver being a ####ing twat and ####ing up a drift.

I mean, I guess we have to establish the definition of "system failures failures". Do they mean lights not working or do they mean a car rolling over a barrier?

Well anecdotally I suppose I would agree to an extent. The accidents I have been involved in involved a similar rear ender, a guy crossing in front of me because he couldn’t see through the traffic and a dick who couldn’t keep in his lane. A near miss where a guy just turned in front of me on a 100kmh section of road. He simply was not concentrating.
That said they are talking about things like skid resistant roads and also the combination of better driving and better “systems”

For example, if someone was driving alone in heavy rain on a freeway at 100kmph when it was not safe to do so. Then lost control, smashed into a barrier which was supposed to prevent the vehicle crossing the median strip into oncoming traffic and had a head on with a B double. Would this be considered "system failure" or would it be considered "extreme driving" or whatever?

Interesting stats either way.

I would think it falls into the “extreme driving” category. I have always considered driving in a manner unsafe for the conditions far worse than simply exceeding a posted limit despite the fact the law looks at it the complete opposite. I also think providing dual lane separated carriageways is pretty much the top of the “systems” available.

better roads wont do shit people need to learn how to drive.

It just isn’t that simple. Check the Adelaide Mannum road which has enormous trees protruding into the road with barrier rails resting on some of them. These trees are scared with multiple impacts from cars that are driving at up to 80kph legally. It would require only a slight miscalculation to hit one of them as is quite evident. Even if the driver was exceeding the speed limit simply removing these obstacle form the verge would allow a better margin for error.
Next have a look at the stobie poles that flank South Road in Adelaide. The section between Port Road and Regency Road in particular has these cement and iron posts as close as 1 or 2 inches from a dual lane road that carries some of the heaviest traffic in the city,. These too are covered in scars. These things are simple to rectify by removal.

Port Wakefield Road was notorious for fatal accidents until it was upgraded to a dual lane carriageway separated by an expanse of grass and bush. It’s pretty hard to have a head on if something isn’t coming the other way.
60% of fatalities occur in the country and many of them are head ons.