Driving in eastern Australia can be a unique experience, especially during the wet season when roads can quickly become flooded.

However, ignoring road closure signs and attempting to navigate through floodwaters can lead to a hefty fine, as one Queensland motorist recently discovered.

In a statement released by Queensland Police, a 41-year-old man from Winton, situated in the state's mid-north, was caught driving through floodwaters in Corfield.

Despite passing two road closure signs and a barrier blocking the road, the man decided to take his chances and drove his Toyota HiLux through the flooded area.

A man who drove into flood water in Queensland got fined with a sum of $800. Image: Freepik

While he managed to navigate the floodwaters without any immediate harm, he was met by police officers on the other side.

The man was subsequently charged with careless driving, resulting in a $619 fine. An additional $185 was added for disobeying the road access signs, bringing the total fine to $804.

On top of the financial penalty, the man also received six demerit points, putting him halfway towards losing his licence.

Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll emphasised the dangers of driving through floodwaters in a media statement.

'You don't know what kind of debris or objects could be lurking just under the surface,' she warned.

'There is also a very good chance that the road's structure has been undermined. It's not worth risking your life or the lives of emergency services who come to rescue you.'

The 2022 Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report highlighted the risks associated with driving into floodwaters.

It found that vehicles being driven into flood waters is the leading cause of drowning, often due to motorists becoming trapped in their cars when washed away from the road surface.

The dangers of driving through flood waters extend beyond the immediate risk of drowning as it can hide debris, potholes, and even washed-out sections of road, which can cause serious damage to your vehicle.

Additionally, as little as six inches of water can cause loss of control and potential stalling if it enters the exhaust. If the water is fast-flowing, it can sweep a car off the road entirely.

If you come across a flooded road, the safest course of action is to turn around and find an alternative route.

If there is no other route, it's better to park in a safe place and wait for the water to recede.

While it might be tempting to try and navigate through flood waters, the risks far outweigh the potential time saved.

Not only could you be risking your life and the lives of others, but you could also be hit with a significant financial penalty.

Key Takeaways

• A Queensland motorist incurred a $804 fine and six demerit points for driving through flood waters despite road closure signs and barriers.
• The incident occurred in Corfield, with the driver proceeding past two road closure signs and a barrier before being stopped by police.
• Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll emphasised the dangers of driving through floodwaters, including hidden debris and potential road damage.
• The 2022 Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report indicated that vehicles entering floodwaters is a leading cause of drowning, often due to being washed away from the road surface.

Have you ever encountered a flooded road while driving? What did you do? Share your experiences and tips in the comments below.

 

[Ashbeare]

Driving in eastern Australia can be a unique experience, especially during the wet season when roads can quickly become flooded.

However, ignoring road closure signs and attempting to navigate through floodwaters can lead to a hefty fine, as one Queensland motorist recently discovered.

In a statement released by Queensland Police, a 41-year-old man from Winton, situated in the state's mid-north, was caught driving through floodwaters in Corfield.

Despite passing two road closure signs and a barrier blocking the road, the man decided to take his chances and drove his Toyota HiLux through the flooded area.

View attachment 39856

A man who drove into flood water in Queensland got fined with a sum of $800. Image: Freepik

While he managed to navigate the floodwaters without any immediate harm, he was met by police officers on the other side.

The man was subsequently charged with careless driving, resulting in a $619 fine. An additional $185 was added for disobeying the road access signs, bringing the total fine to $804.

On top of the financial penalty, the man also received six demerit points, putting him halfway towards losing his licence.

Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll emphasised the dangers of driving through floodwaters in a media statement.

'You don't know what kind of debris or objects could be lurking just under the surface,' she warned.

'There is also a very good chance that the road's structure has been undermined. It's not worth risking your life or the lives of emergency services who come to rescue you.'

The 2022 Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report highlighted the risks associated with driving into floodwaters.

It found that vehicles being driven into flood waters is the leading cause of drowning, often due to motorists becoming trapped in their cars when washed away from the road surface.

The dangers of driving through flood waters extend beyond the immediate risk of drowning as it can hide debris, potholes, and even washed-out sections of road, which can cause serious damage to your vehicle.

Additionally, as little as six inches of water can cause loss of control and potential stalling if it enters the exhaust. If the water is fast-flowing, it can sweep a car off the road entirely.

If you come across a flooded road, the safest course of action is to turn around and find an alternative route.

If there is no other route, it's better to park in a safe place and wait for the water to recede.

While it might be tempting to try and navigate through flood waters, the risks far outweigh the potential time saved.

Not only could you be risking your life and the lives of others, but you could also be hit with a significant financial penalty.

Key Takeaways

• A Queensland motorist incurred a $804 fine and six demerit points for driving through flood waters despite road closure signs and barriers.
• The incident occurred in Corfield, with the driver proceeding past two road closure signs and a barrier before being stopped by police.
• Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll emphasised the dangers of driving through floodwaters, including hidden debris and potential road damage.
• The 2022 Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report indicated that vehicles entering floodwaters is a leading cause of drowning, often due to being washed away from the road surface.

Have you ever encountered a flooded road while driving? What did you do? Share your experiences and tips in the comments below.

The fine is OK but they should also be charged with the cost of rescue. Which could be 10s of thousands.

 

[Uncle Allan]

Driving in eastern Australia can be a unique experience, especially during the wet season when roads can quickly become flooded.

However, ignoring road closure signs and attempting to navigate through floodwaters can lead to a hefty fine, as one Queensland motorist recently discovered.

In a statement released by Queensland Police, a 41-year-old man from Winton, situated in the state's mid-north, was caught driving through floodwaters in Corfield.

Despite passing two road closure signs and a barrier blocking the road, the man decided to take his chances and drove his Toyota HiLux through the flooded area.

View attachment 39856

A man who drove into flood water in Queensland got fined with a sum of $800. Image: Freepik

While he managed to navigate the floodwaters without any immediate harm, he was met by police officers on the other side.

The man was subsequently charged with careless driving, resulting in a $619 fine. An additional $185 was added for disobeying the road access signs, bringing the total fine to $804.

On top of the financial penalty, the man also received six demerit points, putting him halfway towards losing his licence.

Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll emphasised the dangers of driving through floodwaters in a media statement.

'You don't know what kind of debris or objects could be lurking just under the surface,' she warned.

'There is also a very good chance that the road's structure has been undermined. It's not worth risking your life or the lives of emergency services who come to rescue you.'

The 2022 Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report highlighted the risks associated with driving into floodwaters.

It found that vehicles being driven into flood waters is the leading cause of drowning, often due to motorists becoming trapped in their cars when washed away from the road surface.

The dangers of driving through flood waters extend beyond the immediate risk of drowning as it can hide debris, potholes, and even washed-out sections of road, which can cause serious damage to your vehicle.

Additionally, as little as six inches of water can cause loss of control and potential stalling if it enters the exhaust. If the water is fast-flowing, it can sweep a car off the road entirely.

If you come across a flooded road, the safest course of action is to turn around and find an alternative route.

If there is no other route, it's better to park in a safe place and wait for the water to recede.

While it might be tempting to try and navigate through flood waters, the risks far outweigh the potential time saved.

Not only could you be risking your life and the lives of others, but you could also be hit with a significant financial penalty.

Key Takeaways

• A Queensland motorist incurred a $804 fine and six demerit points for driving through flood waters despite road closure signs and barriers.
• The incident occurred in Corfield, with the driver proceeding past two road closure signs and a barrier before being stopped by police.
• Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll emphasised the dangers of driving through floodwaters, including hidden debris and potential road damage.
• The 2022 Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report indicated that vehicles entering floodwaters is a leading cause of drowning, often due to being washed away from the road surface.

Have you ever encountered a flooded road while driving? What did you do? Share your experiences and tips in the comments below.

I would like to respond to this article on cars... Or vehicles, that attempt to drive through flood waters.
Firstly, it it correct to assume that the stats of drowning actually come from the 'Surf Lifesaving Club' organisation? That should be an interesting point in itself.
But Futher... As one person has commented in these replies; I actually own one of these so called beasty machines, that are actually designed to safely navigate such waters if the driver deems it safe to do so. (I

Driving in eastern Australia can be a unique experience, especially during the wet season when roads can quickly become flooded.

However, ignoring road closure signs and attempting to navigate through floodwaters can lead to a hefty fine, as one Queensland motorist recently discovered.

In a statement released by Queensland Police, a 41-year-old man from Winton, situated in the state's mid-north, was caught driving through floodwaters in Corfield.

Despite passing two road closure signs and a barrier blocking the road, the man decided to take his chances and drove his Toyota HiLux through the flooded area.

View attachment 39856

A man who drove into flood water in Queensland got fined with a sum of $800. Image: Freepik

While he managed to navigate the floodwaters without any immediate harm, he was met by police officers on the other side.

The man was subsequently charged with careless driving, resulting in a $619 fine. An additional $185 was added for disobeying the road access signs, bringing the total fine to $804.

On top of the financial penalty, the man also received six demerit points, putting him halfway towards losing his licence.

Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll emphasised the dangers of driving through floodwaters in a media statement.

'You don't know what kind of debris or objects could be lurking just under the surface,' she warned.

'There is also a very good chance that the road's structure has been undermined. It's not worth risking your life or the lives of emergency services who come to rescue you.'

The 2022 Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report highlighted the risks associated with driving into floodwaters.

It found that vehicles being driven into flood waters is the leading cause of drowning, often due to motorists becoming trapped in their cars when washed away from the road surface.

The dangers of driving through flood waters extend beyond the immediate risk of drowning as it can hide debris, potholes, and even washed-out sections of road, which can cause serious damage to your vehicle.

Additionally, as little as six inches of water can cause loss of control and potential stalling if it enters the exhaust. If the water is fast-flowing, it can sweep a car off the road entirely.

If you come across a flooded road, the safest course of action is to turn around and find an alternative route.

If there is no other route, it's better to park in a safe place and wait for the water to recede.

While it might be tempting to try and navigate through flood waters, the risks far outweigh the potential time saved.

Not only could you be risking your life and the lives of others, but you could also be hit with a significant financial penalty.

Key Takeaways

• A Queensland motorist incurred a $804 fine and six demerit points for driving through flood waters despite road closure signs and barriers.
• The incident occurred in Corfield, with the driver proceeding past two road closure signs and a barrier before being stopped by police.
• Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll emphasised the dangers of driving through floodwaters, including hidden debris and potential road damage.
• The 2022 Royal Life Saving National Drowning Report indicated that vehicles entering floodwaters is a leading cause of drowning, often due to being washed away from the road surface.

Have you ever encountered a flooded road while driving? What did you do? Share your experiences and tips in the comments below.

I would like to reply to these posts by people who know precious little about those 'so called muscle cars' often referred to as 'off road vehicles.
It appears that when a lot of people retire, they probably loose their sense of adventure, and relax in the comfort of safety, and don't look beyond what could possibly be a some sort of safe excitement.
I am one of those people who actually drive a purpose built off road vehicle. It is a full 4wheel drive, equipped with safety features, has a lift kit, (if you ever know what that is), and I am experienced in a multitude of driving experienced, both off road, as well as driving a school bus, knowing the difference between defensive V's offensive driving. (Heavy vehicles drive differently than passenger drivers, as stated by Canadian road services, similar to VicRoads).
My issue is two fold. Firstly, often road closures are minor, with water being under the so called 6 inches quoted in one of your articles, being the danger of car stalling BC of water in the exhaust pipe. I just wish to know which car has a car exhaust at or lower than 150mm, which is the updated metric measurement we have been using in Australia since the 70's. We have a road here in the burbs of Melb, that floods about 3or3 times a year, and only being BC of an overflow from a creek. it is not moving water, is not deeper than 200mm, does not/has not ever never ever damaged the road, a person would be an idiot to actually drown in such a low lying depth of water. But the road is blocked for days and days, waiting for the water to go completely away, causing traffic problems like crazy, BC Vicroads are not the most competent people here in Victoria.
My second point, and probably my main point to all this, is what Martin Imes covered (if you know who he is... You should), and that has to do with the concept of us living in a 'nanny state's society.
The nanny state is, in its simplest term, taking away our reasonable common sense of things that occur before us, that just a little common sense would tell us if we should attempt something or not. It puts all circumstance under various umbrellas,and then everyone has to abide by these 'rules' to actually keep us all safe.
Often this is plain redicilous in itself. For an example pulled out by the original article itself... namely, speeding into an unkown body of water in a small sedan. I was tought by my father, to go slow, and when you are through, dry your brakes out by applying the brakes till they are dry and grabbing. Of course, everyone should know this, as well as to know that brakes are a sealed unit, in that,water will not enter the break fluid system this causing break failure. Common sense, right.
But unfortunately, common sense in almost every area of life is being taken away from us, and mainly due to a small percentage of people who have little no sense to begin with. They take a river crossing a road as the save risk value as standing water only 10mm deep that causes little to no problem for most common sense people. But the authorities don't allow most common sense people to make a sensical judgement call, at the expense of only those to whom it will involve. Therefore, all feet fit in the same shoes for the same purpose. That's why you have different shoes for different purposes, and different types of houses for different likes, and different cars for different purposes. So..... Come on people. If you are driving a small car, not suitable for puddles, and you are behind a truck that is an off-road vehicle, or a tow truck, etc, then common sense should tell you not to follow the truck or off-road vehicle, when the not raging river, crossing the road or highway, water level is above the wheels.
This type of policing is just too high. I don't need to be wrapped in cotton woll, and kept from danger, when I am capable of looking after myself and my belongings.
Vso, no. I guess I do not agree with almost everyone in here who try and tell everyone else, that there should be more policing on the general public, and hat, they bend the rules, let them suffer the consequences. When you drive that little car of yours, are you responsible for the sar driver behind you? Are you responsible for the guy in the next land? No. But you want me to be inconvenienced BC I can do better than most people in certain circumstances BC of the type of whatever it is that I or you .... drive. Go think about it, and maybe you will see a different view than you own.

 

[Veggiepatch]

So called muscle cars are V8 Yank tanks, not purpose built off road vehicles. Thunderbirds, Camaros, Mustangs, etc.

I will let you jump into your RAM and drive to the local shops one kilometre away and use $5.00 worth of petrol.

 

[Veggiepatch]

I would like to respond to this article on cars... Or vehicles, that attempt to drive through flood waters.
Firstly, it it correct to assume that the stats of drowning actually come from the 'Surf Lifesaving Club' organisation? That should be an interesting point in itself.
But Futher... As one person has commented in these replies; I actually own one of these so called beasty machines, that are actually designed to safely navigate such waters if the driver deems it safe to do so. (I

I would like to reply to these posts by people who know precious little about those 'so called muscle cars' often referred to as 'off road vehicles.
It appears that when a lot of people retire, they probably loose their sense of adventure, and relax in the comfort of safety, and don't look beyond what could possibly be a some sort of safe excitement.
I am one of those people who actually drive a purpose built off road vehicle. It is a full 4wheel drive, equipped with safety features, has a lift kit, (if you ever know what that is), and I am experienced in a multitude of driving experienced, both off road, as well as driving a school bus, knowing the difference between defensive V's offensive driving. (Heavy vehicles drive differently than passenger drivers, as stated by Canadian road services, similar to VicRoads).
My issue is two fold. Firstly, often road closures are minor, with water being under the so called 6 inches quoted in one of your articles, being the danger of car stalling BC of water in the exhaust pipe. I just wish to know which car has a car exhaust at or lower than 150mm, which is the updated metric measurement we have been using in Australia since the 70's. We have a road here in the burbs of Melb, that floods about 3or3 times a year, and only being BC of an overflow from a creek. it is not moving water, is not deeper than 200mm, does not/has not ever never ever damaged the road, a person would be an idiot to actually drown in such a low lying depth of water. But the road is blocked for days and days, waiting for the water to go completely away, causing traffic problems like crazy, BC Vicroads are not the most competent people here in Victoria.
My second point, and probably my main point to all this, is what Martin Imes covered (if you know who he is... You should), and that has to do with the concept of us living in a 'nanny state's society.
The nanny state is, in its simplest term, taking away our reasonable common sense of things that occur before us, that just a little common sense would tell us if we should attempt something or not. It puts all circumstance under various umbrellas,and then everyone has to abide by these 'rules' to actually keep us all safe.
Often this is plain redicilous in itself. For an example pulled out by the original article itself... namely, speeding into an unkown body of water in a small sedan. I was tought by my father, to go slow, and when you are through, dry your brakes out by applying the brakes till they are dry and grabbing. Of course, everyone should know this, as well as to know that brakes are a sealed unit, in that,water will not enter the break fluid system this causing break failure. Common sense, right.
But unfortunately, common sense in almost every area of life is being taken away from us, and mainly due to a small percentage of people who have little no sense to begin with. They take a river crossing a road as the save risk value as standing water only 10mm deep that causes little to no problem for most common sense people. But the authorities don't allow most common sense people to make a sensical judgement call, at the expense of only those to whom it will involve. Therefore, all feet fit in the same shoes for the same purpose. That's why you have different shoes for different purposes, and different types of houses for different likes, and different cars for different purposes. So..... Come on people. If you are driving a small car, not suitable for puddles, and you are behind a truck that is an off-road vehicle, or a tow truck, etc, then common sense should tell you not to follow the truck or off-road vehicle, when the not raging river, crossing the road or highway, water level is above the wheels.
This type of policing is just too high. I don't need to be wrapped in cotton woll, and kept from danger, when I am capable of looking after myself and my belongings.
Vso, no. I guess I do not agree with almost everyone in here who try and tell everyone else, that there should be more policing on the general public, and hat, they bend the rules, let them suffer the consequences. When you drive that little car of yours, are you responsible for the sar driver behind you? Are you responsible for the guy in the next land? No. But you want me to be inconvenienced BC I can do better than most people in certain circumstances BC of the type of whatever it is that I or you .... drive. Go think about it, and maybe you will see a different view than you own.

And my dick's bigger than yours!

 

[Uncle Allan]

So called muscle cars are V8 Yank tanks, not purpose built off road vehicles. Thunderbirds, Camaros, Mustangs, etc.

I will let you jump into your RAM and drive to the local shops one kilometre away and use $5.00 worth of petrol.

Yeh... That's pretty funny. I lived in America for 12 years, have visited on and off, and still can't find a truck that would use $5 of 'gas' to just go 1 mile. But honestly, did you take time to read the original article, which had to do with stupidity of the Govt and local law makers in issuing fines for driving through puddles. I understand that you may know little about the off-road vehicles that experienced people drive to go off road, which is actually what I was replying to, and not consumption of fuel in some vehicles. And... Muscle cars, insodently, are not just made and owned by Americans. Ford and GM also made big V8 cars, too, but we choose to call them NASCAR. But I'm sure you know that too. But I do perseve you are probably against other non proved things like global warming, and thus the commen on the gas guzzlers.

 

[Veggiepatch]

Yeh... That's pretty funny. I lived in America for 12 years, have visited on and off, and still can't find a truck that would use $5 of 'gas' to just go 1 mile. But honestly, did you take time to read the original article, which had to do with stupidity of the Govt and local law makers in issuing fines for driving through puddles. I understand that you may know little about the off-road vehicles that experienced people drive to go off road, which is actually what I was replying to, and not consumption of fuel in some vehicles. And... Muscle cars, insodently, are not just made and owned by Americans. Ford and GM also made big V8 cars, too, but we choose to call them NASCAR. But I'm sure you know that too. But I do perseve you are probably against other non proved things like global warming, and thus the commen on the gas guzzlers.

For the record Uncle Everything's Big In Texas, I am a staunch anti global warming advocate, and been for years before the advent of the Al Gore's mockumentary "An Inconvenient Truth". I base my views on statistical research, using many tens of thousands of data sets from various weather recording organisations for a variety of parameters.

I just laugh at the clowns at Extinction Rebellion and Greta Thunberg who rely on beliefs and emotions, rather than verifiable facts based on observation and evidence.

These turds should be fair dinkum and instead of gluing themselves to major roadways, secure themselves with masonry fasteners with an air operated tool. Hearing the screams of these pseudo new age hippies being removed sans anaesthesia would be music to my ears.

But I do digress. Remember folks, global warming causes these floods, with in turn, causes drivers to think irrationally, transforming their Audis and Austin Healeys into modern day metallic Arks.

 

[Lisa]

How dense are some people!! If it's flooded forget it! I wonder how this man got his licence because he couldn't read......or could it have been an identity crisis with his car that identified as a tinny????

 

[Lisa]

I would like to respond to this article on cars... Or vehicles, that attempt to drive through flood waters.
Firstly, it it correct to assume that the stats of drowning actually come from the 'Surf Lifesaving Club' organisation? That should be an interesting point in itself.
But Futher... As one person has commented in these replies; I actually own one of these so called beasty machines, that are actually designed to safely navigate such waters if the driver deems it safe to do so. (I

I would like to reply to these posts by people who know precious little about those 'so called muscle cars' often referred to as 'off road vehicles.
It appears that when a lot of people retire, they probably loose their sense of adventure, and relax in the comfort of safety, and don't look beyond what could possibly be a some sort of safe excitement.
I am one of those people who actually drive a purpose built off road vehicle. It is a full 4wheel drive, equipped with safety features, has a lift kit, (if you ever know what that is), and I am experienced in a multitude of driving experienced, both off road, as well as driving a school bus, knowing the difference between defensive V's offensive driving. (Heavy vehicles drive differently than passenger drivers, as stated by Canadian road services, similar to VicRoads).
My issue is two fold. Firstly, often road closures are minor, with water being under the so called 6 inches quoted in one of your articles, being the danger of car stalling BC of water in the exhaust pipe. I just wish to know which car has a car exhaust at or lower than 150mm, which is the updated metric measurement we have been using in Australia since the 70's. We have a road here in the burbs of Melb, that floods about 3or3 times a year, and only being BC of an overflow from a creek. it is not moving water, is not deeper than 200mm, does not/has not ever never ever damaged the road, a person would be an idiot to actually drown in such a low lying depth of water. But the road is blocked for days and days, waiting for the water to go completely away, causing traffic problems like crazy, BC Vicroads are not the most competent people here in Victoria.
My second point, and probably my main point to all this, is what Martin Imes covered (if you know who he is... You should), and that has to do with the concept of us living in a 'nanny state's society.
The nanny state is, in its simplest term, taking away our reasonable common sense of things that occur before us, that just a little common sense would tell us if we should attempt something or not. It puts all circumstance under various umbrellas,and then everyone has to abide by these 'rules' to actually keep us all safe.
Often this is plain redicilous in itself. For an example pulled out by the original article itself... namely, speeding into an unkown body of water in a small sedan. I was tought by my father, to go slow, and when you are through, dry your brakes out by applying the brakes till they are dry and grabbing. Of course, everyone should know this, as well as to know that brakes are a sealed unit, in that,water will not enter the break fluid system this causing break failure. Common sense, right.
But unfortunately, common sense in almost every area of life is being taken away from us, and mainly due to a small percentage of people who have little no sense to begin with. They take a river crossing a road as the save risk value as standing water only 10mm deep that causes little to no problem for most common sense people. But the authorities don't allow most common sense people to make a sensical judgement call, at the expense of only those to whom it will involve. Therefore, all feet fit in the same shoes for the same purpose. That's why you have different shoes for different purposes, and different types of houses for different likes, and different cars for different purposes. So..... Come on people. If you are driving a small car, not suitable for puddles, and you are behind a truck that is an off-road vehicle, or a tow truck, etc, then common sense should tell you not to follow the truck or off-road vehicle, when the not raging river, crossing the road or highway, water level is above the wheels.
This type of policing is just too high. I don't need to be wrapped in cotton woll, and kept from danger, when I am capable of looking after myself and my belongings.
Vso, no. I guess I do not agree with almost everyone in here who try and tell everyone else, that there should be more policing on the general public, and hat, they bend the rules, let them suffer the consequences. When you drive that little car of yours, are you responsible for the sar driver behind you? Are you responsible for the guy in the next land? No. But you want me to be inconvenienced BC I can do better than most people in certain circumstances BC of the type of whatever it is that I or you .... drive. Go think about it, and maybe you will see a different view than you own.

Wow sooking here much! There are reasons why they do this ...or are you just blind to them because you think you are invincible...seriously mate if you have a death wish..by all means that's your prerogative.. but don't try and talk others into doing it...your TOTAL lack of understanding about rules and signs is seriously scary and you are one driver that flaunts your attitude "she'll be right mate!" Maybe you should stick to fantasy land if you believe all that rubbish!! I can't believe how high your stupidity really is...stay off the road.

 

[Codger]

Even when driving through slow flowing or pooled water across a roadway there is still the issue of , 'What is beneath the water's surface?' including whether the road surface below is complete and without sink-holes. My other concern about driving through flood waters, in particular amongst built assets whether rural or such as within urban areas; the 'Bow Wave' wash is very destructive and every such motor vehicle progress causes increasing damage to the sub-water lands as well as the built environment.

 

[Maurie7]

Serve the bloody idiot right.

 

[Maurie7]

Wow sooking here much! There are reasons why they do this ...or are you just blind to them because you think you are invincible...seriously mate if you have a death wish..by all means that's your prerogative.. but don't try and talk others into doing it...your TOTAL lack of understanding about rules and signs is seriously scary and you are one driver that flaunts your attitude "she'll be right mate!" Maybe you should stick to fantasy land if you believe all that rubbish!! I can't believe how high your stupidity really is...stay off the road.

He sounds like a know all tool.

 

[OzBoz]

Maybe removing all of those depth indicators would cause the idiots not to know how deep it was, and the sign replaced with one that said "Rescue will not be attempted until the water level has cleared the road".

 

[Knell]

I would like to respond to this article on cars... Or vehicles, that attempt to drive through flood waters.
Firstly, it it correct to assume that the stats of drowning actually come from the 'Surf Lifesaving Club' organisation? That should be an interesting point in itself.
But Futher... As one person has commented in these replies; I actually own one of these so called beasty machines, that are actually designed to safely navigate such waters if the driver deems it safe to do so. (I

I would like to reply to these posts by people who know precious little about those 'so called muscle cars' often referred to as 'off road vehicles.
It appears that when a lot of people retire, they probably loose their sense of adventure, and relax in the comfort of safety, and don't look beyond what could possibly be a some sort of safe excitement.
I am one of those people who actually drive a purpose built off road vehicle. It is a full 4wheel drive, equipped with safety features, has a lift kit, (if you ever know what that is), and I am experienced in a multitude of driving experienced, both off road, as well as driving a school bus, knowing the difference between defensive V's offensive driving. (Heavy vehicles drive differently than passenger drivers, as stated by Canadian road services, similar to VicRoads).
My issue is two fold. Firstly, often road closures are minor, with water being under the so called 6 inches quoted in one of your articles, being the danger of car stalling BC of water in the exhaust pipe. I just wish to know which car has a car exhaust at or lower than 150mm, which is the updated metric measurement we have been using in Australia since the 70's. We have a road here in the burbs of Melb, that floods about 3or3 times a year, and only being BC of an overflow from a creek. it is not moving water, is not deeper than 200mm, does not/has not ever never ever damaged the road, a person would be an idiot to actually drown in such a low lying depth of water. But the road is blocked for days and days, waiting for the water to go completely away, causing traffic problems like crazy, BC Vicroads are not the most competent people here in Victoria.
My second point, and probably my main point to all this, is what Martin Imes covered (if you know who he is... You should), and that has to do with the concept of us living in a 'nanny state's society.
The nanny state is, in its simplest term, taking away our reasonable common sense of things that occur before us, that just a little common sense would tell us if we should attempt something or not. It puts all circumstance under various umbrellas,and then everyone has to abide by these 'rules' to actually keep us all safe.
Often this is plain redicilous in itself. For an example pulled out by the original article itself... namely, speeding into an unkown body of water in a small sedan. I was tought by my father, to go slow, and when you are through, dry your brakes out by applying the brakes till they are dry and grabbing. Of course, everyone should know this, as well as to know that brakes are a sealed unit, in that,water will not enter the break fluid system this causing break failure. Common sense, right.
But unfortunately, common sense in almost every area of life is being taken away from us, and mainly due to a small percentage of people who have little no sense to begin with. They take a river crossing a road as the save risk value as standing water only 10mm deep that causes little to no problem for most common sense people. But the authorities don't allow most common sense people to make a sensical judgement call, at the expense of only those to whom it will involve. Therefore, all feet fit in the same shoes for the same purpose. That's why you have different shoes for different purposes, and different types of houses for different likes, and different cars for different purposes. So..... Come on people. If you are driving a small car, not suitable for puddles, and you are behind a truck that is an off-road vehicle, or a tow truck, etc, then common sense should tell you not to follow the truck or off-road vehicle, when the not raging river, crossing the road or highway, water level is above the wheels.
This type of policing is just too high. I don't need to be wrapped in cotton woll, and kept from danger, when I am capable of looking after myself and my belongings.
Vso, no. I guess I do not agree with almost everyone in here who try and tell everyone else, that there should be more policing on the general public, and hat, they bend the rules, let them suffer the consequences. When you drive that little car of yours, are you responsible for the sar driver behind you? Are you responsible for the guy in the next land? No. But you want me to be inconvenienced BC I can do better than most people in certain circumstances BC of the type of whatever it is that I or you .... drive. Go think about it, and maybe you will see a different view than you own.

It's called Law and Order - not anarchy!

 

[Lisa]

Queensland police are instructed to collect as many fines as possible even if the so-called offence is questionable

Wow dumbest comment EVER made d!ckhead