Roll Over Protection.

[Mick_Marsh]

And yes I have been driving for 40 years

It's about time you stopped for a coffee break then.

Recently I had a blowout on the front right tyre. I was towing a Sankey trailer at 100km/h. The tyres were Bridgestone and only a few years old.
No major drama. Just a lot of annoyance. The Landrover (SIII Stage 1 on a RRC chassis) handled well and pulled up safely.
We don't know what exactly happened at the recent incident. What speed was he travelling? 100km/h or 80km/h? If I had one of these ex-ADF series vehicles, I'd be travelling with a maximum speed of 80km/h. Wasn't that the maximum speed they travelled at whilst in service?

Some years ago, I had to remove a roll bar from a soft top vehicle for insurance purposes. The Insurance company considered it an unacceptable modification. I wanted lap/sash seat belts. Check how this sits with your insurance company.

It's a personal choice. I go by the rule of "Be aware of the limitations of your vehicle, practice defensive driving and be a courteous driver."

Thought you might like to hear the opinion of one who is not and has never been a professional driver.

[juddy]

Good Points Mick.

Also noted that my Sankey Trailer as a top speed warning of 30mph on it....

[Diana Alan]

Most of my experience is with the other end of the crash, the ones who do make it to the emergency room.  Many roll overs don't, like the couple a few weeks ago near Perth, hard top SIII 88" driver dead, passenger paralysed.  Car landed on its roof which collapsed.

Treating someone with a torn spleen or bowels where  lungs should be ain't a pretty sight. Both are almost exclusively lap belt injuries.  It is why most if not all rear seats in new cars have 3 lap/sash belts.

The injuries can happen at 80KPH, as well as highway speeds, or may not happen at all, its all in the MoI.
'

[Mick_Marsh]

In Vic this weekend, there were a few bad accidents. One at Glengarry had two fatalities involved. The two were thrown from a ute that was carrying six people at the time.
So, what are you saying? We should now legislate utes to have ROPS and three point harnesses in the back? These things will continue to happen. We cannot legislate against poor judgement.

We get back to the nanny state thing. People should accept responsibility. If you feel you need ROPS to make you safer at highway speed, sure, do what you must. Your choice.

I might point out, quite some years ago, I had about six people in the back of my ute. One was flung from the tray. No injuries. Had no Idea what speed I was going. Was not travelling fast enough for the speedo to register.

[Diana Alan]

Hi Mick

I'm not saying that. 

Our SIII GS are not actually civilian approved to carry people in the back.  Look at the compliance plate and you will see it is certified for 3 people.  People shouldn't be in the back of utes and the intoxicated driver on the Tarralgan Road shouldn't have had 6 people in a ute certified for one or two passengers plus the driver.

I am suggesting that 2 point harnesses have dangers that 3, 4 or 5 point harnesses don't have.

Also I believe that in a car with a relatively narrow track and relatively high centre of gravity and no strength in the roof that we should consider ROP.  (A roll over on a side slope off-road at minimal speed is just as dangerous.)

Diana

[juddy]

And thats why some many years ago, in the UK all tractors had to have ROPS fitted, farmers, small holdings, even people who just kept a horse  ( my friend was one of those ) had to get ROPS fitted.

But I have not heard of many accidents in the uk, with series land rovers, that have prompted the possible use of ROPS.

Other factors are more often the cause of these incidents. 

But Land Rovers with roofs are not that good in a roll over, Diana pointed out that the Perenties have ROPS fitted, also alot of land rovers are fitted with ROP, for expedition use, Land Rover fitted the camels and G4s with protection.  and the SVX was fitted with ROPS.

Accidents will always happen, but most owners on here should be well experienced with there older land rover.

[Diana Alan]

Series IIa SASR Landies have a form of ROPS.

I'm not saying that we must, I'm saying we should consider, after all even the RTA historic vehicle policy accepts safety improvements

[cookey]

To start with, there are many issues here.

Without knowing all the facts and circumstances of Mike's last drive, we shouldn't be making assumptions. Perhaps a flat tyre is the result of the roll over and not the cause of it. (Mike's FFR had 3xSeries 3 rims and 1xSeries2a rim fitted. None of these were safety rims. It is very easy for these rims to allow the tyre to pop off the bead when subjected to very high side loads as in a roll over situation when the vehicle lands on the tyre. This is commonly called an "air out".)

Some of these tyres may be more than 25 years old. My experience is that approx. 30% of this type of tyre that I have purchased (ex defence auctions) has defects in the carcase or walls. It is VERY important to subject them to close examination.

Most of the so called "roll over bars" that I have seen fitted to these vehicles aren't worth a cold crumpet. They are mounted in any old fashion to the alloy body work and may be suitable as a rifle rest when out shooting, but that's about all. If a seat belt anchorage point is incorporated and the "roll bar" tears away in an accident, what happens to the occupants? Any ROP installation should be mounted to the vehicle chassis and suitably braced. In NSW it must be approved by a Certifying Engineer. The same applies to seat belt anchorages.

I agree with Roughie in that it is much, much better to avoid the crash in the first place. This is where driver education comes in. How many drivers know what action to take in the event of a blow out?

In this day and age most knew vehicles are fitted with power steering, which makes the vehicle much more controllable in the case of a blow out, especially if it occurs on the steer axle. I personally think that power steering would add a lot more safety than a ROP device.
Perhaps we should be thinking more along these lines.........

cookey

[Chazza]

Let us consider the facts, rather than what we think someone else means.

I mentioned earlier that I plan to fit a roll-bar to my S1; I was prompted to think of doing this, by first-hand reports from two S1 crash survivors, who told us what had happened on the old S1 email forum.

Survivor 1; was hit in the rear whilst travelling on an A-road dual-carriageway in the UK by a miniscule Renault; he was doing about 50mph and lost control. The S1 rolled several times throwing him out of the door space (no burst-proof catches; no seatbelts) and when his body had finally come to a stop on the hard-shoulder, the car with one final roll, fell on him, breaking his back! I can't remember if he became a paraplegic (Diana might).

Survivor 2; in response to Survivor 1 reported on his crash in NZ. He was travelling in surburbia at 60km/h; a car load of hoons drove through a stop sign and Survivor 2 collided with the hoon's door. The S1 cartwheeled over the hoon and came to a halt on the road upside down. Survivor 2 who had fitted a seatbelt and a roll-bar described how the doors had flown off and had he not been strapped in and had a ROP, then he wouldn't have been here to tell the story. Three kids died in the hoon car and one survived.

Both stories convinced me to give a ROP and 3 point seatbelts a go. If anyone else in the World doesn't want them, I am happy for them to exercise their legal right and so is the Govt.

In the above cases, driving safely and carefully was what the Land-Rover owners were doing; poor driving by others is not always within our control.

Diana is not trying to get laws changed, or demanding that we modify our cars; she is merely pointing out that the chances of surviving an accident in old Land Rovers, with any sort of decent life afterwards, is rather small and not a pleasant experience for anyone.

People who think that surviving a crash at 80km/h hour is easy, need to acquaint themselves with the road safety facts. At 40km/h passengers have no chance of avoiding being thrown around the cabin or out of the car; at 60km/h the chance of surviving without major trauma is very small; above 60km/h survivability is so small a chance, that airbags; ROPs; crumple-zones; seatbelts, etc. have become largely superfluous. The above facts refer to collision with another vehicle; hitting solid objects such as a tree is much worse.

I have considered the risk - as Diana and and others have advised - and I will try to fit seatbelts and a roll-bar but that doesn't mean anyone else has to; it is your life!

Cheers Charlie

[DennisM]

I drove my 'Bloodbox' to Corowa in 2009, I swapped wheels off another Land Rover and fitted the 109 with Olympic's, I drove down, around and back, in various degrees of temp, speed around 40-50 MPH, coming home I had 6 extra tyres that I bought in Corowa so that added to the weight on the homeward journey, I had no issues what so ever, I'm quite happy chugging along at 40-50MPH.
I don't think any of us will know what exactly happened to the fellow, unless you are permitted acess to Coroners court!, how fast was he travelling, what were the conditions of the road surface, was that a factor!!, did the tyre shred itself, or was it punctured, faulty tube?, the trailer probably didn't help the situation either, I only have one Land Rover with them fitted, cheers Dennis

[FFRMAN]

HI,

After the events last week I am seriously thinking of roll over protection, not because I don't drive safely but it got me thinking.

A couple of weeks ago driving to Lismore (Vic) for a series 1 day a person backed out of their drive way on my side of the road but looking the other way (I think they where trying to back out to the opposite side of the road and then drive towards my direction), when they thought to look to the left they where right in front of me, 80km/h zone, by the time they put it in drive and drove back up the driveway I had full emergency braking, realising I wasn't going to stop in time I swerved to the other side of the road (no oncoming traffic) to get around them - all safe but......

This was in my S3 FFR with Olympic steel treks - exactly the same as Mike Edwards who I knew quite well.

So for me personal safety comes first and perhaps at the cost of authenticity, Cookey's disc brakes might be an option. The army did retro fit S3 that stayed in service late, with roll over protection.

The Olympic steeltreks is an interesting one, actually on Saturday at Corowa I was talking to Mike about him wanting a couple of S3 rims which I was going to give him in the next couple of weeks, we were looking at his wheels and tyres and everything looked fine.

I bought some tyres off Manheims late last year and really out of 5 pallets only about 4 tyres are good enough to put on a vehicle, I also got a couple of Michelins in the pallets, one steaked through the side wall and the other the bead had been killed by a poor tyre fitter, should they really be selling unsafe tyres?, the usable tyres I will use on farm trailers.

I think I will invest in brand new Michelins and have them fitted by professional tyre shop (they will at least have a military flavour), I also have new firestone bar treads on one of the vehicles which is good for local displays etc

Does anyone know of a company manufacturing ROPS for series Land Rovers?

Thanks
Scott

[juddy]

I will going with the Michelins, as I have a container coming over maybe we can offer a bulk buy if any ones Interested?

[navigation]

Does anyone know of a company manufacturing ROPS for series Land Rovers?

Thanks
Scott

Scott, I've often considered installing ROP into my 109 as it's been modified so far away from standard spec that I'm pushing the parcel whenever I drive it hard into a bend, and oftentimes I'm halfway into the bend and hanging onto it when the ROP issue springs to mind.

I've looked at a few different types of ROP and it's my opinion that each are a tradeoff in one way or another.

Look at the external cages, then look at how heavy they are, exacerbating the body roll and once the vehicle tips, the added weight and structural stability (slight at best) can actually encourage the vehicle to keep on rolling.

Look at what happens to the windscreen in just about every roll over, it always folds back into your headspace. Add an overhead roof console and you again decrease head space. No cage I've seen to date has yet been adequately designed and constructed to overcome this problem in an aluminium bodied vehicle.

Bolting/plating the cage to an aluminium body also isn't ideal for when a decent impact is placed upon the plated area, the flimsy aluminium panel just collapses and many times the cage and plates will just press straight through the aluminium in an instant, further compromising the cage's effectiveness. The cage needs to be tied into the chassis to give it integrity.

I once gave thought to designing a simple cage with a spring loaded top bars, which locked when extended (think adjustable walking stick type arrangement) atop/across the roof at the front and the rear of the cabin, which was rigged to a switch/roll meter, so it would electonically trigger and extend the bars if the vehicle ever exceeded a preset angle, popping the 2x bars upward by a couple foot and instantly locking them. I reasoned that this would stop a vehicle rolling as it increased the height by a couple foot and might allow the vehicle to just lay over on its side and slide rather than continue to roll.

Something to think about anyway...

Do you follow what I'm trying to say?

I've had ROP in steel bodied vehicles before and know a little bit about it, but I'm still to see a decent ROP design for these psuedo empty coke can vehicles.

[Diana Alan]

Most external bars lack transverse and longitudinal bracing so are not so great in dynamic rollovers but are O.K. in low speed rolls.

Would be good to acquire the perentie ROPs and the body/chassis brackets to fit them.

[Diana Alan]

Perentie ROP