MP's completely f**king clueless and believe their own tosh.

[FOZ1]

If you say so

Chris

I do, I do :D:D

[Mr Wobblytickle]

"Ms Ellman, Labour MP for Liverpool Riverside, said if 3,000 people a year were killed in train crashes there would be a national outcry."

Maybe not.

125,000 people die from smoking every year in the UK and nobody seems that bothered, not least the Government who, of course, make tons of cash from millions of, er, addicts.

Double standards and a mental morality, gotta love dem politicians.

Edited 2 November, 2008 by Mr Wobblytickle

[robmawer]

Sometimes no matter what you do the other party can make it impossible to avoid them.

Er...taking account of other's actions to ensure safety is part of defensive driving...something which is taught at a learner driver level!

Rob.

[FOZ1]

Er...taking account of other's actions to ensure safety is part of defensive driving...something which is taught at a learner driver level! (are you sure, as some of the things you see on the roads today would tend to put this in question )

Rob.

Er........

Explain just how you take account of something unexpected? as the clue is in the description, you are not expecting it.......... No matter how safely you drive there will eventually be an occation you cannot anticipate or avoid, this does not make it your fault. Or do you advocate never going out in your car incase you have an accident.

[robmawer]

Explain just how you take account of something unexpected? as the clue is in the description, you are not expecting it...

It's a fairly basic rule - drive so that you can stop within the distance that you can see. If you can see the hazard, you can avoid it. Barring someone teleporting in front of your car then you should find nothing occurs in front of you which you are not able to deal with. If someone *does* teleport in front of your car, then I'll give you that as "unexpected" - but I very much doubt any accident to date has been attributed to this.

Rob.

[cheezemonkhai]

what about the guy overtaking you on the road that has a blow out or loses it because they are driving like a twonk?

[ScoobyChris]

what about the guy overtaking you on the road that has a blow out or loses it because they are driving like a twonk?

If someone is overtaking me, I'll have eased off to allow them to get past easily (not that many people overtake me ) or if they're driving like a twonk behind me, I'll make sure I encourage them to get past. Maintaining a "safety bubble" around is the key and always having an escape route.

Chris

[robmawer]

what about the guy overtaking you on the road that has a blow out or loses it because they are driving like a twonk?

If you can't avoid it, you're too close to it - if someone's overtaking you and it leaves you no space to avoid hazards, make space...slow down a touch when he's out - it'll allow him to pass you quicker and it will allow you to get some space back around your car.

Rob.

[cheezemonkhai]

If you can't avoid it, you're too close to it - if someone's overtaking you and it leaves you no space to avoid hazards, make space...slow down a touch when he's out - it'll allow him to pass you quicker and it will allow you to get some space back around your car.

Rob.

I don't disagree with what you are saying about leaving space, however if somebody has a blow out along side you and spins you're stuffed even if you have lifted off to let them past.

[ScoobyChris]

I don't disagree with what you are saying about leaving space, however if somebody has a blow out along side you and spins you're stuffed even if you have lifted off to let them past.

So leave space, plan ahead and minimise the time they are sat beside you to as little as possible! All the time they are alongside you, they've deprived you of (one of) your escape route so it makes sense to do whatever you can to reinstate it. If you don't you will be stuffed!

Chris

[robmawer]

I don't disagree with what you are saying about leaving space, however if somebody has a blow out along side you and spins you're stuffed even if you have lifted off to let them past.

I said "slow down", not "lift off" - if lifting off isn't enough to give them a significant speed advantage over you to minimise the time they're alongside you, use the brakes too. That way if you are unlucky enough for them to suffer a tyre failure in the second or two they're alongside you, you're slowing down and your foot's on the brake pedal already...

Rob.

[cjb]

How can they be driving/acting in a safe manner if they're involved in a collision? :confused:

Chris

Sat stationary at traffic lights, hit from behind?

Hit from behind having stopped just short of a stationary car sideways on in lane 3 of a motorway, in rush hour, with other vehicles alongside you, so no escape route?

[these first 2 have happened to me]

Driving along a busy High St at very low speed, car pulls out without warning as you are about to pass it?

parked at the side of the road, driver misjudges gap, takes off your mirror?

Car comes over brow of a hill on the wrong side of the road- you've left enough gap to stop, but not enough for him as well- should you allow double the braking distance just in case this happens?

There are plenty of times when you might not have time or space to avoid a collision, even if you are driving sensibly.

I know where you are coming from- I recently avoided being rear-ended when someone wasn't paying attention by letting go of the brakes for a second- but you can't always avoid other peoples mistakes.

So leave space, plan ahead and minimise the time they are sat beside you to as little as possible! All the time they are alongside you, they've deprived you of (one of) your escape route so it makes sense to do whatever you can to reinstate it. If you don't you will be stuffed!

Chris

Have to agree with everything said here, but it's just not always possible. I do try to follow that advice, but modern urban traffic means that you will end up with the safety bubble compromised at least some of the time.

[swedishskoda]

Sat stationary at traffic lights, hit from behind?

Hit from behind having stopped just short of a stationary car sideways on in lane 3 of a motorway, in rush hour, with other vehicles alongside you, so no escape route?

[these first 2 have happened to me]

Driving along a busy High St at very low speed, car pulls out without warning as you are about to pass it?

parked at the side of the road, driver misjudges gap, takes off your mirror?

Car comes over brow of a hill on the wrong side of the road- you've left enough gap to stop, but not enough for him as well- should you allow double the braking distance just in case this happens?

There are plenty of times when you might not have time or space to avoid a collision, even if you are driving sensibly.

You're absolutely right. Last major collison I was involved in (1986 or so) was when a guy came from the opposite direction and made an u-turn just in front of me (heading for the off-license shop ) smashing my wing. I'll never forget the d1ckhead telling me that he was a public prosecutor and had sat on many traffic trials and that this "obviously was a case of shared responsibility" :P "Let's leave it to our insurance companies to find out", I replied

But these collisions rarely lead to loss of life (even if they can lead to severe whiplash injuries) and fatal accidents (and possible masures against) was what the thread started with.

[ScoobyChris]

There are plenty of times when you might not have time or space to avoid a collision, even if you are driving sensibly.

Ok - I'm not going to go through your examples one by one, but this point interests me. It sounds quite defeatist to me Now, I quite like the car the shape it's in, and I also quite like being the height I am, so I'll do whatever I can to avoid being in an accident. For this reason it seems crazy to me to drive into a situation where I don't think I have a pretty good hope of coming out the other side.

If I'm sat at the back of a queue of traffic, I want to leave myself some room for manouevre in front of me and also make it plainly obvious to people approaching I'm not moving (holding on the brake lights or flashing them on or off works well for me). If I'm approaching

Cars rarely pull out without warning. Is the driver looking at you? Are the car's brake lights lit? Is the engine running? Is the car occupied? Are the wheels turned?

If you're approaching a brow of a hill with limited or no visibility, what's the best way of telling someone who might be approaching that you're there? Use the horn maybe? Or main beam at night? Next time you approach that brow how much space will you be leaving? Chances are you'll be expecting the same thing to happen again, but this time you'll be more prepared.

My point really is that it's very easy to just lay blame on someone else, when in truth if a collision occurs both parties are to blame.

Chris

[robmawer]

Sat stationary at traffic lights, hit from behind?

Plan ahead to reduce the amount of time stationary at traffic lights - if you have to stop, leave yourself with enough space so that you have an escape route if the person behind doesn't look like they're stopping.

Hit from behind having stopped just short of a stationary car sideways on in lane 3 of a motorway, in rush hour, with other vehicles alongside you, so no escape route?

Don't move into lane 3 unless you've already planned your return to lane 2...ie. treat it like a proper overtaking manouevre so you've either retained your existing space in lane 2, or have enough room to get back into lane 3. That way you're driving to what you can see, and are a lot less likely to have to take evasive action to come to an abrupt halt.

Driving along a busy High St at very low speed, car pulls out without warning as you are about to pass it?

The car has to start moving - you can anticipate cars pulling out by the movement of the wheels (turning away from the curb, and also rolling forward). If you don't have any room to move sideways to avoid the car, your escape route has to come by slowing down to leave yourself enough time to react.

If it's that busy you can't see the driver in the car that's moving off, would you be able to see a kid crossing between parked cars and avoid them/stop in time if they stepped out?

parked at the side of the road, driver misjudges gap, takes off your mirror?

That's parking not driving.

Car comes over brow of a hill on the wrong side of the road- you've left enough gap to stop, but not enough for him as well- should you allow double the braking distance just in case this happens?

If you're heading towards a blind brow, surely you're not going to be carrying much speed anyway, at least until your view of what's beyond the brow opens up? In which case you should have plenty of space to stop in - and if there's no escape routes to the side, then IMHO it would probably be sensible to scrub off as much speed as possible to allow yourself the best chance to react.

Rob.

[cjb]

Cars rarely pull out without warning. Is the driver looking at you? Are the car's brake lights lit? Is the engine running? Is the car occupied? Are the wheels turned?

Rarely, yes, which is why we wouldn't realistically expect them to.

My only point here is that it *is* possible to be involved in a collision while driving safely, it's just that drving safely makes it many, many times less likely.

If you're approaching a brow of a hill with limited or no visibility, what's the best way of telling someone who might be approaching that you're there? Use the horn maybe? Or main beam at night? Next time you approach that brow how much space will you be leaving? Chances are you'll be expecting the same thing to happen again, but this time you'll be more prepared.

I was more thinking of what I saw happen in front of me once. Minding my own business in a stream of traffic on a NSL SCin Yorkshire, at about 55-60 mph, so good progress, lost of space, good visibility.

Corsa overtakes me, and the car in front. It was a little tight, but OK.

He then proceeds to overtake the next 2 over a blind crest. Me and SWMBO both involuntarily say "Oh my God!". He makes it, but anything the other way would not have stood a change- he was approaching at 70-80, so closing speed at least 120?

Incidentally, he was in a ditch about 5 miles on....

My point really is that it's very easy to just lay blame on someone else, when in truth if a collision occurs both parties are to blame.

Chris

See your point entirely, but can't agree with you if someone piles into the back of you at a red light, that has been red for 10 seconds, and you are in neutral, with the handbrake and foot brake on , and they've come flying around at too high a speed.

Your point of course is that we should all drive defensively, leave space, take every precaution. You're right. It's just sometimes, even that won't save you.

[cjb]

But these collisions rarely lead to loss of life (even if they can lead to severe whiplash injuries) and fatal accidents (and possible masures against) was what the thread started with.

True, but see one of my experiences in my reply to ScoobyChris. That could have been fatal, and not just for the Corsa driver.

[robmawer]

He makes it, but anything the other way would not have stood a change- he was approaching at 70-80, so closing speed at least 120?

Only if the other person is approaching the blind crest at a steady 40 - 50...which, given that there could be a low car broken down in the road on the other side of the crest sounds like it would be too fast an approach speed anyway...

Rob.

[cjb]

Plan ahead to reduce the amount of time stationary at traffic lights - if you have to stop, leave yourself with enough space so that you have an escape route if the person behind doesn't look like they're stopping.

In that case, the person not stopping wasn't in sight when I stopped. Traffic lights on an island, so view behind wasn't far enough. I'd stopped in good time as the light changed, he came from another feeder road while I was waiting on the red phase.

Don't move into lane 3 unless you've already planned your return to lane 2...ie. treat it like a proper overtaking manouevre so you've either retained your existing space in lane 2, or have enough room to get back into lane 3. That way you're driving to what you can see, and are a lot less likely to have to take evasive action to come to an abrupt halt.

In 3 lanes of solid traffic, with all 3 lanes varying in speed? Even if you've got a planned return to L2, in very dense traffic (much of it travelling too close to one another), that's a pretty tricky move. If you leave yourself a good space, all too often someone will fill it for you.

Again, very sensible advice, but a densely packed urban motorway doesn't make this possible all the time.

The car has to start moving - you can anticipate cars pulling out by the movement of the wheels (turning away from the curb, and also rolling forward). If you don't have any room to move sideways to avoid the car, your escape route has to come by slowing down to leave yourself enough time to react.

If it's that busy you can't see the driver in the car that's moving off, would you be able to see a kid crossing between parked cars and avoid them/stop in time if they stepped out?

This was my weakest argument of course. I was imagining a slow queue, you accross the end of a T junction, moving at perhaps 2 mph, driver looks sideways- nothing coming- drives into the side of you, hitting the rear wing. You've already passed them, they didn't look.

That's parking not driving.

. yes, but I was playing devil's advocate. You're involved in a collision and can't avoid it- that's my point.

If you're heading towards a blind brow, surely you're not going to be carrying much speed anyway, at least until your view of what's beyond the brow opens up? In which case you should have plenty of space to stop in - and if there's no escape routes to the side, then IMHO it would probably be sensible to scrub off as much speed as possible to allow yourself the best chance to react.

Indeed, but if there's a real idiot coming the other way, that might not help you even if you stop. You would hardly approach it as if there might be someone coming over at (being daft here) 200mph, could you?

I'm not disagreeing with all of these very sensible techniques: my only argument is that sometimes people will negate all your best efforts....

[cjb]

Only if the other person is approaching the blind crest at a steady 40 - 50...which, given that there could be a low car broken down in the road on the other side of the crest sounds like it would be too fast an approach speed anyway...

Rob.

As it happens, when the idiot concerned did lose it, he did it in a low point between two crests. The traffic stream I was in at 55-60 stopped OK, avoiding him, with no drama.

There's a lot of difference between accounting for stationary object several hundred yards ahead, and a car coming towards you at 70-80.

Again, playing devil's advocate for a moment, should we all drive on the motorway as if soemthing might break through the barrier at a 120+ mph closing speed?

[ItsOnlyMe_vRS]

The simple answer as to why motorists are always focused on is the fact that they can be regulated by laws and policing. Its virtually impossible to place major restrictions on pedestrians as they could never be enforced and the policing costs if it were tried would be astronomical.

[robmawer]

In that case, the person not stopping wasn't in sight when I stopped. Traffic lights on an island, so view behind wasn't far enough. I'd stopped in good time as the light changed, he came from another feeder road while I was waiting on the red phase.

I'm not too sure on the road layout...though you can control how much space you leave in front of you to "escape" into, so whether you can see the person behind when you stop or not shouldn't really come into it, as you can leave the escape space in anticipation of someone joining the queue behind you?

In 3 lanes of solid traffic, with all 3 lanes varying in speed? Even if you've got a planned return to L2, in very dense traffic (much of it travelling too close to one another), that's a pretty tricky move. If you leave yourself a good space, all too often someone will fill it for you.

I'd rather leave a gap and have someone fill it so I have to make another gap rather than not leave a gap at all on the off chance someone might fill it...

What was there to gain from moving to lane 3 from lane 2? If the traffic was that dense you couldn't plan a return to lane 2, would it not have been so dense that changing lanes wouldn't have given you any real gain anyway?

This was my weakest argument of course. I was imagining a slow queue, you accross the end of a T junction, moving at perhaps 2 mph, driver looks sideways- nothing coming- drives into the side of you, hitting the rear wing. You've already passed them, they didn't look.

Hmm...again, I'd say it's about having space to escape, and looking for the early warning signs that the car's moving...

. yes, but I was playing devil's advocate. You're involved in a collision and can't avoid it- that's my point.

OK, in that case I'd say park somewhere that people are less likely to misjudge the gap.

Indeed, but if there's a real idiot coming the other way, that might not help you even if you stop. You would hardly approach it as if there might be someone coming over at (being daft here) 200mph, could you?

A lot would come down to finding the clues to help you anticipate it - a car doing 70/80 isn't going to be making that much noise, while a vehicle doing 200 is likely to be making a fair old racket. So while anticipating it by sight might not leave you much room, if you can hear a car going full chat then keeping out to the left/reducing the speed will help increase your chances of dealing with the hazard...

Rob.

[ScoobyChris]

What was there to gain from moving to lane 3 from lane 2? If the traffic was that dense you couldn't plan a return to lane 2, would it not have been so dense that changing lanes wouldn't have given you any real gain anyway?

An interesting point - imho lanes 1 and lanes 3 (outside lane) are the best lanes to be in as you only have to manage traffic from one side, giving you some usable escape space on the other side.

Chris

[ScoobyChris]

My only point here is that it *is* possible to be involved in a collision while driving safely, it's just that drving safely makes it many, many times less likely.

Ah ok - the distinction between what we are saying has just dawned on me My original quote referred to someone driving "safely" who could not react because something unexpected happens in front of them so they did the colliding.

I agree that you can't control everything that happens behind you but there's certainly a case for influencing it and the fact that you are present and available to be hit means you're still partially to blame

Chris

[robmawer]

An interesting point - imho lanes 1 and lanes 3 (outside lane) are the best lanes to be in as you only have to manage traffic from one side, giving you some usable escape space on the other side.

Yes, I'd rather be in lane 1 (hard shoulder and poss. lane 2 as potential escapes) than lane 2 (poss. lane 1 or lane 3 as escapes) or lane 3 (poss lane 2. as escape)...my comment about not moving from lane 2 to lane 3 was working on being in lane 2 already with a good reason for not being in lane 1.

Personally I'd rather manage traffic on both sides and have potential road to move in to from lane 2, than manage traffic on one side and have an escape route of the crash barrier in lane 3...

Rob.