Whoops

[FromTheDarkness]

[AccoSnr]

No where else for the driver to go and did pretty well under the circumstances. Sometimes you might wish you had wings!

[FluffyEyeball]

:peek: 

 

The one that originally swerved is lucky they didn't hit anything, doesn't look like he looked before swerving! 

[GoneToBeemer]

:peek:

The one that originally swerved is lucky they didn't hit anything, doesn't look like he looked before swerving!

It would have been purely instinctual reaction

[SkodaVRS1963]

Traffic moving freely in lanes 1 and 2, stopped in lane 3.

 

God bless British motorists lane discipline.

 

Another NCB bites the dust.

[GoneToBeemer]

Traffic moving freely in lanes 1 and 2, stopped in lane 3.

God bless British motorists lane discipline.

Another NCB bites the dust.

Still baffles me how people manage to have accidents on motorways!

[lmorris2794]

Still baffles me how people manage to have accidents on motorways!

Because they are s*it drivers!

Edited 24 September, 2016 by lmorris2794

[FromTheDarkness]

No where else for the driver to go and did pretty well under the circumstances. Sometimes you might wish you had wings!

 

The skoda was very poor driving in my opinion, they failed to read the road ahead, they failed to see the traffic was not moving, they failed to see the brake lights of the stood traffic, they did not use any awareness. The car with the dash cam, was unfortunate as they could not see in front of the Skoda, and when it swerved at the last minute would be hard not to hit the car in front. The fault is the Skodas.

[AccoSnr]

AccoSnr, on 24 Sept 2016 - 17:20, said:

No where else for the driver to go and did pretty well under the circumstances. Sometimes you might wish you had wings!

FromTheDarkness said:

The skoda was very poor driving in my opinion, they failed to read the road ahead, they failed to see the traffic was not moving, they failed to see the brake lights of the stood traffic, they did not use any awareness. The car with the dash cam, was unfortunate as they could not see in front of the Skoda, and when it swerved at the last minute would be hard not to hit the car in front. The fault is the Skodas.

FromTheDarkness, I was referring to the driver at the rear with camera. Agreed about the idiot who wasn't paying attention and veered off to the left (Skoda).

[YMe]

Skoda driver a lucky idiot and should be permanently banned from driving as should the driver of the vehicle with the dash cam. If he couldn't stop he was too close to the car in front of the car in front if you see what I mean. Excessive speed all round.

Edited 25 September, 2016 by YMe

[FluffyEyeball]

Skoda driver a lucky idiot and should be permanently banned from driving as should the driver of the vehicle with the dash cam. If he couldn't stop he was too close to the car in front of the car in front if you see what I mean. Excessive speed all round.

 

That's a little unfair I think; if the Skoda had simply slammed on (before it was too late), then the camera car would have stood a pretty good chance of stopping in time. As has actually happened, the camera car hasn't had the grace of someone elses stopping distance in front of them, as the traffic was already stopped and the stopped traffic cannot be seen until the Skoda moves out of the way, which is already at the last minute because he/she wasn't paying attention.

 

At the point he became too close to the stationary traffic to stop he still could not see that it was there, or that anything was wrong, because the Skoda was still in front of him and steaming along at normal speed.

[Guest]

Which means the Camera Car was travelling too close to the car in front. If the Skoda hadn't moved into the middle lane and instead piled into the column of stationery traffic, the Camera Car would have piled into him as he hasn't left enough braking space.

As it was the Skoda still hit the car in front of him (VW Polo?) and it appears to me that he is also hit by the white van.

Also why did neither of the cars pull back into the middle lane after over taking the lorry, as they should have done? (the white van would not/should not have pulled into the middle lane at that point.

[FluffyEyeball]

You can see the camera car about to move back into lane two after their overtake, but then the white van moves there instead so they readjust back into lane 3, he has nowhere else to go.

[MaggotUK]

Well, it was clear that this was very unfortunate, and the camera car really had little choice where to go, but it could have been so much worse!  Car in front of camera car clearly was not paying attention and had to swerve, and camera car had nowhere to go. 

 

Yes agreed, in reality the camera car has to carry some fault, as there was clearly insufficient stopping distance, and if he had left the required amount, i don't believe he would have had an issue.  The stopping distances in the highway code have been proven again and again to be more than sufficient, especially for modern cars.

 

Lastly, i believe the main cause of this has to be the queue in the outside lane.  I know we can't see from this what was causing the queue, but as many have pointed out, it is likely to be bad use of the lanes.  I see so many people sitting in the outside lane when there is no need to, it is comical. Especially in dead of night, 4 lanes of motorway empty, and there they are stuck to the outside lane!  Only one thing worse, is the geriatric drivers who insist on the second lane NO MATTER WHAT!

 

Infuriating!

[London Les]

Interesting to see how 'front assist' would have coped with this extreme scenario - high speed into stationary traffic - I expect it would have reduced the collision speed at least.

[Jigger72]

Stationary car in front of swerving car had its hazard lights on so entirely the fault of the swerving driver for not paying attention.

 

That said, van driver moving from 1st to 2nd lane could have gauged the speed of swerving driver's approach to stationary traffic and delayed his move. Bit harsh perhaps as he was making a legitimate move and wouldn't necessarily have an obligation to be watching lane 3 for signs of extreme idiocy.

 

Dash cam guy had two car lengths room between him and swerve guy, but clearly this isn't enough when traveling at 70(?) and a sudden incident occurs.

 

This is how multiple pile-ups happen kids – it only takes 1 bad driver to wipe out three lanes. Idiot!

[CainDingle]

Stationary car in front of swerving car had its hazard lights on so entirely the fault of the swerving driver for not paying attention.

 

That said, van driver moving from 1st to 2nd lane could have gauged the speed of swerving driver's approach to stationary traffic and delayed his move. Bit harsh perhaps as he was making a legitimate move and wouldn't necessarily have an obligation to be watching lane 3 for signs of extreme idiocy.

 

Dash cam guy had two car lengths room between him and swerve guy, but clearly this isn't enough when traveling at 70(?) and a sudden incident occurs.

 

This is how multiple pile-ups happen kids – it only takes 1 bad driver to wipe out three lanes. Idiot!

 

I think this is spot on. Skoda guy clearly most at fault, but the van seems to me to have had the benefit of a clear view of the stationary traffic in lane 3 and it's not beyond the realms of human endeavour in those circumstances - if you, y'know, look ahead and that - to think 'hang on, best to keep 2 clear here in case someone needs it'. We've all been in a situation when motorway driving when something odd starts to happen in an overtaking lane and the best thing to do is drop back a bit and plan your escape onto the hard shoulder/verge, in case some bugger ends up flying sideways across the carriageway.

 

Camera guy was certainly too close but the manner in which he dealt with it when the accident became unavoidable is actually quite impressive. Also, WTF is with this trend for queuing in the outside lane?

Edited 30 September, 2016 by CainDingle

[bigjim73]

Yup Skoda is at fault and caused 2 accidents (hitting the polo and the camera car hitting the Seat).

 

Typical idiot driver not paying attention to the road in front of him, he clearly was not watching the road, no brakes until he swerves and clips the polo.

 

Camera car guy was unlucky but also an idiot for not watching the road, I'd always try to position myself to see around the car in front of me, maybe up to 5-6 cars ahead whether that's by hogging the white line or by moving more over to the lines by the centre lane.

 

It's very easy to sit here and poke fingers but we could say a other drivers are at fault also, van driver pulling out into lane 2 and clearly NOT reading the road or traffic to the side and in front of him.

 

Fortunately it looks like no-one was badly injured only a few dented panels and NCB's

[Coops]

<snip>.....Also, WTF is with this trend for queuing in the outside lane?

 

Because drivers think this is the quickest lane. Little do they know that lane 1 is generally the quickest in stop start traffic.

 

Just travel on the M42 variable section at night. Lane 1 (formally the hard shoulder) is as empty as anything, everyone including so called professional LGV drivers, sit in lane 2, the middle lane sitters then panic as there isn't a "middle lane" per se so just use lane 3 (which was the middle lane anyway) leaving every bugger else in lane 4 constantly braking!

[bigjim73]

Spot on Coops, not just the motorways but also most A roads, my commute is A13, M25, A2 and I sit in the inside lane most of the way. Even in heavy traffic it's still the fastest moving lane

[KenONeill]

Because drivers think this is the quickest lane. Little do they know that lane 1 is generally the quickest in stop start traffic.

 

Just travel on the M42 variable section at night. Lane 1 (formally the hard shoulder) is as empty as anything, everyone including so called professional LGV drivers, sit in lane 2, the middle lane sitters then panic as there isn't a "middle lane" per se so just use lane 3 (which was the middle lane anyway) leaving every bugger else in lane 4 constantly braking!

I thought that the "hard shoulder" was only a part-time running lane on variable motorways?

[Coops]

I thought that the "hard shoulder" was only a part-time running lane on variable motorways?

 

Yes that is correct but it is generally live through both morning and evening rush hours. Even when I go through at around 7pm it is still live.

[KenONeill]

Yes that is correct but it is generally live through both morning and evening rush hours. Even when I go through at around 7pm it is still live.

Fair enough. I've also got the notion that M6 to M40 (westbound) it has a habit at times of becoming the slip road? (based on impression gained in heavy traffic at Easter 2015).

[vRSAnt]

Front driver clearly a total ****

 

Driver behind, a little inexperienced to allow to get caught up in other drivers mess - but far less guilty of any actual due care - but due to the inexperience

(or poor visibility due to car ride position perhaps) caught up in accident consequently anyway - never mind. Nice attempt to minimise damage though.

The lack of braking cycle clearly affected the 2nd driver, so it was definitely the driver 2 being pulled into the error by driver 1 ( no braking whatsoever).

Queue of cars from nowhere - to quote Paul Daniels -"That's magic" !

 

Gap looked considerable but speed is always a consideration - had to be 80 ish on indicator, so key thing is the 2 second gap, looked more like 1 second to me.

 

Although it looked bigger than most ( mostly in this country you can find people diriving incorrectly with ony 1-2 car lengths between them permanently in convoys on the motorway, and thats including much smaller engine cars too like 1.2s etc who shouldn't even be permanently in the "overtaking" lane)

 

But every incident is an opportunity to learn, we are only human after all.

Edited 30 September, 2016 by vRSAnt