Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 09:13

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 

How many near misses and crashes have you had in the last 100,000 miles?
6 or more 6%  6%  [ 4 ]
6 or more 6%  6%  [ 4 ]
5 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
5 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
4 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
4 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
3 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
3 2%  2%  [ 1 ]
2 5%  5%  [ 3 ]
2 5%  5%  [ 3 ]
1 17%  17%  [ 11 ]
1 17%  17%  [ 11 ]
none 20%  20%  [ 13 ]
none 20%  20%  [ 13 ]
Total votes : 66
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 28, 2005 23:58 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
This is for experienced drivers only - if you don't have 100,000 miles of experience you should not answer. Sorry.

For the purpose of the poll, a near miss is defined as any of the following:

* emergency braking to avoid a crash
* emergency steering (swerving) to avoid a crash
* closing your eyes and hoping for the best (i.e. avoiding a crash by luck)
* losing control

A crash is defined as an accident on the public road involving significant damage. I'm excluding mirror taps, car park scrapes and trackday incidents.

This poll does not expire.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 03:57 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Is there something wrong with this poll? I see it's been viewed 30 times and I'm the only person to have replied.

I was looking for a reasonably objective measure of driver quality. Did I get it wrong?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 04:52 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01
Posts: 4813
Location: Essex
I've only just got to it - viewed it once before.

I hasve voted six or more. I have reported on most of them before. In fact, it is probable that my six are spread over 200,000 miles, so three might have been right. Sorry Paul - screwed it up at the first hurdle!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 04:58 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Roger wrote:
Sorry Paul - screwed it up at the first hurdle!


:lol: Never mind. If the visitors are this unenthusiastic about it I probably should delete it and start again with a better question. :)

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 05:38 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 14:04
Posts: 2325
Location: The interweb
100,000 miles is 10 years for your average driver. Our family car does about 15k a year (and I don't drive for half of that) and I do maybe another 5k for work.

Makes it a little difficult to answer.

Plus. In 10 years you can make a lot of improvements. I know I have.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 10:21 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 09:59
Posts: 3544
Location: Shropshire
SafeSpeed wrote:
Is there something wrong with this poll? I see it's been viewed 30 times and I'm the only person to have replied.

I was looking for a reasonably objective measure of driver quality. Did I get it wrong?


It just takes a bit of thinking about. 100,000 miles is about 8 years or so for me.

Doh! Read the previous post Rig you dummy!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 11:24 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 00:24
Posts: 2400
Location: Kendal, Cumbria
I can't make my mind up whether I'm entirely comfortable with the definition of a "near miss". This is a tricky concept to get across, but I can think of circumstances where I've used full braking effort or full steering effort to prevent a situation turning into a near miss. An example might be where a hazard appears that you could avoid by using 50% braking effort, but you choose to use 100% braking effort early on as you know it is safe to do so and it opens up more space and time for later.

I probably have several incidents a year where I am driving down lanes at a speed where I can comfortably stop in the distance I can see to be clear, yet I have to take emergency evasive action to avoid drivers coming the other way who are either going too fast or (worse) not employing sufficient attention / competence to stay on their own side of the road. There is a limit to what can be done here, and going even slower isn't necessarily an answer as (a) it increases your time exposed to the risk of meeting someone, and (b) it reduces your ability to evasively steer which is often more important than being able to stop - it's something of a pyrrhic victory if you pull up in time only to be hit head on by the oncoming vehicle.

Secondly, what about situations where an external event was completely unpredictable and unavoidable. For example a deer running across the road in front of you. No matter how much you anticipate it there's very little you can do other than apply full brakes and steering and hope you have time to avoid it. Does this make you a bad driver?

And what about an unpredictable loss of control? For example a sudden and unpredictable loss of grip due to an invisible spillage on the road surface. If I temporarily lose control but recover the situation immediately there is the chance to do so does that classify as "bad driving"?

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 11:31 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
I have voted 2, both were "nearish" misses, nothing like contact, but enough that I got a bit of adrenalin going.

The most recent was when I was tired after a long day staring at a computer screen, it was dark and raining hard, and at an unlit roundabout at the end of a dual carriageway in very light traffic a car that wasn't indicating was in fact going around and back on itself - I had assumed that they were going down the road I was coming out from, and didn't pay enough attention as they were hidden by the A pillar - I had to stamp hard on the brakes as they came across in front of me. They didn't give any sign that they had noticed when we were side by side at some later lights, so perhaps the closeness of the incident was only in my tired mind.

The other was a little "boy racer" incident - I admit it, I was enjoying a "slightly faster than I should have been" moment on a very quiet country back road with my brother in the passenger seat who was interested in my cars performance. We were going down a slight hill on a dead straight road approaching a gentle left then right combination. While I was going quite fast I was well within the ability of the car to get around the bends, but what I hadn't anticipated was the car coming the other way (hidden by the bend) that was completely on my side of the road. As I applied full braking they moved back onto their side, and we passed with plenty of space to spare, but if they hadn't moved back, there was no way that I would have stopped in time, and it would have been a full head on. In my mitigation, it would have been just as bad a situation had I not been going so fast, but was closer to the bend as they appeared - but that is not an excuse - it reminded me to ensure that I allow for oncoming vehicles in addition to being certain that I can stop in what I can see to be clear ahead. One second I was certain that I could stop in what I could see, the next second, the space I had free was halved and it could have been big trouble.

I haven't had a fault accident of any type in 20 years (400,000 miles), and the last shunt of any type was being rear-ended by a car that was rammed into the back of me by a minibus that hadn't noticed that the M1 was stationary - the minibus driver said "why was everyone stopped?" which just goes to show that he wasn't paying attention, as I had switched off my hazard lights confident that the car behind was going to stop in time. My 10' gap to the car in front was reduced to 2' despite my foot on the brake, and the consequences of the whiplash still trouble me 17 years later.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 14:11 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
Good poll, Paul.

I can't count the number of near missses I've had, as I drive at least half of the time on single-track lanes, so seem to spend the whole time swerving to avoid people, however careful I am.

Never had a crash, mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 15:15 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
JT wrote:
I can't make my mind up whether I'm entirely comfortable with the definition of a "near miss". This is a tricky concept to get across, but I can think of circumstances where I've used full braking effort or full steering effort to prevent a situation turning into a near miss. An example might be where a hazard appears that you could avoid by using 50% braking effort, but you choose to use 100% braking effort early on as you know it is safe to do so and it opens up more space and time for later.

I probably have several incidents a year where I am driving down lanes at a speed where I can comfortably stop in the distance I can see to be clear, yet I have to take emergency evasive action to avoid drivers coming the other way who are either going too fast or (worse) not employing sufficient attention / competence to stay on their own side of the road. There is a limit to what can be done here, and going even slower isn't necessarily an answer as (a) it increases your time exposed to the risk of meeting someone, and (b) it reduces your ability to evasively steer which is often more important than being able to stop - it's something of a pyrrhic victory if you pull up in time only to be hit head on by the oncoming vehicle.

Secondly, what about situations where an external event was completely unpredictable and unavoidable. For example a deer running across the road in front of you. No matter how much you anticipate it there's very little you can do other than apply full brakes and steering and hope you have time to avoid it. Does this make you a bad driver?

And what about an unpredictable loss of control? For example a sudden and unpredictable loss of grip due to an invisible spillage on the road surface. If I temporarily lose control but recover the situation immediately there is the chance to do so does that classify as "bad driving"?

The definition I used for near miss is something that triggers a rush of adrenaline, which you will know all about just after it happens - butterfly stomach, slight shakes, etc. This will normally only happen when anticipation has failed and control of the situation has been lost.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 15:25 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
JT wrote:
I can't make my mind up whether I'm entirely comfortable with the definition of a "near miss". This is a tricky concept to get across, but I can think of circumstances where I've used full braking effort or full steering effort to prevent a situation turning into a near miss. An example might be where a hazard appears that you could avoid by using 50% braking effort, but you choose to use 100% braking effort early on as you know it is safe to do so and it opens up more space and time for later.


An interesting distinction. I think I covered it when I said "emergency braking to avoid a crash". If you're choosing to brake harder to create a margin then I don't think you are emergency braking to avoid a crash.

JT wrote:
I probably have several incidents a year where I am driving down lanes at a speed where I can comfortably stop in the distance I can see to be clear, yet I have to take emergency evasive action to avoid drivers coming the other way who are either going too fast or (worse) not employing sufficient attention / competence to stay on their own side of the road. There is a limit to what can be done here, and going even slower isn't necessarily an answer as (a) it increases your time exposed to the risk of meeting someone, and (b) it reduces your ability to evasively steer which is often more important than being able to stop - it's something of a pyrrhic victory if you pull up in time only to be hit head on by the oncoming vehicle.


Yes. There are clearly classes of problem about which you can do very little either in terms of prediction or in terms of avoidance. All I can think of is tough. If we tried to exclude blameless situations we'd have half the population cheating. And they'd be cheating themselves.

JT wrote:
Secondly, what about situations where an external event was completely unpredictable and unavoidable. For example a deer running across the road in front of you. No matter how much you anticipate it there's very little you can do other than apply full brakes and steering and hope you have time to avoid it. Does this make you a bad driver?


As above - what can we do that would be better? I also think 'there's more to it than (bad) luck' in many cases.

JT wrote:
And what about an unpredictable loss of control? For example a sudden and unpredictable loss of grip due to an invisible spillage on the road surface. If I temporarily lose control but recover the situation immediately there is the chance to do so does that classify as "bad driving"?


I guess this is a grey area - what is 'losing control'? I see 'losing control' as a sustained condition. A momentary and quickly corrected accidental skid on a greasy roundabout wouldn't qualify. A spin would.

I'm really really open to improving the definitions. Any suggestions very welcome.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 21:12 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 00:04
Posts: 2311
SafeSpeed wrote:
Did I get it wrong?

perhaps asking how many near misses or accidents have you caused would be a better question. I can remember off hand 2 near misses that were totally my fault (not noticing a car was slowing down and turning as I allowed myself to get distracted and going around a bend a little too quickly and having the backend step out).
I can also remember at least 4 near misses and one crash that were neither my fault nor, I believe, avoidable through better observation (pedestrians stepping out while looking the wrong way, cars forgetting to stop at intersections and my crash was a truck suddenly deciding he wanted to be in my lane).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 21:17 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 14:04
Posts: 2325
Location: The interweb
Another thought.

It's quite concievable that a really bad driver would have near misses without even noticing.

The old "he's never had an accident but seen loads" quip.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 29, 2005 21:31 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6735
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
SafeSpeed wrote:
Is there something wrong with this poll? I see it's been viewed 30 times and I'm the only person to have replied.

The problem, as others have said, is in the definition of "near miss". There have been some situations where I feel I could have been more observant and reacted to a hazard more promptly and not needed a sharp brake application, but I don't think I've been a hair's breadth away from a crash. Then there are the examples where a child (or adult) runs into the road in your path. You see it, you stop or slow down in good time, but even so again it may need a strong brake application, though well short of 100%. Even if you're on the lookout for idiots, you can't wholly avoid such situations. Is that a near miss, or not?

I have had no crashes, either my fault or someone else's, in the past 100,000 miles. But I'm sure I've had far more than six incidents in the above two categories.

Quote:
I was looking for a reasonably objective measure of driver quality. Did I get it wrong?

TBH, I'm afraid you did, as it isn't possible to define "near miss" objectively.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 19:39 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 22:21
Posts: 925
I polled '0', but I think I might have interpreted near miss in a different way. I can honestly never think of an occasion where I have been so close to crash that it's really shaken me up, which is what I'd class a near miss as. I'm sure there has been quite a few incidents where it's been a little too close for comfort, but I've always been confidant that there were still options available before a possible impact if that makes sense?


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 20:39 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 21:17
Posts: 3734
Location: Dorset/Somerset border
I think the distribution is interesting here, and clearly depends on what people class as a near miss (see Capri 2.8i's post above)

Because of the 100,000 miles stipulation, people clearly think they have had either very few or plenty, depending on their definition.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 07, 2005 17:44 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 21:00
Posts: 73
Location: Plymouth
Only two, in just over a year,
1st overtaking a slow car (35mph in 50 zone, clear dry day), on a straight road, just as i get about level with his front bumper , guess what! he decides to put his foot down , i'm now doing 50, he thinks its funny, running out of straight, AND a lorry heaves into view at the end bend, he changed his mind about staying inside of me when i veered very close to him while hitting the brakes , he speeds up to an estimated 80mph to get away from 1 very angry lorry driver and 1 very angry van driver and at least 2 car drivers that was behind me, unfortunatley none of us got his number, it happened so fast.
2nd, a micro-sleep at the wheel of a 3 1/2 tonner, never happened before, (or since I can assure you), after a busy morning unloading glass and window frames at depot, had to run a conservatory set to redruth, did that ok , but coming back, in a line of traffic doing about 30mph (thank god), between A30 bodmin and Trago, just went out like a light for about 1- 2 seconds and went up the bank and took a sign down, back onto the road wondering what had just happened, pulled over in a convenient layby 100yds down the road, and walked back to collect bumper bits and headlight, still wondering what happened, as I did not feel over tired, tired yes, physically tired, The doctor explained it very well, brain decides it has waited long enough for rest, so switches off, then reboots, all is well except when driving things have moved on!
mostly you would just tend to suddenly drift across a lane if on a moterway before reboot, but on a single carraigeway well, it is easy to imagine if i had veered right instead,
there are warning signs to be aware of , tingling jumpiness, droopy eyelids, sudden jerk when you think you were awake,

perhaps BiB should investigate every accident in a "how it happened , how did it develope into an accident " , instead of "who's to blame " investigations they seem to do now, then we would learn a lot more on how to avoid accidents and design better faster usable roads.

My apologies for going on so, but I love driving, its all i really like doing

_________________
Brian of Plymouth
When will the government realise , that to err is only human, to be perfect is to be GOD.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2005 00:16 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
JT wrote:
I can't make my mind up whether I'm entirely comfortable with the definition of a "near miss". This is a tricky concept to get across, but I can think of circumstances where I've used full braking effort or full steering effort to prevent a situation turning into a near miss. An example might be where a hazard appears that you could avoid by using 50% braking effort, but you choose to use 100% braking effort early on as you know it is safe to do so and it opens up more space and time for later.

I probably have several incidents a year where I am driving down lanes at a speed where I can comfortably stop in the distance I can see to be clear, yet I have to take emergency evasive action to avoid drivers coming the other way who are either going too fast or (worse) not employing sufficient attention / competence to stay on their own side of the road. There is a limit to what can be done here, and going even slower isn't necessarily an answer as (a) it increases your time exposed to the risk of meeting someone, and (b) it reduces your ability to evasively steer which is often more important than being able to stop - it's something of a pyrrhic victory if you pull up in time only to be hit head on by the oncoming vehicle.

Secondly, what about situations where an external event was completely unpredictable and unavoidable. For example a deer running across the road in front of you. No matter how much you anticipate it there's very little you can do other than apply full brakes and steering and hope you have time to avoid it. Does this make you a bad driver?

And what about an unpredictable loss of control? For example a sudden and unpredictable loss of grip due to an invisible spillage on the road surface. If I temporarily lose control but recover the situation immediately there is the chance to do so does that classify as "bad driving"?



Sound points here JT! I would say none of the above make you a bad driver and if you observed in suffiecent time to compensate for the numpty error of not moving in a little and slowing to pass on a lane - this places you in "competetent" class.

COAST helps - a useful safest practice guide tool - but nothing is ever 100% fool proof. COAST adherence helps minimise dangers.


As for near misses? In private motoring - very few. Professionally.... err - um ...errrr! OK so I engineered a couple of "stingers" - and - er managed to sting myself instead! :roll: :oops: :oops: :roll: - once - :oops: - and once had to resort to ram to stop. OK so I was in my "yoof" and cars were fast - but not that fast :wink: :wink: :wink: )

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 11, 2005 00:18 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
bribritisher wrote:
perhaps BiB should investigate every accident in a "how it happened , how did it develope into an accident " , instead of "who's to blame " investigations they seem to do now, then we would learn a lot more on how to avoid accidents and design better faster usable roads.

My apologies for going on so, but I love driving, its all i really like doing


We do - why roads get closed after an incident.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 19 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.028s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]