Safe Speed Forums

I have often repied to you weepej where I have had no reply from you I don't blame you for this because there lots of 'us' and it's difficult to reply to each and every onslaught at times. (Been there elsewhere).

But if you have time, would you care to explain what you would do in a job where you have to be places and you are following some driver in a NSL, let's say doing 40mph or less, how you would do your job which often means covering 100+ miles in a day and requires making due progress?

I don't know if you are weepej emeritus, but in the real world some of us have to be places and, FYI, whether you realise it or not - you depend on people and resourses getting about quickly and efficeciently; just like the 'speed kills' police, ambulance, fire services...

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Have you got more on this ? Are we talking the about 'real road cars' or the 4 wheeled pavement/road rushing disabled vehicles ?

This thread has some great points being made. I can see - reading it all in one go that some have made particular points in a deliberately 'end of scale manner', that have been perhaps the point' has passed un-noticed - or to a degree ....or mis-understood ...

When receiving instruction it was common (previously) to receive instruction for the 'road' and the official line to pass the test. That Information always told you what was clearly expected of you at all times. (The 'Right' way) The passed down real world experience give you valuable insight into how to drive well and learn from others ...


Actually the brain deliberately makes you forget over time the severeness as our instinct to survive take over and so this disaster *can* be - as it *needs to be* forgotten with time. We consciously try to remove those severe memories too, and (hopefully) as we learn better avoidance techniques and better car control, we re-gain confidence. So people may drive more defensively for a while but unless good and proper lessons are thoroughly learned and understood, in fact they *can* fall back in to similar previous problems ! (Frightening)
Safe Speed Manifesto states that we would like to see a help line for those who have had an accident so that they can talk over with the right people and obtain the best advice. (Would be good to enable practical help too in time when appropriate).

The best policy for this one that I have used is that you brake and stop and you do not release your brake peddle unless you KNOW your path ahead is CLEAR. To drive forward when you are looking away is going to cause an accident at some point.
I do agree we can catch ourselves doing it - the best practice is to stop (creeping forwards). By always releasing the brake when you move and not release until you can 'go' always helps someone else from shunting you too. (I have found).


Current policy is showing a huge increase in illegal drivers. If someone has a key to a car that they 'can' drive, they will. It is making the enforcement fair so that the vast majority of drivers accept the rules AND the punishment. When many ignore the rules, the enforcement is broken and lawlessness prevails. This 'policy' concept I cannot see working as so many would see it is unjust? what have you shown or gained other than s sweeping policy that teaches nothing? (Appreciate that you were not 'trying to teach' - it is the concept of enforcement that is dis-respected that seems unfair - when a 'lesson' cannot be learned from a fair chance - first = hence teach).
I occurs to me that just possibly the sun in her eyes was 'reflected sun' than can dazzle ... off cars, buildings etc ....

Tone it sounds to me - just a thought but that car wasn't one of those 'deliberate' sudden stops to ensure a claim was it ? Ask the insurance to check out the driver and with the Police too - sounds possibly iffy ? Did the driver call the cops ? If a 999 call - car / bike accident and only ask for the ambulance the police will be sent and they will notify the fire-brigade is no additional info is given at the time of the call .... (or how it was a few yrs back anyway !)

This is also about 'Predictable Behaviour' the what is expected of a typical driver. As a good driver one cannot assume anything and have to expect 'every possibility' and be prepared (as is best & possible), then the general expectation maybe 'x' but you have to TRY and ensure that your driving gives you space and room and control all about you too.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Simple. If you have to do 100miles in an environment where the traffic travels at 40mph you allow 2.5 hours. for the journey.

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown

To do 100 miles cross country, without using motorways, you would be lucky to average 35 MPH, even if you drove at the limit when possible.( I know because that's about all I average on a regular basis) So allowing 2.5 hours means that you aint gonna get there in time.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

So... you're saying the overtakee could potentially be charged for this, but the overtaker is to blame? Oh, I forgot, it's all down to numerical speed.

But if one guy does something that causes another guy to get charged, doesn't that count as entrapment?

Incidentally, I've occasionally (maybe three times in twenty years) had people actually swerve out when I've gone to overtake them. Would hitting them be my fault too?

Idealistic but not realistic.

I know, just as you do, that is not how it is in the real world. I would also argue that 2.5 hours in the seat is not conducive to safe driving but tell you what - the next time I go to Colwyn bay, a round trip of ~6 hours, I'll just book-up in Wales and arrive in work late the next day and see how that goes down with the finance dept.

They wouldn’t pay it or approve but I’m pleased you would support an initiative where your tax pounds pay that for me.

ADD: As for time saved: on a typical journey like the one I just described, there are all manor of slow moving vehicles en route; HGV’s to farm trucks, caravans to clueless drivers. I could easily add an hour or more to the time if I didn’t overtake them.

I really don’t care if someone is driving well below the speed limit but for those who have to make due progress overtaking is an option and does make a difference to overall journey time. Not only is it quicker but I also think it helps keep me alert.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Yes, I mean roundabouts, lights, that type of thing. Some blokes (mostly in grey, German vanity cars) lean over to go through the roundabouts, as if they are in a racing car!

not sure i've ever seen a racing driver lean into a corner !
maybe they just have rubbish seats ?

Because people at the scene are probably not best to judge the situation.

This indicates it's standard procedure for all three services to attend an RTC:

"for instance a Road Traffic Collision with injuries and trapped persons, depending on the service the caller has chosen, the service will alert the other services for the caller. "

I.e. If you phone up and say "ambulance" when asked what service you require, and the ambulance service hears it's an RTC the ambulance service will call the other two services.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/999_(emergency_telephone_number)#Procedure

Do you think that's a good idea or not?

Not quite releated but I remember once a fire alarm going off in a building I was in, somebody though had gotten to it, turned it off and advised the remaining people coming down it was OK as it had just been set off by him on the second floor burning some toast, many went back upstairs.

When the fire crew turned up in two engines and a snorkel and found somebody had advised everybody it was OK to stay in the building I'd never seen anybody get such a b**ll*ing from a member of a public service in my life, how did he know the top floor wasn't burning down?

I really don't think a women toppling off a motorbike and breaking her arm needs a fire engine, do you honestly?

I know when I broke my leg skiing, a fire engine was very low on my list?.. I suppose they could have used cutting equipment to get my boot off though.....

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

Probably not, but would you want to make that call as an operator for an RTC?

They must be responding according to a procedure.

I don't know about you but when I learnt English at school, AND meant "as well as", clearly there were no trapped persons inside the motorbike or inside the "damaged " car.

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

So you think the procedure should be interrogate the person that called 999 to work out what's best service or services to send, or just send all three by default?

Update: My sis has recieved paperwork from the police asking all manor of questions ranging from what she saw, what the driver looked like, would she recognise the driver again, who she thinks is at fault...

Really, seriously, how much time, money and resources has this petty little incident taken up and how much more before it's resolved? It's pathetic! What's more pathetic is it looks as though they are looking to prosecute. Unbelievable, but I guess they can tick another crime solved at the end

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

As the over taker you have to ensure that you never hit the car that you are overtaking. When the vehicle is unaware of your intentions there are chances of a collision. If it is an accident then you have to ask yourself what else you could have done to ensure this doesn't happen. (How to make yourself visible and your overtaking intentions clear ...)
Overtaking is the most difficult driving manoeuvre and doing it well and accurately takes time and practice. When you have made a final commitment to the overtake one should always be 100% sure of all the environment, taking into consideration all possibilities from all cars about you. By making clear your intentions will help and should ensure all are aware of your presence and your positioning and indications of your overtaking intentions.
If you make a mistake then you can be held responsible for that mistake. If the other cars around you make a deliberate intention to interfere with your overtake then they will be held to account for that (the more witnesses to that the better). If they pull out as you proceed with your overtake and they side swipe you - or nearly do so then somewhere in your approach did not inform them of your presence or intentions. I am unsure of the legal classification as to what the precise moment, it would be considered that they have pulled out into your existing manoeuvre or you are in their way. But if I am 'already' passing the vehicle then their action of an overtake is encroaching on my existing process, BUT legally who's error if an accident occurred, is going to be become discussed in detail. (What was done and how and when.) However a horn toot may well hold back a potential intruder into your 'existing' action.
Extremely close observations to positioning, wheels, indicators and the driver of the car that you are overtaking, during the overtaking process is essential, along with extreme awareness and alertness.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

I am sorry to hear about this incident, I hope that your sister makes a good recovery, and that the shock dies down soon for you all.

I can understand the seemingly, 'simpleness' of the accident, having an authority, over the top reaction. Once the Police have been notified of course, they have to do their job, and properly investigate. They have to ensure no 'criminal' action has occurred, and driving 'errors' are considered 'crimes', which can sometimes seem to be a wrong classification, but it is difficult all round. The suggestions that the driver deliberately stopped has not been confirmed yet has it ? People do hesitate at junctions and roundabouts especially, it can be hard to judge it just right. I know that your point is that with a 'simple' accident that could have been dealt with there and then rather than an ongoing case. what dot he CPS say ? Have you checked with the legal advice on PePIPoo ?
I am sure the stress of this is not good for all of you involved. I take it that the driver was uninjured -even days later ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

The really stupid thing about this case is that if she had simply fallen off the bike and gotten up again, the police wouldn't have been called. The police were called because she broke her wrist by falling, not through the immediate fault of the accident or driver, so why prosecute?

If she had fallen because he had pulled up at the junction without hitting the other car, would it have been any more or less of a crime? If she had not broken her wrist would it have been any less of a crime?

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

I think that if we were talking about children in a school playground you might want to do the thinking for them and send what you feel best but we are talking about mature sensible adults here and I think they can decide whether a fire engine is needed or not in such a silly little indcident...or maybe you don't....would you say that a fire engine was needed if they asked you?????...or would you say...."I don't really know"

_________________
My views do not represent Safespeed but those of a driver who has driven for 39 yrs, in all conditions, at all times of the day & night on every type of road and covered well over a million miles, so knows a bit about what makes for safety on the road,what is really dangerous and needs to be observed when driving and quite frankly, the speedo is way down on my list of things to observe to negotiate Britain's roads safely, but I don't expect some fool who sits behind a desk all day to appreciate that.

I think the police should be called to more incidents myself.

There appears to be an attitude in the UK of "well, nobody got hurt, don't worry about it".

It was refreshing to hear that when Daniel Bedingfield fell of the road in new Zeland and injured himself, with nobody else around (except his passenger), there was a charge of "dangerous driving". Here I think they would've slapped him on the back and told him how lucky he was there was nobody else was injured, whereas in NZ they took the attitude, what IF there was somebody else around.

http://popdirt.com/daniel-bedingfield-c ... ash/25214/

Can't you grasp the difference between falling over a cliff and being pushed over a cliff?

_________________
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
When I see a youth in a motor car I do d.c.brown