Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Sep 16, 2019 00:01

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 59 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 01:47 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
The advert with the little girl "if you drive at xx miles per hour..." gives children a terrible, terrible message.

"If I am walking in the road and you hit me, it will be your fault. But if you follow government advice and drive at xx miles per hour, I will be all right. So there is no need for me to bother with using crossings, looking to the left and right, or whatever.

"Miss... my gran mentioned something called The Green Cross Code. What was it?"

"Oh, that's old fashioned, Susie. We don't use that, any more. We have speed cameras, today. Much more modern."

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Feb 12, 2008 13:19 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
Being a Yank, how do I get a look at this piece of propaganda?

Not yet having seen it, may I throw a few thoughts at the dart board and see what gets near the 10 ring?

1) If you drive at xx MpH, you will probably strike me at the exact same speed. True or False?

2) If #1 is True, it is more important to travel at the posted speed 'limit' than to know how properly use your brake. True or False?

Mercedes Benz invented Emergency Brake Assist because
Quote:
Some drivers do not make full use of the vehicle's braking capability in an emergency braking situation, maybe not applying the brake all the way to ABS and not applying it quick enough, leading to avoidable collisions or a higher impact speed.
(Also, some people back off the pedal in response to ABS pulses. Mercedes Benz is already phasing out this form of hepatic feedback.)

3) Is Mercedes Benz answering True to question #2?

4) By how much should one expect rear shunts to increase, given an impending decline in society's ability to use the brake pedal to its full capacity?

5) At what point will society at large become so stupid, that it will fail to understand or even perceive how oversimplification has created a society of simpletons?

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 00:46 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member

Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 13:50
Posts: 2643
Quote:
Some drivers do not make full use of the vehicle's braking capability in an emergency braking situation, maybe not applying the brake all the way to ABS and not applying it quick enough, leading to avoidable collisions or a higher impact speed.


If you wind up in an emergency braking situation, chances are excellent that you have - for some reason - left things a bit late. As Paul used to say, the safety systems have already broken down.
The distance you can normally see ahead is, in most cases, far and away in excess of your braking distance - meaning that you should have plenty of time to react appropriately to hazards - so lack of appropriate action could mean:

1) the driver identified the hazard but failed to recognise its seriousness, or
2) they failed to identify potential hazards before they became real hazards, or
3) they didn't think something would happen, or
4) they misjudged, so took insufficient or inappropriate action, or
5) they were just plain inattentive, or
6) they were 'second-guessed' by the hazard, or
7) probably many other things I can't think of at the moment

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 02:56 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2007 19:58
Posts: 730
Here's the road safety video in question
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=FS5f73EHRhA

_________________
www.thatsnews.org.uk / www.thatsnews.blogspot.com / http://thatsmotoring.blogspot.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 05:44 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 17:12
Posts: 618
Location: Borough of Queens, NYC, NY USA
"Hit me at 30 MpH, and there's around an 80% chance I'll live."
"Hit the brakes, and you won't hit me at 30 MpH. You might not even hit me at all."
Brakes. There for a reason.

If this isn't categorical proof that the driving culture is infected with way too much focus on withstanding and surviving accidents that should be avoided in the 1st place, I don't know what is.

The assumption that free traveling speed = impact speed is not only simplistically idiotic, it also presupposes idiocy on the part of the viewer; "We can't reasonably expect the viewer/driver to be paying attention to surroundings."

Who's the bigger idiot?

Besides, it's not like people aren't hitting the brakes. As a percentage, the number of pedestrian deaths suggest an impact speed of 5MpH or less.

_________________
The Rules for ALL ROAD USERS:
1) No one gets hurt
2) Nothing gets hit, except to protect others; see Rule#1
3) The Laws of Physics are invincible and immutable - so-called 'laws' of men are not
4) You are always immediately and ultimately responsible for your safety first, then proximately responsible for everyone's
Do not let other road users' mistakes become yours, nor yours become others
5) The rest, including laws of the land, is thoughtful observation, prescience, etiquette, decorum, and cooperation


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 18:04 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27
Posts: 301
Quote:
If you wind up in an emergency braking situation, chances are excellent that you have - for some reason - left things a bit late.


This information, while true, is unlikely to be of use to a person who gets in an emergency braking situation. It rather reminds me of the old joke:

[joke]
A tourist stops to ask a local how to get to Dublin. The local thinks for a while and says “well if I were you, I wouldn’t start from here”!
[/joke]


Quote:
The distance you can normally see ahead is, in most cases, far and away in excess of your braking distance


But this information is so false it made me laugh out loud! Example: On the motorway, the cars in front of you would have to be made of glass to even have a chance of seeing through them as far as your braking distance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 18:31 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 02:25
Posts: 331
Valle Crucis wrote:
Quote:
The distance you can normally see ahead is, in most cases, far and away in excess of your braking distance


But this information is so false it made me laugh out loud! Example: On the motorway, the cars in front of you would have to be made of glass to even have a chance of seeing through them as far as your braking distance.

How long (in metres) do you think it takes to stop from 70mph including thinking distance? How long does that distance equate to in time if travelling @70mph?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 19:09 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27
Posts: 301
theboxers wrote:
Valle Crucis wrote:
the cars in front of you would have to be made of glass to even have a chance of seeing through them as far as your braking distance.

How long (in metres) do you think it takes to stop from 70mph including thinking distance?


I'm told it's 24 car lengths.

theboxers wrote:
How long does that distance equate to in time if travelling @70mph?


That’s an odd (and irrelevant!) question – but I’ll answer you anyway. As long as you did not brake, you would cover the distance in 3 or 4 seconds.

But (avoiding the elementary error) if you started to brake, it would take much longer. It’s easy to work it out. If you decelerated linearly from 70 to 0, your average speed over the distance is 35 mph. To cover the distance at your average speed during braking would take around 7 or 8 seconds, I should think - double what some might have thought, eh? Just enough time to read ALL of this post?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Feb 13, 2008 23:43 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 02:25
Posts: 331
Valle Crucis wrote:
theboxers wrote:
Valle Crucis wrote:
the cars in front of you would have to be made of glass to even have a chance of seeing through them as far as your braking distance.

How long (in metres) do you think it takes to stop from 70mph including thinking distance?


I'm told it's 24 car lengths.

Agreed it is around 96m according to the Highway code.

Valle Crucis wrote:
theboxers wrote:
How long does that distance equate to in time if travelling @70mph?


That’s an odd (and irrelevant!) question – but I’ll answer you anyway. As long as you did not brake, you would cover the distance in 3 or 4 seconds.

But (avoiding the elementary error) if you started to brake, it would take much longer. It’s easy to work it out. If you decelerated linearly from 70 to 0, your average speed over the distance is 35 mph. To cover the distance at your average speed during braking would take around 7 or 8 seconds, I should think - double what some might have thought, eh? Just enough time to read ALL of this post?

Hoisted by your own petard. vc :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 00:09 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 02:50
Posts: 2868
Location: Dorset
Valle Crucis wrote:
Quote:
The distance you can normally see ahead is, in most cases, far and away in excess of your braking distance


But this information is so false it made me laugh out loud! Example: On the motorway, the cars in front of you would have to be made of glass to even have a chance of seeing through them as far as your braking distance.

I've never had a problem... You can look down the side of them.
If you can't see past then you're probably too close...?

_________________
Andrew.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 00:28 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 22:31
Posts: 407
Location: A Safe Distance From Others
I've never seen glass cars on a M-Way, that's why I "position for maximum forward observation".

It's a common sense driving skill.

_________________
Simon


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 02:14 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
If you're not looking further ahead than the rear of the car ahead of you then you are a horrible liability, and I'd hate to be in proximity to you on the roads.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 08:44 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 23:28
Posts: 1940
Valley Cruzin' - You should be looking well into the distance.


But to help you know how far you travel at 110 kp/h - about 70 mph :wink:

It = 11 x 3 = 33 metre per second :wink: or about 35 yards :wink:

French Highway Code reckon the stopping distance at 110 kp/h to be 11 x 11 = 121 metres.


But a prudent driver or cyclist ist always looking well ahead into the distance as well as in more direct proximity :wink:

It called using COAST :wink:


If I recall.. you once live in Canada which mean you might understand French. :wink: I suggest you buy French Highway Code since the English one does not seem to suit you. (Their version ist actually one of the best handbooks I've seen :bow: Very thorough und clear. Even if you do not understand French .. there are plenty of photos to help. :wink: )

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien
!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:16 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27
Posts: 301
Ziltro wrote:
I've never had a problem... You can look down the side of them.


Of course there's no problem. I can't see any problem! Who said there was a problem???


Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:29 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27
Posts: 301
RobinXe wrote:
If you're not looking further ahead than the rear of the car ahead


There is no way for you behind to know whether the one in front is looking further ahead.

Basically, this means that if you assume that the driver in front is looking further ahead, then you are a horrible liability as well. No explanation is needed - just see the picture above for the outcome of that "chain of assumption". Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:36 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
Valle Crucis wrote:
RobinXe wrote:
If you're not looking further ahead than the rear of the car ahead


There is no way for you behind to know whether the one in front is looking further ahead.

Basically, this means that if you assume that the driver in front is looking further ahead, then you are a horrible liability as well. No explanation is needed - just see the picture above for the outcome of that "chain of assumption". Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups.


I think that's just the "lemming" effect.
Had quite heavy fog the past few nights. Visibility about 80 metres - 20/30 in places. Apparently, if everyone follows the guy in front they'll be ok. Nobody wonders whether the guy in front is driving too fast for the conditions. The "lemming" effect !

_________________
The world runs on oil, period. No other substance can compete when it comes to energy density, flexibility, ease of handling, ease of transportation. If oil didn’t exist we would have to invent it.”

56 years after it was decided it was needed, the Bedford Bypass is nearing completion. The last single carriageway length of it.We have the most photogenic mayor though, always being photographed doing nothing


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:39 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27
Posts: 301
theboxers wrote:
...petard...
In your dreams, tb!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 10:54 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27
Posts: 301
jomukuk wrote:
Valle Crucis wrote:
Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups.
I think that's just the "lemming" effect.


It is a myth that lemmings kill themselves, although they do all act in concert sometimes. Humans, in principle, are smart enough to act independently, but the evidence is that they don’t. Crowds act like, well - crowds. The behaviour seems deeply ingrained, and partly explains the pile-ups, the fashions, the stock market crashes, the panics, and (to a greater or lesser extent) the traffic. And the oddest thing is that we individually think we are each acting independently even as we stick closely to the “trend lines” of a crowd. There must be a Darwinian advantage somewhere, but have you every heard this amusing “crowd” story?

Everybody was sure Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it, but Nobody did it. Somebody got angry about that, because it was Everybody's job. Everybody thought Anybody could do it but Nobody realized that Everybody wouldn't do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:27 
Offline
Banned
Banned

Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27
Posts: 301
SigmaMotion wrote:
"position for maximum forward observation".


We should “depersonalise it” to avoid a flame war, so let’s assume that “Joe Bloggs” said it, not you.

Joe says he gets in a position where the amount he can observe is maximised. But we know that the greater the distance to the object, the smaller is it's angular diameter (i.e. things get smaller the further you are from them). So the actual position for “maximum forward observation” is an infinite distance away!

Now we know that Joe is wrong when he claims to "position for maximum forward observation", whatever he may think he is doing. Let's try and figure out what Joe really means.

What he means is that he "positions for maximum forward observation without slowing down and falling a long way behind". Basically, Joe is treating the road as a crowd – he wants to get through it, he doesn’t want others to get through it before him, and he wants to survive to tell the tale!

These things exist as a tension - he wants to survive, so he should leave a long gap, but he wants to get through, so he shouldn’t leave a long gap. Hm… that’s a problem, so he invents the "position for maximum forward observation" idea to validate trading off safety against speed. Is that it?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Feb 14, 2008 11:49 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 13:54
Posts: 1711
Location: NW Kent
Valle Crucis wrote:
There is no way for you behind to know whether the one in front is looking further ahead.



Which is exactly why you have to yourself. That way you can see a braking wave propagating back towards you and be opening the gap in front of you before the car directly in front starts to brake. Done properly you will have had plenty of time to decide if backing off the accelerator is all that is needed or if you will actually need to brake. You will also have had time to double check how close the vehicle behind is and if you will be clear to change lane.

_________________
Driving fast is for a particular time and place, I can do it I just only do it occasionally because I am a gentleman.
- James May


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 59 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 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 cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.402s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]