Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Apr 08, 2020 20:00

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 00:50 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 00:16
Posts: 67
Location: S Wales
I appreciate your points Gizmo but:
Laminated means the glass is layered, not necessaraly toughened, it comes out in large chunks and it travels large distances. It is also very good at peeling facial skin off in the event it doesn't pop out and fly down the road. :cry:
Volvo were the first company to fit seat belts as standard although both Ford and Volvo provided them as an option at around the same time.
The airbags they introduced had an explosive charge in them and it was quite common for them to go off after the occupant had bounced off the dash. Great engineering from a country great at talking about it. :roll:
Adjustable foot pedals?
Seat belt interlocks simply meant the driver left the belt plugged in and sat on it, great safety benifits in that one. :cry: Mitsubishi came up with an automatic one, when you shut the door the belt slid from the A piller to the B piller and strapped the occupant in. A little bit more effective perhaps.

You didn't mention the crap they use between the car and the road or the lack of mandatory vehicle inspections in some states. :?:
Nor did you raise the point of pedestrian safety design requirements in all new cars or fitting seat belts in school busses. You failed to mention that they still use Ozone depleating gas in their air conditioning systems and that they refuse to sign up to the Montreal Protocol.
Apart from that they are miles ahead :shock:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 07:58 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
tinytim wrote:
You failed to mention that they still use Ozone depleating gas in their air conditioning systems and that they refuse to sign up to the Montreal Protocol.
Apart from that they are miles ahead :shock:


Not sure what this is to do with road safety!!!
However They were the first to introduce exhause emission standards, catalytic converters....and no they don't use CFCs anymore. Their exhaust emissions standards are still the tightest in the world. Perhaps the didn't sign the Montreal Protocol because it is a load of b*llocks. We have now replaced CFCs with chemicals that will kill you directly. Also fire extinguishers that will suffocate you in a close space. Good progress!!!

The USA is he first country to have a roll out program for hydrogen based cars.

Back on the safety front they are making tyre pressure monitoring mandatory.. 8-)

Adjustable foot pedals alow you to keep a safe distance from the airbag!


When it comes to school busses they have the best system. peak hour 20mph limits. no overtaking school busses in either direction when parked.
And the ACTUALY use school busses not like us.

Oh and 75 MPH speed limits on the interstate. Oh yes they have straight roads, ample parking and very easy to understand road signs.

Also....
Quote:
Early next year at the Detroit Show, Ford will display the Mercury Meta One, a concept car with several safety technologies which will eventually be available right through its major brand catalogues.

Having already started to install Roll Stability Control on many of its sport utilities, Ford is moving on to Lane Departure Warning and Collision Mitigation by Braking.



Sorry....give me driving in the US any time

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 12, 2004 19:51 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 00:16
Posts: 67
Location: S Wales
OK we can play table tennis (or ping-pong) for a long time, a lot of this discussion is little more than the prefered history rather than the accurate one and I dare say my information is as dodgy as yours, for example GM did the research on cats way, way back but Volvo fitted the first 3 way cat so who should get the credit.

However:
Quote:
Early next year at the Detroit Show, Ford will display the Mercury Meta One, a concept car with several safety technologies which will eventually be available right through its major brand catalogues.

Having already started to install Roll Stability Control on many of its sport utilities, Ford is moving on to Lane Departure Warning and Collision Mitigation by Braking.


This is not road safety, this is bloody dangerous, the Germans are trying to force these "aids" into EU legislation as mandatory. If we start to fit "aids" like these into vehicles we stand to promote complacency and contempt in drivers, rather than having observant, responsible people behind the wheel.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 13, 2004 09:19 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
tinytim wrote:
OK we can play table tennis (or ping-pong) for a long time, a lot of this discussion is little more than the prefered history rather than the accurate one and I dare say my information is as dodgy as yours


We will agree to differ then... :wink:

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 11, 2004 16:47 
Offline
User

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 22:34
Posts: 603
Location: West Scotland
When I was in the US where they overtake on either side I found it did help traffic flow but all cars were going at wildly different speeds on all lanes, which I think is a recipe for increased accidents due to having to contend with cars at different speeds on different lanes on either side.

the situation here is better in some ways and worse in othere ways to the US system but it is the laws of the universe that a gain somewhere will result in a loss somewhere else. So should we be able to undertake only if completely necessary or should the rules stick. I'd imagine if the rules were relaxed it would just complicate matters however I assume that if you are turning left on a dual carriageway and a line of traffic has built up on the right then this isn't really classed as overtaking to pass this traffic on the right is it?

Andrew

_________________
It's a scam........or possibly a scamola


Homer Simpson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 11, 2004 18:03 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2004 09:16
Posts: 3655
one of the big differences is the use of cruise control.

In the US just about every car has it fitted. You gust set the speed you want to go. Pick a lane that is going at that speed then sit back for the next couple of hours... :lol:

No need to change lanes at all.

What p*sses me off in this country is the number of drivers that cruise down the middle lane at 50mph... :evil: They become a rolling road block

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 12, 2004 22:06 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 00:14
Posts: 535
Location: Victoria, Australia
This should get some heated responses but I think it makes an interesting side debate.

In Victoria, not the rest of Australia, U turns are permitted anywhere unless a sign specifically bans them or you are within 100m of an intersection.

My wife lived in Cambridge for 17 years and the first time I did a U turn she almost freaked out. We were in the heart of Melbourne, where we also have those weird "turn right from the left lane" intersections, and I simply did a U turn to get back to a vacant car parking spot.

I have no problem U turns and have only heard of the occasional crash involving a U turn, usually the fault of the person doing the U turn and not looking properly.

Everything we do on the road involves assessing risks and making decisions about other vehicles, so what's different about a U turn?

_________________
Ross

Yes I'm a hoon, but only on the track!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 12, 2004 22:36 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 20, 2004 09:59
Posts: 3544
Location: Shropshire
M3RBMW wrote:
This should get some heated responses but I think it makes an interesting side debate.

In Victoria, not the rest of Australia, U turns are permitted anywhere unless a sign specifically bans them or you are within 100m of an intersection.

My wife lived in Cambridge for 17 years and the first time I did a U turn she almost freaked out. We were in the heart of Melbourne, where we also have those weird "turn right from the left lane" intersections, and I simply did a U turn to get back to a vacant car parking spot.

I have no problem U turns and have only heard of the occasional crash involving a U turn, usually the fault of the person doing the U turn and not looking properly.

Everything we do on the road involves assessing risks and making decisions about other vehicles, so what's different about a U turn?


You'll ahve to clarify what you mean mate. Are you talking about u-turning through a central reservation on what we call a dual-carriageway, to join the opposite flowing carriageway? Its not possible on ourmotorways because of the barrier along the central reservation, but it can be done on some dual carriageways although a lot of the central reservation gaps that permit it are being blocked off.
On a single carriageway...there is rarely enough room to perform a u-turn in a oner, unless you have a London Taxi that is.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Dec 12, 2004 22:51 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 00:14
Posts: 535
Location: Victoria, Australia
I'm talking about city roads, not motorways or divided roads. A U turn on a divided road is done from a right turn lane and motorway U turns are only possible at openings specifically signed as for emergency vehicles ONLY.

I'm talking about U turns from the left side of the road in two way traffic.

_________________
Ross

Yes I'm a hoon, but only on the track!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2004 02:51 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Mon Mar 15, 2004 15:43
Posts: 2416
I think it's fairly similar in the UK. This
Image
specifically bans U turns, so if it's not there U turns are ok AFAICT. But a lot of roads aren't really wide enough unless you've got 4 wheel steering or, as somoeone said, you drive a black cab. Plus they may be a bit too busy for a three pointer (or a U turn for that matter). This means drivers need to be sensible about when and where they choose to turn round. It's not that unusual to see someone turning left into a side road to use its mouth to get the necessary space for a U turn, which sounds a lot like what you're saying about doing a U turn from the left where you might normally do a hook turn. From what I remember though, you can only do hook turns on certain cross roads because of the trams. I don't remember any hook turn signs on junctions where there's no tram line. Does that mean you can't do U turns there? Personally I wouldn't be too happy doing a U turn on most cross roads here. Probably be easier to wait till the next roundabout, which in my neck of the woods aren't too far apart. Failing that I'd try to pick a side road to turn from that I can get a good look down to see if anything is coming the other way.

Edit: now I'm thinking about it, presumably double white lines should also be taken as "no U turns"? Sure, the sort of road that would have them is likely to be far from ideal anyway, but it seems that they would imply that it would actually be illegal there.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 13, 2004 03:27 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 00:14
Posts: 535
Location: Victoria, Australia
I just asked my wife about it and she told me it wasn't a legal issue, it was just that no-one ever did them around her neck of the woods.

I had assumed it was illegal, but as usual assume makes an ass of u and me.

_________________
Ross

Yes I'm a hoon, but only on the track!!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 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:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.418s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]