Safe Speed Forums

Not necessarily -- they could just be the victims circumstances beyond their control. For example, I know someone who lives right out in the sticks and has had three accidents in the last two years none of which was his fault. In each case he saw the roof of the oncoming car over the hedgerow and stopped where the oncoming car could pass in safety. In all three cases he had the handbrake applied and gears in neutral, waiting patiently. In all cases, the other driver was travelling too fast for the conditions, skidded out of control and collided with the stationary car.

Another example is Northfield in Birmingham heading into the city. There, busses and taxis pull out with no consideration for other road users. On one occasion, my wife was travelling a few cars behind a car that a bus pulled out on. That car swerved to avoid the bus and rear-ended someone who was waiting to turn right. When my wife stopped to offer her name as a witness, she found out that it was the second time in a month that driver had been rear-ended in similar circumstances.

Of course, frequently the "no fault" driver will have contributed to the accident but that is by no means invariably the case.

_________________
Will

I might have taken the following actions:

* Choose a different route avoiding this particular road. (if they were all in the same place)

* Driven up the bank

* Reversed away from the approaching vehicle

* Given an early horn warning.

* ... and maybe more depending on specifics.

Accidents where the passive party really could do nothing to avoid are rare indeed.

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

Not possible when the village in which you live has one road in and out.
You're really going to drive up a Cornish bank? Please report immediately to your local off-road training center

When you've stopped in the passing place, the only place within several hundred yards where two vehicles can pass in safety? To follow your suggestion would be to make an accident more likely!

Really? You've seen the oncoming vehicle. If you can see his roof he should be able to see yours. I don't think that sounding your horn would have any affect whatsoever.

And what more could you do?

I think there we must disagree. I'm not saying that accidents where the passive party could do nothing are the norm. What I am saying is that they do happen and probably more frequently than you realise.

Then again, accidents also happen where the "no fault" party has taken action to turn catastrophe into a minor shunt. In many of these, the real culprit gets away scot-free and isn't even involved in the ensuing collision. I'll give an example in a separate posting.

_________________
Will

Will,

I don't really want to get into this in minute detail - but if you do, I'll continue the discussion. Two key things I can't understand:

Firstly, if we're stopped in a passing place, why did the other vehicle hit? Is this a passing place on the left outer edge of a right hand curve?

Secondly, I might accept that a horn warning wouldn't be justified on the first occasion, but on the third? Aren't we going to take every precaution?

And one more point - it sounds as it it might have been possible (especially on the second and third occassions) to stop well short of the passing place and wait for the other vehicle to stop at the passing place before proceeding. This is something that I've done a dozen times in the last year on narrow roads with passing places here in north Scotland.

(and I said I didn't want to get into minute detail! )

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

I just "split" these posts from the topic "Amazing Statistics". - I hope that helps us to all find the posts we're trying to deal with.

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

Posting to this topic following Paul splitting it from another thread:

As promised, an example or two of the culprit getting away scot-free.

1. On a three-lane motorway, you're in the middle lane at 65 to 70 driving past a line of HGVs who are "on the limiter". The outside lane has nose-to-tail traffic doing 75 to 80. The car behind you has a separation distance of about a second and there is space between the HGV you're overtaking and the HGV in front of it. As you draw level with the front of its trailer, the HGV you're overtaking pulls out with no indication. Unless I'm missing something, you have three options (apart from sounding your horn, which you'd do in any case):
   • stay in your lane and get squashed by the HGV's trailer
   • accelerate and pull over to your right, hoping that the traffic in that lane will give you room
   • brake so that the trailer can pass in front of you, and hope that the guy behind doesn't rear-end you.
   Interesting here is that the culprit (the HGV) gets away completely free in all but the first option -- and who's going to allow their car to be crushed by an HGV when they can turn the potentially lethal situation into a minor shunt?
   
2. You're driving a light van at about 55 mph along a single-carriageway NSL road. There is a queue of traffic behind you and the car behind you is tailgating. As you begin to decelerate for the 40mph zone you are approaching, some nutter three cars back pulls out to overtake. There is no way that nutter is going to be able to pull in safely before the 40 zone and, as he draws level with the guy who's tailgating you, a car travelling towards you emerges from the blind bend just the other side of the 40-limit signs. The nutter is determined to pass you and your tailgater and accelerates, not brakes. This actually happened to me (i.e. I was driving the van) a couple of weeks ago and I hit the brakes to give the nutter the best chance of survival. The nutter got away with it, even though the oncoming car had to swerve onto the verge. Disturbingly, the oncoming car flashed lights, honked horn but didn't slow down! There was a minor shunt as the tailgater ran into my towbar -- minor crack to his bumper and no damage to my vehicle. The real culprit ('R-reg' Rover 400) got away without a scratch and was the only person involved who didn't stop. IMO, the tailgater got his just deserts because had he not been tailgating the Rover could have pulled in safely between the tailgater and me.
   
   I'm always trying to improve, and this one's personal. So, as a "no-fault" driver involved in a minor collision, what else could I have done?

_________________
Will

This one's easy - you shouldn't have been there. It's only very occasionally necessary to accept a "three abreast" situation on a motorway. Usually a minor variation in speed will give you a gap to the left or the right. These gaps are your safety space and should be managed constantly.



The second one is harder, but there is a key element that you failed to control, and that's the tailgater. Assuming that the tailgater has not just arrived you should have got rid of him earler. Assuming again that you have done so, we have now respoved the incident into the loony overtaker - now trying to just overtake you - and the oncoming car. See this page on tailgating:

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/tailgate.html

If something goes wrong when you are being overtaken, there's a built in dangerous ambiguety about what happens next. Frequently the overtaker decides to abort at the same instant as the overtakee decides to brake and let the overtaker in in front. You can end up braking side by side with the overtaker stranded on the "wrong" side of the road. The key to avoiding this is pre-definition.

If someone is overtaking me and I think it's dodgy I will indicate that I am giving way before he actually starts to overtake. (usually by showing brake lights, sometimes with a left indicator and sometimes with my vehicle position) Then while he's overtaking I slow and if it goes wrong I brake. He knows I've given way and can pull in front. The time to grant him a clear space to pull back in by my braking is tiny. I might work it out later, but it can't be more than about 0.25 seconds after harder braking starts.

Of course if the overtake is far too dodgy to permit, you might indicate right and position right to scare him out of it. I might have done this once and certainly don't recommend it as normal driving. But one day it could save a life.

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

This is a single-track road and we've stopped on the left side at a point where the road widens enough to allow two vehicles to pass in safety.

Same road, different places on that road.

On each occasion, the accident was caused by the other driver going too fast and overbraking on seeing the "no fault" car with corresponding loss of control. Had the other person been travelling at a safe speed, the accident would not have happened. You may have a point about waiting short of the passing place but on at least one of the occasions, that would have put the "no-fault" driver on single-track road hidden around a blind bend. The result would probably have required an ambulance or worse.

I understand, however you're the one raising questions.

The point is that there are occasions when you really have no chance. Other than gaining ESP or giving up driving, the accident will happen and the only thing you can do is lessen the effects.

_________________
Will

The point is that these situations are very rare, and anyone repeatedly in such situations has to be very unlucky.

I don't have it to hand but I believe Roadcraft makes a point that there is no such thing as an accident where one party does not have at least a small share of the blame.

There are of course the exceptions that prove the rule.

I remember a program on TV a while ago which featured an accident where a car travelling along a dual carriageway somehow flipped over and landed nose down on a van travelling in the opposite direction. Nothing much the van driver could have done there, even the most skilled person would have trouble judging where an airborne vehicle would land. Slowing, swerving or accelerating have the same result as doing nothing.

But as a general rule I agree with Paul, if you are involved in an accident there is usually some way you could have actively avoided it. And not just by staying in bed that morning.

Paul, thanks for replying to my examples:

The outer lane is nose-to tail travelling in excess of the speed limit. So, unless you break the limit, you have no option but not to overtake or accept "three abreast". Of course, the safest thing to do is hold back until a gap of more than two car-lengths draws alongside in the outer lane, accelerate and pass the HGV with that gap to your right. But then along comes PC Gatso...

Holding back isn't a safe option because you'll end up slowed down to 50 to let every tailgating HGV past and being the slowest vehicle on a motorway puts you in a higher probability of collision than does overtaking in "three abreast configuration".


Thanks for your comments and advice. Strangely, the tailgater was the reason I was at the head of the queue. I'd slowed down a few mph to put a gap between me and the vehicle I was following and I was hoping the tailgater would either drop back or overtake. Unfortunately, it was the nutter two cars behind him that made the move I suspect that when the nutter started overtaking, the two overtakees closed the gaps to try to stop the "queue jumper" from passing them, thereby exacerbating an already dangerous situation. Had they not done that, the Rover may have been able to get in safely.

Whatever, my anti-tailgating measure may have been a contributory factor because I suspect that the Rover wouldn't have tried to overtake had I been travelling a few mph quicker and two seconds behind the vehicle in front. That said, I feel that you've got to drive on balance of probability and by dropping back a couple of seconds, I reduced the chances of an accident from forseeable hazards. It took poor driving from (probably) four other road users to cause the situation.

_________________
Will

Nonsense! Trust me and try it for a month. You'll soon find it's easy to do with small early adjustments to speed.



Yes - I do agree it's a difficult one. Tailgaters need to be dealt with at the earliest possible stage. I usually cheat and overtake to get away. You'll just have to get a V8 in that van of yours.

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

To my comment:

FWIW, I try to drive so that I have always have an escape route (and where possible leave escape routes for others). This includes driving the way that you suggest. However, in the situation that I quoted, if you start overtaking the long vehicle with one car to your right the car behind that will draw alongside before you complete your manouevre. There is a ten mph differential between you and the vehicle you're overtaking and a further ten mph differential between the you and the vehicles that are overtaking you. So, if the gap between cars in the outside lane is less than the length of the HGV you're overtaking, you must have a "three abreast" situation at some point in the manoeuvre. The problem here is caused by the vehicles in the right-hand lane driving dangerously close together, effectively denying your escape route.

Having said that, this scenario is hypothetical. I have encountered each of the conditions required for the accident to occur although, thankfully, not at the same time! That is, I've had HGVs pulling out on me as I draw level with the rear wheels of the tractor, forcing me into the outside lane; I've seen loads of nose-to-tail queues in the outside lane; and being followed at less than the recommended two seconds is more common than not in heavy motorway traffic. Perhaps the reason why I've never encountered all the conditions at the same time is judgement rather than luck but I wouldn't like to make that claim

_________________
Will

If I was genuinely sandwiched in these two rivers of traffic and I didn't have the power available to make the 20mph speed adjustment required in the spaces available, I'd just get the hell out of L2.

I don't really believe that this situation is at all comonplace - where the speed differentials mentioned do exist, they tend to come with bunches and gaps in the traffic flow both in L1 and L3. I drive with an L1 gap or and L3 gap and almost never neither.

Either way, if you want to maximise your safety, you shouldn't be there.

In the very densest motorway conditions, when all three lanes are going at 50mph, I prefer L1 because I've almost always got the hard shoulder to escape onto.

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

This is self evidently crass nonsense. As shown by....



In this case, the exceptions disprove the rule.

From my own experience I can cite three "no fault" examples.

1. While driving on the inside lane of the motorway, there is a van travelling in front of me (say a good 5 or 6 seconds in front of me). On the roof is some sheets of plywood. Suddenly a sheet blows off. In the middle lane there is approaching traffic. On the hard shoulder is an RAC van and a broken down vehicle. I start to brake but the sheet flys towards me. Luckily at the last minute it veers away and takes off my offside wing mirror.

2. I approach a roundabout. There is taffic coming so I stop at the give way lines. I apply handbrake. I am in the outside lane. A car on the inside lane decides to overtake , pulls out, sees me, brakes too late and goes into the back of me.

3. Sitting on my sofa one morning I here a crash from outside. My neighbour has driven into my parked car.


Now, I firm opponent of the "victim culture" but sometimes, it's just not your fault - not even a little.


Gas

"You will never have an accident for which you are not to blame"

It's not a statement of fact. It's a code to live by. And a damn fine code it is too.

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

Suddenly blows off, with not even the slightest sign it might not be tied down properly? Not even a little flap to suggest you might want to give it a wide berth? Especially with the RAC van on the hard shoulder. Personally I give extra room to anything strapped to a roof.



I'm having a hard time understanding that one. What do you mean by inside/outside. To me, inside on the roundabout would be right but inside on the approach would be left. Who is the car on the inside lane overtaking?

Most of the time you can avoid being rear ended with a little observation and planning.



Was that parked car in a garage at the time, or at least on a drive? If so then this time I agree with you. If it was on the road then perhaps you might look again at where you park. Could you chose a safer position? Or make the car more visible (for instance park where a streetlamp will reflect off the rear windscreen).



Sometimes, but very very rarely. And if you can accept that you might be in some way to blame, even slightly then you can use that improve. If you refuse to accept any blame then you will learn nothing. Now if only someone had drilled that into me at 17 instead of push-pull steering it might have saved a lot of bent metal.

Never admit any blame to anyone else though, at least not right away after an accident. They'll screw you for the insurance if you do.

_________________
-mike[F]
Caught in the rush of the crowd, lost in a wall of sound..

True - most of the time!

But there are exceptions and most of you know my wife's bad experience with the terminally ill driver from my post on here and her own post on the PH site! Only way she could have avoided that one was to have stayed at home in bed! She had left textbook space in front when she pulled up as last car in queue, applied handbrake, placed car in neutral - then saw the Escort accelerating hard towards the queue of traffic and realised she had no get-out clause (Happened in front of trafpol in hard shoulder with all his lights flashing to warn people of the sudden queue. - Well - was years ago now!) Likewise the cousin - hit by artic with dodgy everything ploughing through central reservation and hitting Ferdl head on! But these were freak and absurd incidents - and certainly not normal!

Know of another "no-fault" where driver was stopped at the traffic lights - but was rear-ended when the numpty applied his brakes too late and skidded into her. Fault clearly was the numpty's - and the other driver was blameless in every respect. So there are odd occasions, admitttedly few, where there is no way one of the parties involved could have avoided the accident.