points for speeding???

Altreab

Lex Luthor wrote:

thats fair enough kb, but when my dad was teaching me to drive he always said to expect the unexpected around every corner.

Had that guy been going at a safe speed its probably fair to say the accident could have been avoided.

In the accident mentioned above we would have to ask if the road was in bad condition. There was afterall a previous accident at that spot.

At every accident scene there are conditions that make each accident unique. Questions such as

1) Condition of the road. Newly surfaced? badly surfaced? Oil spillage? road signs?
Typical in many parts is where the council resurface roads and dont "sweep" the chips off after. Then Leave signs warning of road chips and/or slippery conditions for months and years after the work has completed. The signs are up so long people Start ignoring them

2) Mechanical condition of the car itself. Brakes steering suspension tyres ect. This would be under the drivers control. Mechanical faults would have greatly reduced since NCT arrived.

3) Driver condition. Tired ..drunk ...wrong speedfor the road.....not concentrating on road ...worried about other things in life ect

4) Totally unexpected events that the driver has no control over such as animals running across the road. Or Other drivers been affected by events in 2 and 3 above.

5) Combination of all of the above.

Futureman

I agree.

FX Meister

Lex Luthor wrote:

stop picking it to pieces.....you know what I mean :rolleyes:

Don't just back step, admit you were wrong, it's not hard.

FX Meister

kbannon wrote:

edit: how can you exactly tell that you have travelled 1km?

You look at your odometer perhaps? Surely they come as standard on BMW's at this stage;)

Lex Luthor

FX Meister wrote:

Don't just back step, admit you were wrong, it's not hard.

but I'm not

FX Meister

Lex Luthor wrote:

but I'm not

Yes you are, but there's no point going into it with you.

Seth Brundle

FX Meister wrote:

kbannon wrote:

edit: how can you exactly tell that you have travelled 1km?

You look at your odometer perhaps? Surely they come as standard on BMW's at this stage;)

So you are assuming that the odometer is correct. How does the odometer account for the wear on tyres, etc.? Maybe the odometer is also out by 10% - it does happen!

Lex Luthor

FX Meister wrote:

Yes you are, but there's no point going into it with you.

cos you know I'm right....:p

yayamark

Quote: From Kbannon

However, as I don't know the details of this case Im talking through my bum. I would also make a large assumption that there was no advance notice of the hazard ahead i.e. "Accident Ahead" signs, etc.[/QUOTE]


ya you are talking through your bum there was loads of signage and flashing becaons there on the road

don't talk about what u don't know it makes one sound stupid

Seth Brundle

yayamark wrote:

Kbannon wrote:

However, as I don't know the details of this case Im talking through my bum. I would also make a large assumption that there was no advance notice of the hazard ahead i.e. "Accident Ahead" signs, etc.

ya you are talking through your bum there was loads of signage and flashing becaons there on the road

don't talk about what u don't know it makes one sound stupid

Given that most accidents scenes do not have adequate warning signage it was a very safe assumption to make. How do you know there was plenty of signage? Were you there prior to the 2nd incident?

yayamark

kbannon wrote:

Given that most accidents scenes do not have adequate warning signage it was a very safe assumption to make. How do you know there was plenty of signage? Were you there prior to the 2nd incident?

Yes

Seth Brundle

hmmm :rolleyes:
In what capacity?
Taking you on your word, how far back from the incident spot were the signs and how many signs were in place? Can you provide a bit more info about the cause of the second incident (without prejudicing any legal case on it)?
Leaving this particular incident aside, do you believe that on the whole incidents have adequate advance warning placed there by the emergency services?
I don't recall ever seeing adequate advance warning at an incident in the RoI.

yayamark

kbannon wrote:

hmmm :rolleyes:
In what capacity?
Taking you on your word, how far back from the incident spot were the signs and how many signs were in place? Can you provide a bit more info about the cause of the second incident (without prejudicing any legal case on it)?
Leaving this particular incident aside, do you believe that on the whole incidents have adequate advance warning placed there by the emergency services?
I don't recall ever seeing adequate advance warning at an incident in the RoI.

don't want to say what capacity.
i wouldn't make it up just to prove a point in an arguement on the internet
the accident happened between 2 bends approx a couple of hundred yards apart. there was 2 emergency vehicles at these bends with emergency lights flashing and men in floursescent jackets and meprolights on the ground
i think in the majority of accidents the emergency services try to have adequate advance warning in place, but unfortunately due to cost restrictions members may not have these at their disposal
i have seen accidents where there has not been adequate warning signs

peasant

yayamark wrote:

i think in the majority of accidents the emergency services try to have adequate advance warning in place, but unfortunately due to cost restrictions members may not have these at their disposal
i have seen accidents where there has not been adequate warning signs

Try to ?

Cost restrictions??

May not have??


WTF ?

This is not against you, yayamark ...I just can't believe what I'm reading here.

When I got my driving license (over 20 years ago ...in another country, obviously:D ) we were taught the first thing to do when you arrive at the scene of an accident is to secure that scene. Prevent other drivers from ploughing into it by putting up the warning triangle (obligatory on every car ...once again, not in this country:( ) at a safe distance.

Please, please tell me that at least the emergency services here have proper equipment to secure the scene of an accident!

yayamark

peasant wrote:

Try to ?

Cost restrictions??

May not have??


WTF ?

This is not against you, yayamark ...I just can't believe what I'm reading here.

When I got my driving license (over 20 years ago ...in another country, obviously:D ) we were taught the first thing to do when you arrive at the scene of an accident is to secure that scene. Prevent other drivers from ploughing into it by putting up the warning triangle (obligatory on every car ...once again, not in this country:( ) at a safe distance.

Please, please tell me that at least the emergency services here have proper equipment to secure the scene of an accident!

i understand your points

only on the last six months to a year due to health and safety becoming a priorty has this equipment started to come on stream

parsi

rebel.ranter wrote:

I have checked the Ford Focus in work speedo with a GPS and at 100 km/h it is reading approx. 5km/h faster than the GPS reading. The GPS is fairly accurate for speed measurement, in fact it's more accurate for this than giving your exact location.

Hmm. It measures speed as a function of the distance travelled over time so if the yokey doesn't accurately know where you are it can hardly measure how long it took to get there. I know that my satnav appears to lag when it shows my speed.

alt.gps had a long thread last year about the accuracy of using a gps for speed and well it became convoluted and complicated but there seemed to be a broad consensus that GPS for speed was best over longer straighter runs rather than shorter curvier runs.