News 130 vehicles crash on bridge

[Evil_Onyx]

Sheppey crossing crash: Dozens hurt as 130 vehicles crash

Sixty people have been injured as more than 130 vehicles were involved in a series of crashes in thick fog on the Sheppey crossing in Kent.

This could quite easily been so much worse.

I brings to my mind a discussion I had with some colleagues some years ago. Has the general quality of driving gone down in the last decade or two? Changes in technology has saved lives and it has been proven, but is that extra layer of safety changed the way some people drive, too close to the car ahead, too fast for the conditions. Carelessly in a word.

Thoughts, ideas & suggestions?

 

[garyw]

This occurred not too far from me and it occurred on a Bridge in thick fog.
Round here, when fog is about it's very easy to drive from thin layers of fog into dense, thick fog in less than a minute, I've done it myself.

Of course, in rush hour there are a lot of drivers on autopilot, they've done the trip a thousand times so why should this be any different. Next thing they have rear ended another car.

I've always thought that drivers should be re-tested every 10 years to see if they can still be allowed to drive.

 

[Artlav]

Maybe not so much careless than not being well educated in physics and lacking imagination?
I often see people driving like the laws of physics can be bribed, or just race ahead oblivious to consequences.

Imagination. If you can readily imagine a stopped dump truck's hind behind the cloud of fog, you would be more reluctant to drive into it at speed than when you can't.

Lack of concept of fundamental law. Legal laws are as binding as the paper they are written on - you might be right by the legal law, but you would be dead by the Newton's law anyway.

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

Maybe not so much careless than not being well educated in physics and lacking imagination?
I often see people driving like the laws of physics can be bribed, or just race ahead oblivious to consequences.

Imagination. If you can readily imagine a stopped dump truck's hind behind the cloud of fog, you would be more reluctant to drive into it at speed than when you can't.

Lack of concept of fundamental law. Legal laws are as binding as the paper they are written on - you might be right by the legal law, but you would be dead by the Newton's law anyway.

More or less. The basic problem with driving is that its a challenging task, and society cannot actually enforce the necessary levels of competence to do the task. I have few concerns about flying, because pilots, ATC, and the mechanics that service the planes all are tested sufficiently, but there are a lot of incompetent drivers on the roads...

Not much we can do about it though :shrug:

 

[Evil_Onyx]

Having to be retested is a great idea, but no politician will ever support it, as 90% of his constituents would be against it, as they would be the ones failing a retest.

I personally drive with a 3-4 second gap between me and a car in front of me in good weather, more in bad or unknown conditions (dawn mist/black ice). And the number of cars that seem to think they can fit in that gap is silly. Also speeding... I was instructed to drive at speed below the speed limit that is safe and no faster than your braking distance (ie. be able to come to a safe stop on the road you can see).

I think many drivers don't know or take into account Reaction time, The time it takes for a human to observe, analyze and make a decision then move a limb possibly from one pedal to another and apply just the right pressure for maximum deceleration.

 

[Shifty]

This graph suggests that some of the perception of increased driving incompetence does not accord with reality:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.s._traffic_deaths_as_fraction_of_total_popualtion_1900-2010.png

Traffic fatalities per mile, per car, and per driver have all fallen steadily since the 1960's (at least in the U.S.)
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1103.pdf
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811552.pdf

 

[BruceJohnJennerLawso]

This graph suggests that some of the perception of increased driving incompetence does not accord with reality:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:U.s._traffic_deaths_as_fraction_of_total_popualtion_1900-2010.png

Traffic fatalities per mile, per car, and per driver have all fallen steadily since the 1960's (at least in the U.S.)
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1103.pdf
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811552.pdf

Just to clarify, I didnt mean to imply that things were getting worse, just that they always were bad.

That is an interesting link though. I wonder whether the significant drop during and after WW2 could be linked to lower car purchases/ownership? It does seem odd that the falloff would carry on into the 50s... :hmm:

 

[RisingFury]

Well, that's what you get for not keeping a good safety distance and for not changing your driving style to fit the conditions.

 

[Andy44]

Imagination. If you can readily imagine a stopped dump truck's hind behind the cloud of fog, you would be more reluctant to drive into it at speed than when you can't.

I used to drive through the mountains of Pennsylvania along U.S. Route 322 back in the 90s when I was in college, often late at night when the road is mostly empty. Up in that section of the road it is a four-lane divided highway, and in good visibility higher speeds are quite safe.

But at night it sometimes gets really foggy, and I would slow down to around 35 mph because of the scenario you describe. If there is a truck stopped in the lane I'd smash into it.

I was always astonished at the people who would blow by me at 60+ mph. There was no way they could see what was in front of them. I went from being scared I would hit something to being scared one of those clowns would hit me.

But overall I don't worry too much about it. That so many people are driving and so few accidents occur says much about the ability of most people to take care of themselves.

 

[garyw]

Well, that's what you get for not keeping a good safety distance and for not changing your driving style to fit the conditions.

It would be interesting to do a study on drivers habits especially when they do the same route day in and day out. I'll bet that their habits change very little. Where possible, they'll do the same speed, take the same turnings and expect things to stay the same. It's parrot fashion driving.

On another note I found out last night that a neighbour of mine was caught up in the tailback. If she had left 5 minutes earlier she would have been in the middle of it.

 

[Urwumpe]

I used to drive through the mountains of Pennsylvania along U.S. Route 322 back in the 90s when I was in college, often late at night when the road is mostly empty. Up in that section of the road it is a four-lane divided highway, and in good visibility higher speeds are quite safe.

But at night it sometimes gets really foggy, and I would slow down to around 35 mph because of the scenario you describe. If there is a truck stopped in the lane I'd smash into it.

Similar here... the Autobahn A2 is already pretty infamous for its high number of fatal accidents (because of the high traffic density, as main road between east and west europe).

But it also has the tendency in the summer, to surprise you with sudden heavy rain in the middle of nowhere (Between Peine and Hanover). From clear sight to 0 mm (windshield) in a few seconds. With braking distances increased quickly because of the water rising on the road.

When you are not keeping a good distance and already have a sane velocity, before the rain surprises you, you have no chance to slow down when you see the braking lights of the car in front of you. Or to control your car in that situation, even ABS fails when you have 2 cm water on the road.

I had a few near misses in such a situation already before, even slowing down to 30 km/h (where you can usually drive 130 km/h recommended speed or more) is no guarantee that you can really stop when you see another car in front of you.

And combine this with the fact, that right at the place, where such rainfall happens most often, you also have a very high chance for traffic jams.

The latest ruling by a court in Germany now clarified how you must behave according to laws:

Minimum distance is half your velocity (in km/h) as meters (or: velocity multiplied with 1/1000 h). Recommended distance is 1 second of reaction time + braking distance.

Braking distance is defined simple in the regulations by s = 1/4 * v * t * k.

s is the safe braking distance in meters.
v is the velocity (in km/h).
t is the time for stopping ( 1 second in town, 2 seconds out of town)
k is the factor for the road condition (usually k=1 for a dry road, k=2 for wet roads, k=4 for gravel on the road, k=8 or more for ice)

So, at 130 km/h on the Autobahn with dry road, you need to plan with 39 + 65 = 104 meters distance to stop.

Also, the judges now clarified for how long you may drive with reduced safety distance (for example, when a car enters the highway in front of you): The maximum allowed time is either the time it takes to travel 140 meters or 3 seconds, what ever is lower. Means effectively: If you drive much faster than recommended, you have to react much faster.

If you are caught trailing a car for a longer time at less than half your indicated velocity ... it gets really expensive. At 260 km/h, this means effectively less than 2 seconds to get to safe distance again.

 

[Spacethingy]

Well, that's what you get for not keeping a good safety distance and for not changing your driving style to fit the conditions.

On the BBC they actually interviewed someone who plainly said "I knew I was going too fast, but I didn't slow down". :shrug:

Some people are just oblivious sometimes. The things you see them do, e.g. lane-hopping like they're playing some cute arcade game... Some make no adjustments, no effort to work out how a situation could possibly mean that they'll have to change their actions.

But I don't actually drive yet, so perhaps I'd better shut up... :lol:

 

[garyw]

Some people are just oblivious sometimes. The things you see them do, e.g. lane-hopping like they're playing some cute arcade game... Some make no adjustments, no effort to work out how a situation could possibly mean that they'll have to change their actions.

Before I passed my car test I used to ride a motorbike. One thing that was drummed into people was 'always have an escape route' and it's something that stayed with me as a car driver. I'm a huge fan of [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defensive_driving"]Defensive Driving[/ame] and think it should be part of the driving test.

 

[Urwumpe]

Before I passed my car test I used to ride a motorbike. One thing that was drummed into people was 'always have an escape route' and it's something that stayed with me as a car driver. I'm a huge fan of Defensive Driving and think it should be part of the driving test.

Drive defensive, buy a tank. :lol:

---------- Post added at 10:38 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:36 AM ----------

As you can see in this example, safe distance is pretty optional for some drivers. I actually mostly see truck drivers and such sprinters to violate the safety distance, while most smaller cars at least roughly follow it.

(The caption of the image says it was recorded at 80 km/h, so the safe distance would have been 24 + 40 meters.)

 

[garyw]

Well... no. Defensive driving is all about knowing what's going on around you and anticipating. For example, with Urwumpes image if I was behind those vehicles I'd be thinking 'What if the white lorry in the left hand lane brakes sharply or what if the vehicle in front sheds it's load'

 

[Urwumpe]

Well... no. Defensive driving is all about knowing what's going on around you and anticipating. For example, with Urwumpes image if I was behind those vehicles I'd be thinking 'What if the white lorry in the left hand lane brakes sharply or what if the vehicle in front sheds it's load'

You can also read the mind of most drivers, if you are a bit skilled in body language. At least for the simple things like:

• Did s-he notice me?
• Will s-he switch lanes?
• Will s-he be aggressive?
• Will s-he cross the road as pedestrian?

If you can predict how somebody will move when you play football, you can also predict it on the road (If you need extreme training in body language, try martial arts or sword fighting)

Also, defensive driving is better for your wallet... you can save a lot of fuel, if you look ahead a few cars further down the road. There is no reason to try hard docking to the car ahead, especially when the traffic lights turn to red less than half a kilometer a head of you.

 

[Notebook]

I just drive slow, someone always pulls in front,,,,then...I talk to myself about the idiot who just reduced my braking space, then I get lost...then I get on the train.

N.

 

[Evil_Onyx]

I wonder if anyone has done a study on how much mental compacity it takes to drive and do other complex tasks?

 

[Urwumpe]

I wonder if anyone has done a study on how much mental compacity it takes to drive and do other complex tasks?

They work on one... they made a car simulator with mental tasks to do, that has already been proven to improve the mental capabilities of old people...

 

[Evil_Onyx]

After some research, 40 min looking online, it seems that there has not been a study to see what the average person's capacity for concurrent complex tasks is. There are ones in to how age affects mental capacity, and how various conditions affect it. but i could not find any study on cars (found lots for aircraft).
What i want to know is, how much of the average person capacity is used when driving in various conditions and situations?
All the overviews of studies I skimmed only covered very specific areas (ie person with X condition brain worked A hard on this day and B hard a set time later)