Driving standards

[Horsetan]

Even if the car driver used his mirrors correctly at those sort of speeds he might not have seen the motorcyclist. If you look at the path he took round the roundabout then cut across his mate with the camera and then went wide he may well have been visible in the car drivers mirrors for only a fraction of a second.

What car was it? Some cars - particularly hatchbacks - have some pretty alarming blindspots at the rear.

[Titan]

Is the speedo in MPH? I presume so, so they were doing over 100mph away from that roundabout. Classic SMIDSY - car driver shouldn't have moved out, but that's a hell of a closing speed.

 

 

Even if the car driver used his mirrors correctly at those sort of speeds he might not have seen the motorcyclist. If you look at the path he took round the roundabout then cut across his mate with the camera and then went wide he may well have been visible in the car drivers mirrors for only a fraction of a second.

 

It is definitely not a "Classic SMIDSY", it is about as far away from a classic SMIDSY a it is possible to be. A classic SMIDSY is where a motorcyclist is riding appropriately and a driver does not see him because he did not look properly, neither of which are true in this case.

 

I see nothing to suggest that the car driver did not look properly - the motorcycle would only have become clearly visible in the drivers mirrors just over a second before the collision. As the car is already indicating and commencing its manoeuvre having checked the road was clear prior to the motorcycle appearing it is not unreasonable for the diver to be looking where he is going rather than glued to his mirrors, especially bearing in mind the nature of the manoeuvre he is carrying out and the oncoming traffic. The poor driver has absolutely nothing to be sorry for.

[Reorte]

No one has a right to drive, simple. It's convenient, of course, but one of the big issues we have versus countries like the Netherlands is epitomised in your post.

No-one has a right to drive and it's still possible to get by without a car for a lot of people, but the world has reshaped itself around cars and the assumption that most people will have access to them, which makes it harder to do without one for most than it would've once been.

[jjb1970]

Even if the car driver used his mirrors correctly at those sort of speeds he might not have seen the motorcyclist. If you look at the path he took round the roundabout then cut across his mate with the camera and then went wide he may well have been visible in the car drivers mirrors for only a fraction of a second.

 

 

This is why I hate driving on the German autobahns, we are conditioned to British motorway speeds which affects our perception of speed and distance when checking mirrors. Driving on roads where cars are (legally) driving atdouble or more our speed limit is rather disconcerting and quite scary at times.

[TheQ]

No-one has a right to drive and it's still possible to get by without a car for a lot of people, but the world has reshaped itself around cars and the assumption that most people will have access to them, which makes it harder to do without one for most than it would've once been.

Out in the countryside there are a lot of people who can't get around without a car, for me it's 1.5 miles to the nearest bus route. The first bus in the morning is an hour after I am supposed to be at work,. The first bus being 08:08 and the last being 19:02 ( I had to look that up.) Even then that only takes me to the next town, (population 1760) no banks, a small tesco, several charity shops, estate agents and a post office., to get to Norwich requires another hours wait and then an hour on the bus to get there.

 

 By car, on a good day 35 minutes from home......

Edited April 13, 2017 by TheQ

[Baby Deltic]

David's Story, released by Norfolk Police:

 

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ff2_1409862515

[chris p bacon]

David's Story, released by Norfolk Police:

 

https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ff2_1409862515

I bike with excessive speed coupled with a foreign plated and probably left hand drive car.

[Baby Deltic]

I bike with excessive speed coupled with a foreign plated and probably left hand drive car.

I looks foreign plated  but right hand drive judging by the windscreen wiper orientation, so the driver would have had a pretty good line of site up the middle of the road. Given the closing speed of the motorcycle it may well have been a done deal anyway. The silence after the accident, the reflection of the flashing red LED on the helmet camera, and the motorcyclists absolute lifelessness are really chilling.

[Horsetan]

I bike with excessive speed coupled with a foreign plated and probably left hand drive car.

 

 

...looks foreign plated  but right hand drive judging by the windscreen wiper orientation, so the driver would have had a pretty good line of site up the middle of the road....

 

That's interesting. If the driver is living and working here, i.e. is a UK resident, then it's unlawful to be running on foreign plates. The trouble is that this is not enforced.

Edited April 13, 2017 by Horsetan

[TheQ]

That's interesting. If the driver is living and working here, i.e. is a UK resident, then it's unlawful to be running on foreign plates. The trouble is that this is not enforced.

That's about 10% of cars around here, mostly Lithuanian Audis working on the fruit farms.

[PhilJ W]

What car was it? Some cars - particularly hatchbacks - have some pretty alarming blindspots at the rear.

Its difficult to see what make/sort of car it was but many modern cars not only have large pillars at the rear, many have thick windscreen pillars that can easily hide a motorcyclist or cyclist. My own car, a Hyundai i10 is a case in point, I have got into the habit of looking either side of the screen pillar when pulling out of a side road. All in the name of crash protection.

[Kickstart]

There's a reason the tax is there, it's just not used for the upkeep of the roads. It's not rocket surgery.

Exactly my point. If it were ring fenced then there is an excuse for basing it on size of vehicle / road damage, etc. As that is only a minor element of it then no reason why similar taxes shouldn't be applied to other classes. CO2 can easily be directly taxed via fuel duties, so also taxing it at a fairly random level (as it does not relate to mileage) on VED is pretty pointless.

 

Yes it is a very simple concept.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[jjb1970]

Tax isn't about being fair, it is about raising money. I always think arguments about tax miss the point, if people don't like tax then they should be taking much more of an interest in what the money is spent on and perhaps more importantly how wisely the money is spent. I think most people accept the need to pay tax if the money is spent to good effect, the problem is that much of it clearly isn't spent to good effect which then leads people to become very cynical (or realistic?) about the whole system. If the money needs to raise £x then it'll figure out a way to raise that money and it is less about fairness than getting £x, if it wasn't raised through taxing car drivers then the burden would just be redistributed to other forms of taxation.

[Guest]

if people don't like tax then they should be taking much more of an interest in what the money is spent on and perhaps more importantly how wisely the money is spent. I think most people accept the need to pay tax if the money is spent to good effect, 

 

http://road.cc/content/news/220791-behold-majestic-42-metre-long-cycle-lane

[jjb1970]

http://road.cc/content/news/220791-behold-majestic-42-metre-long-cycle-lane

 

The problem is that you don't have to look very hard to find inefficient or just plain incompetent examples of government spending. Of course that is true of many private enterprises too, but it's not our money they're wasting and they'll generally either improve or end up losing their market (unless their client is the government but then it comes back to wasteful government spending). I've seen defence spending from the inside and government funded energy projects and what is bizarre is they'll waste billions and nobody seems to be suffer any consequences and then other important items exist on a shoe string. Given that I understand why people are cynical about tax and don't blame anybody for using legally available mechanisms to minimise their tax exposure.

[peanuts]

The problem is that you don't have to look very hard to find inefficient or just plain incompetent examples of government spending. Of course that is true of many private enterprises too, but it's not our money they're wasting and they'll generally either improve or end up losing their market (unless their client is the government but then it comes back to wasteful government spending). I've seen defence spending from the inside and government funded energy projects and what is bizarre is they'll waste billions and nobody seems to be suffer any consequences and then other important items exist on a shoe string. Given that I understand why people are cynical about tax and don't blame anybody for using legally available mechanisms to minimise their tax exposure.

for me its the fact that the people using  legally available mechanisms to minimise their tax exposure.are in a privileged position and it is not available to anybody on P.A.Y.E   if it was available to all then it wouldnt be a problem but its not so it is  

[Norm81]

I now have a new/renewed pet hate of which I cannot see the purpose of, unless it is to deliberately rile other motorists.

 

The situation is as follows, you are on a dual carriageway doing 60-70mph, there is a car ahead of you who you are catching up to so lets say they are doing 50-60mph. You pull out in good time to overtake, or have passed another vehicle recently so already in the overtaking lane. Then draw alongside or maybe half a car length ahead...

 

Then something strange happens, the car you were earlier catching, seems to now be sat there on your left hand side. If you're doing less then 70 and increase speed to 70, it stays with you.

 

Your options are to exceed the speed limit with rapid acceleration to try and gain enough distance to pull in front before they react, drop back and pull back in or wait it out and hope they give up!

 

If you do manage to pass, the car often starts to drop back at the same rate you were catching it earlier. So they slow back down again!

 

I have no idea what the mentality of these drivers is at all, except for either a bloody minded "I won't let them pass" or someone "looking for road rage". All I know is it has inexplicably happened to me once or twice and when you're in a 15+yrs 998cc car it puts you in a difficult spot.

[Baby Deltic]

I now have a new/renewed pet hate of which I cannot see the purpose of, unless it is to deliberately rile other motorists.

 

The situation is as follows, you are on a dual carriageway doing 60-70mph, there is a car ahead of you who you are catching up to so lets say they are doing 50-60mph. You pull out in good time to overtake, or have passed another vehicle recently so already in the overtaking lane. Then draw alongside or maybe half a car length ahead...

 

Then something strange happens, the car you were earlier catching, seems to now be sat there on your left hand side. If you're doing less then 70 and increase speed to 70, it stays with you.

 

Your options are to exceed the speed limit with rapid acceleration to try and gain enough distance to pull in front before they react, drop back and pull back in or wait it out and hope they give up!

 

If you do manage to pass, the car often starts to drop back at the same rate you were catching it earlier. So they slow back down again!

 

I have no idea what the mentality of these drivers is at all, except for either a bloody minded "I won't let them pass" or someone "looking for road rage". All I know is it has inexplicably happened to me once or twice and when you're in a 15+yrs 998cc car it puts you in a difficult spot.

 

I come across these total ar$eholes a lot. They deliberately shut you out like its sour grapes that you passed them. Technically I would class it as deliberate undertaking which I'm sure Mr Plod would take an interest in if he saw it occur. The other favourite is the driver who suddenly pulls out into your lane causing you to have to slow down rapidly, passes the obstruction at 50 - 60 MPH then speeds up to 70MPH as soon as they move back into the other lane, so you can't pass safely and get back in. Then there are the ungrateful ar$eholes where you change lanes to let them enter off a slip road and they speed up shutting you on the outside. You then get the tailgating to$$ers catching you up and trying to pressure you to speed up so you can pass them and get back in. My favoutite course of action in this scenario is to stay put and maintain speed until an obstruction comes up in their lane then adjust  speed accordingly so they end up having to slow down and back off. I dispise undertaking and I will always try and stop people doing it to me. If you are going to made to speed up against your will, you might aswell choose your moment carefully to cause the desired effect and inconvenience the moron causing the problem.

Edited April 14, 2017 by Baby Deltic

[jjb1970]

Most road problems could be resolved if only the government adopted my proposal to limit car ownership and use to those in the upper income tax bracket. Congestion would disappear overnight, pollution would plumet, road deaths drop, higher tax payers would feel happier getting something for the tax they pay rather than just subsidising slackers, people would be incentivised to work harder boosting economic productivity and output and we'd provide high density articulated plebian movement devices for the lower orders to move around if they really must. There are no downsides at all to this idea, everybody wins. I may start one of those on-line petitions to get it debated in Parliament  

[PaulCheffus]

Most road problems could be resolved if only the government adopted my proposal to limit car ownership and use to those in the upper income tax bracket. Congestion would disappear overnight, pollution would plumet, road deaths drop, higher tax payers would feel happier getting something for the tax they pay rather than just subsidising slackers, people would be incentivised to work harder boosting economic productivity and output and we'd provide high density articulated plebian movement devices for the lower orders to move around if they really must. There are no downsides at all to this idea, everybody wins. I may start one of those on-line petitions to get it debated in Parliament

 

Hi

 

Unless you live in a rural community with no public transport and work is 20 miles away.

 

Cheers

 

Paul

[njee20]

Exactly my point. If it were ring fenced then there is an excuse for basing it on size of vehicle / road damage, etc. As that is only a minor element of it then no reason why similar taxes shouldn't be applied to other classes. CO2 can easily be directly taxed via fuel duties, so also taxing it at a fairly random level (as it does not relate to mileage) on VED is pretty pointless.

What?! I can't believe I'm arguing this. Why not just sack it off entirely and add £500 onto everyone's council tax? It's done partially to incentivise more 'eco friendly cars' (whether co2 is the right measure is a whole other thread). Flat rated for every road user regardless of type (or existence) of vehicle is just crazy.

 

I can honestly say I've never had the 'won't let you back in' thing. At the end of the day some people are just idiots.

[ikks]

I now have a new/renewed pet hate of which I cannot see the purpose of, unless it is to deliberately rile other motorists.

 

The situation is as follows, you are on a dual carriageway doing 60-70mph, there is a car ahead of you who you are catching up to so lets say they are doing 50-60mph. You pull out in good time to overtake, or have passed another vehicle recently so already in the overtaking lane. Then draw alongside or maybe half a car length ahead...

 

Then something strange happens, the car you were earlier catching, seems to now be sat there on your left hand side. If you're doing less then 70 and increase speed to 70, it stays with you.

 

Your options are to exceed the speed limit with rapid acceleration to try and gain enough distance to pull in front before they react, drop back and pull back in or wait it out and hope they give up!

 

If you do manage to pass, the car often starts to drop back at the same rate you were catching it earlier. So they slow back down again!

 

I have no idea what the mentality of these drivers is at all, except for either a bloody minded "I won't let them pass" or someone "looking for road rage". All I know is it has inexplicably happened to me once or twice and when you're in a 15+yrs 998cc car it puts you in a difficult spot.

You should live in South Australia.........it seems every other driver thinks that's how to drive

 

Mike

[Baby Deltic]

What?! I can't believe I'm arguing this. Why not just sack it off entirely and add £500 onto everyone's council tax? It's done partially to incentivise more 'eco friendly cars' (whether co2 is the right measure is a whole other thread). Flat rated for every road user regardless of type (or existence) of vehicle is just crazy.

I can honestly say I've never had the 'won't let you back in' thing. At the end of the day some people are just idiots.

Please stop flaming. Thank you.

[njee20]

Who am I flaming?

[Baby Deltic]

Who am I flaming?

 

Your last post calling 'some people' idiots for starters. Who might they be? Just ordinary run of the mill idiots or people posting on this thread that happen to have a different opinion to taxation than you have?