|
Post by thebfg on Feb 22, 2018 21:07:25 GMT
"there's nowt wrong with cruise control, it is ideal on a motorway" - I disagree intensely. On a motorway speeds need to be adjusted almost every second, at least supervised every second.Β WTF are you driving on UK motorways when 95% of the traffic is travelling at a steady speed, but you need to constantly adjust your speed?Β Of course the driver is 'supervising his speed', but cruise control is part of the process if done properly.Β One technique is to set the speed at say 70, and use the accelerator gently to increase speed whenever appropriate to suit the traffic. The conditions evident from that dashcam do not appear to be at all busy. I used to do that and once accelerated or slowed down press resume to put it back to the cruising speed. But observation is key and looking at the whole motorway not just the vehicle in front, which to be fair should be done at all times anyway. It cannot of been that busy as it took 12 minutes to happen, did everyone else manage to change lane and drive around it. I wonder why no 999 call was made by other passing traffic, I would off.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Feb 22, 2018 21:19:52 GMT
The FedEx driver is at least partly to blame, we've had pissed up flip-flops driving in the UK for well over ten years now so it shouldn't have come as a surprise to have found one who had decided to stop for a snooze in lane one of the M1.
One of Stobart's finest...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2018 21:29:00 GMT
The FedEx driver is at least partly to blame, we've had pissed up flip-flops driving in the UK for well over ten years now so it shouldn't have come as a surprise to have found one who had decided to stop for a snooze in lane one of the M1. One of Stobart's finest... While that is a truly horrendous piece of driving (not unexpected mind) and what with me having the telepathic ability to spot an EE ape sawing at a piece of crap 15 year old kraut mobile steering wheel 6" off my rear bumper I'm left wondering why this followed on from the pissed Czech Stobart driver clip.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 22, 2018 22:39:00 GMT
Yes, a disgrace. They should have been able to stop it. Nothing to do with the drivers (not even the drunk one) Rog It's not as black and white as that. I'm back, but after numerous pints whilst I agree with this point I think I should wait until thr morning before commenting further. Hic.
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Feb 22, 2018 22:58:41 GMT
there's nowt wrong with cruise control, it is ideal on a motorway and prevents your speed from creeping up, BUT of course it's still necessary to stay alert; slight pressure on the brake pedal cancels it. how do you know the stationary truck was observed by a traffic camera? Can't agree Bodger, cruise control is dangerous, it sets a speed and the vehicle does not drop below that speed. It should be replace with a variable limiter which sets a top speed and if the driver lessens the pressure on the throttle the vehicle slows. One is a projectile which unless the driver consciously brakes will continue at the set speed for ever not matter what is in the way. The other requires the vehicle to be drive limiting only the top speed, thus if the driver's attention wanders pressure comes off the throttle and the vehicle slows. Having both on my vehicle I never use cruise control always use the limiter, which means that speed limits are observed and I do not have to concentrate on that and allows more concentration to be used on the rest of the task of driving.
|
|
|
Post by Andyberg on Feb 22, 2018 23:14:46 GMT
there's nowt wrong with cruise control, it is ideal on a motorway and prevents your speed from creeping up, BUT of course it's still necessary to stay alert; slight pressure on the brake pedal cancels it. how do you know the stationary truck was observed by a traffic camera? if the driver lessens the pressure on the throttle the vehicle slows. Fitted as standard to every car and motorbike since approx 1890! ππ
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Feb 22, 2018 23:59:36 GMT
there's nowt wrong with cruise control, it is ideal on a motorway and prevents your speed from creeping up, BUT of course it's still necessary to stay alert; slight pressure on the brake pedal cancels it. how do you know the stationary truck was observed by a traffic camera? Can't agree Bodger, cruise control is dangerous, it sets a speed and the vehicle does not drop below that speed. It should be replace with a variable limiter which sets a top speed and if the driver lessens the pressure on the throttle the vehicle slows. One is a projectile which unless the driver consciously brakes will continue at the set speed for ever not matter what is in the way. The other requires the vehicle to be drive limiting only the top speed, thus if the driver's attention wanders pressure comes off the throttle and the vehicle slows. Having both on my vehicle I never use cruise control always use the limiter, which means that speed limits are observed and I do not have to concentrate on that and allows more concentration to be used on the rest of the task of driving. Modern cruise control can slow the vehicle down and stop the vehicle! but only on certain vehicles and if its used, so in lots of cases cruise control is safer. The real problem was the stupid tosser that decided drink driving is safe and the minibus driver that didnt drive safely, I mean he could have gone onto the hard shoulder to avoid the crash couldnt he? or was the hard shoulder missing as so often the case nowdays
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2018 0:00:27 GMT
Use cruise all the time, especially in France.
Still alive.
This incident has made me think about hands free calls though.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2018 0:06:35 GMT
Can't agree Bodger, cruise control is dangerous, it sets a speed and the vehicle does not drop below that speed. It should be replace with a variable limiter which sets a top speed and if the driver lessens the pressure on the throttle the vehicle slows. One is a projectile which unless the driver consciously brakes will continue at the set speed for ever not matter what is in the way. The other requires the vehicle to be drive limiting only the top speed, thus if the driver's attention wanders pressure comes off the throttle and the vehicle slows. Having both on my vehicle I never use cruise control always use the limiter, which means that speed limits are observed and I do not have to concentrate on that and allows more concentration to be used on the rest of the task of driving. Modern cruise control can slow the vehicle down and stop the vehicle! but only on certain vehicles and if its used, so in lots of cases cruise control is safer. The real problem was the stupid tosser that decided drink driving is safe and the minibus driver that didnt drive safely, I mean he could have gone onto the hard shoulder to avoid the crash couldnt he? or was the hard shoulder missing as so often the case nowdays Why are you looking to blame the mini bus driver for anything? Who says he wasn't driving safely? You know bog all about his thought process because you were not there. If the hard shoulder was there surely the polish wagon driver would not have been expected to be on it when he pulled up. If he has pulled up and avoided colliding with the wagon in the inside lane he his blameless, if an idiot in an hgv shunts him into the back of another stationary wagon that is nowt to do with him.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Feb 23, 2018 4:36:38 GMT
Modern cruise control can slow the vehicle down and stop the vehicle! but only on certain vehicles and if its used, so in lots of cases cruise control is safer. The real problem was the stupid tosser that decided drink driving is safe and the minibus driver that didnt drive safely, I mean he could have gone onto the hard shoulder to avoid the crash couldnt he? or was the hard shoulder missing as so often the case nowdays Why are you looking to blame the mini bus driver for anything? Who says he wasn't driving safely? You know bog all about his thought process because you were not there. If the hard shoulder was there surely the polish wagon driver would not have been expected to be on it when he pulled up. If he has pulled up and avoided colliding with the wagon in the inside lane he his blameless, if an idiot in an hgv shunts him into the back of another stationary wagon that is nowt to do with him. I agree. But I would do everything possible to not stop on a live motorway obviously in slow traffic it is inevitable . I also won't swerve between lanes because of slow traffic as that is as dangerous. If my lane is stopping or slowing right down I'm always on the look out behind me to make sure they are stopping too. I would never use my phone full stop whilst driving. Whoever is to blame it was entirely preventable by all three drivers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 23, 2018 8:43:14 GMT
Why are you looking to blame the mini bus driver for anything? Who says he wasn't driving safely? You know bog all about his thought process because you were not there. If the hard shoulder was there surely the polish wagon driver would not have been expected to be on it when he pulled up. If he has pulled up and avoided colliding with the wagon in the inside lane he his blameless, if an idiot in an hgv shunts him into the back of another stationary wagon that is nowt to do with him. I agree. But I would do everything possible to not stop on a live motorway obviously in slow traffic it is inevitable . I also won't swerve between lanes because of slow traffic as that is as dangerous. If my lane is stopping or slowing right down I'm always on the look out behind me to make sure they are stopping too. I would never use my phone full stop whilst driving. Whoever is to blame it was entirely preventable by all three drivers. So you don't think that if the mini bus driver had been able to pull out into the middle lane the Fed ex driver wouldn't have still run into the back of the other wagon? Looking at the resulting wreckage I would say the mini bus driver being there was barely a factor, there would still have been an impact. At the end of the day if you run into the back of another vehicle the blame ultimately for that lies with you, even if the nugget in front of you has stopped where they shouldn't have. You should always be able to pull up in time. Of course if the nugget didn't have lights on whilst parked up in lane one that is a significant contributory factor. However in this case the lights on the mini bus should have been visible to the Fed ex driver.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Feb 23, 2018 8:49:41 GMT
I agree. But I would do everything possible to not stop on a live motorway obviously in slow traffic it is inevitable . I also won't swerve between lanes because of slow traffic as that is as dangerous. If my lane is stopping or slowing right down I'm always on the look out behind me to make sure they are stopping too. I would never use my phone full stop whilst driving. Whoever is to blame it was entirely preventable by all three drivers. So you don't think that if the mini bus driver had been able to pull out into the middle lane the Fed ex driver wouldn't have still run into the back of the other wagon? Obviously the minibus driver is deceased and thus no longer liable to blame, but he must have had the same opportunity and time as the FedEx driver to move into lane 2, or onto the hard shoulder rather than stopping directly behind the vehicle stationary in lane 1. Of course we will never know why he did not do this but this omission had disastrous consequences.
|
|
|
Post by lollygagger on Feb 23, 2018 9:18:49 GMT
I think it's foolish not to give 100% of your concentration to driving. For me it's phone switched off, no cruise control, no chatting. It's a fairly safe thing to do statistically but the consequences when it goes wrong are too serious to be chatting on phone or otherwise.
I used to use a forum with a guy who drove nights up and down the M5/M6 in a double trailer lorry thing. He was big on dissing non-professional drivers but the twat used to post on the forum while driving until he got a heap of abuse from moi. Nobody else had noticed what he was doing and he tried to deny it, saying he posted in his breaks etc, but uou can't have a break every 10 minutes all through the night... He was white British and otherwise intelligent enough.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Stabby on Feb 23, 2018 9:20:12 GMT
Obviously the minibus driver is deceased and thus no longer liable to blame Why can't the dead be blamed? He is unlikely to attract blame during the trial for the simple reason that he cannot be punished.
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Feb 23, 2018 9:41:45 GMT
I agree. But I would do everything possible to not stop on a live motorway obviously in slow traffic it is inevitable . I also won't swerve between lanes because of slow traffic as that is as dangerous. If my lane is stopping or slowing right down I'm always on the look out behind me to make sure they are stopping too. I would never use my phone full stop whilst driving. Whoever is to blame it was entirely preventable by all three drivers. So you don't think that if the mini bus driver had been able to pull out into theΒ middle lane the Fed ex driver wouldn't have still run into the back of the other wagon? Looking at the resulting wreckage I would say the mini bus driver being there was barely a factor, there would still have been an impact. It was going through my mind at the time I wrote the post but I dident have time to further it. Yes the second lorry would of still crashed however it would of not been a fatal crash. I can accept that if he hit the back of a lorry instead if a minibus he may of died. So to correct my statement All three drivers could of prevented a multiple fatatilty accident. Without putting any blame on him as in my opinion the accident was the fault of the two lorry drivers. He should of been able to go round either side of the lorry as for 12 minutes everyone else managed to. So yes he could of prevented it but I guess we will never know if he was able to or he saw the stationary lorry too late. Viability looked fine in that dash cam view.
|
|