Forum menu
He did. And he made the decision that 41 was appropitate for the situation. Speed is not the be all and end all of safe driving you know.
If everyone always made the right decision then there would be no RTCs would there?!!
On the whole I'd prefer not to leave appropriate speed to personal choice.
I'm like the majority of the population.
That's quite a depressing thought...
Sorry Solo I wasn't laughing at that (heck no) just more the comment about going out and doing 100mph it just read funny. Sorry didn't mean to offend you.
@ Zokes I really don't think that 99% of people are above the average driver not looking at the standards of driving on the roads, that's complete rubbish! I would suggest only 10% is above the average driver.
[i] DezB this wasnt' a thread about your brother, cat, MIL it was abotu you being miffed you got 3 points! Get a grip and MTFU.[/i]
I started the thread so it's [i]about[/i] what I want it to be [i]about[/i]. mmKay?
It was going well til you came along.
@ Zokes I really don't think that 99% of people are above the average driver not looking at the standards of driving on the roads, that's complete rubbish! I would suggest only 10% is above the average driver.
And I'm pretty damn certain that the reaction time of a seriously below-average driver is less than 2.5 seconds if they're paying attention. If they're not, the speed they're doing is irrelevant compared to someone driving faster but paying attention.
If everyone always made the right decision then there would be no RTCs would there?!!
No. You still have mechanical failures and health issues like heart attacks which can't be accounted for. And also basic driver skill.
But it has to be said better training and attitude would help safety more than legislation. See my yesterday's comments on Australian drivers for more details.....
Dezb. What was the best you could have hoped for from posting this?
You're just feeding the hungry masses. Some of these people haven't climbed onto their horses in over an hour, they are desperate people.
No one on Singletrackworld is anywhere near competent enough to judge they are better than the law with safety and speed limits.
Even Lewis Hamilton rear ended someone ffs.
It was going well til you came along.
One thing's for certain, this thread was NOT going well from the moment you typed the title
I'm like the majority of the population. Just stand down the road from the main Police station with a radar gun and you'll catch alot of Police rushing to get to the start of their shift.
Ah the old "They do it so why can't I?" argument
So in summary, you're a total sheep.
I wonder if the 2.5 secs is between when the driver SHOULD have seen the obstruction and actually applying the brakes.
Having said that the fact is the quicker you go, the longer it takes you to stop. On an open country road the consequences of going quicker are that you might just end up killing yourself and a sheep. Doing that in a 30 zone and its more likely to be a human that you kill.
Even Lewis Hamilton rear ended someone ffs.
He's an absolute douchebag though
Ah the old "They do it so why can't I?" argument
Selective quoting I see.
No, I'm in a constant rush like most people in Britain.
Just stand down the road from the main Police station with a radar gun and you'll catch alot of Police rushing to get to the start of their shift.
Not mine. Everyone walks.
[img] 
[/img]
[url= http://www.visualexpert.com/Resources/reactiontime.html ]Interesting reaction times[/url]
Are you allowed a speed awareness course for 41mph? I thought it was for folks *just* over the limit. Over ~40mph would mark you out as a bad boy. Being shot in front of your family being to good for you or something! I got caught for 36 in a 30 (middle of day following traffic on unfamiliar roads on way to ssuk).
I did the speed awareness course and the bit I remember most was to do '30 in third'. In third gear you can tell from engine noise if you are going to fast. I find it works well and try to stick to it in urban areas. The fine and the course were the same price in Derbyshire.
Maybe not a lie, but this is not entirely accurate information. There is a mechanism within 112 to deliver location data, but it may not be much more accurate than which cell site your mobile was connected to. I have no idea whether or not this same mechanism can be used dialling 999 (from the mobile network perspective I'm sure they could provide it).
The explanation given was that 112 takes you to a local team, the 999 takes you to a national switchboard. Somewhere along the way the ability to physically locate through the national switchboard gets lost. I have no idea if this is accurate, but sounds like the sort of thing that could be true. Either way, I'll use 112 for an emergency.
30 in 3rd? Thats Advance Drivers talk isn't it?
You can tell when your doing over 30 as when you approach 40 it feels a great deal different to 30 doesn't it!
[i]One thing's for certain, this thread was NOT going well from the moment you typed the title[/i]
Strangely enough, it was.
I posted it to start a discussion which I KNEW would cheer me up about the situation. I've been around here long enough to pretty much know what kind of responses I'd get (and in a lot of cases, who would post them).
and the one's that have cheered me up the most are the ones who think they are giving me a good telling off.
'30 in third'
[tin foil hat] nah, they're in cahoots with the government, wanting to make more money out of you on fuel duty [/tin foil hat]
Alternatively, learn what your engine sounds like at about 1500rpm and drive in 4th, saving fuel, engine wear, and the environment. If that's the most worthwhile bit of the course, it's no wonder people doubt its efficacy.
You could even just learn what 30 mph looks like, then drive at that speed, using the perhaps cryptically named speedometer to tell you how fast you're going.
I'll be forced to rip the michael endlessly when we next meet, Dez. I might tell Rob to push you off for good measure too. 😉 😉
Dezzy, you was listening to dem banging tunes again on car radio @ LOUD wasnt you!?
Sputnik - you is right, blud. 🙂
Go on then, show us the evidence for that, then explain the reasons, then compare that to someone who is paying attention.
Then, of course, who says braking/stopping is the only way to avoid a collision? You have a steering wheel too, FYI....This is exactly the sort if blindly quoted dodgy 'statistic' that pees me off.
IIRC the 2 seconds is about right.
I really can't be arsed to google to find the research. But it's comprehensive and convincing. Even TJ accepted it last time I found it 🙂
Funny you mention the steering wheel. As it happens being given the possiblity of steering actually increases reaction time, as your brain then has an alternative set of options and then has to weigh up the pros and cons of the different options before deciding on a plan of action.
Think of it like this:
40mph = about 60 feet per second (I think, from dim & distant memory)
Average driver reaction time = 2.5 seconds
Therefore 2.5x60 = 150 feet BEFORE you've started braking. Basically for 150 feet you're a passenger in your own car unable to do anything about anything.
150 feet thinking? Not if you are awake. The highway code quotes a total stopping distance at 40mph of 118 feet. Of that 118 feet 1/3 is thinking, the rest stopping. So around 40 feet reaction time.
As the greatest legal expert of all time, may I just point out that speeding is second only to wearing a helmet as a cause of death.
As the greatest legal expert of all time, may I just point out that speeding is second only to wearing a helmet as a cause of death.
You forgot drink driving - even considering driving 1 week after consuming a pint of beer immediately kills five children's faces
zokes - MemberAs the greatest legal expert of all time, may I just point out that speeding is second only to wearing a helmet as a cause of death.
You forgot drink driving - even considering driving 1 week after consuming a pint of beer immediately kills five children's faces
Posted 4 minutes ago # Report-Post
What are you on about? I didn't post anything about driving. Anyway your wrong.
No. What kills drivers/third parties is an over belief in ones own driving ability.
That is the primary factor.
You can drive in any weather condition and not have an accident. Its the ability to read, understand and adjust your perceived threshold.
Its the driver, or another driver that kills.
Only black ice or mechanical failure is the exception to all the above.
Average driver reaction time = 2.5 seconds
2.5 seconds???? rubbish. Nowhere near that. If that were the case, even people walking along the pavement would be bumping in to other constantly. I'd say it's more like half a second.
Go on then, show us the evidence for that, then explain the reasons, then compare that to someone who is paying attention.
Then, of course, who says braking/stopping is the only way to avoid a collision? You have a steering wheel too, FYI....This is exactly the sort if blindly quoted dodgy 'statistic' that pees me off.
And I'm surprised you care enough for it to pee you off.
Anyway, StGeorge's link above is a good source of info'. I can't recall where I read about the 2.5 secs reaction time, but apologies anyway for not incluiding a fully harvard referencedbibliography at the end of my post.
Try this out:
http://getyourwebsitehere.com/jswb/rttest01.html
My best average was 0.36 seconds. Now I was expecting the lights to change and I was fully attending to the computer when I did it, so how would loads of other stimulus affect this time? When you consider that reaction times are a product of:
- the intensity of the stimulus
- the probability of the stimulus occuring
- the existance of warning signals and/or the extent to which the stimulus is expected
- the senses used for detecting the stimulus
Also, factor in the situation where Dez obviously has other things on his mind - His sick brother, the chances that he may suffer the same condition, possibly humming along to the radio/changing station, reading a text on his phone... Whatever it may be, his mind may well not be on the speed limit, and all of this would add to his reaction time (as it does the average driver).
Even further to this - Dez evidently wasn't expecting anything to happen in front of him - he quotes time of day as the negating factor here, so may have even switched off a bit - relaxed in the knowledge that accidents only happen at 'other times'
a "blackspot" apparently (yeah, at 9 o'clock at night, righto).
However, this is all guesswork as being a regular and experienced driver he would have no doubt been actively engaging in the drive, anticipating any hazard that presented itself
.I hardly ever drive a stupid car
KinElll 4 pages within the hour and not a word about Helmets or Diane Abbott.
As to speeding, chill, you were speeding, do you time, be thankfull you are still able to drive and maybe this little incident will make you think twice..
As to speeding, chill, you were speeding, do you time, be thankfull you are still able to drive and maybe this little incident will make you think twice..
This is no place for reason, get out.
That human benchmark link is interesting in itself - since 2007 apparently, except the blip of 2008, our reaction times in january are getting slower. Fancy that.
I think the main problem with these online tests is that we're voluntarily engaging in the test, which means we're expecting something to react to. This has got to effect the result. Driving is different - there are far too many other stimuli that have an affect.
[i]Dez evidently wasn't expecting anything to happen in front of him[/i]
Certainly not some bloke in hi-viz to stand in the road with his arm up.
[i]do you time[/i]
Prison? for 41mph!?
Anyway, let me explain (if I can be bothered), this (as it's been quoted a few times)
[i]a "blackspot" apparently (yeah, at 9 o'clock at night, righto).[/i]
Cop said he was in that place because it was a black spot. I know it is because I ride home that way and there are plenty of W@nkers doing 40-50 cutting me up at the approach to the next roundabout, or pulling out on me from the garage. But it is a blackspot during busy times. Its not a blackspot at 9 o'clock at night as it's approaching a shopping centre which isn't open at that time. I don't think the speed limit should be changed for non-busy times, but it's OBVIOUSLY NOT WHY THE COPPER WAS THERE. He was there to catch people cos it's an easy place to safely do 40 at 9pm. Ah, bollocks, some of you still won't get it.
2.5 seconds???? rubbish. Nowhere near that. If that were the case, even people walking along the pavement would be bumping in to other constantly. I'd say it's more like half a second.
I think this is a case of misunderstanding what's meant by 'reaction time' in the case.
If I'm sat in the passenger seat and tell you I'd like you to perform an emergency stop when I hit the dash, you're reaction time will be about 0.25 seconds. You've been prior warned what to expect and how to react.
The figures in seconds refer to the amount of time from something starting to you noticing it starting, determining if it's a risk, working out what the risk is and deciding on what course of action to take. So if a car brakes in front of you, first you've got to notice it, so if your checking your mirrors, speed, etc this adds to the cumalative time before even spotting something, then you've got to determine what the risk is, how fast is it decelerating, whether that deceleration rate is an issue to you. If you then decide it is, then there's time to decide what to do, can I slow down, can I steer around, if I steer round are there vehciles coming the other way, do I have space? do I have time?
Now you've made a decision and react.
This is when the reaction clock stops ticking. That's why real reaction times are in seconds rather than fractions of seconds.
He was there to catch people cos it's an easy place to safely do 40 at 9pm. Ah, bollocks, some of you still won't get it.
So the police are at fault because they're catching people committing crimes?
This just gets better.
Ah, bollocks, some of you still won't get it.
I'm pretty sure we all get why you're annoyed at being caught and get why you're annoyed about the Police preying on easy targets but not giving you sympathy is not the same as not getting it. Tough 🙂
41mph reading as actually probably 45mph on your speedo (as most cars read 7-10% over).
?there are plenty of W@nkers doing 40-50
"At fault"? [i]some of you still won't get it.[/i]. Thanks for proving me right, BB.
I actually blame my dad for being in hospital the selfish old bugger.
I am with the OP here. We all screw up sometimes but that scenario just seems an easy target.
Like the plod who do people on the road near me (a 20mph limit due to schools) but they are out there at night and at weekends. It isn't helping road safety, it is just generating income in an easy way.
And before anyone asks - no, I haven't been caught and my licence is clean.
EDIT: I use the road every day to get to and from work and I have NEVER seen plod there during school hours. Odd isn't it?
So if a car brakes in front of you, first you've got to notice it, so if your checking your mirrors, speed, etc this adds to the cumalative time before even spotting something, then you've got to determine what the risk is, how fast is it decelerating, whether that deceleration rate is an issue to you. If you then decide it is, then there's time to decide what to do, can I slow down, can I steer around, if I steer round are there vehciles coming the other way, do I have space? do I have time?
I agree to a certain extent if it's just someone braking in front of you, but if a child ran out in front of my car, I wouldn't be checking my rearview mirror before I broke, nor would going through the same thought processes you mention before I decided whether to brake, so for those sort of emergencies, we are talking fractions of a second.
so for those sort of emergencies, we are talking fractions of a second.
Agreed. Of course if those fractions of seconds coincide with when you're checking your mirrors..
But yes reaction times change drastically depending on the type of unfolding situation.