Forum menu
Didn't clear the snow off his roof - car driver at fault.
[quote=legend ]Didn't clear the snow off his roof - car driver at fault.All that snow should have made the [b]VAN[/b] easier to see 🙂
Must admit that I think the movement of the truck should have alerted him earlier...
All that snow should have made the VAN easier to see
pfft, don't let facts get in the way of an STW opinion!
[i]We have two HGV drivers (out of 8 ) who drive with this attitude at work. They've become even worse since we had Telematics fitted (to apparently save money on fuel and stop accidents from inappropriate speed..), they will just drive straight out instead of having to brake and accelerate again. Saves them getting the mpg-hit and any marks for harsh braking/accelerating. [/i]
Consequence of having Telematics fitted. If you are been marked for every 'infringement' then you'll drive to ensure you don't get the 'infringement' and a daily/weekly/monthly sit-down with your Manager to 'explain' yourself. Near-misses aren't recorded 🙂
Interesting that he didnt use the horn at all.
Not that doing so would have made any difference, although perhaps the wagon may have stopped?
Consequence of having Telematics fitted. .. Near-misses aren't recorded
Hmm.. perhaps the telematics need to incorporate proximity sensors and/or cameras? Would that help?
Interesting that he didnt use the horn at all.
If it was me I wouldn't have need the horn - the wagon driver would have heard the swearing and the almighty sonic boom as I filled my breeks in sub-millisecond time.
Horn is DefCon 2/3 - that was DefCon 4 minimum 🙂
Van driver was a pussy - if he'd booted it he could have fitted through the gap no problem. 🙂
If you can't see the conflict that is there for all to see, then I'm not going to get into a race to the bottom with you.
Well obviously I would not have intended to post two contradictory statements, so if I have got mixed up I'd appreciate it being pointed out.
He looks like he didn't brake very quickly at first when he was on tarmac, but once the car is on the grass it appears to slow quickly for a car with two wheels on grass.
You can see the truck has no intention of stopping so I'm going to assume he's missed the van driver completely in the staccato step vision thing (can't remember its name) or maybe he just didn't give a shit.
Edit : Though I also have to guess the driver wasn't aware of the truck approaching at said speed, which again is entirely plausible.
As far as the slowing down thing goes, if you've ever had a high speed accident you'll know in some instances you slow down pretty quickly when you mount/hit the curb.
Molgrips » Well obviously I would not have intended to post two contradictory statements, so if I have got mixed up I'd appreciate it being pointed out.
Junkyard » He doesnt' seem to slow down very fastThe fact that he comes quickly to a stop
Not sure how you unite these views tbh
staccato step vision thing
Saccades.
That's the thingamajig...!
Has this turned into another "I'm a better driver/rider/pedestrian/human than everyone else" thread? I don't dare look.
Saccadic masking shouldn't cause that- you get that when you're looking around quickly, but the driver bloody well should have been looking up the road not just glancing or flicking his eyes over quickly. Basically he could only meet the conditions for saccadic masking by not looking properly.
They were both asleep! That was developing for ages! Its the slowest, most obvious hazard perception test ever! It's also easier to see something crossing your vision rather than direct towards it. The Truck is on a constant bearing which would wake up any sailor!
Though I also have to guess the driver wasn't aware of the truck approaching at said speed, which again is entirely plausible.
When someone pulled out infront of me - although it was all at 20mph ish - there was a split second gap between my Mrs gasping and me hitting the brakes. I saw her at the same time but I think perhaps because I am less of a nervous driver some part of my brain told me she was bound to stop. Only when she actually entered the road and it was clear she wasn't going to stop did I slam on.
Perhaps a similar thing happened here.
Just looked back again.. the lorry is well visible and clearly not slowing to a stop, so yeah I think he should've braked earlier. Bear in mind it's a wide angle lens so the lorry would've been larger in his eye than ours.
Basically he could only meet the conditions for saccadic masking by not looking properly.
Indeed, I wasn't suggesting otherwise. Taking a total guess I'd say he took a few cursory glances and just went for it. Could be totally wrong but that's how it looks to me.
some part of my brain told me she was bound to stop.
If the van driver was aware then that's a likely thought process. We've all done it, I'm sure. Presumption is the mother of all **** ups or something, isn't it...
Edit : Infact, I reckon that's exactly what he thought - the truck might just wait mid-road for him to pass before pulling out, which would explain the lack of reaction, too.
Who knows. TBH, I don't really give a shit, just glad no one got hurt.
They were both asleep! That was developing for ages! Its the slowest, most obvious hazard perception test ever! It's also easier to see something crossing your vision rather than direct towards it. The Truck is on a constant bearing which would wake up any sailor!
Spot on. If I'd been on my motorbike I'd have hit the high beam and the twin Fiamms a long time before that truck reached the junction and I'd have been covering the brakes as well.
Assuming it was a hazard perception test, at 26 seconds in I noticed, and would have braked hard at 27. and reckon car would have stopped at the road junction. But I'm human and not perfect so Death and and a substantial premium increase is also an option.
[i]Has this turned into another "I'm a better driver/rider/pedestrian/human than everyone else" thread?[/i]
Yep. Jeez
First sign of madness, DezB.
I'm sure that if the police follow this up, they will decide it's 50/50 and probably do the driver for parking on a grass verge.
A truck did that to me but I was much closer and driving at 60mph. All I could do is slam my brakes and stop inches from the lorry. Ditches on either side of me.
I did see him pull at the last second and braked early as I could.
Lorry driver drove past me and we opened windows and he said sorry.
Mistakes happen.
I drove off thinking you could have killed me.
No harm done but I do have 330 mm discs on my car thank god.
The problem with "post event analysis" is that it is just that, post event. You know the outcome.
In the real world, trucks arrive at T junctions several millions times a day. if every time you saw one, you performed an emergency stop, you'd never get anywhere at all (and you'd get rear ended all the time too, ooh matron..... 😉
So, regression to normality becomes the significant factor in (near) accidents like this. In fact, i think the driver did ok. He was driving at an appropriate speed (imo) and when it became clear the truck wasn't going to stop, he brakes under control, and remembered to steer out of the way )amazing how many people just brake and then drive straight into the object, even when they could have just driven around it!)
I think a fair proportion of distracted drivers on our roads probably wouldn't have even spotted the truck at all and just driven straight into it........
Consequence of having Telematics fitted. If you are been marked for every 'infringement' then you'll drive to ensure you don't get the 'infringement' and a daily/weekly/monthly sit-down with your Manager to 'explain' yourself. Near-misses aren't recorded
Exactly what I said in the meeting that told us they were being introduced! The number of RLJ fines has increased, related?
Hmm.. perhaps the telematics need to incorporate proximity sensors and/or cameras? Would that help?
We already have separate cameras which are viewed after accidents. Never used to spot bad driving otherwise due to how long it would take to watch the footage generated by 40+ vans each day!
Never used to spot bad driving otherwise due to how long it would take to watch the footage generated by 40+ vans each day!
Yeah fair enough - not sure what the answer is to that (other than driverless vans!)
Frankenstein - MemberNo harm done but I do have 330 mm discs on my car thank god.
Its not the size thats important, its how you use them.... 😉
Has this turned into another "I'm a better human than everyone else" thread?
Yep. When you posted that ..
whilst looking down on everyone else 🙂
Commercial vehicle drivers are nearly always twunts. The bigger the vehicle, the bigger the twunt.
I disagree. Most lorry drivers are pretty good. Always be a few bad ones.
Coach drivers on the other hand.....
Round here I don't in general (bad apples excluded) have a problem, with coach, lorry or tractor drivers. Taxi drivers though...
Logging truck driver being a bat £&)( mental driver shocker
Now with speed overlay
Watching that video a number of times, because of the line of trees and oncoming vehicles, plus the van driver likely not really expecting a large vehicle to be coming from the right, the truck isn't really noticeable until it's almost at the junction; I'm pretty sure the last thing I'd be expecting is some jackass to come screaming out of a side road without apparently slowing for approaching traffic. I wonder if the side-road has give-way signs; I'd expect it to, so pulling straight across without stopping should be a clear infringement.
Compulsory retest with an emphasis on observation for those on the front page who saw a car transporter 🙂
not sure what the answer is to that (other than driverless vans!)
Drones!
The video starts with the filming vehicle just completing an overtake (which can only be on the lorry which comes past as it is parked on the verge. I guess the timber truck has clocked this lorry and is hoping to get in front of it (being empty he doesn't want to be stuck behind a potentially slow moving truck) and is so fixated on the fast approaching truck he fails to notice the video car. Same way that many people pull out in front of bikes/motorbikes.
I reckon the van was obscured by the A pillar and the mirror. As has already been noticed, the HGV is on a constant bearing from the van i.e. it's in the same position in the van's windscreen, so with a straight approach from the side road, the same will be true for the view of the van from the HGV, and it looks like it's at just the right angle to be behind the A pillar.
The HGV driver could have looked several times in the 5+ seconds before the approach and not seen the van. Not making excuses, but a likely explanation.
I bet that left a massive skid mark
I bet the car isn't Hi Viz.
Now with speed overlay
Hang on a minute, isn't he driving a van?
So [url= https://www.gov.uk/speed-limits ]the limit for him is 50 on an NSL single carriageway[/url]?
Looks like Molgrips was right he was going over the speed limit - and he is a bit daft for incriminating himself.
That doesn't excuse the transporter driver though.
[b]EDIT[/b]: hmmm he says in the YouToob comments: [i]"My van is not restricted to 50, it has rear seats and windows?"[/i]. But then he also complains about the average speed cameras which are forcing vans to obey the limit.
"My van is not restricted to 50, it has rear seats and windows?".
Only valid if it's caddy sized or has been re-plated if it's a Vivarro/Transit sized vehicle. My boss was ticketed for 65 on a dual carriageway in the crew van (5 seater), learning the hard way about weight restrictions.