I suppose the question is, are there regulations which cover the
> "visible distance" for different road categories (speeds)?
I doubt it, there are many junctions on derestricted roads that have nothing like the your 100m visibilty. Not to mention the overall stopping distance at 60mph is 73m
formatting link
So 100m leaves you 27m (88') of "clearance" anyway so you can double the "thinking" time and still stop in time (in theory).
It would be easy to restrict the speed on the slip road to 40mph until
> after this junction.
The quickest way to get a speed limit or signage is there to be an injury "accident". Accident in quotes as *very* few "accidents" are truely accidental most are down to driver error of some sort.
What difference would that make if the car stalled?
FFS
How would reliability prevent an unintentional stall? Sometimes, Dave, your answers are beyond belief. What about actually answering a question rather than trying to find ridiculous work-arounds?
1 The slip road section in question gives the impression of being a dedicated access to a busy A road, so even alert drivers could well miss the fact that an (almost hidden) access road is ahead - will have to check the signs, or lack of them, to see how clearly the side road is highlighted.
2 The party in most danger (ie the one that will suffer a side impact) is not the one with the most control over the situation IYSWIM.
3 Your "driving within limits" point is noted, but considering what a gamble it can be pulling out of this junction, many users must assume that a road rated at 60mph is good for that speed (assuming clement weather).
|!If people were prosecuted not for speeding, but for HAVING ACCIDENTS. |!the roads would be a far safer place.
In reality *both* happen. Small fine and a few points for speeding which *may* cause an accident. Bigger fine and more points if you *do* cause an accident by speeding.
|!> I have several ways out of this problem |!> 1. Turn left not right, *wherever* legal. |! |!What difference would that make if the car stalled? |! |!> 2. Find another route. |! |!FFS |! |!> 3. Have a reliable car and put your foot down after *any* turn, so |!> that you can get to the speed limit. I had a car written off by a |!> Boy Racer hitting the rear of the car after a turn. |! |!How would reliability prevent an unintentional stall? Sometimes, Dave, your |!answers are beyond belief. What about actually answering a question rather |!than trying to find ridiculous work-arounds?
This is uk.d-i-y I gave DIY answers to a stupid/confused question.
If this is indeed true (and I'd need rather more than repeated assertion to convince me), then is there one between vehicle speed and severity of accident? Hint: m/2*v**2
No. There is a correlation between severity and peak *deceleration*.
That depends on how long it takes to stop the projectile.
In a well belted in passenger, up to 10g no damage. 10-50g minor contusions. 50-150g probably broken bones,but survivable, over 150g, probably internal organ damage, and above about 300g, at least 50% chance of fatality.
Say you take 100g as a nice upper limit. Shaken, badly bruised, cracked ribs, a bit of concussion, but still alive.
That 3200 feet per second squared
Given that stopping distance is v squared over 2a, consider a car stopping in - say - the distance of its crumple zone..say 5 feet.
5=v squared/6400..for 100g decelaration. V comes out to 178 feet per second.
About 120 mph.
So a head on to a concrete wall in a car with a well designed 5ft crumple zone and rigid passenger cell and a well strapped in passenger at 120mph is easily survivable.
As evinced by any motorsport accident analysis. I've personally seen a mini - race prepared - do just that a bit shy of 90mph and the driver walked away..
Nelson Piquet's final accident was estimated to peak at over 250g. He broke his legs, but lived. Nigel Mansells Indy car accident was similar.
It's a different story where pedestrians are involved..they do not come equipped with 5ft crumple zones.
If you are going to crash, try and make it head on, where the crumple zones and the headrests and airbags will protect you..whiplash will break your neck in a side impact..
I beg to differ. Come into a corner or a junction too fast and your speed has caused an accident that results. Fail to react in time to an unexpected hazard and your speed has caused the accident. You can balance a few angels on the head of a pin by claiming that it was driving too fast for the conditions or the road that was to blame, rather than the speed, but the fact is speeding can cause accidents, and makes accidents worse when they happen.. And a desire to shave seconds off a journey causes more. My son is learning to drive at the moment. It's amazing how an L plate on the back of a car seems to encourage prats to overtake at any cost, even when if they lifted their eyes for even a fraction of a second they would see the queue up ahead and realise that their action was going to gain them sod all.
Being as how this is uk d-i-y, how about a design for a EMP pulse generator that would fry the prat's engine's ECU from a safe distance. Surely a role for an old microwave and some sticky back plastic?
They do and that is essentially the crux of this thread. It has been pointed out that the stopping distance in the situation being considered is close to the limit being that the junction is immediately after a bend. Therefore, if someone speeds (in this case exceeds 60mph), they leave themselves with insufficient time/stopping distance before impact with a car legitimately pulling out from village access road.
He wasn't. He was driving at 15mph and was 15m from the junction when the other car pulled out.
In the case of this accident, to whom do you think that the insurers would apply the blame?
I suppose that you could argue that the car that pulled out was traveling too fast in that he shouldn't have pulled out at all. However, I don't think anybody would sensibly argue that this accident was on the basis of either party speeding.
Are you suggesting that cars travel at 5mph with a man waving a red flag walking in front?
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.