What's your view on this?

[ROG]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/south_west/7884063.stm

Car crash officer was 'powerless'

Sgt Craig Bannister denies driving at an inappropriate speed

A traffic officer was powerless to avoid a 122mph crash in heavy rain, a court has been told.

Sgt Craig Bannister, 30, is accused of dangerous driving by speeding in a police car on the M4 near Neath in "appalling weather conditions".

Defending barrister Chris Rees said because the car was aquaplaning, even motor racing champion Lewis Hamilton could not have controlled it.

Sgt Bannister denies the charge. The trial at Cardiff Crown Court continues.

Mr Rees told the jury: "It wouldn't have mattered if it was you, Sgt Bannister or Lewis Hamilton driving, once you aquaplane you're at God's mercy.

"Once the water rises over the tyres' tread depth, there is no traction.

"In that rain he would aquaplaned at 65mph. Any driver who finds himself with water covering all four wheels is in deep trouble."

Cardiff Crown Court heard that the traffic officer was not answering an emergency call when he hit standing water on the motorway.

Sgt Bannister, of Briton Ferry, near Swansea, drove at speeds of up to 122mph until the marked police car skidded off the road landing in a copse of trees.

'Model pupil'

Other drivers saw him walk away with only minor injuries.

Accident investigator Pc Matthew Curtis told the court Sgt Bannister hit the water at 115mph and lost control.

Prosecutor Michael Hammett earlier told the court: "Conditions were appalling - there was heavy rain, lots of spray and standing water on the carriageway."

Sgt Bannister is a grade two qualified police driver with South Wales Police and had been trained to the second highest level of traffic officers.

The court heard he was a "model pupil" on his police driving course and was described as "a very intelligent man who set himself high standards".

He denies dangerous driving claiming his speed was not inappropriate for the conditions.

[ExadiNigel]

The question has to be asked why he was going so fast in such conditions.

Any vehicle - especially lightweight sports cars - will aquaplane on a damp surface from about 65 mph to 70 mph

Paul Ripley, in Expert Driving, even mentions aquaplaning around 55mph. So, travelling at a speed of 122, I would suggest is irresponsible in the extreme. Powerless to avoid? Crap!

Nigel

[Renny]

True aquaplaning is remarkably rare (water drag and viscoplaning are actually far more common and tend to occur more at lower speeds than high)

Dave,

any chance of a more details explaination of these terms please?

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

Has anybody ever met Tom Topper? Reading his books I do get a very strong pork-pie-hat-and-string-backed-driving-gloves mental image. Is this the case? Can anybody confirm or deny?

[TripleS]

The question has to be asked why he was going so fast in such conditions.

Any vehicle - especially lightweight sports cars - will aquaplane on a damp surface from about 65 mph to 70 mph

Paul Ripley, in Expert Driving, even mentions aquaplaning around 55mph. So, travelling at a speed of 122, I would suggest is irresponsible in the extreme. Powerless to avoid? Crap!

Nigel

I'm quite an admirer of Tom Topper, but both he and Paul Ripley are talking rubbish there.

Aquaplaning (and other foms of loss of grip in wet conditions) can not be predicted as easily as they seem to be doing, and you certainly can't say at what speed such problems are likely to be encountered.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[jont]

True aquaplaning is remarkably rare (water drag and viscoplaning are actually far more common and tend to occur more at lower speeds than high)

Dave,
any chance of a more details explaination of these terms please?

A quick google provides this link:
http://www.michelin.co.uk/michelinuk/en ... 6_100.html

[TripleS]

Has anybody ever met Tom Topper? Reading his books I do get a very strong pork-pie-hat-and-string-backed-driving-gloves mental image. Is this the case? Can anybody confirm or deny?

I get the impression he's a very experienced and long term driving enthusiast who expresses himself in fairly robust fashion at times, and he's not a huge admirer of the 'advanced driving industry' as a whole.

He seems to go his own way, and although I've never met him, I like him - if that makes sense.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

I found his book Very Advanced Driving to be not very advanced at all, and rather more of an "advert for Tom Topper", if that makes sense. I also couldn't get on with the silly Stanley Unwin style language with "fastards", and "buppies" etc. liberally sprinkled through the text.

[Renny]

Water drag is where the tyre hits a wall of standing water and this slows the tyre down due to simple momentum.

Viscoplaning is where the thin film of water left after the tyres have dried the road is enough to change the local coefficient of friction so the tyres slide.

A quick google provides this link:
http://www.michelin.co.uk/michelinuk/en ... 6_100.html

Thanks for that. Water drag was what I thought, but I had not heard of viscoplaning before, but it makes perfect sense.

[Red Herring]

What was his explanation for driving at such speeds. If he was not on an emergency call was he following a suspect, or carrying out some other duty that justified the exemption? In my experience if you are trying to drive quickly in heavy rain you tend to get warnings that you are likely to meet aquaplaning conditions, if on the other hand he just happened to come across a local area of flooding and the rest of the motorway had been relatively clear of water (and traffic) then he may have more of a case, but surely he must still justify his speed.

[TripleS]

I found his book Very Advanced Driving to be not very advanced at all, and rather more of an "advert for Tom Topper", if that makes sense. I also couldn't get on with the silly Stanley Unwin style language with "fastards", and "buppies" etc. liberally sprinkled through the text.

Well I still think it is a helpful book for those who want to make meaningful improvements to their driving, without getting too hooked on the prescriptions set out by the mainstream advanced driving gurus.

I also disliked his use of terms like 'fastard' etc., but I think I've seen that sort of term used by other writers as well.

As for the book being an advert for Tom Topper, I suppose plenty of other books are to some degree a bit of a self-promotion exercise. Perhaps I'm being a bit self-promotional by taking the liberty of offering viewpoints on things here, but y'see I have this desperate need to justify my existence and convince myself that I'm doing something useful - even if nobody else recognises it.

Whatever criticism one might make, Tom's book does at least have the merit of encouraging a bit of thinking about a range of driving situations, so we might welcome that.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[TripleS]

True aquaplaning is remarkably rare (water drag and viscoplaning are actually far more common and tend to occur more at lower speeds than high)

Dave,

any chance of a more details explaination of these terms please?

Water drag is where the tyre hits a wall of standing water and this slows the tyre down due to simple momentum.

Viscoplaning is where the thin film of water left after the tyres have dried the road is enough to change the local coefficient of friction so the tyres slide.

Viscoplaning is not something I'd previously latched onto, but the water drag effect can be quite violent at times when you hit the water with just one front wheel and you suddenly make a sharp turn.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[TripleS]

What was his explanation for driving at such speeds. If he was not on an emergency call was he following a suspect, or carrying out some other duty that justified the exemption? In my experience if you are trying to drive quickly in heavy rain you tend to get warnings that you are likely to meet aquaplaning conditions, if on the other hand he just happened to come across a local area of flooding and the rest of the motorway had been relatively clear of water (and traffic) then he may have more of a case, but surely he must still justify his speed.

From what I've read it rather sounds as if he did not have a genuine need to be using so much speed, and on top of that he got something badly wrong - fortunately without anybody getting badly hurt; although our car will never be the same again.

Even so, I've tried to counter some of the hysterical commentators from PistonHeads on the subject, some of whom would have the guy hung drawn and quartered immediately.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

Whatever criticism one might make, Tom's book does at least have the merit of encouraging a bit of thinking about a range of driving situations, so we might welcome that.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

I do welcome it, to the extent of both spending money on, and reading, his book

I probably won't be reading it again, though.

[MGF]

I found TT's book to be 'worth a look' rather than a 'must read'.

As for the case I am not sure what being 'an intelligent man who set himself high standards' has to do with an allegation for dangerous driving. It can of course be read both negatively as well as positively.