expect the unexpected!

[gannet]

Didn't see this coming...

[michael769]

First time I watched it I didn't even see it coming....

[TripleS]

:shock:

First time I watched it I didn't even see it coming....

Neither did I. My attention was drawn to the car in front moving right. It was only on second watching that I looked for the reason why.

I started thinking in terms of opening up a bigger gap as soon as the car in front started his periods of braking, though these were long before the collision occurred. In a situation where I'm content with the pace, and not looking for overtaking opportunities, I favour having a very large gap in front. It costs me nothing and it makes things easier if somebody wants to overtake me; and it might have given more time for evasive action. The way things worked out here it was all a bit sudden, and rather sobering.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[fungus]

I didn't see it coming. Like mefoster, my attention was drawn to the car moving right. Like Dave, I favour a large gap in front if I'm not intending to overtake.

[sussex2]

'Wider field of vision clearer field of fire'
That old military maxim was thumped into me by my original advanced instructor and by and large I stick with it.
If you follow another vehicle closely your own vehicle is effectively being driven by the person in front; you are just tagging along for the ride.

[Gumby]

Woah

[exportmanuk]

Difficult to tell the distance he is actually behind due to the distortion and forshortening of the camera lens Also the camera is central to the windscreen the driver is further to the left and would have a better field of view.

I too had to watch it twice the range rover was moving very quickly it is surprising the driver in front had time to react

[Astraist]

When one of the local instructors talked about the subject of avoiding a head-on collision, keeping a big gap in front was one of the steps to avoid the situation. Also, we must keep in mind that the camera in action seems to be mounted somewhere in the middle of the dash, unlike the driver who probably had a better view around the other cars in front.

I'm not certain that the driver was indeed looking as far as he should have or that he was paying the necessary attention to clues that might lead to this devastating result:

Anything erratic about the driver in the offside, a slow car, lorry or queue that might cause someone to overtake suddenly, a driver that seems to be "dozing" across the road or a driver that pulled to the shoulder and might suddenly become aware and pull back on the carriageway and into the offside, an obstacle on or near the offside that might lead another driver to veer, etc...

As early as any doubt is raised, the driver must slow down gently, pull right as far as moving two wheels over the 'fog-line' and maybe use the lights or horn to alert the other driver. If the worst case situation does come to pass, the driver should BRAKE to the best of his ability in order to allow the other driver as much time as possible to pull back. Braking that is partial and hestitated have been inefficient in saving many lives, unfortunately.

Only once the solution of braking (and keeping right as best as possible) fails - after you hang on to the brake for as long as possible - the driver should veer right even into the verge, trees or rocks, rather than hit another driver head-on.

[Renny]

Astraist, its all well saying brake gently, but often the "crossing" vehicle is closing at around 70-100mph. Immediate recognition of the hazard and quick, almost instinctive, response is essential.

For some strange reason, in the last 18 months I've had 3 or 4 such incidents where the oncoming driver has crossed into my path requiring evasive actions which have varied from sounding horn and lights whilst braking and moving to the side, to having to mount the verge. In at least one instance I'm sure the opposing driver was using a mobile phone.

I am startng to thiink that a white car with daylight running lights is either invisible to the inattentive driver, or BMW have fitted an intermittently magnetic engine block

[TripleS]

Astraist, its all well saying brake gently, but often the "crossing" vehicle is closing at around 70-100mph. Immediate recognition of the hazard and quick, almost instinctive, response is essential.

For some strange reason, in the last 18 months I've had 3 or 4 such incidents where the oncoming driver has crossed into my path requiring evasive actions which have varied from sounding horn and lights whilst braking and moving to the side, to having to mount the verge. In at least one instance I'm sure the opposing driver was using a mobile phone.

I am startng to think that a white car with daylight running lights is either invisible to the inattentive driver, or BMW have fitted an intermittently magnetic engine block

Pah, worst ever "I drive a (youngish) BMW with poncy fairy lights" post ever.

Er, I'm not sure if my spelling of 'poncy' is correct, but you know what I mean.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[dth]

The following distance of the car from which the clip was made was inadequate almost throughout the clip. It was about 1 second. As mentioned above more space may have made some difference in terms of greater vision.

[Astraist]

Astraist, its all well saying brake gently, but often the "crossing" vehicle is closing at around 70-100mph. Immediate recognition of the hazard and quick, almost instinctive, response is essential. For some strange reason, in the last 18 months I've had 3 or 4 such incidents where the oncoming driver has crossed into my path requiring evasive actions which have varied from sounding horn and lights whilst braking and moving to the side, to having to mount the verge.

Of course. The idea is to recognise the hazard that another driver might cross into your path and than start to take the initial measures: Keeping left, slowing down gently and using the horn and if the driver in front dozes into your path - whether after you recognise these hazards beforehand or not - at which point you should react by braking as hard as possible and as long as possible before moving left, even head-on into a tree.

[Renny]

Pah, worst ever "I drive a (youngish) BMW with poncy fairy lights" post ever.

Er, I'm not sure if my spelling of 'poncy' is correct, but you know what I mean.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Good job I don't take offence

Next car will be painted stealth grey and I'll join the crowd who drive in fog, rain and at night with no lights on. It will be as small as resonable for me to use and hopefully narrow enough so I can get as far across the road away from the other idiots.

Maybe I should buy a bike

[TripleS]

Pah, worst ever "I drive a (youngish) BMW with poncy fairy lights" post ever.

Er, I'm not sure if my spelling of 'poncy' is correct, but you know what I mean.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

Good job I don't take offence

Next car will be painted stealth grey and I'll join the crowd who drive in fog, rain and at night with no lights on. It will be as small as resonable for me to use and hopefully narrow enough so I can get as far across the road away from the other idiots.

Maybe I should buy a bike

You can't really take offence at my clowning, can you?

....and as for buying a bike: well if you're out riding it and you're involved in any kind of mishap, there's a fair chance it'll be deemed to be somebody else's fault, regardless of the circumstances (1), so that's a plus point.

(1) Check with Mr C-W for full details of terms and conditions.

Incidentally, I think that regime is complete bollox, (albeit foreign bollox only, for the time being) and to my mind it has no justification whatsoever: but there again it's just another example of the twisted sense of logic and justice we may also expect to see from UK officialdom in due course.

Best wishes all,
Dave.

[Mr Cholmondeley-Warner]

So you reserve your right to go out mowing down cyclists because it'll all be their fault? Well that's reassuring, not!

Heaven forbid you should actually take any responsibility for your own actions. Whatever next?