AUDI SQ5 Dash cam footage Dangerous overtake Somerset
Discussion
PorkInsider said:
Definitely this ^^^
Driver101 has decided his opinion has become fact and the mythical '46mph' was plucked out of thin air and then used as a stick to beat the OP with.
Hilarious. You really couldn't make it up.
(Well actually some people on this thread definitely could make it up, so perhaps a poor choice of phrase.)
I've not decided my opinion is fact. Driver101 has decided his opinion has become fact and the mythical '46mph' was plucked out of thin air and then used as a stick to beat the OP with.
Hilarious. You really couldn't make it up.
(Well actually some people on this thread definitely could make it up, so perhaps a poor choice of phrase.)
I'm just baffled so many people seem to have zero perception about speed and distance.
I never said 46mph was correct. By the guy's claims, it wasn't plucked out of thin air either. He claimed to have calculated it. The guy even gave the speed to one decimal place. Nobody questioned him at the time.
What is clear is he is way over 40mph. He's not even be able to offer his speed and didn't previously question 46mph.
The closing speed of his car and the van is easily 15+mph. Likewise after he hits the brakes, scrubbing off some speed, the van moves off at a reasonable rate.
The van wasn't doing 10mph and the OP doing 30mph.
There is a lot of threads that go off topic and get out of hand on here. Do you not find it strange that a number of the people who can judge the speed and acceleration aren't your usual wind up merchants?
hombrepaulo said:
The assumed bad driving by the OP - his speed and intention to block cannot be accurately deduced from the video. We have no idea to the Audi's positioning prior to his appearance alongside the OP. You are making significant assumptions and jumping on the OP based upon them.
Where do you think the Audi was before? The OP has already offered the information that he took off harshly from the lights as he was frustrated with the traffic. He's also just sat there at a red light. He's only driven a few seconds up the road.
Do you not think the Audi was always behind him?
Edited by Driver101 on Wednesday 7th October 16:34
Driver101 said:
Where do you think the Audi was before?
The OP had already offered the information that he took off harshly from the lights as he was frustrated with the traffic. He's also just sat there at a red light. He's only driven a few seconds up the road.
Do you not think the Audi was always behind him?
Seems to slipped your attention that someone who knows the area and the road has stated my speed was too fast (ok fair enough I take criticism) however they have experienced the aforementioned audi and it has been seen to drive in a similar manor by that person as well. The OP had already offered the information that he took off harshly from the lights as he was frustrated with the traffic. He's also just sat there at a red light. He's only driven a few seconds up the road.
Do you not think the Audi was always behind him?
Does that suggest that it is in the darkest realms of possibly that a) the audi driver may well of done a last minute dangerous overtake and driven in that manor whether I had been speeding along that section or not.
Is not becoming clear that the driver is dangerous and if someone doesn't take action they could well cause a fatality.
jbsportstech said:
Seems to slipped your attention that someone who knows the area and the road has stated my speed was too fast (ok fair enough I take criticism) however they have experienced the aforementioned audi and it has been seen to drive in a similar manor by that person as well.
Does that suggest that it is in the darkest realms of possibly that a) the audi driver may well of done a last minute dangerous overtake and driven in that manor whether I had been speeding along that section or not.
Is not becoming clear that the driver is dangerous and if someone doesn't take action they could well cause a fatality.
I must have missed some posts out. I never read about the previous conduct.Does that suggest that it is in the darkest realms of possibly that a) the audi driver may well of done a last minute dangerous overtake and driven in that manor whether I had been speeding along that section or not.
Is not becoming clear that the driver is dangerous and if someone doesn't take action they could well cause a fatality.
He might very well have done it before and would do it again. I would say it's extremely rare to see someone doing in excess of 50mph on a 30mph zone like that.
It was an irresponsible move.
However I see people pushing in on a regular basis. I also see people trying to push them back out,like I think is clear you did.
The front end of your car lifts as the Audi is coming suggesting acceleration, everything around the car speeds up suggesting acceleration and your closing speed to van increases suggesting acceleration.
One minute you say the road was congested and was holding you up. Next minute you offer the information that the road was clear (when it wasn't) for your burst of acceleration.
It appears in the story that the Audi appeared from nowhere through this congestion, the congestion that also vanished.
I just don't beleive your story.
I think the Audi was always there and I can see you tried to keep it behind you.
Some people disagree with that, but there is a lot that do, including people who deal with this kind of stuff.
Edited by Driver101 on Wednesday 7th October 17:31
Eclassy said:
La Liga said:
f course, that's how a S.172 request works. You just say "not me" and it magically goes away...
Maybe you can explain to us why your colleagues didnt use the S.172 when there was an accident and just fobbed the victim off.thescamper said:
Lysander Road in Yeovil, site of some of the most atrocious driving I have ever had the misfortune to witness.
OP you were in the wrong, anything more than 30 along that piece of road is idiotic, however the guy driving the Q5 is a complete cock not just on your video either, that is how he always drives.
DRIVER 101?OP you were in the wrong, anything more than 30 along that piece of road is idiotic, however the guy driving the Q5 is a complete cock not just on your video either, that is how he always drives.
Here we go
jbsportstech said:
thescamper said:
Lysander Road in Yeovil, site of some of the most atrocious driving I have ever had the misfortune to witness.
OP you were in the wrong, anything more than 30 along that piece of road is idiotic, however the guy driving the Q5 is a complete cock not just on your video either, that is how he always drives.
DRIVER 101?OP you were in the wrong, anything more than 30 along that piece of road is idiotic, however the guy driving the Q5 is a complete cock not just on your video either, that is how he always drives.
Here we go
If he always drives like that, I'm amazed he hasn't been caught before now.
I'm judging on that video alone. It's clear the Audi driver is an idiot and I've not seen one person say otherwise.
No matter how he behaved before, no matter what you introduce as your latest excuse, I feel you played your part in that incident.
No argument the Audi driver needs some action. I also think you need to stop your whiter than white pretence.
Ahhh,back in the eighties no-one would have batted an eyelid at that,overtaking wasn't frowned upon,there wasn't hatching everywhere,speed limits were what they should be and people didn't feel the need to dive to the nearest police station to complain about someone cracking on.Good times lost to the fluffy bunny brigade.
jbsportstech said:
Seems to slipped your attention that someone who knows the area and the road has stated my speed was too fast (ok fair enough I take criticism) however they have experienced the aforementioned audi and it has been seen to drive in a similar manor by that person as well.
Does that suggest that it is in the darkest realms of possibly that a) the audi driver may well of done a last minute dangerous overtake and driven in that manor whether I had been speeding along that section or not.
Is not becoming clear that the driver is dangerous and if someone doesn't take action they could well cause a fatality.
what have the police said about the footage and your comments in this thread about your own driving (since you will have sent a thread link as well, right?) Does that suggest that it is in the darkest realms of possibly that a) the audi driver may well of done a last minute dangerous overtake and driven in that manor whether I had been speeding along that section or not.
Is not becoming clear that the driver is dangerous and if someone doesn't take action they could well cause a fatality.
scorcher said:
When my missus was rear ended and the driver done a runner the RK told the Police and the insurance company that he was not the driver that evening, it was a "pool car" used by him and his mates and he didn't know who the driver was. The End.
So perhaps given the information the police had they felt the statutory defence were made out or there was a high probability it would be - S.172(4).Funkycoldribena said:
Ahhh,back in the eighties no-one would have batted an eyelid at that,overtaking wasn't frowned upon,there wasn't hatching everywhere,speed limits were what they should be and people didn't feel the need to dive to the nearest police station to complain about someone cracking on.Good times lost to the fluffy bunny brigade.
Back in the 1980s we had nearly 3x as many Killed of Seriously Injured collisions with fewer cars on the roads, travelling approximately half the total distance as is travelled today. Perhaps rose-tinting works better if the data above were different.
La Liga said:
ack in the 1980s we had nearly 3x as many Killed of Seriously Injured collisions with fewer cars on the roads, travelling approximately half the total distance as is travelled today.
Perhaps rose-tinting works better if the data above were different.
Im alive!!! How did I manage it?? I never wore a hi-vis vest and sat in pubs full of smoke but Im still here,I must be really lucky.Perhaps rose-tinting works better if the data above were different.
Funkycoldribena said:
La Liga said:
ack in the 1980s we had nearly 3x as many Killed of Seriously Injured collisions with fewer cars on the roads, travelling approximately half the total distance as is travelled today.
Perhaps rose-tinting works better if the data above were different.
Im alive!!! How did I manage it?? I never wore a hi-vis vest and sat in pubs full of smoke but Im still here,I must be really lucky.Perhaps rose-tinting works better if the data above were different.
Thousands more would be alive if we had the same standards and were as advanced with the road safety strategy as we are now in the 1980s.
Hackney said:
Wills2 said:
Why are you sending this stuff to the Police? What have you suffered from? Apart from a bruised ego......
So you can't report an offence to the police unless you've suffered some personal loss? When did this rule come in, I think it may affect crime solving immensely.-which service do you require?
-police please, my neighbour is away on holiday and his house is being burgled
-OK, the police will be on.....oh, wait. Did you say your neighbour's house?
-Yes, that's right. He's on holiday
-I'm sorry sir, if it's not your house I'm going to have to end the call.
-But...
-Please get off the line or you'll be reported for wasting police time
House burglary.....
BrownBottle said:
I reckon the Audi driver panicked after thinking they either hadn't been left enough room to merge by the OP or wouldn't be able to brake in time without going into the back of the fiesta or a combination of both so a split second decision was made.
After such a close encounter I'm pretty sure they just wanted to get the hell out of dodge.
While we're speculating randomly, maybe the Audi driver thought he was being chased by a flying saucer? Maybe he had a premonition of this thread and decided to end it all? Seriously, let's just make sAfter such a close encounter I'm pretty sure they just wanted to get the hell out of dodge.
t up. He saw a donkey lurking in the hedge (what hedge) and thought it was going to jump out in front of him. Because he knows a lot about donkeys, he thought the best thing to do was to hide behind the nearest Fiesta.Has anybody yet explained what evidence they have of the OP booting it to close the gap? I thought so at first but, having watched the longer clip, he seems to accelerate at a fairly constant rate.
If you have just decided that he booted it because it lets you slag him off, that's pretty pathetic. He seems to be a bit of a knob and a st driver, but there is nothing to suggest he tried to close the gap on the Audi.
As for the second overtake, it too was silly, but I can see the point that it was a decision taken very quickly (because he approached the fiesta way too fast having aimed for a small and decreasing gap). I would see it as part of the same st piece of driving, rather than a separate fk up.
If you have just decided that he booted it because it lets you slag him off, that's pretty pathetic. He seems to be a bit of a knob and a s
t driver, but there is nothing to suggest he tried to close the gap on the Audi.As for the second overtake, it too was silly, but I can see the point that it was a decision taken very quickly (because he approached the fiesta way too fast having aimed for a small and decreasing gap). I would see it as part of the same s
t piece of driving, rather than a separate fk up. ORD said:
Has anybody yet explained what evidence they have of the OP booting it to close the gap? I thought so at first but, having watched the longer clip, he seems to accelerate at a fairly constant rate.
If you have just decided that he booted it because it lets you slag him off, that's pretty pathetic. He seems to be a bit of a knob and a st driver, but there is nothing to suggest he tried to close the gap on the Audi.
I'll admit it's not obvious (it is a people carrier after all) but at the four second mark (of the shorter vid) just as he passes the painted merge arrow, you can see a noticeable rise from the camera car, combined with the scenery getting faster and the gap to the car in front decreasing a lot quicker than before. As I said, it's subtle, but to my eyes, and a few others it would seem, it's definitely there.If you have just decided that he booted it because it lets you slag him off, that's pretty pathetic. He seems to be a bit of a knob and a s
t driver, but there is nothing to suggest he tried to close the gap on the Audi.ORD said:
Has anybody yet explained what evidence they have of the OP booting it to close the gap? I thought so at first but, having watched the longer clip, he seems to accelerate at a fairly constant rate.
(snipped)
After watching the original clip I couldn't believe people were arguing this was it was obvious, now watching the re-upload I agree. I wonder if the different hosts/compression have had an effect on the video. (snipped)
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff