What small changes would you make to improve road/car safety
Discussion
Moonhawk said:
After seeing this article on the BBC website - it got me thinking about roads/cars and what could be done to improve safety even further.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-27021291
I have a few idea of my own - but wondered what others would change if you could.
Mine:
1. Paint road markings/signs with phosphorescent paint - and incorporate "black light" bulbs into headlight assemblies. That way the road markings would appear to glow - rather than just reflecting light. These lights could be in a permanent "high beam" state since they dont affect human night vision or dazzle. It could also make pedestrians more visible, especially where they are wearing hi-vis or clothing washes with optical brighteners.
2. I'd change the flash pattern of hazard lights. A vehicle parked at the side of the road with its hazards on that has another vehicle parked behind it without hazards on looks like it is indicating to pull out. By changing the flash pattern of the hazards to something like a double flash, pause, double flash etc - this would make hazard warnings distinguishable from indicators.
3. Brake force indicating rear brake lights. Like a high mounted rear brake light bar - but where the brake force is indicated. So for example - the bar would illuminate from the outside into the middle (from both ends). Light brake force would therefore only light a few LEDs at either end - whereas strong braking would illuminate the entire bar - and everything in between.
The only ways to really improve safety are to put computers / robots in control of vehicles, and set maximum vehicle speeds at less than 10mph.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-27021291
I have a few idea of my own - but wondered what others would change if you could.
Mine:
1. Paint road markings/signs with phosphorescent paint - and incorporate "black light" bulbs into headlight assemblies. That way the road markings would appear to glow - rather than just reflecting light. These lights could be in a permanent "high beam" state since they dont affect human night vision or dazzle. It could also make pedestrians more visible, especially where they are wearing hi-vis or clothing washes with optical brighteners.
2. I'd change the flash pattern of hazard lights. A vehicle parked at the side of the road with its hazards on that has another vehicle parked behind it without hazards on looks like it is indicating to pull out. By changing the flash pattern of the hazards to something like a double flash, pause, double flash etc - this would make hazard warnings distinguishable from indicators.
3. Brake force indicating rear brake lights. Like a high mounted rear brake light bar - but where the brake force is indicated. So for example - the bar would illuminate from the outside into the middle (from both ends). Light brake force would therefore only light a few LEDs at either end - whereas strong braking would illuminate the entire bar - and everything in between.
Cutting maximum speeds to 10mph is unlikely, of course. But computer-controlled vehicles (i.e. driverless) will be here and commercially available from 2016 or 2017 onwards (e.g. taxis).
Simples;
Remove the requirement for third party insurance cover under the RTA
The driver of the vehicle is liable for all damages caused whilst driving a vehicle.
Mandatory 360 degree hiqh quality black box style video/data recorders that can be accessed by authorized parties at any time and must incorporate 6 weeks storage. Lack of required video/data of an incident due to any reason other than a manufacturer of said equipments admitted faul = automatic fault in accident.
House/wife/husband kids/assets etc can all be sold to pay for damages/injury caused.
Not very fair to those that suffer life changing injuries, but after a couple of days worth of incidents and people becoming bankrupt/losing their homes there would sure be a change in driving
Remove the requirement for third party insurance cover under the RTA
The driver of the vehicle is liable for all damages caused whilst driving a vehicle.
Mandatory 360 degree hiqh quality black box style video/data recorders that can be accessed by authorized parties at any time and must incorporate 6 weeks storage. Lack of required video/data of an incident due to any reason other than a manufacturer of said equipments admitted faul = automatic fault in accident.
House/wife/husband kids/assets etc can all be sold to pay for damages/injury caused.
Not very fair to those that suffer life changing injuries, but after a couple of days worth of incidents and people becoming bankrupt/losing their homes there would sure be a change in driving
Mr SFJ said:
Yes, then why do Drivers and Motorcyclists do the same? It should be compulsory for the same reason car and motorbike drivers have to pay it. Regardless of damage, A cyclist who runs a red light and rode straight into a innocently passing pedestrian gets taken out and badly wounded. A car driver would have to through insurances and pay-outs, why not cyclists?
And also, if a cyclist was to fall and damage their expensive bike, that would be covered by a comprehensive insurance policy.
Also, if they were to pay their way a little more on the roads, perhaps car drivers might give them a little extra room, as they're also paying for the upkeep? And in return, and Cyclists will use cycle lanes where provided?
That, to me, is fair.
Are you on your first car? You seriously cannot have been driving for more than five minutes, with such ridiculous opinions and lack of knowledge.And also, if a cyclist was to fall and damage their expensive bike, that would be covered by a comprehensive insurance policy.
Also, if they were to pay their way a little more on the roads, perhaps car drivers might give them a little extra room, as they're also paying for the upkeep? And in return, and Cyclists will use cycle lanes where provided?
That, to me, is fair.
Two serious questions for you:
1. How do you think you're contributing to the roads, given that no money is ringfenced for roads?
2. Why on earth would you think you know the tax liabilities of any man, whether he owns a bicycle or not?
Motorway/night/wet weather/skid pan to be compulsory in the driving test is a great idea. I have a (25 year old) female freind who absolutely will not drive on a motorway, will do anything she can to avoid driving at night and avoids roundabouts. In my opinion such people shouldn't be on the road if they can't cope with such basic aspects of driving.
ferrariF50lover said:
I've argued for the latter two mentioned by the OP for many years. The first one is an extremely good idea and should be pitched to someone who will listen as a matter of urgency.
The cyclist thing is something which I recently argued against. I'm all for making changes as per the ones mentioned by the OP, but it's not the job of the legislature to protect morons from themselves. If people are stupid enough to ride a bike with no helmet/lights/dressed like a ninja, then that is nothing but Darwinism playing its part. Those of us fit and strong enough to cycle and smart enough to take sensible precautions against death and injury are the type of people who need to survive in order that the species advances. Those too retarded to do likewise are just the sort of Wayne and Waynettas that we need to eradicate, lest we end up as a nation of Benefits Street types.
Simon.
Do you think you would still have the same perspective/attitude if you ran over a kid on a bike at night because he rode out infront of you and you didn't notice him?The cyclist thing is something which I recently argued against. I'm all for making changes as per the ones mentioned by the OP, but it's not the job of the legislature to protect morons from themselves. If people are stupid enough to ride a bike with no helmet/lights/dressed like a ninja, then that is nothing but Darwinism playing its part. Those of us fit and strong enough to cycle and smart enough to take sensible precautions against death and injury are the type of people who need to survive in order that the species advances. Those too retarded to do likewise are just the sort of Wayne and Waynettas that we need to eradicate, lest we end up as a nation of Benefits Street types.
Simon.
I couldn't agree more with the idea for TV road safety messages. I think there was one on several years back, keep 2 chevrons apart?
I can't see a better way to educate the masses of droids on our roads about basic road safety, procedure and courtesy.
Honestly, it's the last thing I want to happen, but the lack of police around here and the fact that they only rely on ANPR means that at a guess 30% of the population of East London have never passed a driving test.
It's a f
king joke, you can spot them from miles away but as the car flashes legal for the traffic police and seatbelts are being worn then they don't touch it.
It's a f
king joke, you can spot them from miles away but as the car flashes legal for the traffic police and seatbelts are being worn then they don't touch it.Highway Code updates and/or applicable law changes compiled in bullet point format on a sheet of paper and posted to registered keeper's address along with VED Liability reminders by the DVLA.
It won't reach everyone but may incrementally increase the awareness of what's changing.
And periodic theory and practical retesting, of course.
Ban automatic collision avoidance, or have the car register its activation with a limp home mode that has to go to the mail dealer to be cleared, who are legally obliged to collect questionnaire data on how the driver screwed up before resetting the car.
It won't reach everyone but may incrementally increase the awareness of what's changing.
And periodic theory and practical retesting, of course.
Ban automatic collision avoidance, or have the car register its activation with a limp home mode that has to go to the mail dealer to be cleared, who are legally obliged to collect questionnaire data on how the driver screwed up before resetting the car.
1. More frequent MOT tests - start from 1 years old.
2. Driving license retests every 10 years
3. Skid pan training as part of tests
4. Ban any member of BRAKE from driving at all, public transport use only
I was chatting to an MOT tester recently, and he had commented on the amount of relatively new cars (3 years old) failing MOT's due to worn tyres and brakes- might be down to budget- easily affordable finance means car purchase is easy, but maintenance items are overlooked or ignored.
2. Driving license retests every 10 years
3. Skid pan training as part of tests
4. Ban any member of BRAKE from driving at all, public transport use only
I was chatting to an MOT tester recently, and he had commented on the amount of relatively new cars (3 years old) failing MOT's due to worn tyres and brakes- might be down to budget- easily affordable finance means car purchase is easy, but maintenance items are overlooked or ignored.
Pan Pan said:
Make it compulsory to give signals showing which way a driver is going to go, when there is at least one adjacent vehicle which would benefit from this.
Amended to say that signals should be compulsory when there is at least one other adjacent road user (pedestrian/cyclist/ biker/ driver etc) who would benefit from seeing it.Pan Pan said:
Make it compulsory to give signals showing which way a driver is going to go, when there is at least one adjacent vehicle which would benefit from this.
Scratch the requirement for there to be a visible vehicle that could benefit, but saying that a major campaign to remind drivers Mirror Signal Manoeuvre has the unwritten rider of check there is a space to move into, the number of drivers who think their indicator flashing means the space will appear as soon as they move is scary. People forget that they should give way to traffic in the lane they are looking to join, it happens at the end of slip roads indicator on and carry on even if parallel to and matching speed with a car already on the road, or on multi-lane roads where they will try and pull out into the side of the car they are alongside.Engineer1 said:
Pan Pan said:
Make it compulsory to give signals showing which way a driver is going to go, when there is at least one adjacent vehicle which would benefit from this.
Scratch the requirement for there to be a visible vehicle that could benefit, but saying that a major campaign to remind drivers Mirror Signal Manoeuvre has the unwritten rider of check there is a space to move into, the number of drivers who think their indicator flashing means the space will appear as soon as they move is scary. People forget that they should give way to traffic in the lane they are looking to join, it happens at the end of slip roads indicator on and carry on even if parallel to and matching speed with a car already on the road, or on multi-lane roads where they will try and pull out into the side of the car they are alongside.Engineer1 said:
Pan Pan said:
Make it compulsory to give signals showing which way a driver is going to go, when there is at least one adjacent vehicle which would benefit from this.
Scratch the requirement for there to be a visible vehicle that could benefit, but saying that a major campaign to remind drivers Mirror Signal Manoeuvre has the unwritten rider of check there is a space to move into, the number of drivers who think their indicator flashing means the space will appear as soon as they move is scary. People forget that they should give way to traffic in the lane they are looking to join, it happens at the end of slip roads indicator on and carry on even if parallel to and matching speed with a car already on the road, or on multi-lane roads where they will try and pull out into the side of the car they are alongside.check to see if there are any other road users around me (not `just' vehicles) who might benefit from one.
I do between 37 and 42 thousand miles a year, and realize that there will always be situations, where I have not picked up the presence of another road user, that I should have. In these situations, by always giving a signal, at least the other road user knows where I intend to go even if `I' have not seen them.
Engineer1 said:
Pan Pan said:
Make it compulsory to give signals showing which way a driver is going to go, when there is at least one adjacent vehicle which would benefit from this.
Scratch the requirement for there to be a visible vehicle that could benefit, but saying that a major campaign to remind drivers Mirror Signal Manoeuvre has the unwritten rider of check there is a space to move into, the number of drivers who think their indicator flashing means the space will appear as soon as they move is scary. People forget that they should give way to traffic in the lane they are looking to join, it happens at the end of slip roads indicator on and carry on even if parallel to and matching speed with a car already on the road, or on multi-lane roads where they will try and pull out into the side of the car they are alongside.A quick look over the right shoulder every time, is the best cure for this situation.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff