A close shave on the A9

A close shave on the A9

Author
Discussion

rich888

2,610 posts

198 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
Here's something to mull over....

If the dash cam had been fitted in a police car, what would have been the outcome after having been forced off the road by the lorry driver?

I think most of us know the answer to the question!

LittleEnus

3,218 posts

173 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
iambeowulf said:
It was a mistake pure and simple.
As are all crashes. He's lucky nobody died as he couldn't be bothered coming to a stop at the junction.

The guy is a prick and should be fired in my opinion. Blind spot or otherwise, if he had stopped this wouldn't have happened.

This is the result of complacency.



soad

32,825 posts

175 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
A close shave. yikes

TooMany2cvs

29,008 posts

125 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
rich888 said:
Here's something to mull over....

If the dash cam had been fitted in a police car, what would have been the outcome after having been forced off the road by the lorry driver?

I think most of us know the answer to the question!
If it had been a traffic car, the driver would have been too damn embarrassed to show it in evidence back at the station.

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

260 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
The Wookie said:
Agreed, I've watched back plenty of my racing shunts from the on board camera and it's amazing how many times you can yell st between the first 'Oh st' as it starts to go wrong and the final impact!
So that's what SOS stands for!

idea

Muddle238

3,871 posts

112 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
In my opinion the truck driver is 100% at fault for this. He/she should have anticipated that the oncoming vehicles in the video could have masked a smaller car - which clearly they did as at times, the entire truck was hidden behind the van so there is no way that the trucker could have seen the camera car, as others have said. I can't see in what way the car driver could have any blame in this incident, although it serves as a reminder why you should always remove all the snow and ice from your car before driving.

As I see it, the truck driver made two critical mistakes;

1. Carrying so much energy into the junction
2. Convincing themselves it was safe to pull out when they were still a fair way back from the give way lines

The human eye isn't instantaneous at recognising moving objects, it takes a short time for movement to be spotted, focussed on and then for the eyes to send that observation to the brain. Quick glances aren't suitable for junctions, you need a good second or two to fully assess the road and for your brain to process any hazards. The speed of the truck meant that the driver couldn't have spent much time observing, as he had to check both ways so quickly that he didn't detect the camera car. At the end of the day that truck had far too much energy and the driver wasn't adapting his observation to compensate for this.

Has anybody been able to identify the camera car? I wonder what role DRLs may have had on this.


matchmaker

Original Poster:

8,462 posts

199 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
The truck is first visible from the car at 18sec. The road sign is also visible at that point, so it's clear that there's a junction the truck's heading to, with great visibility of what's approaching it. Why wouldn't you be looking there, and seeing a wagon moving at a fair lick, considering.

At 24sec, when the the junction is obscured by another logging wagon, he's still showing no sign of slowing. Once that's cleared, by 27sec, it's VERY clear that the wagon is not going to be stopping at the junction, even if he wanted to. By 29sec, surely every fibre of the driver's body is screaming "fkADOODLEDOO"?

Yet he shows no signs of reacting until about 31sec, when the wagon is actually crossing the line. That's when the nose dips and the snow comes off the roof totally obscuring vision - without that, he could probably have kept it on the tarmac. So the "near miss" was fourteen seconds after the truck was first visible, and at least four or five since it was first clear there might be a problem.

As for "Maybe the truck driver didn't see the car", there's a rigid wagon comes past within a few seconds of the car coming to a stop. It wasn't behind the logging wagon, so must've been behind the car.

I don't think the truck driver even saw the junction, and and was bloody lucky to get round rather than go straight on
As he probably works for a local company he bloody well should have!

scubadude

2,618 posts

196 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
Antracer said:
I'm still waiting for an explanation as to how that incident could have been fatal?. (from anyone)

Strangely enough despite several people believing it could have been fatal no one has offered up any logical reasoning. If you have a valid point then back it up.
The most logical scenario would be the car hitting the lorry and suffering a sudden deceleration- we do not know if the car was equipped with airbags or the driver was belted in.

Even so its likely the front (engine heavy) of a modern car striking the angled side of a lorry even at low speed would be crushed on the impact side increasing braking whell/bodywork jammed together) and causing the rear of the car to swing into the lorry (side by side position)

Since the logging lorry was towing an empty trailer at didn't stop its highly likely the trailer would have ridden over the cars roof reduced the car to about 2ft high and made spam out of the driver.

The final obvious scenario is the driver swerving and hitting the roadsigns or skidding across the wet grass and into the wall beyond it leading to an impact and potential fatality.


Lastly we do not know the health situation of the driver, even reasonably healthy people can be killed by shocking incidents and minor accidents.

So in summary to categorically state that it would be impossible for the accident in this scenario to be fatal is farm animal level stupid.

Steven_RW

1,727 posts

201 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
If it had been a traffic car, the driver would have been too damn embarrassed to show it in evidence back at the station.
I presume you mean the driver should have predicted the situation and not let it happen?

I often think it's easy to state such stuff for most accidents in hindsight.

The driver handles the off-road excursion quite well, maybe could have braked harder earlier but I think that's the case in so many crashes.

Steven RW

XDA

2,141 posts

184 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
iambeowulf said:
The fact is if a driver of a large vehicle can pull out of a T-junction without stopping then it's better for everyone as they are not then putting themselves and other road users in danger for as long. It takes at least 5 seconds to clear the nearest lane (from the T junction) from a dead stop and another 15/20 seconds to get up to the 40mph speed limit.
"Better for everyone"? Don't you mean it's better for the truck driver?

I don't appreciate having a truck pull out infront of me when I'm doing 60-65 mph, which will force me to brake and then impede my progress as it (legally) travels at 40 mph. It's knobbish selfish driving but unfortunately all too common.

halo34

2,428 posts

198 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
matchmaker said:
As he probably works for a local company he bloody well should have!
Absolutely no mistaking that as a junction - you come up a dead straight road onto the A9 with clear views to the left (where he pulled out on that car).

Lucas Ayde

3,541 posts

167 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
Mike_Mac said:
I'm quite happy to let the video of an HGV nearly t-boning a car stand as a very logical reason to back up my opinion that, in slightly different circumstances, that incident could easily have been a fatality. Unladen lorry or not.

Your belief that this possibility was laughable (or at least 'LOL'able) in your first post, coupled with your subsequent statement that 'He could plow into the lorry at 50 & his seat belt & airbag would save him' is, to me, utterly foolish, hence cretinous.
'Antracer' has either raised the bar for stupidity or is a clever troll.

Z.B

224 posts

177 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
Muddle238 said:
In my opinion the truck driver is 100% at fault for this. He/she should have anticipated that the oncoming vehicles in the video could have masked a smaller car - which clearly they did as at times, the entire truck was hidden behind the van so there is no way that the trucker could have seen the camera car, as others have said. I can't see in what way the car driver could have any blame in this incident, although it serves as a reminder why you should always remove all the snow and ice from your car before driving.

As I see it, the truck driver made two critical mistakes;

1. Carrying so much energy into the junction
2. Convincing themselves it was safe to pull out when they were still a fair way back from the give way lines

The human eye isn't instantaneous at recognising moving objects, it takes a short time for movement to be spotted, focussed on and then for the eyes to send that observation to the brain. Quick glances aren't suitable for junctions, you need a good second or two to fully assess the road and for your brain to process any hazards. The speed of the truck meant that the driver couldn't have spent much time observing, as he had to check both ways so quickly that he didn't detect the camera car. At the end of the day that truck had far too much energy and the driver wasn't adapting his observation to compensate for this.

Has anybody been able to identify the camera car? I wonder what role DRLs may have had on this.
Actually the human eye is quite good with moving objects. Ones that are stationary or appear so in perspective are more likely to be missed.

The lorry driver had ages to see the car at that speed, he just didn't account for the blind spot. It happens every day, including to powerfully built driving gods.

I'm not making excuses, just saying that the analysis of "bell end driver causes near miss by utter stupidity" is arrogant and inaccurate.....

Vaud

50,283 posts

154 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
Z.B said:
The lorry driver had ages to see the car at that speed, he just didn't account for the blind spot. It happens every day, including to powerfully built driving gods.

I'm not making excuses, just saying that the analysis of "bell end driver causes near miss by utter stupidity" is arrogant and inaccurate.....
What stood out for me was the way he stopped immediately to offer help.

iloveboost

1,531 posts

161 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
Riley Blue said:
0:29 completely unsighted 'cos of white van but no excuse for that at all - idiot!
This. He glanced left at 28-29s and didn't bother stopping or checking again. Drive up road not knowing you've just gone off it to avoid him.
Reaction time of 0.6s from 'why is that truck rolling still' to slow motion 'oh crap' phase and near maximum braking. Quick thinking to drive off road to save it. smile
Edited to add: Please lets not turn this or any other thread like it into a witch hunt.

Edited by iloveboost on Wednesday 25th February 15:14

BugLebowski

1,033 posts

115 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
If it had been a traffic car, the driver would have been too damn embarrassed to show it in evidence back at the station.
Thats a bit harsh!

daveinhampshire

527 posts

125 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
To all the people suggesting in any way the car driver was at fault for not keeping a crystal ball on the dashboard go fk yourselves, you're idiots.

The lorry driver is 100% responsible. He is coming from a minor road to a major road, comes out carrying way to much speed and if he saw the car or not, he wouldn't have stopped. If that was in front of me in court I'd ban the tt and send him fore a retest and chuck a voucher in for specsavers for good measure.


mp3manager

4,254 posts

195 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
Ex Sandy Kydd truck.

What a surprise! rolleyes

Mr2Mike

20,143 posts

254 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
TooMany2cvs said:
If it had been a traffic car, the driver would have been too damn embarrassed to show it in evidence back at the station.
Utter bks I'm afraid Mr Cv.

framerateuk

2,730 posts

183 months

Wednesday 25th February 2015
quotequote all
Very impressed with the lack of swearing.

I took a video off my dash cam yesterday when I hit a massive pothole in the middle of Cardiff (just in case I do have issues from it and the Council refuse to admit there's one there). After the initial "thud" the first noise is me: "F***king hell!".