Nasty situation - not easy to avoid?

[motco]

Yahoo News

I respectfully suggest that most/many drivers in this situation would have been caught out. It's one thing to leave a safe distance on the assumption that the car ahead cannot stop dead, but in this case it effectively did just that. Captions required for the first words out of the mouth of the bloke getting out of his car at the end...

[hoppo4.2]

Well that could have been much worse

[Evanivitch]

What was the car infront doing! ?

But yeah some sympathy for the dashcam driver but ultimately it's all about safe stopping distances, and he was only about 3 car lengths out. I bet the car behind would have clattered him though.

[TooMany2cvs]

motco said:

I respectfully suggest that most/many drivers in this situation would have been caught out.

Yes, you're right.

Most drivers don't look any further than the far-too-close bootlid of the car in front.

FFS.

[jontykint]

The car that swerved was lucky.
He was caught out here, probably texting. How the hell could he not see that stationary traffic????

[Durzel]

Plenty of people do it but surely you're not suggesting that the camera car was leaving an acceptable distance to the car in front given they must have been doing at least 70+?

It's not that scientific really, if you can't stop in the distance you've left between you and the car in front - you're too close. The fact the guy in front was napping himself doesn't change that, it could've been any stationary object in front.

The camera car seemed to do a woeful job of stopping himself, too.

Terrible driving all round, but not particularly remarkable given what you see on motorways day in, day out.

jontykint said:

The car that swerved was lucky.
He was caught out here, probably texting. How the hell could he not see that stationary traffic????

Not that lucky, he clipped the first car.

[Leins]

The driver in the white van looked like he got a bit of a shock too

[bitchstewie]

None of the driving gods on here would, don't be daft.

[TooMany2cvs]

Durzel said:

The camera car seemed to do a woeful job of stopping himself, too.

Soon as he hit the grass next to the armco, the ABS would have been hammering away and the brakes wouldn't actually have been doing much.

Don't think he was doing 70 - he doesn't pass the wagon with the portakabin very quickly.

[HustleRussell]

The solution to this one is to be looking further up the road. Position yourself so you can see what's going on in front of the car in front.

[The Mad Monk]

Shall I be first?

http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/126

Always drive at such a speed that you can stop well within the distance that you can see to be clear.

I feel better now.

[Sheepshanks]

Evanivitch said:

.. and he was only about 3 car lengths out.

I think he was further back than that - dashcams make the distance look shorter.

There was also no sense of bunching traffic - up to that point everything had been flowing freely - lanes 1 & 2 didn't even look busy.

Impressive he managed to hit several cars to slow himself down gradually though!

[With these feet]

It does somewhat highlight how many are forced to drive when if indeed you leave a decent gap when in the outside lane there is always someone willing to move from the middle lane into the space youve left, then continue with half a cars length between them and the car in front.

I really despair at how some seem to think a gap they can fit in to park is also the same space as travelling at 70.

Still, even with a big gap you can still get caught napping on a free running road.

[spookly]

HustleRussell said:

The solution to this one is to be looking further up the road. Position yourself so you can see what's going on in front of the car in front.

Yeah, that ^^

Don't just watch the bumper in front of you. If you are going at speed you need to anticipate when the car ahead might start need to stop not just blindly trust him to be watching what he is doing.... and if you can't see then act appropriately and drop back.

[red_slr]

In extreme situations (i.e car stopped in lane 3) distance = time = options.

You might not avoid a collision but if you give yourself more options the chance is you might.

[anonymous-user]

i tried to leave a 2 second gap but this tt in a disco sat 3 metres from my arse, then went to undertake me. people 99% of time don't leave enough space.

[jmorgan]

So many nearly happened seen over the years. Not a surprise. Need to be watching the fools behind as well today and a gap to get out, not that this situation was avoidable to the fella that got out.

[Register1]

The Mad Monk said:

Shall I be first?

http://www.highwaycode.info/rule/126

Always drive at such a speed that you can stop well within the distance that you can see to be clear.

I feel better now.

40 mph x 3 = 120 feet ((36.5 meters) or 9 car lengths)

50 mph x 3.5 = 175 feet ((53 meters) or 13 car lengths)

60 mph x 4 = 240 feet ((73 meters) or 18 car lengths)

70 mph x 4.5 = 315 feet ((96 meters) or 24 car lengths)

can never happen,
All that's going to happen is your going in reverse.

Feck, if I leave 3 car lengths at 70mph, some one always want "in",
At 70 mph, Leaving 24 car lengths is just a historical joke.

You just co further and further to the back of the tail.
http://tips.drivingtestsuccess.com/featured/stoppi...

Edited by Register1 on Sunday 25th September 10:33

[RowntreesCabana]

Evanivitch said:

What was the car infront doing! ?

That's the big issue here. Yes he was a little too close to the car in front, but its quite easy to simply follow and you expect them to be your eyes for things ahead. Only in this case, it seems that the eyes in front were concentrating on a mobile phone (possibly).

[RedAlfa]

The dashcam car appeared to be approx 0.7 seconds behind the car in front. Shouldn't the gap should be three times greater? I feel sorry for the driver of the 16 reg car that was rear-ended!