Rising bollards destroy vehicles, injure drivers!
Discussion
emicen said:
TBH, I'd like to see these replace red light camera's at quite a few junctions in Glasgow. Make them seriously tough and as soon as the light goes red - WHAM! - up it comes. Seems more and more people are using the amber = green, red = pretend you thought about stopping mentality these days.
I remember my mate telling me how amusing he found it sitting in Cambridge in the summer watching cars getting impaled on the buslane bollards. Think he said it was about 1 a week he saw.
I remember my mate telling me how amusing he found it sitting in Cambridge in the summer watching cars getting impaled on the buslane bollards. Think he said it was about 1 a week he saw.
I'm with you on the red light thing, although I think red light cameras would be enough if they were everywhere.
The first time I saw the rising bollards in action was in Cambridge, a little Suzuki van smashed straight in to a pair as they came up. Cue a bloke falling out of the sliding side door along with about 400 tins of paint. Laugh? I nearly bought a round.
GreenV8S said:
Adz The Rat said:
I think that is great. They all deserved what they got.
Im in Manchester 2moro so going to have a look for these bollards and maybe see some numpty drive into them
Im in Manchester 2moro so going to have a look for these bollards and maybe see some numpty drive into them
Great idea. While you're there, lift up a few manhole covers (you'll need to put up a sign warning people not to fall into them, of course) and then video people stupid enough to fall into them anyway. With a bit of Benny Hill music in the background, that should be hilarious. Don't worry about the people who fall in, if they're stupid enough to fall into a hole after you've put signs up and everything, they deserve anything that happens to them. Send the video in to You've Been Framed (or whatever it's called now - Celebrity Big Brother Framed In the Jungle or something I expect) and you may even win a prize.
Absolutely agree, but you probably should get permission first!
All very funny until you're on a bus that crashed into one, you dislocate your shoulder, tear all the muscles off the joint and end up with no feeling in your arm for six months. I, for one, don't find rising bollards so funny.
Especially when your options for recovery are: lose all rotational movement in your shoulder (no driving or riding), or be in pain in some situations for the rest of your life.
Especially when your options for recovery are: lose all rotational movement in your shoulder (no driving or riding), or be in pain in some situations for the rest of your life.
I can't believe people on here are still sticking up for Kermit and friends!
* The cars in the clips I have looked at clearly hit the bollards with the front of their vehicle, which carried on going as the bumpers ride over them. Cosidering the speed they are going it is the inertia of the vehicle doing this.
* The bumpers stop on impact so the cars are hitting the bumpers, not the other way round!
* As the drivers are doing damage to their own vehicles, nobody is being punished!
* all the people who have seen these with their own eyes testify that they are visible enough!
* All the drivers in the clips displayed that they clearly were there, and that they were trying to beat them before they rose up!
Anyone disagreeing with any of the above, I respectfully suggest you view all the clips and read all of the posts as I have. Then and only then post a reason to your disagreement, and the more sensible amongst us will explain why these drivers taking themselves off the road can only be a good thing!
Hang on a minute though, this means that they will get a loan car while their vehicle is repaired! If this is how the treat their own vehicles, how badly will they drive this car that does not belong to them?
* The cars in the clips I have looked at clearly hit the bollards with the front of their vehicle, which carried on going as the bumpers ride over them. Cosidering the speed they are going it is the inertia of the vehicle doing this.
* The bumpers stop on impact so the cars are hitting the bumpers, not the other way round!
* As the drivers are doing damage to their own vehicles, nobody is being punished!
* all the people who have seen these with their own eyes testify that they are visible enough!
* All the drivers in the clips displayed that they clearly were there, and that they were trying to beat them before they rose up!
Anyone disagreeing with any of the above, I respectfully suggest you view all the clips and read all of the posts as I have. Then and only then post a reason to your disagreement, and the more sensible amongst us will explain why these drivers taking themselves off the road can only be a good thing!
Hang on a minute though, this means that they will get a loan car while their vehicle is repaired! If this is how the treat their own vehicles, how badly will they drive this car that does not belong to them?
Way back in the mists of time in this thread I suggested an idiot-friendly barrier. I have finally gort around to rendering it so you can visualise what I had in mind.
The bollard consists of a deformable, brightly coloured plastic section for the top 20cm illuminated from within just prior to the bollard rising until the bollard reaches full extension when the illumination is extinguished.
If somebody still can't see the bollard due to being so close to the bollard and only the top 20cms are above the surface then the plastic will deform and in the worse case detach.
Any views?
The bollard consists of a deformable, brightly coloured plastic section for the top 20cm illuminated from within just prior to the bollard rising until the bollard reaches full extension when the illumination is extinguished.
If somebody still can't see the bollard due to being so close to the bollard and only the top 20cms are above the surface then the plastic will deform and in the worse case detach.
Any views?
The detachable portion would need to have quite a large shear strength, otherwise they would be a target for Saturday night "I'm a drunken Kung-Fool" types, but not a bad idea for minimising accidental damage. Strong enough to do damage to ABS bumbers etc, but not solid enough to bring a car to a sudden stop. I still think they should have a proximity sensor to prevent them rising under (OK, just in front of 
) a vehicle, but this would be a good compromise.
) a vehicle, but this would be a good compromise.MrKipling43 said:
All very funny until you're on a bus that crashed into one, you dislocate your shoulder, tear all the muscles off the joint and end up with no feeling in your arm for six months. I, for one, don't find rising bollards so funny.
Especially when your options for recovery are: lose all rotational movement in your shoulder (no driving or riding), or be in pain in some situations for the rest of your life.
Is this your actual experience, or just hypothetical?Especially when your options for recovery are: lose all rotational movement in your shoulder (no driving or riding), or be in pain in some situations for the rest of your life.
PC vrach said:
I can't believe people on here are still sticking up for Kermit and friends!
* The cars in the clips I have looked at clearly hit the bollards with the front of their vehicle, which carried on going as the bumpers ride over them. Cosidering the speed they are going it is the inertia of the vehicle doing this.
* The bumpers stop on impact so the cars are hitting the bumpers, not the other way round!
* As the drivers are doing damage to their own vehicles, nobody is being punished!
* all the people who have seen these with their own eyes testify that they are visible enough!
* All the drivers in the clips displayed that they clearly were there, and that they were trying to beat them before they rose up!
Anyone disagreeing with any of the above, I respectfully suggest you view all the clips and read all of the posts as I have. Then and only then post a reason to your disagreement, and the more sensible amongst us will explain why these drivers taking themselves off the road can only be a good thing!
* The cars in the clips I have looked at clearly hit the bollards with the front of their vehicle, which carried on going as the bumpers ride over them. Cosidering the speed they are going it is the inertia of the vehicle doing this.
* The bumpers stop on impact so the cars are hitting the bumpers, not the other way round!
* As the drivers are doing damage to their own vehicles, nobody is being punished!
* all the people who have seen these with their own eyes testify that they are visible enough!
* All the drivers in the clips displayed that they clearly were there, and that they were trying to beat them before they rose up!
Anyone disagreeing with any of the above, I respectfully suggest you view all the clips and read all of the posts as I have. Then and only then post a reason to your disagreement, and the more sensible amongst us will explain why these drivers taking themselves off the road can only be a good thing!
I viewed the clips and have read *most* of the posts on this thread, and I think there are two schools of thought. I'm in one, you clearly are in another.
In the red corner, anyone stupid enough to drive into steel bollards despite all the signs, and despite in some cases clearly being aware that the bollards are there, deserves anything they get. If they're stupid enough to do this then they are probably an accident waiting to happen so if they're going to have an accident, here is as good a place as any. I think you are in this corner.
In the blue corner, it is reasonably obvious that from time to time people will try to drive through the barriers, through ignorance, stupidity or dumb bad luck. The design and operation of these barriers makes it difficult or impossible for the driver to see them rising up in close front of the vehicle, so drivers who approach the barriers with the aim of driving through have no obvious indication that this isn't going to work, right up to the point their vehicle slams to a halt. In this respect the barriers are completely unlike any vehicle barriers used elsewhere. Even in car parks where rising barriers are used to stop vehicles leaving without paying, they are always supplemented by conventional barriers which lower an arm across the front of the car at windscreen level.
In my opinion, given the design and operation of the bollards it is reasonably forseeable that people will drive into them occasionally. These people will suffer severe damage and possible injury when they do this. As a society, we have a moral obligation to protect each other from harm. This protection extends to people who act stupidly and/or illegally as well as sensible people. This doesn't mean wrapping everyone in bubble wrap and making sure that nobody ever comes to any harm no matter how stupid they are, but it does mean that things reasonably likely to harm people should be avoided. No sharp edges on signs, no open manhole covers, steps painted to make them obvious, no high voltage electricity anywhere that people could reach it (even if it was obviously illegal/stupid for them to try).
Wrecking cars and injuring people is obviously bad. It may be that the harm from this is outweighed by the benefit of reducing traffic on the other side of the barrier. If the barriers were ther to stop you driving off a cliff, you might br glad they stopped you. Nothing has been said to suggest that there are significant benefits in this case, and it would need some very substantial benefit to justify spending tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds installing an operating the barriers, and then severely damaging multiple cars and potentially injuring their occupants. I think the barriers are unjustified, the harm they do is disproportionate to their benefit, and they should never have been used for that purpose.
Reduce the harm they do to vehicles that drive into them, or reduce the likelihood that people will drive into them by making it sufficiently obvious when they are up/rising, and it may be that barriers could be an appropriate way to enforce a restricted area. This isn't it.
GreenV8S said:
Adz The Rat said:
I think that is great. They all deserved what they got.
Im in Manchester 2moro so going to have a look for these bollards and maybe see some numpty drive into them
Im in Manchester 2moro so going to have a look for these bollards and maybe see some numpty drive into them
Great idea. While you're there, lift up a few manhole covers (you'll need to put up a sign warning people not to fall into them, of course) and then video people stupid enough to fall into them anyway. With a bit of Benny Hill music in the background, that should be hilarious. Don't worry about the people who fall in, if they're stupid enough to fall into a hole after you've put signs up and everything, they deserve anything that happens to them. Send the video in to You've Been Framed (or whatever it's called now - Celebrity Big Brother Framed In the Jungle or something I expect) and you may even win a prize.
However do you deal with roadworks and the large holes that can be left in roads surrounded only by a few plastic barriers (some don't even have a flashing light!!!)?
Edited by Oakey on Monday 20th November 14:10
GreenV8S said:
steps painted to make them obvious, no high voltage electricity anywhere that people could reach it (even if it was obviously illegal/stupid for them to try).
Where are all these steps painted to make them obvious? I've seen them in factories but that's it. As for the high voltage electricity. How many times have we read about kids being killed breaking into electricity substations with "Danger of Death" signs all over them. Maybe we should ban electricity substations as it's entirely foreseable that somebody might actually miss the sign and break into the enclosure
. Oakey said:
However do you deal with roadworks and the large holes that can be left in roads surrounded only by a few plastic barriers (some don't even have a flashing light!!!)?
No, your mistake is putting the plastic barriers up. People aren't very likely to fall into your trap if they have something in their line of sight to make it obvious the trap is there. Just leave the hole, but for maximum amusement put up a sign they have to read telling them about the trap. If you get it right you may even find you can get people who might otherwise have avoided the trap, who are so distracted by trying to read the sign that they fall into it anyway.
mondeohdear said:
Where are all these steps painted to make them obvious? I've seen them in factories but that's it. As for the high voltage electricity. How many times have we read about kids being killed breaking into electricity substations with "Danger of Death" signs all over them. Maybe we should ban electricity substations as it's entirely foreseable that somebody might actually miss the sign and break into the enclosure.
.Most trip hazards in public places are painted to make the obvious. For example you will routinely have a line of high vis paint on the edge of a step.
We don't ban substations, but we do everything we can to stop people coming into contact with high voltage electricity including locked doors, high fences and barbed wire to stop you climbing over the fences. And that's obviously hazardous but worth while, because a barbed wire fence might hurt but is unlikely to kill you, but the HT on the far side of it easily could do.
GreenV8S said:
Oakey said:
However do you deal with roadworks and the large holes that can be left in roads surrounded only by a few plastic barriers (some don't even have a flashing light!!!)?
No, your mistake is putting the plastic barriers up. People aren't very likely to fall into your trap if they have something in their line of sight to make it obvious the trap is there. Just leave the hole, but for maximum amusement put up a sign they have to read telling them about the trap. If you get it right you may even find you can get people who might otherwise have avoided the trap, who are so distracted by trying to read the sign that they fall into it anyway.
Come off it, you know those barriers are useless as chavs will usually kick them down in no time at all.
How about wet floors then? What's your argument for the majority of people managing to not slip on their arse?
Oakey said:
Come off it, you know those barriers are useless as chavs will usually kick them down in no time at all.
How about wet floors then? What's your argument for the majority of people managing to not slip on their arse?
How about wet floors then? What's your argument for the majority of people managing to not slip on their arse?
What am I supposed to be arguing here? Sorry, your leading question isn't quite leading enough. It's normal to put up signs warning people of hazards such as trailing cables or slippery floors. Without these warnings, the hazards can be very dangerous. Even with the warnings, people can be caught out from time to time. Unfortunately sometimes the hazards are not really avoidable, floors get wet sometimes and it can't always be avoided, and mains operated vacuum cleaners simply have to be connected to the mains. This doesn't mean it's OK to leave hazards around, just that it can't always be avoided. Don't try to claim that the bollards are a hazards that can't be avoided though, that's obviously nonesense.
What's this about chavs kicking barriers down? Chavs are always to busy making sweeping generalisations to do anything like that. Or are you really saying that it's pointless trying to protect people because we can never protect them perfectly? That's another fatuous argument.
victormeldrew said:
MrKipling43 said:
All very funny until you're on a bus that crashed into one, you dislocate your shoulder, tear all the muscles off the joint and end up with no feeling in your arm for six months. I, for one, don't find rising bollards so funny.
Especially when your options for recovery are: lose all rotational movement in your shoulder (no driving or riding), or be in pain in some situations for the rest of your life.
Is this your actual experience, or just hypothetical?Especially when your options for recovery are: lose all rotational movement in your shoulder (no driving or riding), or be in pain in some situations for the rest of your life.
Unfortunately, yes it is my actual experience. A bloody painful one too.
MrKipling43 said:
victormeldrew said:
MrKipling43 said:
All very funny until you're on a bus that crashed into one, you dislocate your shoulder, tear all the muscles off the joint and end up with no feeling in your arm for six months. I, for one, don't find rising bollards so funny.
Especially when your options for recovery are: lose all rotational movement in your shoulder (no driving or riding), or be in pain in some situations for the rest of your life.
Is this your actual experience, or just hypothetical?Especially when your options for recovery are: lose all rotational movement in your shoulder (no driving or riding), or be in pain in some situations for the rest of your life.
Unfortunately, yes it is my actual experience. A bloody painful one too.
I'd be asking some very serious questions about what alternatives to a potentially hazardous device the council had considered before installing them, and I'd start with asking for a copy of the risk assessment that any responsible public body is duty bound to have carried out. Even one of the more robust defenders of the devices on this thread has managed to come up with a suggestion that would make them safer, so you really do have to wonder about due diligence. Good luck.
mondeohdear said:
Can you imagine one of these coming up under somebody's car. No doubt somebody would be claiming it was the urinal's fault
You were only joking I'm sure, but from some postings on here I think there are actually people who would claim a valid comparison. They'll be along in a second ...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff