Potholes - Porsche Driver Killed

[Gordon Hill]

slk 32 said:

bigothunter said:

Super Sonic said:

Nomme de Plum said:

There is only one person responsible and unfortunately he has died.

Nomme de Plum said:

PH seems to attract a few posters who like to point the finger. It is rarely so black and white in real life.

Hoist by his own petard!

[Tim Cognito]

I was just thinking the other day how dangerous the potholes are and how difficult it is to be looking far ahead whilst also constantly scanning for and dodging craters in the road.

[GT9]

bodhi said:

Horrible tragic accident

I find it hard to believe it was caused by the Porsche driver driving too fast - simply as it was I doubt the Police would have mentioned the pothole at all - they'd have led with he was driving too fast for the conditions.

I do like how the resident PH expert on everything seems to know better than the Police who attended the scene and spoke to witnesses however.

This is what the Sussex Police website says in their appeal for information.

“Police are investigating the collision which is believed to have involved four vehicles. The other two vehicles were a black BMW and a white Audi. The drivers of both those vehicles were not injured. Officers are appealing for witnesses or anyone with information to come forward.”


The Telegraph has ‘implicated a pothole’ , presumably implying the pothole acted criminally…
The Mail has said he ‘swerved to miss a pothole’, as has the Sun.

The actual quote in the mail is:
“Police are appealing for information and sources have indicated that one theory relates to a large pothole close to the crash site, which they believe the man may have sought to avoid as he travelled along the road on Monday at 7.50am.”

Do you think there is any chance we are being led down the garden path by these tabloids?

[_Neal_]

Forester1965 said:

_Neal_ said:

That's pretty much the same as saying not all drivers will drive to the conditions. Swerving into the path of an oncoming car is (hopefully) a rare reaction, and, as said above, many many cars have driven the same stretch of road without this outcome.

The conditions aren't a surprise demanding an immediate decision. Think of it more like a ln animal running out from the hedgerow- some drivers will instinctively swerve to avoid before considering whether it's safe and others will run over the cat.

It's not about who's right or wrong but about accepting in any given circumstance different people will respond in different ways. Potholes are dangerous because they force people to make snap decisions.

It's more like (as I mentioned earlier) an object in the road (let's say a bit of metal that's fallen off a scaffolding truck, or a half brick). The animal suddenly appears without warning - the object/pothole is just there - so it is a condition of the road, not a surprise like a cat running out. I don't disagree that people react in different ways, it if you're driving to the conditions (and can therefore stop in the distance you can see to be clear, on your side of the road) you should be able to stop before the object/pothole. If you're driving along on a clear road and a cat runs out without warning, it's very different as you say.

[Forester1965]

If you're following another vehicle or driving a low-slung car a pothole can appear with little or no prior warning.

[Heaveho]

georgeyboy12345 said:

and why are councils doing that? Because they are and have been chronically underfunded by central government - the conservatives - for years. It’s what you voted for, guys!

I think you need to start your own thread if all you want to contribute is a rant about politics. It's fking dull frankly, and misplaced on this thread.

[bodhi]

GT9 said:

This is what the Sussex Police website says in their appeal for information.

“Police are investigating the collision which is believed to have involved four vehicles. The other two vehicles were a black BMW and a white Audi. The drivers of both those vehicles were not injured. Officers are appealing for witnesses or anyone with information to come forward.”


The Telegraph has ‘implicated a pothole’ , presumably implying the pothole acted criminally…
The Mail has said he ‘swerved to miss a pothole’, as has the Sun.

The actual quote in the mail is:
“Police are appealing for information and sources have indicated that one theory relates to a large pothole close to the crash site, which they believe the man may have sought to avoid as he travelled along the road on Monday at 7.50am.”

Do you think there is any chance we are being led down the garden path by these tabloids?

Depends what you think the tabloids would think was the better story:

- Man kills himself driving Porsche too quickly

Or

- Man dies having an accident trying to swerve a pothole.

Still not sure what the Mail hates more, potholes or speeding drivers. I'd call it a draw tbh.

[Unreal]

Most accidents on that road are caused by simple driver error, not some third party element. They very frequently involve performance vehicles. Could just be coincidence.

[ecsrobin]

Unreal said:

Most accidents on that road are caused by simple driver error, not some third party element. They very frequently involve performance vehicles. Could just be coincidence.

Source?

[Unreal]

ecsrobin said:

Unreal said:

Most accidents on that road are caused by simple driver error, not some third party element. They very frequently involve performance vehicles. Could just be coincidence.

Source?

Living in the area for half a century and reading the press and other reports of every serious accident that has ever happened on the A272. Driven the road dozens of times every week for decades and witnessed the aftermath of scores of accidents.

[Pica-Pica]

Forester1965 said:

If you're following another vehicle or driving a low-slung car a pothole can appear with little or no prior warning.

Only if following too closely. Adapt one’s driving to the situation.

[Hugo Stiglitz]

FMOB said:

That is awful.

I hope the Police can find clear evidence that the presence of the pothole was the root cause of the incident and the Council gets prosecuted for manslaughter.

Why?

When's the last time you swerved into an oncoming car to a oid a pothole travelling at normal road speeds.

Some of the comments on this topic are mindblowing.

That's not 'clipped' either.

The pothole comment is 'witnesses suggest'

The article also 'suggest' excessive speed.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz on Monday 6th May 14:47

[Forester1965]

Pica-Pica said:

Forester1965 said:

If you're following another vehicle or driving a low-slung car a pothole can appear with little or no prior warning.

Only if following too closely. Adapt one’s driving to the situation.

The Highway Code recommends the two second rule. This would give you 2 seconds notice of a pothole.

Are you suggesting this rule is no longer fit for purpose?

[lord trumpton]

Often, potholes form from previous stey pothole repairs don't poorly by lazy fat bd contractors who dump a bit of tarmac in and fk off.

[FMOB]

Hugo Stiglitz said:

FMOB said:

That is awful.

I hope the Police can find clear evidence that the presence of the pothole was the root cause of the incident and the Council gets prosecuted for manslaughter.

Why?

When's the last time you swerved into an oncoming car to a oid a pothole travelling at normal road speeds.

Some of the comments on this topic are mindblowing.

That's not 'clipped' either.

The pothole comment is 'witnesses suggest'

The article also 'suggest' excessive speed.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz on Monday 6th May 14:47

Because the condition of the roads just keeps deteriorating year on year with no sign of improvement, if the presence of this pothole/obstacle in the road contributed to the accident and it was known about / poorly repaired by the Council why should get off scot free to ignore another one.

I do my best to avoid potholes everytime I go out in the car, multiples craters within half a mile of my house, one claimed a BMW tyre about a week ago.

And everyone is assuming the Porsche driver missed the 'pothole', what if despite trying to avoid it, they actually clipped it which caused the accident, then what?

[FMOB]

lord trumpton said:

Often, potholes form from previous stey pothole repairs don't poorly by lazy fat bd contractors who dump a bit of tarmac in and fk off.

This is part of it, when was the last time you saw the repair sealed with hot bitumen not to mention utility companies whacking holes in roads when ever needed and making the same repair the council does.

Seen this happen on a brand new bit of road within a week of it being laid, instant pothole.

[Unreal]

FMOB said:

Hugo Stiglitz said:

FMOB said:

That is awful.

I hope the Police can find clear evidence that the presence of the pothole was the root cause of the incident and the Council gets prosecuted for manslaughter.

Why?

When's the last time you swerved into an oncoming car to a oid a pothole travelling at normal road speeds.

Some of the comments on this topic are mindblowing.

That's not 'clipped' either.

The pothole comment is 'witnesses suggest'

The article also 'suggest' excessive speed.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz on Monday 6th May 14:47

Because the condition of the roads just keeps deteriorating year on year with no sign of improvement, if the presence of this pothole/obstacle in the road contributed to the accident and it was known about / poorly repaired by the Council why should get off scot free to ignore another one.

I do my best to avoid potholes everytime I go out in the car, multiples craters within half a mile of my house, one claimed a BMW tyre about a week ago.

And everyone is assuming the Porsche driver missed the 'pothole', what if despite trying to avoid it, they actually clipped it which caused the accident, then what?

Some of us are assuming nothing and merely stating facts.

The Police have said avoiding a pothole is only one area they're looking at. I get that it's interesting to speculate but in the absence of video it can't be more than that. The media are playing the clickbait game.

[911Spanker]

FMOB said:

lord trumpton said:

Often, potholes form from previous stey pothole repairs don't poorly by lazy fat bd contractors who dump a bit of tarmac in and fk off.

This is part of it, when was the last time you saw the repair sealed with hot bitumen not to mention utility companies whacking holes in roads when ever needed and making the same repair the council does.

Seen this happen on a brand new bit of road within a week of it being laid, instant pothole.

Agree. Terrible "repairs" done by people who don't give a monkeys.

Reflects the attitude of councils too.

[_Neal_]

Pica-Pica said:

Forester1965 said:

If you're following another vehicle or driving a low-slung car a pothole can appear with little or no prior warning.

Only if following too closely. Adapt one’s driving to the situation.

Exactly. Bigger gap and look further ahead and/or slow down.

[BunkMoreland]

911Spanker said:

FMOB said:

lord trumpton said:

Often, potholes form from previous stey pothole repairs don't poorly by lazy fat bd contractors who dump a bit of tarmac in and fk off.

This is part of it, when was the last time you saw the repair sealed with hot bitumen not to mention utility companies whacking holes in roads when ever needed and making the same repair the council does.

Seen this happen on a brand new bit of road within a week of it being laid, instant pothole.

Agree. Terrible "repairs" done by people who don't give a monkeys.

Reflects the attitude of councils too.

when I become President of the UK. Probably in a violent coup!

I will make it law that road repair companies have to warrant their repairs for a minimum of 10 years. And if a repair fails inside that time the warranty timeframe resets. i.e Repair fails at 5 years old. Warranty runs from that point of repair for a further 10 years .

Failure to comply with that warranty obligation will result in your company being blacklisted for 20 years from all road repairs country wide. I'd also blacklist the company owners and directors for the same time frame from working in the construction industry to avoid them starting up a new company to get round it.

(As an slight aside. The reason car drivers are instructed by the highway code to give cyclists a fairly wide berth when passing them, is because a bike may have to dodge a pothole which can as we all know be quite substantial! And in worst case scenario may throw the rider off their bike!)

Edited by BunkMoreland on Monday 6th May 16:32