A heart stopping moment today
Discussion
I was driving on Interstate 11 near Las Vegas this morning. Light fast traffic with average speed of 80 MPH, well-spaced.
Suddenly the car ahead of me swerved very quickly ( I was properly spaced behind him) and a wrong-way driver was bearing down at high speed. I did have space and time to avoid a collision, but there was that microsecond of disbelief. I would say also 80 MPH, so closing speed would not have been survivable.
Never had the experience in decades of driving and hopefully will not have it again. Wil see if I can find out what happened subsequently.
Suddenly the car ahead of me swerved very quickly ( I was properly spaced behind him) and a wrong-way driver was bearing down at high speed. I did have space and time to avoid a collision, but there was that microsecond of disbelief. I would say also 80 MPH, so closing speed would not have been survivable.
Never had the experience in decades of driving and hopefully will not have it again. Wil see if I can find out what happened subsequently.
There's a bad junction north of the border from us, I've seen someone try to do the same;
T junction onto a dual carriageway (and this was constructed in the last 30 years I think), tourist attraction area so lots of drivers unsure of the area. The worst part is that if I hadn't stopped them, within one mile they'd be entering the A74/M6 motorway-if they made it. Before the motorway (or for normal drivers after) the dual carriageway has a tight 90 turn which would obviously impede vision for any collision.
It was terrifying seeing them do it but luckily they realised I wasn't a complete nutter and figured out how wrong they'd got it.
If it was quiet they'd have carried on to carnage in less than two minutes.
T junction onto a dual carriageway (and this was constructed in the last 30 years I think), tourist attraction area so lots of drivers unsure of the area. The worst part is that if I hadn't stopped them, within one mile they'd be entering the A74/M6 motorway-if they made it. Before the motorway (or for normal drivers after) the dual carriageway has a tight 90 turn which would obviously impede vision for any collision.
It was terrifying seeing them do it but luckily they realised I wasn't a complete nutter and figured out how wrong they'd got it.
If it was quiet they'd have carried on to carnage in less than two minutes.
The A3 off sliproad at Burpham comes to a 4 exit roundabout, occasionally people will drive down the sliproad from the roundabout, I've seen it whilst queueing as I come off the A3, an acquaintance lived just off the roundabout, he would see it happen fairly regularly, there are plenty of no entry signs but it still happens.
RDMcG said:
I was driving on Interstate 11 near Las Vegas this morning. Light fast traffic with average speed of 80 MPH, well-spaced.
Suddenly the car ahead of me swerved very quickly ( I was properly spaced behind him) and a wrong-way driver was bearing down at high speed. I did have space and time to avoid a collision, but there was that microsecond of disbelief. I would say also 80 MPH, so closing speed would not have been survivable.
Never had the experience in decades of driving and hopefully will not have it again. Wil see if I can find out what happened subsequently.
Never nice, we met an OAP who had got confused and driving the wrong way down a dual carriageway. When stopped he was indignant at everyone overtaking when he was coming...Suddenly the car ahead of me swerved very quickly ( I was properly spaced behind him) and a wrong-way driver was bearing down at high speed. I did have space and time to avoid a collision, but there was that microsecond of disbelief. I would say also 80 MPH, so closing speed would not have been survivable.
Never had the experience in decades of driving and hopefully will not have it again. Wil see if I can find out what happened subsequently.
The papers said his family persuaded him to give up his licence, probably on threat of the police taking it
I witnessed an elderly man die having got into the Bristol ring road on the wrong carriageway. I drove parallel with him, desperately trying to catch his intention.
Several motorists avoided colliding with him, until a red E39 estate collided head on with his Rover 216. By the time I'd gone to the next roundabout and turned back, he was dead.
I had to attend the inquest as a witness, and it was harrowing having to describe what I saw to his family and the coroner. I remember the coroner asking me why I thought so many drivers has been able to avoid a collision, yet the BMW driver hadn't. Of course, I couldn't put myself in the shoes of any of those people, yet the coroner was surprisingly persistent.
Several motorists avoided colliding with him, until a red E39 estate collided head on with his Rover 216. By the time I'd gone to the next roundabout and turned back, he was dead.
I had to attend the inquest as a witness, and it was harrowing having to describe what I saw to his family and the coroner. I remember the coroner asking me why I thought so many drivers has been able to avoid a collision, yet the BMW driver hadn't. Of course, I couldn't put myself in the shoes of any of those people, yet the coroner was surprisingly persistent.
RDMcG said:
I was driving on Interstate 11 near Las Vegas this morning. Light fast traffic with average speed of 80 MPH, well-spaced.
Suddenly the car ahead of me swerved very quickly ( I was properly spaced behind him) and a wrong-way driver was bearing down at high speed. I did have space and time to avoid a collision, but there was that microsecond of disbelief. I would say also 80 MPH, so closing speed would not have been survivable.
Never had the experience in decades of driving and hopefully will not have it again. Wil see if I can find out what happened subsequently.
Horrifying experience, and I am pleased you managed to avoid any harm. Suddenly the car ahead of me swerved very quickly ( I was properly spaced behind him) and a wrong-way driver was bearing down at high speed. I did have space and time to avoid a collision, but there was that microsecond of disbelief. I would say also 80 MPH, so closing speed would not have been survivable.
Never had the experience in decades of driving and hopefully will not have it again. Wil see if I can find out what happened subsequently.
But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
(We can debate whether hitting a stationary object at 80mph is survivable in an average car, but thats a different debate)
Lord Marylebone said:
Horrifying experience, and I am pleased you managed to avoid any harm.
But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
(We can debate whether hitting a stationary object at 80mph is survivable in an average car, but thats a different debate)
Whilst I’d agree 80mph and 80mph is not the same as hitting the stationary object at 160mph (unless the stationary object is a car that deforms at 0mph in the same manner), I’d have thought it would be worse due to the combined speeds, and certainly not ‘no more dangerous’ unless you’re referring to just how dead you need to be at those speeds?But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
(We can debate whether hitting a stationary object at 80mph is survivable in an average car, but thats a different debate)
Care to elaborate?
Lord Marylebone said:
Horrifying experience, and I am pleased you managed to avoid any harm.
But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
(We can debate whether hitting a stationary object at 80mph is survivable in an average car, but thats a different debate)
Wouldn't it depend on whether the other vehicle is significantly heavier than yours? (I'm assuming you are alluding to deceleration being the principle danger)But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
(We can debate whether hitting a stationary object at 80mph is survivable in an average car, but thats a different debate)
Dashnine said:
Lord Marylebone said:
Horrifying experience, and I am pleased you managed to avoid any harm.
But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
(We can debate whether hitting a stationary object at 80mph is survivable in an average car, but thats a different debate)
Whilst I’d agree 80mph and 80mph is not the same as hitting the stationary object at 160mph (unless the stationary object is a car that deforms at 0mph in the same manner), I’d have thought it would be worse due to the combined speeds, and certainly not ‘no more dangerous’ unless you’re referring to just how dead you need to be at those speeds?But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
(We can debate whether hitting a stationary object at 80mph is survivable in an average car, but thats a different debate)
Care to elaborate?
If you hit an oncoming car at 80mph, exactly the same thing happens. Your car goes from 80mph to 0mph within the time it takes for the crumple zones to collapse. The other car also goes from 80mph to 0mph in the same way.
The only thing largely relevant is the deceleration to 0mph.
You could actually argue it would be safer to hit an oncoming car at 80mph + 80mph, rather than hitting a stationary concrete wall or a tree at 80mph. There is a better chance for the oncoming car, and your car, to deform around each other on contact, and for the collision to be more glancing, rather than a completely immovable object such as a tree or concrete wall, which won't deform.
pteron said:
Wouldn't it depend on whether the other vehicle is significantly heavier than yours? (I'm assuming you are alluding to deceleration being the principle danger)
Absolutely correct, but I was keeping it simply and assuming Car vs Car or SUV vs SUV etc.Lord Marylebone said:
But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
What happens to the kinetic energy the other car has? There's double the energy that there is in a one-car-into-a-wall collision. Sporky said:
What happens to the kinetic energy the other car has? There's double the energy that there is in a one-car-into-a-wall collision.
Half of the total energy messes up your car, the other half messes up the other car. Your car doesn't get more messed up.(assuming equal sized, perfectly spherical SUVs in a vacuum etc)
Sporky said:
Lord Marylebone said:
But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
What happens to the kinetic energy the other car has? There's double the energy that there is in a one-car-into-a-wall collision. 
Sporky said:
Lord Marylebone said:
But, the physicist in me wishes to point out that a collision which occurs with you doing 80mph and the oncoming vehicle doing 80mph, is no more dangerous than you hitting a stationary object at 80mph. It isn't a case of 80mph + 80mph = worse.
What happens to the kinetic energy the other car has? There's double the energy that there is in a one-car-into-a-wall collision. Both cars will go from 80mph to 0mph. The same as if a car hit a tree, it would go from 80mph to 0mph. Yes, the closing speed is 160mph, nut that is shared been the cars, so we are back to 80mph each.
As the poster above pointed out, it does depend on the mass of the vehicles, but assuming they are similar, then the forces acting on each car won't be any different to hitting a stationary object.
Clearly if a car hit a HGV which was also travelling at 80mph, then the forces on the car would be greater, but if the OP was in an SUV, and hit another SUV, then it wouldn't matter.
Monkeylegend said:
This is going to end up like the aeroplane on a conveyor belt discussion
Not really, Mythbusters did it and found the same as physics would suggest. Two cars head on at the same speed is the same force/impact/damage as once car hitting a concrete wall at that same speed.It can't be any different can it when you think about it? You go from 80mph to 0mph within 1 second or so in both situations. Thats all that matters.
popegregory said:
21TonyK said:
Father in law had the same experience when he lived in Spain.
Except he was the one going the wrong way.
“Drive carefully dear, there’s a news report of a car driving the wrong way”Except he was the one going the wrong way.
“One?? There’s hundreds of them!”
At least he's back to driving on the "right side" of the road in the UK.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff