A proper road safety advert
Discussion
About time too 
www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk/campaigns/motorcycles/media/howclose.mpg
Thats the ad.
Its a bit misleading, since the first shot shows the driver's head blocking the viewer's view of the bike.
Thats the ad.
Its a bit misleading, since the first shot shows the driver's head blocking the viewer's view of the bike.
As usual, SafeSpeed is well ahead of their game in terms of promoting real road safety.
www.safespeed.org.uk/smidsy.html
www.safespeed.org.uk/smidsy.html
mefoster said:Try pulling out of roundabouts, the angles are such that it's even easier to miss a bike. Inexperienced riders and mopeds are the worst, they hide in the gutter amongst the camouflage of lamp posts and trees. If it moves driver thinking away from speed and back onto observation it's a step forward.
I'd go so far as to say that the bike isn't in the first shot at all. I had to replay and frame advance to make sure so it did make we wonder if I really did miss it. It's a bit of a con really even if it does make the point.
Parrot of Doom said:
www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk/campaigns/motorcycles/media/howclose.mpg
Thats the ad.
gave me a bit of a nasty flashback that
there was more damage to the car and to the bike, and less damage to me, in my similar crash though
in reality, car driver says "he came from nowhere"
witness says "he was going really fast"
biker gets nicked "you must've been going too fast or he would have seen you"
Pah.
Had to rewind as I was certain I DIDN'T see a biker when the driver looked right the first time, and was worried that I was being ignorant! Eek.
Anyway, no where to be seen in the first video, so I was happy at that.
So the second replay they show the biker, approaching at maybe 20mph, then suddenly as he pulls out the biker is going about 60mph!
Good advert, good message, but badly executed by being a bit unreal appearing. They almost made it look like your always in the wrong even if a biker (as appeared in the advert) to come from nowhere at high speed! Until the replay where it seems to tell an inconsistent story and confuse even more!
I preferred the one they did some months ago. A bloke out on a bit of a mild hoon, and as he drove along hazards were expressed on signs and defined quite obviously as he drove along, like blind brows, tractors in the road etc etc... Made more sense as it was saying "lots of hazards on the road, keep your eyes open and read the road" sort of thing.
The worst one is the moped driving down the outside of a right turning driver. Not there when he looks and is indicating, so why did the moped driver down his outside? Then it makes out that the driver is at fault! Now you see him.
OK, not a situation you want to happen, and it IS good that we look again just to make sure etc, but why emphasise the driver at fault again? Maybe they should put up a point about the moped driver being a dumbass!?
Dave
Had to rewind as I was certain I DIDN'T see a biker when the driver looked right the first time, and was worried that I was being ignorant! Eek.
Anyway, no where to be seen in the first video, so I was happy at that.
So the second replay they show the biker, approaching at maybe 20mph, then suddenly as he pulls out the biker is going about 60mph!
Good advert, good message, but badly executed by being a bit unreal appearing. They almost made it look like your always in the wrong even if a biker (as appeared in the advert) to come from nowhere at high speed! Until the replay where it seems to tell an inconsistent story and confuse even more!
I preferred the one they did some months ago. A bloke out on a bit of a mild hoon, and as he drove along hazards were expressed on signs and defined quite obviously as he drove along, like blind brows, tractors in the road etc etc... Made more sense as it was saying "lots of hazards on the road, keep your eyes open and read the road" sort of thing.
The worst one is the moped driving down the outside of a right turning driver. Not there when he looks and is indicating, so why did the moped driver down his outside? Then it makes out that the driver is at fault! Now you see him.
OK, not a situation you want to happen, and it IS good that we look again just to make sure etc, but why emphasise the driver at fault again? Maybe they should put up a point about the moped driver being a dumbass!?
Dave
But this is the point that's being made. If a driver pulls into the path of an oncoming motorcycle becasue he hasn't seen him for whatever reason then the driver is at fault as the motorcyclist has right of way. Heck, a lot of cars can't even be arsed to wait for cars at junctions as they're just too impatient. If the advert gets drivers to actually look round their A pillars at junctions before they pull out then it has to be a good thing.
BliarOut said:
hilighted the danger for drivers of SMIDSY's in cars with thick A pillars.
I'm sure SafeSpeed did a piece on the danger of A-pillars vs. bikes a while back. {eta: Ah yes - missed smeggy's post}
To be fair, it is a real problem, even for normally observant and attentive drivers.
A few weeks ago, I had a close call at a junction where I missed an entire car
. Looked right, looked left (car was obscured by B-pillar and passenger's head), looked right again, looked left again (car was now obscured by A-pillar), started to pull out. Cue expletive from passenger, brakes and car passing in front. double- Makes you think.
>> Edited by pdV6 on Wednesday 1st February 10:40
Mr Whippy said:
So the second replay they show the biker, approaching at maybe 20mph, then suddenly as he pulls out the biker is going about 60mph!
that's a perfect example of what happens
you aren't spotted till it's too late, then the driver says "he was going way too fast!"
no way he was doing anywhere near 60
Just the advert is misleading because in the first instance, before the replay, it shows a clear road, then in the next instance a bike travelling at high speed rams into the side of his car.
Not sure what it's putting across thats all.
It would have worked better if the biker was following and partially obscured by a big 4x4 on a country road where speeds are 50mph maybe, and the car "assumes" there is nothing behind the big 4x4 and the car pulls out.
As it is now I was sat thinking, well if you will go over 50mph in a built up area (30mph zone) your leaving yourself open to people pulling out on you without seeing you!
In the advert there is easily 30mph worth of space to pull out when it shows the driver look, and even then there isn't a bike, so how it puts across in the first instance that you should have seen him I have no idea.
Guess for simple people who don't bother looking then that won't be apparent, and hopefully the shock tactic will work. Shame that we have to cater for such poor drivers in the first place though imho!
Dave
Not sure what it's putting across thats all.
It would have worked better if the biker was following and partially obscured by a big 4x4 on a country road where speeds are 50mph maybe, and the car "assumes" there is nothing behind the big 4x4 and the car pulls out.
As it is now I was sat thinking, well if you will go over 50mph in a built up area (30mph zone) your leaving yourself open to people pulling out on you without seeing you!
In the advert there is easily 30mph worth of space to pull out when it shows the driver look, and even then there isn't a bike, so how it puts across in the first instance that you should have seen him I have no idea.
Guess for simple people who don't bother looking then that won't be apparent, and hopefully the shock tactic will work. Shame that we have to cater for such poor drivers in the first place though imho!
Dave
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff