'Dangerous' Roads?
Discussion
Can a road accurately be described as dangerous?
Thus can some roads be described as being more dangerous than others?
I suggest the inherent danger levels vary massively, and in many cases the odds in the users' favour may only be ameliorated to a certain degree by cautious, knowledgeable or skilful use.
Question prompted by a post or two in a thread on at the moment that I would rather not drag off topic.
Thus can some roads be described as being more dangerous than others?
I suggest the inherent danger levels vary massively, and in many cases the odds in the users' favour may only be ameliorated to a certain degree by cautious, knowledgeable or skilful use.
Question prompted by a post or two in a thread on at the moment that I would rather not drag off topic.
Dangerous roads would have three sources, I suppose;
1) Inherently more dangerous than necessary for the Competent and Careful Driver due to design/layout/construction/location or;
2) Dangerous due to encouragement of driving that is not competent and careful or;
3) A combination of 1 and 2
1) Inherently more dangerous than necessary for the Competent and Careful Driver due to design/layout/construction/location or;
2) Dangerous due to encouragement of driving that is not competent and careful or;
3) A combination of 1 and 2
DatsunDave said:
Can a road accurately be described as dangerous?
Thus can some roads be described as being more dangerous than others?
I suggest the inherent danger levels vary massively, and in many cases the odds in the users' favour may only be ameliorated to a certain degree by cautious, knowledgeable or skilful use.
Question prompted by a post or two in a thread on at the moment that I would rather not drag off topic.
When you say road im assuming you mean in the UK for the remainder of this post and not the side of a mountain as the TG team drove down.Thus can some roads be described as being more dangerous than others?
I suggest the inherent danger levels vary massively, and in many cases the odds in the users' favour may only be ameliorated to a certain degree by cautious, knowledgeable or skilful use.
Question prompted by a post or two in a thread on at the moment that I would rather not drag off topic.
How can a piece of tarmac be dangerous?
What you/the driver does on that piece of tarmac is a different story but the road itself? Absolutely not.
This logic can be applied to anything for example
BMW's as a car are seen as safe but the way alot of them are driven is dangerous.
Water is seen as safe as you drink and wash yourself with it but if you try and breeth whilst in it you probably wont have much luck.
I can think of a few roads I take extra care on, because I consider them 'dangerous'. They usually have a poor surface and poor visibility, with high speed limits usually 'B' roads. They are often quiet and, lets face it, good fun too.
Oddly, the worst road near me for fatal accidents (A404 between Hazlemere and Amersham) is not a dangerous road. I reckon it's actually quite safe (well sighted, good surface, wide, all corners can be taken well in excess of the speed limit, even in the wet) but people drive it at such speed they occasionally fall off into a tree. Dangerous place, but not because of the road.
Oddly, the worst road near me for fatal accidents (A404 between Hazlemere and Amersham) is not a dangerous road. I reckon it's actually quite safe (well sighted, good surface, wide, all corners can be taken well in excess of the speed limit, even in the wet) but people drive it at such speed they occasionally fall off into a tree. Dangerous place, but not because of the road.
varsas said:
I can think of a few roads I take extra care on, because I consider them 'dangerous'. They usually have a poor surface and poor visibility, with high speed limits usually 'B' roads. They are often quiet and, lets face it, good fun too.
Oddly, the worst road near me for fatal accidents (A404 between Hazlemere and Amersham) is not a dangerous road. I reckon it's actually quite safe (well sighted, good surface, wide, all corners can be taken well in excess of the speed limit, even in the wet) but people drive it at such speed they occasionally fall off into a tree. Dangerous place, but not because of the road.
Also that people pull out of the side roads without properly accelerating, leaving them in danger for longer for people who may be travelling a little fast. To be honest, it isn't a bad road to drive!!Oddly, the worst road near me for fatal accidents (A404 between Hazlemere and Amersham) is not a dangerous road. I reckon it's actually quite safe (well sighted, good surface, wide, all corners can be taken well in excess of the speed limit, even in the wet) but people drive it at such speed they occasionally fall off into a tree. Dangerous place, but not because of the road.
DaveH23 said:
DatsunDave said:
Can a road accurately be described as dangerous?
Thus can some roads be described as being more dangerous than others?
I suggest the inherent danger levels vary massively, and in many cases the odds in the users' favour may only be ameliorated to a certain degree by cautious, knowledgeable or skilful use.
Question prompted by a post or two in a thread on at the moment that I would rather not drag off topic.
When you say road im assuming you mean in the UK for the remainder of this post and not the side of a mountain as the TG team drove down.Thus can some roads be described as being more dangerous than others?
I suggest the inherent danger levels vary massively, and in many cases the odds in the users' favour may only be ameliorated to a certain degree by cautious, knowledgeable or skilful use.
Question prompted by a post or two in a thread on at the moment that I would rather not drag off topic.
How can a piece of tarmac be dangerous?
What you/the driver does on that piece of tarmac is a different story but the road itself? Absolutely not.
As an example, near me there is a road with a bend that tightens and turns downhill when you are halfway round it. There's no warning that this might happen, so if you have not left plenty of capability in reserve, it's easy to be surprised - and plenty of people have been.
Another example was a 4-way junction onto a trunk road, which saw several fatal accidents every year. It's since been redesigned and the accident rate has dropped. Probably fair to say that it was a "dangerous junction", though its entirely the fault of those using it.
The Black Flash said:
Yes you can always blame the driver. However, the fact is that as drivers we expect a road to adhere to certain rules. Where they don't, in such a way as to cause people to be caught out regularly, I think it's fair to describe it as "dangerous", though that's really shorthand for "people make more mistakes here than usual".
As an example, near me there is a road with a bend that tightens and turns downhill when you are halfway round it. There's no warning that this might happen, so if you have not left plenty of capability in reserve, it's easy to be surprised - and plenty of people have been.
Therein lies the problem - expecting the road to adhere to a driver's assumptions and experience of similar roads is not a route to safe driving. If you're driving so as to be able to stop in the distance to be clear ahead, such bends shouldn't ever come as a surprise or cause you problems. As an example, near me there is a road with a bend that tightens and turns downhill when you are halfway round it. There's no warning that this might happen, so if you have not left plenty of capability in reserve, it's easy to be surprised - and plenty of people have been.
One could make an assumption that a road in the middle of nowhere in the early hours of the morning isn't going to have a pedestrian lurking around the corner, and indeed it's very unlikely there will be, but it'd make a poor defence trying to rely on that.
This is why I can't agree that roads such as these that are considered dangerous are anything of the sort. It's drivers hurtling around bends relying on percentages that are the problem.
Junctions with poor visibility are a little different, and there are some that I would agree are dangerous. If the layout means you can't see far enough for other traffic no matter what the positioning of your car is, then you're always going to have to tread carefully and make a leap of faith to a degree.
I've often wondered what would happen if we took down all the signs for bends and 'Slow' signs.
I wonder if drivers get so used to being told what to do (subconsciously reading signs like pace notes...... left bend, right bend, slow, hump back bridge) that when they get an 'un-signed' hazard, they are more likely to crash. On my local lane, two bends have illuminated chevron signs, but the next two shallower, but faster bends don't even have a sign.
If all the danger signs were covered up, would we do more thinking and assessing, rather than responding to signs?
There was an experiment in urban areas in Holland where they proved that taking down road markings and blurring the line between pedestrian and driving areas actually reduced incidents, as everyone was out of their comfort zone.
Taking this logic further, removing 'Slow' signs on b-roads and 'Fog' warnings on motorways may actually work....
I wonder if drivers get so used to being told what to do (subconsciously reading signs like pace notes...... left bend, right bend, slow, hump back bridge) that when they get an 'un-signed' hazard, they are more likely to crash. On my local lane, two bends have illuminated chevron signs, but the next two shallower, but faster bends don't even have a sign.
If all the danger signs were covered up, would we do more thinking and assessing, rather than responding to signs?
There was an experiment in urban areas in Holland where they proved that taking down road markings and blurring the line between pedestrian and driving areas actually reduced incidents, as everyone was out of their comfort zone.
Taking this logic further, removing 'Slow' signs on b-roads and 'Fog' warnings on motorways may actually work....
Redlake27 said:
I've often wondered what would happen if we took down all the signs for bends and 'Slow' signs.
Tbh I'm not convinced the average driver even pays attention to such signs for the most part. Show many of them pictures of such signs and I bet a good few wouldn't be able to tell you their meaning unless they'd recently passed their driving tests.jagnet said:
Tbh I'm not convinced the average driver even pays attention to such signs for the most part. Show many of them pictures of such signs and I bet a good few wouldn't be able to tell you their meaning unless they'd recently passed their driving tests.
I think people do, they just don't register it. It's automatic, so to speak. I can think of a few roads near me which are fairly fast and flowing and then have a deceptively tight corner or series of bends, which could quite easily catch someone out if they were driving faster than they should for the conditions. I'd imagine more than a few people have breezed down the road at 40 or 50mph (you know, those annoying people that can't ever seem to hit the speed limit in the well sighted bits!) but then when they get to the tighter corners, where common sense would say "slow down" they just keep going at the same speed and end up going off the road.
Does that make the road "dangerous", or is it just a combination of misfortune and poor driving that causes accidents there? While I'd agree that a proportion of the accidents could be avoided if the general standard of driving in this country was better, a road, or anything for that matter, can only be classed as "dangerous" if it presents an above average amount of risk to the general public that drive it. So I would yes, you can call a road "dangerous".
Does that make the road "dangerous", or is it just a combination of misfortune and poor driving that causes accidents there? While I'd agree that a proportion of the accidents could be avoided if the general standard of driving in this country was better, a road, or anything for that matter, can only be classed as "dangerous" if it presents an above average amount of risk to the general public that drive it. So I would yes, you can call a road "dangerous".
I crashed on a dangerous road!
Council workmen resurfaced a small section of country road incorrectly. Mixed the tarmac incorrectly and ended up with an extremely oily top surface that didnt cure. So it was basically a skid pan smooth surface that with a dash of snow and rain were perfect for black ice. I rolled my car and the council were forced to re-lay the road.
Pretty damn dangerous if you ask me!
Council workmen resurfaced a small section of country road incorrectly. Mixed the tarmac incorrectly and ended up with an extremely oily top surface that didnt cure. So it was basically a skid pan smooth surface that with a dash of snow and rain were perfect for black ice. I rolled my car and the council were forced to re-lay the road.
Pretty damn dangerous if you ask me!
TheHeretic said:
I think people do, they just don't register it. It's automatic, so to speak.
It could be, although the oft sighted flash of brake lights once well into the bend does make me wonder if they had any idea it was there until it comes into view within their focal point, some six feet in front of their radiators.It'd be interesting to see a study of driver's eye movements and how much attention is paid to warning signs. I recall seeing one done contrasting experienced v inexperienced drivers and hazard perception, but I don't remember where or when this was.
Obviously an unlit dual carriageway with no cats eyes, worn road markings, sharp bends, junctions with no slip roads, no crash barriers protecting road signs, poor drainage and a poor road surface is going to be a "more dangerous road" than a relatively straight, lit motorway with few junctions, long slip roads, good road markings, decent crash barriers, proper drainage and a good road surface.
off_again said:
I crashed on a dangerous road!
Council workmen resurfaced a small section of country road incorrectly. Mixed the tarmac incorrectly and ended up with an extremely oily top surface that didnt cure. So it was basically a skid pan smooth surface that with a dash of snow and rain were perfect for black ice. I rolled my car and the council were forced to re-lay the road.
Pretty damn dangerous if you ask me!
Fair do's - that sounds pretty exceptional and genuinely dangerous, or at least you'd hope it wasn't a common occurrence. Wasn't there another PHer that had something similar outside their house, with numerous crashes after the road was resurfaced with one coming through the garden wall?Council workmen resurfaced a small section of country road incorrectly. Mixed the tarmac incorrectly and ended up with an extremely oily top surface that didnt cure. So it was basically a skid pan smooth surface that with a dash of snow and rain were perfect for black ice. I rolled my car and the council were forced to re-lay the road.
Pretty damn dangerous if you ask me!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff