The "Sh*t Driving Caught On Cam" Thread (Vol 4)
Discussion
Here's the rear view, it uses a zoom lens, so things look somewhat closer than they are.
https://youtu.be/_bvdggmcdWg
https://youtu.be/_bvdggmcdWg
Wiccan of Darkness said:
Seriously?
What was unnecessary was the MLM standing on the brake pedal at the last moment. Note how the displayed speed halves - and then the MLM has the nerve to dawdle along at 40mph.
Cammer should have backed off a bit more, earlier in the clip at 0:25 cammer passes a large TNT lorry, and only 30 seconds elapsed before the MLM nailed the brakes. Ergo, there was a massive lorry trundling away less than 100 yards behind. The cammer therefore should have backed off a little more, primarily due to the wanton cocksocket in the renault but also to ensure a more controlled last-second switch on to the hard shoulder and swift undertake, as 40 tonnes of TNT lorry concertinas the back of the renault and not the cammer. 10pm on a tuesday night, that logistics lorry will be full. What's to say the renault doesn't decide to come to a complete halt; half on the hard shoulder and half in lane 1? They've already pulled off a manoeuvre of mind-boggling stupidity, sometimes a second one follows. That leaves an escape route of either in to the coned off area, or the hard shoulder.
Oh look, the renault does the same thing again @01:42 and drops speed from 50 to 40. The cammer is now a decent distance behind the renault and reacts perfectly to the second dollop of insanity regurgitated by the statistic-in-waiting.
Cammer did well to keep his/her cool, there isn't even a squeak from the cammer. Frankly I'd have s
t my pants and hurled them at the renault.
I know DCW-bashing is the norm but on this occasion I'm 100% sticking up for the cammer. Had that motorway been any busier, and other vehicles between the lorry and the cammer, the actions of the cerebrally-atrophied bell-end would have resulted in the lorry rear-ending any preceding car, or the cammer. 40 tonnes of TNT lorry doesn't stop on a sixpence.
While I'm in full on rant mode, why the juddery fk does the renault have its rear fog light on? N/S/R light is obscenely bright, do they think it makes them look cool to have their front fogs on? I bet we'll shortly see the same renault concertina'd to the size of a crumpet after swerving across another motorway and nailing the brakes in front of a lorry full of dog food.
Anyhoo...it's past midnight. Happy Pi day.
Any competent driver would have had at least 900-100 yards (800 + seeing the first signs before that), telling them lanes 2 and 3 are ending. This means everything ahead of you that is not currently in lane 1 is going to need to be there imminently. You should expect that less observant or competent drivers may leave it late to make that manoeuvre, but they're either going toive in the next 30 seconds or collide with the cones. If you're travelling faster than the MLM in front of you, you should adjust your speed early by easing off and allowing the scenario to unfold with plenty of room to spare.What was unnecessary was the MLM standing on the brake pedal at the last moment. Note how the displayed speed halves - and then the MLM has the nerve to dawdle along at 40mph.
Cammer should have backed off a bit more, earlier in the clip at 0:25 cammer passes a large TNT lorry, and only 30 seconds elapsed before the MLM nailed the brakes. Ergo, there was a massive lorry trundling away less than 100 yards behind. The cammer therefore should have backed off a little more, primarily due to the wanton cocksocket in the renault but also to ensure a more controlled last-second switch on to the hard shoulder and swift undertake, as 40 tonnes of TNT lorry concertinas the back of the renault and not the cammer. 10pm on a tuesday night, that logistics lorry will be full. What's to say the renault doesn't decide to come to a complete halt; half on the hard shoulder and half in lane 1? They've already pulled off a manoeuvre of mind-boggling stupidity, sometimes a second one follows. That leaves an escape route of either in to the coned off area, or the hard shoulder.
Oh look, the renault does the same thing again @01:42 and drops speed from 50 to 40. The cammer is now a decent distance behind the renault and reacts perfectly to the second dollop of insanity regurgitated by the statistic-in-waiting.
Cammer did well to keep his/her cool, there isn't even a squeak from the cammer. Frankly I'd have s
t my pants and hurled them at the renault.I know DCW-bashing is the norm but on this occasion I'm 100% sticking up for the cammer. Had that motorway been any busier, and other vehicles between the lorry and the cammer, the actions of the cerebrally-atrophied bell-end would have resulted in the lorry rear-ending any preceding car, or the cammer. 40 tonnes of TNT lorry doesn't stop on a sixpence.
While I'm in full on rant mode, why the juddery f
k does the renault have its rear fog light on? N/S/R light is obscenely bright, do they think it makes them look cool to have their front fogs on? I bet we'll shortly see the same renault concertina'd to the size of a crumpet after swerving across another motorway and nailing the brakes in front of a lorry full of dog food.Anyhoo...it's past midnight. Happy Pi day.
Or, of course, you could act all surprised that MLM needed to move to lane 1, leave your breaking late and use the opportunity to blare your horn and upload the whole thing to YouTube.
The video is an example of two bad pieces of driving, which is one more than the camera driver will accept, I'm sure.
janesmith1950 said:
ny competent driver would have had at least 900-100 yards (800 + seeing the first signs before that), telling them lanes 2 and 3 are ending. This means everything ahead of you that is not currently in lane 1 is going to need to be there imminently. You should expect that less observant or competent drivers may leave it late to make that manoeuvre, but they're either going toive in the next 30 seconds or collide with the cones. If you're travelling faster than the MLM in front of you, you should adjust your speed early by easing off and allowing the scenario to unfold with plenty of room to spare.
Or, of course, you could act all surprised that MLM needed to move to lane 1, leave your breaking late and use the opportunity to blare your horn and upload the whole thing to YouTube.
The video is an example of two bad pieces of driving, which is one more than the camera driver will accept, I'm sure.
We must be watching a different video. There’s no surprise that MLM is going to have to move to lane 1, the surprise comes from the fact that the dimwit feels the need to bleed nearly half of their speed on the brakes to make the manoeuvre which is completely unnecessary. The MLM’s reaction to the cones being there isn’t rational or reasonable and they are entirely to blame for the whole situation.Or, of course, you could act all surprised that MLM needed to move to lane 1, leave your breaking late and use the opportunity to blare your horn and upload the whole thing to YouTube.
The video is an example of two bad pieces of driving, which is one more than the camera driver will accept, I'm sure.
djc206 said:
janesmith1950 said:
ny competent driver would have had at least 900-100 yards (800 + seeing the first signs before that), telling them lanes 2 and 3 are ending. This means everything ahead of you that is not currently in lane 1 is going to need to be there imminently. You should expect that less observant or competent drivers may leave it late to make that manoeuvre, but they're either going toive in the next 30 seconds or collide with the cones. If you're travelling faster than the MLM in front of you, you should adjust your speed early by easing off and allowing the scenario to unfold with plenty of room to spare.
Or, of course, you could act all surprised that MLM needed to move to lane 1, leave your breaking late and use the opportunity to blare your horn and upload the whole thing to YouTube.
The video is an example of two bad pieces of driving, which is one more than the camera driver will accept, I'm sure.
We must be watching a different video. There’s no surprise that MLM is going to have to move to lane 1, the surprise comes from the fact that the dimwit feels the need to bleed nearly half of their speed on the brakes to make the manoeuvre which is completely unnecessary. The MLM’s reaction to the cones being there isn’t rational or reasonable and they are entirely to blame for the whole situation.Or, of course, you could act all surprised that MLM needed to move to lane 1, leave your breaking late and use the opportunity to blare your horn and upload the whole thing to YouTube.
The video is an example of two bad pieces of driving, which is one more than the camera driver will accept, I'm sure.
As for the horn blast, that was a very much “this schmuck doesn’t know that I’m here and might decide to do something stupid again”, not “f
k you”I facepalmed at the MLM moving out to to L2 immediately after the cones ended. Someone probably told them L2 is the safest place to be on the motorway and to stay there.
A very good sign of a terrible driver is having the satnav right in the middle of the windscreen blocking their view.
A very good sign of a terrible driver is having the satnav right in the middle of the windscreen blocking their view.
Solocle said:
Absolutely. If I’d been trying to prove a point to the MLM, or oblivious to them, I could have hammered up L1 and sat on their inside, which almost certainly would have caused a crash. As it was, I was travelling at a similar speed to them, as is fairly evident from the rear video (after the roadworks, they sat on my offside corner, going no faster or slower than me). There was no speed limit imposed due to the roadworks, and I was expecting them to slow down to maybe 60, or even 50. But slamming on the anchors down to 35?
As for the horn blast, that was a very much “this schmuck doesn’t know that I’m here and might decide to do something stupid again”, not “fk you”
I think a lesser person would have gone round them on the hard shoulder with lights flashing and horn blaring.As for the horn blast, that was a very much “this schmuck doesn’t know that I’m here and might decide to do something stupid again”, not “f
k you”The Renault driver is the sort of person who shouldn’t be on the road. Absolutely clueless.
djc206 said:
janesmith1950 said:
ny competent driver would have had at least 900-100 yards (800 + seeing the first signs before that), telling them lanes 2 and 3 are ending. This means everything ahead of you that is not currently in lane 1 is going to need to be there imminently. You should expect that less observant or competent drivers may leave it late to make that manoeuvre, but they're either going toive in the next 30 seconds or collide with the cones. If you're travelling faster than the MLM in front of you, you should adjust your speed early by easing off and allowing the scenario to unfold with plenty of room to spare.
Or, of course, you could act all surprised that MLM needed to move to lane 1, leave your breaking late and use the opportunity to blare your horn and upload the whole thing to YouTube.
The video is an example of two bad pieces of driving, which is one more than the camera driver will accept, I'm sure.
We must be watching a different video. There’s no surprise that MLM is going to have to move to lane 1, the surprise comes from the fact that the dimwit feels the need to bleed nearly half of their speed on the brakes to make the manoeuvre which is completely unnecessary. The MLM’s reaction to the cones being there isn’t rational or reasonable and they are entirely to blame for the whole situation.Or, of course, you could act all surprised that MLM needed to move to lane 1, leave your breaking late and use the opportunity to blare your horn and upload the whole thing to YouTube.
The video is an example of two bad pieces of driving, which is one more than the camera driver will accept, I'm sure.
If the dashcam car sat back and adjusted his speed for the roadworks that would have been a nothing incident. Two bad bits of driving created an incident.
Driver101 said:
You wouldn't foresee a car entering roadworks slowing down, especially when it's quite clear it's in the wrong lane at the last second?
If the dashcam car sat back and adjusted his speed for the roadworks that would have been a nothing incident. Two bad bits of driving created an incident.
Slowing down yes, anchoring on no. It’s hardly last second they taper the cones to feed you into the correct lane it’s not just a wall of conesIf the dashcam car sat back and adjusted his speed for the roadworks that would have been a nothing incident. Two bad bits of driving created an incident.
New compilation. Phones to blame for several clips here, I’m sure, especially the first one. Looks like the colliding car thought about doing a runner. Must have taken pretty heavy damage...
https://youtu.be/z35LwppQfXo
https://youtu.be/z35LwppQfXo
djc206 said:
Driver101 said:
You wouldn't foresee a car entering roadworks slowing down, especially when it's quite clear it's in the wrong lane at the last second?
If the dashcam car sat back and adjusted his speed for the roadworks that would have been a nothing incident. Two bad bits of driving created an incident.
Slowing down yes, anchoring on no. It’s hardly last second they taper the cones to feed you into the correct lane it’s not just a wall of conesIf the dashcam car sat back and adjusted his speed for the roadworks that would have been a nothing incident. Two bad bits of driving created an incident.
Anchoring it? His brake lights went on at 50 seconds. It took around 4 seconds before the DCW even reacted to the brake lights. He only scrubbed off around 30mph.
If the DCW had a safe gap, read the clearly developing situation and didn't have the world's worst reaction time he wouldn't have had to brake as hard as he did. It would have been a nothing incident.
I'd say tapering at the cones is indeed the last second.
Driver101 said:
djc206 said:
Driver101 said:
You wouldn't foresee a car entering roadworks slowing down, especially when it's quite clear it's in the wrong lane at the last second?
If the dashcam car sat back and adjusted his speed for the roadworks that would have been a nothing incident. Two bad bits of driving created an incident.
Slowing down yes, anchoring on no. It’s hardly last second they taper the cones to feed you into the correct lane it’s not just a wall of conesIf the dashcam car sat back and adjusted his speed for the roadworks that would have been a nothing incident. Two bad bits of driving created an incident.
Anchoring it? His brake lights went on at 50 seconds. It took around 4 seconds before the DCW even reacted to the brake lights. He only scrubbed off around 30mph.
If the DCW had a safe gap, read the clearly developing situation and didn't have the world's worst reaction time he wouldn't have had to brake as hard as he did. It would have been a nothing incident.
I'd say tapering at the cones is indeed the last second.
Dashcammer has rightly captured some seriously s
t driving, as per the thread title. There was no created “incident”. I thought it a good example of the muppetry we face everyday on the roads, especially seeing what happen after.......breadvan said:
Sorry, you’re wrong (imho).
Dashcammer has rightly captured some seriously st driving, as per the thread title. There was no created “incident”. I thought it a good example of the muppetry we face everyday on the roads, especially seeing what happen after.......
It is bad driving by the Renault. Equally if the DCW had the ability to read the road ahead he would have foreseen what could happen. Dashcammer has rightly captured some seriously s
t driving, as per the thread title. There was no created “incident”. I thought it a good example of the muppetry we face everyday on the roads, especially seeing what happen after.......If he didn't wait almost 4 seconds after the car ahead started to brake then he wouldn't have ended right up it's arse and the incident and horn honking wouldn't be required.
His hazard perception and reaction time is as bad as the Renault driver.
Driver101 said:
It is bad driving by the Renault. Equally if the DCW had the ability to read the road ahead he would have foreseen what could happen.
If he didn't wait almost 4 seconds after the car ahead started to brake then he wouldn't have ended right up it's arse and the incident and horn honking wouldn't be required.
His hazard perception and reaction time is as bad as the Renault driver.
So if you’re following a car on the motorway, and their brake lights light up, with nothing ahead of them, do you think “oh, they’re clearly emergency braking”, and act accordingly? Or might they be a few mph over the speed limit, and just adjusting their speed? They don’t slow down significantly until a few seconds after their brake lights illuminate.If he didn't wait almost 4 seconds after the car ahead started to brake then he wouldn't have ended right up it's arse and the incident and horn honking wouldn't be required.
His hazard perception and reaction time is as bad as the Renault driver.
Frimley111R said:
and this guy the first guy is an idiot, but the 2nd is just not watching.
comedy watching everyone running around afterwards - like a benny hill show
Solocle said:
So if you’re following a car on the motorway, and their brake lights light up, with nothing ahead of them, do you think “oh, they’re clearly emergency braking”, and act accordingly? Or might they be a few mph over the speed limit, and just adjusting their speed? They don’t slow down significantly until a few seconds after their brake lights illuminate.
What kind of mouth breather uses brakes to drop their speed a few mph on a motorway rather than gently lifting off the throttle? If you see brake lights on a motorway you need to be ready to slow down in a hurry.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff