The "Sh*t Driving Caught On Cam" Thread (Vol 4)
Discussion
mikal83 said:
Deluded comment. If your so concerned about the vehicle to your left..."might" just swing into your lane all of a sudden, where you also checking your rear view mirrors, your side mirrors, your speed, engine lights, any other warning lights, the right incase a ow flying aircraft was coming your way, kids on a bridge throwing rocks. EH!
No of course not, you make sure your in the middle of your lane looking ahead and feckin overtaking.
Are you the OP's wife? You seem to exist on another planet if you see a van swinging all of a sudden and didn't notice because you were checking for engine warning lights. No of course not, you make sure your in the middle of your lane looking ahead and feckin overtaking.
Anyway as OP and his wife won't admit they have a part to play in avoiding accidents, let's get on with the videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyYmJAL4hzg
WarrenB said:
Blimey I can't believe we're still discussing the van!
It's all well and good pointing out the errors made, we all know the van is going to try and come into lane 3, at the time the driver of the car didn't.
No one is 100% aware of what is going on 360 degrees around them on the road 100% of the time, despite what people may say. Yes car driver should have left a larger gap but he didn't, van driver should have checked his blind spot (the mirrors on the Citroen Dispatch are awful - they don't have a wide angle mirror like most other vans) but he didn't. Even if there was a bigger gap in lane 3, van driver still wouldn't have seen our man with the dash cam.
You can normally tell when people are going to move to the right, and all the clues were there in the vid - the biggest fIt's all well and good pointing out the errors made, we all know the van is going to try and come into lane 3, at the time the driver of the car didn't.
No one is 100% aware of what is going on 360 degrees around them on the road 100% of the time, despite what people may say. Yes car driver should have left a larger gap but he didn't, van driver should have checked his blind spot (the mirrors on the Citroen Dispatch are awful - they don't have a wide angle mirror like most other vans) but he didn't. Even if there was a bigger gap in lane 3, van driver still wouldn't have seen our man with the dash cam.
king clue being the van's indicators, but well before he signalled he was moving towards teh right. Spotting that doesn't take 360 degree vision. The main error was still the van driver but the Op missed some clues and had a closer encounter than is comfortable.Now I am an old git with probably millions of miles of driving I find I notice all those clues more, so experience is definitely a factor, along with mindset. As we have seen the DCW mindset creates more near misses than a less agressive mindset.
untakenname said:
Autopilot DCW https://youtu.be/i9r4nS5EjjQ
how can anyone believe in this tech, Ilm sure the cult followers will say the usual excuses, but any accident they should sisabled whole system untill fully sorted out.Thesprucegoose said:
untakenname said:
Autopilot DCW https://youtu.be/i9r4nS5EjjQ
how can anyone believe in this tech, Ilm sure the cult followers will say the usual excuses, but any accident they should sisabled whole system untill fully sorted out.blueg33 said:
It certainly looks like it needs a lot of work. But surely the driver/attendant has to carry responsibility too. I don't think Tesla promote it as something that allows you remove all attention from whats going on.
Maybe but the brand it as auto pilot. The defination as such, ''An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required.''
And system that requires hands on shouldnt be called AP, it should be called driver assit, but that just wouldnt sell.
Thesprucegoose said:
Maybe but the brand it as auto pilot.
The defination as such, ''An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required.''
And system that requires hands on shouldnt be called AP, it should be called driver assit, but that just wouldnt sell.
The name is just that. Its sold and marketed as a driver aid. Its not in an aircraft and even aircraft autopilots have different levels of sophistication. Even early self drive tests are much safer than average human drivers by every metric. The argument that self drive cars have accidents so we shouldn't have them makes no sense - unless they are worse than the status quo. The defination as such, ''An autopilot is a system used to control the trajectory of an aircraft without constant 'hands-on' control by a human operator being required.''
And system that requires hands on shouldnt be called AP, it should be called driver assit, but that just wouldnt sell.
Turfy said:
ericmcn said:
This citroen Van idiot almost too the wife and myself out of it on the M4 yesterday, was lucky I did not smash into the central barrier. I got my car checked over and it looks ok, which is good news for that driver.
https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc
This is like standing in front of a train approaching at full speed and still 10 seconds away when the light is red. Morally you are in the right and had every chance to save yourself, but idiocy, arrogance or stupidity took over and you got splattered.https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc
Your wife had 10 seconds to avert the situation but ignored all the signs of the impending accident. Sorry, this is madness and you are just as much to blame for that near-miss as the van driver. Silly.
It looked like the space was closed on purpose; just sayin...
Graveworm said:
The name is just that. Its sold and marketed as a driver aid. Its not in an aircraft and even aircraft autopilots have different levels of sophistication. Even early self drive tests are much safer than average human drivers by every metric. The argument that self drive cars have accidents so we shouldn't have them makes no sense - unless they are worse than the status quo.
The marketing is quite ambiguous though, which is why people get confused.From there website.
''Eight surround cameras provide 360 degrees of visibility around the car at up to 250 meters of range. Twelve updated ultrasonic sensors complement this vision, allowing for detection of both hard and soft objects at nearly twice the distance of the prior system. ....
Autopilot enables your car to steer, accelerate and brake automatically within its lane.''
yet added in just after this statement.
''Current Autopilot features require active driver supervision and do not make the vehicle autonomous.''
It shouldn't be called Autopilot.
blueg33 said:
Thesprucegoose said:
untakenname said:
Autopilot DCW https://youtu.be/i9r4nS5EjjQ
how can anyone believe in this tech, Ilm sure the cult followers will say the usual excuses, but any accident they should sisabled whole system untill fully sorted out.Turfy said:
Turfy said:
ericmcn said:
This citroen Van idiot almost too the wife and myself out of it on the M4 yesterday, was lucky I did not smash into the central barrier. I got my car checked over and it looks ok, which is good news for that driver.
https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc
This is like standing in front of a train approaching at full speed and still 10 seconds away when the light is red. Morally you are in the right and had every chance to save yourself, but idiocy, arrogance or stupidity took over and you got splattered.https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc
Your wife had 10 seconds to avert the situation but ignored all the signs of the impending accident. Sorry, this is madness and you are just as much to blame for that near-miss as the van driver. Silly.
It looked like the space was closed on purpose; just sayin...
Frimley111R said:
Turfy said:
Turfy said:
ericmcn said:
This citroen Van idiot almost too the wife and myself out of it on the M4 yesterday, was lucky I did not smash into the central barrier. I got my car checked over and it looks ok, which is good news for that driver.
https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc
This is like standing in front of a train approaching at full speed and still 10 seconds away when the light is red. Morally you are in the right and had every chance to save yourself, but idiocy, arrogance or stupidity took over and you got splattered.https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc
Your wife had 10 seconds to avert the situation but ignored all the signs of the impending accident. Sorry, this is madness and you are just as much to blame for that near-miss as the van driver. Silly.
It looked like the space was closed on purpose; just sayin...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rMxLdilqog
tigger1 said:
Frimley111R said:
Turfy said:
Turfy said:
ericmcn said:
This citroen Van idiot almost too the wife and myself out of it on the M4 yesterday, was lucky I did not smash into the central barrier. I got my car checked over and it looks ok, which is good news for that driver.
https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc
This is like standing in front of a train approaching at full speed and still 10 seconds away when the light is red. Morally you are in the right and had every chance to save yourself, but idiocy, arrogance or stupidity took over and you got splattered.https://youtu.be/6gzp83NSmqc
Your wife had 10 seconds to avert the situation but ignored all the signs of the impending accident. Sorry, this is madness and you are just as much to blame for that near-miss as the van driver. Silly.
It looked like the space was closed on purpose; just sayin...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rMxLdilqog
t driver by using lane three with two empty lanes to their left?tigger1 said:
The van did a Signal, quick Manoeuvre, maybe Mirror. The DCWs prediction powers won't win the lottery.tigger1 said:
I am struggling to see any safety benefit in the camera car getting so close to the white Skoda in front of it. It was to encourage the Skoda driver to move over, something the Skoda driver couldn't reasonably be expected to do if they were aware that the van in lane two was catching up with the vehicle in front of it in lane two?
Perhaps that whole situation could've been avoided and inconvenienced the driver of the camera car less if the driver of the white Skoda had put their foot down so they could have moved over to lane two sooner?
Perhaps the driver of the camera car was late for an important appointment, a flight or a ferry?
It's the Skoda drivers fault.
tigger1 said:
Assuming my screen is right, the van was signalling for quite a while waiting for the white car to clearWouldnt most people in the DCW position allow the van out maybe with a flash of the lights?
saaby93 said:
tigger1 said:
Assuming my screen is right, the van was signalling for quite a while waiting for the white car to clearWouldnt most people in the DCW position allow the van out maybe with a flash of the lights?
saaby93 said:
tigger1 said:
Assuming my screen is right, the van was signalling for quite a while waiting for the white car to clearWouldnt most people in the DCW position allow the van out maybe with a flash of the lights?
Yes, I am taking the we we, but your right.
Looking at it again, he wasn't signalling until the dash cam car was almost alongside him, then van pulled into lane 1 and didn't pass the white car, or stay in lane 2, so WTF is going on.
Edited by Vipers on Friday 26th July 20:38
If you put yourself into a pinch point why then be surprised when you get pinched?
What was the camera car going to achieve by continuing to advance other than get even closer to the rear bumper of that white Skoda three car lengths in front?
I am sure the possibility of getting some exciting dashcam footage didn't influence the intention to get even closer to the rear bumper of the white Skoda in front.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff