Subaru vs bike head on collision.

Subaru vs bike head on collision.

Author
Discussion

Fastdruid

6,819 posts

110 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
janesmith1950 said:
Interestingly the guy took legal advice and pleaded guilty to an offence that has a high bar to conviction, an easy get-out for borderline cases to convict Careless instead and carries a potential 5 year custodial sentence.

Funny how watching a video makes you think he, his counsel, the Police and the Courts all got it wrong and the road (yes, the one without warning for the obviously 'dangerous' bend) should be locked up for life.

Hence my comments about the negative outcome from videos like this.
I've said this before but it's a common mistake to believe that because you're clearly guilty of doing "something" that you're guilty of the ***charge***.

That the end result of his driving left the rider with life changing injuries are beyond question.

That it was "dangerous driving" is in question, obviously we've not seen the rest of the footage but given the state of the corner and what was *not* excessive speed on the previous straight (although speeding 67mph is hardly massive speed) it strikes me more as DWDCA, a particularly unfortunate case of it obviously but that's down to (bad) luck.

TheDukeofBork

161 posts

46 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
No-one pleads guilty to DD if they think a jury might reduce to DWDCA.

Dr Jekyll

20,406 posts

219 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
janesmith1950 said:
t is, just not in the practical part. It's also in the Highway Code. Is the limit point in the test or Highway Code? We know the answer to that.

The guy's driving fell far below that expected of the careful and competent driver. It wasn't the road's fault.
This is like trying to have a conversation with Vonhosen.

Yes he drove very badly. Yes it was his fault. Nobody is denying he got it wrong, nobody is saying it wasn't his fault, nobody is saying it's the roads fault.

What we are trying to focus on is WHY he got it wrong. That does not constitute making excuses or saying the court made the wrong decision. Can you really not see the benefits in trying to find out why someone made the mistake/s they did?

A few months back a friend of a friend was killed when his aircraft flew into a mountain in poor visibility. There was no question that it was the pilot's fault. Yet there was still discussion of why it happened. Was it a navigation error? An altimeter setting error? Was setting off in those conditions a mistake in itself? Because it's by such analysis others can avoid the same mistake. Nobody said 'it was his fault so any further discussion constitutes making excuses', or accused anyone of blaming the mountain or the weather.

Fastdruid

6,819 posts

110 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
TheDukeofBork said:
No-one pleads guilty to DD if they think a jury might reduce to DWDCA.
Again, if the evidence is such that the action is indefensible people get the advice that they should plead guilty to the charge. That does not mean the charge is correct.

He plead guilty, We don't know what kind of advice he was given, he may not have taken advice, may have been given poor advice or just felt that he was guilty regardless.

echazfraz

567 posts

105 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
Dont like rolls said:
Speed is not the only factor here, re compliant suspension.

You raising the Audi R8 confirms you do not understand.....that is my point. Cars like this and the A8 do this, it is why a French farmer in a 206 TD can be impossible to catch.

Nor am I defending him....I am making no comment on danger.
This thread's become a bit confusing because there's now another video where a man with some radios and a yellow vest drives an R8 around the same corner and makes some observations about the environment that led to the crash, including doing some physics and making some assumptions / claims.

That's why an R8 is being referenced in some of the comments recently - confused me a bit too.

triathlonstu

142 posts

107 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
WinstonWolf said:
You're not competent if you don't understand what the limit point is and how it tells you what's happening ahead. It's a very basic and useful tool.
Someone should tell the DVLA

jsf

19,331 posts

194 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
DCCD apportions torque, the driver had lifted and then braked, DCCD would therefore have no effect! Dynamic Stability control that uses the brakes to modify the vehicle yaw gain could have helped the car turn, but only if the driver had turned the handwheel and the tyres had grip, neither of which looked to be the case.
Thats not correct, DCCD is actively controlled under braking, if ABS triggers it unlocks to 5% clamping load to enable pulsed braking without damaging the centre diff.

Compared to a conventional vicous coupling centre diff, it runs more free at low clamp rates under braking, so induces less understeer.

The brake system also uses a G sensor shared with the DCCD to actively control the front to rear brake bias so you dont get the rear wheels locking and triggering the ABS system.

heebeegeetee

27,053 posts

206 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
I've posted on the YT comments so I may as well put it here :-)
What the video hasn't explained (and may in part 2) is how countless motorists negotiate the bend without a problem, indeed as happens in the video. Due to the crest a driver has no view of the road ahead, there is no road visible in the distance, so clearly the road deviates. This driver has only reduced speed by 2mph when he's on top of the bend, far too late. The investigation is very impressive and it's a very good video, but I think the driver was on his phone or was totally distracted. He's caught completely unawares, he doesn't even brake until he's gone round the corner. Also, irrespective of the road surface immediately before, the whole area is full of bends and surfaces like this one, I dare say it is precisely the challenging nature of the road that has taken this driver out there, and he's already driven on such surfaces. I too have gone into the Peaks, specifically to drive in such 'challenging' circumstances and enjoy such fabulous scenery, over many years, it's what car enthusiasts do. It's a country road, country roads are like that, the vast majority are national speed limit, even the tiny, tiny single tack lanes that twist and wind. You can't do 60, the speed limit is irrelevant.

I've only just come across this thread and this incident though so I may have missed something, but at the moment I still think the guy totally wasn't looking where he was going, and it's a simple as that. The next thing to consider for me, is if such bad driving, with such bad consequences, deserves a sentence as light as 16 months, and my answer is I don't know. scratchchin



Sa Calobra

29,790 posts

169 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
warch said:
That car washed out horribly, 4wd road cars are prone to doing that, especially with an unskilled driver at the wheel. Biker's worst nightmare that, he had absolutely nowhere to go and no time to react even if he did.

One thing that is a problem these days is some drivers drive on the centre line or other side of the road to carry more speed through corners or to avoid potholes. Fair enough with decent visibilty but lethal if not. I nearly had a similar accident last year on my bike with an articulated lorry occupying most of my lane. Nerve shaking at best.
I've owned four Subarus. Sadly anyone can buy a car with bhp.

There should be a rated driving licence with different levels for power etc.

The driver of ^ car just doesn't know how to drive.

blade7

9,688 posts

174 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
Looks like a slow in, fast out corner to me. Driver ran out of talent very early.

jsf

19,331 posts

194 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
Sa Calobra said:
I've owned four Subarus. Sadly anyone can buy a car with bhp.

There should be a rated driving licence with different levels for power etc.

The driver of ^ car just doesn't know how to drive.
Power was not a factor in this crash, the car was cruising at a steady speed that any old tin box could achieve.

Gad-Westy

10,554 posts

171 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
I found the video interesting and quite informative but found the elevation stuff very questionable. The diagram represented a road that immediately goes from horizontal to 10 degrees downward. That's simply not realistic. There will be a gradual change so although a very small amount of unloading might be involved, I think it's a bit of a stretch to suggest grip is halved. And further, looking at the road it doesn't look anything like 10 degrees anyway.

janesmith1950

8,528 posts

53 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
It's pretty simple. A careful and competent driver wouldn't be spat across the road in clear, dry conditions by small changes in road surface, camber or elevation. They wouldn't be travelling fast enough for it to matter. They also wouldn't miss that the road ahead had disappeared out of view and would have slowed to an appropriate speed.

The guy here inexplicably crossed into the opposing lane when he shouldn't and had no need to.

You don't need a physics degree or Youtuber in hi-viz to understand.

It was 100% the driver's fault.

Dr Jekyll

20,406 posts

219 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
janesmith1950 said:
It's pretty simple. A careful and competent driver wouldn't be spat off the road in clear, dry conditions by small changes in road surface, camber or elevation. They wouldn't be travelling fast enough for it to matter. They also wouldn't miss that the road ahead had disappeared out of view and would have slowed to an appropriate speed.

The guy here inexplicably crossed into the opposing lane when he shouldn't and had no need to.

You don't need a physics degree or Youtuber in hi-viz to understand.

It was 100% the driver's fault.

The question of whose fault it was is indeed perfectly simple, blindingly obvious in fact.

The question of WHY he got things so wrong is what we are interested in.

janesmith1950

8,528 posts

53 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
Dr Jekyll said:

The question of whose fault it was is indeed perfectly simple, blindingly obvious in fact.

The question of WHY he got things so wrong is what we are interested in.
Unless you do the obvious, ask the driver, you may as well suppose it was aliens or demonic possession.

The Police will have undertaken an exhaustive physical and scientific examination of the scene at the time and neither this nor the driver seem to have offered a reasonable explanation other than gross driver error.

xjay1337

15,966 posts

76 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
janesmith1950 said:
It's pretty simple. A careful and competent driver wouldn't be spat across the road in clear, dry conditions by small changes in road surface, camber or elevation. They wouldn't be travelling fast enough for it to matter. They also wouldn't miss that the road ahead had disappeared out of view and would have slowed to an appropriate speed.

The guy here inexplicably crossed into the opposing lane when he shouldn't and had no need to.

You don't need a physics degree or Youtuber in hi-viz to understand.

It was 100% the driver's fault.
It's not a "small change" in elevation. It dropped 2 Meters in a small space of time.

I don't think anyone is debating the fact the driver was at fault.
We are not looking to EXCUSE THE DRIVER

We are looking into surrounding reasons....

kiseca

8,277 posts

177 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
A sobering incident to reflect on. It demonstrates how unusual driving is in our daily lives; a momentary lapse of judgement can permanently injure or kill someone and land you in jail. I can't think of anything else that most of us do that has this fleeting tipping point between normality and disaster. If I place a ladder incorrectly and fall off it, or someone else does, that placement is something I have as much time as I like to think about before I use the ladder. Similarly, if I'm using power tools incorrectly, I've got as much time as I like to think about how dangerous what I'm doing is; it's a clear mistake with time to reflect. With driving, all it takes is a split second lapse, and together with other coincidences, such as the biker being at that exact point in the road, our lapse of judgement occurring on a dangerous corner, etc, and we have an accident like this one. Scary.
I agree with this. I do think that one of the problems with driving, and feeling safe in a car, is the distortion of perspective a driver has. You don't realise how quickly your situation is changing, all the time, until something unexpected turns up.

You're driving along a road like that one before the corner, good weather, straight lines and good visibility in all directions. You're doing 60mph. Not speeding. To most of us on here that will feel safe to the point of boring. The problem is, if anything happens that makes you change course, whether it's to avoid something you somehow hadn't seen, or a mechanical failure, or whatever, only then will you realise how quickly at 60mph you will run out of road and are taking your chances in the fields.

I've seen a video of some unfortunate fool tooling down a motorway in, I assume the USA because the car they were in, and many of the cars around them, were American cars. They were in a line of steady flowing traffic, boring motorway miles. Relaxed with one hand only on the wheel, and that hand was palm down, inside the rim, holding the bottom of the rim. They weren't exactly tailgating but were closer than 2 second gap. Maybe 50mph. When it went wrong, with no signs visible through the rather low resolution recording, the traffic in front of the driver pretty much stopped dead because they were hitting the cars in front. They were stopping faster than any brakes can. Driver had room to go left or right, but their stty hand positioning gave them only about 60 degrees of possible steering input either way. It wasn't enough. And the situation went from dead boring to have-to-act-now so fast they didn't even have time to move their hands to a proper position. So they crashed at an angle and rolled down an embankment.

Or, for another point of view, drive at 70mph on a private, well sighted, straight road. Have an accomplice standing at the side of the road, and when you pass that person, brake as hard as you can. Be impressed with how quickly and in what a short distance the car feels like it stops, from the driver's seat. Then swap places with the accomplice, so they're driving and you're the roadside observer, and realise the reality of a) how fast 70mph is, and b) how far past you the car has gone before it stops. Or better still, use a cone as the braking marker, and then walk down the road and stand at the point where you think the car will stop. For nearly everyone, do it at 30mph and the car will stop long before it reaches you. Do it at 70mph, (obv stand further away from the cone...) and the car will sail past you still travelling surprisingly quickly.


Edited by kiseca on Thursday 26th March 18:11

MDMA .

5,781 posts

59 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
The driver of the Legacy behind managed the same corner without issue. Both travelling around the same speed. I don't agree with latest Youtube/Walt video.

Dont like rolls

3,798 posts

12 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
MDMA . said:
The driver of the Legacy behind managed the same corner without issue. Both travelling around the same speed. I don't agree with latest Youtube/Walt video.
There are clear reasons it made it and the other one did not....

Sa Calobra

29,790 posts

169 months

Thursday 26th March
quotequote all
Didn't something similar happen to 10penceshort?

Overcooked the bend into an incoming motorcyclist.