The "S**t Driving Caught On Cam" Thread (Vol 6)
Discussion
Hackney said:
Ron240 said:
The world would be a lot better if everyone could assume most Dash Cam Videos are about a mistake rather than deliberate.
Ron240 said:
Bonefish Blues said:
@17.36 Compilation
Why didn't you just quote the post so that people wouldn't need to scroll back to the previous page to find it by looking at time stamps? 
Tell me where you are and I'll pop round and search it for you
Ron240 said:
Alex N at 5:30 there is normally signs up at sections like this indicating who has priority, but I couldnt see any. If there is no priority then Alex N was in the wrong and should have waited his turn.
Paige at 9:20, that was unbelievably bad driving by the black Corsa! Coming back onto the main road without looking was bad enough, but to then go straight over to the outside lane really takes the cake! I hate to say this but that Corsa deserved to get rammed up the arse by the large vehicle.
Its ok though, a quick flash of the hazards and all is forgiven.
Ron240 said:
Hackney said:
As others have mentioned I find it incredible the camera car didn't stop.
But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
This assumes that the cam car was looking in their rear view mirror watching the situation unfold. For one thing they wouldn't have been expecting anybody stupid enough to overtake them at that point, and for another we all know that the majority of drivers rarely look in their rear view mirrors.But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
None of us will know what the forward view and spatial awareness of the cam car driver was at precise moment, but I think it is wrong to apportion any blame at all to the cam car driver.
Edited by Ron240 on Sunday 19th June 17:49
The view the driver of the van had before the overtake was blind and it would have been for some time.
It's a straight road with 3 dips. As you drive along approaching the crest of the hill you are climbing, the road dips over the crest and descends, however as you climb up its impossible to see what's coming the other way for at least half a mile. I always slow approaching the crest as there is always a chance that a car could be overtaking a cyclist etc.
He might as well have driven with his eyes closed. There is only one safe place to overtake, and that's after the third crest where you can see a mile ahead along a straight road.
knitware said:
Ron240 said:
Hackney said:
As others have mentioned I find it incredible the camera car didn't stop.
But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
This assumes that the cam car was looking in their rear view mirror watching the situation unfold. For one thing they wouldn't have been expecting anybody stupid enough to overtake them at that point, and for another we all know that the majority of drivers rarely look in their rear view mirrors.But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
None of us will know what the forward view and spatial awareness of the cam car driver was at precise moment, but I think it is wrong to apportion any blame at all to the cam car driver.
The view the driver of the van had before the overtake was blind and it would have been for some time.
It's a straight road with 3 dips. As you drive along approaching the crest of the hill you are climbing, the road dips over the crest and descends, however as you climb up its impossible to see what's coming the other way for at least half a mile. I always slow approaching the crest as there is always a chance that a car could be overtaking a cyclist etc.
He might as well have driven with his eyes closed. There is only one safe place to overtake, and that's after the third crest where you can see a mile ahead along a straight road.
Ron240 said:
Hackney said:
As others have mentioned I find it incredible the camera car didn't stop.
But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
This assumes that the cam car was looking in their rear view mirror watching the situation unfold. For one thing they wouldn't have been expecting anybody stupid enough to overtake them at that point, and for another we all know that the majority of drivers rarely look in their rear view mirrors.But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
None of us will know what the forward view and spatial awareness of the cam car driver was at precise moment, but I think it is wrong to apportion any blame at all to the cam car driver.
Edited by Ron240 on Sunday 19th June 17:49
saaby93 said:
knitware said:
Ron240 said:
Hackney said:
As others have mentioned I find it incredible the camera car didn't stop.
But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
This assumes that the cam car was looking in their rear view mirror watching the situation unfold. For one thing they wouldn't have been expecting anybody stupid enough to overtake them at that point, and for another we all know that the majority of drivers rarely look in their rear view mirrors.But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
None of us will know what the forward view and spatial awareness of the cam car driver was at precise moment, but I think it is wrong to apportion any blame at all to the cam car driver.
The view the driver of the van had before the overtake was blind and it would have been for some time.
It's a straight road with 3 dips. As you drive along approaching the crest of the hill you are climbing, the road dips over the crest and descends, however as you climb up its impossible to see what's coming the other way for at least half a mile. I always slow approaching the crest as there is always a chance that a car could be overtaking a cyclist etc.
He might as well have driven with his eyes closed. There is only one safe place to overtake, and that's after the third crest where you can see a mile ahead along a straight road.
It's quite hard to visualise without driving on this road but, for most, the hazard would be quite obvious, you cannot see what's coming, which isn't a problem if you don't overtake until you're sure it's safe.
knitware said:
Really good point. I'm not sure, would solid lines be painted if there are unseen dangers ahead, junction, giveway or other hazards? My only thought is that the danger is quite clear negating the need to lable the point.
It's quite hard to visualise without driving on this road but, for most, the hazard would be quite obvious, you cannot see what's coming, which isn't a problem if you don't overtake until you're sure it's safe.
Given how many roads around here are continuous solid lines for no apparent reason, it's a surprising one that there aren't any where there's actually been an accident as bad as that.It's quite hard to visualise without driving on this road but, for most, the hazard would be quite obvious, you cannot see what's coming, which isn't a problem if you don't overtake until you're sure it's safe.
knitware said:
saaby93 said:
knitware said:
Ron240 said:
Hackney said:
As others have mentioned I find it incredible the camera car didn't stop.
But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
This assumes that the cam car was looking in their rear view mirror watching the situation unfold. For one thing they wouldn't have been expecting anybody stupid enough to overtake them at that point, and for another we all know that the majority of drivers rarely look in their rear view mirrors.But also incredible that they didn't seem to take any evasive action at all when they must've seen the over-taking van and the car approaching. Hard on the brakes and give them space to pull in? Was visibility that bad?
I just don't understand it.
None of us will know what the forward view and spatial awareness of the cam car driver was at precise moment, but I think it is wrong to apportion any blame at all to the cam car driver.
The view the driver of the van had before the overtake was blind and it would have been for some time.
It's a straight road with 3 dips. As you drive along approaching the crest of the hill you are climbing, the road dips over the crest and descends, however as you climb up its impossible to see what's coming the other way for at least half a mile. I always slow approaching the crest as there is always a chance that a car could be overtaking a cyclist etc.
He might as well have driven with his eyes closed. There is only one safe place to overtake, and that's after the third crest where you can see a mile ahead along a straight road.
It's quite hard to visualise without driving on this road but, for most, the hazard would be quite obvious, you cannot see what's coming, which isn't a problem if you don't overtake until you're sure it's safe.
havoc said:
Vipers said:
Odd one at 3.54, malfunction or idiot?
Looks empty....oh, you meant the pratt sitting there watching it rather than getting out of harm's way!
bigothunter said:
Motorway guardian in action...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51epGAms9Jc
What are the chances that a UK based video that is over 4 years old hasn't already been discussed on these pages? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51epGAms9Jc
I already know the answer, but if i didn't I would reckon they are very slim.
Ron240 said:
bigothunter said:
Motorway guardian in action...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51epGAms9Jc
What are the chances that a UK based video that is over 4 years old hasn't already been discussed on these pages? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=51epGAms9Jc
I already know the answer, but if i didn't I would reckon they are very slim.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff