Friday 25th August 2006

Weekend driving advice abounds

But don't let it stress you out

---

Be happy, don't worry

Prompted by the impending Bank Holiday weekend, insurance companies and other groups are falling over themselves this week to give you advice about how to drive, thanks to surveys and internal data. Although the advice is well-intended and much of it is sound stuff, there's enough of it to stress you out.

From motorinsurance.co.uk comes the startling news that the biggest threat to your safety may come from front seat passengers, who grab the wheel, indicator stalks, and whose feet twitch uncontrollably as you miss the braking zone. And most of us (62 per cent) of the 500 people polled say they were not comfortable being driven by someone else. Over a third (39 per cent) of passengers worry so much that they cannot sleep while being driven.

There was yesterday's news from Kia which suggested that those who drive together will argue.

The What Car magazine surveyed motorists and found that 20 per cent don't wear seat belts, which have proved to be the best life savers on the road since whenever. According to What car: "It is estimated that seatbelts save seven lives every day in the UK."

And even if you've got your belt on, you mustn't eat because, according to a "startling" new study from Privilege Insurance, eating or drinking at the wheel "dramatically increases the risk of a car crash". It finds that tests reveal that drivers are almost twice as likely to crash when eating or drinking as when driving normally. And although drivers try to compensate for eating and drinking by driving more slowly and carefully, they are often unable to brake in enough time to avoid a collision. Privilege’s study found that drivers’ mental workload was significantly higher when eating or drinking.

Various organisations are insisting that you remember to check your oil, water and tyre pressures, listen to traffic announcements for congestion warnings.

And finally, again from Privilege, comes the topping on the cake: don't look at the scenery. The company advises drivers to enjoy the sights along the way without taking risks when behind the wheel, prompted by another survey whose findings are that "drivers admit to putting themselves and their passengers at risk by losing concentration at the wheel in order to take in the nation’s famous sights".

And oddly, in the middle of Privilege's press release talking about what sort of person is most distracted by the sight of hills, comes this non sequitur: "But while checking out the local countryside may seem harmless, approximately 16,000 people are killed or seriously injured on the UK’s rural roads each year. Earlier this month, the Government announced a major overhaul of road speed limits in an attempt to cut casualty rates -- especially on rural routes. 74 per cent of drivers believe the current speed limit is too high for some or all country roads."

Why breaking a speed limit has anything to do with not watching the road is anyone's guess...

Enjoy your weekend, be safe -- and try not to worry too much.

[timberwolf]

Privilege Survey said:

74 per cent of drivers believe the current speed limit is too high for some or all country roads.

Do you think the speed limit on country roads is too high?
( ) - No, not on any roads
( ) - On some roads
( ) - On all roads

Lies, damn lies, and statistics, eh?

Edited by timberwolf on Friday 25th August 12:34

[renny]

All we can do is hope all the morons that pay attention to such drivel and propoganda are so frightened that they stay at home.

[alhuyshe]

renny said:

All we can do is hope all the morons that pay attention to such drivel and propoganda are so frightened that they stay at home.

And we can challenge some of these stunning statistics. "It finds that tests reveal that drivers are almost twice as likely to crash when eating or drinking as when driving normally."

What tests? Who by? Who paid for them? What was the procedure? What is meant by 'driving normally'?

All this pseudo science parading as fact.....

[b10brw]

What a load of complete Tosh.
This Government is comprised of complete idiots, many of them don't even drive.

[oppressed mass]

They also negletcted to mention a key piece of advice about not driving with a bag over your head

[jamesrgore]

In answer to allhuyshe's question about our research on eating and drinking at the wheel, it was carried out by Dr Mark Young from Brunel University's School of Engineering Design, using the University's driving simulator. You can find out more details on Brunel's web site - www.brunel.ac.uk/news/pressoffice/cdata/eating+and+drinking. We don't just make these things up!

I appreciate the frustration felt over the barrage of advice around at the moment, but would have thought most people would admit that (a) they have snacked while driving, and that (b) it does impact on their driving ability. So we still need to get the message across.

James Gore
Privilege Insurance

[Philbes]

Perhaps it should be pointed out to these that think that the current speed limits on some rual roads are too high that the speed limit is a maximum not a target - they can drive at less than the speed limit if they wish.

At a recent IAM meeting a member suggested that the speed limit on a certain local road should be reduced as "it's not possible to drive around all the corners at the current limit"!!!

[Timberwolf]

Philbes said:

At a recent IAM meeting a member suggested that the speed limit on a certain local road should be reduced as "it's not possible to drive around all the corners at the current limit"!!!

For roads like these, I'm a great advocate of leaving the national speed limit untouched and making use of additional limit signage on the corners - "Sharp Bend 20MPH maximum", as these seem in my experience to work quite well at reducing the speed of drivers whose assessment of the corner might otherwise be excessively optimistic. We do have a normal "sharp bend" sign, but I don't think it gets as much attention as the big boards with speeds up on them.

There are actually a couple of roads locally where I don't think the visibility supports 60 mile per hour driving anywhere along the route at any time, even though it may be physically possible. (Single lane, filthy, broken road surface, high banks, thick hedges, crests, dips and agricultural traffic.)

Here I'd like to see the limit lowered - as vonhosen often implies, a reduced limit does reduce the chance of a numpty flying into the back of a tractor, or worse still meeting you head-on with speedo pegged on 60.

That is a limited case applied to maybe 1-2% of roads. I have tremendous objection to the tinkering of speed limits elsewhere, especially when the road easily affords higher speed. I find it especially frustrating as I'd like to use the presence of a reduced limit to determine that there may be additional, unexpected hazards on that stretch of road; every "pointless" limit reduction erodes the informational value of a speed sign.

Now here's a thing, while we're playing with simulators.

Ditch the sandwich-eating experiments, and set up this. A stretch of road with a motorway, a dual-carriageway, a stretch of rural B-road with some dangerous corners, and a couple of villages. Set up a third of the experiments with typical British limits, a third with reduced limits all around, and the final third with no (!) limits on the fast roads but severely reduced limits in the town.

Then get people to drive the stretch. Although not a "real" situation, I'd be interested to see what the road speeds, compliance and accident rate are for each configuration.

[cptsideways]

jamesrgore said:

In answer to allhuyshe's question about our research on eating and drinking at the wheel, it was carried out by Dr Mark Young from Brunel University's School of Engineering Design, using the University's driving simulator. You can find out more details on Brunel's web site - www.brunel.ac.uk/news/pressoffice/cdata/eating+and+drinking. We don't just make these things up!

I appreciate the frustration felt over the barrage of advice around at the moment, but would have thought most people would admit that (a) they have snacked while driving, and that (b) it does impact on their driving ability. So we still need to get the message across.

James Gore
Privilege Insurance

Perhaps those drivers who can't multitask should'nt be allowed on the road, think about it! most can't anticipate what happens at a motorway slip road or a junction ahead & only react to what happens in front of them, god knows what they'd be like with more than two tasks on the go

About time you lot started putting out some proper messages, like explaining what signposts & white lines in the road actually mean & whats likely to happen & what to possibly do as they approach them. Most drivers can recite what the signs are but have no idea what it actually means or what they should do about it.

It's a bit like "mirror signal moanouver" most drivers have no idea what they're looking for in the mirror or why they're indicating in the first place! Their answer would be because I'm turning right, when in fact it should be to allow the following car to slow down, increase its gap & not shunt them up the ass.

If you'd like some words to post about I'd be more than able to oblige

[uksleeper]

two tasks at once???
like breathing AND thinking!?! Good god.....

[alhuyshe]

cptsideways said:

jamesrgore said:

In answer to allhuyshe's question about our research on eating and drinking at the wheel, it was carried out by Dr Mark Young from Brunel University's School of Engineering Design, using the University's driving simulator. You can find out more details on Brunel's web site - www.brunel.ac.uk/news/pressoffice/cdata/eating+and+drinking. We don't just make these things up!

I appreciate the frustration felt over the barrage of advice around at the moment, but would have thought most people would admit that (a) they have snacked while driving, and that (b) it does impact on their driving ability. So we still need to get the message across.

James Gore
Privilege Insurance

About time you lot started putting out some proper messages, like explaining what signposts & white lines in the road actually mean & whats likely to happen & what to possibly do as they approach them. Most drivers can recite what the signs are but have no idea what it actually means or what they should do about it.

It's a bit like "mirror signal moanouver" most drivers have no idea what they're looking for in the mirror or why they're indicating in the first place! Their answer would be because I'm turning right, when in fact it should be to allow the following car to slow down, increase its gap & not shunt them up the ass.

Thanks, James, for your reply. However, the link you posted comes up as 'unavailable'.....

....and frankly, it's immaterial, though I would like a look sometime. What concerns me much more is the attitude I see pervading 'road safety experts' these days. You write that most drivers admit to having snacked whilst driving, and that it does impact on their driving ability. I'd agree wholeheartedly with you on this. My problem comes with the conclusions you draw from these somewhat obvious facts. You write, "So we still need to get the message across."

WHY?? You cannot legislate safety. It is about awareness, not rules.

Lots of things impact on my driving. Sneezing is probably the worst. Or would it be having an argument? Sunshine can affect things, as of course can rain, along with windscreen wipers, washer fluid, time since last wash. Oh, the list is endless. WHY OH WHY do we need a stream of panic fueled advice on what to do and what not to do whilst driving, backed up with ridiculous legislation? Did I hear right? Did someone really get fined for eating an apple whilst driving? (I believe they used a helicopter to photograph her.....)

'Sideways' goes on to talk about EDUCATION. This surely is the point. In this country we USED TO HAVE a marvelous system of corner and other hazard warnings. All in the white lines, from short to long to solid. Sadly that's fast disappearing as local 'road safety experts' inflict their own interpretations on what is and isn't safe. Other members have talked about speed advisory signs, speed limits for corners, etc. What frustrates me is that modern day drivers are being taught NOT to think, and not to learn. No wonder our accident rates have got so much worse in the last ten years.

BAD DRIVING IS DANGEROUS. That doesn't mean fast driving, or driving whilst eating, on the phone, or bursting for a pee. There are some circumstances in which it is quite possible to drive completely safely whilst holding a phone to your ear. Just because we all see many people every day almost causing accidents by doing so whilst also negotiating street corners, changing gear and adjusting their make up/lighting a fag while not indicating doesn't mean it's talking on the phone that's the problem. Driving on an empty dual carriageway for many miles with nothing to do physically other than occasionally use indicators, it can be quite safe to hold a phone to one's ear. And everyone knows that, which is why th elaw doesn't work. It has no respect. What counts is our ability to assess for ourselves when it becomes unsafe, when the conversation becomes distracting (as it could with a passenger) or when more use is requred of one's hands. In the later case it's simple...just drop the phone.

Same with sandwichs, or apples. JUST PUT IT DOWN!!

A logical progression of the 'it affects my driving so therefore it isn't safe' argument will have us all driving in cars without passengers (especially children) wearing full safety harness's in auto cars. I mean, manual gear boxes are SO UNSAFE, aren't they? YOU HAVE TO TAKE A HAND OFF THE WHEEL TO CHANGE GEAR!!!!!!!

Let's get off this 'what people should and shouldn't do whilst driving' fiasco. Let's encourage people to understand that passing their test IS THE BEGINNING of their learning experience. Let's have more testing as the years go on with several levels of 'advanced driving'. Let's have road planners and road safety legislators aware that DRIVERS ATTENTION/INTEREST is paramount in road safety.

The straighter(safer) the roads get, the better handling (safer) the cars get, the faster the goods vehicles get and the slower (safer) the small vehicles get, the better the crash protection, tyres, brakes, high level brake lights, slower speed limits. It all makes so much sense, until you try it out, that is.

Reality is different, which is why the figures show so clearly that current Dep of Trans policy DOES NOT WORK/KILLS PEOPLE.

IT TERRIFIES ME, sometimes, just how little attention people pay, and how little skill they have. In thirty five years of driving in excess of 30,000 miles a year I have seen so many skills almost completely lost.

As a pedestrian I learned to pay attention to where I was walking whilst studying for a year in India. There, telephone engineers open up manholes in the pavement and go off for lunch, with no protection/warnings whatsoever around the deep hole waiting for the unsuspecting to fall into. You soon learn to wake up and watch where you're going!! I'm not suggesting that all 'safety' rules/improvements are dangerous. Just that we need to strike a balance between 'safety' and awareness/skill levels.

As the yanks used to say, 55mph is slow enough to feel safe, but fast enough to kill you.

We seriously need to get back to some education of our drivers. We've made it socially unacceptable to drink and drive. Why on earth can't we make it socially unnacceptable to drive too close? Change lanes without indicating? Drive in the middle lane whilst not overtaking? Look at our passengers? Not go for further driving tuition every five years or so? Not check our tyre pressures? Not learn how to use the demister?

And let's get our traffic moving at DIFFERENT speeds again, TEACH people how to overtake ( a monoevre that involves changing gear, and often, to do it safely, exceeding the speed limit.....).

Let's get our sleeping drivers awake again. And stop wasting money on research that proves what we all already know, and then draws irrelvant and misleading conclusions from the data gathered.

[V8 Archie]

timberwolf said:

Privilege Survey said:

74 per cent of drivers believe the current speed limit is too high for some or all country roads.

Do you think the speed limit on country roads is too high?
( ) - No, not on any roads
( ) - On a few roads
( ) - On most roads
( ) - On all roads

Then you'd get about 75% if you asked a bunch of chimpanzees.

...

Edited by V8 Archie on Friday 25th August 18:45

[deadlym]

jamesrgore said:

In answer to allhuyshe's question about our research on eating and drinking at the wheel, it was carried out by Dr Mark Young from Brunel University's School of Engineering Design, using the University's driving simulator. You can find out more details on Brunel's web site - www.brunel.ac.uk/news/pressoffice/cdata/eating+and+drinking. We don't just make these things up!

I appreciate the frustration felt over the barrage of advice around at the moment, but would have thought most people would admit that (a) they have snacked while driving, and that (b) it does impact on their driving ability. So we still need to get the message across.

James Gore
Privilege Insurance

Unfortunately I've seen this "simulator" on the news on TV, and it looks more like the late-80s game Hard Drivin' than real life and is, in my opinion, worthless and so is any research involving it.

[bdeng66]

alhuyshe said:

cptsideways said:

jamesrgore said:

In answer to allhuyshe's question about our research on eating and drinking at the wheel, it was carried out by Dr Mark Young from Brunel University's School of Engineering Design, using the University's driving simulator. You can find out more details on Brunel's web site - www.brunel.ac.uk/news/pressoffice/cdata/eating+and+drinking. We don't just make these things up!

I appreciate the frustration felt over the barrage of advice around at the moment, but would have thought most people would admit that (a) they have snacked while driving, and that (b) it does impact on their driving ability. So we still need to get the message across.

James Gore
Privilege Insurance

About time you lot started putting out some proper messages, like explaining what signposts & white lines in the road actually mean & whats likely to happen & what to possibly do as they approach them. Most drivers can recite what the signs are but have no idea what it actually means or what they should do about it.

It's a bit like "mirror signal moanouver" most drivers have no idea what they're looking for in the mirror or why they're indicating in the first place! Their answer would be because I'm turning right, when in fact it should be to allow the following car to slow down, increase its gap & not shunt them up the ass.

Thanks, James, for your reply. However, the link you posted comes up as 'unavailable'.....

....and frankly, it's immaterial, though I would like a look sometime. What concerns me much more is the attitude I see pervading 'road safety experts' these days. You write that most drivers admit to having snacked whilst driving, and that it does impact on their driving ability. I'd agree wholeheartedly with you on this. My problem comes with the conclusions you draw from these somewhat obvious facts. You write, "So we still need to get the message across."

WHY?? You cannot legislate safety. It is about awareness, not rules.

Lots of things impact on my driving. Sneezing is probably the worst. Or would it be having an argument? Sunshine can affect things, as of course can rain, along with windscreen wipers, washer fluid, time since last wash. Oh, the list is endless. WHY OH WHY do we need a stream of panic fueled advice on what to do and what not to do whilst driving, backed up with ridiculous legislation? Did I hear right? Did someone really get fined for eating an apple whilst driving? (I believe they used a helicopter to photograph her.....)

'Sideways' goes on to talk about EDUCATION. This surely is the point. In this country we USED TO HAVE a marvelous system of corner and other hazard warnings. All in the white lines, from short to long to solid. Sadly that's fast disappearing as local 'road safety experts' inflict their own interpretations on what is and isn't safe. Other members have talked about speed advisory signs, speed limits for corners, etc. What frustrates me is that modern day drivers are being taught NOT to think, and not to learn. No wonder our accident rates have got so much worse in the last ten years.

BAD DRIVING IS DANGEROUS. That doesn't mean fast driving, or driving whilst eating, on the phone, or bursting for a pee. There are some circumstances in which it is quite possible to drive completely safely whilst holding a phone to your ear. Just because we all see many people every day almost causing accidents by doing so whilst also negotiating street corners, changing gear and adjusting their make up/lighting a fag while not indicating doesn't mean it's talking on the phone that's the problem. Driving on an empty dual carriageway for many miles with nothing to do physically other than occasionally use indicators, it can be quite safe to hold a phone to one's ear. And everyone knows that, which is why th elaw doesn't work. It has no respect. What counts is our ability to assess for ourselves when it becomes unsafe, when the conversation becomes distracting (as it could with a passenger) or when more use is requred of one's hands. In the later case it's simple...just drop the phone.

Same with sandwichs, or apples. JUST PUT IT DOWN!!

A logical progression of the 'it affects my driving so therefore it isn't safe' argument will have us all driving in cars without passengers (especially children) wearing full safety harness's in auto cars. I mean, manual gear boxes are SO UNSAFE, aren't they? YOU HAVE TO TAKE A HAND OFF THE WHEEL TO CHANGE GEAR!!!!!!!

Let's get off this 'what people should and shouldn't do whilst driving' fiasco. Let's encourage people to understand that passing their test IS THE BEGINNING of their learning experience. Let's have more testing as the years go on with several levels of 'advanced driving'. Let's have road planners and road safety legislators aware that DRIVERS ATTENTION/INTEREST is paramount in road safety.

The straighter(safer) the roads get, the better handling (safer) the cars get, the faster the goods vehicles get and the slower (safer) the small vehicles get, the better the crash protection, tyres, brakes, high level brake lights, slower speed limits. It all makes so much sense, until you try it out, that is.

Reality is different, which is why the figures show so clearly that current Dep of Trans policy DOES NOT WORK/KILLS PEOPLE.

IT TERRIFIES ME, sometimes, just how little attention people pay, and how little skill they have. In thirty five years of driving in excess of 30,000 miles a year I have seen so many skills almost completely lost.

As a pedestrian I learned to pay attention to where I was walking whilst studying for a year in India. There, telephone engineers open up manholes in the pavement and go off for lunch, with no protection/warnings whatsoever around the deep hole waiting for the unsuspecting to fall into. You soon learn to wake up and watch where you're going!! I'm not suggesting that all 'safety' rules/improvements are dangerous. Just that we need to strike a balance between 'safety' and awareness/skill levels.

As the yanks used to say, 55mph is slow enough to feel safe, but fast enough to kill you.

We seriously need to get back to some education of our drivers. We've made it socially unacceptable to drink and drive. Why on earth can't we make it socially unnacceptable to drive too close? Change lanes without indicating? Drive in the middle lane whilst not overtaking? Look at our passengers? Not go for further driving tuition every five years or so? Not check our tyre pressures? Not learn how to use the demister?

And let's get our traffic moving at DIFFERENT speeds again, TEACH people how to overtake ( a monoevre that involves changing gear, and often, to do it safely, exceeding the speed limit.....).

Let's get our sleeping drivers awake again. And stop wasting money on research that proves what we all already know, and then draws irrelvant and misleading conclusions from the data gathered.

I applaud your response it sums up how I feel everyday, stuck behind people who seem drugged to the eyeballs travelling at 25 mph in a 30 or 40 and if you're lucky 40 on an unrestricted single carriageway, completely unaware of what's going on around them, what's going on?

Marx misquoted when he said that religion was the opium of the masses, its actually current road policy.

Edited by bdeng66 on Tuesday 29th August 11:13

[Don]

Philbes said:

At a recent IAM meeting a member suggested that the speed limit on a certain local road should be reduced as "it's not possible to drive around all the corners at the current limit"!!!

AaAaaaaaaAAaaaaaaaAAAAArrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggghhhhhhhhhh!

[Philbes]

Don said:

Philbes said:

At a recent IAM meeting a member suggested that the speed limit on a certain local road should be reduced as "it's not possible to drive around all the corners at the current limit"!!!

AaAaaaaaaAAaaaaaaaAAAAArrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggghhhhhhhhhh!




Even worse, other members were nodding their heads in agreement.
A quick check found no record of any accident on that road, so drivers do seem able to moderate their speed by observation.

[derfpeterman]

www.thecarbib.com
FOR WHAT YOU DON'T WANT ON YOUR LAP!