Impact Kills - Not Speed !
Discussion
It has been brought to notice through another thread on another Forum, and i have concluded that the main reason that many people die in collisions is the final impact, whether it be another vehicle, street furniture etc.
Any bit of bad driving, coupled with a bit of speed (fast or slow) can result in instant death whenever there is an impact.
Perhaps this should be the new 'Slogan'....after all, the old one is wearing a bit thin now and not many people believe it 100%.
Any bit of bad driving, coupled with a bit of speed (fast or slow) can result in instant death whenever there is an impact.
Perhaps this should be the new 'Slogan'....after all, the old one is wearing a bit thin now and not many people believe it 100%.
Hmm! To an extent this is a bit like saying "cause of death is lack of oxygen to the brain". Yes every death is caused by lack of oxygen - every RTA has an element of impact.
Outlaw was closer to the truth though:
Human error
Mechanical failure
Don't know what the percentages are in the real world, but by far the biggest factor is human error. That's not speed. Speed may be a factor in human error, but is not equivalent to human error.
Outlaw was closer to the truth though:
Human error
Mechanical failure
Don't know what the percentages are in the real world, but by far the biggest factor is human error. That's not speed. Speed may be a factor in human error, but is not equivalent to human error.
Fair point Tony (I've been reading the other thread with alarm), but I can just see it now.....low impact (read low terminal speed) = chance of survival, whereas high impact (read high terminal speed) = low chance of survival, etc.......dunno if there's any way round the terminology really
doh
:/
doh
:/
tonyrec said:
It has been brought to notice through another thread on another Forum, and i have concluded that the main reason that many people die in collisions is the final impact, whether it be another vehicle, street furniture etc.
Any bit of bad driving, coupled with a bit of speed (fast or slow) can result in instant death whenever there is an impact.
Perhaps this should be the new 'Slogan'....after all, the old one is wearing a bit thin now and not many people believe it 100%.
tecnicaly speeding its the opersit of speed that kill.
its the stoping thats the killer
Riding a bike is, a good way too develope good observation skills if one makes it pass a few years riding in one bit.
and gives a better respect for traction and road grip being they only got to wheels to play with.
not colection as many 60 as you can with a cam.
add
skid control to getting a licence. It would save many a crash
teach em to look where the
there going. and teach how to
park in a mulitstory car park PLEASE PLEASE THIS ONE DRIVES ME NUTS and for
sack teach em how to drive on a motorway. and most inportian of all teach em to use there
brain. oh but i for got that cost money it dont make it like speed cams and fines do
>> Edited by outlaw on Monday 10th November 00:00
>> Edited by dazren on Monday 10th November 00:06
Mobility Kills! tonyrec said:
It has been brought to notice through another thread on another Forum, and i have concluded that the main reason that many people die in collisions is the final impact, whether it be another vehicle, street furniture etc.
You'd better be careful Tony, posting dangerous stuff like thst (i.e. the truth) in a public forum may bring the wrath of your superiors down on you.
tonyrec said:
and i have concluded that the main reason that many people die in collisions is the final impact, whether it be another vehicle, street furniture etc.
That truely is ground breaking mate. Newton would have been really over whelmed.
I've read the thread you're talking about though and it was truely horrendous, you've got a point(prob not 6 like me) but it kindda indicates that scameras are not the answer, it seems to lean more towards the fact that more intelligent policing is needed rather than money making schemes. Personally I don't think there is such a thing as intelligent policing as most police officers do not seem to have an opinion of their own, their opinions seem to stem from what a bloke has said sat behind a desk on the 2nd floor.
318ti said:
Yes the impact is the killer, but could you have avoided the impact if going slower and thus allowing more time to react? Or would you be able to stop short of the impact if going slower?
Maybe to both, however I would not expect to require to go slower than the speed limit, unless there were circumstances requiring it. To me, any accident that started with an appropriate speed for the circumstances cannot be caused, primary or secondary cause, by speed.
318ti said:
Yes the impact is the killer, but could you have avoided the impact if going slower and thus allowing more time to react? Or would you be able to stop short of the impact if going slower?
The truth of the matter is that life kills. As soon as we are born we are on borrowed time. The human species is far from perfect - no matter how "safe" you try to make life, we will always find novel and messy ways of doing ourselves in. No number of speed cameras, speed limits or airbags will ever prevent people killing themselves and others in road accidents. No number of anti-smoking adverts will stop people getting lung cancer. The human species is imbued with adventurous spirit - suppressing this will just create criminals, not save lives.
beano500 said:
Hmm! To an extent this is a bit like saying "cause of death is lack of oxygen to the brain". Yes every death is caused by lack of oxygen - every RTA has an element of impact.
Yes, i know what you mean but i was just talking about balance of probability.
When you think about Superbike racers that crash frequently, gladly not many of them die. This is because they rarely hit anything, they slide along on their legs, bum and arms.
As in the case of many Fatal RTAs,someone loses control, whether it be speed or otherwise, but they normally impact with something that doesnt move and it stops them dead (literally)or it deflects them causing serious trauma, damage to the Aorta resulting in the obvious.
When you compare 'Speed Kills' with 'Impact Kills' i just feel that the latter is more appropriate and true in most day to day incidents.
>> Edited by tonyrec on Monday 10th November 08:57
I might take my point a bit further, then.
If your starting point is that "Speed Kills", the answer is to take action to deal with speed. I think we're all agreed that the authorities are persuing this one. We don't like it!
If you change perspective as you are advocating, Tony, and start with the premise that "Impact Kills", the reaction is to design airbags and side protection bars, for bikers someone designs stupid systems to protect legs or suits that blow up on impact!
But when you accept that the vast majority of accidents occur because we are human and make mistakes, then you have "Errors Kill". Now you start looking at the root of the problem. Start considering ways by which you reduce the human error.
Don't throw away crash helmets for bikers and crumple protection zones or street furniture that folds away. Don't throw away systems that monitor and supervise the road user, to stop inappropriate use of speed, jumping red traffic lights and find out why certain road configurations don't work very well.
But put the responsibilities back where they firmly belong. Apart from very few occasions where mechanical failure comes into play, the vast majority of accidents, and therefore deaths, are down to human error. The impact wouldn't happen without the human error; or putting it another way: the error is the cause, the impact is just the effect.
If your starting point is that "Speed Kills", the answer is to take action to deal with speed. I think we're all agreed that the authorities are persuing this one. We don't like it!
If you change perspective as you are advocating, Tony, and start with the premise that "Impact Kills", the reaction is to design airbags and side protection bars, for bikers someone designs stupid systems to protect legs or suits that blow up on impact!
But when you accept that the vast majority of accidents occur because we are human and make mistakes, then you have "Errors Kill". Now you start looking at the root of the problem. Start considering ways by which you reduce the human error.
Don't throw away crash helmets for bikers and crumple protection zones or street furniture that folds away. Don't throw away systems that monitor and supervise the road user, to stop inappropriate use of speed, jumping red traffic lights and find out why certain road configurations don't work very well.
But put the responsibilities back where they firmly belong. Apart from very few occasions where mechanical failure comes into play, the vast majority of accidents, and therefore deaths, are down to human error. The impact wouldn't happen without the human error; or putting it another way: the error is the cause, the impact is just the effect.
beano500 said:
I might take my point a bit further, then.
If your starting point is that "Speed Kills", the answer is to take action to deal with speed. I think we're all agreed that the authorities are persuing this one. We don't like it!
If you change perspective as you are advocating, Tony, and start with the premise that "Impact Kills", the reaction is to design airbags and side protection bars, for bikers someone designs stupid systems to protect legs or suits that blow up on impact!
But when you accept that the vast majority of accidents occur because we are human and make mistakes, then you have "Errors Kill". Now you start looking at the root of the problem. Start considering ways by which you reduce the human error.
Don't throw away crash helmets for bikers and crumple protection zones or street furniture that folds away. Don't throw away systems that monitor and supervise the road user, to stop inappropriate use of speed, jumping red traffic lights and find out why certain road configurations don't work very well.
But put the responsibilities back where they firmly belong. Apart from very few occasions where mechanical failure comes into play, the vast majority of accidents, and therefore deaths, are down to human error. The impact wouldn't happen without the human error; or putting it another way: the error is the cause, the impact is just the effect.
it bing human error bing the main cause ill agre with.
but your answer to the problem I dont.
the answer is simple if you think about.
we have to get away fron dont do this speed do that and you will be safe it is total bolocks.
let make roads easy to drive on that bolocoks.
that will just make the problem worse. the simple fact is the average skill of most drivers on the road is shit and thats a fact.
by letting them think about the it less and less by making more rules and easy roads to drive on stops em thinking and inproving there skill.
take away the silly road marking that tell em to slow for a bend.
take away the speed limet signs and remove all limets from motor ways and nsl
let the driver learn the apropiate speed for there selfs
let them look and learn the corect speed for the bend and there driving skill.
add a day on a track and skid pan to the test.
then they can learn how a car reacts in a a sid and learn to control it if the worst happens on the road there may have a chance to catch it and not hit a
tree. on the track they can learn in a safe inviroment the limets of a car and there limets. and start to get a feel for when a car starts to lose traction and when to back off.
teach em to cane break if the dont have abs.
rules laws fines and rubber road side funiture wont save as many lives as there own brain if they use it.
and face the fact that not everyone can drive.
some pepole cant and are a compleat nightmare proberly because they dont have much in the brain department to start with.
my sisters one she scares there
life out of me it dont mater how much you try to show her. I wont get in a car with unless i drive.
she too thick to understand and should not even be in a car.
know how she even passed a test. the best bit is she pased it years ago and still cant drive for shit. after that just face it theres a milloin and one ways to die in this word and some will die in a car no mater what we do.
beano500 said:
I might take my point a bit further, then.
If your starting point is that "Speed Kills", the answer is to take action to deal with speed. I think we're all agreed that the authorities are persuing this one. We don't like it!
If you change perspective as you are advocating, Tony, and start with the premise that "Impact Kills", the reaction is to design airbags and side protection bars, for bikers someone designs stupid systems to protect legs or suits that blow up on impact!
But when you accept that the vast majority of accidents occur because we are human and make mistakes, then you have "Errors Kill". Now you start looking at the root of the problem. Start considering ways by which you reduce the human error.
Don't throw away crash helmets for bikers and crumple protection zones or street furniture that folds away. Don't throw away systems that monitor and supervise the road user, to stop inappropriate use of speed, jumping red traffic lights and find out why certain road configurations don't work very well.
But put the responsibilities back where they firmly belong. Apart from very few occasions where mechanical failure comes into play, the vast majority of accidents, and therefore deaths, are down to human error. The impact wouldn't happen without the human error; or putting it another way: the error is the cause, the impact is just the effect.
Exactly, treat the cause don't get rich from the symptom
>> Edited by Apache on Monday 10th November 10:57
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff