Driving standards

[peanuts]

32 minutes ago, Reorte said:

You'd have thought so but I bet the threat of losing their phone seems greater to most of them than the threat of losing their licence...

i have said it before and will say it again phone is gone there and then on the spot  vehicle is impounded . 28 days to pay 10% of the book value of the vehicle or its gone to be crushed or auctioned wouldnt have to do many for the message to get through .exaining to your boss why you need £600+ to get the company van back would be an interesting call 

[Joseph_Pestell]

11 minutes ago, peanuts said:

i have said it before and will say it again phone is gone there and then on the spot  vehicle is impounded . 28 days to pay 10% of the book value of the vehicle or its gone to be crushed or auctioned wouldnt have to do many for the message to get through .exaining to your boss why you need £600+ to get the company van back would be an interesting call 

 

10% of the value of a new semi-artic would be quite a fine.

[alastairq]

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

Don't take their phones off of them, take their driving licences off of them. And if they do it again remove their licences permanently.

 Revoking driving licences is a hard one to enforce.....a casual look at my local Constabulary's tweeter fed  finds a regular crop of unlicensed drivers being caught.....which begs the question, how many out there simply continue driving anyway?

 

Perhaps we need a bigger insurance database....so that drivers with offences against them, can be identified by insurers as a no-go risk?

Uninsured vehicles are a lot easier to detect [ even with unmanned technology] than who a driver happens to be.

Also maybe make the Registered Keeper a lot more responsible for offences committed in/on their vehicle?

Edited March 25, 2019 by alastairq

[ejstubbs]

7 hours ago, kevinlms said:

Often this thread has discussed foreign drivers and their lack of understanding of road signs & markings.

 

This one blames GPS & differences in rules applying to 'rumble strips', between Australia & China.

 

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/driver-who-couldn-t-read-road-signs-blames-gps-for-deadly-crash-20190320-p515q5.html

 

Note the new temporary LED signs in Chinese.

 

It of course essential, to read up on the meanings of road rules, when travelling in a foreign country.

 

To be fair, he did plead guilty to both charges.  It's not like he was trying to use those factors* as an excuse to get off, and he does appear to be genuinely remorseful.  (I'd be more annoyed about the lawyer apparently trying to argue that the fact that others have crashed there reduced his client's "moral culpability").

 

* Though GPS should hardly count as a factor to any rational person.  That said, I can see little rational explanation for the "GPS guides drivers to horror intersection" title under the embedded video clip.  The article says that the offending driver was going from Colac to Lorne.  The road he was driving along is called the Colac-Lorne Road.  The intersection with the Birregurra-Forrest Road is here; zoom out and it's clear that, well, that's the way you go to get from Colac to Lorne.  Anyone making that journey would think it perfectly reasonable to go that way, whether they were using sat-nav, a paper map or just local knowledge.

Edited March 25, 2019 by ejstubbs

[billy_anorak59]

1 hour ago, peanuts said:

i have said it before and will say it again phone is gone there and then on the spot  vehicle is impounded . 28 days to pay 10% of the book value of the vehicle or its gone to be crushed or auctioned wouldnt have to do many for the message to get through .exaining to your boss why you need £600+ to get the company van back would be an interesting call 

 

In some situations vehicles that have a fault, usually with the engine management, record a fault code, and then go into limp mode.

 

Now I reckon that using a phone at the wheel is a pretty big fault - surely it isn't beyond the wit of man for the car to detect the 'fault' that's driving the vehicle, record it, and go into limp mode?

Surely after the inconvenience of struggling down the road at reduced speed, then having to have the code cleared by a garage (at a cost) might put most off doing it?

Just a thought.

 

[kevinlms]

51 minutes ago, ejstubbs said:

 

To be fair, he did plead guilty to both charges.  It's not like he was trying to use those factors* as an excuse to get off, and he does appear to be genuinely remorseful.  (I'd be more annoyed about the lawyer apparently trying to argue that the fact that others have crashed there reduced his client's "moral culpability").

 

* Though GPS should hardly count as a factor to any rational person.  That said, I can see little rational explanation for the "GPS guides drivers to horror intersection" title under the embedded video clip.  The article says that the offending driver was going from Colac to Lorne.  The road he was driving along is called the Colac-Lorne Road.  The intersection with the Birregurra-Forrest Road is here; zoom out and it's clear that, well, that's the way you go to get from Colac to Lorne.  Anyone making that journey would think it perfectly reasonable to go that way, whether they were using sat-nav, a paper map or just local knowledge.

I do have a problem though of suggesting missing/misunderstanding the Stop sign.

 

Another article.

 

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/gps-devices-turn-tiny-country-intersection-into-high-risk-crash-zone-20190322-p516ik.html

 

Edit to add - Sorry for the size!

 

Edited March 25, 2019 by kevinlms

[peanuts]

1 hour ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

10% of the value of a new semi-artic would be quite a fine.

and what do you think would happen to amy employee who incurred sutch a fine ? very polarising effect on ALL  i would say atm most employers in the haulage industry have a zero tollerance policy written into your contract of mobile phone use doesent seem to stop a torrent of phone calls from "transport managers " wanting to know where you are on your days route 

[Joseph_Pestell]

50 minutes ago, peanuts said:

and what do you think would happen to amy employee who incurred sutch a fine ? very polarising effect on ALL  i would say atm most employers in the haulage industry have a zero tollerance policy written into your contract of mobile phone use doesent seem to stop a torrent of phone calls from "transport managers " wanting to know where you are on your days route 

 

Absolutely. That's why I think your idea is such a good one.

 

When I worked in the courier industry, we (DPD) did indeed have a policy about use of mobile phones -definitely no use of handheld.

 

But even a call over a fixed phone can be distracting as I found out when I nearly rear-ended a car near Faringdon. My caller could hear it all happen and was very worried. Fortunately, there was a large flat verge for me to run onto.

[rockershovel]

One thing which is very clear, living near the A1M is that overseas HGV drivers show no recognition of the law, whatsoever - presumably because they know that the police make no effort to enforce them. 

 

Given the critical nature of HGV timings in the context of JIT timings, tach hours and offloading slots, how about a fixed penalty whereby the wagon is impounded for 6 hours, or until another driver arrives with a clear tach disc and full licence and insurance documentation, whichever is the longer? The original driver to be stood down for not less than 24 hours, and not allowed to take the wheel of that HGV again 

 

Time is money, and that’s how you hit the owners - who are the ones who need targeting. 

 

 

[Hobby]

With regard to location f the HGV I thought that they had trackers on them now so can be tracked from head office, at least that's the impression I got when watching an episode of that fly on the wall doc of Stobarts... Or perhaps it's just the big boys that fit them...

[MarkC]

1 hour ago, rockershovel said:

One thing which is very clear, living near the A1M is that overseas HGV drivers show no recognition of the law, whatsoever - presumably because they know that the police make no effort to enforce them. 

 

Given the critical nature of HGV timings in the context of JIT timings, tach hours and offloading slots, how about a fixed penalty whereby the wagon is impounded for 6 hours, or until another driver arrives with a clear tach disc and full licence and insurance documentation, whichever is the longer? The original driver to be stood down for not less than 24 hours, and not allowed to take the wheel of that HGV again 

 

Time is money, and that’s how you hit the owners - who are the ones who need targeting. 

 

 

I was just approaching my junction on the A1(M) a couple of years ago; about a mile and a half to go, so was still making progress passing assorted HGVs. I was just passing one, which was carrying Eastern European plates, when he started drifting into lane 2. Fortunately I had nothing close behind me so was just able to brake before being crushed between the lorry and the Armco. I watched in horror as it then drifted onto the hard shoulder before returning to lane 1. I was very shaken by this, so pulled over onto the hard shoulder of my slip road and called the police. They thanked me & I thought nothing more would happen. About an hour later, they called me back to let me know that they had stopped the vehicle a few miles further on and discovered that the driver had been on the road for some 36 hours; his only stop being on the Calais-Dover ferry...

[bimble]

6 hours ago, billy_anorak59 said:

 

In some situations vehicles that have a fault, usually with the engine management, record a fault code, and then go into limp mode.

 

Now I reckon that using a phone at the wheel is a pretty big fault - surely it isn't beyond the wit of man for the car to detect the 'fault' that's driving the vehicle, record it, and go into limp mode?

Surely after the inconvenience of struggling down the road at reduced speed, then having to have the code cleared by a garage (at a cost) might put most off doing it?

Just a thought.

 

 

They were talking on the radio only yesterday that Volvo are developing a system that can recognise if a person is dozing off (or looking away at a phone) and will pull the car over and call Volvo customer services.

[62613]

9 hours ago, peanuts said:

talking of signs i know us hgv drivers are much maligned but this ?

I drive round that roundabout at least once a week, and I've never noticed that! That could even be my car at the back of the queue going the other way.

 

[johnofwessex]

My suggestion would be to make a driving ban the equivalent of an injunction with power of arrest so that its off to the cells, do not pass go.

 

That and if you get caught driving while disqualified the ban automatically resent to the start.

 

So every Friday afternoon do a push on the disqualified drivers so they spend the weekend in the cells 

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Removing licences won't work.

Removing fingers however.

 

Mike.

[peanuts]

Everybody does realize the one major flaw in our new draconian measure to deal with mobile phone misuse behind the wheel ?

 

 actualy having the traffic officers on patrol to catch the offenders this to me is the main reason for the total disregard of this law 99% of folk believe they are never going to get caught because they never see a traffic patrol car anymore . dont get me wrong our police do a valiant job with the resources they have but they are spread woefully thin and the driving public know it  

[rockershovel]

11 hours ago, MarkC said:

I was just approaching my junction on the A1(M) a couple of years ago; about a mile and a half to go, so was still making progress passing assorted HGVs. I was just passing one, which was carrying Eastern European plates, when he started drifting into lane 2. Fortunately I had nothing close behind me so was just able to brake before being crushed between the lorry and the Armco. I watched in horror as it then drifted onto the hard shoulder before returning to lane 1. I was very shaken by this, so pulled over onto the hard shoulder of my slip road and called the police. They thanked me & I thought nothing more would happen. About an hour later, they called me back to let me know that they had stopped the vehicle a few miles further on and discovered that the driver had been on the road for some 36 hours; his only stop being on the Calais-Dover ferry...

 

Exactly. I’m only surprised that the police did anything about it. 

 

No 1 Son recently bought a motorcycle on eBay, which proved to be in Germany. The seller arranged transport, and the bike duly arrived in a van along with several other items making up the load. The driver’s itinerary seemed to be NW Germany - Netherlands - Calais - Peterborough - Scottish Borders and back the same way; from the text received from the seller that it had been collected, he must have been on the road pretty much non-stop. 

 

Hence the suggestions about compulsory breaks and replacement for the driver. This is actually taken from various measures I’ve seen in offshore construction, which tends to be a 24/7 activity. It’s relatively easy to control in that industry, because of the various certifications required and the widespread use of “smart” swipe cards to gain access.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JDW]

So, not quite "driving" standards, but todays topic for discussion since it's quiet here: https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4419935,-1.3233855,3a,90y,42.98h,82.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDFriY5N30mz9konNirqwlw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Have a look at these traffic lights.  We're approaching a major roundabout.  On the left is a bus lane.  Traffic lights stop cars as a bus approaches so that buses can jump to the front of the queue and cross the lanes of traffic on the approach to the roundabout.  Sensible, and used in quite a few places.  Now zoom in on the traffic lights themselves.  The ones in the bus lane are (unless we're being pedantic about emergency vehicles etc) only for buses.  They are there to let buses through.  But read the sign at the bottom: "Except buses".  I'm sure what they mean was a blue disc with a picture of a bus, or even the words "buses only", but as it stands, the traffic lights suggest that at red they mean "Stop.  Except buses" and "Go.  Except buses".  I've no idea if the green phase is a round light or a filter arrow, but still, it wouldn't change anything.  I can't think of any possible reason for them to have used those words, on all three sets of lights - plus the sets approaching from the other side too.

[Hobby]

Best to look from above at the lane markings. When the buses come out of that bus stop they end up in the "left turn" lane (right two straight on, left hand one left turn only), I suspect it is to indicate that the buses have the right to use that lane and merge with the traffic on the roundabout rather than force their way across before joining the roundabout?

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4419935,-1.3233855,134m/data=!3m1!1e3

Edited April 5, 2019 by Hobby

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Not wishing to bog yet another thread down with correct use of English language, but except can be inclusive or exclusive depending on the sentence it is used in and the nouns used before it or after it, it simply doesn't work as a 2 word statement as it becomes ambivalent. It's been one of my bugbears on road signs for many a long year.

 

Mike.

[alastairq]

13 hours ago, JDW said:

So, not quite "driving" standards, but todays topic for discussion since it's quiet here: https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4419935,-1.3233855,3a,90y,42.98h,82.62t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sDFriY5N30mz9konNirqwlw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

Have a look at these traffic lights.  We're approaching a major roundabout.  On the left is a bus lane.  Traffic lights stop cars as a bus approaches so that buses can jump to the front of the queue and cross the lanes of traffic on the approach to the roundabout.  Sensible, and used in quite a few places.  Now zoom in on the traffic lights themselves.  The ones in the bus lane are (unless we're being pedantic about emergency vehicles etc) only for buses.  They are there to let buses through.  But read the sign at the bottom: "Except buses".  I'm sure what they mean was a blue disc with a picture of a bus, or even the words "buses only", but as it stands, the traffic lights suggest that at red they mean "Stop.  Except buses" and "Go.  Except buses".  I've no idea if the green phase is a round light or a filter arrow, but still, it wouldn't change anything.  I can't think of any possible reason for them to have used those words, on all three sets of lights - plus the sets approaching from the other side too.

 

The confusion seems hardly surprising really....given the name of the roundabout, shown in Hobby's post?

[JDW]

31 minutes ago, Hobby said:

Best to look from above at the lane markings. When the buses come out of that bus stop they end up in the "left turn" lane (right two straight on, left hand one left turn only), I suspect it is to indicate that the buses have the right to use that lane and merge with the traffic on the roundabout rather than force their way across before joining the roundabout?

 

https://www.google.com/maps/@53.4419935,-1.3233855,134m/data=!3m1!1e3

 

Essentially it is to create a gap in traffic so the bus can get across to whichever lane it needs, not to allow it to use the left lane to enter the roundabout, which would be dangerous. If something such as "left turn only, except buses" were needed there should be a blue turn left sign above next to the amber light with "except buses". You can't just have "except buses" as there's no restriction there to exempt them from. If it were related to lanes/road markings, it would all need to be on the same sign or piece or road. 

As Enterprisingwestern says English can be confusing, but I can't think of any way a sign maker or road planner with half a knowledge of English and the basics of the Highway Code would think "except buses" on a buses only set of lights is correct!

[Enterprisingwestern]

 

Another confusing one is the "Left Turn Except Buses" and similar signs. It infers buses must always go straight on (or whatever the option is) and never turn left or right.

I have first hand experience of such a sign in Sheffield, I forget the exact wording, but I made the manoeuvre which was the one that the sign was intended to convey but didn't because of the ambiguous use of the word except, and was pulled over by a police patrol car, (remember them?!). I simply asked the policeman to explain to me what I had actually done wrong that the sign was banning and he couldn't. Within a few weeks the junction had been completely remodelled and a road was made buses only with the relevant signage.

[PhilJ W]

There is a similar arrangement at the Saddlers Farm roundabout for buses coming from Pitsea. Though in this case the lights only operate when a bus is present, otherwise they are permanently showing red. Several times I have seen cars illegally using the bus lane finding themselves waiting for the lights to change whilst traffic using the correct lanes has a green light. Incidently the traffic lights are now fitted with cameras so theres no alternative but for them but to reverse and use the correct lane.

[shortliner]

Re nobody seeing patrol cars any more - I'd suggest you don't drive badly on the A9 in Northern Scotland - this morning - going to Inverness and back I saw four  - two of which had pulled drivers over - and south of Inverness in the last month they have stopped 3 on the A9 doing 140+mph!  (And the A9 from Dunblane through Perth, to Inverness has average speed cameras fitted!!!) On the other hand, foot patrols seem non-existent! I don't remember when I last saw a policeman on foot(or a traffic warden) !

Edited April 5, 2019 by shortliner