100mph in Southampton Water

[dunedin]

I'm not entirely sure I get your drift. Are you suggesting people crash their cars on motorways and then make up some story about hitting debris? I can assure you after you have extracted them from their overturned vehicle and loaded them into an ambulance there really isn't much room for doubt when your colleague retrieves what's left of the ladder, 4x2 timber, ratchet strap block, fridge (I kid you not) or most common of all lorry tyre from the live carriageway.

Next time you see a police car doing 40mph in the centre lane with all their lights on and the crew getting lots of dirty looks from the drivers they are holding up spare a thought for their colleague who is running around a mile or so up the road retrieving whatever it is that's lying in the middle of lane three.....

I suspect you are way over acceptable use of social media policy if you really are a traffic cop

And what are your superhero properties that allow you to avoid debris at 140mph plus that we can't avoid at 70mph.

 

[jac]

I suspect you are way over acceptable use of social media policy if you really are a traffic cop

And what are your superhero properties that allow you to avoid debris at 140mph plus that we can't avoid at 70mph.

What the hell kind of acceptable use social media policies do you deal with. That would look to be well within ours.

 

[l'escargot]

I'm not entirely sure I get your drift. Are you suggesting people crash their cars on motorways and then make up some story about hitting debris? I can assure you after you have extracted them from their overturned vehicle and loaded them into an ambulance there really isn't much room for doubt when your colleague retrieves what's left of the ladder, 4x2 timber, ratchet strap block, fridge (I kid you not) or most common of all lorry tyre from the live carriageway.

Next time you see a police car doing 40mph in the centre lane with all their lights on and the crew getting lots of dirty looks from the drivers they are holding up spare a thought for their colleague who is running around a mile or so up the road retrieving whatever it is that's lying in the middle of lane three.....

My drift is your exaggeration by grouping "debris" with "crash(es)". Most debris doesn't cause accidents, just as most pot markers don't overturn speeding boats. I'm not saying there haven't been accidents caused by debris but I am sure you have heard claims of mysterious black dogs/cats running out in front of cars never to be seen again. I would think more motorway "accidents" are caused by inappropriate speed than debris, including many involving debris, unless you are suggesting otherwise?

 

[Triassic]

I suspect you are way over acceptable use of social media policy if you really are a traffic cop

And what are your superhero properties that allow you to avoid debris at 140mph plus that we can't avoid at 70mph.

One of the advantages of being retired is that I'm allowed to tell things as they are, not that it would have made a lot of difference in this case. And on a small point, as I did say earlier, I tried really hard for most of my career not to be associated with traffic cops although we were often mistaken for them.

On your second point, none. We were as susceptible to debris as any other driver, in fact more so given the frequency with which we drove on the lesser used parts of the carriageway. As I also said in an earlier post you cannot completely remove risk, it's generally a case of managing it to an acceptable level and that is partly done through training and familiarisation with some of the hazards you are likely to face. As I explained earlier what may be a bit of a drama to some may not be such to an individual who faces it regularly. I've lost count of the number of tyre failures I've experienced over the years, including several at the speeds we have been talking about, and I've also hit things at those speeds. Having the discipline not to try and swerve around something takes practice..... which brings us rather nicely back on topic given it was the equivalent of a sudden swerve that led to the powerboat rollover. To save you going back to re-read my earlier post I also said that if the driver had known the buoy was only marking a fishing pot I suspect he wouldn't have attempted to miss it, his mistake (if we can call it that) was thinking it might be divers which he clearly had to try and avoid.

The general order of risk we used was to put the safety of the public first, that of the subject second, and that of ourselves last. If I am entirely honest with you I'm sure there were occasions when the line between the last two was a bit vague, but there was never any doubt about where our first responsibility lay.

 

[Triassic]

I would think more motorway "accidents" are caused by inappropriate speed than debris, including many involving debris, unless you are suggesting otherwise?

I would say you're about right. Inappropriate speed for the distance that the driver can see to be clear, and that's generally down to the fact that they are only looking at the rear of the vehicle ahead, which is usually not very far at all........

 

[pmagowan]

One of the advantages of being retired is that I'm allowed to tell things as they are, not that it would have made a lot of difference in this case. And on a small point, as I did say earlier, I tried really hard for most of my career not to be associated with traffic cops although we were often mistaken for them.

On your second point, none. We were as susceptible to debris as any other driver, in fact more so given the frequency with which we drove on the lesser used parts of the carriageway. As I also said in an earlier post you cannot completely remove risk, it's generally a case of managing it to an acceptable level and that is partly done through training and familiarisation with some of the hazards you are likely to face. As I explained earlier what may be a bit of a drama to some may not be such to an individual who faces it regularly. I've lost count of the number of tyre failures I've experienced over the years, including several at the speeds we have been talking about, and I've also hit things at those speeds. Having the discipline not to try and swerve around something takes practice..... which brings us rather nicely back on topic given it was the equivalent of a sudden swerve that led to the powerboat rollover. To save you going back to re-read my earlier post I also said that if the driver had known the buoy was only marking a fishing pot I suspect he wouldn't have attempted to miss it, his mistake (if we can call it that) was thinking it might be divers which he clearly had to try and avoid.

The general order of risk we used was to put the safety of the public first, that of the subject second, and that of ourselves last. If I am entirely honest with you I'm sure there were occasions when the line between the last two was a bit vague, but there was never any doubt about where our first responsibility lay.

So is it ok for Lewis Hamilton to drive a formula one car at 200mph on the motorway at a quiet time, say 5am? He is very experienced. If not why not?

 

[Triassic]

So is it ok for Lewis Hamilton to drive a formula one car at 200mph on the motorway at a quiet time, say 5am? He is very experienced. If not why not?

Seriously?

If you want to get silly then pm me and I respond appropriately, or start another thread on safe driving. I'm sure people on here are getting as bored with this game of ping pong as I am.

 

[dom]

Seriously?

If you want to get silly then pm me and I respond appropriately, or start another thread on safe driving. I'm sure people on here are getting as bored with this game of ping pong as I am.

I have not yet managed to make out whether your posts are written tongue in cheek or not; for if not they are somewhat curious, to say the least.

 

[Triassic]

I have not yet managed to make out whether your posts are written tongue in cheek or not; for if not they are somewhat curious, to say the least.

I'm not completely adverse to a bit of humour in the right place, but it's not been that prevalent on this thread. Was there a particular post or stance you are having trouble with?

 

[dom]

I'm not completely adverse to a bit of humour in the right place, but it's not been that prevalent on this thread. Was there a particular post or stance you are having trouble with?

Well as you ask, I am somewhat surprised at the weight you attach to the "within his comfort zone" argument. After all Michael Jackson claimed to have been perfectly comfortable hanging his baby over a Berlin balcony. The German Polizei were not however so dazzled by Jackson's career to simply accept this argument at face value.

But what intrigues me is this; if based on such scant evidence an ex-officer of the law can be so sure this guy is innocent of any wrongdoing, then god help those who the police view as guilty, especially those who can't afford a decent lawyer.

 

[Sandy]

Nope. Someone who has significant qualifications and experience. Someone who understands and respects the risks of the sport does not put others in an avoidable position whereby their lives are risked needlessly. He could have gone out that day and done 100mph as safely as it is possible to do. He chose to go out, travel at a speed whereby he was unable to avoid predictable fixed objects in a safe way, crash badly and almost kill his crew who were not wearing any of the available safety equipment. If we can't learn anything from that then I say bring on the regulation because it sounds like a lot of people can't behave themselves and are completely blind as to the risks to themselves and others.

Then sir we still disagree and we will leave it at that.

 

[pmagowan]

Then sir we still disagree and we will leave it at that.

That is fine but which part do you disagree with?

1)That he has significant qualifications and experience.
2)That someone who understands and respects the risks does not put others at avoidable needless risk.
3)That he could have gone out and safely done 100mph.
4)That he crashed
5)That we can learn something from it

For the life of me I can not work out what is remotely controversial about that!

 

[pmagowan]

Seriously?

If you want to get silly then pm me and I respond appropriately, or start another thread on safe driving. I'm sure people on here are getting as bored with this game of ping pong as I am.

I am sorry, maybe I got this wrong but were you not the one to make comparrisons to driving fast on a public highway? I was simply, if correct, using your anaology with someone likely to be even more experienced and skillful than yourself. You seem to have implied, in the post I quoted, that there is no problem because this man is skilled. I was wondering if that is a universal rule or if there is some other reason it does not apply in your analagous situation.

 

[Blue Sunray]

A charity link for those interested (not the chippy inverse snobs obviously)

https://www.justgiving.com/Laura-dredge/

 

[Triassic]

But what intrigues me is this; if based on such scant evidence an ex-officer of the law can be so sure this guy is innocent of any wrongdoing, then god help those who the police view as guilty, especially those who can't afford a decent lawyer.

Let me help you understand our legal system. The police investigate and report the facts, and in some cases their opinion. The courts decide on innocence or guilt.

What intrigues me is that members of the public, who make up our juries and reach such decisions are so often prepared to do so without considering any of the evidence at all, let alone seeking to understand it......

 

[Triassic]

I am sorry, maybe I got this wrong but were you not the one to make comparrisons to driving fast on a public highway? I was simply, if correct, using your anaology with someone likely to be even more experienced and skillful than yourself. You seem to have implied, in the post I quoted, that there is no problem because this man is skilled. I was wondering if that is a universal rule or if there is some other reason it does not apply in your analagous situation.

Lewis Hamilton is an extremely experienced Grand Prix driver and his car control skills are no doubt excellent. He's also no doubt pretty good at race craft and knowing how to beat other cars on the track. That doesn't necessarily mean he knows how to drive quickly on public roads, unless your understanding of such activity simply involves knowing which pedal to hold down....

Advanced driving, as taught to police officers is around 90% observation, anticipation and planning, and a little bit of skilful car control.

Hopefully now you can see why it might not be OK for him to drive at 200mph down the local motorway.

 

[dunedin]

A charity link for those interested (not the chippy inverse snobs obviously)

https://www.justgiving.com/Laura-dredge/

That sounds like a horrifically close dice with death. I hope the driver has huge remorse

 

[Triassic]

That sounds like a horrifically close dice with death. I hope the driver has huge remorse

You are aware this is the same incident we have been discussing for the past 18 pages aren't you?

 

[pmagowan]

Lewis Hamilton is an extremely experienced Grand Prix driver and his car control skills are no doubt excellent. He's also no doubt pretty good at race craft and knowing how to beat other cars on the track. That doesn't necessarily mean he knows how to drive quickly on public roads, unless your understanding of such activity simply involves knowing which pedal to hold down....

Advanced driving, as taught to police officers is around 90% observation, anticipation and planning, and a little bit of skilful car control.

Hopefully now you can see why it might not be OK for him to drive at 200mph down the local motorway.

So he is not skilled enough to drive on an empty motorway in the early hours of the morning. You obviously have an encyclopaedic knowledge of the various skill levels of the worlds speed demons to determine which ones are safe in which circumstances. I rather think you are running out of logical defence for your views. I am sure Lewis will pop round some day soon to learn about the other skills he needs other than simply putting the right foot to the floor. The idea that he needs to look where he is going and anticipate and plan things is likely to come as a complete revelation to him.

 

[lw395]

.....Hopefully now you can see why it might not be OK for him to drive at 200mph down the local motorway.

Motorway would be a bit limp.
Have a look at real men's racing, IOM TT, 200mph on a B road.