Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Driving At 159mph Is Safe

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Driving At 159mph Is Safe

Old 29th Aug 2006, 15:10
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: northants
Posts: 202
G-CPTN

swerves left when you brake at speed?

Or that the brakes stop working after 5 minutes of high speed driving and braking?

If the car swerves left under heavy breaking, I want and need to know that before I have to do in traffic

Every car is different, and reacts differently, and if its a car he's not driven before, then testing at speed is in reality a safer option than finding out in heavy taffic.


These are all your quotes. I would much rather you find these things out at somewhere like Dunsfold before the vehicle is purchased as a pursuit vehicle, and then trained on it at an off road facility, before using in on a public highway.

You seem to want to defend Police drivers regardless. You are not infallible, a Police instuctor was the hare, while the trainee chased him through Cambridgshire. He rounded a corner to find temporary roadworks, and a car at the red light. Using his high level of training looked for an escape route, his choice was to hit the parked car, killing the nurse inside.
This is the problem, all the Police drivers think Joe Public is useless, and the Police are perfect. Both are wrong, some of Joe Public are excellent, and not all Police drivers are.

Admit it, PC Milton was out for a joy ride because he can, but he got caught.
Plain and simple. Now he should take the punishment, instead of bullshitting.

FL's proposition seems a commonsense approach and a good idea to me.
yakker is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2006, 15:16
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Claire
Age: 58
Posts: 587
G-CPTN. I was there in 1979! "Nicht Schneller 130" I think it said.

BTW I've got a car that will go a great deal faster than I have yet had the courage to drive it. If I get caught at that sort of speed-I'll be banned. I won't come out with a bunch of pish about how I was testing the car out or 'familiarising' myself with it.

Re your earlier comment about Ambulances/ fire engines etc. I've never seen or heard of these guys flogging about at VNE in their motors to get the hang of them. Or doing 159 on the highway!
brain fade is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2006, 15:25
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
So all's well that ends well and a precident has been set. Next time we are up in front of the mags for doing 35 in a 30, we can inform their lordships that although we are technically guilty of such a piddling crime, the dangerous copper didn't get any points so we shouldn't either. Such impudence is probably more likely to get your fine quadrupled but the confused look on their faces would be worth it.
slim_slag is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2006, 15:41
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 183
Flying Lawyers replies / opinions on this and other topics appear balanced & reasonable in respect of the Laws pertaining

In aviation terms, Pilots do live familiarisations & emergency procedures, mostly after time in the simulator where the unexpected can be programmed in & the consequences of their actions can be played to the end.

Most car manufacturers have a test track and a central Police driving school poss based at Transport Road Research Lab, could have various road layout test track and a fast car sim. There will soon be several more redundant military airfields around the UK. A Central Police driving school could benefit the their local economy.

Car familiarisation should be done off-road whether Learner or Pursuit driver
and honed on-road within the speed limit. (unless under Police instruction requiring blue flashing lights)

Many Police see these famil rides as 'jollies' and they often take their Police mates. It has been so for years inc 150mph on the M6
The Telford motorway is only 2 lanes.
Nov71 is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2006, 17:59
  #225 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
Originally Posted by Nov71 View Post
Many Police see these famil rides as 'jollies' and they often take their Police mates. It has been so for years inc 150mph on the M6
The Telford motorway is only 2 lanes.
In this case, the PC relied on the video for his brag. THAT was his undoing . . .

Prat!
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2006, 19:24
  #226 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Ruritania
Posts: 96
The same judge recently fined a cyclist in Telford 300 for using the main road instead of the glass-strewn cycle path when approaching a roundabout on a .6km long section of connecting road, single-laned, at night - for "obstructing traffic".

I understand it is to be appealed against.
BaronChotzinoff is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2006, 21:18
  #227 (permalink)  
PPRuNe Enigma
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Scotland
Posts: 427
"Obstructing traffic", huh ? Obviously not going fast enough.

Shoulda been cycling at 159 mph.
Grainger is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 01:10
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 398
Times have changed!

Can anyone remember the last time the police saved a life by speeding. Or indeed can anyone remember the last time the police shot a bad guy. Generaly. the police with fast cars or firearms results in innoccent deaths. Firmly of the belief that the police should be prohibited from speeding and shooting. This would result in an overall saving of innocent lifes. I think in the UK statistics bare this out. Ambulances and fire brigades. Carry on speeding. Net saving of lives I think is positive.
Bally Heck is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 01:33
  #229 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,619
Not wishing to sully this thread with matters aviation, but I am somewhat torn between being either a "one bad apple doesn't make etc, etc" or a "Fascist Bastards the lot of 'em, why aren't they catching real criminals etc, etc". That said, I feel sure that the next professional pilot who shoots the ILS at 250 Kts, sideslips the excess speed off at 50', takes the hi-speed taxiway at 100 Kts to a tyre smoking halt at the gate simply has to reiterate that he is a "the "creme de la creme" of commercial pilots, trained in advanced flying and was simply "familiarising" himself with a new aircraft.

As long as he stresses that as a pilot, he is also trained in the use of autopilots, so the CAA could note that "two pilots who gave evidence for the prosecution, including the CAA's senior chief examiner, had declined to classify the defendant's flying as dangerous." The CAA's senior chief examiner further said that: "Capt Speaking was flying in accordance with his training, honing his skills while possible and testing the aircraft's capabilities so that if he was required on an urgent trip, he would be flying safely."

The court heard the airways on which Capt Speaking flew were deserted at the time of the approach and that flying conditions were good.

Mmmmmm....I think I see the flaw in this, better make that a vote for "Facist Bastards."
Two's in is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 01:44
  #230 (permalink)  
Resident insomniac
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: N54 58 34 W02 01 21
Age: 75
Posts: 1,859
It depends whether Captain Speaking had Souls on Board (IMHO).
One has heard rumours of unladen 'positioning' flights . . .

Of course, the aircraft limits must NEVER be exceeded (unless one files a report).
G-CPTN is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 06:26
  #231 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 393
As most police forces have access to either a helicopter / fixed wing aircraft the need for pursuits to go at that sort of speed is far less that it used to be.

I would expect a mandatory ban if a) found guilty of dangerous driving b) caught doing 100+ mph yet he gets off without punishment despite being found guilty.
Police drivers are not above the law yet this one seems to think he is.
The police have a hard enough job as it is without this muppet adding weight to the point of view that there is 'one rule for them, another for us'
paulc is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 07:58
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: ESSEX
Age: 61
Posts: 95
Speeding

How many people a year are killed or seriously injured by emergency vehicles? A mate of mine was badly injured by a fire engine as he went through a green light and the fire engine went through a red!
Last I heard his insurance company was paying out loads to the poor firemen. I have heard this is a way of boosting their low pay.
While I am in rant mode I have heard if you pull forward at a red light to let a police car through and get caught on camera you still have to pay the penalty. Does anyone know if this is true?
I had it the other day and refused to pull forward. Copper behind got very aggresive with the horns and lights till my reversing lights came on!
bigflyingrob is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 09:36
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 735
B.F.R :

How many people a year are killed or seriously injured by emergency vehicles?
A lot less than speeding motorists without blue lights and sirens - but it's the Police get all the stick when they try and tackle that issue...
I have heard if you pull forward at a red light to let a police car through and get caught on camera you still have to pay the penalty. Does anyone know if this is true?
A Police Officer can lawfully direct traffic in contravention of usual Road Traffic Regulations ( like closing one half of a dual carriageway at a "Police incident" and sending vehicles "the wrong way" to clear the area, so in your case you were being directed by the Police Officer to move out of the way and would not have been prosecuted for crossing the Stop line - you may have received a ticket in the post if a red light camera captured this, but you could return it with an explanation which should result in cancellation of the ticket.
I had it the other day and refused to pull forward. Copper behind got very aggresive with the horns and lights till my reversing lights came on!
You pillock- I just hope it wasn't your house being burgled that they were on their way to or any of your family in distress ( or worse )

Highway Code :
194. Emergency vehicles.
You should look and listen for ambulances, fire engines, police or other emergency vehicles using flashing blue, red or green lights, headlights or sirens.
When one approaches do not panic. Consider the route of the emergency vehicle and take appropriate action to let it pass.
If necessary, pull to the side of the road and stop, but do not endanger other road users.

Most legislation governing the traffic on our roads incorporates an element of common sense - sadly this does not apply to all the motorists using the roads.

Coconutty is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 09:47
  #234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Well coconutty. One had a similar problem recently on the M1 where they have the average speed cameras protecting non existent road workers. I'm in 'outside' lane with clear lane ahead, loads of lorries bunched up on lane to my left, all of us doing 40mph +-. Then a ambulance flashing blue lights appears behind me.

The safest and morally correct thing to do is speed up ahead of the lorries and pull into left, letting ambulance through. But that would bugger up my average speed calculations and I could possibly get a ticket. Not feeling my chances of winning this argument in the mags court is very good, and besides it's a long way to the court from my home, I stuck at 40mph and held the ambulance up.

Most legislation governing the traffic on our roads incorporates an element of common sense - sadly this does not apply to all the motorists using the roads.
Or criminal-(in)justice systems. Sorry, but I reckoned my probability of getting justice was low. When I am reasonably confident I will not get a rubber-stamped three points I'll break the speed limit for the ambulance, right now that confidence doesn't exist.
slim_slag is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 10:11
  #235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 735
s_s

... So indicating left and waiting for the vehicles on your left to slow, and open up a gap for you to move into - when they saw why you wanted to move over was not an option ?

You just made a selfish decision and held up an ambulance answering an emergency call - nice one
Hope you didn't slow it up so much that someone died as a result

Good of you to quote me on motorists having no common sense though

... but this is thread creeping - bottom line is that the Police are not required to adhere to a speed limit in a vehicle being used for Police purposes, if doing so would hinder that purpose at that time - the legislation does not then give an upper speed limit, or an amount by which the limit can be exceeded, hence the reason for the more serious charge of "Dangerous Driving", which is dependant on all the circumstances, as opposed to one of "Exceeding the speed limit".

The sentencing is then a separate issue.

Coconutty is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 10:36
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Cocunutty. What I just did is file the equivalent of a NASA report. I accept I did something which could be improved on, and identified the problem as I see it. That problem was not my standard of driving or my attitude towards human life.

Your response was belitlling and attacked the messenger instead of concentrating on the message. I really don't care, but you obviously belong to a blame culture, and I think that is something you need to work on too.

(Did you read the bit where I said the lorries were bunched? I was not prepared to move into a small gap, that would have been dangerous, but at least there was an ambulance nearby I suppose)
slim_slag is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 10:38
  #237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,917
I think it's sad that slim_slag has that perception of the legal system in relation to motorists.
It's a very widely held view.

I wish I could argue that the perception has no foundation in fact.
Unfortunately, I can't.


FL
Flying Lawyer is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 11:05
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 735
Dear Slim_Slug ( seems to be the in thing to mis-pell names ),

I can't see any point in getting into an arguement with you - I think your comments say it all :

The safest and morally correct thing to do is speed up ahead of the lorries and pull into left, letting ambulance through. But that would bugger up my average speed calculations and I could possibly get a ticket ........ I stuck at 40mph and held the ambulance up.
and
That problem was not my standard of driving or my attitude towards human life.
I wouldn't say I "belong to a blame culture" ... but I DO blame you for holding up that ambulance on an emergency call when, on the information you provided, you made a concious decision to do so, rather than face the possibility of getting a speeding ticket - which you could have challenged.

No-one wants to get a speeding ticket or points on their licence, and this will always be an emotive topic - arguments that if everyone stuck to the limit there would be less accidents, limiting someones speed doesn't necessarily make them drive any safer, speed cameras are only used to raise revenue for the Police / Government instead of tackling "real crime" etc etc, but if it's an emergency vehicle trying to get through then it is every responsible motorist's duty to get out of the way if it is safe to do so.

Slim- if they're coming to my house, or attending to one of my family - I'll pay the 60 for you

Coconutty is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 11:33
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Airwaves
Posts: 65
So nutty, you expect Slim Slag to cop 3 points and 60 fine, for a saving of a few seconds for the ambulance. That would be very altruistic of him, but might have a significant effect on his life. It might eventually lead to a ban, if he gets a few more points before they are removed, which could lead to him losing his job. Would you risk your job for a tiny chance of helping a complete stranger, in the unlikely event that those few seconds are the ones that make a difference? I'm not sure many would do.

Of course he could challenge the ticket. No guarantee at all he would be successful though.

Cheap shots and ad-hominem comments harm your case, not S_S's.

Of course if your previous posts are correct, in which you imply (with little basis in fact) that those caught speeding are recklessly dangerous in all cases then he couldn't speed without taking great risk. So you say he should risk his life as well, I presume.
Tuned In is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2006, 11:56
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 735
IF it is safe to do so is what I said.

Slim did not save the ambulance ANY seconds - we don't know HOW LONG it was held up for, so before firing shots yourself, and trying to change the context of what is being said TUNE IN yourself will you.

Of course I don't expect anyone to "cop a fine and points" - there is no reason at all why that should have happened - If he had at least TRIED to move over in the manner suggested, but he didn't - he CHOSE not to.
Talk about melodramatic - Who knows how many points Slim has on his licence - if anyone does get up to the 12 required for a ban then there is good chance that they have done more than moving over to let let an ambulance pass

I can't quite see how you translate my recent posts into "those caught speeding .... imply that everyone who does so is recklessly dangerous .....

Last edited by Coconutty; 30th Aug 2006 at 14:55.
Coconutty is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.