Sunday Times: Death row: Britain's most dangerous road

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:00:41 GMT, Juliette
wrote in message :

taking those bends
at 40mph is dangerous unless you're sure that there isn't going
to be a cyclist doing 10mph on one of them, he didn't have time
to slow down and tuck in behind me until we were past the twisty
bit.

You should really assume that there will be some **** on the wrong
side coming towards you.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

On Mon, 27 Sep 2004 08:56:31 +0100, Tony Raven
wrote in message :

Yes it is people driving inappropriately for the conditions but just as
you can have dangerous cycling facilities you can have dangerous road as
well. It all comes down to the design. If you have junctions with no
sight lines there is a much greater probability there will be a
collision than if visibility is good.

Yes, up to a point. The point being when there is something done
about the problem and drivers respond by going faster, which is what
seems to happen in practice.

I favur a large sign saying "Oi! Knobhead! Slow down!"

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

So you put up some signs saying something like "20 foot diameter holes in
road
in several places, all obscured from view until 10 foot from hole". Let's
even
assume that this particular statement is true i.e. that the holes exist.
How
many drivers would actually reduce their speed to the level required to
avoid
plunging into one of the holes?

You have totally missed the point. The current state of affairs is such
that the hazards are so varied and difficult to 'advertise' that a first
time user to the road is likely to have problems bearing in mind that I know
the road, have used it several times in each direction and still found
myself in situations that I'd rather not have been in - not all of them
being my fault. It is a scary road and has to be experienced before voicing
childish suggestions. Grow up or shut up.

Intemperately yours

Vernon in Leeds

One thing that galls me, is the inference that it's the road that's
dangerous.
It's the ****s that aren't driving safely, driving to take into account
the
type of road it is and the conditions on the road that make the danger,
not the
asphalt width, number of bends etc.. Never blame the drivers... blame the
road
:-(
The problem lies not so much with the regular users of the road, thankfully,
I am not one of them but with the occasional user or first time user. The
road is difficult to 'read' accurately and driver errors are exacerbated by
poor road design. It's too easy to blame reckless drivers but on this road
the layout of some junctions and peculiar lines taken by the road and some
lanes contribute considerably to drivers finding themselves in situations
they'd rather not be in.

Clive George wrote:

The article did say they ignored motorbike stats to get the A59.

I thought this NG was like Slashdot, where no-one ever, EVER, reads TFA ;-)

I agree that it takes concentration and effort to drive safely along the
A59 Vernon as I too have driven along it a few times but I still think that
driver error is the main problem. Despite it being in beautiful scenery too
many drivers want to rush along it. A speed limit of 40 (or even 30 in
places) with plenty of speed cameras which are working and offenders
prosecuted would make it much safer. All that should be done along with
junction redesign where needed. That said there are parts where the
landscape is so vertical that to put a 'safe' road in (AKA a motorway) would
be very expensive and ruin the landscape. If you can't read the road - slow
down.

--

Jon Farley
-----------------------------
help the hungry
http://www.thehungersite.com/
"vernon levy" wrote in message
...


The problem lies not so much with the regular users of the road,
thankfully,
I am not one of them but with the occasional user or first time user. The
road is difficult to 'read' accurately and driver errors are exacerbated
by
poor road design. It's too easy to blame reckless drivers but on this
road
the layout of some junctions and peculiar lines taken by the road and some
lanes contribute considerably to drivers finding themselves in situations
they'd rather not be in.




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.766 / Virus Database: 513 - Release Date: 17/09/04

The problem lies not so much with the regular users of the road, thankfully,
I am not one of them but with the occasional user or first time user.

If the road in question in the ST article is anything like the roads round
here, it is often the regular users causing the problems. They get complacent.
The "have driven the road a thousand times and I've never had a problem"
thinking. On some of the roads round here I have dipped headlights on a lot of
the time, to give the **** coming round the bend in front an extra nanoseecond
to slow down, by seeing the lights, as otherwise they simply are not really
*looking* - and it's the regular drivers who are at fault, the same cars again
and again.

Cheers, helen s


--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam--
to get correct one remove fame & fortune
**$om $

--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel is switched off--

"dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers" wrote in
message ...
The problem lies not so much with the regular users of the road,
thankfully,
I am not one of them but with the occasional user or first time user.

If the road in question in the ST article is anything like the roads round
here, it is often the regular users causing the problems. They get
complacent.
The "have driven the road a thousand times and I've never had a problem"
thinking. On some of the roads round here I have dipped headlights on a
lot of
the time, to give the **** coming round the bend in front an extra
nanoseecond
to slow down, by seeing the lights, as otherwise they simply are not
really
*looking* - and it's the regular drivers who are at fault, the same cars
again
and again.

I'll rephrase what I said. The regular users are less likely to be the
accident statistic and more likely to be the cause of accidents through
forcing occasional users into errors. As a motor cyclist, I really don't
believe that headlights on makes a blind bit of difference as I have had
innumerable SMIDSYs oer the past fifteen years and on three ocassions,
impacts despite best practice on my part. I can look back and laugh at a
couple of them especially the spotty little git who I forced to cough up
£400 (I've often wondered what sort of person has over £1000 on them at 21)
or soon the spot for damage cause by his careless driving knowing that:

A: he couldn't afford to have an insurance hike probably on his mother's
policy for his hot hatch
B: a police station was in the field of view
C: half the damage was caused by a hit and run from the previous month

And that:
A: I was double his body weight and incandescent with rage
B: I was more agitated after he suggested that I might like to fit second
hand parts to keep the cost down and I suggested that he fitted second hand
wings to replace the ones I was about to damage.

Vernon the part time barbarian
in Leeds. Can't believe I had a hot fiery temper fifteen years ago. The
kids I teach think I'm cuddly.

On Tue, 28 Sep 2004 07:26:59 +0100, "vernon levy" wrote (more or
less):
....
The regular users are less likely to be the
accident statistic and more likely to be the cause of accidents through
forcing occasional users into errors. As a motor cyclist, I really don't
believe that headlights on makes a blind bit of difference as I have had
innumerable SMIDSYs oer the past fifteen years and on three ocassions,
impacts despite best practice on my part. I can look back and laugh at a
couple of them ...

The Evening Standard had a 1/2 page article about SMIDSYs last Friday,
using the insurance industry abbreviation of 'looked but did not see'
(LBDNS), about their irrestitible rise in recent years.

I had ripped out the article to type in, but left it on the far side
of the country. And, of course, it's not an articlre I've been able
to find on their web-site. Ah well.


--
Cheers,
Euan
Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122
Smalltalk links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk) http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote in message . ..

No idea, but I have driven the A59 a Several of times and lived to
tell the tale.

I've actually *raced* on the A59 a couple of times (escaping unharmed
on both occasions), though thankfully it was only a couple of miles'
worth between the B6451 and B6161 junctions [1]. On the same course (a
19 mile hilly TT starting and finishing in Ripley), riders had to go
past the Menwith Hill base whilst on the B6451. My memory may be a
little clouded here, but I seem to recall an instruction in the race
route/start sheet advising competitors not to stop due to
mechanicals/punctures/loo breaks in the vicinity of the base if
possible as this may be frowned upon by the military police based at
Menwith. I may have my facts wrong here, though Arthur Clune might be
able to back me up or disprove as appropriate.

David E. Belcher

[1] Though actually, the B6161-A61 junction at Killinghall was
probably the riskiest bit of the course.