bullerboY Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Too fast,too close and not expecting the unexpected also how many motorists have had motor way training once the basic test has been passed.Only a fool ignores the two second rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 No, probably not, but even so the cloud of smoke is not to blame. That's a pretty definitive statement considering the police haven't finished their investigation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 That's a pretty definitive statement considering the police haven't finished their investigation. It's a very definite statement. Unexpected changes in driving conditions are not, and cannot ever be, responsible for a crash. Drivers are responsible for being able to stop their vehicles before hitting anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 So break failure, break light failure, heart attack, tyre blowout, all at 70mph, at night will definitively have nothing to do with the outcome. I'm not being pedantic but you are suggesting that all the drivers (not passengers) who could have died in this tragedy could have saved themselves ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Squirrel Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 So break failure, break light failure, heart attack, tyre blowout, all at 70mph, at night will definitively have nothing to do with the outcome. I'm not being pedantic but you are suggesting that all the drivers (not passengers) who could have died in this tragedy could have saved themselves ? I dont think anybody is pointing the finger of blame specifically but it is true to say that people should drive in such a manner that they can stop in the distance that they can see. The circumstances you suggest are legitimate reasons a crash may occur but to suggest that all of the 25+ vehicles all suffered some sort of unexpected technical or physical failure is pushing the boundaries of reality. What caused the leading few vehicles to come to a sudden stop is anybodys guess at this time and one im sure the authorities will discover in due course but the following vehicles that crashed into the first (leading) stationary vehicles can only be guilty of one thing... Travelling too fast for the conditions. If they hadnt been travelling too fast, they would have been able to stop in good time and avoid being involved in the accident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Unexpected changes in driving conditions are not, and cannot ever be, responsible for a crash. Drivers are responsible for being able to stop their vehicles before hitting anything. I dont think anybody is pointing the finger of blame specifically... I think HN definitely was pointing the finger of blame at drivers. Has he never seen film of earthquakes suddenly causing roads to develop large holes or bridges to collapse? I suppose that would be the drivers' fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Squirrel Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 I see what your saying LeMaquis, but in this instance, i dont think there was an earthquake, holes appearing or bridges collapsing. I strongly suspect the verdict will be 'Driver error'. I was on the road Friday night Between 1800 and 0300 up the North East, admittedly the opposite direction to the South West but if the conditions were the same down there as i experienced on my journey, i can only describe them as treacherous. It was constantly misty rain making the roads wet and slippery and it was Foggy in patches. The sensible thing to do in such circumstances is to slow to a speed where you can stop in the distance you can see. I fear this wasnt the case in Taunton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 I dont think anybody is pointing the finger of blame specifically but it is true to say that people should drive in such a manner that they can stop in the distance that they can see. The circumstances you suggest are legitimate reasons a crash may occur but to suggest that all of the 25+ vehicles all suffered some sort of unexpected technical or physical failure is pushing the boundaries of reality. What caused the leading few vehicles to come to a sudden stop is anybodys guess at this time and one im sure the authorities will discover in due course but the following vehicles that crashed into the first (leading) stationary vehicles can only be guilty of one thing... Travelling too fast for the conditions. If they hadnt been travelling too fast, they would have been able to stop in good time and avoid being involved in the accident. As a regular motorway user I'm trying to envisage how it happened ( or something similar) and I still can't fathom how all the drivers were at fault. I'm in the inside lane when captain rep jumps in front of me and crashes/faints hits something or breaks really heavily. Hes already taken out my 3 second rule through no fault of my own. Let's say I cant break in time and have choice of hitting him or swerving into lane 2. They've got there 3 second gap but I hit them in the side - or nearly do causing him to swerve into lane 3 clipping a car with nothing in front of him. Some might think that hypothesis (nit based on the m5 accident) is rhubarb and they are all perfect drivers and would get through all that without a scrape. Others might suggest that a car could crash with little fault on one drivers part and a whole heap of fault on another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Squirrel Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Tinfoilhat.. Im sure not all of the drivers will be at fault.. Im sure some may have stopped in time and some may have stopped in time but were shunted into the carnage by drivers hitting them from behind. All my point is that vehicles dont crash by themselves.. the road didnt collapse from under them or debris from space fall onto the road. The weather was probably the main contributing factor as well as possible smoke from the bonfire party at Taunton RFC but the biggest factor has to be taken into account and that is driver error. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 Some might think that hypothesis (nit based on the m5 accident) is rhubarb and they are all perfect drivers and would get through all that without a scrape. Others might suggest that a car could crash with little fault on one drivers part and a whole heap of fault on another. I don't mean to suggest that all drivers involved are equally to blame. My point is that a bank of cloud - be it fog, smoke or whatever else - cannot be to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.