Ooops!! I don't think the insurance companies are going to be too happy

[foxy lady]

Cyclone my old mate, go and have counselling, get a hobby, throw that anorak away, try stamp collecting............get a life !!:hihi:

 

:hihi::hihi:

[Cyclone]

Cyclone my old mate, go and have counselling, get a hobby, throw that anorak away, try stamp collecting............get a life !!:hihi:

 

Is your new hobby to cyber stalk and then post without contributing anything to the thread?

If you've got nothing better to do than post insults you should probably stop posting.

[Cyclone]

It doesn't matter a jot. When I was being taught to drive we were taught of the 2 second rule the 3second rule and a 6 second rule relating to driving in different conditions. The accident in Japan happened in rain.

The drivers of the "supercars" involved were all driving considerably above the speed limit despite the adverse conditions.

The lead driver crashed because he lacked the talent to drive his Ferrari around a bend at his chosen speed in the rain. The others crashed into him because they were too close to pull up from the speed they were traveling. You can put whatever spin you like on that but they are the facts.

So it doesn't matter what figure you chose to produce for stopping distances. The fact remains that they couldn't stop in whatever distance they were giving one another.

 

Incidentally the government guideling for driving at 85mph is quite simple. Don't do it. The speed limit in the UK is 70mph and in Japan 62 mph.

 

Incidentally I made a mistake by assuming that the accident happened on a road restricted to 62 mph. It happened in a 50mph limit where the cars were apparently traveling at over 85 mph in the wet.

 

You should probably send your analysis to the accident investigators.

From a few bits of media coverage you've put together the entire sequence of events and you're absolutely convinced that you're right. As an exercise in self confidence it's amazing, accident investigation, not so impressive.

 

I notice that you still refuse to qualify your statement about multi car accidents on the motorway. Are they all the fault of drivers going too fast and too close together, including when that car in the next lane hits you for some reason?

 

Stretch your imagination around this scenario for a 2nd. It'll be hard, because it doesn't fit in with what you've decided is what happened.

The cars were using 2 lanes of the motorway, the ferrari that lost control was moving into the 3rd lane to overtake and hit a patch of diesel, he bounced off the central reservation, into the car in lane 2 which was pushed into the car in lane 1.

Despite the safe breaking distances the diesel spill meant that the following cars were unable to stop before hitting bits of the debris and also loosing control (indeed, the attempt to stop might have caused the loss of control).

 

All this needs beyond your assumptions is a moderate spill of diesel (not that unlikely) and the cars not to be in single file (very likely that they weren't).

 

Okay, they were still speeding, but that's not the key fact any more and your assumptions about what happened are all wrong.

 

Now I'm not saying that's how it happened. I'm not there to look, but unless you're keeping it very quiet, neither are you!

[foxy lady]

You should probably send your analysis to the accident investigators.

From a few bits of media coverage you've put together the entire sequence of events and you're absolutely convinced that you're right. As an exercise in self confidence it's amazing, accident investigation, not so impressive.

 

I notice that you still refuse to qualify your statement about multi car accidents on the motorway. Are they all the fault of drivers going too fast and too close together, including when that car in the next lane hits you for some reason?

 

Stretch your imagination around this scenario for a 2nd. It'll be hard, because it doesn't fit in with what you've decided is what happened.

The cars were using 2 lanes of the motorway, the ferrari that lost control was moving into the 3rd lane to overtake and hit a patch of diesel, he bounced off the central reservation, into the car in lane 2 which was pushed into the car in lane 1.

Despite the safe breaking distances the diesel spill meant that the following cars were unable to stop before hitting bits of the debris and also loosing control (indeed, the attempt to stop might have caused the loss of control).

 

All this needs beyond your assumptions is a moderate spill of diesel (not that unlikely) and the cars not to be in single file (very likely that they weren't).

 

Okay, they were still speeding, but that's not the key fact any more and your assumptions about what happened are all wrong.

 

Now I'm not saying that's how it happened. I'm not there to look, but unless you're keeping it very quiet, neither are you!

 

Keep digging and you'll be in Australia soon.

 

You seem to be the one making assumptions to try to prop up you ludicrous claims. I note that non of the reports refer to a deisel spill despite a road closure and a full investigation. It is also odd that non of the drivers involved thought to mention it either.

 

What isn't in doubt is a driver who was travelling at least 70% faster than the speed limit despite the rain lost control of his car and his mates who were following at the same speed were traveling too close and too fast to stop.

 

I particularly liked this report.

 

According to police reports, the 60 year old man was apparently driving his Ferrari too fast when he lost control of his supercar and because of the wet road, what happened next will probably make “history”. If the old man will be charged for Japan’s most expensive car crash yet, he will most likely have to pay for all the damages, and considering the fact that most supercars were destroyed completely, the total amount might rise to a few million US dollars.

 

“I was driving at a faster speed than the legal limit. I had attempted to change lanes while driving in the passing lane, but the rear wheels of my car skidded, prompting my car to hit the guardrail”, said the 60 year old Ferrari driver.

 

As a result of the crash, in the 80 km/h speed limit zone a number of 14 luxury vehicles were damaged, some of them ending up as scrap metal. The wreck included a number of Ferrari 355s, Ferrari F430s, Ferrari F360, Ferrari F512, Lamborghini Diablo, three Mercedes-Benz models, a Nissan Skyline and an “eco-friendly” Toyota Prius.

 

I think you should take up nimrods suggestion and try stamp collecting or train spotting you really do need to drop this grudge against female posters and get yourself a life. But I bet you just keep peeling that turd.

[Bigthumb]

Stretch your imagination around this scenario for a 2nd. It'll be hard, because it doesn't fit in with what you've decided is what happened.

The cars were using 2 lanes of the motorway, the ferrari that lost control was moving into the 3rd lane to overtake and hit a patch of diesel, he bounced off the central reservation, into the car in lane 2 which was pushed into the car in lane 1.

 

That would certainly explain it what with it being only a 2 lane road an all. The old bod driving the front car was senile and didn't realize that there wasn't a 3rd lane and whacked the barriers. He then invented the skid to try to save face.:loopy:

[Kadogo]

Since when has A Ferrari been a, so called, Supercar ? Mine was a bag of ****. (ooops, can't say that, it rhymes with writ, which the prix at Marinello might apply for).

[Kadogo]

a Nissan Skyline

 

Now that IS a supercar.

[Cyclone]

That would certainly explain it what with it being only a 2 lane road an all. The old bod driving the front car was senile and didn't realize that there wasn't a 3rd lane and whacked the barriers. He then invented the skid to try to save face.:loopy:

 

So remove 1 lane from my explanation. The skid didn't need to be invented, that would be the diesel that may or may not have been there. The skid caused by the diesel would explain the bouncing off the central reservation and back into the car he'd been about to pass.

[Cyclone]

Keep digging and you'll be in Australia soon.

 

You seem to be the one making assumptions to try to prop up you ludicrous claims. I note that non of the reports refer to a deisel spill despite a road closure and a full investigation. It is also odd that non of the drivers involved thought to mention it either.

I'm not making any assumptions,

 

Now I'm not saying that's how it happened.

I made a suggestion of a possible scenario in the knowledge that we don't have all the facts.

You are assuming however that having read the media reports you know exactly what happened and that's it, case closed.

 

What isn't in doubt is a driver who was travelling at least 70% faster than the speed limit despite the rain lost control of his car and his mates who were following at the same speed were traveling too close and too fast to stop.

No, that's something you've decided is the case.

 

I particularly liked this report.

 

According to police reports, the 60 year old man was apparently driving his Ferrari too fast when he lost control of his supercar and because of the wet road, what happened next will probably make “history”. If the old man will be charged for Japan’s most expensive car crash yet, he will most likely have to pay for all the damages, and considering the fact that most supercars were destroyed completely, the total amount might rise to a few million US dollars.

 

“I was driving at a faster speed than the legal limit. I had attempted to change lanes while driving in the passing lane, but the rear wheels of my car skidded, prompting my car to hit the guardrail”, said the 60 year old Ferrari driver.

 

As a result of the crash, in the 80 km/h speed limit zone a number of 14 luxury vehicles were damaged, some of them ending up as scrap metal. The wreck included a number of Ferrari 355s, Ferrari F430s, Ferrari F360, Ferrari F512, Lamborghini Diablo, three Mercedes-Benz models, a Nissan Skyline and an “eco-friendly” Toyota Prius.

 

I think you should take up nimrods suggestion and try stamp collecting or train spotting you really do need to drop this grudge against female posters and get yourself a life. But I bet you just keep peeling that turd.

 

Grudge against female posters? Now you're just being ridiculous. I don't care whether you're male or female, you jumped to conclusions that weren't supported by the evidence. In fact you didn't have access to any evidence, it was pure speculation when the thread started and have since then refused to admit that you could possibly have been wrong.

[Bigthumb]

So remove 1 lane from my explanation. The skid didn't need to be invented, that would be the diesel that may or may not have been there. The skid caused by the diesel would explain the bouncing off the central reservation and back into the car he'd been about to pass.

 

You are clearly trying to prove to everyone that you are the biggest idiot on the forum. Why don't you just give it up and concede that you are backing the wrong horse on this.

 

The evidence is here.

The road where the accident happened is a 80 km/hr road. The drivers were travelling at 70% more than that despite the poor driving conditions.

The driver who hit the barriers admits he was speeding and lost control

The police who investigated said he was speeding and lost control. They also say they are looking at prosecuting him for reckless driving.

The witnesses to the accident saythe cars were speeding and the front car lost control.

The other cars were unable to stop because they were following too close to allow themselves to do so before hitting the cars they were following.

NO ONE MENTIONS DEISEL. The only reason you invented it is because you've made yourself look a total prat on this because you simply cannot admit that you might be wrong.