Interesting AD decision to share

Topics relating to Advanced Driving in cars
User avatar
Horse
Posts: 2023
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:20 am

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby Horse » Sat Feb 18, 2017 8:39 am

crr003 wrote:
Horse wrote:
crr003 wrote:"what if the incident they're attending is round the next bend"?
Doesn't matter if you're driving to limit points etc.


Might be safer to use the Surprise Horizon ;)

The "Mind Driving" thing? Whatever happened to that?


Well, I continue to recommend it. Perhaps its 'downfall' - actually more a shortcoming - is that it's not pre-prepared for training purposes. Plus, for example, why would you need to think 'surprise horizon' when the limit point seems to work so well (terms and conditions apply )?
My own views. For better or worse :)

User avatar
Mr Cholmondeley-Warner
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:01 pm
Location: Swindon

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby Mr Cholmondeley-Warner » Sat Feb 18, 2017 5:35 pm

Don't want to be rude, Jason, but this isn't an AD decision. It's the same decision any driver has to make. The key is to remain safe, not panic, and do what you can within the law to help the ES driver. Once you start believing in your own AD hype, you're on the slippery slope. You should always be thinking afterwards - "did I do the right thing?". You've proved that by posting here, but just outrunning an ambulance isn't necessarily "advanced".
Nick

User avatar
ChristianAB
Posts: 267
Joined: Mon Sep 28, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby ChristianAB » Sat Feb 18, 2017 9:15 pm

crr003 wrote:
devonutopia wrote:...Seemed the right thing to do to me. Wondering what others thought. I did technically break a law but is it much different to going through a red light?

This is the garage I pulled in to. If you go "backwards" for half a mile or so you will follow the section of road I took the above choice to accelerate to the petrol station rather than immediately pull over.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.70731 ... 312!8i6656

Did you turn left off the B3180? There were a couple of places to pull over (one road and some drive ways), but there were some double white lines too.
I'd have no hesitation about keeping ahead of them (ambulance/fire) till a sensible place - it's like being followed by a biker - they're fast enough in a straight line but they can't go round bends very well. ;)

There's the standard "what if it's your wife/daughter in the back" emotional rhetoric (because everyone's life is worth the same), but the flip side is the other standard "what if the incident they're attending is round the next bend"?
Doesn't matter if you're driving to limit points etc. but then we wouldn't need speed limits and it all gets a bit circuitous.


May I respectfully reject the notion that "everyone life's is worth the same" ? It's an appealing theoretical notion but in practice, I fail to see how I would ever not preferentially value my life and the lives of my close relatives (in the heat of the moment or not, tbh). And I suspect this is generally true.
Interestingly, in 'Mind driving', there is some emphasis on 'Values and beliefs', which makes me think: go try to tell a mother that her new-born life is worth the same as mine or yours and see whether that fits with her 'values and beliefs'. Even as a society we don't do it: when the Titanic sank, it was "children and women first in the lifeboats".

I also don't understand why "what if the incident they're attending is round the next bend" is the flip side of this, since the idea is not to become reckless because of the circumstances. If anything, the emotional situation makes you prioritise survival, of yourself and of your relatives, which I don't believe is the same as making you drive too fast for the circumstances. So yeah, I don't understand this part. Granted, there is a slippery slope when anyone decides to behave according to exclusively internal references, but at the same time, we are talking about humans here. Flawed, unpredictable, biased humans. Laws cannot change our DNA.

kfae8959
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: Liverpool

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby kfae8959 » Sun Feb 19, 2017 11:39 pm

I've had some correspondence with the North West Ambulance Service about this, particularly following a journey a while ago on a stretch of road where I was baulking the following ambulance when there were speed restrictions, but the ambulance was very definitely baulking me when there weren't. In the end I decided that I was going faster than the ambulance overall, so I stopped trying to let it past.

A subsequent conversation with someone who has trained ambulance drivers encouraged me to try to get a drive in one of their vehicles. Apparently they're complete buggers, and I'd be a lot more sympathetic if I'd had a go in one. I'll let you know!

David

ratty
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2015 6:38 pm

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby ratty » Mon Feb 20, 2017 4:23 pm

.

crr003
Posts: 543
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2015 5:32 pm

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby crr003 » Tue Feb 21, 2017 4:18 pm

ChristianAB wrote:May I respectfully reject the notion that "everyone life's is worth the same" ? It's an appealing theoretical notion but in practice, I fail to see how I would ever not preferentially value my life and the lives of my close relatives (in the heat of the moment or not, tbh). And I suspect this is generally true.
Interestingly, in 'Mind driving', there is some emphasis on 'Values and beliefs', which makes me think: go try to tell a mother that her new-born life is worth the same as mine or yours and see whether that fits with her 'values and beliefs'. Even as a society we don't do it: when the Titanic sank, it was "children and women first in the lifeboats".

Well yes, people have their own ideas about the right thing to do. I don't like being told to consider driving differently based on the imagined occupants of a vehicle that's all.
It's going to be interesting when the autonomous vehicle has to make the decision between driving you head on into an artic, or into a queue at a bus stop.
Re the Titanic - I found this article:
https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archi ... ce/266085/
The behaviour on the Costa Concordia a hundred and odd years later displayed a different attitude apparently.

ChristianAB wrote:I also don't understand why "what if the incident they're attending is round the next bend" is the flip side of this, since the idea is not to become reckless because of the circumstances. If anything, the emotional situation makes you prioritise survival, of yourself and of your relatives, which I don't believe is the same as making you drive too fast for the circumstances. So yeah, I don't understand this part. Granted, there is a slippery slope when anyone decides to behave according to exclusively internal references, but at the same time, we are talking about humans here. Flawed, unpredictable, biased humans. Laws cannot change our DNA.

If you get it right with the emotional/car control then there's no problem, except you could end up blocking the road for the emergency vehicles or at least lengthening the queue if the event is just ahead. If you get it wrong then the Ambulance has another problem to deal with.
As an earlier poster mentioned, it's possible those perceived skills will let you down and exacerbate the problem.
edit to add - not you specifically - the general you.

fungus
Posts: 439
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2015 5:26 pm
Location: Dorset

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby fungus » Fri Feb 24, 2017 9:47 am

Re crr003s link above regarding chivalry.

It has long been my belief that the feminist movements of the 1960s, whilst achieving greater equality for women, and rightly so, also contributed to the lowering of the respect men had for women. Having said that, respect in society is generally lacking. It actually offends me that some in the feminist movement should see it as sexist that I hold a door open for a lady or girl, also the elderly and disabled. In all fairness I am usually thanked for it. However, I find that there is a general reluctance amongst the population to even move aside when walking side by side when there is no room for an approaching pedestrian to pass. This I find applies to both sexes and all age groups. My wife and I were walking the daughters dog on a narrow footpath with a fence to one side and a three foot high bank on the other. There is only room for two people to pass. Approaching us were two teenagers from the local senior school walking side by side. My wife moved in behind myself and the dog, but niether of the teenagers made any attempt to move. I'm affraid I just stood my ground and the one my side reluctantly moved his shoulder enough for me to squeeze through. And to think that someone will have to teach them to drive.

Nigel.

User avatar
Mr Cholmondeley-Warner
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:01 pm
Location: Swindon

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby Mr Cholmondeley-Warner » Fri Feb 24, 2017 11:19 am

kfae8959 wrote:I was baulking the following ambulance when there were speed restrictions, but the ambulance was very definitely baulking me when there weren't.

Confused. Did you and the Ambulance keep swapping places? Or were they "baulking you" from behind?
Nick

kfae8959
Posts: 135
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 12:36 pm
Location: Liverpool

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby kfae8959 » Fri Feb 24, 2017 12:37 pm

Mr Cholmondeley-Warner wrote:
kfae8959 wrote:I was baulking the following ambulance when there were speed restrictions, but the ambulance was very definitely baulking me when there weren't.

Confused. Did you and the Ambulance keep swapping places? Or were they "baulking you" from behind?


We swapped places a few times, and then when the ambulance caught me (gradually) in a speed restriction, I made the decision not to do anything. The ambulance didn't overtake, I pulled away once the restriction had ended, and didn't see it again.

David

User avatar
Mr Cholmondeley-Warner
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 7:01 pm
Location: Swindon

Re: Interesting AD decision to share

Postby Mr Cholmondeley-Warner » Fri Feb 24, 2017 1:13 pm

Interesting. This sounds like you were, effectively, racing the ambulance? You chose to overtake it in the NSL sections, but then held it up in the lower speed limits?
Nick


Return to “Advanced Driving - Cars”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests