One of my neighbours was in the car with his girfriend when she turned right across the front of one of a pair of motorcyclists on an open country road. The motorcyclist lost control of his bike and slid into the front wing of neighbour's car and survived with a broken leg and severe bruising. The motorcyclist says there was no indication; girfriend says she checked her mirrors and did indicate, but because of a bend in the road and the speed he was travelling, he had no chance of avoiding her car. Why didn't the motorcyclist pass down the left of her car? Why did he choose to overtake a right-turning car? Why did girlfriend (with a spotless driving record for 20 years) pull across in front of the motorcyclist?
Many of these questions would be answered if the car and bike had "black box" recorders in them. So how much would they cost? Would backroomers like them in their cars or not? Will they appear in the future?
Hawkeye
-----------------------------
Stranger in a strange land
|
As I have no knowledge of the above case, I shall just pose a theoretical question: Why do some people drive motorbikes and overtake stupidly?
Presumably the motorbike was coming from behind (I don't think OP makes this clear). If so, then I should suggest that overtaking a slowing car that is approaching a junction is at least 'adventurous'.
______________________________
The above should not be construed as a recommendation or advice. Be
|
And anyway, if you are prepared to gamble your life on the person in the car in front having remembered to indicate - or to have changed the bulb - then I'm not playing poker with you!
______________________________
The above should not be construed as a recommendation or advice. Be
|
|
|
|
Why didn't the motorcyclist pass down the left of her car?
It is very very unusual to overtake on the inside on an "open country road".
Why did he choose to overtake a right-turning car? Why did girlfriend (with a spotless driving record for 20 years) pull across in front of the motorcyclist?
Why indeed should a motorcyclist even think of doing that - if she really did indicate, etc., of course!
Many of these questions would be answered if the car and bike had "black box" recorders in them. So how much would they cost? Would backroomers like them in their cars or not?
They should cost a lot less than the "road charging" "boxes" which have been propounded. Objections to them are the same, however - unless very limited information is gathered.
Will they appear in the future?
Very likely. Resist them.
|
|
More and more (including me soon) of my motorcycling friends are equipping themselves with Helmet mounted cameras and DVR kits.
|
More and more (including me soon) of my motorcycling friends are equipping themselves with Helmet mounted cameras and DVR kits.
Which would prove in this case that he was overtaking at a junction....?
|
|
You're right from the OP they were overtaking "AT OR NEAR A JUNCTION" which is bad news especially if the car turns in front of you.....
|
Will they appear in the future?
Already possible: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/northamptonshire/36032...m
|
That is 9 collisions short of one per day for the whole year! How many cars have they got? This sounds horrendous - black boxes not needed - try some basic driving skills!
|
|
|
|
You're right from the OP they were overtaking "AT OR NEAR A JUNCTION" ...
Sorry, not clear. They were turning into a large concreted farm entrance, so not a juction and not marked as such.
The girlfriend's contention there was nothing in her mirror (between her car and the bend in the road) when she started her turn but the motorcyclist was travelling too fast to stop in the space he could see to be clear (ie up to the bend).
IIRC she has been convicted by Teesside magistrates for performing an "illegal manoeuvre".
The "facts" as I faultily remember them shouldn't distract us from trying to decide whether a "flight recorder" would have helped. It would certainly have established relative speeds and whether or not any indication was going on.
Hawkeye
-----------------------------
Stranger in a strange land
|
|
|
|
|
|
What will you do if (God forbid) it clocks you doing something bad PU?
|
< click > < rewind >
------------------------------
TourVanMan TM < Ex RF >
|
|
You forgot on step - "delete"
|
Airbag systems (at least some on them) have been doing this to a limited extent for years:
www.theregister.co.uk/2004/03/10/airbag_grasses_up.../
|
|
If you want a camera or two in your car for your own piece of mind, they are easily available, as fitted to buses, police cars etc.... Why should it be compulsary?
|
I'd like to have such cameras and a black box fitted, but I can't afford it!
[ I'd have one camera facing forwards out the front, one facing out the back and the black box recording every adjustment I make to the controls and an actual - NOT indicated! - speed ].
|
|
|
|
Delete is probably of absolutely no use whatsoever. A good techie can still recover the 'deleted' information. IMVHO, incineration is the only reliable method of deleting computer files.
Post accident, if the police get hold of your video machinery and go through it identifying every dodgy or illegal moment that will provide them with a huge bank of evidence to prove your all-round incompetence and hence achieve a conviction.
I wouldn't have one...
|
yes, all delete does is allow the area of memory to be re-used, the data is still there.
And as for cameras wasn't there a case where the police stopped a biker for speeding, saw a camera strapped to the bike and replayed it? There on screen was evidence that he'd been breaking the limit by vastly more than they were originally going to charge him with - bit of an own goal.
|
|
|
True, but I always drive within the limits; I'd want the recorded evidence as proof in various scenarios:
1 ) Being caught by a defective speed thingy like those radar guns that clock stationary walls at 58mph.
2) Being caught by a staged accident in an insurance scam.
3) Anything similar.
|
|
|
|
|
|
What will you do if it clocks you doing something bad PU?
These things ought to be a) fitted as standard, b) tamper-resistant, with c) a stiff penalty including a ban and a jail sentence for those who wish to pervert the course of justice. They should also, IMO, take a "circular recording" of say 10 minutes duration to remove much of the possibility of gross invasion of privacy possible when more data are collected. You can probably buy a 5MP video-capable camera for less than £50, and that's *retail*. A 512 MB card is peanuts. A bespoke device should be cheap, compared to the cost of vehicle purchase.
|
They should also IMO take a "circular recording" of say 10 minutes duration to remove much of the possibility of gross invasion of privacy possible when more data are collected.
How would the box know that an incident has occurred that it needs to retain, rather than continuing the circular recording?. Otherwise, all you have to do to remove the evidence is to drive home, assuming that the car is still driveable after the incident.
The only way to stop this happening would be to make it compulsory for EVERY accident to be attended by the Police or HA Traffic Officers, so they could commandeer the evidence, but this is simply not realistic.
|
Also, would it be necessary for the box to record while the car was stationery - presumably it would be as many bad things that happen to you do so whilst you yourself are stationery (i.e. other vehicles running into you).
Therefore, the box wipes the evidence waiting for the police to arrive ! ;)
|
|
|
How would the box know that an incident has occurred that it needs to retain rather than continuing the circular recording?.
It is a problem, isn't it. Perhaps some sort of technical whizz could overcome it. It's also a problem with any straight recording where the medium is small. With a huge amount of recording capacity, we've got state intrusion concerns. Difficult. Social engineering? If one party only stopped or dumped off their "black box" after a crash, at least that would get some of the story.
|
|
|
|
ought to be a) fitted as standard b) tamper-resistant with c) a stiff penalty including a ban and a jail sentence for those who wish to pervert the course of justice.
FT: are you completely round the bend? I ask in a spirit of concerned curiosity.
|
FT: are you completely round the bend?
Re-read. I said "those", not "Lud".
|
Ah, I may have missed the point. You don't consider that perverting the course of justice should be an offence?
Perhaps you will explain, rather than just saying "are you 'round the bend?".
|
Perhaps you will explain rather than just saying "are you 'round the bend?".
Forgive me for going a bit OTT, Fothers, but I was expressing surprise at your apparent wish to see black boxes fitted as standard...
There are already penalties in place for people who attempt to pervert the course of justice.
|
Forgive me for going a bit OTT Fothers but I was expressing surprise at your apparent wish to see black boxes fitted as standard...
I see. In the interests of finding out what happened when crashes occur, then yes, I would like to see these. For road pricing and general "nanny state/Big Brother" issues, then I have insuperable difficulties with this sort of thing - hence the desire to keep (say) the last 10 minutes available, and no more, especially not linked to any tracking system, just good 'ol film-type recording with speed details (as seen on "Police camera" or whatever they are TV programmes).
There are already penalties in place for people who attempt to pervert the course of justice.
The "Crash!" of my jaw hitting the ground put me off. I knew that, really ;).
|
In the interests of finding out what happened when crashes occur then yes I would like to see these. For road pricing and general "nanny state/Big Brother" issues then I have insuperable difficulties
Thin end of the wedge FT. And don't imagine it would come free, or even at cost price.
Once the technology was there, the monkeys of officialdom would lose no time in thinking up ingenious ways to use it against humanity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
"'Ere Dave. Plug me car into ya computa to get shot of vat crash I 'ad vee ova night....'Ere's a monkey for ya trouble....."
Would be open to too much abuse by those wanting to avoid being caught. Making the devices tamper proof would, IMHO, push the cost of the car out of the reach of most people.
Good idea but not practical in cars.
--
Top Turkey - the fastest hands in Brum
|
I can see a time coming in the not too distant future........when Mr Average pulls into a m/way service station... and on the way out is stopped randomly by a civilian traffic patrol with 'extra powers' and required to have a 'safety check' which would include a plug in device to his veh's 'black box'.
.... and then the fact he topped 80mph some 200 miles ago in totally unknown circumstances results in a speeding ticket there and then.
don't think i'm exaggerating.....who would ever have thought that local council officials in control rooms could send out parking tickets to people via CCTV?.... they do.
|
|
'....80mph some 200 miles ago in totally unknown circumstances ...' such as taking his Scooby or whatever to a track day or other piece of private ground or even a rolling road. Too many legit possibilities for this to work but then I guess plod would put the onus on Mr Average to prove it.
|
I recall there are wing mirror mounted affairs that constantly loop 15 minutes or so of video recording.
Upon an imapct (i.e. accident), recording is stopped, the memory is sealed and they are admissable in court. I imagine they are pricey, but this would fit the bill in a lot of cases.
I would search it out on google, but am supposed to be working unfortunately.
Ian
|
www.siemensvdo.co.uk/press/releases/fleetmanagemen...m
Most Police Forces (if not all) use these apparently
"I recall there are wing mirror mounted affairs that constantly"
But only if you have wing mirrors ??
|
wing mirrors ??
Is it you that has the thing about door mirrors being called wing mirrors PU? I seem to remember some sort of mad explosion to that effect from someone... :o]
|
|
And what about mirrors mounted on the screen pillar, eh? What diabolical name must we give them?
|
|
|
Is it you that has the thing about door mirrors being called wing mirrors PU?
That'll be me Lud ;o)
|
|
|
|
No it's not me but I know a man who does !!
|
Terribly sorry PU.
I knew it was someone with an edit button who can change words at a blink of an eye to make it look like they've said nice things about the moderators ... :o)
|
|
|
|
|
|
