Does any driver enjoy getting a large amount of snow, dirty water, or — worst of all — salt-filled winter slush thrown up onto their windscreen, temporarily making it hard to see and needing large amounts of windshield washer fluid to clean it away? It’s a silly question, isn’t it? It’s obvious that none of us likes that experience, especially as it can at least briefly make things unsafe, through the loss of view, the distraction of rectifying the lost view, and last but by no means least, the fact that the overtaken driver has now been forced into a tailgating scenario (see more about this, below).
One of the biggest contributory causes of serious-injury and fatal road crashes in the USA (and the rest of the world) is speed.
Typically, speeds in excess of the posted limit, or that are within the limit but are inappropriate for the circumstances, are factors in around 28-30 percent of collisions where people are ‘Killed or Seriously Injured’ [KSI]. In American terms, this represents about 11,000 people killed and approaching a million people injured each year as a direct result of those who drive too fast.
Clearly then, excessive speed, even when below the posted limit, truly is a killer — big time — despite all of the people who emptily argue that this situation is mere propaganda and is untrue.
If excessive speed is dangerous, and it is, there is still an additional aspect that defies any logic or any excuse, and that is speeding in bad weather. And for our purposes, bad weather extends to include any situation where visibility is reduced, either through simple low-light or darkness, and also airborne view limitations such as mist, fog, dust, smoke or falling rain and snow, together with any cause of slippery road surfaces.
We hope the photographs that accompany this article give you pause for thought. The driver of the silver pick-up truck in this incident could very easily have caused the deaths of several people. All it would have taken was for an oncoming vehicle to loom out of the misty murk at the wrong moment and a collision would have been inescapable. Was he driving at a speed inappropriate for the circumstances? You betcha!
Even without a vehicle coming the other way, the pick-up driver caused significant risk to ourselves by unnecessarily throwing a large quantity of snow up onto the windscreen of our car as he passed and then pulled directly in front of us with less than a car length between the vehicles (see more on this aspect), and that alone was unforgivable.
Please don’t ever be ‘that’ driver, and equally importantly, be prepared for the day when you will encounter somebody as incompetent and brainless as this particular pick-up driver was. Naturally, this involves getting your wipers onto maximum speed — in advance if possible — slowing down promptly but safely (there may be another vehicle close behind, and of course the road is slippery). Then hold a steady course as you do this and don’t allow the situation to panic you.
Finally, please note that these are general comments and do not amount in any way to specific advice. Please see our Disclaimer in this context.
It is easy to identify a person driving safely from someone who is a bad driver by their attitude about whether to pass a snow plough on winter roads.
Is that whiteness you can see on the road just a sprinkling of light snow or could there be ice in among it.
Continue reading “Do You REALLY Want to Pass the Snow Plow?”
Sadly, when politically-correct people in the field of traffic safety state that one should never refer to drivers as “stupid,” or by any other derogatory adjective, there have to be occasions which deserve an exception, and if watching television or videos while driving is not a supreme example of dangerous idiocy, I’m not sure what is.
Event Summary from the NTSB – July 25, 2017
[Comments from ADoNA are at the foot of the page]
Although speeding is one of the most common factors in motor vehicle crashes in the USA, it is an underappreciated problem, involved in about 10,000 highway fatalities each year according to the National Transportation Safety Board.
We saw this earlier today, in Latham (Albany), NY, and the question is “can there be any worse example of thoughtless driving than completely blocking a crosswalk at a red light?”
The attached article and video show a story about Kenyan bus drivers and their matatus, which between them have a truly dreadful crash record. The story does, however, illustrate the power of speaking up against bad driving so, without triggering any ‘rage’ incidents, can you think of any ways that this approach could be used to discourage people from driving badly here in the USA?
One that springs to mind is to tell a friend or loved one that if either they drink alcohol or drive too fast you won’t ride with them because it is too frightening. (It may be best not to say “too dangerous” because that can be seen as confrontational — accusing a person of being a dangerous driver.)
This article was first posted by Eddie Wren in 2005 at the Drive and Stay Alive website & has been re-posted here on July 11, 2017, because it remains important.
For their own safety, drivers — and particularly young drivers — should not be encouraged to do crisis evasion courses or skid training. They can now be shown to cause more crashes than they will ever cure.
I was one of the lucky ones — lucky because nobody can deny that skid training is great fun.
Having said that, the training I received lasted for a total of more than a week spent on a skid pan (known as a “skid pad” in America) during various stages of driver training to become a traffic patrol police officer in Britain.(1)
But now there is overwhelming proof that the one- and two-day courses that are widely available in emergency evasive techniques, including skid control, are not only serving no useful purpose, they are actually increasing the risk of subsequent crashes; a classic example of a little knowledge being dangerous.(8)(9)
This revelation came as quite a shock to me, as I’m sure it has to many of my former police colleagues. Having had the benefit of such extensive training ourselves we perhaps naturally believed that even a small amount of skid pan experience would be beneficial for anyone because drivers would learn more about handling a car.
The fundamental difference, however, lies in the fact that qualifying as an advanced driver and an advanced motorcyclist (for most police traffic patrol officers achieve both qualifications) in British police forces can take upwards of 600 hours and the vast majority of this overall duration is spent learning the discipline and attitude necessary for a remarkably safe standard of driving, irrespective of the high speeds at which traffic police officers often have to travel.
And that is the key to this issue: attitude training.
Even after I left the police and became a supervisory driving instructor — and later still when I was invited to become the managing director of an advanced driver training company aimed at ordinary people, so that they could learn to drive to the same, possibly unequalled safety standards as British traffic officers — I believed that an element of skid training would be beneficial for all drivers.
But I was wrong… totally wrong… and at that time so were virtually of all my colleagues and contemporaries.
But at least the truth has now emerged.
And it is simply this: Skills-based [driving] courses currently are, at best, a waste of valuable resources and, at worst, actively harmful to road safety.
Job (1999) suggests that the naive but pervasive belief that great driving skill is a critical road safety benefit persists despite the evidence to the contrary. This faith in skill has led to the waste of many road safety resources on numerous skill based driving courses and advanced skill components in courses (this does not apply to knowledge based or attitude based courses).(2)
Job’s research was used in Australia. In Sweden, one finds that: A new course syllabus for skid training was introduced on 1 July 1999. It had been preceded by several years’ work by the Swedish Road Administration and the affected organisations (TÖP, Skidcar [Federation of Swedish Skid Tracks], STR and TR [Associations of Swedish Driving Schools]). The impetus for changes in the course syllabus was provided by research results from e.g. Norway which showed a negative effect, i.e. that drivers had a greater number of accidents after completion of skid training (Glad, 1988). This gave rise to a debate in Sweden, and the National Society for Road Safety NTF took the initiative for a research programme which was carried out by VTI. This research programme resulted in proposals that a course syllabus should be formulated with the emphasis on risk awareness, anticipation in driving and recognition of the driver’s own limitations, instead of teaching the pupil how to handle the vehicle in critical situations, as in the previous course syllabus (Gregersen et al 1994)….
During the after-measurement, interviews were held with those in charge of training and instructors once every six months, when they were asked what they thought of the development work itself and the skid training. The responses reveal a definite positive trend; as time went on, people increasingly accepted the new message and the training procedure, and are of the opinion that it is without a doubt the right procedure.(3)
From the 31 countries that form the International Commission for Driver Testing (CIECA) the question is asked: Do you still teach skid control training to your participants?
Leave out highly technical, emergency reaction training (such as regaining control of a skidding car). Insufficient practice time and the potential for counterproductive effects are likely to make such exercises pointless. Trainers with years of technical handling experience should not assume that everyday road users can master such manoeuvres in a one day course and, crucially, be able to execute in a split-second at some random stage in the future. For instance, whilst emergency braking training is recommended, high speed braking and avoidance is not, unless extreme conditions mean that this type of manoeuvre is readily needed in everyday driving (e.g. Scandinavian winter).(4)
From Drivers.com, in Canada, one can read: A word of warning: taking a course in more advanced driving skills such as emergency braking, skid control, collision avoidance maneuvers may create a new risk for you. If the extra skills make you overconfident, that cancels out the advantages of having the skills in the first place. Research has indicated that drivers who take advanced skills courses have a tendency to misuse the skills and actually have a higher crash rate.
Advanced skills such as emergency braking and collision avoidance are not a substitute for good risk management.(5)
From Australia, under the heading of ‘Post-Licence Training’, one finds: Skills-based driver training and education continue to be recommended as potential road safety measures despite consistent evidence (see the review by Christie, 2001) that this approach does not result in road safety gains and may result in increases in crash risk for some drivers.
The ongoing interest in skills-based training most likely reflects a general belief that safe driving involves vehicle control skills and conscious decision-making that can be influenced by education or training. Harrison (1999) discussed the potential value of education and training given the assumptions it makes about the development of driving skill, and concluded that the likely benefits of this approach were limited to improvements in relatively basic skills relating to vehicle control.
Continued investment in this area is unwarranted given the consistency of evaluation results.(6)
And in Britain, the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) state: There is evidence that driver training courses tend to concentrate on vehicle control skills and place too little emphasis on attitudes, behaviour, risk assessment, and hazard perception skills.(7)
REFERENCES (some links are no longer available – 2017):
(1) Police Driving — the Standards and the Reasons (a DSA web page)
(2) Job R.F.S. 1999 The Road User: The Psychology of Road Safety, Chapter 2, Safe and Mobile: Introductory Studies in
Traffic Safety, J.R. Clark — as discussed in Submission to the Australian Parliamentary Travelsafe Committee, January 2003.
View that document here. See also the transcript of the enquiry of the Travelsafe Committee, dated September 23, 2003, here.
(3) Evaluation of new course syllabus for skid training, VTI rapport 472 (November 2001)
(4) Document from CIECA
(5) Article from Drivers.com
(6) Report On Review Of Novice Driver Road Safety Programs (Page 19)
Prepared for NRMA Motoring and Services
By Warren Harrison of Eastern Professional Services Pty, Ltd.
Christie, R. (2001) The Effectiveness of Driver Training as a Road Safety Measure: A Review of the Literature, Report 01/03. Melbourne: RACV
(7) Young and Novice Drivers Education, Training and Licensing; RoSPA, March 2003 (9.13)
(8) Evaluation of an insight driver-training program for young drivers, T. M. Senserrick & G. C. Swinburne (Monash Univ., Australia); 2001.
“Traditional driver-training programs that aim to improve vehicle-handling skills, including manoeuvring exercises and skid training, have tended to be relatively ineffective in reducing crashes. In fact, the introduction of skid training into driver-training programs has been found to increase certain crash types for young drivers. This has been attributed to associated increases in confidence that resulted in greater risk-taking….”
(9) Conflicting goals of skid training; Katila A, Keskinen E, Hatakka M.; Department of Psychology, Univ. of Turku, Finland.
“Efforts to make novice drivers drive more safely on slippery roads by means of special courses have mainly failed…. The exercises may give students the impression that manoeuvring skills are more important than anticipating skills. Manoeuvring exercises also increase their self-confidence and may lead to underestimation of the risks involved, resulting in e.g. driving at higher speed.”
Original Article Excerpt
…According to [an Allstate] survey, Boston drivers are 80 percent more likely to file an insurance claim than the national average. And while the average driver nationwide goes a decade between car crashes, Boston drivers manage a mere 3.6 years between fender benders — that’s 12 percent worse than last year and 22 percent worse than 2015.
Boston drivers were the worst-rated drivers in those years as well, reported. Apparently, Bostonians are really living up to their “Masshole” name.
Back in 2014… the Department of Transportation launched a road safety campaign to address incidents of road rage, distracted driving and seat belt use.
The road safety campaign culminated in the rollout of the oh-so-successful “Use Yah Blinkah” electronic message boards, and at the time, road safety officials hailed the media attention as a sure sign drivers would pay attention.
“We had a lot of public attention and discussion around it,” Frank DePaola, administrator of MassDOT’s highway division, told Boston Magazine at the time of roll out. “It elevated the awareness of good driving habits.”
But despite garnering local and national media acclaim for the clever mingling of road safety and Boston’s charming accent, it appears Massachusetts drivers didn’t really listen….
As someone who has lived and worked in Massachusetts and who now visits Boston frequently, I can readily say that Mass. drivers do many things badly. But that said — and as though ‘designed’ perfectly to prove what a complex subject road safety truly is — it is also a fact that the state actually performs very well in the context of having among the very best (as in ‘lowest’) rates of road deaths in the entire USA, and this has been the case for many years.
If you doubt this, see Traffic Safety Facts 2015 Data (published by NHTSA and the NCSA in June 2017)
As they say, here in America, go figure!
See also: Late Lane-Changes to Exit from Highways are Dangerous! (which features a form of dangerous driving that is common in Massachusetts)
Sadly, it is very common here in the N.E. USA, to see selfish drivers deliberately stay out in the middle- or left-lanes of a highway until they are alongside the exit they require then veer or even swerve sharply across the right-hand lane(s) to exit, right across the front of vehicles being driven correctly and safely.