Advanced Driving Hub

Had the driver slowed to 20 mph some 30 metres before the crossing the car would have been 12 metres away from it, not 5 when the child ran out. The judge found that the extra distance meant the child, probably, would not have 'frozen' on the crossing but kept on running. See 83 (which isn't above) and 102.

I think it is a combination of things - had she been doing 20 and been more observant she would have been covering the brakes / baking off in seeing the children…

As with many such incidents observation is probably the key flaw and the yet speed the headline note

First a Horse war story, then a question.

Some while back, a 'back to biking' trainee binned a bike on-road. It was quite spectacular, and frightening. A escaped with bruises, the bike needed far more than T-Cut. It turned out that he had an undiagnosed medical problem.

It happened in a 30 limit. One of drivers who had been following stayed specifically to tell the police how sensibly we had been riding, in the 30 and before.

External perceptions, the man on the Clapham omnibus, a jury, a judge, etc.


So, question:

Do you think that this judgement might have implications for candidates on 'L' or advanced tests? Perhaps some recalibration of 'safe' progress?

Horse wrote:Do you think that this judgement might have implications for candidates on 'L' or advanced tests? Perhaps some recalibration of 'safe' progress?

“Making progress” on advanced tests – not least the finely judged overtakes that can help influence gaining higher grades – is increasingly at odds with third-party perceptions.

I heard of an L candidate, a 'large' gentleman on a 125, riding on an exposed coastal road in NE England in very wet and blustery conditions, being criticised for not maintaining 60mph when it was legal to do so.

Different, but similar.

I suspect that this driver falls into the "looks ahead, sees nothing to the sides" category. Even in perfect conditions, she probably wouldn't have noticed anyone on the footpath.

Ohlins wrote:

Horse wrote:Do you think that this judgement might have implications for candidates on 'L' or advanced tests? Perhaps some recalibration of 'safe' progress?

“Making progress” on advanced tests – not least the finely judged overtakes that can help influence gaining higher grades – is increasingly at odds with third-party perceptions.

Good reason to keep doing it and keep them used to it. Otherwise we're all heading for men with red flags....

Can (semi) autonomous cars overtake? Parked cars? Bikes? Tractors? If those, then why not slower traffic on an NSL? (and if they can't, are they fit for purpose? Will they leave return gaps for those that can?)

jont- wrote:Good reason to keep doing it and keep them used to it. Otherwise we're all heading for men with red flags....

Don't know about cars, but for riders overtaking is one of the three 'gotchas', typically with very poor outcomes - not something to 'get used to'.

Perhaps ironically, the answer to your automated car question could be that if it's an automated car ahead, then they might both select the same speed for the circumstances.

Horse wrote:

jont- wrote:Good reason to keep doing it and keep them used to it. Otherwise we're all heading for men with red flags....

Don't know about cars, but for riders overtaking is one of the three 'gotchas', typically with very poor outcomes - not something to 'get used to'.

Perhaps ironically, the answer to your automated car question could be that if it's an automated car ahead, then they might both select the same speed for the circumstances.

I meant get folk used to being overtaken, although getting used to getting overtaking right should be a good thing too.

To the second comment - should autonomous cars even need speed limits? And will passengers get a comfort dial? What if the car knows 60mph is safe but the passenger doesn't feel comfortable doing more than 45? Do they get to choose to be a mobile chicane or does the car get to keep everyone reaching their destination in a more timely manner?

jont- wrote:

Horse wrote:Perhaps ironically, the answer to your automated car question could be that if it's an automated car ahead, then they might both select the same speed for the circumstances.

To the second comment - should autonomous cars even need speed limits? And will passengers get a comfort dial? What if the car knows 60mph is safe but the passenger doesn't feel comfortable doing more than 45? Do they get to choose to be a mobile chicane or does the car get to keep everyone reaching their destination in a more timely manner?

Really good questions. Not something I've heard discussed. Nearest was work being done (UCL, I think, led by Cyriel Diels) on designing vehicles to help reduce passenger discomfort/travel sickness. I suggested (albeit not to that team) that there might be a greater benefit by getting the vehicle to drive smoothly and 'considerately'.

https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations? ... AAAJ&hl=en


As an aside to speed, positioning is something where automated vehicles could have advantages, in that there could be less need for lane markings and parking (for storage, rather than passenger access) won't need to allow for door opening. However, while there is a mix of vehicles, neither will apply.

FWIW AFAIK on-road AVs is not where the tech will be most appropriate. Applications such as mining and agriculture are far better uses.

Almost at random:
https://www.volvoautonomoussolutions.co ... dling.html
https://www.nokia.com/thought-leadershi ... riculture/
https://www.asme.org/topics-resources/c ... ing-trucks
https://www.generationrobots.com/blog/e ... -cleaning/

And it's no secret that the military are looking at them for various applications.