Safari snorkel Top - which way?

In message <[email protected]>
"Lee_D" <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > one day I'll reprise the thing about why, in a queue of traffic separated
> > by
> > 1-second intervals, the 8th and 9th cars (IIRC) inevitably collide in the
> > event of the one in front stopping... cue cross-thread...
>

You can see it on any motorway if you are in a van or Land Rover. Everyone
is too close (you have to be to stop the undertakers), so as the delay
due to reaction time builds up as each driver has to brake a little more
sharply eventually the inevitable happens......

Mind you, if you are in the aformentioned van or Landie with cars
only in front and you are keeping an eye on the traffic flow as far
ahead as you can (that must at least ½ mile in anything but pretty
poor conditions) then you get *plenty* of warning and you can ease off
without even using the brakes - though any gap you leave will be
immediately filled by something of German manufacture..


> Depends who's at the front! ;o)
>
> Lee D
>
>

Richard

--
www.beamends-lrspares.co.uk [email protected]
Running a business in a Microsoft free environment - it can be done
Powered by Risc-OS - you won't get a virus from us!!
Boycott the Yorkshire Dales - No Play, No Pay

On or around Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:51:43 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
<[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:

>In message <[email protected]>
> "Lee_D" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > one day I'll reprise the thing about why, in a queue of traffic separated
>> > by
>> > 1-second intervals, the 8th and 9th cars (IIRC) inevitably collide in the
>> > event of the one in front stopping... cue cross-thread...
>>
>
>You can see it on any motorway if you are in a van or Land Rover. Everyone
>is too close (you have to be to stop the undertakers), so as the delay
>due to reaction time builds up as each driver has to brake a little more
>sharply eventually the inevitable happens......

'zackly. I satisfied myself that an alert driver in a reasonable car would
be safe enough with a time-gap of 1 second, but that for more than few cars
in a row it doesn't work. The 2-second rule (which has got to be the best
and simplest road safety rule ever) allows enough space even for a long
queue. 2 seconds is approximately 1 yard gap for every MPH, so 50 yards at
50, for example. 1 second is of course only half a yard per MPH (60 mph =
88 fps, which is as close as dammit to 90 fps), which is 25 yards at 50 and
for any vaguely sensible driver that feels too close for long-term use.

>Mind you, if you are in the aformentioned van or Landie with cars
>only in front and you are keeping an eye on the traffic flow as far
>ahead as you can (that must at least ½ mile in anything but pretty
>poor conditions) then you get *plenty* of warning and you can ease off
>without even using the brakes - though any gap you leave will be
>immediately filled by something of German manufacture..

ah, yes, the people who watch more than the car in front spoil the
arithmetic by braking early. Luckily, since if they didn't there'd be even
more collisions.
--
Austin Shackles. www.ddol-las.net my opinions are just that
"For millions of years, mankind lived just like the animals. Then
something happened which unleashed the power of our imagination -
we learned to talk." Pink Floyd (1994)

Austin Shackles wrote:

> On or around Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:51:43 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
> <[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>In message <[email protected]>
>> "Lee_D" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>> > one day I'll reprise the thing about why, in a queue of traffic
>>> > separated by
>>> > 1-second intervals, the 8th and 9th cars (IIRC) inevitably collide in
>>> > the event of the one in front stopping... cue cross-thread...
>>>
>>
>>You can see it on any motorway if you are in a van or Land Rover. Everyone
>>is too close (you have to be to stop the undertakers), so as the delay
>>due to reaction time builds up as each driver has to brake a little more
>>sharply eventually the inevitable happens......
>
> 'zackly. I satisfied myself that an alert driver in a reasonable car
> would be safe enough with a time-gap of 1 second, but that for more than
> few cars
> in a row it doesn't work. The 2-second rule (which has got to be the best
> and simplest road safety rule ever) allows enough space even for a long
> queue. 2 seconds is approximately 1 yard gap for every MPH, so 50 yards
> at
> 50, for example. 1 second is of course only half a yard per MPH (60 mph =
> 88 fps, which is as close as dammit to 90 fps), which is 25 yards at 50
> and for any vaguely sensible driver that feels too close for long-term
> use.
>
>>Mind you, if you are in the aformentioned van or Landie with cars
>>only in front and you are keeping an eye on the traffic flow as far
>>ahead as you can (that must at least ½ mile in anything but pretty
>>poor conditions) then you get *plenty* of warning and you can ease off
>>without even using the brakes - though any gap you leave will be
>>immediately filled by something of German manufacture..
>
> ah, yes, the people who watch more than the car in front spoil the
> arithmetic by braking early. Luckily, since if they didn't there'd be
> even more collisions.
This sort of conversation reminds me that there are different situations in
different parts of the world. On Monday I drove 60km each way into town to
do my shopping. Except for the last 5km or so into town I saw two other
vehicles going the same direction, and one going the other - which makes
this sort of calculation sound very academic. (and it was morning peak when
I arrived in town - I actually had to wait for two cars on the first
roundabout, and a whole row had to wait for me)
JD

On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:18:15 +0100, Austin Shackles
<[email protected]> wrote:

>On or around Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:51:43 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
><[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>
>>In message <[email protected]>
>> "Lee_D" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>'zackly. I satisfied myself that an alert driver in a reasonable car would
>be safe enough with a time-gap of 1 second, but that for more than few cars
>in a row it doesn't work. The 2-second rule (which has got to be the best
>and simplest road safety rule ever) allows enough space even for a long
>queue. 2 seconds is approximately 1 yard gap for every MPH, so 50 yards at
>50, for example. 1 second is of course only half a yard per MPH (60 mph =
>88 fps, which is as close as dammit to 90 fps), which is 25 yards at 50 and
>for any vaguely sensible driver that feels too close for long-term use.
>

Of course you also have to be able to stop whilst leaving enough space
for the guy following in the white van who needs extra time to finish
his text message, put his sandwich down and turn the telly off.

Memorable occasion being about a year ago when I had time to almost
stop, check mirror, see white van approaching at Mach 1 in a plume of
tyre smoke, check wing mirror, pull into middle lane the remaining
momentum and watch white van impale car that had been front of me.
Total time - about 2 seconds I'd guess....




--

Tim Hobbs

'58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
'03 Volvo V70

Scary, that must have got your adrenaline flowing! Good reactions, though!

Pieter

"Tim Hobbs" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 10:18:15 +0100, Austin Shackles
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>On or around Wed, 14 Sep 2005 16:51:43 +0000 (UTC), beamendsltd
>><[email protected]> enlightened us thusly:
>>
>>>In message <[email protected]>
>>> "Lee_D" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Austin Shackles" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
>>'zackly. I satisfied myself that an alert driver in a reasonable car
>>would
>>be safe enough with a time-gap of 1 second, but that for more than few
>>cars
>>in a row it doesn't work. The 2-second rule (which has got to be the best
>>and simplest road safety rule ever) allows enough space even for a long
>>queue. 2 seconds is approximately 1 yard gap for every MPH, so 50 yards
>>at
>>50, for example. 1 second is of course only half a yard per MPH (60 mph =
>>88 fps, which is as close as dammit to 90 fps), which is 25 yards at 50
>>and
>>for any vaguely sensible driver that feels too close for long-term use.
>>
>
> Of course you also have to be able to stop whilst leaving enough space
> for the guy following in the white van who needs extra time to finish
> his text message, put his sandwich down and turn the telly off.
>
> Memorable occasion being about a year ago when I had time to almost
> stop, check mirror, see white van approaching at Mach 1 in a plume of
> tyre smoke, check wing mirror, pull into middle lane the remaining
> momentum and watch white van impale car that had been front of me.
> Total time - about 2 seconds I'd guess....
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Tim Hobbs
>
> '58 Series 2 88" aka "Stig"
> '03 Volvo V70