NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/nz/general/1894

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-27 | 4.0 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!comp.vuw.ac.nz!waikato.ac.nz!aukuni.ac.nz!kcbbs!nezsdc!derek
Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: Holiday Road Period
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
From: [e-mail] (Derek Tearne)
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 01:02:52 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: Fujitsu New Zealand - Software Development Center
Lines: 74

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Murray Knox) writes:

[much discussion of smooth curving deleted]

>Actually, both the British Police and the Advanced Motorists
>Association teach the following for going around curves in roads (this is
>not an exact quote) :-
>
>" ... when approaching a curve that you can not clearly see around slow
>down and approach from as far to the outside of the bend as possible
>(note: this may involve crossing the centre line on left-hand bends).
>When you can see clearly around the corner move as close to the inside
>of the curve as possible (around right-hand bends this again involves
>crossing the centre line)..."
>
>Both the police and AMA also teach proper observation methods and state
>that if you can't see far enough ahead don't cross the centre line [deleted]

This isn't exactly the situation we were discussing.  There is an implication
that you have slowed down to allow you to move safely into your correct
lane as soon as possible and to a speed where you can see clearly around
the corner.  The curve smoothing discussed in the thread did not involve
slowing down.  Rather it involved executing a shallower radius bend because
they are already going to fast for the turn and don't want to slow down.

To make it even less relevant it is apparently illegal in NZ to cross the
centre line unless you are overtaking or have a very good reason to do so.

>The reasons behind this method is to allow you travel "as quickly and as
>safely as possible"

I think you've missed out the 'during high speed pursuit or en-route to an
emergency' part of that sentence.

>Approaching blind corners from the outside allows you to see further
>around the curve and thus spot potential hazzards[sic] more easily and sooner.
>Thus, this improves safety and allows you to move in and take the bend
>more tightly when you can see it is safe to do so.

This applies mostly to single track roads with high hedging in the UK and
on such roads I do employ this method.  Scares the unfamiliar shitless and
does involve a certain amount of risk.
The important thing when doing this is travelling at a speed which allows
you to safely get back into your lane if necessary.  This thread was started
as a discussion of people who only just managed to get back in lane with no
safety margin at all.
This type of road does not really exist in New Zealand and as such is not
relevant to the discussion at hand.

>If you dispute these arguments, then I suggest you take it up with
>the British Police force who average in excess of 100000 miles/year
>each and probably with a lower accident rate than anybody arguing
>in this thread.

This is USENET.  You have absolutely no idea of the driving skills/accident
rate of most of the people taking part in this thread.  What is the basis
of your speculation on the Police accident rate? Per year, per miles
travelled or per car chase?  The average British Police driver will have
several accidents in a year.  Admittedly they do get involved in car chases
etc. but their record in terms of numbers of accidents is not that great.
Their record in terms of lack of fatal accidents is good though - especially
considering the speeds and situations...

In the end I don't give a monkeys toss about what the British Police
recommend for car chases through a set of conditions not prevalent in NZ.




--
Derek Tearne.   --   [e-mail]   --    Fujitsu New Zealand   --
 _______
 _______} This is a Usenet Condom<tm>.  Roll the condom over the .signature
      file before posting to protect yourself from .sig retro-virii