Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules

No ban for 196kmh Porsche driver (www.unison.ie)

Options
  • 08-11-2006 11:37am
    #1
    Hotwheels
    Registered Users Posts: 751 ✭✭✭


    Spotted this on Unison today...That's about 122 MPH...if you hit something at the speed its FUBAR time...


    A BUSINESSMAN caught travelling at 196kmh in his Porsche was fined €1,500 at Letterkenny District Court yesterday.

    Declan Grady, technical manager at Novotem factory in Crolly, Donegal, was charged with dangerous driving on June 3 after reaching high speeds on the main Letterkenny to Ballybofey road.

    Garda Dan Curran said the car was travelling so fast he could not detect a speed on his laser gun, however, he clocked the car travelling back down the main Ballybofey road five minutes later at a speed of 196kmh.

    Garda Curran said it was a bank holiday weekend and there was a lot of traffic about at the time.

    "I couldn't believe the speed of the vehicle. I was in shock. I think travelling at 196kmh is dangerous in my opinion," he said. Peter Nolan, BL, argued the wrong charge had been brought against his client and no evidence had been given in relation to dangerous driving.

    However, Judge Derek McVeigh said it was a fact the defendant was travelling at 196kmh and fined Grady €1,500.


«1

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,524 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Doesnt send out a good signal.
    The guy should have gotten a disqualification. But I suppose the judge was only applying the options available to him.
    Until mandatory sentances come in for such things stories like this will always shock.


  • Options
    #3
    deman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,672 ✭✭✭deman


    Already being discussed here


  • Options
    #4
    drdre
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,245 ✭✭✭drdre


    he also got 5 penalty points.thats given to everyone that gets a dangerous driving conviction


  • Options
    #5
    deman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,672 ✭✭✭deman


    drdre wrote:
    he also got 5 penalty points.thats given to everyone that gets a dangerous driving conviction

    Yeah but he WASN'T convicted!


  • Options
    #6
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    The paper today said that the judge didnt ban him because he needs his car for work.I'm sorry but as far as I'm concerned thats a load of bollocks. If he needs the car for work he should be extra carefull not to do things to lose his licence. In fact it should be more of a reason for the judge to ban him, so it teaches him a lesson. A 6 month ban with the promise that if it happens again it'll be gone for 2 years is whats needed.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    colm_mcm
    Registered Users Posts: 73,438 ✭✭✭✭colm_mcm


    the "Bank-Holiday Weekend" is the icing on the cake!


  • Options
    #8
    galwaytt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,766 ✭✭✭✭galwaytt


    196km/h...damn, he should get that car serviced!

    Ode To The Motorist

    “And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, generates funds to the exchequer. You don't want to acknowledge that as truth because, deep down in places you don't talk about at the Green Party, you want me on that road, you need me on that road. We use words like freedom, enjoyment, sport and community. We use these words as the backbone of a life spent instilling those values in our families and loved ones. You use them as a punch line. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the tax revenue and the very freedom to spend it that I provide, and then questions the manner in which I provide it. I would rather you just said "thank you" and went on your way. Otherwise I suggest you pick up a bus pass and get the ********* ********* off the road” 



  • Options
    #9
    Anan1
    Registered Users Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    "Garda Dan Curran said the car was travelling so fast he could not detect a speed on his laser gun, however, he clocked the car travelling back down the main Ballybofey road five minutes later at a speed of 196kmh."

    To my mind, this is the most interesting sentence in the article.


  • Options
    #10
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,047 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Stekelly wrote:
    The paper today said that the judge didnt ban him because he needs his car for work.I'm sorry but as far as I'm concerned thats a load of bollocks. If he needs the car for work he should be extra carefull not to do things to lose his licence. In fact it should be more of a reason for the judge to ban him, so it teaches him a lesson. A 6 month ban with the promise that if it happens again it'll be gone for 2 years is whats needed.
    If you can afford a porsche you can afford a phone/bus pass/taxi.

    And I agree 110% that someone who needs a car for work should be MORE careful. Especially since you would expect them to cover more miles than the rest of us.

    What is the stopping distance at 196Kph ?


  • Options
    #11
    Anan1
    Registered Users Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    Capt'n Midnight wrote:
    What is the stopping distance at 196Kph ?
    It depends very much on the car. A large part of it will be the distance travelled between seeing the hazard and actually getting on the brakes. And let's remember that this guy didn't even see the speed trap on his first pass.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    the_syco
    Registered Users Posts: 37,297 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    "Garda Dan Curran said the car was travelling so fast he could not detect a speed on his laser gun, however, he clocked the car travelling back down the main Ballybofey road five minutes later at a speed of 196kmh."
    So the message that that sends out is: so, if I drive to work, I can't go 5 miles over the speed limit, but if the cops can't detect what speed I go at, it all ok?


  • Options
    #13
    Anan1
    Registered Users Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    the_syco wrote:
    So the message that that sends out is: so, if I drive to work, I can't go 5 miles over the speed limit, but if the cops can't detect what speed I go at, it all ok?
    The second part has always been and will always be the case.


  • Options
    #14
    layke
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,956 ✭✭✭layke


    You can't blame the judge on this.

    The reaon we have penalty points is so when you reach 12 not 5 our off the road. Also I would guess the judge can only set a max limit for dangerous driving so really his hands are tied by the law itself.

    You want some one to get the full what write to your TD and get them to up the dose.


  • Options
    #15
    Hotwheels
    Registered Users Posts: 751 ✭✭✭Hotwheels


    What is the stopping distance at 196Kph ?

    The stopping distance for that speed under ideal conditions, e.g tyres on the car are in good condition, and road surface is good...is about 620ft...189m

    At 54m/s if something unexpected happens, the drivers reaction time will make very little difference imo...
    The guy should be walking...:mad:


  • Options
    #16
    Anan1
    Registered Users Posts: 22,815 ✭✭✭✭Anan1


    Hotwheels wrote:
    The stopping distance for that speed under ideal conditions, e.g tyres on the car are in good condition, and road surface is good...is about 620ft...189m
    In what car?


  • Options
    #17
    Hotwheels
    Registered Users Posts: 751 ✭✭✭Hotwheels


    In what car?
    The Porshe.....

    Using the available data i.e 196Kmph = 54.4 m/s and say 0.8 is a nominal value for the static friction between good tires and a good road surface....


  • Options
    #18
    CPG
    Registered Users Posts: 108 ✭✭CPG


    Anan1 wrote:
    "Garda Dan Curran said the car was travelling so fast he could not detect a speed on his laser gun, however, he clocked the car travelling back down the main Ballybofey road five minutes later at a speed of 196kmh."

    To my mind, this is the most interesting sentence in the article.



    Ya, it means the Garda are incapable of clocking a car travelling at ridiculous speeds. And the guy had gotten away with it the first time.


  • Options
    #19
    [CrimsonGhost]
    Registered Users Posts: 1,023 ✭✭✭[CrimsonGhost]


    Hotwheels wrote:
    The Porshe.....

    Using the available data i.e 196Kmph = 54.4 m/s and say 0.8 is a nominal value for the static friction between good tires and a good road surface....

    A porshe will have
    a) Much more powerful brakes than your average car
    b) Much more downforce than you average car, thereby greatly increasing the friction
    c) Will stop in a far shorter distance than you would think.


  • Options
    #20
    kippy
    Registered Users Posts: 18,524 ✭✭✭✭kippy


    Ya, it means the Garda are incapable of clocking a car travelling at ridiculous speeds. And the guy had gotten away with it the first time.
    Interesting,
    I believe a few years ago a "test" was done at the speed camera at the spawell.
    Some crazy guy on a motorbike decided to see if it was possible to beat the camera there by going as fast as possible over the speed check. I think he was clocked doing some ridiculous speed, and his theory about going through it fast enough not to get caught was defunked. Now, this is a static camera and I believe the technology is different to that which the Guards us out on the road.

    They dont have a static camera or reference point and as such I believe they have to physicilly get a "lock" on the car for a second or so. If the guards vantage point is not great or awkward and the car is going at a crazy speed then its likely that the Guard wont be able to get him with the speed gun. Its more a problem with humans rather than the technology as the technology relies on the guard to aim and keep it on the car for a short time.
    I would be pretty sure that if this did happen, as in the case above, the guard would try his damdest to get the driver again.
    I doubt the porsche driver would have gotten past a static camera as luckily the first time.

    It doesnt really matter what the stopping distance of the car is-the guy was driving with little regard for other road users or himself. I totally agree with the work thing-he should be more careful if he needs the car for work, not less.
    Kippy


  • Options
    #21
    unkel
    Registered Users Posts: 65,213 ✭✭✭✭unkel
    Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!


    [CrimsonGhost] wrote:
    A porshe will have
    a) Much more powerful brakes than your average car
    b) Much more downforce than you average car, thereby greatly increasing the friction
    c) Will stop in a far shorter distance than you would think.

    Exactly, plus:

    d) Has ABS
    e) Has more rubber surface in contact with road
    etc.

    Those generic stopping distances are just that. Generic.

    Stopping distance from 100km/h to standstill:

    Generic: 80m
    Porsche Carrera 4: 35m


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    peasant
    Registered Users Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    Yeees, a Porsche can really "throw anchor" but that's totally beside the point.
    The Letterkenny to Ballybofey road is bendy and hilly. There a very few stretches on that road, where at 196 km/h your man would have been able to overlook his stopping distance (as short as that is in his Porsche) never mind get a "clear view of the road ahead".

    For nutcases like him, I'd like to see a law where his Porsche gets confiscated, sold on and the proceeds donated to a charity for the victims of traffic accidents.


  • Options
    #23
    unkel
    Registered Users Posts: 65,213 ✭✭✭✭unkel
    Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!


    peasant wrote:
    Yeees, a Porsche can really "throw anchor" but that's totally beside the point.
    The Letterkenny to Ballybofey road is bendy and hilly

    Agreed. My point was just that there is no such thing as "the stopping distance"

    Back on topic: so it's official now that speeding alone (even on twisties) is not enough for it to be dangerous driving?


  • Options
    #24
    Car Mad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 510 ✭✭✭Car Mad


    galwaytt wrote:
    196km/h...damn, he should get that car serviced!

    thats what i was thinking:D shur ur aveage car could get near enough to that.(makes note bmw mercs etc)average cars that eveyone happens to get these days.:D anyway he was a bit silly.he turned around and came back:rolleyes: no seriously though that is mad speed and he should be off the road:mad: but thats the max penalty the judge can give:eek: im sure he will be caught speeding again:cool:

    edit i read somewhere that he had 4 passangers in the car he should never be left in a car again.You think the passengers would of had the copon to tell him slow down


  • Options
    #25
    peasant
    Registered Users Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    breaking distance Porsche 911 carrera (2002)
    100 - 0 Km/h cold 35,8 m
    100 - 0 Km/h hot 36,9 m
    200 - 0 Km/h 144,2 m
    200 - 0 Km/h 5,2 s

    www.track-challenge.com


  • Options
    #26
    dubstub
    Registered Users Posts: 204 ✭✭dubstub


    Car Mad wrote:
    edit i read somewhere that he had 4 passangers in the car he should never be left in a car again.You think the passengers would of had the copon to tell him slow down

    Were they midgets and did he stack them? That's pretty good going to get 5 people into a Porsche. ;)


  • Options
    #27
    deman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,672 ✭✭✭deman


    peasant wrote:
    The Letterkenny to Ballybofey road is bendy and hilly.

    It was the Ballybofey to Donegal Town road, Barnesmore Gap.
    layke wrote:
    You can't blame the judge on this.

    Yes you can. It's common sense. How can anyone say that travelling at 196kmph isn't dangerous? The driver is 19 years old and driving a Porshe. How many 19 y.o.s do you know that drive a Porshe? There's a lot of influence going round here. :mad: nudge nudge wink wink.


  • Options
    #28
    peasant
    Registered Users Posts: 17,819 ✭✭✭✭peasant


    deman wrote:
    It was the Ballybofey to Donegal Town road, Barnesmore Gap.

    even worse :eek:


  • Options
    #29
    Guy:Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 38,247 ✭✭✭✭Guy:Incognito


    kippy wrote:
    Interesting,
    I believe a few years ago a "test" was done at the speed camera at the spawell.
    Some crazy guy on a motorbike decided to see if it was possible to beat the camera there by going as fast as possible over the speed check. I think he was clocked doing some ridiculous speed, and his theory about going through it fast enough not to get caught was defunked. Now, this is a static camera and I believe the technology is different to that which the Guards us out on the road.y


    The only speed camera I've ever seen at the spawell is a gard with a handheld detector.


  • Options
    #30
    Car Mad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 510 ✭✭✭Car Mad


    Stekelly wrote:
    The only speed camera I've ever seen at the spawell is a gard with a handheld detector.

    dats becuse your not supposed to see them:D about the passangers i saw it in another thread so dont blame me:eek: maybe they are midgets.and how in gods blazes could a 19 year old get insurance on a porsche never mind buy one as in most cases the insurace for 19 year old is twice the cost of the car;)
    i really should think before i belive what other people say.im just a poor gulibale irish man.thank god you corrected me be4 i said it to someone else


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    SouperComputer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,949 ✭✭✭SouperComputer


    How can anyone say that travelling at 196kmph isn't dangerous?

    196 or even 300Kph isn't dangerous, just ask a German :)

    However it can be an inappropriate use of speed and become dangerous when certain conditions come into play. Blind hills and long bends with a short distance of visiblity at that speed, not smart, even in a F1 car! These terms are set and do not change with your vehicle or driving ability.

    Stopping and braking distances are fine and great, but if you can't see the hazard and react in time you are borked (major problem with undulating roads and blind bends), weather you are an F1 star or a granny. However bear in mind that the best way to avoid a collision is not always to stop. This is the primary reason ABS helps prevent collisions. It allows everyday drivers to turn and brake effectively to avoid a collison.

    Take a typical reaction time and the distance travelled before any braking is applied is 264ft at 200KPH. In the real world, even if you can see ahead twice that distance you are asking for trouble. Throw hills, bends, trees and other items that affect your field of view and you could be cruisn' for a bruisin' to put it mildly.

    200Kph Dangerous? No
    200Kph Dangerous in the conditions? Definately!


Advertisement