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

Hotwheels

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.

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.

deman

Already being discussed here

drdre

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

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!

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.

colm_mcm

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

galwaytt

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

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.

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 ?

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.

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?

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.

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.

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:

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?

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....

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.

[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.

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

unkel

[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

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.

unkel

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?

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

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

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.

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.

peasant

deman wrote:

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

even worse :eek:

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.

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

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!

It BeeMee

I don't think he should be fined.
Nor, indeed, get any points.

Instead, he should be forced to watch his precious porsche go through a crusher.
Better still, he should be forced to push the button to activate it......

kippy

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

There is a fixed camera there all right (unless my geography is wrong).
If you look at the road markings just after the speed limit drops from 120 to 80 on the main western to dublin road you'd realise there is a fixed camera there (as well as the numerous signs)

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

Speeders would generally not be interested in reading any more than that sentence, this is the problem, they do not see the danger, and as you have mentioned these roads of ours arent up to that standard and never will be, hence the need for limits and enforcement of said limits.

silent

unkel wrote:

Stopping distance from 100km/h to standstill:

Generic: 80m
Porsche Carrera 4: 35m

ehm, a lada kalina (possible the biggest POS on 4 wheels) has a stopping distance of 59,4/55,2m (cold/warm)
anything over 40m is considered poor
best stopping power from 100km/h in a 'ordinary' car is ~33m (m3 csl I think)

byte

deman wrote:

Already being discussed here

That's a different story deman, but on the same road.

Donegal News wrote:

THE decision to acquit a Letterkenny driver detected driving at 197kph through Barnesmore gap has been met with outrage this week

Controversy has surrounded the decision by Judge Derek McVeigh to find driver Paul McAteer (19) of Lismonaghan, Letterkenny, not guilty for dangerous driving at Keadue, Barnesmore on 3 March. The decision was made at a recent sitting of Donegal District Court following a week of carnage on the roads where 12 young people lost their lives.

Garda Sweeney recorded McAteer travelling at 195kph at 10.40am. He was driving a blue BMW with four passengers in the car. He stopped the driver near Drumlonagher and arrested the defendant and took him to Donegal Garda Station. He charged McAteer with dangerous driving.

Under cross-examination by solicitor Mr Paudge Dorrian, Garda Sweeney said the car did not cross the white line and no-one had to jump out of the way. Garda Sweeney said that as a member of the Garda Traffic Corps for eight years he had seen first hand the effects of speed and considered McAteer's driving to be dangerous.

Judge Derek McVeigh said McAteer would've been travelling at around 120mph and it appeared from the evidence was driving at speed but was not driving dangerously. He dismissed the charge.

Linky: http://www.nwipp-newspapers.com/dn/free/287362082939382.php

So basically, 2 guys got away with such speeds because they got they were charged wrongly?

Car Mad

god damit eveyone is mixed up lol dam roads who needs em,drive safely ladies and gentlemen

Guy:Incognito

kippy wrote:

There is a fixed camera there all right (unless my geography is wrong).
If you look at the road markings just after the speed limit drops from 120 to 80 on the main western to dublin road you'd realise there is a fixed camera there (as well as the numerous signs).

Your geography is indeed wrong. Your thinking of the spa hotel in lucan. The spawell is on the n81 between the m50 and templeogue bridge.

C_Breeze

deman wrote:

Yeah but he WASN'T convicted!

GOOD

is_that_so

SouperComputer wrote:

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

AFAIK travelling as double the speed limit in Germany is instant loss of licence. There are certain places on the autobahn where you are allowed to go at those speeds. Many have speed limits.

Lovely writer

byte wrote:

That's a different story deman, but on the same road.



Linky: http://www.nwipp-newspapers.com/dn/free/287362082939382.php

So basically, 2 guys got away with such speeds because they got they were charged wrongly?

I would be inclined to believe that influential people in Donegal brought influence to bear on the judge. No intelligent person (and judges are suppose to be intelligent) could imagine that driving at those speeds was not extremely dangerous.

dubstub

Lovely writer wrote:

No intelligent person (and judges are suppose to be intelligent) could imagine that driving at those speeds was not extremely dangerous.

As has other posters have noted, driving at those speeds are not necessarily dangerous. I regularly drive at 185-190kph. But it's on a Spanish highway with excellent visibility and in a car that is safe to drive at those speeds.
Doing that kind of speed on any Irish road is reckless. The judge seems to have examined the evidence and decided that it was not dangerous in this case. I find it hard to know how he came to that conclusion, even if the roads were empty and it was in a car that was able to do that speed safely, the fact that other road users would not be expecting cars travelling at that speed and the fact that Irish roads are in crap condition means that this could not have been anything other than dangerous.
Disclaimer: I'm not familar with the road he was caught on but it can't be in a condition safe for those speeds?

unkel

is_that_so wrote:

There are certain places on the autobahn where you are allowed to go at those speeds

Yes so in the view of the Germans, speed in itself isn't necessarily dangerous. The judge seems to have the same view...

kippy

Yes so in the view of the Germans, speed in itself isn't necessarily dangerous. The judge seems to have the same view...

Lets stop this crap about making excuses.
1.
This is not germany.
2.
Even if it were Germany, our laws are different.
3.
Germans will tell you that driving at such speed on Irish roads is dangerous.
4.
Germans do have speed limits on all roads outside of the autobahn-so let cut the crap about Germans.

The attitude of a lot of people towards speed in this country leaves a lot to be desiried.
The faster you drive the more likely there will be a fatality if something goes wrong. This is physics. Whether or not no speed limits are a good thing on roads is up to that country. I personally believe it is not a good thing. No matter how good the road or the vehicle you drive.
Roads in Donegal are notorious for accidents, I think I know the piece of road that the driver was caught on and it aint a good road by any means.

The bottom line was he was well over the legal speed limit and in my opinion he got off very very lightly. The judge did not do what he should have done, however he was within the current guidelines in doing what he did.
The current guidelines need to be changed.

peasant

right ...heres what the Germans think about speeding:


fines for going above the signposted speed limit within built up areas:
innerhalb geschlossener Ortschaften (gilt auch für 30 km-Zone !)
bis 10 km/h 15,- EUR
11-15 km/h 25,- EUR
16-20 km/h 35,- EUR
21-25 km/h 50,- EUR, 1 Punkt
26-30 km/h 60,- EUR, 3 Punkte
31-40 km/h 100,- EUR, 3 Punkte, 1 Monat Fahrverbot
41-50 km/h 125,- EUR, 4 Punkte, 1 Monat Fahrverbot
51-60 km/h 175,- EUR, 4 Punkte, 2 Monate Fahrverbot
61-70 km/h 300,- EUR, 4 Punkte, 3 Monate Fahrverbot
über 70 km/h 425,- EUR, 4 Punkte, 3 Monate Fahrverbot


fines for exceeding the signposted speed limit outside buildt up areas:
außerhalb geschlossener Ortschaften (z.B. Landstraße, Autobahn, auch in Baustellen)
bis 10 km/h 10,- EUR
11-15 km/h 20,- EUR
16-20 km/h 30,- EUR
21-25 km/h 40,- EUR, 1 Punkt
26-30 km/h 50,- EUR, 3 Punkte
31-40 km/h 75,- EUR, 3 Punkte
41-50 km/h 100,- EUR, 3 Punkte, 1 Monat Fahrverbot
51-60 km/h 150,- EUR, 4 Punkte, 1 Monat Fahrverbot
61-70 km/h 275,- EUR, 4 Punkte, 2 Monate Fahrverbot
über 70 km/h 375,- EUR, 4 Punkte, 3 Monate Fahrverbot

Punkte = penalty points
Fahrverbot= banned from driving for x months

so in both cases these guys would have used the bus for three months, got 4 points on their licence and a fine of 375 euro (plus 26.50 in fees)

EDIT ...oh ...and if their driving would have been deemed "dangerous" it would have been another automatic (i.e. without a courtcase) 7 points on the licence ...bye,bye licence ...plus a possible prison sentence/ really hefty fine depending on the amount of danger they posed and the outcome of their day in court

deman

Lovely writer wrote:

I would be inclined to believe that influential people in Donegal brought influence to bear on the judge. No intelligent person (and judges are suppose to be intelligent) could imagine that driving at those speeds was not extremely dangerous.

Sorry guys. I just came to the realisation myself that these were 2 different incidents. Who'da thought it? Same speed, same county, same area (roughly), same verdict and, most importantly, SAME JUDGE!

Guys, if you have a fast car, e.g. a Porshe or a BMW, why not come up to dear old Donegal and see how hard she can go. It's perfectly legal up here (it's my home btw ignoring current location). As long as you have Judge McVeigh and a rich daddy, you'll be fine, and NOT fined.

Oh, and in Finland, police can issue bans themselves without it going to court for a maximum of 6 months.
http://www.poliisi.fi/poliisi/home.nsf/Pages/07897C7BD4BDDB12C2256C370036F94F

MrPudding

kippy wrote:

Lets stop this crap about making excuses.
1.
This is not germany.
2.
Even if it were Germany, our laws are different.
3.
Germans will tell you that driving at such speed on Irish roads is dangerous.
4.
Germans do have speed limits on all roads outside of the autobahn-so let cut the crap about Germans.

The attitude of a lot of people towards speed in this country leaves a lot to be desiried.
The faster you drive the more likely there will be a fatality if something goes wrong. This is physics. Whether or not no speed limits are a good thing on roads is up to that country. I personally believe it is not a good thing. No matter how good the road or the vehicle you drive.
Roads in Donegal are notorious for accidents, I think I know the piece of road that the driver was caught on and it aint a good road by any means.

The bottom line was he was well over the legal speed limit and in my opinion he got off very very lightly. The judge did not do what he should have done, however he was within the current guidelines in doing what he did.
The current guidelines need to be changed.

In addition, there are now only very small sections of the autobahn network that have no limits.

MrP

Alun

MrPudding wrote:

In addition, there are now only very small sections of the autobahn network that have no limits.

That's a comment that's bandied about here a lot, but I have to say that after a recent two week trip there, I didn't notice any significant difference between now and when I lived over there 15 years ago. If you're looking at motorway networks around large urban areas like the Ruhrgebiet, then yes, they have limits there, but then they always did, but on the open sections between the major cities they're pretty much all still unrestricted as far as I can see (except for areas around the major motorway intersections, that is).

unkel

Alun wrote:

That's a comment that's bandied about here a lot

I was thinking the same thing. I have nothing to back it up, but a couple of years ago about half of all Autobahns were unrestricted iirc

peasant

I've done an extensive search but I can't come up with any solid, never mind official data.

Seems to be that around 30% of German motorway are still unrestricted, but even that is under dispute, because there are an awful lot of places that have automated speed governing systems that react to traffic density and weather circumstances.

So while one section of Autobahn might be unrestricted on a bright Sunday morning at 7, a rainy Friday afternoon during rushour might see it restricted anywhere between 60 -120 km/h

The days where you could drive for hours on end at insane speeds are definetly over. If you're lucky, you might find the odd 20 - 50 km stretch that's unregulated ...if you're even luckier it might actually be clear enough to really open up.

MrPudding

peasant wrote:

I've done an extensive search but I can't come up with any solid, never mind official data.

Seems to be that around 30% of German motorway are still unrestricted, but even that is under dispute, because there are an awful lot of places that have automated speed governing systems that react to traffic density and weather circumstances.

So while one section of Autobahn might be unrestricted on a bright Sunday morning at 7, a rainy Friday afternoon during rushour might see it restricted anywhere between 60 -120 km/h

The days where you could drive for hours on end at insane speeds are definetly over. If you're lucky, you might find the odd 20 - 50 km stretch that's unregulated ...if you're even luckier it might actually be clear enough to really open up.

I have carried out no research on the subject and based my comment on a section of Fith Gear. Jason Plato was driving an Audi S6 (I Believe) and was trying to get 180mph or something out of it.

He commented on the difficulty in finding a area of autobahn which was unrestricted and further, when you did find one, you would be lucky if it was long enough or that the traffic was light enough.

MrP