What would you do ?

MarkoC

Just random here and would like to hear your opinions about that.

Case itself now:

Its a narrow country road but not too bad, 80 km/h allowed with couple sharp bends.
You are drivin on the red car and you also have 2 babies on board.
Your speed is around 40 km/h and in the middle of the bend suddenly you see a blue car and the pedestrian on your side of the road walking toeards you. Lets say time for the action in that case is less than a second, what would you do ? Crash to the blue car to avoid run over the pedestrian or you will avoid the crash and ram the man ?

ART6

Sound horn in one long blast, stay on course, make pedestrian jump onto verge out of the way.

qz

Perform a death-defying skid that whips out the tail of your car and smashes into the pedestrian while the blue car ploughs into the offside front of your car. This is the only way to get bonus points.

Anan1

If those are your only two options then you're going too fast. Always hit a car before hitting a person. Out of interest, do you hold a full license?

benj

if the road is too narrow for a walker and 2 cars then you should adjust your speed on approaching bend so you will be able to stop in time

MarkoC

ART6 wrote: »

Sound horn in one long blast, stay on course, make pedestrian jump onto verge out of the way.

Usually when theres less than 1 sec to act you dont think about horning and swearing , its either you turn the steering wheel right or left and if you horn at that distance, usually pedestraians will freeze of fear ...

The Dagda

I recognise that bend, it's near Moyasta in Co. Clare. Joachim's alway's out walking...

Out of interest, what did you do OP?

MarkoC

Anan1 wrote: »

If those are your only two options then you're going too fast. Always hit a car before hitting a person. Out of interest, do you hold a full license?

LOL, you cant even image what ive done and how much i paid for the whole courses and exams And yes i do have full license nearly 10 years.
Dont start this "too fast" BS again please, road signs are so bad in this country that this situation can happen to anyone, so lets stay in topic please :

Its just random in my head and didnt happen to me yet ...

ART6

Anan1 wrote: »

If those are your only two options then you're going too fast. Always hit a car before hitting a person. Out of interest, do you hold a full license?

OK, so let's suppose the other car is also doing 40 kph. That's a closing speed of 80 kph. A head on collision at that speed is going to hurt someone. So, two babies on board in the OP's car, and who know who is in the other? Do you risk injuring or even killing two or three others, or do you take out the pedestrian?

I respect your humanitarian approach, but if they were my babies on board........

Anan1

MarkoC wrote: »

LOL, you cant even image what ive done and how much i paid for the whole courses and exams And yes i do have full license nearly 10 years.
Dont start this "too fast" BS again please, road signs are so bad in this country that this situation can happen to anyone, so lets stay in topic please :

Its just random in my head and didnt happen to me yet ...

With respect, it's got nothing to do with road signs and everything to do with being able to stop within the distance which you can see to be clear. If you can't then you're driving dangerously fast with two babies on board.

I also find the question about which to hit more than a little strange - surely it's obvious that the occupant of a car will have a better chance of survival than an unprotected pedestrian?

the_syco

MarkoC wrote: »

Dont start this "too fast" BS again please, road signs are so bad in this country that this situation can happen to anyone, so lets stay in topic please :

If you're going at speed round a blind bend on a narrow road, the blue car may be a JCB, and the pedestrian a Garda.

You call BS to the "too fast" rules, I call BS to your lack of common sense. I've driven on 80kph backroads, but if I see a sharp blind bend coming up, I slow down before it. Why? In case that instead of a blue car, there may be a truck carrying cattle to the market around it in the middle of the road. Sure, they may be in the wrong, but that won't do you any good.

Anan1

ART6 wrote: »

OK, so let's suppose the other car is also doing 40 kph. That's a closing speed of 80 kph. A head on collision at that speed is going to hurt someone. So, two babies on board in the OP's car, and who know who is in the other? Do you risk injuring or even killing two or three others, or do you take out the pedestrian?

I respect your humanitarian approach, but if they were my babies on board........

It's a closing speed of 80km/h but with two cars and therefore two crumple zones - roughly the equivalent of a single car impact into an immovable barrier at 40km/h. As such it's more likely to be survivable than an impact with a pedestrian at 40km/h. All this is presuming the driver hasn't compounded his recklessness by failing to adequately secure the two infants in the car.

BrianD3

Hit the car, don't hit the pedestrian. You'll be completely in the wrong no matter who you hit but by hitting the car you may well prevent a death and also avoid a prison sentence (dangerous driving causing death)

If blue is a good driver he should have anticipated what might happen. Blue can see the pedestrian in plenty of time and should anticipate that he is a hazard even though he's on the other side of the road.

MarkoC

Looks like you didnt read the first post propebly, where i mentioned the actual speed at the time, which was 40km/h. Sp 16% of more pedestrians killed this year and its always drivers fault ? Was hoping someone comes up with an idea that actually pedestrian should walk on the other side of the road in that case ...
Anyway keep posting

tossy

MarkoC wrote: »

road signs are so bad in this country that this situation can happen to anyone,
.

Yeah you never see enough ''caution pedestrian walking and oncoming car driving on tight bend ahead'' signs! this government eh!! :rolleyes:

Alanstrainor

MarkoC wrote: »

Looks like you didnt read the first post propebly, where i mentioned the actual speed at the time, which was 40km/h. Sp 16% of more pedestrians killed this year and its always drivers fault ? Was hoping someone comes up with an idea that actually pedestrian should walk on the other side of the road in that case ...
Anyway keep posting

You never mentioned the speed of the blue car. And since when can we change the situation outlined in the OP!

The situation is ridiculous, if you're travelling on that tight a road going around a blind bend, with 2 babies in the back, you should be shot.

And still my response would be; brake hard and smash into the car. Crumple zones, airbags etc will absorb the impact, at least you'd have some chance of coming out of the situation with all parties alive.

MarkoC

tossy wrote: »

Yeah you never see enough ''caution pedestrian walking and oncoming car driving on tight bend ahead'' signs! this government eh!! :rolleyes:

I really rarely see a warning sign about upcoming sharp bend in this country, sry ...

Anan1

MarkoC wrote: »

Looks like you didnt read the first post propebly, where i mentioned the actual speed at the time, which was 40km/h.

Which, given your inability to stop safely, is too fast.

MarkoC wrote: »

Sp 16% of more pedestrians killed this year and its always drivers fault ?

In this case it would be entirely your fault.

kerten

Assuming both cars are not huge cars even narrow backroads should be able to accommodate two car + pedestrian in a row.

I would break strongly but not %100 to keep back of car on road and progress on my lane until 1 meter left to pedestrian then steer right enough to not to hit pedestrian. then steer back the lane after make sure pedestrian is out of danger

lucky scenario : blue car steer left or stop as much as it can during situation and no crash at all

expected scenario : blue car doesn't do anything but roads are wider than they seems and you can save yourself from an accident if you didn't steer right excessively

unlucky scenario : blue car doesn't do anything and road is not wide enough. a side to side accident with minimal damage. pedestrian is safe

worst scenario : you slammed brakes and spin in the bend, head to side crash with blue car and some injury to pedestrian

stupid scenario : targeting blue car for head to head crash without breaking.

djimi

Are we talking about the car being on your side of the road as well? In that case it doesnt really matter what you do, youre going to get hit, so you may as well get as far away from the pedestrian as possible.

If the blue car is on its own side of the road where it should be then its unlikey that at 40kmph you are going to have to choose between hitting the car or the pedestrian unless the pedestrian is walking down the middle of your side of the road like a halfwit, and you almost definately wouldnt have only 1 second to react. At the speeds you mentioned I dont see it being a very likely situation tbh, but lets say for arguement sake that it is, then you are travelling too fast for the conditions.

"Drive at a speed that enables you to stop within the distance you can see to be clear"

The most fundamental, yet apparently least understood rule of the road. If the driver of the blue car were following this rule they would have a third option available - come to a stop before colliding with the pedestrian, whilst staying on their own side of the road and avoiding the red car.

Cuddlesworth

Your going too fast. What if it was a cow standing there in the middle of the road. Odds are a 40kph impact into a cow could kill you as the driver when it goes through the windscreen. And its not like its a uncommon occurrence in the country.

Safest answer would be to put the car in the ditch. No sudden stop if done right.

MarkoC

Most people still didnt get the question and getting personal ,...thats sad actually about this forum ...
No it dint happen to me so please stop this pofensive crap, we all have unexpected situations in the traffic, my question was:
What would you do in that situation ?
I didnt ask any other questions, but the thread turs so offensive and off topic ...
But im really glad that couple people here got the point, someone should start a thread about hhow many users can read and stay in topic , infortunately i can see already in this thread, the per centage is very low ...

Keep firing

peasant

I just love the reasoning that having two babies on board gives some sort of moral justification to mow down an innocent pedestrian. (another reason to shun cars with those stickers in the back window)

If your kids are that prescious to you then don't drive too fast in the first place.

Anan1

MarkoC wrote: »

Most people still didnt get the question and getting personal ,...thats sad actually about this forum ...
No it dint happen to me so please stop this pofensive crap, we all have unexpected situations in the traffic, my question was:
What would you do in that situation ?
I didnt ask any other questions, but the thread turs so offensive and off topic ...
But im really glad that couple people here got the point, someone should start a thread about hhow many users can read and stay in topic , infortunately i can see already in this thread, the per centage is very low ...

Keep firing

Most posters have already told you

a.) What to do in that situation

and

b.) How to avoid it in the first place.

I'm sorry if you find the answers offensive - I think people are trying to impress on you how recklessly one would have to be driving with two infants in the car to find oneself in this position in the first place. If you like I could close the thread? If I leave it open i'll expect you to rebut responses with some kind reasoned argument rather than simply dismissing them as 'offensive crap'.

veetwin

Have to agree with Anan and JamesL85. You must be able to stop in the within the distance you can see to be clear. If this means driving at 10kph then so be it. Babies in the back are irrevelant or at least there were when the hypothetical person decided to enter a blind bend at 40kph.

Answering the question what would I do in this situation my answer is I hope to never be in that situation but I would drive at an appropriate speed to avoid the situation cropping up. Blaming a lack of road signs is hardly useful either. I don't need a road sign to tell me a bend is blind and I need to adjust my speed accordingy.

Cookie_Monster

so did this actually happen then OP?

Correct answer is to be able to stop in time and then scream abuse at the numpty pedestrian for being on the wrong side of the road* and putting themselves in unnecessary danger.


*yes, normally you should walk against traffic, except on blind corners where you should cross in advance enough to clearly see traffic

foxinsox

MarkoC wrote: »

Was hoping someone comes up with an idea that actually pedestrian should walk on the other side of the road in that case ...

Pedestrians are supposed to walk on the side of the road facing oncoming traffic.

I agree with other posters as in your hypothetical scenario the red car is going too fast.

The red car and the blue car should react to blind bend coming up and adjust speed accordingly, slow down completely prepared to come to complete stop if required.

Pedestrian if he had any sense would have already heard your car and the blue car and be standing in the ditch.

Expecting a pedestrian to cross a back road on a blind bend is just silly and dangerous.

Regardless of road signs, common sense and safe driving should come into effect especially on country roads, therefore your hypothetical scenario should hypothetically never exist.

Drive safe

MarkoC

Anan1 wrote: »

I'm sorry if you find the answers offensive - I think people are trying to impress on you how recklessly one would have to be driving with two infants in the car to find oneself in this position in the first place. If you like I could close the thread? If I leave it open i'll expect you to rebut responses with some kind reasoned argument rather than simply dismissing them as 'offensive crap'.

If i need driving lessons or advices how to drive safe and all other moral speech, i will make another thread for that ! Theres plenty of them made already anyway, so no needs to jump on me here for random thread i made,

In this thread my point was, i repeat it.

If you have babies in your car, would you crash to other car or the pedestrian, if these are your only options

Simple question, simple answers please ONLY !

Leave the picture out, leave the speed out concentrate on my last question, is it so hard ?

And again, NO it didnt happen to me ! FFS

Ghost Train

Well if there are only two options I suppose hit the car

foxinsox

MarkoC wrote: »

If you have babies in your car, would you crash to other car or the pedestrian, if these are your only options

I think that when I have babies/kids in the car I do take extra care driving, shouldn't be this way but I'm being honest.

I don't have kids myself, so it's usually friend's kids, maybe that's why.

I know you want a simple answer, I don't have one..

1 second to decide..

So many outcomes, I don't think anyone would have time to make such a decision, consciously anyway.. it would just happen..

It would be an accident, until proven "someone" was driving too fast for the situation.

But at that stage there could be 6+ people dead..

I can't give you a simple answer. Sorry.

tommyhaas

You should have just drawn a wider road

Eric Cartman

stop paying attention to your kids and slow down before it happens, then horn and brakes

jimmyw

Well I agree with most other posters, even the mods;) about slowing down, but in a "hypothetical" situation the pedestrian would be a complete numpty.Any time I am walking along a road I always cross to the other side going around a bend and then cross back again.I am always aware of some car not seen me until the last minute or not at all.

kazul

Why pose a hypothetical question and then get upset about the hypothetical answers?
You will only know the true answer when you're in the actual scenario.
How about option 3 of steering left into the ditch? Or planting your foot on the brake and closing your eyes?
In fairness, we could all come up with myriad hypothetical driving situations, what's the point???

Tigger

As far as I'm aware um still the holder of the top speed here and I never drive faster than being able to brake within my sight

So I'd brake and stop before the pedestrian or go in the hedge

corktina

MarkoC wrote: »

Looks like you didnt read the first post propebly, where i mentioned the actual speed at the time, which was 40km/h. Sp 16% of more pedestrians killed this year and its always drivers fault ? Was hoping someone comes up with an idea that actually pedestrian should walk on the other side of the road in that case ...
Anyway keep posting

Oh so you think its the PEDESTRIANS fault. That'll learn him!:rolleyes:

MarkoC

corktina wrote: »

Oh so you think its the PEDESTRIANS fault. That'll learn him!:rolleyes:

No i still think its a bitchfest here, please read my previous post before you post again.
Long story short, either your car with the kids or pedestrian, whats your choice ?
Same time a collision with the other car can still hit the pedestrian.
cheers

Absurdum

In these situations, I simply accelerate to 88mph then go back in time by 10 minutes, thus allowing me to approach the bend at a suitable speed. I have enclosed a diagram to help explain:

galwaytt

I'm not going to jump on one bandwagon or the other, but I would say this: whether you have children in your car is irrelevant. Whether you do, or not, doesn't do the occupant's of the other car any favours - and whether they indeed might be carrying children, even if you aren't......

And I think another option is being missed. Brake like mad, let ESP and ABS help you out. More often than not, it'll save you.

The problem I find is that people in emergency situations DON'T brake hard enough. And to prove it, you should take the opportunity sometime to find an empty road and practice just what it does take. Use both feet, if you have to. You'll be surprised at the results - and no, the car won't roll.........

Then, maybe, sometime, if you are in a pickle, you'll have a reference for what you can do, what it feels like. It might just save a life.


Hold on: there's a slogan in that: Braking Hard Saves Lives.

Mozoltov!

MarkoC wrote: »

I really rarely see a warning sign about upcoming sharp bend in this country, sry ...

Then you're not paying attention to the road.

I think some people here are missing something. I don't know anyone who decides out of the blue to use narrow back roads that they don't know over main roads that they do so, if you live up this road, and my presumption is that you do, then you should expect and know that there could be people walking on the road and naturally, there might be other cars.

So, slow down enough for the corner, beep a couple times before it if needed and continue on safely and vigilantly.

That way everyone stays safe and the insurance companies stay happy.

Stheno

I agree with Mozoltov if any of you are familiar with the back road from Dunboyne to Maynooth, then you'd know you would encounter such a scenario.

Going around some of the bends on that road I'd literally be at a crawl as a. I can't see what's around the corner, b. can't see what the local lunatics are doing, and c. don't know the road conditions ahead given the state of the roads.

In your circumstances OP, I'd have slowed to about 15/20 km/h to anticipate any dangers, not 2-3 times that speed.

After rounding the corner if there were no dangers I've have sped up a little.

MarkoC

In this thread my point was, i repeat it.

If you have babies in your car, would you crash to other car or the pedestrian, if these are your only options

Simple question, simple answers please ONLY !

I can smell some mental illness in this thread

Anan1

MarkoC wrote: »

In this thread my point was, i repeat it.

If you have babies in your car, would you crash to other car or the pedestrian, if these are your only options

Simple question, simple answers please ONLY !

Your question has been answered, repeatedly. Read the thread.

MarkoC wrote: »

I can smell some mental illness in this thread

I'm going to close this now, before you get yourself banned for personal abuse.