Dash cam saves your ass (no Roundabout stuff please :)

Mick55

Red Nissan wrote: »

They are not forensically secure devices. For digital imagery to be accepted as evidence they need to be forensically captured, that means a recording that cannot be tampered with.

Digital still cameras had to have special cards and software installed on them as example.

That said, a judge will take the evidence as bona fida, and insurance companies tend to accept the evidence from the cameras.

Re your resetting, you may need to put a .txt file on your root directory with the correct date and time on it, your manual should guide you. Failing that it is probably a fault, but that may make it less credible as evidence.

However, all that will only be an aid to the police report on the incident anyway! So I'd not worry too much about it and start saving a few shillings for better model in the near future perhaps.

Great info, thanks.

minotour

sogood wrote: »

A narrow road, oncoming traffic, a wheelchair and a pedestrian. I saw that we were all going to meet at about the same time and place and correctly guessed that the pedestrian might step off the path, so I slowed right up, just in case. And she did! It's nice when a plan comes together!

http://youtu.be/0JxAyPLErNs

bored at work so trawling through these.......

this one is interesting, there's another force at work here. Consider that the wheelchair person can see the driver and the pedestrian so they make a similar calculation and adapt their speed......

The pedestrian can see the wheelchair and possibly hear the driver and also adapts her speed

The driver can see both and clearly adapts their speed....

Each of them try to avoid the other in their own way yet through some cosmic wonder they actually create the worst situation for all and pass each other at the same time.

Or im over thinking it, im goin' home.

Lawless2k12

Caliden wrote: »

http://i.imgur.com/nyJltkx.png

She's a fine lookin woman as well, swit swoo

Youtube's compression could be to blame for the crap quality. Car reg can't be made out but it's 98/99 D for sure.

Paused the original video on my laptop and zoomed in on number plate... Managed to read it and typed it into "Cartell" and it came back as a ford focus 1.4 I LX. Half tempted to report it now that I have the reg. I don't mind people making mistakes. Everyone does it. But that's blatant disregard and people on the phone while driving is also a pet hate of mine :P

sogood

minotour wrote: »

bored at work so trawling through these.......

this one is interesting, there's another force at work here. Consider that the wheelchair person can see the driver and the pedestrian so they make a similar calculation and adapt their speed......

The pedestrian can see the wheelchair and possibly hear the driver and also adapts her speed

The driver can see both and clearly adapts their speed....

Each of them try to avoid the other in their own way yet through some cosmic wonder they actually create the worst situation for all and pass each other at the same time.

Or im over thinking it, im goin' home.

Hi and thanks for the input. As the original poster, I achieved exactly what I set out to do. By slowing up, I actually avoided meeting the pedestrian at the point where I felt she might step off the footpath. She stepped onto the road and was back up on the path, well before I passed her. She may or may not have heard me coming. We hear what's in front much better than what's behind, thanks to how our ears are designed.

Either way, no harm done and it was more of an example of how, sometimes, our instinct proves to be right.

PS. Any vacancies?

moxin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvSpGT9WeDo

Mick55

Arctic truck nearly crushes car N3/ M50 interchange this morning. Fails to see car in blind spot and nearly pins it between truck and wall. Baby seat in car.

Truck belongs to: Express Distribution Services, Co. Armagh.
http://www.expressdistributionservices.co.uk/home

Bio Mech

Mick55 wrote: »

Baby seat in car.

No "Baby on Board" sign though. That would have prevented this whole mess. :pac:

Taylor365

The same thing happened to me on Sunday.

Except it was on the N11





And it was a Mitsubishi colt!!

Probably the smallest blind-spots known to man!

Gob****e......

franksm

Taylor365 wrote: »

The same thing happened to me on Sunday.

Except it was on the N11


And it was a Mitsubishi colt!!

Probably the smallest blind-spots known to man!

Gob****e......

And happened to me on Sunday last as well, on the offslip from the N4 westbound to the Leixlip exit. Some bint in a Citroen C1 - she came within an inch of creaming my passenger door as she merged into my lane without looking.

I even got out to make sure there was no contact. Of course her passenger then screams at me for having no respect for people with babies on board (she did have the yellow warning note on the rear window). WTF like.

My damn camera chose that particular time to do a reboot, so I had no footage. SD card is now well and truly low-level-formatted, so hopefully it won't screw up next time.

Fighting Irish

Anyone use one of these?

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Mobius-ActionCam-Full-HD-Sports-Camera-1080P-30FPS-720P-60FPS-Pocket-Camcorder-/151071891306?pt=Camcorders_Professional_Video_Cameras&hash=item232c961f6a

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wmIyD1fM4M

Caliden

Lawless2k12 wrote: »

Paused the original video on my laptop and zoomed in on number plate... Managed to read it and typed it into "Cartell" and it came back as a ford focus 1.4 I LX. Half tempted to report it now that I have the reg. I don't mind people making mistakes. Everyone does it. But that's blatant disregard and people on the phone while driving is also a pet hate of mine :P

Well with evidence like that half the work is done for the Gardai. You could call Traffic Watch and tell them what you have (possibly have to email it on) and then they can make a visit to the driver in question with a caution or pursue a court case if you want to go that far.

I know there's a driver on here who is doing the latter and rightly so as it was some seriously careless driving.

gallag

Don't like that this is becoming a "rat them out" thread ffs, yes let's laugh at them etc but you could be costing someone their job for talking on their phone, how many on the high horse have never broke a rule? Do wee really want a bunch of people filming every indiscretion! Different if you have something serious, road rage etc but let's not report every person on a phone etc

runawaybishop

gallag wrote: »

Don't like that this is becoming a "rat them out" thread ffs, yes let's laugh at them etc but you could be costing someone their job for talking on their phone, how many on the high horse have never broke a rule? Do wee really want a bunch of people filming every indiscretion! Different if you have something serious, road rage etc but let's not report every person on a phone etc

Aren't you more likely to cause a crash while talking on your phone? Sounds serious to me. Given that every single phone has a handsfree option what's the excuse?

Páid

gallag wrote: »

Don't like that this is becoming a "rat them out" thread ffs, yes let's laugh at them etc but you could be costing someone their job for talking on their phone, how many on the high horse have never broke a rule? Do wee really want a bunch of people filming every indiscretion! Different if you have something serious, road rage etc but let's not report every person on a phone etc

Why not? You could be saving their lives.

Fozzie Bear

Mick55 wrote: »

Arctic truck nearly crushes car N3/ M50 interchange this morning. Fails to see car in blind spot and nearly pins it between truck and wall. Baby seat in car.

Truck belongs to: Express Distribution Services, Co. Armagh.
http://www.expressdistributionservices.co.uk/home

I'm not intending to blame anyone, or excuse anyone. Just my take on it....

The truck was clearly indicating in plenty of time that he intended to move right. The car was in the right hand lane, behind the truck (look through the trailer behind the van) and had plenty of time to see he was moving over from the indicator. Instead of holding back they accelerated up the inside of the truck as it started its manovoure and put themsleves in danger. There is a brief blind spot (I drive trucks) for the driver in his right hand mirror (that the car could well have hit) as he started to move over.

I presume the car did not want a slow moving truck in front of them? But was it worth putting yourself in danger to get ahead of the truck? Where they in that much of a rush?

When I started driving my ould fella always said you were better off 10 minutes late in this world than 10 minutes early in the next. Something I've always stuck to.

Mick55

Fozzie Bear wrote: »

I'm not intending to blame anyone, or excuse anyone. Just my take on it....

The truck was clearly indicating in plenty of time that he intended to move right. The car was in the right hand lane, behind the truck (look through the trailer behind the van) and had plenty of time to see he was moving over from the indicator. Instead of holding back they accelerated up the inside of the truck as it started its manovoure and put themsleves in danger. There is a brief blind spot (I drive trucks) for the driver in his right hand mirror (that the car could well have hit) as he started to move over.

I presume the car did not want a slow moving truck in front of them? But was it worth putting yourself in danger to get ahead of the truck? Where they in that much of a rush?

When I started driving my ould fella always said you were better off 10 minutes late in this world than 10 minutes early in the next. Something I've always stuck to.

From my recollection, the car had already gone up the inside of the truck before he started crossing. This was only my interpretation of the incident, we all perceive things differently in certain situations. Its hard to tell from the video.

When I passed the car there was a startled looking woman driving, an angry looking man in the passenger seat and a child on the back. I didn't get the impression of an aggressive driver, having said that she could have panicked and floored it when she saw the truck making a move.

In the truck's defense it must be a nightmare trying to cross the whole way across that carriageway in rush hour traffic in a short distance.

Caliden

gallag wrote: »

Don't like that this is becoming a "rat them out" thread ffs, yes let's laugh at them etc but you could be costing someone their job for talking on their phone, how many on the high horse have never broke a rule? Do wee really want a bunch of people filming every indiscretion! Different if you have something serious, road rage etc but let's not report every person on a phone etc

Driving while on your phone is not the same as going 5-10 kmh over a speed limit, let's just nip that in the bud right now.

ironclaw

Fozzie Bear wrote: »

I presume the car did not want a slow moving truck in front of them? But was it worth putting yourself in danger to get ahead of the truck? Where they in that much of a rush?

I'd tend to agree with this version of events. Doesn't excuse the truck driver as he wasn't clear but in a David and Goliath situation, I have no idea why you would continue to try and pass a truck like that. Equal blame in my book but that said, the truck would be 100% liable if there was contact.

gman2k

I was under the impression that HGVs are not allowed to use the overtaking lane on motorways?

From http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Road%20Safety/Leaflets/Leaf_booklets/motorway_driving.pdf
: Do not use the outside lane if you are driving:
• a goods vehicle with a design gross weight of more than 3,500 kilogrammes
such as a lorry or heavy goods vehicle (HGV);

Thoie

gman2k wrote: »

I was under the impression that HGVs are not allowed to use the overtaking lane on motorways?

From http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Road%20Safety/Leaflets/Leaf_booklets/motorway_driving.pdf
: Do not use the outside lane if you are driving:
• a goods vehicle with a design gross weight of more than 3,500 kilogrammes
such as a lorry or heavy goods vehicle (HGV);

That lane is turning into essentially an aux lane for the M50 southbound, not an overtaking lane. Here's the spot: http://goo.gl/maps/Q0WFK

Caliden

gman2k wrote: »

I was under the impression that HGVs are not allowed to use the overtaking lane on motorways?

From http://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Road%20Safety/Leaflets/Leaf_booklets/motorway_driving.pdf
: Do not use the outside lane if you are driving:
• a goods vehicle with a design gross weight of more than 3,500 kilogrammes
such as a lorry or heavy goods vehicle (HGV);

The lane he was moving into is for the M50(S), he had to moved into it in order to go that direction.

josip

runawaybishop wrote: »

Aren't you more likely to cause a crash while talking on your phone? Sounds serious to me. Given that every single phone has a handsfree option what's the excuse?

From what I've read, the main reason it's dangerous, is the reduction in concentration while talking to someone who is not aware of what's going on around you. That's why most of us can listen to the radio or talk to someone else in the car without affecting our driving concentration. The problem with the phone is that the other person isn't aware of what's happening, and will continue to converse when the driver is in difficult driving situations. Unlike a passenger who will know to shut up.

Which is why there are now proposals to also ban handsfree devices.

Mousewar

josip wrote: »

From what I've read, the main reason it's dangerous, is the reduction in concentration while talking to someone who is not aware of what's going on around you. That's why most of us can listen to the radio or talk to someone else in the car without affecting our driving concentration. The problem with the phone is that the other person isn't aware of what's happening, and will continue to converse when the driver is in difficult driving situations. Unlike a passenger who will know to shut up.

Which is why there are now proposals to also ban handsfree devices.

I don't think that's the main reason - just another reason that people don't think about. I'd still say the big problem is the loss of one of your hands, the loss of attention and then of course there's the clowns who try to text while driving. They're cretins.

dr.fuzzenstein

josip wrote: »

From what I've read, the main reason it's dangerous, is the reduction in concentration while talking to someone who is not aware of what's going on around you. That's why most of us can listen to the radio or talk to someone else in the car without affecting our driving concentration. The problem with the phone is that the other person isn't aware of what's happening, and will continue to converse when the driver is in difficult driving situations. Unlike a passenger who will know to shut up.

Which is why there are now proposals to also ban handsfree devices.

Utter sh*te, nothing but "think of the children" hysteria and vote garnering.
Anyone who doesn't have the brains to prioritise while driving will most likely crash anyway because they have mentally drifted off and are now thinking of the fluffy bunnies that are the only thing inhabiting their head.

bear1

josip wrote: »

From what I've read, the main reason it's dangerous, is the reduction in concentration while talking to someone who is not aware of what's going on around you. That's why most of us can listen to the radio or talk to someone else in the car without affecting our driving concentration. The problem with the phone is that the other person isn't aware of what's happening, and will continue to converse when the driver is in difficult driving situations. Unlike a passenger who will know to shut up.

Which is why there are now proposals to also ban handsfree devices.

There is a thread in AH about a woman who took a selfie of herself whilst driving. She had a head on collision immediately after taking the picture.

jackofalltrades

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Utter sh*te, nothing but "think of the children" hysteria and vote garnering.
Anyone who doesn't have the brains to prioritise while driving will most likely crash anyway because they have mentally drifted off and are now thinking of the fluffy bunnies that are the only thing inhabiting their head.

It's not utter sh*te. The NTSB has called for a ban on all cellphone use while driving.

Here's a study on the links between using a mobile and being involved in a crash.

wrote:

Results Driver's use of a mobile phone up to 10 minutes before a crash was associated with a fourfold increased likelihood of crashing

Using a hands-free is just as distracting. The only reason it isn't being banned is due to the unpopularity such a ban.

josip

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

Utter sh*te, nothing but "think of the children" hysteria and vote garnering.
Anyone who doesn't have the brains to prioritise while driving will most likely crash anyway because they have mentally drifted off and are now thinking of the fluffy bunnies that are the only thing inhabiting their head.

In my case I wouldn't describe it as utter sh*te.
I find listening to the radio least distracting, talking to someone else in the car occasionally distracting and talking to someone on handsfree while driving moderately distracting.

I prefer not to use handfree at all because I'm very conscious that I'm paying more attention to talking than I'd like.

When talking to someone else in the car, I'll often tune out or stop talking mid sentence at a roundabout for example. For some reason this is something I find harder to do on handsfree because the other person on the phone doesn't know I'm at a roundabout.

Sometimes, I subconsciously turn off the radio if there's a traffic situation that's unusual or dangerous and only realise it afterwards.

Others probbaly can do hands free better than me, but it's not hysteria or vote garnering, it's peer reviewed research.

eg.
http://www.distraction.gov/download/research-pdf/comparison-of-cellphone-driver-drunk-driver.pdf

For the record I am male whose brain can't multitask.

moxin

moxin wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvSpGT9WeDo

Boy racer overcooking it!

sogood

Deleted User wrote: »

Boy racer overcooking it!

Inexcusable, inconsiderate, brainless, reckless stupidity. And some people wonder/ complain about their insurance premiums being so high!

Someone needs more lessons!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-AmqccASS4