Road deaths: 2013 off to a bad start

Iwannahurl

Report in today's Irish Times says twice as many killed on the roads so far this year compared to the same period last year. Can't find a link, but here's the Garda info:

Total Killed to 15/2/12 15
Total Killed to 15/2/13 27

Total Collisions to 15/2/12 15
Total Collisions to 15/2/13 26

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=138

veryangryman

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Report in today's Irish Times says twice as many killed on the roads so far this year compared to the same period last year. Can't find a link, but here's the Garda info:

Total Killed to 15/2/12 15
Total Killed to 15/2/13 27

Total Collisions to 15/2/12 15
Total Collisions to 15/2/13 26

http://www.garda.ie/Controller.aspx?Page=138

With no new dual carriageway roads in the past 3 years is it any wonder. Improved driver behaviour my backside.

L1011

Degrading road quality and poorer vehicle maintenance definitely have some impact on these.

mike65

Sample size too small to make any firm judgement

Iwannahurl

mike65 wrote: »

Sample size too small to make any firm judgement

veryangryman wrote: »

With no new dual carriageway roads in the past 3 years is it any wonder. Improved driver behaviour my backside.

Regression to the mean also rearing its head again, I would imagine. 2012 was exceptional, so 2013 may well look worse just because it's more 'average'.

Still, any increase in road deaths is a tragedy for the people involved.

With regard to there being no new DCs, why would that lead to an increase in road deaths?

ardmacha

Sample size too small to make any firm judgement

Exactly. Deaths increased by the third in Jan between 2010 and 2011, 2013 is less than 2011.

veryangryman

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Regression to the mean also rearing its head again, I would imagine. 2012 was exceptional, so 2013 may well look worse just because it's more 'average'.

Still, any increase in road deaths is a tragedy for the people involved.

With regard to there being no new DCs, why would that lead to an increase in road deaths?

More people take long journeys due to less travel time but the non dual sections have no work on them. Increase on last year likely due to poor maintenance of the existing roads.

AugustusMinimus

With all the rain, some of the roads this January have been truly appalling.

Iwannahurl

mike65 wrote: »

Sample size too small to make any firm judgement

Strictly speaking it has nothing to do with sampling, but I know what you mean.

The time period is too short to make any judgment about how the entire year will pan out.

Still, perhaps this is how strategic targets work. If the trend for the year starts to look bad, it provides a strong incentive to the relevant parties to redouble their efforts.

MYOB wrote: »

Degrading road quality and poorer vehicle maintenance definitely have some impact on these.

veryangryman wrote: »

More people take long journeys due to less travel time but the non dual sections have no work on them. Increase on last year likely due to poor maintenance of the existing roads.

To clarify: the new DCs constructed up to three years ago lowered the road death total, but reduction in maintenance has led/is leading to a rise in fatalities?

Is so, can we anticipate a higher number of fatalities over the next few years as road construction and maintenance grinds to a halt?

veryangryman

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Strictly speaking it has nothing to do with sampling, but I know what you mean.

The time period is too short to make any judgment about how the entire year will pan out.

Still, perhaps this is how strategic targets work. If the trend for the year starts to look bad, it provides a strong incentive to the relevant parties to redouble their efforts.










To clarify: the new DCs constructed up to three years ago lowered the road death total, but reduction in maintenance has led/isleading to a rise in fatalities?

Is so, can we anticipate a higher number of fatalities over the next few years as road construction and maintenance grinds to a halt?

In my opinion yes. Numbers certainly won't go down.

the culture of deference

The driving standards are still atrocious in Ireland. Nothing will change until that's addressed.

Iwannahurl

veryangryman wrote: »

In my opinion yes. Numbers certainly won't go down.

2012 was the seventh consecutive year in which road fatalities were reduced, and the past five years in succession have seen a record low number of deaths.

Are we reaching the end of the road (pun intended) in terms of making improvements?

road_high

the culture of deference wrote: »

The driving standards are still atrocious in Ireland. Nothing will change until that's addressed.

Totally agree. "Speeders" are absolutely vilified where as the "careful" doodlers at 70/80kmh on 100-120kmh roads, oblivious to their fellow motorists are not dealth with at all. How may times have people witnessed risky overtaking due to sheer and utter frustration at some numpty in a Yaris or Micra. I see it weekly.

Junction discipline is appalling with people regularly pulling out in front of me as is relaible use of signals or lane discipline. Many do not even know when to turn on their lights or use them correctly.

ardmacha

"Speeders" are absolutely vilified where as the "careful" doodlers at 70/80kmh on 100-120kmh roads, oblivious to their fellow motorists are not dealth with at all. How may times have people witnessed risky overtaking due to sheer and utter frustration at some numpty in a Yaris or Micra.

It is the reckless overtakers that are contributing to the deaths and they alone. The others may be guilty of bad manners or inconsideration, they are ignorant people in every sense of the word, but their actions are not directly dangerous as such and are not illegal.

A general attitude of taking driving seriously is needed though.

antoobrien

road_high wrote: »

Totally agree. "Speeders" are absolutely vilified where as the "careful" doodlers at 70/80kmh on 100-120kmh roads, oblivious to their fellow motorists are not dealth with at all. How may times have people witnessed risky overtaking due to sheer and utter frustration at some numpty in a Yaris or Micra. I see it weekly.

I saw this at the weekend on the motorway between Galway & Dublin. I was travelling between 100-120km/h and passing cars as if they were standing still. One had to be very careful to make sure that the approach speed was right and that ensure enough time and space to get out into the overtaking lane. I got caught out on a couple of occasions and ended up reducing my speed to less than 80km/h (120 limit) until I could overtake.

Iwannahurl

road_high wrote: »

Totally agree. "Speeders" are absolutely vilified where as the "careful" doodlers at 70/80kmh on 100-120kmh roads, oblivious to their fellow motorists are not dealth with at all. How may times have people witnessed risky overtaking due to sheer and utter frustration at some numpty in a Yaris or Micra. I see it weekly.

antoobrien wrote: »

I saw this at the weekend on the motorway between Galway & Dublin. I was travelling between 100-120km/h and passing cars as if they were standing still. One had to be very careful to make sure that the approach speed was right and that ensure enough time and space to get out into the overtaking lane. I got caught out on a couple of occasions and ended up reducing my speed to less than 80km/h (120 limit) until I could overtake.

So, are our motorways therefore dangerous to drive on, contrary to some people's impression?

If so, is this reflected in increasing road deaths on motorways and DCs?

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So, are our motorways therefore dangerous to drive on, contrary to some people's impression?

No

You need to stop trying to develop strawmen, particularly when you're being so hilariously obvious about it.

Iwannahurl

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So, are our motorways therefore dangerous to drive on, contrary to some people's impression?

If so, is this reflected in increasing road deaths on motorways and DCs?

MYOB wrote: »

No

You need to stop trying to develop strawmen, particularly when you're being so hilariously obvious about it.

I'm delighted you're so entertained, though you're incorrect with your "strawman" reference.

Where is the distortion or misrepresentation in my post above?

Here are the related quotes I was referring to:

the culture of deference wrote: »

The driving standards are still atrocious in Ireland. Nothing will change until that's addressed.

road_high wrote: »

Totally agree. "Speeders" are absolutely vilified where as the "careful" doodlers at 70/80kmh on 100-120kmh roads, oblivious to their fellow motorists are not dealth with at all. How may times have people witnessed risky overtaking due to sheer and utter frustration at some numpty in a Yaris or Micra. I see it weekly.

antoobrien wrote: »

I saw this at the weekend on the motorway between Galway & Dublin. I was travelling between 100-120km/h and passing cars as if they were standing still. One had to be very careful to make sure that the approach speed was right and that ensure enough time and space to get out into the overtaking lane. I got caught out on a couple of occasions and ended up reducing my speed to less than 80km/h (120 limit) until I could overtake.

My summary of the quoted posts:

1. Driving standards are atrocious, and nothing will change [in the context of road fatality numbers] until that's addressed.

2. A prime example of such atrocious driving is "doodling" at 70-80 km/h on 100-120 km/h roads [motorways being the only roads with a 120 km/h limit]. This can be seen happening every week.

3. This kind of atrocious driving was seen only last weekend on the M6.

Where's the exaggeration, distortion or misrepresentation?

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So, are our motorways therefore dangerous to drive on, contrary to some people's impression?

If so, is this reflected in increasing road deaths on motorways and DCs?

If it was a complaint about having to slow down so that I didn't mow over a cyclist would your reply have been different?

Iwannahurl

That would be a red herring.

My understanding of what is being said above is that driving at 70-80 km/h on motorways is both atrocious and unsafe, and that nothing will change with regard to road safety in such circumstances (fatalities being the subject of this thread) until such dangerous "doodling" is dealt with.

Are motorways made more dangerous by such "doodling" and if so how is that reflected in the road death stats?

Irish and Proud

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So, are our motorways therefore dangerous to drive on, contrary to some people's impression?

If so, is this reflected in increasing road deaths on motorways and DCs?

Cop yourself on...

Before the M1 (near where I live) was built, people were dropping like flies on the old main road - it was a very well known fact.

Having listened to it for decades, this anti-car thinking is seriously like a broken record - it's old and tired. What we need is integrated transport - that's the way mate.

Iwannahurl

Twasn't me who made the dangerous doodling claim...

monument

Irish and Proud wrote: »

Cop yourself on...

Before the M1 (near where I live) was built, people were dropping like flies on the old main road - it was a very well known fact.

Having listened to it for decades, this anti-car thinking is seriously like a broken record - it's old and tired. What we need is integrated transport - that's the way mate.

The anti-car labeling / name calling seems to be the most broken record of them all.

AngryLips

veryangryman wrote: »

With no new dual carriageway roads in the past 3 years is it any wonder. Improved driver behaviour my backside.

Are you suggesting that in order to maintain road safety the Government needs to continually build dual carriageways?

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

That would be a red herring.

No it's not a fallacy, it's a hypothetical question: would your response have been different if the complaint had been slowing down to save the lives of cyclists?

Because if it is then you're being hypocritical!

Iwannahurl wrote: »

My understanding of what is being said above is that driving at 70-80 km/h on motorways is both atrocious and unsafe

It is, if there is no reason to be travelling 30% slower than the posted speed limit. An example of dangerous driving at the speed limit would be driving 120km/h in fog with visibility of >50m (I've seen it happen on a humber of occassions).

From the rules of the road:

Possible hazards include anything you can see that can, and will, give rise to an emergency, such as oncoming traffic if you are turning onto a major road. They also include anything you cannot yet see and anything you can reasonably expect to happen, such as a pedestrian walking onto the road in front of you, a child running onto the road between parked cars, and or animals on the roadway. It includes your own physical and mental state while driving (for example whether you are stressed or tired) and the condition of your vehicle.

My reading of the above is that driving at 30% below the speed limi,t when there is no good reason (and there wasn't last weekend) to be going so slowly, fits into the definition of creating a hazard.

Why? It creates situations where the closure rate is significantly higher than it should be, consequently leaving significantly lower time frames to take action. Now add traffic moving at the speed limit into the mix attempting to overtake and the possibility of an accident turns into a probability.

You might see that as a fallacy but the next time you're on the motorway watch how vehicles react to other vehicles going at significantly slower speeds than the speed limit.

antoobrien

AngryLips wrote: »

Are you suggesting that in order to maintain road safety the Government needs to continually build dual carriageways?

No, it's pointing out that since the last of the motorways/dcs opened the rate of falling has plateaued somewhat. The major drop in deaths can be mostly attributed to the generally safer driving conditions created by having multi lane roads carrying large amounts of traffic - despite the higher speeds that they are travelling at.

AngryLips

antoobrien wrote: »

No, it's pointing out that since the last of the motorways/dcs opened the rate of falling has plateaued somewhat. The major drop in deaths can be mostly attributed to the generally safer driving conditions created by having multi lane roads carrying large amounts of traffic - despite the higher speeds that they are travelling at.

Just so long that it's clear there's no correlation between the two.

antoobrien

AngryLips wrote: »

Just so long that it's clear there's no correlation between the two.

No, but veryangryman would be right in pointing out that there are still roads that need to be built/converted to at least DC, if not motorway.

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Where's the exaggeration, distortion or misrepresentation?

The very posts you quoted coupled with the interpretation you made of them is an obvious attempt at distortion and misrepresentation. Don't pretend you don't know it.

spacetweek

There is no reason to believe that driving standards, lack of maintenance, or lack of new builds in the last few years is causing this apparent uptick.
We cannot expect fatalities to go down every year forever as there must be some bottom figure that's hard to reduce. The declines we saw over the last few years were low-hanging fruit and all that's been plucked now.
Even the safest countries in the world have some level of fatalities.

Iwannahurl

antoobrien wrote: »

It is, if there is no reason to be travelling 30% slower than the posted speed limit. An example of dangerous driving at the speed limit would be driving 120km/h in fog with visibility of >50m (I've seen it happen on a humber of occassions).

Why? It creates situations where the closure rate is significantly higher than it should be, consequently leaving significantly lower time frames to take action. Now add traffic moving at the speed limit into the mix attempting to overtake and the possibility of an accident turns into a probability.

antoobrien wrote: »

No, it's pointing out that since the last of the motorways/dcs opened the rate of falling has plateaued somewhat. The major drop in deaths can be mostly attributed to the generally safer driving conditions created by having multi lane roads carrying large amounts of traffic - despite the higher speeds that they are travelling at.

MYOB wrote: »

The very posts you quoted coupled with the interpretation you made of them is an obvious attempt at distortion and misrepresentation. Don't pretend you don't know it.

It seems that two contradictory claims are being made: (1) that motorways are responsible for a substantial proportion of the reduction in road deaths over recent years, and (2) "nothing will change" unless "atrocious driving" such as allegedly travelling on the motorway at speeds of 70-80 km/h is "dealt with".

If that is a distortion of what has been stated so far, what is the correct interpretation?

L1011

They are unconnected. Crap driving occurs on all roads and is dangerous on all roads. But that doesn't suit your position so you tried a strawman.

Deise Vu

In a doubtless vain attempt to claw the thread form the semanticians (I don't care if that's not a word) it is way too early to draw any conclusions. There were 10 deaths in January 2012. Annualised that would be only 120 whereas the total was a record-breaking low of 162. Wait until June when there was a scary total of 26 killed last year.

But in the meantime drive carefully.

Iwannahurl

MYOB wrote: »

They are unconnected. Crap driving occurs on all roads and is dangerous on all roads. But that doesn't suit your position so you tried a strawman.

This is what was said earlier:

road_high wrote: »

Totally agree. "Speeders" are absolutely vilified where as the "careful" doodlers at 70/80kmh on 100-120kmh roads, oblivious to their fellow motorists are not dealth with at all. How may times have people witnessed risky overtaking due to sheer and utter frustration at some numpty in a Yaris or Micra. I see it weekly.

This was emphasised with a later reference to similar doodling on the M6.

Is the (apparently frequent) doodling having a noticeable effect on road safety or is it not? Have there been doodling-related fatal crashes on motorways or not?

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is the (apparently frequent) doodling having a noticeable effect on road safety or is it not? Have there been doodling-related fatal crashes on motorways or not?

There are significantly more 100km/h roads in Ireland which are non motorway than there are motorways. Which you're also well aware of.

There was nothing to support your claim, except what you created.

Iwannahurl

So, just to confirm: no doodling-related fatalities on motorways then?

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

So, just to confirm: no doodling-related fatalities on motorways then?

I don't know - but its of absolutely zero relevance to your pathetic strawman argument anyway.

Iwannahurl

MYOB wrote: »

I don't know

I think you're not the only one who doesn't know.

It's a favourite theme in certain quarters: speeders are unfairly vilified while the really dangerous doodlers are let off the hook.

If doodling was as common, and as dangerous, as some seem to believe, then the road fatality stats would reflect that, especially on motorways where the speed variance (120 vs 70-80 km/k) would be much greater.

But let's not let the hard facts get in the way of self-serving myth.

L1011

Iwannahurl wrote: »

But let's not let the hard facts get in the way of self-serving myth.

If that was of concern to you, you wouldn't have brought in your strawman now would you?

Iwannahurl

Legal Expert wrote: »

Is there some sort of cosmic mean number of road collisions we are supposed to be having forever more? How can you have a regression to a non-stationary mean?

Interesting point.

You could just take the average annual death toll for the last ten years, for the sake of argument/illustration, and compare each individual year's total to that. If the most recent year is at a record low, and the total figure for the current year turns out higher, you could argue regression to the mean in that case.

But you're right, there's no 'cosmic mean' in that sense. It's just a handy way of saying that if a bunch of years saw a record low number of fatalities, a subsequent increase may just be due to random factors.

antoobrien

Iwannahurl wrote: »

Is the (apparently frequent) doodling having a noticeable effect on road safety or is it not? Have there been doodling-related fatal crashes on motorways or not?

If you survive it, let us know what you feel about it if it ever happens to you.

The Browser

the culture of deference wrote: »

The driving standards are still atrocious in Ireland. Nothing will change until that's addressed.

I used to think that too. Then I moved to Dubai.

antoobrien

The Browser wrote: »

I used to think that too. Then I moved to Dubai.

Try a week in Mumbai, it really opens the eyes to just how well we actually drive compared to some of the beliefs espoused in this country.

SeanW

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I think you're not the only one who doesn't know.

It's a favourite theme in certain quarters: speeders are unfairly vilified while the really dangerous doodlers are let off the hook.

It also happens to be true - in some quarters that's the view - motorists who break speed limits (I estimate 99% of us) are vilified as reckless, dangerous, selfish, careless killers, regardless of whether it's going faster than 30kph on a grade separated dual carriageway, or speeding past a primary school at discharge time. Also at least one poster seems to take the view that any breaking of speed limits regardless of circumstance, is the same as driving liquored up.

It is indeed likely that doodling, done wrong can be dangerous, for example if one is doing a very low speed for no good reason on a 100kph single carriageway, done so as to restrict overtaking opportunities, they may provoke someone behind them to overtake, possibly not in the safest way. If that results in a head-on collision then that is how it will be recorded - a head on collision between the two vehicle involved while the dozy barsteward that help cause the crash will just doodle away and their involvement never recorded.

The same is also true of dozy cyclists who completely disregard the ROTR and dart out in front of a motorist and cause them to slam on the brakes. If a 2nd motorist behind crashes into 1st, the accident is regarded and recorded as the fault of the 2nd motorist for rear-ending the first and the cyclists role is never recorded, primarily because cyclists have no licenses, registration, insurance or anything and can't be punished even in the unlikely event that they're ever caught doing anything dangerous.

If doodling was as common, and as dangerous, as some seem to believe, then the road fatality stats would reflect that, especially on motorways where the speed variance (120 vs 70-80 km/k) would be much greater.

I could say the same about breaking speed limits - if "speeding" was UNIVERSALLY dangerous, regardless of location or circumstance, and in all cases comparable to driving loaded on booze, then the N3 going over the N50, the N4 in Co. Dublin and the N85 East of Ennis (not to mention countless urban peripheries where IMO a similar dynamic arises) then all these roads would be drenched in blood and most of us that ever used them would all be maimed or killed. But it's not happening.

As to the matter of doodling I consider myself qualified to speak on this subject because I am routinely on both sides of it - both as the doodler and the irate driver behind some gob****e that insists on going at 50-60% of the speed limit for no reason.

When I'm on a single carriageway going slower than other traffic wishes to do, I use any and all opportunities to allow them to pass with comfort and safety, up to and including travelling in the hard shoulder. There was also a time when, due to mechanical issues, I had to do a long drive that I would normally use a motorway for much of but could not comfortably go faster than 80kph. I got off the motorway for the 'old' road the whole way because I considered it safer and less stressful for myself and every vehicle behind me for 50 miles.

I expect the same courtesy from those who wish to travel slower than me - if there's a hard shoulder and vehicles behind that might want to pass, use it. Even if there's no hard shoulder but there's a very long convoy behind you, then you should pull off the road altogether at the first safe place and let the tailback pass, instead of being a rolling road block. And yes, if for whatever reason you can't go faster than 70-80kph on a motorway, please get the **** off it for everyone's sake including your own.

But let's not let the hard facts get in the way of self-serving myth.

A thought provoking sentence, one that should be considered by both sides of the debate.:rolleyes:

Iwannahurl

SeanW wrote: »

both sides of the debate.

Both sides of what debate?

mitosis

Does anyone publish the results of inquiries into individual fatalities? Were they wearing seatbelt, using a phone, innebriated etc.?

When were those eight people killed in Donegal? Was there ever any report published? Any prosecutions?

Girl got €5m today in settlement for injuries received in a crash. Did she have a seatbelt on?

Iwannahurl

The concept of contributory negligence has long been recognised.

Here's just one example, found after a brief Google search: http://www.moloneysolicitors.ie/road-traffic-award-reduced-by-55-for-contributory-negligence.html