Ashley's Analysis | A Motorway Undertaking Smash!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 мар 2021
- This motorway smash was definitely a Driving Fail! Was undertaking a factor in this collision, or was the lack of a signal a bigger factor? As usual I analyse this clip and see what Paul could've done differently to stop it from happening.
Social Media
www.ashleyneal.com
/ ashleynealdrivinginstr...
ashleysanalysis@gmail.com
/ lessontracker
The Apps
Pupils - apps.apple.com/gb/app/driving...
ADI - apps.apple.com/gb/app/lesson-...
Amazon Links
Sony a6400 Camera - amzn.to/2xVCrn0
Sony FDR X3000 Action Camera - amzn.to/2YVoPDh
VIOFO 4K Dash Cam A129 Pro Duo - amzn.to/3fEouLg
DJI Osmo Action - amzn.to/2WN7BWg
Joby Suction Cup Mount - amzn.to/2YYQ68a
RODE Wireless GO Microphone - amzn.to/3cmSBEZ
That Peugeot has seen 20 years without being destroyed. RIP soldier.
And along comes an Audi driver 🤣🤣
The clip is 3years old
Plenty more of the dependable workhorses out there battling on. My 406 celebrated its 21st birthday last month and is well-loved and cared for!
@@sawleyram7405 very rare for anyone to call a post-2000 French car dependable.
@@MrSupercar55 Not at all! The 406 owner's club is international. There are plenty of countries around the globe where that model alone is still a common sight on the road, and that's for a reason.
You know the Audi driver has said at some point “I’m a great driver - never had an accident” 😉
Yeah but he's left a trail of destruction behind him! 😳
It's always an Audi.
Like my grandad, never had an accident in his life but saw plenty in his rear view mirror.
@@I_Evo That was a Jaspar Carrott line :)
I have been driving 5 years and touch wood never hand any acccident
Middle lane hoggers can just as easily move out into lane 3 without looking. Passing them is just as hazardous either way
I remember twenty years ago, you'd find middle lane hoggers from time to time, but where they were always out in their numbers was inside the M25 boundary. Especially after 9 in the evenng, cruising down an empty M1.
Every day , morning and evening to and from work lane hoggers.. getting annoyed with them . One time a curtain sider went from middle lane to outside lane , . I flashed him, he went back to the middle to let me pass , I passed then he went back to the outside, was watching in RVM ,he did this with all the cars . Must have been a European driver forgot he was in England
Any idea what speed the Audi was doing originally, and was he intending to move into the nearside lane. The Peugeot appears to have no o/s rear brake light, so I also wonder what the condition of its tyres was.
@Ed Straker so in your eyes the problem car is the cam car 😂?
How many times have you hogged the middle lane doing 10mph under the limit then bitch at people who overtake ?
@Ed Straker so you do sit in the middle lane ? Should always move over to the left if not overtaking , tut tut
The Audi changed lanes a bit strong for me. I suspect they cut the 206 off intentionally as they didn’t like being undertaken.
Yup, and had there been a fatal collision, and the camera had slightly better resolution the Audi driver would have been in a lot of trouble.
Don't like being undertaken then keep left. It's not rocket science
@@XaviRonaldo0 If you don’t like causing accidents, don’t do dangerous manoeuvres. It’s not rocket science.
@@trainman665 if idiots actually did the REQUIRED checks before changing lanes it wouldn't be dangerous to undertake.
@@XaviRonaldo0 If idiots didn’t deliberately drive towards others accidents wouldn’t happen.
Audi driver seeing the bedlam and carnage in their rear mirror thinks to themselves "Everyone's stupid but me"
Ashley, I don't think the Peugeot was intending to do an undertake on the Audi. First run through starts at 31 seconds. When the footage starts, they've just passed an overhead sign gantry.
From 31 to 33 seconds the cam car is catching both cars ahead at a similar rate. From 34 to 35 seconds, it seems the camera car is catching the Audi much more quickly.
I put it that the Peugeot was not traveling faster than the Audi, but the Audi had overtaken the Peugeot then slowed and changed lanes suddenly.
Yes, I completely agree with you.
That was my thought as well there is not really evidence to suggest that the Peugeot was undertaking but more to suggest the Audi was slowing? Quite often it has happened to me, doing a constant speed (70) in the nearside lane get overtaken by a car in the middle lane then moves back to the nearside not paying attention to their speed relative to mine, while slowing causing me to drop back & then they carry on at a slower pace than I was traveling at.
Wrong the Audi doesn't slow down it's the Peugeot that speeds up had they not accelerated the Audi would have had space, which it still had to pull into that lane
@@andrewblackamore4668 no need for the Audi to have pulled over given an approaching slip road and vehicles merging. Looks like Audi slowed down even when compared to the speed of the camera driver
Agreed. Not done frame by frame analysis but certainly looks like slowing by Audi. Not speeding up by Peugeot.
Hi Ashely! I know it's probably too late but I think I have managed to get the numberplate for this Audi, it's seems to be T9 DLA, which comes back to a 2017 White Audi S5 TFSI Quattro which looks to be the same car.
Hopefully Paul can see this and make it useful!
Good work!
What amazes me is that if the RUclips community can do some basic investigation work with software and attain or piece together information when they have nothing to gain beyond some gratitude, why can't the police when they can bring about a prosecution for dangerous driving/driving without due care and attention?. Would give credibility and prestige to the police and stop the MIB having to pick up the bill when the person responsible should have their insurance increased due to their poor driving.
@@razgriz380 Let me fix that for you.
"...stop innocent, law-abiding motorists from picking up the bill..."
MIB is funded by insurance underwriters who, in turn, are funded by insurance premiums.
Yes - there is one frame at high res around the 40sec mark where although its not 100% clear, it does look like T9 DLA
Cloned plates? Forget the police I'm sure the insurance companies must have tried to track down the Audiot, there's got to be reason why they ended-up going through MIB.
Seems to me the Peugeot driver overreacted, just backing off rather than slamming on the brakes would have been OK -- there was more of a gap than he must have thought. Though "just backing off" 10 seconds earlier would also have been a much more sensible option.
This ties into not undertaking, had he held back behind the audi instead of moving up next to it and undertaking then he could have just braked when the Audi moved. He was too close to the rear end of the Audi and probably felt he was about to get hit.
Very true
He would of been better backing off the Peugeot 205 and 206 were well known for lift off and heavy braking oversteer. Great fun when you plan it not so much when you don't.
Inexperience and the lack of vehicle control skills in that situation definitely added to the risk.
I agree
Pretty sure the Audi had seen the car undertaking, and the swerving across was a deliberate ‘you’re not allowed to do that’ warning move, that had greater consequences than the they Perhaps expected... call me a cynic
I was thinking the exact same thing actually and wondering how to describe it. You did a great job of putting it into words. Its as well to remember that some drivers have exactly that mentality.
Possibly, but judging by the position, the Peugeot was likely in the Audi’s blind spot....
@@mcihs2 Because the Peugeot driver sped up and wasn't where the Audi driver expected it to be which is why you should never rely on mirrors alone when changing lanes
The weird part about that is he's also in the wrong, hogging the middle lane. I think you're probably right but pot, kettle, black.
@@mcihs2 You are the first person I've noticed to acknowledge the blind spot, which is quite large on the near side. It did not look like the Peugeot was making his way past very quickly. If it had been, it would have been in & out of the blind spot more quickly.
@2:50, it isn't undertaking, the Peugeot was proceeding in his lane.
I remember the Police saying they were going to crack down on lane hoggers - no, I've not noticed it either.
Along with mobile phone users and other bad driving, it never gets enforced, but every now and then, a new law comes along, for them to not enforce.
it was about to undertake. the front wheel of the Peugeot is along side the Audi's rear wheel
@@martf8014 not undertaking
@@waynedl99 yeah its under taking.
@@martf8014 how to tell everyone you haven't a clue what you're on about.
@@waynedl99 You are clearly thick as two short planks
I'm not sure how much 'undertaking' has got to do with this. A driver who doesn't look and doesn't signal can and does do it to either side.
Ashley loves to blame undertaking on every collision if there's a car on the left.. He once said it's illegal. A few years later he said it's not illegal but it is classed as careless driving. There was no undertaking here.
Obviously it's not impossible for someone to suddenly change into the fast lane. However, it doesn't take a lot of understanding of human behaviour to grok that someone nervous, spooked by a faster car behind them, is much more likely to move to the slow lane than to the fast lane. Just because someone tends to stay in the middle lane doesn't mean they're complete lunatics randomly bouncing in every direction.
Putting yourself where inattentive drivers are less likely to expect you increases the likelihood of them colliding into you.
Undertaking is fine in my book, where legal. But if you do it, you should understand the risks and be extra vigilant for aberrant behaviour from involved drivers, lest you end up with the Pug driver's fate.
@@arantala There is no slow or fast lane : all lanes have the same maximum permitted speed , and it is the perpetration of that myth that encourages poor lane discipline .
That small car was hiding in the Audi driver's blind spot ; mirror checks would probably not have revealed the small car , and signals are only required where of benefit - we do not make them just because someone 'might' be hiding in a blind spot . Driving in peoples' blind spots is a prime cause of many collisions , and those who do it are at fault for what happens .
I'm very happy to be corrected but had the Peugeot given the Audi a safe gap this would have never have happened, when driving in lane 1 you should always be giving the car in lane 2 space in the event that they suddenly change lanes, if the Peugeot wanted to get ahead of the Audi they should have slowed down, joined lane 2 and finally completed an overtake in lane 3.
I'm very confused why the insurance companies didn't see the Peugeot as the one at fault here - I'd love to know why.
I’ve only Been driving for 3 months and had an old man going the wrong way around a roundabout today, was rather scary🤣
If it can reassure you about the next time you get behind the wheel, I've been driving for about 8 years (about 55,000 miles) and never seen it outside of youtube. That said, no matter how long you've been driving, you're only as good as your last 10 metres, so I try not to get complacent. May your building of experience be a relatively stress free, instructive, and useful one.
I've seen it a couple of times. Old man, and old women. Both were going a snails pace.
@@mikeh2006 Doesn't surprise me. Probability doesn't play smooth. :D
As with another reply, I’ve only seen it on RUclips videos. And that’s with 35yrs of driving, mostly work related & 16yrs professionally (Grp 2 Licences) I’m guessing spanning 1 1/4 million miles
@@paulcollyer801 i drive class 2, 40 hours a week. But interestingly the only time ive seen it has been when ive been in the car (about 5k miles a year) in the car .
Another great video Ashley! Thanks for the great content.
It's frightning the amount of drivers out there that are involved in/witness an accident and keep on driving. Where are people going that is so important they can't delay getting there by a few minutes to exchange details with the other road users. Stay safe out there everyone.
As a driving instructor (long time ago) one major rule of the road I would teach and explain the reasons was "Avoid overtaking from the right" (In Canada) so that would translate to "Avoid overtaking from the left" for the UK. That being said however, and in my opinion, the one major factor that directly caused this foul up was the obvious inability of the Peugeot driver to calmly control his vehicle. ABS or not there was no need to touch the brakes or in the least apply very little pressure and slowly merge onto the 15 foot wide paved shoulder and then slowly return to his original lane of travel. This video clearly shows the Peugeot braking hard, over steering, momentarily release the brakes (split second), overcorrecting and braking hard as he crosses 60 feet of motorway into the path of the Volvo which has an excellent ABS system. (At this point I'm speculating) From the (0:32 sec) the driver of the Volvo has yet to recognize the events unfolding in front of him and he is likely executing his intentions of overtaking the 'Audi', concentrating, (0:35 sec) signaling a right lane merge, eyes on the rear view mirror for traffic, checking his right hand blind spot all the while rapidly approaching the two other vehicles, (0:39 sec) realizing and recognizing the up coming fiasco. Time and space have run there course and (0:40 sec) the Volvo has no time to brake and avoid the Peugeot, even with an excellent ABS system.
Another big rule of the road: Situational awareness ! The Audi showed no situational awareness ! The Peugeot showed no sign of situational awareness ! The Volvo momentarily lost some situational awareness ! In my harsh criticism I would place the onus of fault on the Peugeot driver's inability to control a motor vehicle. The Volvo driver fell victim and the Audi driver, well, got away ! Shit happens.
Great video and always interesting !
With respect perhaps you should have been there... The Audi was obviously what us Brits call "lane hogging" ie hogging the middle lane as not to have to move for almost any situation as I am sure you have the same in your country. Both cars seemed to be travelling at similar speeds I did not detect the Peugeot accelerating (in the video) it looked like the Audi decided (for whatever reason) to move into the "inside" lane without doing the necessary checks.I am "pasting" in a comment from "above" to save typing again to explain further..........
Sorry NO undertaking JUST an Audi driver being an Audi driver.... People who overtake OR "undertake" should increase their speed as to get them past the target vehicle safely.. BOTH cars appeared in the video as travelling at similar speeds.. a simple "cut up" job for whatever reason.
@@MrSparks20002 I return the same respect and I will address your comments by stating (Please correct me if I'm wrong in regards to UK rules of the road) that in a three lane situation, the outside lane (Far right in the UK) is for faster moving traffic or overtaking traffic found in the transit lane (Second or middle lane) the inside lane is used for merging traffic or for traffic exiting the motorway. Here, (Canada) you are never considered (theoretically) "hogging" the merging lane (Far left) and the same applies to the transit lane (Middle lane) but driving in the passing lane (Far right) for no reason other than overtaking slower transit traffic is considered a "lane hog". Now that being said, in this scenario the Peugeot is visibly overtaking the Audi from the far left lane (first key factor) (0:31 sec) full 5 seconds (to 0:36 sec) ! (0:37 sec) the Audi (Signaling at this moment would not be a contributing factor) begins to merge to his left, obviously unaware of the Peugeot's presence which in turn tells me the Audi wasn't aware of the Peugeot at any given time. It's at this very second the Peugeot's reaction was his downfall. The Audi's action (With all it's faults) had no direct bearing to the collision. As I said, the onus of fault falls on the Peugeot driver's inability to control a motor vehicle. As for the Volvo, well, that's a whole different conversation ! As for "People who overtake OR "undertake" should increase their speed as to get them past the target vehicle safely." that kind of thinking, my friend, is a recipe for disaster !
Now be safe out there. Again I would like to extend my appreciation for all the hard work required to brings us these great videos.
@@palco22 Well done!! my bad I should have checked for fakeness!!
@@MrSparks20002 No bad to speak of. People who show interest in these kind of videos are my kind of people. You obviously appreciate Mr. Neal's efforts and acknowledge his videos as top notch information to those who want to better understand the complexities involved when operating one and half tons of metal on todays roads. It's a serious topic and lives matter ! Thanks again for your comments.
@@palco22 in the UK it is Lane 1, Lane 2 and Lane 3. Lane 1 is the transit lane. Lanes 2 and 3 (or more if they exist) are overtaking lanes. You should only use Lane 2 to ovettake a vehicle in Lane 1 ane you should only use Lane 3 to overtake vehicles in Lane 2.
It is down to merging traffic to merge safely although it is often in ones own best interest to give merging vehicles space because many people don't seem to understand how to match speed and fall into a gap.
A "little" over the speed limit. That would mean that both he Audi and the 206 were doing a fair amount less than the speed limit, since the camera car was closing quite fast. Colour me very suspicious about the "little", I think it unlikely they were both slow-boating it. In fact, it's feasible the Audi driver was aware of the car barrelling up the middle lane behind them at a rate of knots, felt the obligation to get out of the way and was distracted enough by this that they lost track of the 206.
This is definitely very possible as well.
They looked to be going 85-90 mph based on road line speed using the standard 9 metre period for road lines. It's a fairly common speed when the conditions allow, but still adds over 50% to your braking distance compared to 70.
Have to laugh at some of the commenters on here saying what the Peugeot should have done.. This is all great and simple in theory. Practical is a completely different matter.
Hindsight is 2020
Fair comment, but that's not to say we shouldn't all think about and practice (if only in our heads) our "escape manoeuvres" in case we find ourselves in a situation like this. It's important to understand the performance limitations of the cars we drive. As a rule of thumb, most road cars will quite happily switch lanes smartly, especially in dry weather, provided you keep off the brakes. So if you're in the nearside lane and somebody sideswipes you from the right, you can very quickly jump over onto the hard shoulder. Most modern road cars have pretty good braking performance, too, as long as you're not trying to brake and turn at the same time when travelling at high speed.
I'm not saying I'd have successfully avoided that collision, because there's a difference between knowing what to do and actually doing it instinctively in a split-second crisis, but when I see clips of motorway accidents, it seems to me many of them are made much worse than they need to be by drivers panicking and asking their car to perform a manoeuvre that's completely outside of it's performance envelope.
If somebody moves across on you on a motorway, it's better to err on the side of under-reacting rather than over-react. That incident would have been far less serious if the Peugeot had allowed the white car to hit him.
@@philwoodward5069 100%. I undertake middle lane hoggers sometimes and I know what not to do if they start to cut me up. Hindsight is irrelevant; if you don't know how to control your car don't perform risky manoeuvres.
@@cynicalpenguin No. In some circumstances you thing you know. If during you're undertaking or overtaking for that matter the car to your side makes a sudden swerve into your path for some unknown reason how would you be able to avoid a collision??? You don't have control of the another vehicle. There's plenty of videos on RUclips of cars making a sudden left turn from lane two without indicating and plowing into vehicles to their left. Mick Hunter is spot on.
Thank God that the Motorway was quite empty at that time and not packed full of vehicles. Driver of cam car was very lucky man that day that his collision was a head on hit, and not a sideswipe from the hit car.
I'm so glad for my Mother *always* telling me to stay out of people's blind spots. If you have to go through it e.g. overtaking or even being overtaken, be prepared for them to either move without signalling or have a blowout and moving without wanting to. This has always served me very well.
Yes, get out of that blind spot quick.
According to the law, in an overtaking manoeuvre it's the responsibility of the overtaker to ensure that the manoeuvre is done safely. I also suggest that the overtaker in the middle lane may have slowed down without realising it. It had probably been travelling in the middle lane for an unescesarily long time. This would give the impression that the vehicle in the first lane was speeding up to undertake when it's just as probable that the middle lane hogger was in fact slowing down. The first lane driver was taken by surprise and in fact over reacted, suggesting that he too was daydreaming and not paying proper attention but it certainly seems like the overtaker had failed to overtake correctly.
I'll be honest, the Peugeot didn't need to brake so hard, and swerve so much. There was ample room to just slow slightly. Not saying the Audi was right, but still, could have been avoided by just slowing slightly.
But for someone who has never been in that situation before (I'm guessing otherwise they would have backed of way before it happened) can you blame them for panicking
People react differently in different situations and the peugeot driver was not prepared for that situation.
@@mrtommygunwhite if you panic like that whilst driving, then you shouldn't have a licence. You are a danger to yourself and everyone around you.
@@NicolasCageM8 I didn't say I did I have been in a similar situation and been ok but I could see how someone with a little less experience could come undone
@@NicolasCageM8 don’t be silly. They reacted and braked, wtf are you? A Vulcan?. Don’t be such an arse.
In my motorway driving experience I've passed (while in the left lane) cars in the middle lane going slower than the speed limit for no apparent reason on quite a few occasions. I am always on high alert when doing so, in case they move back in without looking. However never had a problem. Twice I have had dangerous moments where I have been overtaking and cars have pulled out without looking, however
I had to drive to South Wales on business a few years back, following the M4 all the way through until London.
The first thing I encountered after crossing the Severn Bridge was a car with Welsh plates (begins with C) in the middle lane at 60mph. Being passed on both sides and horns going off. Based on what I saw of the driver's reaction it seemed likely to me that he knew what he was doing and just didn't care.
It does show the importance of looking before changing lanes. Also, I remember having seen stickers in some cars stating something along the lines of "items in the mirror may be closer than they appear". Which is still useful to remember.
It's a great song too.
Especially when you are being chased by a T-REX !
Noticing that audi car, they defo sped of in a hurry after that small brake, they caught up with that ahead traffic rather quickly 🤔
Engrish?!
@@PSNragglefraggle1 Pirrock ?
"Motorway Dangerous Lane Changing" should have been the title to this video. It wasn't the undertaking (If that is what the Peugeot was doing) was the cause, it was the Audi driving without due care and attention.
The Audi was probably the main culprit but being in the blind spot of a middle lane hogger, undertaking, and then slamming the brakes like that was also really stupid.
@@nintendokings The Peugeot was slowly catching up on the Audi. So it couldn't have been in the blind spot for very long.
I use a pair of cheap blind spot mirrors and never have that problem.
@@billyporter1389 like the stick-on mirrors?
@@nintendokings exactly.
Audi would likely have been on the hook for Careless Driving had they been traced. That starts at 3 points and £100 fine, plus a licence endorsement would have had insurance implications.
Virtually every day I’ll follow some idiot onto the empty motorway and they’ll go straight into middle lane and sit there at 70mph . I just wonder who the hell taught them to drive like that
Police said they were going to crack down on this but it's all pony. Use the over head signage to tell people not to dawdle in the overtaking lanes or get points and a fine.
First lane is 65-70, then 70-75 then 75+ 😉
No one, until recently you couldn't go on a motorway in the UK before passing your driving test so it's very possible no-one taught them how to drive on a motorway.
@@UKbob1975 If you actually think this your part of the problem, hopefully you’re taking the piss
@@123owenboy yes it's a piss take, but I have actually heard it said and I genuinely think some people drive like that.
A couple of things that also should be mentioned Neal: The Audi's lane change was aggressive, as well as being unsignalled. It almost seemed that the Audi's swerve was willful aggression.. Added to that, the Peugot driver's swerve under braking was absolutely the worst thing to do in an avoidance situation at speed, as it leads to loss of control (as seen).
I was taught to ONLY brake, using only very moderate corrective wheel movements until back to a lower speed. The reason being that, if impact is unavoidable, it's better to hit them as squarely as possible, to allow the impact areas on each vehicle to do their job and (hopefully) keep both vehicles in the lane.
If you swerve, you only add increased risk to the situation, as road furniture, bridge buttresses, trees, slopes, barriers and other vehicles in other lanes (or worse-still, the opposing carriageway) are far greater risks to life and limb, as they are either stationary, reinforced concrete and steel objects, or vehicles moving at speed that are likely to hit you side-on, where there is no crumple zone.
Better (I think) to let the impact happen while under full positional control, don't increase risk to your life for the sake of a few dents and scratches!
I love educational clips like this for analysis, and I like how you're quite open minded and not too harshly critical while still offering constructive feedback on what dangers to look out for on the road as a defensive driver.
Pretty sure the 52 plate 206 does have ABS. Could be a fault. Break light was out as well. I had one of these and when one thing went on it, everything went on it.
Given that observation I'd also wonder about the state of the tyres - I'd be unsurprised given the general condition they were near minimum or below legal tread.
EDIT: Holy **** - just checked the MOT history on the Peugeot - this was an accident waiting to happen.
The owner(s) were obviously untroubled about having working tyres, suspension or brakes.
@@Rroff2 abs and good tires or not, this was caused entirely by weight transfer. Very similar to lift off oversteer.
@@NitroNuggetTV True but check the MOT history LOL - pretty good bet with all the brake balance concerns, etc. this vehicle was likely in a state which would struggle with any degree of weight transfer!
i had a 52 plate 206 and it was insanely tale happy.
@@Rroff2 any small dar would have behaved that way if driven like that (that's how you forcefully induce oversteer in cars that are stable by themselves) unless ESP saved them, it's a clear case of not enough skill for this situation. Braking, sudden wheel movement, lift off the brake, starts spinning so apply brake again. Could have been saved, at most should have ended in a slight collision, the Audi didn't move so quickly as to require such a sudden swerve, the driver panicked.
Not being able to find the driver tho, imo totally disgraceful of the police, aspecially since the car has a custom license plate...
I don't understand with all the cameras both video and ANPR that a driver, or at least a car, can not be identified.
Maybe footage is to blurry when zoomed in to get an accurate read. Or maybe the driver dumped it fast or was never licenced to the vehicle.
At the risk of sounding down on police, because the police don't give a toss - as they don't give a toss about anything that happens on the roads any more.. If it takes work like banging on the person's door it aint getting solved.
@@streaky81 Could be sadly, where i live The police are never around when you need them or deal with such incidents like this.
But dare not wear a mask in Tesco or say something rude online, then wham their there.
Because it was probably an off-duty copper...
@@streaky81 I was thinking along the same lines, not that they don’t care but they certainly don’t care enough to look at camera/ANPR footage to find the car, a lot of work for something which hasn’t resulted in any serious injury
Always worth doing the 'shoulder check' in addition to checking mirrors before moving across, like you would on a motorbike.
Indicating helps as well, bugger, sorry forgot Audis don't have indicators.
Not recommended at motorway speeds .
@@derekheeps1244Of course it is. The Highway Code literally says to check your blind spot before changing lanes on motorways.
I would just say that the amount of dash cam accidents where you can see that something in the road ahead is happening but vehicles simply fail to react to is astounding. If drivers could just understand that a vehicle that is not under control can go in any direction and that they should immediately slow down whether they believe they will be affected or not. If the camera car would have slowed on seeing this event unfolding then he would have been a non issue for him. Great analysis again Ashley.
Absolutely.
I firmly believe they were driving too much above the speed limit for that. The only reason for the police to not use the footage to make them partially responsible (or at least give them a speeding ticket) is that we want people to provide dashcam footage as evidence.
I blame Days of Thunder.
Hi Ashley, I watch your clips with interest, as a hgv driver of nearly 50 years, and a period of self employment as a driving instructor, one comment on observation when overtaking, I find too many drivers use the near side door mirror, which gives the impression of a safe distance to return to the near side lane, in fact I used to teach my pupils to wait until they could see the headlights, in the inside mirror, of the vehicle they had just passed before returning to the near side lane thus giving braking distance and a safe gap, I find observation, and lane discipline, and driving too fast for conditions and attitude a contributory factor in too many unnecessary road traffic accidents, keep up the good work, Les Thomas
I'm not convinced the Peugeot was undertaking; at least you can't be certain from this short clip. It looks like the Audi was slowing as they moved left, and from my experience, inattentive drivers often have poor ability to hold a steady speed... it's entirely plausible the Peugeot was at a steady speed in L1, the Audi passed in L2 then slowed down and pulled in whilst alongside. I've seen that happen many a time; the solution is of course to lift off to create space when you realise they're going to do that, but I can imagine when faced with such a special driver as the white Audi that "lift off to create space" becomes "brake hard and move left to hopefully not have a collision".
I would also note that the Peugeot was the only car of the three that was in the correct lane right up to the point of the incident... Whilst it would be unreasonable to blame the cammer for the initial incident, he did have the reaction time of a potato, which seems to be a common attribute for those who refuse to drive in L1. Braking half a second earlier would have kept him out of that collision.
Perhaps BRAKE might want to start an "MLMing kills" campaign now we've got clear proof that MLMing causes accidents? 🤔
I'm glad I'm not the only one that spotted this. @0:34 there is a definite slow down by the Audi.
I think it's unfair to say that the camera car had poor reactions. He clearly saw the accident occuring early enough to take action, as evidenced by his yell of "oh sh**". What he probably didn't expect to happen was for the Purgeot to loose control and career across all of the lanes. He brakes as soon as it becomes apparent that the Purgeot isn't going to stop in lane 2.
As someone who has nearly been in a pile-up on a motorway, I know just how dangerous performing an emergency stop on a motorway can be. I had to strike a balance between hitting the car in front and not braking so hard that the car behind hit me. You really don't want to have to do an emergency stop unless you have to. And yes we can see that it's clear behind him, but he won't have time to check his mirrors or necessarily remember that it was clear from the last time he checked them given the situation in front of him.
A number of drivers don’t use their mirrors often enough. I’m not an advocate of checking mirrors periodically as that tends to make drivers not really being aware of what is happening. But mirrors should always be checked as you will agree I’m sure Ashley, before a change of speed or direction, I use to say to my pupils, “Before you move your Hands or your feet, check your mirrors.”
Also regarding Motorway Driving a check of your mirrors so you are always aware of what vehicles are behind, which lane they are in and speed they are travelling, helps with your planning.
Checking mirrors on the highway constantly is a very good advice. I often had cars catching up in a matter of few seconds and got surprised when they suddenly were at my tail. At least for no speed limit Autobahns this is very important.
Why would you state that checking mirrors periodically makes drivers not aware what's going on? It's exactly the opposite dude, just think about it. Imagine an accident happens in front of you, you didn't check the mirrors because you didn't expect anything to happen, you either can stay in your lane and potentially hit something, or swerve to the other lane without checking, potentially causing a bigger disaster (happens way too often...)
Now imagine you looked in your mirrors let's say every 5 seconds, you have a general idea of what's going on around you, just a second ago you saw that there is no one behind or next to you, so you have to epyion to change lanes, extending your safe space greatly.
Always regularly check your mirrors, and try to keep track of whats around you. The times I’ve been on the motorway and seen an emergency vehicle a mile back, and 60 seconds later some idiot STILL cant see them right behind them.
@@piciu256 check mirrors every few seconds becomes a habit and you don’t always take note of what you see. Checking mirrors consciously you are more likely to be aware of what is happening.
Checking your mirrors regularly enables you to keep up with the changing traffic pattern behind you. You need to be able to plan for both ahead of you and for what’s going on behind you. On multi lane roads and motorways I like to know I have a bolt hole or an escape route when I am overtaking. Now that’s hard when the road is really busy and naturally even speeds of 70 mph drivers tailgate with a sheet of paper between them but I’ll try not to go ‘three in a line’.
I learn many things from your videos.thanks
we can all improve our driving even ME !! it's good to see things like this as you might not think your driving needs examination by yourself, but to me it's a good reminder
According to MOT records, the most recent test the Peugeot had included an advisory for front brake discs!
So what?
@@David-pt6hl so the breaks were running Very low on one side, but not the other causing a heavy breaking to lock one wheel, instead of breaking two
@@David-pt6hl What do you mean "So What?" What do you think? Thats a stupid thing to say.
I did think that the offside wheel must have locked harder than the nearside to cause that veering. Having experienced French braking systems the left caliper may well have been seized up and gave no input to braking at all.
But no advisory to avoid undertaking.
About to pass on the inside is not the same as passing on the inside also called "undertaking". So you cannot blame or partially blame the Pugeot.
You mention about travelling above the speed limit, and ultimately yes that would have been a massive factor in them being involved depending on how long they were travelling for doing above the speed limit. Could have been the difference between being involved in an accident and being held up by it. Whilst I wouldn’t advise others to drive above the speed limit on motorways, it can be expected to be going on as it is highly prevalent and the vast majority of people do not get penalised for it unless they are doing silly speeds.
Thanks for your analysis Ashley, it’s always good to see a breakdown of these clips by a professional driver rather than seeing people bickering in the comments section. I also do really like the sound of your voice!
Or if they'd have been going quicker for longer they'd have well past the accident scene by the time it had happened, whose to know.
@@I_Evo comment fits the name 😎👌
Agree about the ABS, gladly all cars since 2014 have ESP which would have helped in this case. After checking the MOT advisory list from 9 months previous to this accident it appears the Peugeot had problems which could have contributed to it's very unstable looking dynamics under heavy braking. The drivers steering and brake input also didn't help matters, I used to own a 2003 model 206 and the rear end was so light it was very easy to steer the back end with brake and throttle, great for track but not for road! The cam car seems to react vocally before actually braking, but it's very easy to criticise when not actually in the situation, and the angle the 206 comes across the road at could not have been predicted. Regarding that point, the cam car only has one playthrough of the situation, we can study it several times, it's easy to decide what could have been done sooner or differently when you already know the outcome! These videos are a great learning tool and I appreciate the analysis, thanks.
All driver aids do is cause risk compensation, the number f crashes doesn't change, but because of medical technology and heavier vehicle structures more survive/don't get seriously injured in the metal boxes. unfortunately this means vulnerable road users take the brunt of drivers inability to drive safely even when they have all this tech they still manage to fuck up just as much as before. I'm no safer now as a driver in any conditions in a modern vehicle than I was in my Austin Allegro or MKII Astra 9the latter I commuted into/through London for 10 years, drove through snow laden motorways and the Lake District all on 13" tyres, no power steering/ABS and only front discs). Same thing happens everywhere, such as cycling with helmets/s all sports that i have studied re head injuries are worse off since they adorned headgear, also in the workplace hard hats/hi-vis all have negative effects on safety, people feel they are more protected and have all the kit to 'save' them, and they actually take greater and greater risks and the 'ppe' simply isn't suffice to stp the incident from occurring or suffering injury.
it's all about not having the incident in the first place and sadly all those bits of kit make jack all difference.
There were actually a lot of cars on the road with abs in the 90's, it just depends n the manufacturer.
I think Clarkson said, whatever today's s class has will be standard equipment on other manufacturers cars 20 years later.
@@allothernamesbutthis So you think.
Can’t believe the police didn’t even try to get in contact with the Audi driver
Too busy arresting people that are "too far away from home" or not wearing a mask.
@@ja390es9 cry me a river, stay home, stay safe, stay healthy, get vaxxed and let this pandemic end. It's all in all our hands.
too busy arresting women at a vigil
@Sideshow 44 I got arrested for travelling to work, to a laboratory, in a business vehicle last week. I don't get furlough from the government. The traffic police officer "didn't believe me". Spent an hour on the roadside filling in various forms. I'm not a covid-denier, anti-vaxxer etc. I donated my companies' stock of FFP3 respirators to the hard-working NHS staff at the start of the pandemic, over £10k worth.
@@einfach_kurt2393 Haha, no. Don't tell me what I can and can't do buddy. I wear a mask, that is good enough. I will go out and live my life, as I have been doing all year. The mere fact that you think you think any of this is in OUR hands shows just how much you have been brainwashed.
Thanks for this good presentation.
Thanks for this, just goes to show that awareness is needed at all times, thankfully no serious injuries in this case apparently.
Stay alert Folks.
Watching back on the trajectory of the Pug, it first moved to the left and braked (the nearside brake light did not come on!). Had it continued onto the hard shoulder at that point the accident would not have occurred.
However, it seems that the driver then lost control as the car veered violently to the right. It was then heading for the central reservationr.
Ironically, if the cammer had not acted thoughtfully and moved out to give more space, they would have passed unscathed in lane 2 as the Peugeot hit the crash barrier.
I think this illustrates that when we drive we should seek to manage and minimise risk but that we will never eliminate it altogether.
Defensive driving, the key to a good driving and safe roads.
Perfect analysis of a very nasty incident indeed. Horrible how the Peugeot rides up onto the bonnet of the Volvo. Certainly shows the value of a dashcam!
I wonder how well maintained the 206 was - I don't want to denigrate drivers of older cars, I owned older cars for many years myself - but I see the brake light not working. Were there other issues - worn or underinflated tyres, brake balance etc. that contributed to the loss of control? Although I'm sure the main cause was the panicky late reaction and combined steering and heavy braking. I've said this here before but I think it's worth repeating - when the unexpected happens at first your brain doesn't believe it and that delayed reaction makes the situation worse. So try to anticipate what the other drivers *might* do and proactively manage risk so you can't get into these situations. He said from the comfort of home!
Re. the point about overtaking correctly rather than undertaking. Very true. But also overtaking itself isn't compulsory. How much have an issue would it have been for the 206 to have hung back behind the dozy Audi? Might have added a few minutes to their journey, but they wouldn't have ended up in hospital.
The most recent editions of 'Roadcraft' have removed any references to 'cadence braking', presumably because so many new cars (and all emergency services vehicles) now have ABS. Personally I think that's a bit of a shame.
Reactions to an emerging situation vary greatly from person to person.
In this instance, it can be seen the Peugeot's reaction was a startled one, proberly not expecting the Audi to move across when it did, and over hard braking inducing a rightside intermittent front wheel lock, together with a swerve of the steering to end up where it did, ending in a position where a collision was inevitable.
In many cases postioning yourself in the proper part of the road, can be your saving grace if things should turn ugly!
Pretty much everything covered. To answer Ashley's question re: the cammers speed....
Borderline in my opinion. Yes, he admits to being slightly over the speed limit but I cannot say 💯% if the extra few mph would have affected this significantly. There was relatively little time/space in which to react. I'm surprised that the Audi couldn't be traced.
Your point about passing on the left is duly noted.
Cammer could have actually braked, might have helped. 🤷♂️
It probably would as the camera wouldn't have been near the accident if they were going more slowly , at best they would have just seen it in the distance or passed it after the event.
The danger was there to see in my opinion Graham and a slow down was required.
But admittedly they were the victim of the others S#%t driving. 👍✌
.
@@Jonc25 also @Michael and Adam....
All fair and decent comments.
We can all say "if only this" or "but that".... so to speak.
Not being in that position in the first place would be ideal.
If this gives people reasons for, perhaps, slowing down a bit then I think many "incidents" would be avoided. The speed limit, all said and done, is a limit, not a target.
We can all agree on that point.
Good thread guys and thank you for the replies 👊👍👍
@@grahamnutt8958 🙂👍
A vehicle undertaking does not cause an issue. It's the one who changes into the left lane without due care and attention is the one causing the issue. It's the same if a car in lane 1 moves into lane 2 without due care and attention and collides with one beside in lane 2, it's not the overtaking car that's causing the issue.
I actually thought that our camer moved to lane 3 to allow the pug206 to move into lane 2.
It's sad to see they couldn't trace the driver despite having camera evidence of the number plate.
Yes, emergency braking without ABS is difficult!
Was once on the way to change ABS rings - thus no ABS - and went over a hill to fast. Single track road, car coming towards me, hit the brakes hard, brakes locked up. Before I could realise what was happening I'd veered too far left to avoid a large rock on the verge. Ended up damaging the nearside wishbone and outer CV joint.
Everyone said "Didn't you pump the brakes?" but it's not something you think of if you're not used to it 😆
Would going into the hard shoulder there save the peugeot? Knowing that there probably wouldn't be anyone in there?
I agree that using the hard shoulder as an extra lane stops that accident almost certainly. To be honest I think that accident might not have even happened if the Peugeot had kept the wheel straight and just braked. The gap between the cars looks small granted but I think there is a gap after watching the video back. If the Peugeot could bleed off enough speed to be slower than the Audi then the Peugeot will never be able to collide with the Audi in the first place, therefore the accident would have been avoided. They lost control because they panicked, swerved away from the danger, then sealed their fate when they swerved again while the car was unbalanced. I don't really hold it against the Peugeot for not thinking clearly in such a scary moment though (actions leading up to the incident notwithstanding), since many drivers on the road don't know how to control their car approaching, and above, the limit of tyre grip at the best of times never mind in an emergency.
I once had a Discovery with trailer pull straight off a hard shoulder in front of me. I used the hard shoulder to 'undertake'. No way would I have gone into lane 2 or 3. The way the Pug swerved suggested the Pug driver had an issue with the Audi. Ease off and you slow quite quickly, no need to slam on.
I mean personally that would be the choice that would naturally come into my mind I would imagine
If they weren't paying 100% attention they couldn't know for certain a move into the shoulder wouldnt involve you meeting the back of a car in a far worse accident. Depends how much they were looking.
Actually Ash, to me it looks like the Peugeot's brakes are possibly unbalanced as well, braking harder on the near side front.
That it has a brake light out might also be a sign that maintenance wasn't a priority on that Peugeot.
I’d be inclined to disagree. The front right clearly works fairly well as it’s locked when he skids into lane 3. To me it looks like they’ve put a quarter turn of left lock on whilst simultaneously mashing the brakes causing a massive forward weight transfer.
Unbalanced by turning left then right. Front right wheel carrying less weight. So it locked
@@mcgherkinstudios An imbalance can cause the vehicle ro pull aggressively left or right.
An imbalance is commonly caused by one side caliper working perfectly fine and the other partly seizes or air in the system, this can delay the faulty side from working correctly under hard braking for enough time to then cause the car to pull aggressively left or right.
Take another look at the video, all he had to do was brake, the Audi was already in front.
And also the Peugeot had a brake light out which in my opinion shows lack of maintenance, I would put money on the brakes been defective.
@@TheEulerID my point exactly steve, I would put money on them brakes been defective.
I have been trained to stay (hog) in the lane on a multi lane carriage way unless you see a vehicle approaching from behind in which case then move over to the left & hold that position unless you need to overtake (on the right) , the reasoning be hind this is most accidents happen while changing lanes not while staying in a lane.
One thing I wanted to highlight that wasn't talked about is the danger of driving in someone's blind spot. The Peugeot looked to be driving in an area where the white Audi wouldn't have been able to see him in his mirrors or outside his window. Now there's no guarantee that the Peugeot would've spotted him in his mirrors, but it's good to be aware that you're less visible in that area. When I'm driving in someone's blind spot, I'm always mentally prepared for him not having spotted me, and in general when driving in someone's blind spot I usually try to speed up or slow down a bit, to either make myself more visible to them or to get out of the way if they do decide to swerve into my lane.
I'm not saying I'm a perfect driver and I have undertaken people hogging the central lane. I know I shouldn't do it, and this clip perfectly demonstrates the dangers. It's good to be aware that, if you're doing something illegal, that there are dangers involved. Having said that, I think it's equally important to explore WHY it's dangerous, because this blind spot doesn't just occur when undertaking someone. Knowing the dangers allows you to spot those dangers in other situations too.
If the Audi had panels instead of glass he would have seen the Peugeot if he bothered to look. With a pair of cheap stick on convex mirrors and side view mirrors adjusted properly you won't have blind spots.
@@MrJohnny3shoes yeah cool stuff. People make mistakes. Expecting everyone to just stop making mistakes is stupid.
The camera car didn't appear to start braking until the Peugeot started to cross the carriageway, yet we can hear from his voice that he knew something was already starting to go wrong.
Ugggh really annoys me when people fail to do a blind spot check or even check the mirrors! Just imagine if that was someone on a bike! 😠
Especially given how frequently they undertake.
@Andy XxX there’s a blind spot in virtually every vehicle with a roof and pillars.
@@CycolacFan
Yes. But that car would have been 100% visible in the mirror. The mirror the driver should have been checking every 5 to 10 seconds anyway. They would have known it was there and gaining on them before they even noticed the cam-car catching them from behind if they'd actually been looking in the mirrors properly.
@@tin2001 I can’t argue with that, good drivers get a sixth sense about certain cars, the way they’re likely to act from their condition, lane positioning etc. Someone gaining speed on your left is likely going to make some sort of manoeuvre.
the Audi knew what it was doing, they switched lanes while backing off the power to prevent the under-take
Just shows how quickly these situations arise. The Peugeot was on the inside lane but lost control in no time at all. Shows how important it is to pay attention to what’s going on in all other lanes. Although in this case it’s hard to know what else the cammer could have done.
0:37 - just an observation in delays, the eye level light comes on one full frame before the rear light does, (and even then only one ever illuminates) no bearing on the collision of course, just an observation I picked up.
It's a common misconception that ABS stops wheels from sliding when turning. It allows the wheels to continue rolling, yes, but wheels are not designed to roll sideways, so if a car's momentum is too great for the tyres' grip when the turn is tight, the car will slide straight on. That, of course, will be modified by inconsistent grip, uneven road surface, driver's reactions, etc, and can result in total loss of control.
You are correct
Lots of drivers are unaware that their cars have ABS or what it is ,or if their cars are fwd or rwd.
There is a video on RUclips of a woman putting snow chains on the rear of a fwd car!
How much difference would a functioning rear offside brake light have made to the cammer's reaction time noticing something was amiss is the interesting one that we'll never know the answer to..
I have a feeling the cammer wasn't paying full attention or had tunnel vision. It doesn't look like they braked until the Pugeuot started coming towards them. A functioning brake light would have probably made quite the difference
Very little I expect. It was obvious they got too close and that the Peugeot braked. The high level light is clear enough. The cam car tried to move out of the way into lane 3 but unfortunately didn’t expect the Peugeot to get into such a mess and swerve across all 3 lanes. Most people would probably do the same thing and try to just stay clear of the accident. You don’t want to slam on and possibly cause a second accident even though you might of entirely missed the first one anyway. He had no idea the Peugeot would end up where it did. If the Peugeot had handled it better it would of been a minor non-event entirely contained to the left side of the road. It’s just unlucky a fairly minor incident in lane 1 ended up causing an accident in lane 3.
Exactly this happened to me last Tuesday, but I braked to let someone move away laterally. It was a close call instead of a crash.
I am shocked to see an Audi driver moving to the left lane at all! :)
This is a good example of how collisions are not purely singular events, but the result of a chain where any link or "if" can be broken leading to a different, or even non-event. To take one, the speed of the camera car, if it had been traveling either slower or faster, trying to occupy the same bit of road space as the Peugout would have been different, or non-existent. More than that, a different speed and the Audi may have changed lane at a different time, different place, with better observations, or even not at all.
I also wonder, was it actually an undertaking incident? Not enough prior time is shown to make that call in my mind. All too often I can be sat at a constant speed, uphill or down, no matter how steep, and see people driving at constant throttle position, not speed thus people can get themselves in a mindset they have passed me, when they actually started dropping back. The other aspect is I can gain on someone as they head uphill, then they zoom off out into the distance as the road levels. Maybe you have a longer video that demonstrates prior circumstances to make that call.
Another thing that springs to mind is how the way driving behaviour is taught has changed and can influence such outcomes. Some of us will remember "Mirror-Signal-Manoeuvre" being drummed into us, but even with a second mirror check after signal, poor situational awareness on the part of the Audi driver would have missed the car on the nearside as it was not really in the mirror. Then, there is the current method being trained, no signal to move left a lane as it should be an expected and necessary manoeuvre. Not convinced, a signal from the Audi could have been more warning for the pug driver that there was that intention, even if only the half-second of a single orange flash, the pug could have been aware before the audi started moving across. Added to the only signal when necessary/useful method's potential failings, it is easy to judge that no signal to move right by the camera car is a judgement call where it could easily be deemed not necessary.
It is a discussion I often have on check-drives to keep my certification up to date, unnecessary signalling is deemed a result of poor observation being the standard, a way of encouraging good observation, discouraging "I'm signalling so I am clear to do it". My side of it being I am human, may miss something, can't see through hedges that well, and other such factors should be accounted for too. Making both signalling and good observation work together is sometimes the way. Reducing the simplest factor, the signalling to pure instinct, to do it regardless, allows the brain to concentrate on "can/should I do this", rather than "should I signal before I do this".
I've heard it said several times over the years that the vast majority of road accidents could have been avoided if at least one of the drivers involved would have reacted 1 second sooner. In this scenario, coupled with the fact that "if only" the driver was not even slightly over 70mph may have turned this accident into a near miss. But we will never know for sure..and yes I realize typing on a keyboard in the comfort of home is a lot easier than actually being in that situation out on the road.
Like your point about the cam car. If only, we’ll never know but maybe a few miles an hour less, a fraction less, would have saved that collision
100%
That reminds me, several years ago on my way home from work, for some reason I decided to just cruise at 70 the whole way that night.
An old astra in lane 3 lost control, crossed all three lanes and the hard shoulder, hit the barrier and bounced back into lane 1.
I stopped a couple of feet from the passenger door.
@@1daddyDA or maybe a few mph faster.
I’ve said many times that it’s not illegal to “make progress in your lane” but passing in the nearside is not advisable.
And herein lies the proof.
Another nicely balanced vid.
Passing on the nearside, when not in a moving traffic queue, is not legal ever.
@@FFVoyager, it’s a matter of definition.
Should you pull in to lane one to pass the car then pull back out, you’re overtaking. However, were you In lane 1, and remain so after passing, you are making progress in your lane.
Not advised but legal.
@@paulcollyer801 you are not even slightly correct.
Rule 163
Overtake only when it is safe and legal to do so. You should
only overtake on the left if the vehicle in front is signalling to turn right, and there is room to do so
stay in your lane if traffic is moving slowly in queues. If the queue on your right is moving more slowly than you are, you may pass on the left
@@FFVoyager, so when you have a lane hogger, in lane 2 of 2 going 40mph, on a Nat Speed limit dual carriage way, a truck cannot pass??
Therein lies the tale, definition and interpretation is the mother of case law.
The rules/laws governing mobile phone use while driving are in disarray atm, thanks to R v Baretto. Before that case, yup, using a hand held mobile comms device while driving was illegal, (except 2way radios and calls to emergency services in an emergency). Now, interactive communication needs to be proved to prove an offence, so driving and holding your phone out the window filming stuff is not interactive communications.
Therefore prosecutions for the offence have dropped significantly.
However, were I the officer dealing, I might run my roadside interview in a way to get the offender for, not in proper control, driving distracted, and possibly driving without due consideration, potentially getting them more points & fines than simple mobile phone use.
@@FFVoyager, also, (at least in the old printed highway codes) there will be reference to the actual legislation involved, if any, as a foot not. Not all rules in the Highway Code are legislated
my opinion;
1) Pug driver;
Car had faulty rear right brake, which could indicate the car was not well maintained.. could have had very cheap or worn tyres on there also. Someone else mentioned an advisory on the MOT for front brakes.
Rule number 1, if possible never change direction when heavy breaking unless you absolutely have to, it’s much better to hold the car straight and provide hard progressive pressure or cadence pumped braking on one without ABS.
The pug driver went slightly to the left, lost control and ended up swerving right. What he should have done, is held back in the first place or at least held the steering straight and apply progressive brake pressure.
2) Audi driver;
Only thing I’ll ding him for his a failure to stop at the scene of an accident. The pug could have been in his blind spot - we don’t know.
3) The cammer;
He possibly should have identified the potential of the collision earlier by reading the road head, allowing more chance to brake, but it’s easy for us to say that isn’t it. These things happen so fast. Unfortunate.
Talking about brake-lock causing loss of steering - I had practical experience of that in my driving course at school when I was fifteen - we were in the bottom carpark of a shopping-centre and it had dirt on the bitumen - the instructor hit the brakes while saying "try to steer now, you can't" [pre-ABS car] - did it with every student.
Also, in my state, Queensland, it is legal to overtake to the left of another vehicle on all multi-lane roads, and everyone knows that - we check just as carefully whether left or right.
Another great analysis and the fact that the Audiot got away really irks me! However, I am guilty of doing what the wee car did, sail past in the inside lane if someone is hogging the middle lane. My thinking is if they are doing that then I'm doing nothing wrong, they should have moved over. I think I will change my mindset from now on having watched this and heard your analysis. Thank you.
@chris jones No, I'm not.
@chris jones Undertaking is not illegal, I suggest you look it up.
@chris jones It's simply an advisory because in certain circumstances it is dangerous, but not all circumstances hence why it is not illegal.
If you were travelling in lane 1 of a 4 lane motorway at 70mph and another vehicle was in lane 4 travelling at 65mph what would you do? I would continue on my way as that is the safest option. I would be undertaking but not performing a dangerous manoeuvre.
If you are adamant that you will never undertake then I guess you would either move to lane 4 and wait for the vehicle to move over (unlikely these days) or slow your speed as to not undertake and thus wait in lane 1 at a reduced speed. Both scenarios are more dangerous than simply carrying on. If you sit in lane 4 behind the other vehicle, other cars will soon catch you up and get frustrated, prompting an undertake which would be classed as dangerous driving as they'd be switching lanes to do so. If you sit in lane 1 other vehicles will catch you up because you've had to reduce your speed so as not to undertake and now you have vehicles also catching up the other vehicle in lane 4, they get frustrated and undertake as other vehicles are overtaking you for going so slow. In each scenario you're going to get caught up in it all.
The safest option by FAR is continue your journey in lane 1 and if I was ever stopped by police for doing so I'd argue my case in court every day!
Furthermore, a simple rule is usually this. If you have to change lanes to undertake then never do so. That's classed as dangerous driving. If you don't have to change lanes to undertake then you may be able to if it's safe to do so.
Summary of Audi behaviour: middle lane hogging, changes lane without looking or indicating, realises what he has done, clears off!
It's not that simple. There was, as Ashley said, a junction just ahead with traffic joining, so a middle lane position wasn't entirely unreasonable at that point.
@@clickrick So no reason to move back to the left lane when approaching the junction then. The audi driver knew exactly what they were doing, I'm sure of it. They seen the puegeot undertaking and moved over purposely.
@@clickrick which would be true if he'd not been sat there for five minutes before the video started
There are a couple of things I’d like to add to Ashley’s analysis. The white car behind the Volvo was quite a way back. There was, in my opinion, time for the late model Volvo to brake and steer left to avoid the Peugeot. Also, it didn’t look, from what I could see of the video footage, that the Peugeot driver needed to brake as hard as he did and a slight steer into the hard shoulder would probably been enough to avoid contact, if a steer at all was needed. Also, having lost control of the Peugeot, and having violently swerved to the right, there was enough time to release pressure on the brakes and steer left, thus regaining control.
I know this would have required quick reactions and car control but the Peugeot driver did freeze, I think!
I know it would mean a big change but I’ve always favoured a system of training where basic car control can be attained on off-road sites before conventional training is commenced. Knowing you can control a car gives much needed confidence and helps with not over-reacting. I was lucky, I was taken to an ex Hornchurch airfield when I was young for this very purpose. The disused airfield had roads, traffic lights and roundabouts etc plus hills for clutch control and brake effort appreciation and even a hard gravel ring for extreme basic practice. Just a thought as I feel for brand new learners trying to cope with unforgiving traffic when they haven’t yet learnt clutch control. 1:00
To your comment at 1:30 regarding the lack of signal from the Audi - I agree with you that this is of minimal causation to this incident. It's the lack of 360 observations that triggered this series of events, nothing to do with signaling. In fact, as the left lane is our 'normal driving position' in the UK, in a situation like this with no vehicles in front, provided you're overtaking properly with a big enough gap behind, no road user stands to benefit from the signal; so I personally very rarely signal to move back into the left lane. This is taught and reinforced in both the IAM Advanced and Masters courses too. Unfortunately, a large number of road users don't THINK about the suitability of a signal, and just instead slap a left or right signal on (almost invariably AS they turn), and chastise anyone who doesn't do the same!
The 206 had ABS and most likely EBFD. Even on a 1999 306, I didn't just have ABS, I had ABS and even Electronic Brake Force Distribution. This was a simple issue of lift off oversteer, caused by the swerving and harsh braking which results in the weight shifting forward off the rear wheels, hence why at no point does the rear wheel lock - the ABS was working!
A reason why people shouldn't think about how much safety kit a car has in their driving. Drive like it has nothing. People should be required to learn car control on airfields or something in cars without any assists, experience a wide variety of emergency situations under controlled circumstances without any help from tech and then they won't become a risk when they can't buy the latest car with the kit when they gain a licence. A properly trained competent driver will never activate those systems. If they trigger you're doing something wrong.
Another commenter looked up the MOT history on the 206 and apparently it was an absolute disaster.
Whilst a 306 may have had ABS, that does not mean the 206 would. On smaller cheaper cars it was not fitted as standard until close to the mandatory deadline. May have been an option, but few people buying a cheaper car would pay that extra. If ABS was working, front wheel would not have stayed locked.
Looking at the video I think the cammer crashing into the Peugeot was inevitable. I don't think speed made that much difference. Although if they were travelling in major excess of the limit i.e. 85+, then the collision will have had a lot more force, potentially resulting in the Peugeot being pushed over the barrier into oncoming vehicles.
Also the Audi driver definitely should have stopped. If just to make sure everyone is OK. They clearly saw what happened, to me it's along the same lines as hit and run
No hit though... so Audi can claim ignorance. It boils my piss, I've always said that if there's a clear choice between not hitting a bellend but damaging my car in the process, or just piling right into the twunt... I'll take the pile up if only for the sake of making sure they can't just tootle off and claim it's not their fault some knob piled into a lamp post next to them....
@@kal9001 I think fundamentally it comes down to the fact that the Audi was hogging the middle lane and then lane changed without checking mirrors/blindspot. To me the Audi was the cause of the crash so even though they never made contact with any other vehicle, they're still involved. So in the same way that if you drive off from a collision with another vehicle it's considered hit and run, this should be treat as leaving the scene of an accident without reporting to the police and should therefore carry the relevant penalty.
Unfortunately the nature of policing today, you can guarantee some copper was given half an hour to look at any available CCTV/traffic cams and then told to move on as they don't have the resources and have other more important 'operational requirements'.
@@jaywright9924 I do agree it does look like lane hogging bad driving by the Audi and the other car should have not undertaken as the out side lane looks clear but the Audi driver will wave his I am a good driver halo it was not my fault as he was undertaking so it was the other drivers fault etc etc
When taking lessons for an HGV1 test many years ago, we were firmly instructed not to indicate a when returning to the 'Driving' Lane after overtaking. It was considered unprofessional, returning should be an automatic action every time and not having to indicate reduced the drivers distraction. The emphasis was on checking your mirrors. If I remember correctly, it was not specifically required according to the highway code, the instruction was merely to return to the diving lane with no mention of indicating. Some argued that its a lane change therefore you should indicate. I understand that applied to all vehicles at the time and it still made sense to Me. I didn't indicate my returns and passed the test 1st time.
My current car had no ABS,TC,ESP for a year. some tricky driving through wales and for sure i had to adapt my driving. had a few close calls on back end stepping out, and plenty total lock ups but for sure it was good training for my 2nd year of driving . thankfully managed to keep car on road but breaking hard on a wet corners was a big no, exp without Esp and Abs. without all the safety aids i defo learned a lot also a lot also fun times to when conditions allowed
Audi Saloon did as you say obviously know, was reg not visible
Reg is T9 DLA, I managed to find it after going through frame by frame
Buses undertake, truckers undertake but not a mention of it. Yet if it's a car that undertakes we get a big lecture about it being a careless or even dangerous criminal offence. Looking foward to seeing Ashley driving a truck with his instructor when he comes across a hogger doing under 55mph.
The difference is that a vehicle over 7.5T, a bus, and a rowing vehicle in this case is unable to go around the outside of the Audi as it’s a three lane motorway and these types of vehicles aren’t allowed in the outside lane.
If it were a 4 or more lane motorway then the vehicles mentioned would be able to go around the outside.
@@Whurbere Wasn't referring to this video. No difference on the type of vehicle, undertaking is quite legal and in most cases safer than making multi lane changes.
Ashley seems to pick and criticise cars undertaking only and tries to call it careless driving.
@@saundersdachicken6197 for the most part car drivers do undertake in a careless and irresponsible manner. They do so accelerating around someone because they are impatient. Many times I’ve had cars come up the inside of me not giving me the opportunity to move over to the left.
The amount of times I’ve moved over to overtake on the right and the car then decides to speed up because they don’t want a lorry to overtake them and another car comes up my inside blocking me from moving back to the left.
@@Whurbere Accelerating around someone consists of changing lanes and weaving around traffic. You also overtake while doing so. I am referring to just staying in your lane and undertake. Nothing careless or illegal in doing so, unlike what some people try to make out.
@@saundersdachicken6197 hilarious I agree with you for the most part, the problem is that most people don’t seem to use their mirrors properly let alone look over their shoulder. I would say that the main reason it’s frowned upon is that there are more blind spots on the near side compared to the offside.
I’m placing no judgement upon anyone that does it, unless they’re doing it because traffic is a little slow and they’re weaving between lanes.
My clio is a 2004. My brother drove it and asked if it had ABS as it felt like it locked up on him. It does have an ABS pump, but recently I found out it only has ABS on the front axle. Probably what he felt was the rear wheels locking up. I guess the front axle is the important one, however, I am now aware of this, incase I ever have problems because of it.
I always follow a little rule in my head I came up with...
Don't move back over to the left, until you can clearly see the other vehicles front headlight in the rear view mirror. Then you know you have plenty of space without cutting them off.
Also.. the Audi driver should've planned ahead with the junction ahead and stayed in the left lane OR EVEN (if anyhting) moved into the right hand lane to allow the Peugeot to move out for the merging traffic form the sliproad. I usually move to the middle lane when approaching junctions to prevent any surprises coming from the slip road, especially on busy days.
If I was in the middle lane and overtaking a vehicle I would be weary of the distance between them and a vehicle in front. Are they catching it up? Are they going to have to move out at some point? If so, then check my right mirror and if its clear I will move over to allow them space to move out and not be trapped/ have to brake. None of these forward planning processes ever entered that white Audi drivers mind at one point.
That's a serious over reaction from the Peugeot driver, coming off the pedal would have probably been much better
I've never know this expectation that there won't be anything passing in left lane
obviously it's less likely but you should be checking when moving over right?
Ironically, in this same video we witness another white Audi in a very near miss. I'm surprised no one as yet has commented. It's in the rear cam footage from around 4:40 onwards. The white Audi in lane one that brakes very heavily on witnessing the collision and the white van behind having to use the hard shoulder to avoid running into the back of the Audi. Lesson from this: Don't slam on your brakes just because you witnessed a nasty accident especially when there is no need to. If you want to stop and be an official witness, just pull over normally and gently, preferably PAST the accident scene rather than before it.
Glad you said that the camera car admitted to speeding - when I watched the clip for the first time I thought 'that's going a bit quick'. Suspect that running at 70 would have given them a chance to avoid getting tangled up in that.
The Audi, in the wrong for all sorts of reasons, but not indicating to move left is not one I would have thought of. You should expect a car in an outside lane to move left (when it is safe to do so) so what benefit is a signal?
If they signalled, the driver of peugeot would have seen and possibly beeped to warn them before they pulled into their path?
Video suggestion: Should there be extra mandatory lessons and a test for winter driving and skid control?
And for Motorway lane discipline - people wouldn't be tempted to undertake if others used the correct lane.
Nice idea. I took my angel driving in the snow while she was learning, and we made good use of empty carparks for skid control practice.
Great skill to learn and great fun.
Much more recently, I’ve had a go on a skid pan car (on hydraulic dolly wheels), again, great fun.
While not compulsory, I Do recommend skid pan days for new drivers.
There absolutely should be advanced car control lessons required for every driver on the road in my opinion. A driver should be able to practice controlling their car in a safe environment so that when an emergency happens they will have a better idea of what to do if they lose control. It should come as no surprise that Finland has this and they produce some of the best drivers in the world. It's a bit pointless to me making drivers pay with, at best, higher insurance for the experience gained in a crash when they could pay for an hour or two on a skid pan to hopefully avoid a crash and the subsequent insurance claim.
There definitely should, but it would be more expensive and would make it so much less peopple pass if it's included in the test, and if it isn't, it won't be done anyway.
So, I don't see this happening unfortunately.
Well then people would need a test in winter and not everyone has time to wait months just for that especially when it hardly does snow
Audi was middle lane hogging and swerved into probably a young driver I’m guessing by the car, how it was driven and maintained. Swerving is a young persons/ inexperienced driver reaction to a danger. If they just braked like they would if someone pulled out on them on a 30 then it would have been fine to then overtake the Audi
Ashley has already commented that there was no need for the Audi to change lane, so I agree that all of this unessessary lane changing would avert many accidents...Especially with the plethora of inaccurate assumptions on the so called " lane hogging" syndrome.!!
After actually watching the whole video and read a few comments, this is what I think happened:
Audi overtakes Peugeot very very slowly.
Suddenly a cam car appear in the middle range closing in at very high speed.
I measured a random part of the M1, and the distance between lamp post was a little more than 40 meters, which makes sense.
They pass buy at a rate of about one per second which is a speed of 144 km/h. The speed limit is (at the most) 70 mph which is is about 112 km/h.
So yes, that "slightly over" is about 30 km/h or 20 mph above the limit. This is consistent with how habitual speeders would describe their speed.
The closing speed is approximately what I would suspect from that speed difference.
If someone want to figure out where this was taken, and make better measurement. please help me.
What the Audi did is something that happens way too often:
Passing with a very slow speed difference, and then when they move in ahead of the vehicle they just passed, the slow down.
Or the Peugeot (in an old car with no ABS or cruise control) may have increased their speed when passsed.
So in the end:
1 - there would have been no incident without the camera car barreling down the middle lane like a battering ram.
2 - even if the Audi had driven the way they did, and the Peugeot had lost control, the driver of the cam car would have had time to react.
From the short clip prior to the incident I don't think the pug driver was catching (at least at any speed). I think the Audi slowed before moving into L1. The cammers rate of gain on the audi seems to increase before moving to L3 and before the audi moves to L1. The cammer doesn't show the same change in rate of gain against the pug. It's as if the audi lets off before moving to L1.
Perhaps the audi driver was (although unannounced) expecting an exit at the junction which caused them to move to L1 although they move back into L2 further up the road.
I agree, the cammer should have moved to L3 well before the video footage starts given how fast they are catching up. They said they were a 'little over' the speed limit, IMO they were well over and it was them looming large in the Audi drivers mirror that ended up with the driver trying to move to L1
I can't believe the Audi driver never stopped. What a knob.
I believe.....
The Audi driver was probably surprised LIKE everyone else...Peugeot never came into contact with Audi , so therefore a collision, as far as the Audi is concerned, never involved them.
The Peugeot (SD52 NKU) has an awful MOT history the car wasn't looked after very well. (It could be a different past owner of course.) Multiple failures and advisories for brakes, suspension and tyres (someone even took it to the MOT centre with cords showing on the tyre)
Says it all really.
I noticed one of the brake lights wasn't working here.
I used to drive Pug 205's both of them pre 2000, early 90's or late 80's honestly can't remember. But they both had ABS. I think most Pugs probability all, would have had ABS by 2004.
I think the thing most people don't understand about ABS is that it means antilocking breaking system, not non locking breaking system. The system has become much more sophisticated, and subsequently effective, however the A in ABS still stands for antilocking, not non locking. There is a significant difference in meaning between these 2 things. Which becomes apparent when driving on brocken terrain, dirt gravel, or low traction environments, snow, ice etc.
The systems in modern cars are really good, but if you take them out of their normal operating environment, then you better be ready. With older ABS systems, it is much easier to overwhelm the system, violently shifting the weight of the car whilst breaking hard would do it. When I was a driving instructor, I made a point of teaching people what ABS is, and more importantly it's limitations.
P.S
The pug shouldn't have tried to undertake, there was plenty of space for them them to go to the right hand lane, and pass. Maybe they wanted to come off at the junction and were in too much of a hurry to wait behind the Audi, or maybe they were pissed off at the middle lane hogging, but at the end of the day, whatever plan the pug driver had for that day was ruined, as well as their car, and from the sounds of things several days possibly months of their life's were disrupted due to this decision.
People have to make risk reward decisions when driving. What am I risking, what do I get.
I often wonder if allowing undertaking on the motorway would actually help this sort of thing by making drivers expect potential overtakers on either side. It seems to work in other countries. To be clear, I'm not saying this should be the case just that it's worth some consideration.
It does help and is legal. Every vehicle wanting to pass a hogger sitting in lane 3 would have to move out to lane 4. Anybody who thinks that is safer shouldn't drive.
4:32 - A little over the speed limit is an understatement. 80+ without doubt. If the cammer was sitting at 70 he would have had more time to react and could have avoided the collision. But no one expects something like this to happen so I don't blame him.
This is something that Ashley has raised in videos before but dashcams really change the perspective and make things appear further away than they really are. Even if this cammer was at 70 this accident would have most likely happened, they had about 3 seconds from the Peugeot losing control to slamming into the railing.
@@JackHaarriiss if he was going slower he could of hit that Peugeot fully side on and killed the driver so maybe going faster was a good thing here. Speed limits in the UK are poor but then again so are the average standards of driving
70mph+ the reaction time would have been minimal
If he'd have been going slower, the accident would have happened well ahead of him.
@@MonarchA330 Depends when he started doing more than 70 if he's been going fast for a while then obviously he would be a completely different place but that's a pretty pointless argument.
The key to the accident was the random over reaction of the Peugeot driver, a non event turned into an accident. Audi guy made a mistake which caused the initial situation but wasn’t responsible for the Peugeot’s poor driving skills. Cant see how its possible to tell if the Peugeot was undertaking or Audi stopped accelerating. audi didn’t check his mirrors when he changed lanes.
Audi stop accelerating? Must be joking
You've obviously never experienced wheel lock
@@fluffyfetlocks no, must be an unskilled driver thing.
maybe it was not because of the driving skills. maybe it was the car. it was a french car for crying out loud.
@@charng mate I've got a Citroen and I can guarantee you that wouldn't have happened A) I have the common sense to not undertake B) even if I did I would have just moved to the shoulder without all the heavy braking C) if I did heavy brake I have ABS and ESP, modern French cars are actually pretty brilliant for the most part these days.
Honestly, the number of drivers, I see on our M-Ways, who change lanes abruptly or without signalling or too close to the car behind /infront that I see on my fairly rare motorway trips, makes me understand that best practice is keep my distance at all times.
I always say, it is not the speed that causes accidents, but not knowing when to slow down.
I drove on autobahns in Germany close to 200mph without any issue, but the key is POWDERY and awareness while driving.
Peugeot Driver: Needs to think
Everyone: RUN! FLEE FOR YOUR LIVES!!!
Im a Peugeot driver! You're right run for your lives.
The Peugeot driver was also in his BLIND SPOT.
The thoughts on the ABS are interesting, I used to drive a 1999 Puegeot 306 and even though it was fitted with ABS i can vividly remember one time where I had to brake hard and it did lock up despite the ABS, it was only a quick release of the brake followed by reapplication before the ABS kicked in. Maybe earlier ABS systems were not as reliable as the ones we have today.
Eithier way that accident looks like it was multiple factors, poor indication of intentions from the Audi, poor hazzard perception of the Peugeot knowing it would have been likely that the audi would have moved back over (But also poor perception of the Audi with a junction approaching) and possibly the Peugeot driver was flexing a bit after being overtaken and taking a disliking to it. Driver age and experience could have played a part too. The Volvo driver just got unlucky, anticipated the hazzard and took avoiding action but still collided, notr how the volvo driver remained in lane during the collision, that suggests to me he was aware of his entire surroundings, both front and back.
My observation is, given this is about “anticipation”, had the Volvo driver anticipated the situation and stayed in lane 2, he would have avoided colliding with the Peugeot. Look at the distance the Volvo is from the Peugeot at 0:39, at the point the Peugeot starts to lose control and tell me the Volvo couldn’t start heavy breaking, stay in lane 2 and completely avoid a collision. The Volvo was still at a distance to observe and anticipate the Peugeot was in trouble at 0:39. By abandoning his lane change and with heavy breaking at the point the Peugeot lost control, the Volvo would have avoided rear ending the Peugeot and making the situation worse. The Volvo no doubt had ABS and ESP? Heavy breaking and abandoning the lane change and staying in lane 2 would have avoided the Peugeot. The Volvo just seemed intent on barrelling along into lane 3. ABS & ESP allows for heavy breaking and steering at the same time which the Volvo didn’t seem to want to do.