Extra info: 1. More mistake analysis - watch this playlist. ruclips.net/p/PLG5Om1_yP8jl791CG4eV4kYrgVwRKRF6g 2. How Not To be a Loser Driver - perhaps the most important video I've made. ruclips.net/video/hJe3-TdjO0g/видео.html
When I was learning to drive many years ago, my Dad asked a friend of his to take me for a few lessons. His friend was an ex UK policeman, and he taught me the " vanishing point" concept of cornering. You must be able to stop within the distance of the vanishing point on the curve, which is where the near side and far side of the road converge in your sightline. Most importantly, that point should never appear to get closer to you as the vehicle travels around the bend. This has been great as a defensive driving technique for me over many years now!
In my country cops very often drive dangerous without thinking of other people on the road. Just because they can do that without getting any warning or fine. For me watching this video it is kind of irritating. At the same time I am glad that you took the time and effort to give us viewers a very clear insight in what is happening in a situation like that. As you do usually. Science explained in a way that many people can learn from to become better drivers themselves. You have made me a safer driver, thank you!
As always, good analysis. I'm glad the LC79 had a dashcam. Not saying the police driver would have done the wrong thing and just stated the facts of the collision (they were going too fast and too wide into the corner to account for oncoming traffic), but their word would have more standing in the eyes of the law even if they tried to avoid liability. Also in the police driver's perspective the may have thought the other car suddenly appeared... like it was speeding. I'm glad the LC79 wasn't a motorbike, which would still not been left much room. Thankfully it was only vehicle damage.
Agreed, a "sudden appearance" would have been plausible, but this car was lead in a 4x4 convoy so there were other witnesses to its general speed and positioning. As you can see from the lead-up, a cautious and safe drive. I don't think they were at fault in any way.
Most corrugations on the inside (low side) of a corner on dirt roads are caused by water runoff with rain. The smoothest section is the high side of a corner which is probably what the police vehicle driver was going to use. Unfortunately he was driving too fast for the conditions and visibility! Great video and explanation of how things work! Many drivers these days have little to no idea of how these electronic systems work and just rely on it anyway! God forbid something goes wrong because they don't have the skills or experience involved to react when it does! New vehicles with all the latest technology may be much safer but sadly the people driving then aren't! Hopefully by watching videos such as these it will help to bring drivers up to date with the vehicles they drive!
The corner is obscured at the apex, but anyone should be able to see a vehicle sized object moving along the road as they both approach the corner. Sometimes you need to look out the window in the doors, rather than just the windscreen, particularly on winding roads. The cop was coming in hot, but I think that the guy that was hit could have seen him coming.
I have to drive on twisty clay gravel dirt roads every day and assume each corner will have a vehicle (possibly a truck) coming the opposite way. And assume the other driver has poor judgement and abilities. That guides my approach speed and course. And yes I've dodged more than I can count! But no collisions. Even had joggers coming around on the dirt at the apex...Even kangaroos are n't that stupid!
Well said. I lived on a windy gravel road with logging trucks and speeding cars while learning to drive about 50 years ago. I got pretty quick on gravel roads too, but ever since then the rule has been assume a fast and bad driver is coming the other way, particularly on blind corners, but also on crests, sweeping bends and steep sections. BTW that Police vehicle had a bad driver, clearly too fast and should have steered further left before braking hard. The camera vehicle seemed okay for speed, could have been slightly further left, and could have jerked the wheel left but didn't. All you can do with this information is make judgements based on experience. It would require measured data to be absolutely sure.
You forgot to mention the most important factor in this crash, the cop was going too fast, you can tell this by the amount of dust behind the cop car. If the roles were reversed you can guarantee a change of dangerous driving. No doubt the cops won't charge themselves
What is "too fast" ? How does "you were driving too fast" help someone understand what's happening? I know the police are fond of talking about speed, but let's do a bit better than "too fast". Would 10km/h have been ok? 20? Please define "too fast", other than looking at the quantity of dust kicked up, which I would suggest is not a reliable indicator of speed given differences in road surface, wind, moisture, tyre type, tyre inflation pressure and many other factors.
@@L2SFBC in a court ' too fast' would be what the judge deemed to be the major cause of the crash. As you point out other factors are at play bou put simply if the cop was for example 20kmh slower the crash would have not occurred unless there are other factors we don't know about such as he was drunk or on the phone.
None of us infallible...every driver needs to drive their vehicle in such a way and at such a speed, that he/she can avoid a collision like the one in this video. There's no right or wrong speed....other than you must be in control of the vehicle. The police officer behind the wheel wasn't in control of their vehicle. That wasn't an accident!! It was the result of the police driver not operating the vehicle within the limits of either the vehicle and/or their own capability. I hope the dashcam driver obtains full restoration from the police.
The thing with the speed and the stopping distance: Where i come from there's 2 rules (among many others) you learn when making your drivers license: 1.When the road is wide enough for 2 vehicles, the speed you should go max is so that you can stop in the distance you can see. (if the road in your example would be wider, the trees in the corner would mean to go slower for example as they reduce the distance you see.) 2. and more important for this example: When the road is narrower (so 2 cars can't pass each other without needing to use the shoulder of the road), you only should go so fast as to be able to stop at *half* the distance you can see. -> Because this way you leave space for oncomming traffic to stop too. (works when they do the same). We call it "driving on sight distance" and driving on half the sight distance". (Sadly many don't remember when after years of making their license.)
I was taught many years ago to drive within your brakes, especially when off a sealed road. I.e. to be able to stop if there is something in front of you, and always assume there is another vehicle either stopped or approaching you around a corner, or even a tree across the road. Won't prevent every collision but will assist with minimising the chance of a collision and contribute to reducing the impact if there is one.
Really bad corrugations will prevent a car from turning at all. Even if you aren't braking. If I was the 200 I'd be braking as much as possible and then in the last few moments released the brakes significantly to achieve maximum steering. Not sure if would have saved them though, they seem to be too fast and too wide initially. On gravel especially its really common to use some of the other lane in a corner but you gotta remain in a position to give room to another car.
Great video. Looks like it was either a police or emergency response vehicle. Good to know that everyone was ok. Camber, canter of the road, speed, dirt and tyres all things that a driver probably doesn’t think about on a lazy summer day. A great video to remind us to be more aware.
Everyone gets it wrong at some stage. Not to excuse the driver(s) of any vehicle in this clip. I drive on a dirt road every day. It just seems to accentuate how little people are aware of the physics involved in driving in general, and also a level of not being involved in the thought process around what could go wrong. I learned through stupidity and arrogance. Not a recommended way to do it. Physics is an uncaring and harsh teacher.
Thanks David. Yes, anyone that judges harshly is either inexperienced, or delusional. We've all made mistakes, had near misses and even dare I say it thrown a car around a corner just for fun. I'm trying here to shortcut that process of "stupidity and arrogance" just a little.
I'd blame the cop car, but good luck with that. The thing is, a lot of people approach a blind corner with too much speed. Maybe the cop was responding to an urgent situation. For the rest of us, there's no need.
Country drivers are no better than city drivers despite the obvious issues. The number of drivers that don't really slow down on gravel roads or bends, but blind crests as well !!!!
You are only allowed to drive so fast that you can stop in the half distance that you can see. This is because the oncoming driver can only see the stretch of road that you can see.
I appreciate the analysis. I wonder if the police car had of come off the brakes at the last moment it just might have gripped up and turned as it was just a glancing hit in the end so almost a miss. Admittedly that requires some advanced levels of rally driving skill in that situation and may have been too much to expect.
Jumping off the brakes would extend the springs, reducing load on the front wheels and therefore grip and create an understeer situation. Smoothly reducing the braking to allow a transition to using all the grip for turning would have worked. That is a racing technique called 'trailbraking'.
As no other car passed the camera, the Cops were probably not in pursuit, or on a task so they definitely need more driver training. All the good info about grip, braking, speed, control etc. are of little use if you put, or allow, yourself to get into situations with with no exit strategy.
First of all, it's "them" not "it". Yes a police officer who reviewed this prior to publication did suggest a potential careless driving cause but that's not the same as hooning. Nobody has suggested there will be no consequences for the driver, quite the opposite in fact, and you have to remember that a lot of the time police officers are driving under stress, or to some sort of emergency. The sirens and lights weren't activated but under the road code they don't need to be if there is good reason. None of this excuses the LC200 driver but your points made are incorrect and disrespectful.
@@L2SFBCYes, it started as a joke, but became a rant. I'll edit the tone down a few degrees, but I still stand by the view that there is a broad lack of consequence for misconduct that would get the average driver a decent fine or even impounded.
Excellent Video. Thanks. At times I do drive a lot on dirt roads, and I've been forced off the road by an oncoming curtain-sider going far too fast - no damage fortunately. I always slow right down at the corners as you've explained, maybe I'll slow even more after your excellent explanation. I like to nerd out on facts and data so thumbsup. 🙂 Pretty unfortunate placement of a culvert.
I tend to go with the Swiss Cheese Model for causation of accidents. There are many, many reasons why a single accident occurs and you've pointed most of them out. Off the cuff, I'd suggest blind corner, speed, corrugations, marbles, tight bend, unfortunate timing, inadequately wide road at the corner, ditch, and there may be others like unfamiliar road, inexperienced driver, hurry, distractions (may be talking to someone via UHF or phone), sun, etc etc. So there is no point blaming a single factor, as other factors were at play. I'm not as confident about ABS etc on that type of dirt road - IMO too many marbles and corrugation for it to work. I see the wheels are turned, the brakes are applied and the vehicle continues straight ahead. Can't expect ABS to do the impossible on that surface. And I agree - never drive faster than it would take to stop if there was a problem - my grandfather taught me that 50 years ago.
The vehicle was turning and braking, but just not much grip. ABS and ESC did their best to work with the grip available to meet the driver's demands. Sadly, overspend of grip budget.
Good video.That road looks very similar to the road to my property. There have been quite a few collisions there over the years involving locals, who IMHO are the worse for not keeping left and overdriving their visibility. Anyway the police are at fault in this case and should the driver should have his/ her license suspended pending retraining.
I don’t know the speed of the police vehicle but let’s assume it wasn’t stupid but perhaps a little too fast for complete control should something unexpected happens. On a blind left hand turn there is nothing wrong to approach from your side of of the road but closer to the middle to allow greater vision but the caveat is that you will need to travel slow enough so you can immediately steer to the left should you see a vehicle coming the other side. The corner is also positively camber on the inside meaning the left turning vehicle can go around it at a higher speed than otherwise. My take is that the police vehicle driver simply panic, jam on the brake and apply steering without releasing the brake to allow the tyres more traction to turn. I think the police car would have been able to turn tighter and miss the camera car all together. Things which can be learned: 1) drive not only to sight distance but also comfort level ( need to be able to react to unexpected without panic given one’s experience/ concentration level at the time) 2) brake as much as possible in a straight line but always release/ lighten brake application just before you turn Obvious it’s easy for me to do arm chair analysis after the fact.😅
Its great that someone is speaking about this. I had experienced many near misses coz folks were speeding around the bend or cut straight across my path to another road.. Its absolutely frightening. ironic that this time it was the police. Though I can't say I totally agree with your comments around the 3:50 mark where you said there's no harm putting your left wheel all to the left side,. I think you would know this but sometimes there's mud and debris accumulated like a muddy pool at the bottom of the bend. And the area is usually shaded by the trees. We lost traction on the passenger front wheel hitting one of those deceiving things before, and the back of the car spun out.
not really, it's a narrow road and there is a tradeoff between road position and visibility. If the corner isn't blind it's often fine to use the best part of the road, left or right, to maximise traction. The problem comes with a blind corner.
There isn't 'lanes' as such. It's pretty much up to driver discretion as to whether you drive far left or in the middle when there is visabily. In this case there wasn't, so yes the on coming car should have been hugging left a bit more, but there really isn't a lot of room.
Over easter in the Otways i came very close to a few of theses type of collisions, Young guys that think they are still on the highway...........Thay need to slow the fuck down!!!!!!
Cop was totally hooning through there, Not only does the dashcammer need to drive with due care and attention, but also the pig in the prado. Excessive speed for conditions. Diference is amd speaking from experienece having been to court for a me vs cop situation similar to this, You aint coming out of it un scathed. They will do everything they can to show they were 100% in the right.
I did, once, a white CM Valiant, 245 Hemi, three on the column. I found some .38 bullets, uniform buttons and a bag of, I think it was, speed under the back seat. Perhaps someone dumping their score before being processed?
Right, so the ESC stops understeer? How? If you're suggesting that it keeps traction on the wheel? That is skid prevention NOT understeer. The key here is simple, if it effects the BRAKE system, it is not understeer prevention, that would be a design fundamental of the steering and geometry. Yes, this is getting boring and you need to learn that you are wrong with calling it under steer etc... Fact: steering and suspension geometry in the whole will not effect skidding if all things are equal other than the road surface. This tells you easily if it is a skid or if it is over steer or under steer. What will happen if it is under or over steer is the vehicel will behive the same no matter what the surface is to a point, that point is described in your grip circle. If it is a SKID the surface makes a difference, so the same input perameters on grit will cause a skid, but on tarmac it will not. so in reality, easily differentialed. Here is the result of the above, you have to admit the car that caused the incident was skidding wasn't it? Dictionary definition of: "skid /skɪd/ verb verb: skid; 3rd person present: skids; past tense: skidded; past participle: skidded; gerund or present participle: skidding 1. (of a vehicle) slide, typically sideways or obliquely, on slippery ground or as a result of stopping or turning too quickly. "her car skidded and hit the grass verge" slip; slide. "Barbara's foot skidded and she fell to the floor" cause to skid. "he skidded his car" North American move a heavy object on skids. "they skidded the logs down the hill to the waterfront" 2. fasten a skid to (a wheel) as a brake. noun noun: skid; plural noun: skids 1. an act of skidding or sliding. It is interesting that there is no mention of suspension or steering geometry here, why? Because a skid is not due to steering and suspension, over and under steer are. You even go as far as saying "sliding", well, that's a skid! I would suggest that instead of driving in a manner to stop in the distance you can see, drive in a manner that you can stop in at least HALF of the distance you can see. This way both parties has a space to stop without excessive skidding.
There is a lot for people to learn here, as well as a lot you need to learn. the circles of grip verify it's a skid, please do this more regularly and give the correct name to the actions.
Here is further consideration to say why it is a skid not over steer or under steer: If you have a trailer, it starts to sway and fishtails, it will come past the tow vehicle. Correct? This is not stated as over or under steer, why? Here's why; the trailer (as you put it) is trying to overtake the vehicle (it's mass is attempting to travel faster than the tow vehicle - again your words), thus it's axle steps out from inline. Now think what the vehicle does and what effects are different from the trailer's tyres and the rear axle of the vehicle in a over-steering (driver demand request) incident? There is nothing different, the tyres lose traction as they have exceeded the coefficents of traction. they have exceeded your arrows in a circle. So if the vehicle over or under steers, then this must also be stated as the trailer over or under steers as the steering is effectively a cetre pivot steering mechanism. Also when the "tail wags the dog" and the rear axle of the vehicle is pushed, this must also be labelled as over or under steer. Again, it's not, because it is not a fundamental design of steering and suspension geometry causing the action it is an external force. Getting the fundametals correct is a prerequisit to learning, if you can't get the basics you compound the error when ellabourating on the basics. This is what you're doing, you're getting the basics wrong, even though you understand the principals of grip, you are calling it by the name of another fundamental of mechanics. A skid is not over or understeer and should never be labelled as such, it is a skid, it's own, fundamental if you like. If what you call over and under steer was actually correctly named it would involve something actively altering the steeering and suspension geometry on the fly, so altering lengths or positions of the mounts and arcs of travel. There is no mechanism other than impacts for this and at that point, you've crashed so the physics of over and under steer no longer apply as to a good vehicle as the vehicle is damaged. Get the fundamentals right and your videos will be a lot better - as you'll be stating what it is not a different thing.
I'm confused, Your in a right hand drive country...One of those cars was on the wrong side of the road. Do you not respect driving on the correct side of the road when on dirt? Shouldn't that police car have been all the way to the other-side of the road? Seems to me what caused this crash is a cop driving on the wrong side of the road, perhaps revoke their license for a year due to causing an avoidable collision.
Two issues; you mention trailbraking as a reply to another comment. You also explained to them that coming off the brakes would extend the front suspension and therefore remove grip on the outer front wheel. Not going to argue on either point. In the video, you talk about ABS. In this situation, ABS has likely contributed to the incident, by not allowing full braking and therefore, desired grip for either turning OR traction was realised. Good thought provoking vid. 👍
@@L2SFBC yes. That’s right. But I was more suggesting that ABS interferes with the balance that can be struck by a knowledgeable and trained driver in dirt/gravel. You’d be brilliant to improve on modern ABS on tar in a straight line. 👍
I think camer was up to one third responsible. Still too fast for that very narrow, blind, & tight bend, on gravel, in a tall, long wheelbase ute based vehicle. Utes can't do what wagons can do, & wagons can't do what cars can do here. Didn't seem to be much reduction of speed from sighting until impact.
I absolutely cannot agree that ABS is good on gravel. In most cases it is downright dangerous imagine having some system that randomly decides that you don't have any brakes when you need them😂.
Robert, from the content of your last videos I suspect you have difficult digestion in the evening and then nightmares in the night. I suggest lighter dinners. PS BTW, interesting video.
"Speed" by itself is never a problem. Inappropriate speed is a problem. And then you need to understand why the speed was inappropriate. And that's not as simple as "going too fast" which is an overly simplistic assessment which helps nobody understand how to truly be a better driver.
@@L2SFBC I would outdrive you easily. I would love to do a series of tests but I am in Canada other wise ol fella enjoy making your content and live your life.
Extra info:
1. More mistake analysis - watch this playlist. ruclips.net/p/PLG5Om1_yP8jl791CG4eV4kYrgVwRKRF6g
2. How Not To be a Loser Driver - perhaps the most important video I've made. ruclips.net/video/hJe3-TdjO0g/видео.html
When I was learning to drive many years ago, my Dad asked a friend of his to take me for a few lessons. His friend was an ex UK policeman, and he taught me the " vanishing point" concept of cornering. You must be able to stop within the distance of the vanishing point on the curve, which is where the near side and far side of the road converge in your sightline. Most importantly, that point should never appear to get closer to you as the vehicle travels around the bend. This has been great as a defensive driving technique for me over many years now!
British police driver training is THE BEST for onroad. #roadcraft
In my country cops very often drive dangerous without thinking of other people on the road. Just because they can do that without getting any warning or fine. For me watching this video it is kind of irritating.
At the same time I am glad that you took the time and effort to give us viewers a very clear insight in what is happening in a situation like that. As you do usually. Science explained in a way that many people can learn from to become better drivers themselves. You have made me a safer driver, thank you!
I appreciate that comment, thank you, I'll all about the safety!
My experience is that the locals are worse than tourists. Familiarity breeds contenpt and all that.
As always, good analysis.
I'm glad the LC79 had a dashcam. Not saying the police driver would have done the wrong thing and just stated the facts of the collision (they were going too fast and too wide into the corner to account for oncoming traffic), but their word would have more standing in the eyes of the law even if they tried to avoid liability. Also in the police driver's perspective the may have thought the other car suddenly appeared... like it was speeding.
I'm glad the LC79 wasn't a motorbike, which would still not been left much room. Thankfully it was only vehicle damage.
Agreed, a "sudden appearance" would have been plausible, but this car was lead in a 4x4 convoy so there were other witnesses to its general speed and positioning. As you can see from the lead-up, a cautious and safe drive. I don't think they were at fault in any way.
Most corrugations on the inside (low side) of a corner on dirt roads are caused by water runoff with rain. The smoothest section is the high side of a corner which is probably what the police vehicle driver was going to use. Unfortunately he was driving too fast for the conditions and visibility!
Great video and explanation of how things work!
Many drivers these days have little to no idea of how these electronic systems work and just rely on it anyway! God forbid something goes wrong because they don't have the skills or experience involved to react when it does!
New vehicles with all the latest technology may be much safer but sadly the people driving then aren't!
Hopefully by watching videos such as these it will help to bring drivers up to date with the vehicles they drive!
The corner is obscured at the apex, but anyone should be able to see a vehicle sized object moving along the road as they both approach the corner. Sometimes you need to look out the window in the doors, rather than just the windscreen, particularly on winding roads.
The cop was coming in hot, but I think that the guy that was hit could have seen him coming.
I have to drive on twisty clay gravel dirt roads every day and assume each corner will have a vehicle (possibly a truck) coming the opposite way. And assume the other driver has poor judgement and abilities.
That guides my approach speed and course.
And yes I've dodged more than I can count! But no collisions.
Even had joggers coming around on the dirt at the apex...Even kangaroos are n't that stupid!
Well said. I lived on a windy gravel road with logging trucks and speeding cars while learning to drive about 50 years ago. I got pretty quick on gravel roads too, but ever since then the rule has been assume a fast and bad driver is coming the other way, particularly on blind corners, but also on crests, sweeping bends and steep sections. BTW that Police vehicle had a bad driver, clearly too fast and should have steered further left before braking hard. The camera vehicle seemed okay for speed, could have been slightly further left, and could have jerked the wheel left but didn't. All you can do with this information is make judgements based on experience. It would require measured data to be absolutely sure.
The camera car couldn't have got any further left due to a culvert, and in fact did turn left just prior to impact.
The police vehicle appears to be way to far right and not hugging the left.
It's not massively far right, it's a narrow road
I'm going to install a dash cam. :)
You forgot to mention the most important factor in this crash, the cop was going too fast, you can tell this by the amount of dust behind the cop car. If the roles were reversed you can guarantee a change of dangerous driving. No doubt the cops won't charge themselves
What is "too fast" ? How does "you were driving too fast" help someone understand what's happening? I know the police are fond of talking about speed, but let's do a bit better than "too fast". Would 10km/h have been ok? 20? Please define "too fast", other than looking at the quantity of dust kicked up, which I would suggest is not a reliable indicator of speed given differences in road surface, wind, moisture, tyre type, tyre inflation pressure and many other factors.
@@L2SFBC in a court ' too fast' would be what the judge deemed to be the major cause of the crash. As you point out other factors are at play bou put simply if the cop was for example 20kmh slower the crash would have not occurred unless there are other factors we don't know about such as he was drunk or on the phone.
What about 15km/h slower and different road positioning, or different actions with regard to braking and steering?
None of us infallible...every driver needs to drive their vehicle in such a way and at such a speed, that he/she can avoid a collision like the one in this video.
There's no right or wrong speed....other than you must be in control of the vehicle.
The police officer behind the wheel wasn't in control of their vehicle.
That wasn't an accident!! It was the result of the police driver not operating the vehicle within the limits of either the vehicle and/or their own capability.
I hope the dashcam driver obtains full restoration from the police.
“you can tell this by the amount of dust”? Utter rubbish. Not possible with any accuracy.
Unfortunately, no matter what you do, there's no fixing the craziness of idiots zooming around dirt roads, thinking they're rally pros!
Excelent, as usual. The Circle of Traction is also descripted by the "Circle of Kamm". Regards from Argentina!
Thanks, love to hear from people all over the world! Yes, I only used one of the names for it in this video.
The thing with the speed and the stopping distance:
Where i come from there's 2 rules (among many others) you learn when making your drivers license:
1.When the road is wide enough for 2 vehicles, the speed you should go max is so that you can stop in the distance you can see.
(if the road in your example would be wider, the trees in the corner would mean to go slower for example as they reduce the distance you see.)
2. and more important for this example: When the road is narrower (so 2 cars can't pass each other without needing to use the shoulder of the road), you only should go so fast as to be able to stop at *half* the distance you can see. -> Because this way you leave space for oncomming traffic to stop too. (works when they do the same).
We call it "driving on sight distance" and driving on half the sight distance".
(Sadly many don't remember when after years of making their license.)
Excellent advice!
I was taught many years ago to drive within your brakes, especially when off a sealed road. I.e. to be able to stop if there is something in front of you, and always assume there is another vehicle either stopped or approaching you around a corner, or even a tree across the road.
Won't prevent every collision but will assist with minimising the chance of a collision and contribute to reducing the impact if there is one.
"drive within your brakes" - great advice!
Really bad corrugations will prevent a car from turning at all. Even if you aren't braking.
If I was the 200 I'd be braking as much as possible and then in the last few moments released the brakes significantly to achieve maximum steering.
Not sure if would have saved them though, they seem to be too fast and too wide initially. On gravel especially its really common to use some of the other lane in a corner but you gotta remain in a position to give room to another car.
Great video. Looks like it was either a police or emergency response vehicle. Good to know that everyone was ok.
Camber, canter of the road, speed, dirt and tyres all things that a driver probably doesn’t think about on a lazy summer day.
A great video to remind us to be more aware.
Everyone gets it wrong at some stage. Not to excuse the driver(s) of any vehicle in this clip. I drive on a dirt road every day. It just seems to accentuate how little people are aware of the physics involved in driving in general, and also a level of not being involved in the thought process around what could go wrong. I learned through stupidity and arrogance. Not a recommended way to do it. Physics is an uncaring and harsh teacher.
Thanks David. Yes, anyone that judges harshly is either inexperienced, or delusional. We've all made mistakes, had near misses and even dare I say it thrown a car around a corner just for fun. I'm trying here to shortcut that process of "stupidity and arrogance" just a little.
For that loose stone surface, I've been taught, having your 4x4 in 4-Hi for Better tracking. Though not mentioned in your dialogue.
What is the reason behind that, and what is 'tracking'?
I'd blame the cop car, but good luck with that. The thing is, a lot of people approach a blind corner with too much speed. Maybe the cop was responding to an urgent situation. For the rest of us, there's no need.
I'd reckon the dash cam footage proves it conclusively. Lucky they had it.
Country drivers are no better than city drivers despite the obvious issues. The number of drivers that don't really slow down on gravel roads or bends, but blind crests as well !!!!
Country drivers are generally worse as the know the road and have an idea of frequency of traffic so are likely to go faster than they should.
White car was going too fast, not paying attention for the risk of an on-coming vehicle around a blind corner and in the middle of the road.
You are only allowed to drive so fast that you can stop in the half distance that you can see. This is because the oncoming driver can only see the stretch of road that you can see.
I think you should have run a scenario with 2 vehicles, one from each direction, to see if they could take the corner at the same time.
I appreciate the analysis. I wonder if the police car had of come off the brakes at the last moment it just might have gripped up and turned as it was just a glancing hit in the end so almost a miss. Admittedly that requires some advanced levels of rally driving skill in that situation and may have been too much to expect.
Jumping off the brakes would extend the springs, reducing load on the front wheels and therefore grip and create an understeer situation. Smoothly reducing the braking to allow a transition to using all the grip for turning would have worked. That is a racing technique called 'trailbraking'.
As no other car passed the camera, the Cops were probably not in pursuit, or on a task so they definitely need more driver training. All the good info about grip, braking, speed, control etc. are of little use if you put, or allow, yourself to get into situations with with no exit strategy.
So now the copper needs to charge itself with careless driving, and under the Victorian hoon laws impound the vehicle. 😁
First of all, it's "them" not "it". Yes a police officer who reviewed this prior to publication did suggest a potential careless driving cause but that's not the same as hooning. Nobody has suggested there will be no consequences for the driver, quite the opposite in fact, and you have to remember that a lot of the time police officers are driving under stress, or to some sort of emergency. The sirens and lights weren't activated but under the road code they don't need to be if there is good reason. None of this excuses the LC200 driver but your points made are incorrect and disrespectful.
@@L2SFBCYes, it started as a joke, but became a rant. I'll edit the tone down a few degrees, but I still stand by the view that there is a broad lack of consequence for misconduct that would get the average driver a decent fine or even impounded.
thank you
Excellent Video. Thanks. At times I do drive a lot on dirt roads, and I've been forced off the road by an oncoming curtain-sider going far too fast - no damage fortunately. I always slow right down at the corners as you've explained, maybe I'll slow even more after your excellent explanation. I like to nerd out on facts and data so thumbsup. 🙂
Pretty unfortunate placement of a culvert.
I tend to go with the Swiss Cheese Model for causation of accidents. There are many, many reasons why a single accident occurs and you've pointed most of them out. Off the cuff, I'd suggest blind corner, speed, corrugations, marbles, tight bend, unfortunate timing, inadequately wide road at the corner, ditch, and there may be others like unfamiliar road, inexperienced driver, hurry, distractions (may be talking to someone via UHF or phone), sun, etc etc. So there is no point blaming a single factor, as other factors were at play.
I'm not as confident about ABS etc on that type of dirt road - IMO too many marbles and corrugation for it to work. I see the wheels are turned, the brakes are applied and the vehicle continues straight ahead. Can't expect ABS to do the impossible on that surface.
And I agree - never drive faster than it would take to stop if there was a problem - my grandfather taught me that 50 years ago.
The vehicle was turning and braking, but just not much grip. ABS and ESC did their best to work with the grip available to meet the driver's demands. Sadly, overspend of grip budget.
to me the cops were over to far . not on there side of the road
Good video.That road looks very similar to the road to my property. There have been quite a few collisions there over the years involving locals, who IMHO are the worse for not keeping left and overdriving their visibility. Anyway the police are at fault in this case and should the driver should have his/ her license suspended pending retraining.
You can see where it is from the roadsigns
Looks alot like Lardners Track/Gellibrand East Road
But it is not :-)
Once upon a time, it was usual to sound the vehicle's horn when approaching a crest or a blind corner.
Not a good way to manage risk in 2024. Speeds are too fast, and too hard to hear. Better to rely on vision.
@L2SFBC Totally agree. How times have changed. Cheers
I don’t know the speed of the police vehicle but let’s assume it wasn’t stupid but perhaps a little too fast for complete control should something unexpected happens. On a blind left hand turn there is nothing wrong to approach from your side of of the road but closer to the middle to allow greater vision but the caveat is that you will need to travel slow enough so you can immediately steer to the left should you see a vehicle coming the other side. The corner is also positively camber on the inside meaning the left turning vehicle can go around it at a higher speed than otherwise.
My take is that the police vehicle driver simply panic, jam on the brake and apply steering without releasing the brake to allow the tyres more traction to turn. I think the police car would have been able to turn tighter and miss the camera car all together.
Things which can be learned:
1) drive not only to sight distance but also comfort level ( need to be able to react to unexpected without panic given one’s experience/ concentration level at the time)
2) brake as much as possible in a straight line but always release/ lighten brake application just before you turn
Obvious it’s easy for me to do arm chair analysis after the fact.😅
Agreed. The police car is maybe a bit too far right, but it's a narrow road. Got to balance visbility and position.
Remember drive to the conditions.
Dirt road.
Its great that someone is speaking about this. I had experienced many near misses coz folks were speeding around the bend or cut straight across my path to another road.. Its absolutely frightening. ironic that this time it was the police. Though I can't say I totally agree with your comments around the 3:50 mark where you said there's no harm putting your left wheel all to the left side,. I think you would know this but sometimes there's mud and debris accumulated like a muddy pool at the bottom of the bend. And the area is usually shaded by the trees. We lost traction on the passenger front wheel hitting one of those deceiving things before, and the back of the car spun out.
Thanks - no harm in that case, every dirt road corner is different and sometimes day to day too.
This is a great fear of mine.
looks like white car was in middle of road and not in their lane!!
not really, it's a narrow road and there is a tradeoff between road position and visibility. If the corner isn't blind it's often fine to use the best part of the road, left or right, to maximise traction. The problem comes with a blind corner.
There isn't 'lanes' as such.
It's pretty much up to driver discretion as to whether you drive far left or in the middle when there is visabily.
In this case there wasn't, so yes the on coming car should have been hugging left a bit more, but there really isn't a lot of room.
Over easter in the Otways i came very close to a few of theses type of collisions, Young guys that think they are still on the highway...........Thay need to slow the fuck down!!!!!!
Cop was totally hooning through there, Not only does the dashcammer need to drive with due care and attention, but also the pig in the prado. Excessive speed for conditions. Diference is amd speaking from experienece having been to court for a me vs cop situation similar to this, You aint coming out of it un scathed. They will do everything they can to show they were 100% in the right.
Don't call police pigs, that's not warranted. You'd be pretty happy they were there if you needed them. What do you think the cammer did wrong?
The vehicle at fault was not being driven by someone that has to insure or replace it.
The driver at fault has far to many gadgets to distract them.
Why is it always a LandCruiser😅
So was the driver of the police car charged?
No idea, not relevant to the points I'm making but I'm sure the Court of Public Opinion will deliver a verdict
Advice from talking to a policeman. "Never buy an ex-cop car"
I did, once, a white CM Valiant, 245 Hemi, three on the column. I found some .38 bullets, uniform buttons and a bag of, I think it was, speed under the back seat. Perhaps someone dumping their score before being processed?
Not dirt, gravel road.
Right, so the ESC stops understeer? How? If you're suggesting that it keeps traction on the wheel? That is skid prevention NOT understeer. The key here is simple, if it effects the BRAKE system, it is not understeer prevention, that would be a design fundamental of the steering and geometry. Yes, this is getting boring and you need to learn that you are wrong with calling it under steer etc...
Fact: steering and suspension geometry in the whole will not effect skidding if all things are equal other than the road surface. This tells you easily if it is a skid or if it is over steer or under steer. What will happen if it is under or over steer is the vehicel will behive the same no matter what the surface is to a point, that point is described in your grip circle. If it is a SKID the surface makes a difference, so the same input perameters on grit will cause a skid, but on tarmac it will not. so in reality, easily differentialed.
Here is the result of the above, you have to admit the car that caused the incident was skidding wasn't it? Dictionary definition of: "skid
/skɪd/
verb
verb: skid; 3rd person present: skids; past tense: skidded; past participle: skidded; gerund or present participle: skidding
1.
(of a vehicle) slide, typically sideways or obliquely, on slippery ground or as a result of stopping or turning too quickly.
"her car skidded and hit the grass verge"
slip; slide.
"Barbara's foot skidded and she fell to the floor"
cause to skid.
"he skidded his car"
North American
move a heavy object on skids.
"they skidded the logs down the hill to the waterfront"
2.
fasten a skid to (a wheel) as a brake.
noun
noun: skid; plural noun: skids
1.
an act of skidding or sliding.
It is interesting that there is no mention of suspension or steering geometry here, why? Because a skid is not due to steering and suspension, over and under steer are. You even go as far as saying "sliding", well, that's a skid!
I would suggest that instead of driving in a manner to stop in the distance you can see, drive in a manner that you can stop in at least HALF of the distance you can see. This way both parties has a space to stop without excessive skidding.
There is a lot for people to learn here, as well as a lot you need to learn. the circles of grip verify it's a skid, please do this more regularly and give the correct name to the actions.
Here is further consideration to say why it is a skid not over steer or under steer: If you have a trailer, it starts to sway and fishtails, it will come past the tow vehicle. Correct? This is not stated as over or under steer, why?
Here's why; the trailer (as you put it) is trying to overtake the vehicle (it's mass is attempting to travel faster than the tow vehicle - again your words), thus it's axle steps out from inline. Now think what the vehicle does and what effects are different from the trailer's tyres and the rear axle of the vehicle in a over-steering (driver demand request) incident? There is nothing different, the tyres lose traction as they have exceeded the coefficents of traction. they have exceeded your arrows in a circle. So if the vehicle over or under steers, then this must also be stated as the trailer over or under steers as the steering is effectively a cetre pivot steering mechanism. Also when the "tail wags the dog" and the rear axle of the vehicle is pushed, this must also be labelled as over or under steer. Again, it's not, because it is not a fundamental design of steering and suspension geometry causing the action it is an external force.
Getting the fundametals correct is a prerequisit to learning, if you can't get the basics you compound the error when ellabourating on the basics. This is what you're doing, you're getting the basics wrong, even though you understand the principals of grip, you are calling it by the name of another fundamental of mechanics. A skid is not over or understeer and should never be labelled as such, it is a skid, it's own, fundamental if you like.
If what you call over and under steer was actually correctly named it would involve something actively altering the steeering and suspension geometry on the fly, so altering lengths or positions of the mounts and arcs of travel. There is no mechanism other than impacts for this and at that point, you've crashed so the physics of over and under steer no longer apply as to a good vehicle as the vehicle is damaged.
Get the fundamentals right and your videos will be a lot better - as you'll be stating what it is not a different thing.
I'm confused, Your in a right hand drive country...One of those cars was on the wrong side of the road. Do you not respect driving on the correct side of the road when on dirt? Shouldn't that police car have been all the way to the other-side of the road?
Seems to me what caused this crash is a cop driving on the wrong side of the road, perhaps revoke their license for a year due to causing an avoidable collision.
Yes, RHD country. The road is quite narrow and it is reasonable on dirt roads to approach from the opposite side...IF YOU HAVE VISBILITY!
Two issues; you mention trailbraking as a reply to another comment. You also explained to them that coming off the brakes would extend the front suspension and therefore remove grip on the outer front wheel. Not going to argue on either point. In the video, you talk about ABS. In this situation, ABS has likely contributed to the incident, by not allowing full braking and therefore, desired grip for either turning OR traction was realised.
Good thought provoking vid. 👍
If the tyre's grip was used 100% for braking there would be no turning.
@@L2SFBC yes. That’s right. But I was more suggesting that ABS interferes with the balance that can be struck by a knowledgeable and trained driver in dirt/gravel. You’d be brilliant to improve on modern ABS on tar in a straight line. 👍
You'd have to be brilliant to improve on it on dirt too and you do get to choose how to spend your grip budget!
@@L2SFBC maybe they’ve improved since my 2013 Vitara was released. All the electronics nobbled that!👍
They have. Suzuki's electronic calibration is terrible. Check my sand setup video for an example.
I think camer was up to one third responsible. Still too fast for that very narrow, blind, & tight bend, on gravel, in a tall, long wheelbase ute based vehicle. Utes can't do what wagons can do, & wagons can't do what cars can do here. Didn't seem to be much reduction of speed from sighting until impact.
Can't agree sorry
I absolutely cannot agree that ABS is good on gravel. In most cases it is downright dangerous imagine having some system that randomly decides that you don't have any brakes when you need them😂.
Modern ABS is good!
Absolutely no reason to drive that fast if you can’t see anything ahead of you, idiocy !
Robert, from the content of your last videos I suspect you have difficult digestion in the evening and then nightmares in the night. I suggest lighter dinners.
PS BTW, interesting video.
Only nightmares I have are reading my comment section
@@L2SFBC 😀 There is always a price to pay for the Ego.
I think you protest too much.. you appear to be well to the left, other vehicle using your lane..end of story..
Luckily it wasn't head on. One guy was just going to fast. Overly dramatic break down. Mostly nonsense.
so I can do better, which parts were nonsense, and which were not? How could I be less dramatic?
@@L2SFBC Its a simple accident. The biggest factor by a very large margin is speed. I respect the interest you have in all things 4x4.
"Speed" by itself is never a problem. Inappropriate speed is a problem. And then you need to understand why the speed was inappropriate. And that's not as simple as "going too fast" which is an overly simplistic assessment which helps nobody understand how to truly be a better driver.
@@L2SFBC I would outdrive you easily. I would love to do a series of tests but I am in Canada other wise ol fella enjoy making your content and live your life.
Under what circumstances would you "outdrive me"? How would that be determined?