Compulsory helmet cams?

[marinyork]

[QUOTE 1426099"]
If you'd care to have another read you'll see that you've not disagreed with me, nor me with you.

You shouldn't let your obsession get the better of you.
[/quote]

I have disagreed with you. I neither think the pass is normal behaviour, nor various other things that you seem to think I think is significant. I said in my opening post very clearly what was wrong with it. The interesting thing is that the driver got caught doing it.

And it's not an obsession. I would say that the following scenario was more like an 'obsession'. You come into the chatroom last night just for a laugh and just outright insult me, the first thing you say. You're an extremely nasty piece of work. Your behaviour is much worse than other people that at least make some kind of effort to understand, think and get on with others.

 

[Shaun]

You come into the chatroom last night just for a laugh and just outright insult me, the first thing you say.

Marinyork, that is simply untrue.

The chat log clearly shows that Mr. P entered the chat room and without any remark towards you, you said "Welcome, tool of the state". Nasty indeed!!

All of the mods are forum users first, mods second. They are entitled to opinions and should not be made targets because of their mod status.

If you have issues with any of the moderators talk to me about it. If you can't live with the way CC is moderated, then please feel free to leave.

Shaun

 

[Red Light]

[QUOTE 1426095"]
Getting closer immediately prior to an overtake is completely normal. Not necessarily right, and not something I'd do, but it's normal. Happens all day long out there.
[/quote]

As is the consequence of making the widest point of the overtake many yards in front of you.

 

[abo]

[QUOTE 1426091"]
That's not Safespeeding's point in reality. All they're interested in is getting together as many arguments -legitimate, dubiously constructed or completely fabricated- together against speed cameras. Their motive is the point, and that's that they're driven by an overwhelming insecurity brought about by the questioning of their driving ability by someone telling them how fast they're allowed to drive. It's a selfish, dangerous attitude, and thankfully since the demise of their hairy leader they don't even get the wasted one-liner poor response comments in the press any more.

Unless deliberately taking one of the police's methods in isolation, there is no robotic policing of road safety.
[/quote]

Ah, I'd only skimmed the website so I was taking it on face value.

I think the point I was making though was that it is entirely possible to be driving over the posted limit very safely, or at (or under) the limit and be driving very dangerously but a camera wouldn't discriminate. A skilled (or at least, a non-****wit) wouldn't need speed limits because they would never drive an a manner inappropriate for the conditions. Unfortunately, they have to allow for the lowest common denominator Though I feel a posted limit can give a poor driver a false sense of what is safe; a 30 mph sign tells them it is safe to drive at that speed (or even, they *should* be driving at that speed) past schools at kicking out time, past rows of parked cars etc. etc. All IMHO of course

Hmm, I also think that driving tests should be made a lot tougher and car licenses should be given on a dead man's shoes basis, so a new licence isn't issued unless an existing driver dies or otherwise hands back their licence. If you fail your test you go to the back of the queue for a licence.

 

[abo]

[QUOTE 1426106"]
I agree. Cameras aren't the only method of enforcement though, despite what some would like to have us believe. [/quote]

You'd think so round here, you barely ever see a traffic officer

The thing with this is though that every driver is his own lowest common denominator. What I mean by that is that a driver never has all of the information to hand in order to make the perfect judgement. Add to that the physics, both of driving and collisions, and we can save ourselves all the trouble by just driving within the limit that those with more knowledge have helpfully provided us with.

I don't think I came across right; ideally a car shouldn't need a speedometer at all IMHO, a skilled driver would know whether their current speed was right for the conditions by observing, the feel of the car etc. The race car I used to work on didn't have a speedo (I know its a different kettle of fish, but...)but Pete never stuck it off the track going into a corner too fast, or anything like that just because he was a good driver. Unfortunately skilled drivers are a small percentage of the overall driver-base; if only we'd been stricter from day 1 (perhaps I wouldn't have a licence?)

I agree that we need to be a lot stricter. I've not heard the "dead man's shoes" suggestion before. Interesting!

Dunno if my kids would agree though!

 

[abo]

[QUOTE 1426108"]
I understand what you're saying, though there are a lot of differences with racing. Your driver will have learned the track. He'll be very aware of the car's limits, of what's around him. He's not going to suddenly arrive at roadworks that weren't there the last time, a broken down car, a child running into the road.
[/quote]

No this is true, however, one should be driving in a manner in which one is able to brake within a distance one can see, and anticipating what could happen when one sees a child walking down the road, or driving alongside parked cars etc., so as to be ready to take action should said child step out or whatever else happens.

It's how all drivers should be driving really, but (IMHO) people are taught how to pass a test, not how to be a good driver. It certainly was the case for me; I managed to pass my test at age 17 after seven lessons and was I ready to be let loose on my own? Hell no!

 

[Bicycle]

You'd think so round here, you barely ever see a traffic officer



...a skilled driver would know whether their current speed was right for the conditions by observing, the feel of the car etc. The race car I used to work on didn't have a speedo but Pete never stuck it off the track going into a corner too fast, or anything like that just because he was a good driver. Dunno if my kids would agree though!

I take the point about absence of speedometers on trackks, but racing cars and motorcycles don't generally have speedometers because the information provided is of no use to the driver/rider.

If it were of use, they'd have one.

Speeds are gauged in terms of revs and gear. (5200 in 5th or similar).

I've ridden on tracks (never driven) and there is simply no need for a speedo. You know which gear you're in and everything else is from the tacho. Speeds also change a lot according to air temperature, track temperature, condition of tyres, brakes, forearms and all the rest of it. So a speedo feeds useless information into a scenario full of almost infinite variables.

Entry speed is important, but the tacho is a great measure of that. Exit speed and speed down the following straight are functions almost entirely (but not quite) of entry speed.

On the Public Highway, cars and motorcycles do need a speedometer. I've ridden and driven without one ("cable snapped, officer") and it is EXTREMELY difficult to judge speed, even with a tacho. Even in the absence (theoretical) of speed limits, driving safely on the Public Highway would be made very difficult without speedometers.

Nobody on the Public Highway (I hope) is going into a corner on the very edge of available grip and trying to bang the apex and nail the power as early as possible to allow further controlled progress along the track.

There are big fines (and worse) for exceeding certain speeds and there are other road users to think about, so I think everyone needs a speedo.

Someone can say "I know my car's doing 60 at 2200 revs in top", but it all gets a bit mathematical when you're in lower gears hopping from a 30 to a 40 to a School Zone....

But that's just my (probably flawed) opinion.

 

[davehann]

after being knocked out bu a car and left for dead today

I NEED A HELMET CAM!

 

[Holdsworth]

I would like to ask a quick question regarding helmet cams if I may.

If one were to be attached to your helmet and you take a direct hit to the camera and it immediately breaks, what would happen to the footage currently being recorded? Would it auto save or is there a chance that the final segment would become corrupted by not have an opportunity to "finalize" if you know what I mean?

 

[BSRU]

I would like to ask a quick question regarding helmet cams if I may.

If one were to be attached to your helmet and you take a direct hit to the camera and it immediately breaks, what would happen to the footage currently being recorded? Would it auto save or is there a chance that the final segment would become corrupted by not have an opportunity to "finalize" if you know what I mean?

I understand, as I had a problem with my camera with a battery that was not the right size and would result in a sudden lose of power leading to corrupt files.
I researched the web and there are ways to fix corrupted .mov files, so all the video is viewable up until the power fails.