Oil at 95mph on highway

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Originally Posted by h22a

IB4R your being a fair nanny. Im sure youve driven in the same manner at some stage yet you sound so condescending. If thats classified as driving like a maniac we are all guilty. So many people get on their high horse when something like this pops up on the net, give the guy some credit. yeah he probably was exceeding the limit, and lane changed without indication but even if he had of been doing say 80mph, the exact same thing would of happened. im not condoning his speed or his lack of indication skills but he did preety well

2 things.

1) I drive a Volvo 850. Being a nanny comes with the territory.

2) I have never, EVER, driven in such an obviously dangerous manner. I know of a few road rules, not least of which is lane discipline.

You undermine your own comments here by bringing down his driving. He was DAMNED lucky he didn't hurt someone or himself driving like the fool he was, and if he hadn't of swerved lanes so erratically he might not have been in such a position in the first place (The oil, it seems, was only in that lane).

so yeah, feel free to knock my judgement, but know where I'm coming from

[h22a]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

Put the drivers skill aside for a moment.
The oil patch didn't just arrive magically in front of him, so therefore reasonable to assume other cars had driven through it and we don't see the road littered with crashed cars driven by grannies. So the exact same thing didn't happen

So reasonable to conclude the following
1. The higher speed was a major factor
2. the limited time availabel to respond to it was a major factor
3. if driving to the conditions ie visibility of the road surface and other vehicles then it was avoidable

Almost every miraculous "save" on the roads can be attributed to failure to recognise conditions and drive to them. Hence "avoidable"

1) the oil slick could of been very new so you cant assume that other cars have driven over it. the oil slick could of been very small as well.

Whether he was driving at 80 or 93mph the difference in speed required to catch such a slide would be marginal. Yes, it would of been easier to control the slide had he off been going slower and again im not condoning the speed factor. Indication wise, had he indicated properly into the lane at 80mph do you think the car would of slid?

Driving conditions: Visibilty looked preety good to me so i doubt that plays much of a role, the road was preety much empty so the fact he decided to indicate into the middle lane to avoid being next to the armco is not unheard off. I doubt he did it to shave those few seconds off hitting a tighter apex.

Hypotheticaly, if you were driving around a slight bend with an overtaking lane and you hit an oil slick whilst exceeding the speed limit(to overtake) and slid would you classify that as not observing the road surface/traffic?

So if a deer comes out of nowhere, you pitch the car sideways to avoid it and you miraculously save the slide is that aviodable?

[h22a]

Originally Posted by IBrake4Rainbows

2 things.

1) I drive a Volvo 850. Being a nanny comes with the territory.

2) I have never, EVER, driven in such an obviously dangerous manner. I know of a few road rules, not least of which is lane discipline.

You undermine your own comments here by bringing down his driving. He was DAMNED lucky he didn't hurt someone or himself driving like the fool he was, and if he hadn't of swerved lanes so erratically he might not have been in such a position in the first place (The oil, it seems, was only in that lane).

so yeah, feel free to knock my judgement, but know where I'm coming from

i sell volvo's everyday, its people like you who give them a bad name
He quickly shifted into the middle lane, hardly erratic i'd say. You really do sound like a 70y'o 244DL volvo driver
Its DAMNED lucky he caught the car from sliding into the armco, this entire scenario probably did happen to a number of other moterists for all we know.
If someone correctly indicated into that lane, following the speed limit and drove over the oil slick do you think we would of seen the same thing happen?

Both you and Matra are right with the speed and quick lane change, but the slide in my opinion was going to happen regardless.

[IBrake4Rainbows]

Originally Posted by h22a

i sell volvo's everyday, its people like you who give them a bad name
He quickly shifted into the middle lane, hardly erratic i'd say. You really do sound like a 70y'o 244DL volvo driver
Its DAMNED lucky he caught the car from sliding into the armco, this entire scenario probably did happen to a number of other moterists for all we know.
If someone correctly indicated into that lane, following the speed limit and drove over the oil slick do you think we would of seen the same thing happen?

Both you and Matra are right with the speed and quick lane change, but the slide in my opinion was going to happen regardless.

If he'd have stuck in the far lane it's doubtful the incident would have occurred.

Judging by the lack of strewn car bodies, explosions and ambulance/rescue personnel on the scene one can probably hazard a guess and say that no, no one else had hit that particular piece of tarmac.

He shifted quickly, without indication, and without a mirror or blind spot check. Now I don't need to be a 70 year old 244DL driver to know thats dumb.

I'd also be careful about alienating fellow Volvo contributors - you never know when they might be looking to upgrade there vehicles.....

[ruim20]

Originally Posted by RPower

Not a correct judgement in my opinion...

In the first I will not comment,because you are really a "typical portuguese commentor"... (If something is portuguese it sucks no matter what... )

In the second I just want to ask how can you react instantly to a tail-slide when you are not counting it can happen in the middle of the highway at that type of speed and conditions...

If he wasn´t so concentrated,we would have crash...

Not a correct judgement EH!?

Ok...

1 - Speeding

2 - Not using turn signals

3 - Not obeying lanes

4 - lack of maners (civismo)

And how about this one... noone of the other cars entered a spin... that's amazing!

Maybe because they where driving like you are supposed to, inside the speed limits and obbeying traffic rules instead of using the highway as your own track, i'm guessing the "track day" was the trip he made to the track day?

[Matra et Alpine]

Originally Posted by h22a

Driving conditions: Visibilty looked preety good to me so i doubt that plays much of a role

Distance is different from recognition on "visibility".
All driving should be done to reasonable distances and speeds.
Race and rally cars can go very VERY quickly because 99% of the poetential real-world "surprises" don't exist.
Driving to the vanishing point is cruicial.

Hypotheticaly, if you were driving around a slight bend with an overtaking lane and you hit an oil slick whilst exceeding the speed limit(to overtake) and slid would you classify that as not observing the road surface/traffic?

I quote the police training .... if you can't reaonably stop or avoid an unexpected obstacle then you are exceeding the appropriate speed and safety.

So if a deer comes out of nowhere, you pitch the car sideways to avoid it and you miraculously save the slide is that aviodable?

Deer don't "come out of nowhere"
If driving in a forest with deer population then observation and speed shodul be adjusted accordingly.

However, in the case in point the driver wasn't necessarily "wrong" in what happened. It's just that it's possible he was

[h22a]

Originally Posted by IBrake4Rainbows

Judging by the lack of strewn car bodies, explosions and ambulance/rescue personnel on the scene one can probably hazard a guess and say that no, no one else had hit that particular piece of tarmac.

He shifted quickly, without indication, and without a mirror or blind spot check. Now I don't need to be a 70 year old 244DL driver to know thats dumb.

I'd also be careful about alienating fellow Volvo contributors - you never know when they might be looking to upgrade there vehicles.....

clearly we'll never find out if anyone else hit that "particular piece of tarmac" anyway, and because there's a lack of "strewn car bodies, explosions blah blah" doesnt prove jack IB4R. He didnt crash, why would you assume everyone that potencially hit that slick would prang?

He didnt indicate - correct, but i hardly call his lane change that dramatic and how do you know he didnt check his blind spot??? you cant even see his face

And mate....i dont think i have to worry about Volvo prospects on UCP but hey if anyones interested

[h22a]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

Distance is different from recognition on "visibility".
All driving should be done to reasonable distances and speeds.
Race and rally cars can go very VERY quickly because 99% of the poetential real-world "surprises" don't exist.
Driving to the vanishing point is cruicial.

I quote the police training .... if you can't reaonably stop or avoid an unexpected obstacle then you are exceeding the appropriate speed and safety.

Deer don't "come out of nowhere"
If driving in a forest with deer population then observation and speed shodul be adjusted accordingly.

However, in the case in point the driver wasn't necessarily "wrong" in what happened. It's just that it's possible he was

I quote Police training: Fair enough but in relation to this situation an oil slick could not of been reasonably avoided as you cant even see it. I do agree with the comment itself but i dont think it applies in this scenario.

Ok maybe deer dont come out of nowhere, but kangaroos and wombats sure as fark do. You could be driving anywhere in country Aus, with high beams on and you still wouldnt have enough time to avoid it without putting the car into a ditch or throwing the car sideways in an attempt to dodge whatever...to me thats preety unavoidable

i totally agree with your last comment. Im not trying to start shit, i just think he did a good job considering the speed of the slide.

[NSXType-R]

Can one see an oil slick from far away?

I'm a new driver and I'm interested in this video.

I've been practicing highway driving a lot lately.

[Matra et Alpine]

Despite h22a's MISquote of any police driver training You CAN see an oil slick -- even in the wet if you know what to look for ( and every biker DOES )

Look back at the vid, there is a huge dark patch, there is plenty of space to the left. The driver makes no attempt. In my opinion he has become fixated with distance or (less likely) the 10ft in front of him because of the speed he's doing. It's also visible from far enough back to slow down enough to be able to go through it

[h22a]

Originally Posted by Matra et Alpine

Despite h22a's MISquote of any police driver training You CAN see an oil slick -- even in the wet if you know what to look for ( and every biker DOES )

Look back at the vid, there is a huge dark patch, there is plenty of space to the left. The driver makes no attempt. In my opinion he has become fixated with distance or (less likely) the 10ft in front of him because of the speed he's doing. It's also visible from far enough back to slow down enough to be able to go through it

sorry bro i didnt explain myself properly, i wasnt quoting the police training but was questioning the relavence of the quote to this situation.
To be honest, looking for oil slicks or identifying them has simply not crossed my mind due to the fact i never see them or if i did, i wouldnt even realise it was one.
I can totally understand bike riders looking for them.Hitting one would be a recipe for disaster. If the slick was identifiable, he should of seen it i guess but as you said he was more focused on controlling the vehicle at that speed.
I concede....because he was speeding it reduced his awareness and response time for upcoming road conditions....avoidable

[Sledgehammer]

Originally Posted by h22a

I quote Police training: Fair enough but in relation to this situation an oil slick could not of been reasonably avoided as you cant even see it. I do agree with the comment itself but i dont think it applies in this scenario.

Sounds like you quoted Police training to me specifically the bold statement

Do I really need to get my handbook out? I believe that Matra's quote is correct to my knowledge. The guy did a good job keeping the car on the pavement but his responsive coorections were only needed because of his previous actions.

[h22a]

Originally Posted by Sledgehammer

Sounds like you quoted Police training to me specifically the bold statement

Do I really need to get my handbook out? I believe that Matra's quote is correct to my knowledge. The guy did a good job keeping the car on the pavement but his responsive coorections were only needed because of his previous actions.

if you took the time to read my last post I stated I wasnt quoting the police book but questioning the relavance of the police handbook quote to this scenario.
No...you dont need to get your handbook out.