Crazy Christmas RV Drivers

[Protagonist]

I've said it before on other threads, but it bears repeating. As I learned when I was trained as an accident investigator (one of several collateral duties I was assigned when working for the Corps of Engineers), there is never just one cause for any accident. There are always at least two causes. One is an unsafe act by a person, and the others are additional unsafe acts by the same or another person, and/or a pre-existing unsafe condition. It is theoretically possible for two unsafe conditions (and no unsafe acts) to cause an accident, but that's seldom the case for traffic accidents unless there is a bridge collapse or similar structural failure involved.

Many people routinely commit unsafe acts behind the wheel and get away with it. Such as tailgating the vehicle in front of them during rush hour, or cutting people off when passing too close, or lane changes without signalling their intentions to the drivers around them, or driving 10 miles over the posted limit. Or whatever.

They think they're safe drivers anyway, because they haven't ever tried to commit an unsafe act at the same time as another driver next to them is committing an unsafe act of their own, or have never committed their preferred unsafe act at the same time as there was an unsafe condition, such as the vehicle in front of them not having working brake lights, or slippery pavement that causes loss of traction, or whatever. And almost without exception, when the inevitable accident finally occurs, they say, "I don't understand. I've been doing it that way for years and never had a problem." Because they don't recognize that it takes TWO OR MORE causes for every accident, and they were always providing one of them. It just took a while for the second cause to manifest itself.

Or to put it another way, many unsafe drivers rack up many accident-free miles because they were lucky enough to have better drivers get out of their way— which is what defensive driving by the better drivers is all about. Merely being accident-free (so far) is not always the same thing as being safe. Usually, but not always. Yet everyone who is accident-free (so far) thinks they're a safe driver regardless of their actual skill level. Right up until the time that they're in an accident.

And the really sad part about it is that not every person who commits an unsafe act that helps to cause an accident is necessarily caught up in the accident. He or she may get off scot-free as the accident happens right behind as a result of something they did. They see the accident in the rear-view mirror and say, "That guy back there must have done something wrong. Glad I wasn't involved!" not realizing that they themselves committed one of the unsafe acts that led to the other guy's collision.

[xrvr]

Pro, your comments are absolutly right on.

[tevake]

It has been eye opening for me to drive my 345 motorhome over the last few years, especially with a car in tow.
After many years living on the outer islands in Hawaii. Then coming back to the mainland and dealing with the much more congested roadways. Particularly near almost any large city. Not only is the density of traffic striking, but the attitude and behavior of many drivers seems quite hazardous. Many of the issues mentioned by Protag are frightingly common. Excessive speed, lack of safe spacing, erratic lane changing. Behavior that indicates a very selfish attitude of I'm the only one that matters, me getting to my destination as quickly as possible. All others on the roads are but obstacles to my personal goals.

The impact of this situation is amplified when driving a larger than average rig thru it all. This is where we all come into the picture with our RV rigs, much like the truckers, most of us are driving just at or slightly below the speed limit. This alone sets us at odds to the aggressive city commuter or point to point high speed traveler of most interstates, driving at 10 over or more. Add to that the desire to keep safe distance from traffic ahead plus the inability to do quick defensive manurvering to avoid wreckless moves of those around us. And now we are seeing the situation that truckers find themselves in daily.

I go out of my way to avoid these situations, stay away of large cities, stick to the state highways or lesser roads and enjoy the pleasure of leisurely touring.

The truckers are not able to avoid these conditions with their need for timeliness and to deliver their loads to city areas. Wouldn't want to be them.

Another observation after so long away from the busy US, is that there is much less predictable consistently professional driving among the large fleet of commercial trucking than many years ago. I'm not sure what leads to this, but Im much more cautious of being around large trucks and expecting prudent driving from them, than I used to be.

It can be a jungle out there folks, let's do our best not to add to it. ����

Cheers Richard

[SteveSueMac]

Protagonist - reply 101 should be a sticky somewhere.

It wasn't until I started towing my trailer that I realized how much of an a$$ I was on the road and in retrospect how lucky I was that all of my one-off contributors to possible accidents weren't met by a second factor.

I moan today about the heathen who ride my tail or enter the highway in a race to be in front rather than behind me - but it's like payback for all the times I did the same stupid things.

Trailering has taught me to be much calmer with or without the trailer.

Great insights Protagonist !

[Boxite]

Sarge, the disagreement between us may be due to a misunderstanding. But your seeming defense of truckers as being under delivery-pressures and therefore should be given special consideration (such as tailgating 4-wheelers or "pushing")... has no validity whatsoever.

EVERYONE on the road has a certain timeline in which to get to their destination. Those timelines have NO validity to drive discourteously or aggressively. Neither truckers nor common motorists have the authorization to enforce traffic laws or reprimand other drivers simply because the other driver is "in the way" or slowing traffic or any other transgression perceived in the mind of the trucker (or other driver.)

The timelines imposed upon freight is the responsibility of the SHIPPER. If "just in time" deliveries are all-important...then earlier loading/shipping or alternative transportation is the answer... not aggressive driving by the trucker.

As a professional pilot I often transported Fortune 500 executives and VIPs who arrived "late" to the airplane...and expected ME to make up the time. To rush my preflight/takeoff/procedures is the WRONG thing to do because it hazards a safe operation. If anything...I slowed down to be certain I operated in a safety-conscious manner. Exceeding the authorized speeds is the WRONG thing to do. (Yes, airplanes and flight-rules have speed limits for operational and use of airspace.)
Aggression/Crowding against other flights or Air Traffic Controllers is the WRONG thing to do...for what SHOULD be obvious reasons. And it makes little difference if that other airplane is operated by a professional pilot or a private/amateur one. The result of an accident is the same.
When passengers asked/told me to "whip the horses" or "blister the paint"... I replied to them that to add another 100 mph to a 500 mph-airplane... all they had to do was show up 15 minutes earlier. It is not my prerogative to violate rules, speeds, or safety of myself or all the other people out there simply because YOU failed to provide adequate time for the task.
And yes, weight limitations, duty-limitations, training, and all the rest of it is just as familiar to me in my profession as it is in any other.... the difference is, when pilot's get blamed for error... I don't take it personally and apply blame universally to everyone else in the world. I study the report and re-apply myself to diligence to my profession. You should do the same because the same is also true on the public highways. If your cargo is so time-sensitive... either leave earlier or ship it via different mode, and the professional trucker has no authority to "crowd" or "blame" the most-likely amateur public motorist over it.
If this isn't clear, then we'll never agree and I'm through with the discussion.

[EZTOO]

There is also the psychological factor that hasn't been addressed much, at least that I have so far, maybe I missed it. Drivers, no matter how well trained/experienced can have "bad" days or pressures that affect their driving. We don't know what is going on in their minds as they don't know what's going through ours. All we can do on the highway is control our actions, maintain our vehicles, educate ourselves on driving/towing operations and keep our eyes open and focussed on the task. Life includes risk, the others options include staying home or maybe flying which seems safer than driving. Good luck and travel safe...

[xrvr]

When i rode motorcycles all over the country i never got on the bike if i did not feel right or had any trepidations that day. I towed the same way. Not worth the risk!

[SnowWanderer]

Protagonist. I am a retired police officer and crime scene investigator. I disagree with the premise that there are always two or more unsafe acts in a crash. I have worked fatal crashes where the cause of the crash was a speeding driver slamming into the moving vehicle ahead of them. The struck vehicle was maintaining its lane, the lawful speed limit and did not commit any maneuver or act to contribute to the crash.

Granted, there are crashes that several factors come together and a crash results; I have worked many if those, too!

Oftentimes the DWHUA factor is the primary cause and it goes downhill from there.

DWHUA.....Driving while head up a**.

[Countryboy59]

And the really sad part about it is that not every person who commits an unsafe act that helps to cause an accident is necessarily caught up in the accident. He or she may get off scot-free as the accident happens right behind as a result of something they did. They see the accident in the rear-view mirror and say, "That guy back there must have done something wrong. Glad I wasn't involved!" not realizing that they themselves committed one of the unsafe acts that led to the other guy's collision.

I see a lot of people follow too closely, then freak out and swerve when someone signals and changes lanes. Sorry, but if you're following that closely and freak out and crash that's your fault whether the other person is involved or not. Following too close and trying to "police" others is asking for trouble and the other person may just drive on. If you've driven enough that you're retired and pulling an Airstream and still "get cut off" a lot you might want to evaluate your following distance And other factors. I realize people drive badly but you can recognize when someone is likely to cut in, and in many cases a slight adjustment in speed keeps traffic flowing. Those in heavy vehicles who follow ridiculously close and rear end someone have no excuse if they rear end someone whether or not the other person uses their "blinker". It's great if you have a dashcam but remember, it tells all.

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by SnowWanderer

I have worked fatal crashes where the cause of the crash was a speeding driver slamming into the moving vehicle ahead of them. The struck vehicle was maintaining its lane, the lawful speed limit and did not commit any maneuver or act to contribute to the crash.

I consider that to be two simultaneous unsafe acts by the same driver: (1) speeding; and (2) not paying attention to his surroundings for whatever reason.

Lots of speeders don't crash into the vehicle ahead, because at least they're paying attention. Lots of drivers aren't paying attention, but at least they're not driving faster than the traffic around them so they don't rear-end anybody. So, by that token, two unsafe acts by the same individual at the same time, my premise stands.

When I investigated accidents (ranging from traffic accidents in Government vehicles to fatal drownings) my purpose was to find out WHAT caused the accident. As a law enforcement officer, your purpose was to find out WHO caused it. That's a completely different emphasis, and accounts for our different methodologies.

[Rzrbrn]

I agree completely with SnowWanderer. There are situations where it is only one cause of an accident. Anything else is just an insurance company trying to get out of paying.

[xrvr]

I agree with pro . Most accidents have at least two causes, sometimes by the same driver . Too fast, too close, too drunk, too little attention, driving an unsafe vehicle or tow combo, or improper training. And one morevthing too little smarts!!!

[Protagonist]

Originally Posted by Rzrbrn

I agree completely with SnowWanderer. There are situations where it is only one cause of an accident. Anything else is just an insurance company trying to get out of paying.

Originally Posted by avionstream

I agree with pro . Most accidents have at least two causes, sometimes by the same driver . Too fast, too close, too drunk, too little attention, driving an unsafe vehicle or tow combo, or improper training. And one morevthing too little smarts!!!

This isn't a "SnowWanderer vs. Protagonist" argument. No one has to take sides.

As he pointed out, SnowWanderer was a law enforcement officer. I was a safety coordinator. We had completely different emphasis in our respective investigations.

In my case, I had to identify the causes of the accident regardless of who was at fault, to see if any safety rules were violated, or (in rare cases, but it did happen) if the all-encompassing CoE Safety Manual needed to be updated— and if so to draft an appropriate update. Many of the accidents I investigated did not involve lawbreaking, only carelessness.

SnowWanderer had to determine who was at fault, and determine if they broke any laws. If he determined that a person broke the law and needed to be cited or arrested, he had to take the appropriate steps. He was not necessarily concerned with carelessness unless it was also unlawful. So it didn't matter to him if the lawbreaker committed one, two, or more unsafe acts, only if they committed illegal ones.

If we had an insurance adjustor here to chime in, they would probably have a completely different approach to accident investigation, because the focus would be "who pays for it."

That doesn't make any one investigatory technique— or the conclusions drawn from that technique— right or wrong. Each is valid in its own context.

[SARGE/AF]

Many great points on here, except for 1 person, point here is that it is human intervention that causes accidents. Whether it is a stupid act, reality of life, breaking some sort of law (everyone does), humans inhearently cause accidents through their actions good or bad and the only way that will ever change is when the human interaction is removed. Which is not too far over the horizon but until then we all need to do our best to accommodate that which we can not control and that is human interaction.

[SARGE/AF]

[QUOTE=Protagonist;2057911]This isn't a "SnowWanderer vs. Protagonist" argument. No one has to take sides.

I agree,,

As he pointed out, SnowWanderer was a law enforcement officer. I was a safety coordinator. We had completely different emphasis in our respective investigations.

Also True, but what is not mentioned here is the notation of speed in that it is assumed that because a vehicle (no matter what kind) may have been speeding intentionally, now that would definitely apply at 20+ over the speed limit, but I have been in many vehicles where you are driving the speed limit by the speedometer and you are actually traveling much faster or slower than what it says.
My current F350 which I bought new the next day after delivery to dealer, the speedo registered 7 mph below the actual speed, and I got nailed one day, had the cruise at 45 posted limit and got a ticket for over the limit in a school zone, had it checked took it to judge and he dismissed it, this was 30 days after purchase, if it had not been for that how long would I have drove thinking I was at or near the posted limit travel with traffic flow which is how I drive (not towing)
I have driven many vehicles and I have only had just a couple where the speedo was somewhat accurate, most was either showing more or less than actual speed.
So just because speed is a factor does not mean that the person did it intentionally..

[rmkrum]

Cross-checking speedometer vs GPS at regular intervals is how I stay within limit. My Prius is deliberately set to read 2 mph over actual speed. Since I use a separate GPS to navigate, I can verify speed to within one tenth of a mile per hour. Good enough to consistently avoid speeding tickets.

Of course, the usual mob is traveling 5-15 mph faster around here. So i just stay out of their way, and let them be a CHP magnet...they can have all the tickets they earn[emoji3]

[Countryboy59]

Usually it takes more than a speed error to get you stopped...every officer has their "pet peeves".

[SnowWanderer]

That is an interesting point ref not paying attention, speeding, being unsafe acts, etc. You may have something there!

[rmkrum]

Originally Posted by Countryboy59

Usually it takes more than a speed error to get you stopped...every officer has their "pet peeves".

Well, add unsafe lane changes, weaving in and out of lane edges, tailgating, display of speed, etc. The list of attractions for law enforcement attention goes on and on. Only issue I have is that there are not enough cops to solve the problems.

I always smile and wave when the CHP collects the clown that just tried to run me off the road because I’m doing close to the speed limit...

[featherbedder]

I have Eye witnessed 3 accidents w/fatalities, 1 by teenagers speeding w/5 dead 1 by texting 1 not paying attention. Many other with injuries or property damage, caused by several reasons. I Have been involved in 6 fatalities, 2 by suicide 4 by victims simply not paying attention, the last was video taped shown on national tv in a safety campaign for RAILROAD CROSSING DANGERS. Stated at start of showing of video tape, this accident was not staged. On tape, 2 paid, attention stopped 3rd. person killed was with one of those persons. As stated other posts, causes of accidents. Also involved w/several other so called accidents where persons were left vegtable status. Even today many High schools in drivers ed. WON'T recognize this national safety campaign for RAIL CROSSINGS both pedestrian and road crossing.