A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

accident situation - car slams on breaks to complete stop in 55mph zone



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 13th 05, 04:54 AM
Tim923
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default accident situation - car slams on breaks to complete stop in 55mph zone

If a car slams on the breaks in a 55mph zone unexpectedly to a
complete stop (as quickly as possible, he missed his turn perhaps),
how much reaction time does the car behind need to avoid collision.
Would it be fair for the car hitting the stopping car to get a ticket
for tailgating?

My accident conditions weren't this extreme, but it got me thinking.
I only received a tailgating warning, plus 5 grand damage to the car.
It was a 45mph zone. I actually hit the 2nd car behind the stopped
car. The first two were able to stop in time. The stopped car drove
off and was never ID'd.
Ads
  #2  
Old January 13th 05, 05:05 AM
Ed Nuxters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:54:48 -0500, Tim923 wrote:

> If a car slams on the breaks in a 55mph zone unexpectedly to a
> complete stop (as quickly as possible, he missed his turn perhaps),
> how much reaction time does the car behind need to avoid collision.
> Would it be fair for the car hitting the stopping car to get a ticket
> for tailgating?
>
> My accident conditions weren't this extreme, but it got me thinking.
> I only received a tailgating warning, plus 5 grand damage to the car.
> It was a 45mph zone. I actually hit the 2nd car behind the stopped
> car. The first two were able to stop in time. The stopped car drove
> off and was never ID'd.



Isn't there a four second rule? If you're 4 seconds behind the person in
front, at highweay wpeeds you shoudl be able to stop or go evasive?
  #3  
Old January 13th 05, 05:05 AM
Ed Nuxters
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:54:48 -0500, Tim923 wrote:

> If a car slams on the breaks in a 55mph zone unexpectedly to a
> complete stop (as quickly as possible, he missed his turn perhaps),
> how much reaction time does the car behind need to avoid collision.
> Would it be fair for the car hitting the stopping car to get a ticket
> for tailgating?
>
> My accident conditions weren't this extreme, but it got me thinking.
> I only received a tailgating warning, plus 5 grand damage to the car.
> It was a 45mph zone. I actually hit the 2nd car behind the stopped
> car. The first two were able to stop in time. The stopped car drove
> off and was never ID'd.



Isn't there a four second rule? If you're 4 seconds behind the person in
front, at highweay wpeeds you shoudl be able to stop or go evasive?
  #4  
Old January 13th 05, 05:12 AM
Alan Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article <1105588501.1343a69283ca53e18e3983dea2fe5949@teran ews>,
Tim923 > wrote:

> If a car slams on the breaks in a 55mph zone unexpectedly to a
> complete stop (as quickly as possible, he missed his turn perhaps),
> how much reaction time does the car behind need to avoid collision.


About two seconds.

> Would it be fair for the car hitting the stopping car to get a ticket
> for tailgating?
>


You bet.

> My accident conditions weren't this extreme, but it got me thinking.
> I only received a tailgating warning, plus 5 grand damage to the car.
> It was a 45mph zone. I actually hit the 2nd car behind the stopped
> car. The first two were able to stop in time. The stopped car drove
> off and was never ID'd.


Then you had that much more chance of stopping in time, and if you were
following properly, *by definition* you should have been able to stop
even if it was the car immediately ahead of you who precipitated the
chain of events.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
  #5  
Old January 13th 05, 05:12 AM
Alan Baker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article <1105588501.1343a69283ca53e18e3983dea2fe5949@teran ews>,
Tim923 > wrote:

> If a car slams on the breaks in a 55mph zone unexpectedly to a
> complete stop (as quickly as possible, he missed his turn perhaps),
> how much reaction time does the car behind need to avoid collision.


About two seconds.

> Would it be fair for the car hitting the stopping car to get a ticket
> for tailgating?
>


You bet.

> My accident conditions weren't this extreme, but it got me thinking.
> I only received a tailgating warning, plus 5 grand damage to the car.
> It was a 45mph zone. I actually hit the 2nd car behind the stopped
> car. The first two were able to stop in time. The stopped car drove
> off and was never ID'd.


Then you had that much more chance of stopping in time, and if you were
following properly, *by definition* you should have been able to stop
even if it was the car immediately ahead of you who precipitated the
chain of events.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling 4 feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect
if you sit in the bottom of that cupboard."
  #6  
Old January 13th 05, 06:02 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Tim923 wrote:
> If a car slams on the breaks in a 55mph zone unexpectedly to a
> complete stop (as quickly as possible, he missed his turn perhaps),
> how much reaction time does the car behind need to avoid collision.
> Would it be fair for the car hitting the stopping car to get a ticket
> for tailgating?
>
> My accident conditions weren't this extreme, but it got me thinking.
> I only received a tailgating warning, plus 5 grand damage to the car.
> It was a 45mph zone. I actually hit the 2nd car behind the stopped
> car. The first two were able to stop in time. The stopped car drove
> off and was never ID'd.


Depends on the driver(s), vehicle(s), and road conditions. An alert
driver in a sports car behind a SUV driven by your typical soccer mom
is going to need *much* less following distance than if the
roles/positions were reversed.

There is no hard set answer, just like there is no fixed "speed limit"
that will improve highway safety. Even though you didn't hit the
original vehicle, that you were involved in an accident where you hit
someone from the rear would be an indication that the distance you were
traveling at wasn't far enough. :-)

  #7  
Old January 13th 05, 06:02 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Tim923 wrote:
> If a car slams on the breaks in a 55mph zone unexpectedly to a
> complete stop (as quickly as possible, he missed his turn perhaps),
> how much reaction time does the car behind need to avoid collision.
> Would it be fair for the car hitting the stopping car to get a ticket
> for tailgating?
>
> My accident conditions weren't this extreme, but it got me thinking.
> I only received a tailgating warning, plus 5 grand damage to the car.
> It was a 45mph zone. I actually hit the 2nd car behind the stopped
> car. The first two were able to stop in time. The stopped car drove
> off and was never ID'd.


Depends on the driver(s), vehicle(s), and road conditions. An alert
driver in a sports car behind a SUV driven by your typical soccer mom
is going to need *much* less following distance than if the
roles/positions were reversed.

There is no hard set answer, just like there is no fixed "speed limit"
that will improve highway safety. Even though you didn't hit the
original vehicle, that you were involved in an accident where you hit
someone from the rear would be an indication that the distance you were
traveling at wasn't far enough. :-)

  #8  
Old January 13th 05, 06:39 AM
Tim923
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>There is no hard set answer, just like there is no fixed "speed limit"
>that will improve highway safety. Even though you didn't hit the
>original vehicle, that you were involved in an accident where you hit
>someone from the rear would be an indication that the distance you were
>traveling at wasn't far enough. :-)


No excuses, but I thought my car breaked slower than normal due to
heavy equipment in the car. Still my fault though. My only accident
in 12 years of driving 3 years ago. Increased insurance rates as
punishment. Back to normal now.
  #9  
Old January 13th 05, 06:39 AM
Tim923
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

>There is no hard set answer, just like there is no fixed "speed limit"
>that will improve highway safety. Even though you didn't hit the
>original vehicle, that you were involved in an accident where you hit
>someone from the rear would be an indication that the distance you were
>traveling at wasn't far enough. :-)


No excuses, but I thought my car breaked slower than normal due to
heavy equipment in the car. Still my fault though. My only accident
in 12 years of driving 3 years ago. Increased insurance rates as
punishment. Back to normal now.
  #10  
Old January 13th 05, 07:28 AM
Laura Bush murdered her boy friend
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Remeber - in the event of a crash, the dood that hit the brakes is
gonna tell the cops that a kid or deer or something ran onto the road.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.