will this fly?

"Roger Halstead" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 02:57:11 GMT, "Matthew S. Whiting"
wrote:

snip

I was taught, no matter what the target, don't suddenly swerve. In
heavy traffic swerving can cause more problems than it solves.

Like flying, I was taught to always have an out. In most cases, this is an
entire lane (left or right non-movement lanes). In the middle lane, or no
shoulder construction zones, or snowbanks, add extra following space - no
tailgating!

At any given moment, you must know whether you can go right or left. If you
can't do either, then you need to make an adjustment so that you can, or
there is plenty of room in front. Try it; it can be exhausting if overdone,
but it's good practice.

$.02

"Matthew S. Whiting" wrote in message
...

Only if you applied the brakes, or applied them too hard.

Yes, I saw an impending problem standing in the middle of the road to my
left with a ditch to my right- I was braking.

My first
choice is always to steer around an obstacle rather than to try to stop
short of it, given the option.

Correct. I wasn't able to stop in time and the animal was in the other lane.

Unfortunately, most of our driver
education advocates braking rather than steering.

Agree!

If you don't hit the
brakes at all when on snow, you can steer reasonably well. And if you
are in full ABS mode (pedal to the metal), the steering even then gets
pretty dicey if on snow or ice.

Less responsive for sure, but not impossible. On a non-ABS vehicle, once
the wheels lock, getting them unlocked requires a period of reduced brake
pressure - a pressure far less than maximum braking. Steering is impossible
until that braking pressure is released. That straightline physics problem
is a factor until then, some stopping distance has to be sacrificed, and
critical moments are ticking away.

I know as I experiment a lot in parking
lots in the winter. It is great fun and good practice! Drives the wife
crazy though... :-)

Exactly, and oh well.



I'm talking mostly about road tests done by car magazines and motorcycle
magazines. ABS almost always increases stopping distance on dry
pavement, gravel, and snow. It tends to be about a wash on wet pavement
and ice.

The NHTSA study stated that ABS reduced stopping distances in most road
conditions, including dry pavement - just "less so." Since we're both less
interested in stopping distance anyway, this isn't really worth drawing
swords over.

Unfortunately, the real world statistics don't show a clear advantage
for ABS. And this is from thousands of accidents involving people of
many different skills and many different vehicles.

What you refuse to acknowledge is that the best driver in the world is going
to do poorly in an ABS-vehicle if there is 1) no idea/training on how to use
it, or 2) that it is even there (like an average driver with a rental car).
Think of it like spell check - if we hit cancel - send it anyay when it
automatically pops up, the best speller in the world might send out a
message with a typo. It rarely catches omitted words either.

Even the insurance
companies were caught off guard as some originally offered discounts for
ABS vehicles being sure they would reduce claims. Didn't happen and try
to find a company that still offers a discount for ABS...

Funny, how if you go to an all day defensive driving clinic, they'll give
you a defensive driver discount. I just checked my policy, and you have to
be over 50 years of age to qualify for the discount. The insurance companies
know that it's about training and experience, not technology. If you look at
the training announcements from Cirrus since the statistical fleet crash
rate went through the roof, you'll see they got the same message.

On the other hand, I do receive an ABS discount from my insurance company.
It only applies to collision and comprehensive, though.

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:59:45 GMT, "Matthew S. Whiting"
wrote:
snip

Read what I wrote earlier. I never suggested swerving into either
traffic or large fixed objects. Nice that you snipped out the relevant
parts of my previous post(s).

Don't take it personal, I always try to snip everything except the
points I'm answering. Sometimes a bit extra gets lost.

I hate to see a one line answer on two pages of accumulated post.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Return address modified due to dumb virus checkers




Matt

On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 17:37:05 -0500, "Robert Henry"
wrote:


"Roger Halstead" wrote in message
.. .
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 02:57:11 GMT, "Matthew S. Whiting"
wrote:

snip

I was taught, no matter what the target, don't suddenly swerve. In
heavy traffic swerving can cause more problems than it solves.

Like flying, I was taught to always have an out. In most cases, this is an
entire lane (left or right non-movement lanes). In the middle lane, or no
shoulder construction zones, or snowbanks, add extra following space - no
tailgating!

At any given moment, you must know whether you can go right or left. If you
can't do either, then you need to make an adjustment so that you can, or

In heavy traffic it may not be practical. With traffic moving at
express way speeds with only a couple of car lengths space, all lanes
full, if you slow down, you become the hazard. I don't like those
conditions, but they do exist.

The SUV that ended up in the left turn lane was hit by two more cars
about 5 minutes after the parts quit rolling around, but just before
the police arrived. The one guy got off by telling them he was trying
to turn into the parking lot drive way, which is where he ended up
after spinning around. As the second one made it airborne out over
the parking lot by about 30 feet before landing, he really didn't have
a valid excuse.

there is plenty of room in front. Try it; it can be exhausting if overdone,
but it's good practice.

In my case I had lots of space between me and the car in front, but
the SUV shot out of a parking lot driveway with all 4
spinning/burning. I had just enough time to get my foot on the
brake.12 feet of skid marks means I didn't slow down very much before
I hit him broad side. He was going fast enough that it spun me CCW
and I ended up in a parking lot on the other side of the road.

I really do believe in defensive driving. :-))

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Return address modified due to dumb virus checkers

$.02

("Roger Halstead" wrote)
I hate to see a one line answer on two pages of accumulated post.


It seems like that problem is getting worse these days.

People, please trim your posts.

Just me being snippy tonight. :-)

--
Montblack
http://lumma.de/mt/archives/bart.gif

"Montblack" wrote:
I hate to see a one line answer on two pages of accumulated post.

It seems like that problem is getting worse these days.

People, please trim your posts.

Hear, hear!

"Roger Halstead" wrote in message
...

In my case I had lots of space between me and the car in front, but
the SUV shot out of a parking lot driveway with all 4
spinning/burning. I had just enough time to get my foot on the
brake.12 feet of skid marks means I didn't slow down very much before
I hit him broad side. He was going fast enough that it spun me CCW
and I ended up in a parking lot on the other side of the road.

I really do believe in defensive driving. :-))


Well, that's quite a bit different, I'd say. It is however, the one time you
don't want ABS so they can measure.

12 feet of skid - At 40 mph that's probably .5 seconds from cognition to
impact.

You should probably get that bull's-eye painted over, too.

Bob

Chute, because it can turn a number of potentially-unsurvivable situations
into potentially-survivable ones.

Though on average, a "magic six gallons of gas" would prevent a ton of
accidents. Maybe we should start a secret campaign to mislabel airplanes and
gas gauges?

-cwk.

"Teacherjh" wrote in message
...
\
So, if you ever had an unexpected need for one of these (unspecified)
things,
which would you prefer. A chute on the airplane, or six more gallons of
gas?

Jose

Chute, because it can turn a number of potentially-unsurvivable situations
into potentially-survivable ones.


"potentially-unsurvivable": Maybe you won't survive. Maybe you will.
"potentially-survivable": Maybe you'll survive. Maybe you won't.

I'd want more of a difference in outcome before I trade six gallons for a
chute.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Roger Halstead wrote:
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:59:45 GMT, "Matthew S. Whiting"
wrote:
snip

Read what I wrote earlier. I never suggested swerving into either
traffic or large fixed objects. Nice that you snipped out the relevant
parts of my previous post(s).


Don't take it personal, I always try to snip everything except the
points I'm answering. Sometimes a bit extra gets lost.

I don't take it personally, but in this case it completely changed what
I said.


I hate to see a one line answer on two pages of accumulated post.

I agree, but you shouldn't snip so much that the meaning is completely
lost. That is rather disengenuous at best.


Matt