There you go with the usual ‘let’s change the whole thing’ bs from what it started off with. Do try and concentrate on the op and what I actually wrote, rather than going off at a tangent like you normally do. 
mazzer:
xichrisxi:
selby newcomer:
Not blaming the car for this incident but why do car drivers constantly hang around the sides of hgv’s, it’s the last place I want to be when I’m in my carBecause he/she was keeping a safe distance from the car in front,simple.
Which he could have done just by hanging back an extra couple of feet and he would have been clear of the trailer too. While the blame lies with the lorry driver the amount of cars who sit in that position when you have your indicator on is unreal it is about time motorway driving was made part of the test. The difference in standards on the motorways between the UK and Europe is really great with the UK’s being far lower
I never sit next to a truck either. I hang back until I can clear the front of the truck before beginning an overtake. I hate having a car sitting next to me on the motorway and a lot of them seem to like matching my speed when I am passing them. They clearly have no idea how dangerous it is to sit with trailer wheels a couple of feet from their face. A well timed blow out would be very educational 
It’s astonishing that anyone would be blaming the car driver for this accident, putting the indicators on when there’s a car already overtaking does not give you the right to dangerously tailgate a car or the right to force a van to brake sharply.
This accident was 100% the lorry drivers fault, the Clio wasn’t hanging about at the side of the lorry he was overtaking it, lane 2 appears to be held up by a lorry in lane 2 (possibly the culprits mate) crawling past a large van he appears not to have the speed to overtake quickly.
The Clio driver could not safely pull into lane 3 because when the car at 0:15 pulled over to lane 4 there was another car less than 3 seconds behind it (in lane 3), and another car immediately behind that one.
The lorry driver was completely at fault, he appears to have tried to pull out far to close to the backside of the Clio and forced the “hm” van to brake sharply.
I’m sure we’ve all pulled out into the next lane when we should really have held back, but this was far too close to the car, and with the “hm” van closing the gap so quickly it was completely inappropriate for the lorry driver to consider changing lanes.
Presumably the lorry is fitted with brakes so perhaps the lorry driver needs to learn which pedal operates them
I’m sure that numerous recovery operators will be pleased to note that equally numerous drivers out there think that there was no place in that video for co operation between all concerned to allow the truck in lane 1 to enter lane 2.
Carryfast:
I’m sure that numerous recovery operators will be pleased to note that equally numerous drivers out there think that there was no place in that video for co operation between all concerned to allow the truck in lane 1 to enter lane 2.
I very much doubt that the car driver could possibly see that there was a broken down vehicle on the hard shoulder, I also doubt that was the reason for the lorry driver wanting to change lanes, did you notice that after the accident and after he’d passed the broken down vehicle, not only did the lorry driver not stop but he never went back to lane 1 either.
Anyway, it’s debatable whether or not the car driver would even have known the lorry driver wanted to change lanes, going by the shadows I would say the car driver was forward of the rear of the lorry when it’s indicators came on.
I’m all for people making room for people on the hard shoulder, especially people who have to work there, but making potentially dangerous lane changes or expecting other road users to do so is not the way to keep recovery workers or other road workers safe.
tachograph:
I’m all for people making room for people on the hard shoulder, especially people who have to work there, but making potentially dangerous lane changes or expecting other road users to do so is not the way to keep recovery workers or other road workers safe.
That’s a contradiction because it obviously becomes ‘potentially dangerous’ if/when all concerned don’t co operate and if people in lane 2 etc ‘don’t see’ ( more like don’t give a zb about ) hazards well ahead on the hard shoulder.
Carryfast:
tachograph:
I’m all for people making room for people on the hard shoulder, especially people who have to work there, but making potentially dangerous lane changes or expecting other road users to do so is not the way to keep recovery workers or other road workers safe.That’s a contradiction because it obviously becomes ‘potentially dangerous’ if/when all concerned don’t co operate and if people in lane 2 etc ‘don’t see’ ( more like don’t give a zb about ) hazards well ahead on the hard shoulder.
It’s not a contradiction at-all, I’m all for people making room for people on the hard shoulder as long as it can be done safely, I also think that people in lane 2 should co-operate and and try to make room for vehicles in lane 1 to move over out of the way of people or vehicles on the hard shoulder, but only if it can be done safely.
Do you really think that your average motorist in L2 is going to observe a possible hazard on the hard shoulder and make allowances for a vehicle in L1 to move out a little ? you certainly have a higher opinion of our fellow road users than I do.
But back to the video; for me this just backs up my theory that the vast majority of all accidents are the result of two pieces of crap driving. In this case, crap and illegal driving on behalf of the lorry driver for crashing into a car whilst changing lanes, and crap (but blameless under law) driving on behalf of the car driver for not predicting the bleeding obvious; If either party had any skill this would never of happened.
Bluey Circles:
Do you really think that your average motorist in L2 is going to observe a possible hazard on the hard shoulder and make allowances for a vehicle in L1 to move out a little ? you certainly have a higher opinion of our fellow road users than I do.But back to the video; for me this just backs up my theory that the vast majority of all accidents are the result of two pieces of crap driving. In this case, crap and illegal driving on behalf of the lorry driver for crashing into a car whilst changing lanes, and crap (but blameless under law) driving on behalf of the car driver for not predicting the bleeding obvious; If either party had any skill this would never of happened.
Pretty much spot on!
Bluey Circles:
Do you really think that your average motorist in L2 is going to observe a possible hazard on the hard shoulder and make allowances for a vehicle in L1 to move out a little ? you certainly have a higher opinion of our fellow road users than I do.But back to the video; for me this just backs up my theory that the vast majority of all accidents are the result of two pieces of crap driving. In this case, crap and illegal driving on behalf of the lorry driver for crashing into a car whilst changing lanes, and crap (but blameless under law) driving on behalf of the car driver for not predicting the bleeding obvious; If either party had any skill this would never of happened.
I very much doubt the Clio could even see the hazard on the hard shoulder!there is a artic in front of the “crash causer”,and the crash causer was so closer to the artic I doubt the Clio ever had sight of the broken down vehicle and I still maintain that the crash causer didn’t move out to give the hazard space,he moved out to keep up with his mate in the other flat bed and couldn’t bear to be apart from his mate so pulled out under the assumption that the Clio would instantly move out of his way but the Clio literally had a few seconds before the flat bed ■■■ took his back end and sent him up the embankment…