richard_smith237

What cars are coming from the left ???? - you can't see because of the buildings, its a 'blind junction'... And you are suggesting you'd drive through at anywhere between 60 and 120 kmh - you are a fool and a danger to everyone around you. Hopefully it'll just be a truck that you t-bone and not an innocent motorcyclist or family in a small car.... but what I'm really hoping is that you learn not to be such a fool and drive with a sensible appreciation for the dangers around you so don't have an accident at all.

So you'll admit to driving 120 kmh on a road with a speed limit of 80 kmh though a blind junction.... hmm... I really hope you don't end up killing someone... you are playing a game of chance. That area is clearly dangerous....

The Grey Sedan did just that - it slowed then stopped because it saw the Trike entering the junction. The SUV was not even at the junction when the trike was in the junction - so its clear the SUV drive didn't slow and stop when something else was in the junction. Where is the SUV ????? As mentioned earlier - careful... It could be you t-boning someone at that junction next... and you'll be legally at fault no matter how others drive that road. Do you stop at pedestrian crossings ?... ... or are you one of those foreigners here who have gone 'so far native' that they claim they never stop at a Pedestrian crossing because the car behind will crash into you.... ??

It's not easy to read the road when you have a projectile approaching at breaking speed from your blind spot. This suicidal, psycho, madman, on his very small vehicle (by the way has no tax or insurance) would have scared that poor woman in the SUV. Some people here are making this woman out to be a monster, I feel sorry for her. Then you are not reading the road ahead at all.... Because, it doesn't matter what is on the junction or approaching the junction, you read the road ahead and slow for the blind junction at which legally you are supposed to give way to crossing traffic. Additionally, reading the road ahead... the SUV was not even 'at the junction' when the Disability-Trike was in the junction... The Grey Sedan stopped and gave way. The SUV driver had no intention of stopping or slowing for anything that was in the junction - monster, of course not she made a mistake which could be fatal to someone else. You have consistently applied a binary approach to this incident... Swiss-man riding like a madman / SUV driver innocent. The reality is different - yes, Id agree the Swiss-man rode without care or regard for his own safety. The SUV driver drove without care or regard for anyone else's. But... you take it a step further and suggest the Swissman is terrible for 'scaring' the woman in the SUV - but she was the one blasting through a blind junction (as it seems many do - but that doesn't make it right).

Are you blasting through the junctions at 80 kmh ???

The white 'give way line' exists on the other-side (south bound)... and on the other junctions... I agree with you that we have to adopt to some of the 'local styles of driving'.... but what we see here is two people driving / riding with 'local style' and both shooting through a junction without stopping with serious consequences - if either rider or driver applied caution, the accident would not have existed. The junction is poorly designed and priority should perhaps be reversed - but that doesn't make those blasting through the junction correct, it makes it dangerous and causes accidents (as we have seen).

Indeed.... And then a Doctor is killed on a pedestrian crossing by a foreigner in his SUV... his defence, 'but the other cars weren't stopping'.... I get that - all junctions along that road are very poorly designed... there are two options: 1) Make the North-South roads (parallel to the railway lines) the primary road and 'East-West' roads secondary and have to give-way. 2) Or, put speed bumps and measures to slow the traffic on the North-South roads (parallel to the railway lines) because people have got into the habit of driving this road recklessly. Given your comments [SAFETY FIRST] - it would make a log more sense to have the North-South roads (parallel to the railway lines) the primary road... remove the white lines, and place clearly mark 'stop / give way' at the junctions of the 'East-West' roads.

You are saying because of the WRONGLY placed white line it is OK for a madman to come shooting out of a side street without looking or slowing, driving in front of an SUV travelling at around 80km/h. Can you confirm that is what you are saying? Is the white line wrongly placed ???.... You already highlighted that 'East - West' has right of way... so how are the lines place wrongly incorrectly... the White lines are place in accordance with the rules of that junction. I agree that the mobility rider rode without consideration for his own safety and was not riding defensively as he should have been doing... ... But blasting through a blind junction at 80 kmh is reckless - whether you are copying the idiots in front of you or not. It seems you still want to state that the SUV is not at fault, because thats the way everyone else drives - copying everyone else is not a solid defence for driving illegally - I don't copy the car in front when it goes through a red traffic light (as it seems some other idiots might). There doesn't need to be - the line itself is sufficient... Dangerous to lower your driving standards to the idiot in front... Do you follow them through pedestrian crossings and red lights ?

In some cases adopting the 'local way' is the only way to drive here otherwise we'd not get anywhere.... or we'd place ourselves in greater danger.... ... Such things as driving with a degree of assertiveness so that we can 'merge' into traffic because people never give way unless we push in a little etc... But that doesn't mean we should jump lights and not stop at pedestrian crossings just because the locals (or many of them) drive that way.... The same goes for blasting through a junction at 80 kmh... particularly one at which right of way is questionable.

Absolutely agree.... SAFETY FIRST is backing is original conclusion because he knows the area's and thinks its ok to drive through a blind junction at 80kms... because if he doesn't someone will rear-end him. I get his basic premise - but blasting through junctions like that is craziness, I don't know how any western (UK) trained driver can think this is acceptable unless they've gone completely native. Of course, we can't drive to UK rules or exactly as we would in the UK as we'd end up in an accident - this is the excuse given by SAFETY FIRST and I agree with him, but not to the degree we go to the extend of adopting the complete recklessness of 'some' Thai drivers as that places us at greater risk. I'd ask who drive in the same manner as SAFETY FIRST a what happens if its a Bin-lorry or truck driving across the junction from the left ??? - Approaching that junction at 80kmh means there's no chance of stopping...

I'm sure a top contributor are these reckless foreigners. Given your comments - you are one of 'these reckless foreigners' !!!...

I agree with you that risk starts with low alcohol levels and increases rapidly... however, the risk is negligible up to 0.035% BAC after which point risk factors increase rapidly. Regarding risk factor, having one or two beers over a couple of hours presents less risk than driving with a cold, while on cold / flu medication, driving while tired, driving while angry, studies have shown different music to be distracting, even having noisy kids in the car... the phone to be highly distracting - there are so many factors that elevate the 'risk level' (risk of accident)... So... I get and understand the point you made - but its better saved for someone who doesn't understand how the 'other factors' are more significant than one or two beers over a few hours. I'm not defending drink driving - I'm stating that 1 or 2 beers over a couple of hours and remaining well within a legal level is not the horrific crime you claim it to be - your protest of such in this thread is a ridiculous over reaction. However, had you choose to react in the same manner to someone who drinks 5 beers and drives home - I'd be backing your argument.

How does an ICE give a more rewarding riding / diving experience ??.. is the noise, vibration, something more visceral, or is that we've grown up with it and there's an element of nostalgia ? Perhaps our kids will look back fondly and state... I prefer EV, its a more rewarding experience than this nuclear cell power. I've no idea.... I think EV's will be around for a long time, government have backed EV's too much, but I suspect ultimately hydrogen will be the best option...

i won't be fearing the reaper, that's for sure.... Wrong Blue Oyster !!...

I agree... Well done - nice big picture thinking there !!... I'm guessing it'll keep getting nudged on....

There's an advantage to both... The newer / higher end iPhones have much better cameras and are faster, better security etc compared to a 'cheapie'.... But, there's also an advantage that carrying a cheaper phone around, 'we are not owned by the things we own' (i.e. we are not scared of losing it). At some point the phone will be all we'll need... It'll start our car, open our house, we'll use it for payments, for ID.... But... what if the phone has an issue... We'll need the real keys.... I also think we'll need to have real cash and all places need to be able to take cash (by law) because cash is the backup if the E-systems cut out.... and should be the option if we simply 'want to use cash'... As much as I support E-payments for the convenience, I'm also in firm support that cash remains accepted everywhere. Having an iPhone I can't get GoogleWallet and ApplePay won't work with local cards here..... But, whenever I am in overseas places that accept ApplePay, the convenience is brilliant... I know its just the difference between getting a card out of a wallet, tapping and confirming the transaction... but the phone is often closer at hand than the wallet, and thus picking up the phone, Face ID to open, double-tapping power to bring up wallet and tapping on the Point of Sale device..... it actually sounds like a lot of effort, but for a Gen Y&Z its a single movement... Its kind of like going from a car with a normal key.... ... to a car with a key-fob to unlock... .... to a car with keyless entry... .... to a car with Keyless entry and ignition... ..... and now to a car that we can enter with our phone... It'll become the norm just as other norms have passed before, such as credit cards, contactless payment..... I absolutely agree with your revenue dept comment - for sure people will want to fly below the radar... I hope cash doesn't become obsolete in my lifetime - all payment options should be on the table, cash and e-payment, but as you imply, people may not want e-payment if the info takes them above tax thresholds... Someone should design a currency that can't be traced easily.... something not controlled, something with no head office, or specific centre of information and power.. something that can be everywhere at once.... sort of decentralised... hmm... Would Thailand make Crypto illegal ???

Where are you that has clean air and convenience ?

A lot of people don't like the 'nanny state' but dealing with the roads alone there is a log of reasons why the roads are safer there and the primary reason is the very 'nanny state' some don't like... For the most part, road laws are strictly enforced and that keeps people alive - and when it comes to DUI there is little give.

This is incorrect.....vehicles GIVE WAY to the LEFT at intersections.....that is the correct rule.... He [Excogitator] already acknowledged.... This GIVE WAY to the LEFT at intersections stands only when roads are of equal status and there, are no road markings and no other vehicle is on the junction (i.e. they arrived at the junction at the same time). You are indeed right Sir, I stand corrected. Yield to the LEFT is the general rule. (Seems to be a lot of confusion about this. I was even taught the wrong way here..)

Next here... think bigger picture.... What if scenario for you: What IF the whole idea of EV's is to have cleaner cities... then more in the city will be encouraged to have an EV. More of those people in the inner cities will live in largo condo blocks and areas of high population density. How will charing occur in Condo's when many more people or even most of the occupants have an EV ??? So... while I agree, on the individual level its not rocket science, thinking beyond over simplified and dumbed down responses.... the issue is genuine... "No new petrol or diesel cars sold from 2030" - Ring a bell ???

Do you pay for it yet ??..... You will... My guess is that there are so many EV's now, soon, perhaps this year, Shopping Malls etc will have no choice but to charge for charging

That's interesting, what's the total cost job start to finish. Do you need any planning permission ? A far simple solution exists... would planning permission be require for this (in the UK - no one would care here).... The issue of course, is when everyone in the street, or in a condo is charging their EV at the same time.... the grid would fail. To avoid that, additional infrastructure added and to pay for it night-time electricity consumption is charged at a premium.... https://www.chargegully.com/

But you'd still be using electricity generated by hydrocarbons... So... Put SolarCells on the roof, and run the power down to your car charger from that....

Some will suggest get away with it until someone complains. Ultimately, you will not be a permitted to charge your car on 'co-owners' electricity.... Thus, you'd have to arrange (and pay for) a dedicated meter so you can pay separately. OR... the condo installs their own outlets (just a 240v regular plug) - and you use a 'log in device' such as an RFID card and your electricity usage is registered - you receive a bill monthly etc. As EV usage increases - I imagine Condo's and Apartments will go this way and install extra power-points that run off some sort of meter which is paid for by the user.

Hey Champ... maybe the white line did mean something.... Should have looked into that before 'hanging your hat on the wrong thing' & 'diggin up' !!!