kwilco

What I can see is limited - I'm aware of that but It is unfortunate that people grossly over estimate what they are seeing in a video - they are just being naive.

I don't thinl there was any visibility until he got out that far - and that's why he stopped - due to the poor road markings he probably had no idea of his actual position on the junction.

you have the link - read it....

you can't tell from the video how far away to other road user was - I would suggest he expected her to go in front of him - however holding a baby, she was probably restricted in her ability to manoeuvre the bike or even apply the brakes. - during that |second" she would have travelled 20 metres - I suspect he saw her a couple of seconds before that she coud have been anywhere up. to 100 metres away.

I agree - You will also know that the substance used has inferior reflective and friction qualities. You will also know that in UK and EU their are standard formulae for where road markings and signs are stationed - i am of the opinion that there are NO qualified traffic engineers in Thailand - the entire system is haphazard and inconsistent. These things actually do make a difference as you are probably aware that they work "subliminally" and the male motorcyclist may well have positioned himself better before entering the junction. As it was he was able to ignore the stop line and this was probably s=due to its positioning and a lack of visibility at the junction - this is not available from the video. When designing these junctions in UK a lot of research goes into how rto position them and how people observe and adhere to road signs and markings - there is little or no evidence of this on any Thai roads.

OK - here's my answer

...my point is there is no point explaining this to people who can't understand - you are a case in point.

Such a passive aggressive cliche - a prelude to sealioning from somone without a coherent argument - why don't you go and educate yourself and find out rather than spouting nonsense about road safety before you know anything about it?

As someone who worked in a traffic engineers dept in the UK - I can see at a glance huge faults in the junction and also how people regard video - what we need is a series of shots towards th woman motorcyclist for about 200 metres before she comes in frame and a ground level 360 degree scan of the junction in particular the vegetation around it. One also needs to bear in mind the Thai culture of driving like a boat on a river. Most foreigners are totally unaware of this - Thai drivers of course aren't. BTW - the male motorcyclist was stationary when the female and baby collided with him.

It's called confirmation bias.

Yes - I appear to be flogging a dead horse - unfortunately people are too limited to understand. There is stupid, stupider and racist - so how would you expect a rcist to know? One clue is that racists spend a lot of time blaming others for their shortcomings and arguing they aren't racists - QED.

THe reason that so much rubbish is posted on this thread is that people are just incapable of even understanding what thy are looking at.

OK - finally someone who admits that their take on road safety is based on racism

Not only do I look at crash stats, I actually understand them which meand I don't talk meaningless nonsense about "number one in the world". I also don't talk subjectively or racially about driving skills.

Like so many foreigners, you don't understand driving in Thailand or the video. THen try to make up some wierd assumptions as if you are superior to Thai people. You do realise that you can watch the same sort of driving in videos from all over the world including UK?

don't suppose the guy has Dengue by any chance?

THe numbers of road deaths in buses in Thailand is relatively low - however the problem is vehicle construction - these vehicles - once they crash, offer very little protection for the occupants.

You are not an authority of speeding though, are you? and you didn't have a speed gun to hand, I take it.

People love to blame “reckless driving” or “bad driving” on crashes – but in reality they are not the primary cause – but it makes it easier for bystanders to make conclusions. Over 90% of crashes are caused by “human error” – this is a small lapse that is perfectly normal in all drivers – usually a distraction or loss of concentration. Human error refers to mistakes, lapses, or incorrect actions made by individuals while driving or being involved in road traffic. These errors can occur due to various factors, such as lack of attention, distraction, fatigue, inadequate driving skills, misjudgement of situations, or simply making a wrong decision. Then there are also more serious cases of impairment (e.g., due to alcohol or drugs). Microsleeps refers to very short periods of sleep that can be measured in seconds, rather than minutes or hours. A microsleep is defined as sleep episodes that last for 15 seconds or less People may not even appear to be asleep during a microsleep episode, but nevertheless their brain is not processing external information like usual. Microsleeps occur most often after sleep deprivation. E.g. shift workers, people with forms of insomnia or sleep apnoea,. But, people who do not have sleep disorders can experience microsleeps too. Microsleeps commonly occur when performing monotonous tasks, e.g. - driving on an empty highway. Microsleep can happen to anyone and have serious consequences, such as a risk of car crashes. If someone has frequent microsleeps it is important to seek medical advice because they are a serious danger on the roads.

Sadly the forensic analysis of road accidents is almost non-existant in Thailand....the best you get is some amateur guesses by a local policeman. Al an "investigation" will do is try to blame someo=ne - e.g the driver - in reality it is a system that has been allowed to grow without any proper regulation - a combination of roads and vehicle engineering do nothing to mitigate the severity of incidents like this. These "VIP" coaches are particularly deadly once in an accident as the construction is unregulated and flimsy.

Therefore you had POOT - your earlier post didn't make that clear. "I arrived visa exempt. I flew from San Francisco to Bangkok. This was my third trip to Thailand this year visa exempt, and I extended last time, which is my guess why they asked me. I will be continuing on to another destination, but didn't decide when or where yet."

Clearly not the whole story - and how failing a claim would justify not having future insurance is illogical. One thing your story shows in accidents DO happen. Not getting the right cover in future is just cutting off your nose to spite your face - which already needs fixing apparently.

so you arrived with an onward proof of travel?....but not a return ticket? Did you have the POOT when you boarded the plane in San Francisco?

to be clear - were you on a visa exempt entry? where was your POOT to? Will you buy your ticket home in Thailand or are you continuing on?

Are you saying you travelled one way all of these times? Firstly why would they ask on a tourist visa? Secondly you don't know they weren't checking as they would only say something if they thought there was a problem.