Video: Gran, 72, on motorcycle thought it was safe to go through a red light....

[Happyman58]

10 hours ago, Moti24 said:

Poor dear got red traffic light and red light district mixed up.  But, she is 72!

Well she aint the only Thai person riding or driving a vehicle here 50% of them go through red lights and they are much younger

[jacko45k]

I am perplexed why the car driver did not brake and veer left and avoid her, which on the video looks easy.

I suspect we are seeing it  in slow motion.

 

 

[oldlakey]

33 minutes ago, jacko45k said:

I am perplexed why the car driver did not brake and veer left and avoid her, which on the video looks easy.

I suspect we are seeing it  in slow motion.

 

 

What we see is nothing other than the reason why the slaughter continues unabated, and will continue to do so

It comes down to attitude, our grannie got her come uppance, 

 the car drivers turn will arrive sooner or later

Who knows maybe one day they might even work out the solution for themselves

 

[Juan B Tong]

Stop the age bashing!

She is 72, so what?

Lot of stupid bad drivers of all ages, especially here.

 

 

[Prairieboy]

19 hours ago, BEVUP said:

I've noticed the only thing that will stop them is when they actually hit you - they just don't seem to worry 

They then have to stop so they can get out and run away!

Edited January 6, 2018 by Prairieboy

[Moti24]

2 hours ago, Happyman58 said:

Well she aint the only Thai person riding or driving a vehicle here 50% of them go through red lights and they are much younger

50%!  More like 95%, and some of those aren't even old enough to apply for a licence!

[lvr181]

18 hours ago, Get Real said:

Go, Granny, Go! It was a red light. What has helmets and looking left and right to do with that????

 

It diminshes the "level" of stupidity?  The current level of her "stupidity" is at its highest.

 

Just thinking outside the square.

[Ron19]

19 hours ago, glasswort said:

I move over for no-one, i slow for no-one.

 

So basically you would have done exactly the same as the driver of the white car. Driving which you describe as pathetic. Hmmm!

Go back and read the full  post you quoted not just what you have selectively quoted here.

[sometimewoodworker]

9 hours ago, jacko45k said:

I am perplexed why the car driver did not brake and veer left and avoid her, which on the video looks easy.

I suspect we are seeing it  in slow motion.

 

 

Watch again. The car was breaking heavily from the point it was half way over the stop line, ABS so no skid.

[Sir Dude]

72 huh...what's the betting no license, no tax, no insurance and probably no helmet?

[jerojero]

Just another retard. Nuff said.

Sent lovingly from my S8.

[jimi]

How can people not see that this is a slow motion video?

 

Some simple observations and calculations:

• The car moves about 5 car lengths during the clip, before the impact, that means about 25 meters
• The clip takes about 5 seconds to show the car traveling this distance
• 25 meters in 5 seconds is 5 m/s or 18 km/h

 

If my observations and calculations are good, then the assumption that the video is shown in normal speed is simply absurd. A crash in 18 km/h would hardly result in a crash that hard, where the motorbike driver is flung high into the air.

 

No, I would say that the speed was more like about 60 km/h, meaning that the video was shown at about 1/3 of normal speed, and the length of the clip up until the crash is about 1.5 seconds at normal speed. It is not uncommon for drivers to require up to 2 seconds to perceive an unexpected object and perform the thought process needed before applying the breaks (or until the perceived situation is "scary" enough so that some reflex kicks in). So even if the driver didn't break at all, it would still be possible to explain that with the slowmotion video and the normal reaction time. 

 

And if the driver did break, then it would be even more obvious that the video must be shown in slow motion. Because that would mean that the speed of the car at the impact would be even lower than 18 km/h, assuming the clip was at normal speed.

[Grumpy Duck]

On 1/5/2018 at 10:05 AM, Enoon said:

 

If the driver had kept to their original line they would have passed behind the motorcycle, but they lacked the ability to calculate that.

 

Or perhaps it was unthinkable for them that they should defer, pass behind, and allow the peasant motorcyclist to take their space?

 

Either way the result was that they were, in fact, aiming for the motorcyclist.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Your conclusion is likely, however, It is also possible the person in the white car was just too busy checking google maps or chatting on Line/WeChat or FB to bother paying attention to driving. I see that a lot riding in Bangkok. 

 

I realize this is not the USA but I know in California now most cops check time/date stamps on cell phones to see if they were on the phone at the time of accident

Edited January 6, 2018 by Grumpy Duck

[Moonlover]

1 hour ago, jimi said:

How can people not see that this is a slow motion video?

 

Some simple observations and calculations:

• The car moves about 5 car lengths during the clip, before the impact, that means about 25 meters
• The clip takes about 5 seconds to show the car traveling this distance
• 25 meters in 5 seconds is 5 m/s or 18 km/h

 

If my observations and calculations are good, then the assumption that the video is shown in normal speed is simply absurd. A crash in 18 km/h would hardly result in a crash that hard, where the motorbike driver is flung high into the air.

 

No, I would say that the speed was more like about 60 km/h, meaning that the video was shown at about 1/3 of normal speed, and the length of the clip up until the crash is about 1.5 seconds at normal speed. It is not uncommon for drivers to require up to 2 seconds to perceive an unexpected object and perform the thought process needed before applying the breaks (or until the perceived situation is "scary" enough so that some reflex kicks in). So even if the driver didn't break at all, it would still be possible to explain that with the slowmotion video and the normal reaction time. 

 

And if the driver did break, then it would be even more obvious that the video must be shown in slow motion. Because that would mean that the speed of the car at the impact would be even lower than 18 km/h, assuming the clip was at normal speed.

Yes, I completely agree with you. An aspect that you did not mention is that no motorcyclist, not even a 72 year old granny, would potter across a main intersection like this one at what appears to be little more than walking pace!

[Coconutman]

Why steer the car in the same direction yhe person is going.. it wasnt the driver of the car fault.. go on youtube most of the accidents are redlights and over correcting 

[Just Weird]

On ‎1‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 6:05 PM, canuckamuck said:

The car moves to the right so far that he has to turn sharply left just to get back on the road after he collided with grandma. If you watch he begins his move to the right at about the time he begins to overtake the white truck.

If the video has been slowed down, they do not mention it. By the speed with which granny gets launched I would say that this clip is either actual speed or only slightly slowed.  The car has about 5 seconds clear view of the motorcycle before impact. Even if you halve that it's 2.5 seconds. If you can't find your brake pedal in 2 seconds while approaching an intersection, you shouldn't be on the road. There wasn't even any braking after the impact, but the driver was able to correct the car and get back to his lane. Something that also indicates this was real time.

 

"The car moves to the right so far that he has to turn sharply left just to get back on the road...".

It doesn't, the car hardly moves out of a straight line.

 

"If you watch he begins his move to the right at about the time he begins to overtake the white truck".

If you watch you will see that the beginning of the CCTV has been edited; the truck is there for a split second with no image of the car, then the truck disappears and only the car, moving in a dead straight line, not overtaking anything, is visible.

 

It is very obvious that the video has been slowed, look how slowly the bike is moving across the junction and how slowly the car appears to be moving.

 

Why do you say that there was no braking after the accident, how do you know that most unlikely factor when the natural reaction in that situation is to try to stop?

[canuckamuck]

On 05/01/2018 at 10:05 AM, Enoon said:

 

If the driver had kept to their original line they would have passed behind the motorcycle, but they lacked the ability to calculate that.

 

Obviously if the video is slowed considerably than the situation is different. Not knowing that information really limits the conversation.

But for braking, if there was any hard braking we would see the car's velocity change and we don't. Even after the driver corrects his path and continues down the road.

[jacko45k]

13 hours ago, sometimewoodworker said:

Watch again. The car was breaking heavily from the point it was half way over the stop line, ABS so no skid.

It looked like they were on ice!

Are you kidding, he was still moving at about the same speed at the other end of the junction!

He never even came close to a stop!

[Moonlover]

8 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

Obviously if the video is slowed considerably than the situation is different. Not knowing that information really limits the conversation.

But for braking, if there was any hard braking we would see the car's velocity change and we don't. Even after the driver corrects his path and continues down the road.

Oh the cars driver brakes alright! Freeze the video at 21 secs as the car crosses the white stop-line. It is obvious that there is a characteristic nose dive. It then lifts slightly as ABS kicks in.

 

If the car was travelling at 60 kmh, which would be fairly typical, it would cross the junction before coming to a halt. Which was happened.

 

I don't believe the car driver is at fault at all here. If he had a green light and she a red, it's her fault entirely. She could well have come out from behind a row of waiting traffic, giving the car driver very little warning.

 

And let's not forget that she was 72 and her faculties may not be all there. I recall, many years ago, seeing an old man in Scotland, drive straight through a level crossing barrier and into the side of a passing train.

 

Age takes its toll on most of us one way or another.

 

I must remember that myself. I'm 72 next week and still riding almost daily.

[SABloke]

On 1/5/2018 at 4:09 PM, glasswort said:

I move over for no-one, i slow for no-one.

 

So basically you would have done exactly the same as the driver of the white car. Driving which you describe as pathetic. Hmmm!