Swiss Expat Critically Injured in Scooter-Car Crash in Pattaya

[kwilco]

39 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

I think its quite clear that the approach of the SUV was at speed

You aren't taking into account the natural fallibility of observation - it is totally subjective. I'm not saying you are wrong but there is simply not enough in view to make an accurate judgment.

Another factor is that gauging speed on videos is very difficult - you actually have to measure distance against time and check that the reply speed of the video is properly calibrated. Without doing this videos tend to make speeds look faster.

If you care to check there are a lot of papers on the fallibility of witnesses to calibrates speed and the fallibility of video evidence.

[kwilco]

30 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Right of way at unmarked junctions of equal status is to the right

In Thailand priority is to the left.

If two vehicles enter a junction from different directions at the same time, the vehicle on the left side has a right of way, except when there's a designation of "principle roadway" in which case the vehicle on the principle roadway has a right of way.]

Section 72

11

[A principle roadway is announced by the traffic officer and installed with indicative traffic signs.]

 

 

the "law" part of this is mentioned in the Highway code translation which actually dates from 1979

Land Traffic Act, B.E. 2522 (1979)

[richard_smith237]

22 minutes ago, kwilco said:

You aren't taking into account the natural fallibility of observation - it is totally subjective. I'm not saying you are wrong but there is simply not enough in view to make an accurate judgment.

Another factor is that gauging speed on videos is very difficult - you actually have to measure distance against time and check that the reply speed of the video is properly calibrated. Without doing this videos tend to make speeds look faster.

If you care to check there are a lot of papers on the fallibility of witnesses to calibrates speed and the fallibility of video evidence.

 

Yup... I quite agree...

 

Very rudimentary calculations based on what maybe flawed observation and assumption gives the following.

 

CCTV Frame rates are 25 fps

 

The SUV travelled ~2m in 2 frames...  thats a speed of 90 kmh.

The SUV Travelled ~2m in 4 frames... thats a speed of 45 kmh.

 

If the measurement is slightly off and its not 2m but 1.5m.

The SUV travelled ~1.5m in 2 frames...  thats a speed of 33.7kmh.

The SUV Travelled ~1.5m in 4 frames... thats a speed of 67.5 kmh.

 

 

Yes, its rudementary, however, in the most favourable light - the SUV was travelling at 33 kms...  in the most damning light, the SUV was travelling at 90kmh....   my guess is the SUV was travelling somewhere closer to 60 kmh - which is a reckless speed to enter a junction at which the visibility of crossing traffic is blocked. 

[richard_smith237]

24 minutes ago, kwilco said:

56 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Right of way at unmarked junctions of equal status is to the right

In Thailand priority is to the left.

If two vehicles enter a junction from different directions at the same time, the vehicle on the left side has a right of way, except when there's a designation of "principle roadway" in which case the vehicle on the principle roadway has a right of way.]

Section 72

11

[A principle roadway is announced by the traffic officer and installed with indicative traffic signs.]

 

 

the "law" part of this is mentioned in the Highway code translation which actually dates from 1979

Land Traffic Act, B.E. 2522 (1979)

 

100% correct -  I meant to the left...  no idea why I wrote to the right !!...  (too late to edit the comment now).

[richard_smith237]

28 minutes ago, kwilco said:

You aren't taking into account the natural fallibility of observation - it is totally subjective. I'm not saying you are wrong but there is simply not enough in view to make an accurate judgment.

 

We know the Swiss-man on his trike had already entered the junction before the SUV reached the junction and entered the frame of the CCTV).

 

28 minutes ago, kwilco said:

Another factor is that gauging speed on videos is very difficult - you actually have to measure distance against time and check that the reply speed of the video is properly calibrated. Without doing this videos tend to make speeds look faster.

 

Completely agree... this seems to be the case in another thread where a Merc-driver cut across a Motorcyclist, a lot of posters were suggesting the motorcyclist was speeding - but the 'impact' makes it appear faster and distorts our perspective. 

IMO that motorcyclist was travelling the same speed as all the others which passed before the Merc cut across traffic and cause the crash.

 

28 minutes ago, kwilco said:

If you care to check there are a lot of papers on the fallibility of witnesses to calibrates speed and the fallibility of video evidence.

 

Yup... thats very well known that witness statements are extremely unreliable.

 

[kwilco]

23 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Yup... I quite agree...

 

Very rudimentary calculations based on what maybe flawed observation and assumption gives the following.

 

CCTV Frame rates are 25 fps

 

The SUV travelled ~2m in 2 frames...  thats a speed of 90 kmh.

The SUV Travelled ~2m in 4 frames... thats a speed of 45 kmh.

 

If the measurement is slightly off and its not 2m but 1.5m.

The SUV travelled ~1.5m in 2 frames...  thats a speed of 33.7kmh.

The SUV Travelled ~1.5m in 4 frames... thats a speed of 67.5 kmh.

 

 

Yes, its rudementary, however, in the most favourable light - the SUV was travelling at 33 kms...  in the most damning light, the SUV was travelling at 90kmh....   my guess is the SUV was travelling somewhere closer to 60 kmh - which is a reckless speed to enter a junction at which the visibility of crossing traffic is blocked. 

Digital not frames - we don't know if it was constant, accelerating  because we haven't seen the hudred or so metres before the junction.

THe difference in speed between 30 and 40 kph is huge.

It can be calculated by the distance off line travelled by the m/c that was hit.

In countries where crsheds are scientifically analysed the speeds of vehicles is detwermined quite accurately not from video but the resulting distances travelled on/across the asphalt. In Thailand crashes simply aren't calibrated.

Certainly no=one on this thread could make an accurate assessment.

Edited April 29 by kwilco

[kwilco]

Foreigners driving in Thailand are usually ignorant of the priority laws and fail to understand their significance.

Anyone who has driven in Europe in thee 1960s/70s will know the effects of "priority" laws. (the other way round) the effect was devastating - and there have been significant changes to overcome this. THsiland has not. In Thailand they still remain as a significant part of the driving psyche and culture - foreigners ignoring them do so at their peril.

 

A lot of driving behaviour is subliminal - It may also be a contributory factor that the (elderly?) Swiss guy comes from a "DoR" country - he may have not instinctively looked or anticipated oncoming traffic correctly.

THe classic example. of this is the pedestrian who steps off a kerb having looked left instead of right.\in this case in doesn't look as if he checked the traffic to his left and even if he did, he may have looked into the wrong lane and nothing wouls have registered - least of all a "fast" moving vehicle in what he considered to be the wrong lane.

 

THe most common thing said after an accident is "I just didn't see him".

 

[scubascuba3]

34 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

thats very well known that witness statements are extremely unreliable.

 

Sadly witnesses often chicken out, cowards 

[kwilco]

2 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

Sadly witnesses often chicken out, cowards 

THat's irrelent - I'm talking about the fact you can't rely on them anyway. s I said there are papers on this.... A lot of witnesses are "shocked" by the event  or impact and grossly over estimate speed etc ..

[kwilco]

We also can't tell if the video is running at the right speed - certainly ther e is a tendency for them to look faster and BE faster.

[scubascuba3]

36 minutes ago, kwilco said:

THat's irrelent - I'm talking about the fact you can't rely on them anyway. s I said there are papers on this.... A lot of witnesses are "shocked" by the event  or impact and grossly over estimate speed etc ..

I'm surprised you guys are still banging on about it, talk about flog a dead horse

[kwilco]

38 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

I'm surprised you guys are still banging on about it, talk about flog a dead horse

 

the Thai media spends a lot of time reporting crashes - one of the reasons is they can't actually publish a lot of political stuff as they could end up being sued or worse.

THe result is that a lot of rubbish is posted about road safety eeven on this site - if you like many other posters don't know anything about it then it would be boring but there is a lot that needs to be said to change peoples perception about road safety in general and this is a good example of how people misunderstand and misread Road safety incidents in Thailand. Even you "are still banging on about it, talk about flogging a dead horse" and have decided to chip in - maybe you'll learn something - who knows?

[transam]

1 minute ago, kwilco said:

 

the Thai media spends a lot of time reporting crashes - one of the reasons is they can't actually publish a lot of political stuff as they could end up being sued or worse.

THe result is that a lot of rubbish is posted about road safety eeven on this site - if you like many other posters don't know anything about it then it would be boring but there is a lot that needs to be said to change peoples perception about road safety in general and this is a good example of how people misunderstand and misread Road safety incidents in Thailand. Even you "are still banging on about it, talk about flogging a dead horse" and have decided to chip in - maybe you'll learn something - who knows?

Yet, you haven't, you don't seem to have a clue about road safety, only about Thais and their road safety.........🤔

[richard_smith237]

56 minutes ago, scubascuba3 said:

I'm surprised you guys are still banging on about it, talk about flog a dead horse

Or continuing to have the discussion as new postered with further input enter the fray….

 

It’s easy enough to scroll on by…. So, why did you open the thread this time around if you are no longer interested ???

 

 

[scubascuba3]

50 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

It’s easy enough to scroll on by…. So, why did you open the thread this time around if you are no longer interested ???

 

 

I wondered whether you guys were continuing with the petty arguments 

[PJ71]

4 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Yup... I quite agree...

 

Very rudimentary calculations based on what maybe flawed observation and assumption gives the following.

 

CCTV Frame rates are 25 fps

 

The SUV travelled ~2m in 2 frames...  thats a speed of 90 kmh.

The SUV Travelled ~2m in 4 frames... thats a speed of 45 kmh.

 

If the measurement is slightly off and its not 2m but 1.5m.

The SUV travelled ~1.5m in 2 frames...  thats a speed of 33.7kmh.

The SUV Travelled ~1.5m in 4 frames... thats a speed of 67.5 kmh.

 

 

Yes, its rudementary, however, in the most favourable light - the SUV was travelling at 33 kms...  in the most damning light, the SUV was travelling at 90kmh....   my guess is the SUV was travelling somewhere closer to 60 kmh - which is a reckless speed to enter a junction at which the visibility of crossing traffic is blocked. 

Dicky, you're still waffling on about this, it there not other RTA's that need you expert analysis yet?

 

Comedy gold.

[richard_smith237]

1 hour ago, scubascuba3 said:

I wondered whether you guys were continuing with the petty arguments 

 

Yet here you are scuba - why ??? 

[PJ71]

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Or continuing to have the discussion as new postered with further input enter the fray….

 

It’s easy enough to scroll on by…. So, why did you open the thread this time around if you are no longer interested ???

 

 

I open it to have a laugh at your comments Dicky boy.

[Negita43]

On 4/22/2024 at 5:51 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

What are the traffic rules on that intersection? 

Even if there were "rules" do you think anyone would abide by them ?