Why it's best not to stop at a Beach Rd pedestrian light!

[Si Thea01]

It's the same here in the north east. Pedestrian crossings, these don't mean stop, they mean speed up and if you get in the way, bye, bye. The other day driving with a van right up my clacker, orange then red light, changed within 2 seconds. Even though I was only 30 metres off the lights, there was no way I was going to stop, I actually had to accelerate otherwise I would have been nursing the van. I just made sure I flashed the headlights so fortunately no one started to turn in front of me and I got through, of course with the van still tailgating me.

Unbelievable. See you've got your Thainess all figured out. Law breaker. Crimes like you should be banned from driving for life. Your vehicle taken away and sold to pay for some unfortunate road accident victims medical expenses.

So you're saying that if someone is tailgating me, so close I cannot see their headlights, that I should have stopped and in turn have them drive through me and possiblly they, myself or others are seriously injured or even killed. And it's crims not crimes, learn to write properly or at least correct your spelling.

"if" not with capital I and "someone" as 1 word, "being seriously injured" instead of "are seriously injured" and "your spelling" instead of "you spelling" that is. Otherwise pretty much OK

Ok teacher I'll agree on two but disagree with being. I corrected the others just to make you happy.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Si Thea01

[Keesters]

It's the same here in the north east. Pedestrian crossings, these don't mean stop, they mean speed up and if you get in the way, bye, bye. The other day driving with a van right up my clacker, orange then red light, changed within 2 seconds. Even though I was only 30 metres off the lights, there was no way I was going to stop, I actually had to accelerate otherwise I would have been nursing the van. I just made sure I flashed the headlights so fortunately no one started to turn in front of me and I got through, of course with the van still tailgating me.

Unbelievable. See you've got your Thainess all figured out. Law breaker. Crimes like you should be banned from driving for life. Your vehicle taken away and sold to pay for some unfortunate road accident victims medical expenses.

So you're saying that If some one is tailgating me, so close I cannot see their headlights, that I should have stopped and in turn have them drive through me and possible they, myself or others are seriously injured or even killed. And it's crims not crimes, learn to write properly or at least correct you spelling.

Yes. Doubt that anybody would be injured as the speed of the tailgating vehicle would be close to yours so hardly a big crash. However because you continue through a red light protecting your beloved motor some innocent pedestrian who at that time has the legal right to cross and gets mown down by you and your tin can on 4 wheels. It doesn't take much speed to maim or kill a pedestrian. Do you want that on your mind for the rest of your life together with possibly manslaughter charges, a prison sentence, and compensation to the victims family. If it was my child you ran over I would spend the rest of my life making yours a complete misery.

Seems like you'd rather take the risk of killing a child than have your precious vehicle involved in a bender fender that would not be in anyway be your fault. The tailgating vehicle would be 100% in the wrong.

Now that you have admitted this traffic violation do you have anymore you'd like to get of your chest. Speeding, drink driving perhaps.

Damn spell checker. But you got the meaning didn't you.

Not that I am required to give you an explanation but I will, as well as a lesson as to how stopping distances are determined. And Keesters, even though you seem nice enough, what you have written is utter rubbish. You're also assuming a lot. Firstly I was not speeding, and do not drink so that dispels those theories. It's a wonder you did not accuse me of being unlicensed or driving an unregistered vehicle as well? Now, this is quite lengthy so I hope you will take the time to educate yourself.

For your benefit here is a lesson. It will show you that the total stopping distance of a vehicle is made up of four components and what can occur, so please, before you try and chastise me and carry on with the hokum you have written, absorb the lesson and think twice before you post about something you clearly have no knowledge of. .

• Human Perception Time; Is how long the driver takes to see the hazard, and the brain realize it is a hazard requiring an immediate reaction. This perception time can be as long as ¼ to ½ a second.

• Human Reaction Time; Once the brain realizes danger, the human reaction time is how long the body takes to move the foot from accelerator to brake pedal. Again this reaction time can vary from ¼ - ¾ of a second.

• Vehicle Reaction Time; These first 2 components of stopping distance are human factors and as such can be effected by tiredness, alcohol, fatigue and concentration levels. A perception and reaction time of 3 or 4 seconds is possible. 4 seconds at 100 km/hr. means the car travels 110 metres before the brakes are applied.

• Vehicle Braking Capability; Once the brake pedal is applied there is the vehicle's reaction time which depends on the brake pedal free-play, hydraulic properties of the brake fluid and working order of the braking system.

• This is why the tailgating car usually cannot stop, when the brake light came on in the car in front, this driver had already completed the perception, human and vehicle reaction periods. The following driver was perhaps 1 second to late in applying the brakes. At 100km/hr. the car required 28 metres further to stop.

  The last factor that determines the total stopping distance is the cars braking capability which depends on factors such as;

• the type of braking system,
• brake pad material,
• brake alignment,
• tyre pressures,
• tyre tread and grip,
• vehicle weight,
• suspension system,
• the co-efficient of friction of the road surface,
• wind speed,
• slope of road,
• surface smoothness
• the braking technique applied by the driver.

Worth noting is that from 50 to 100 kph the braking distance of a car will increase from 10 metres to 40 metres. When you double the speed of a car braking distance quadruples. This is based on the laws of physics. When a car is moving it has kinetic energy, ½mv2. When the velocity doubles the kinetic energy quadruples. The braking capability does not increase when driving faster, there are no reserves of friction. As such, in any vehicle, when your speed doubles braking distance is four times larger.

Now, if you have absorbed all of this and noting that I was not speeding and was there, when you were not, and I was fully aware of the circumstances around me, i.e., it was on an open six lane highway, not in a built up area and no pedestrians were in or about the immediate area and very little traffic about, with the exception of two vehicles in the left lane beside me. I was not driving to protect my beloved motor, as you call it, I was driving to the prevailing circumstances and did not want to create something that was easily avoided without placing anyone else in any type of danger.

The more I read your post the more ridiculous it is ,as you have assumed so much from so little. The other most important factor is the skills of the Thai driver. (From my experience, the majority have very little to none) I have been driving for over 50 years, cars, truck, motor cycles and have completed a number of driver training courses. I have been booked once in my life, over 40 years ago (yes speeding) and have been involved in one crash. (not at fault.) My License has never been suspended, cancelled or endorsed and I consider myself a safe driver, even though it appears you do not. In addition, I have had over 20 years experience as a crash investigator in both the police force and civilian life, and can assure you I know a lot more about crashes, vehicle dynamics and the results from crashes than you do.

And even though I understood what you meant by the incorrectly spelt word, I do object to being called such, as I have never been convicted of any criminal offense, and speeding is not such an offence, nor is my going through the red light. I also hold the office of Justice of the Peace within the New South Wales legal system (Court Officer), so I suggest you refrain from using defamatory remarks in you post, especially to someone you do not know. I could have called you some names also but I will not lower myself in doing so. Here endeth the lesson.

Not interested you have admitted to breaking the law that is enough for me. Whatever excuses you have dream up, position you have or may have held makes no difference. You broke the law to save being rear ended. Nuff said.

I no longer wish to communicate with criminals.

[Keesters]

It's the same here in the north east. Pedestrian crossings, these don't mean stop, they mean speed up and if you get in the way, bye, bye. The other day driving with a van right up my clacker, orange then red light, changed within 2 seconds. Even though I was only 30 metres off the lights, there was no way I was going to stop, I actually had to accelerate otherwise I would have been nursing the van. I just made sure I flashed the headlights so fortunately no one started to turn in front of me and I got through, of course with the van still tailgating me.

Unbelievable. See you've got your Thainess all figured out. Law breaker. Crimes like you should be banned from driving for life. Your vehicle taken away and sold to pay for some unfortunate road accident victims medical expenses.

So you're saying that If some one is tailgating me, so close I cannot see their headlights, that I should have stopped and in turn have them drive through me and possible they, myself or others are seriously injured or even killed. And it's crims not crimes, learn to write properly or at least correct you spelling.

"if" not with capital I and "someone" as 1 word, "being seriously injured" instead of "are seriously injured" and "your spelling" instead of "you spelling" that is. Otherwise pretty much OK

5 to my 1. Thank you spelling police.

[mango66]

thats why you must do a traffic light test when you " purchase " your DL !! 555

[inzman]

All the good intentions in the world won't save your life if you stop. Stop and you will be rear ended.

[Basil B]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

pretty &^%&% to think Beach Road is a "highway"

Traffic down Beach Road and Second Road needs to be reduced to "Access Only", through traffic needs to be routed round 3rd road or the sumkumvit, one idea would be a 30Kmh speed limit with pedestrian crossing lights every 200m that have speed detectors built in that switch the lights to red if they detect speeding vehicles

[joesanunu]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

pretty &^%&% to think Beach Road is a "highway"

OK a**hole..... it's dumb to build a four lane road with speeding busses, cars, trucks and motorcycles going at highway speed between the beach and hotels.

[Si Thea01]

It's the same here in the north east. Pedestrian crossings, these don't mean stop, they mean speed up and if you get in the way, bye, bye. The other day driving with a van right up my clacker, orange then red light, changed within 2 seconds. Even though I was only 30 metres off the lights, there was no way I was going to stop, I actually had to accelerate otherwise I would have been nursing the van. I just made sure I flashed the headlights so fortunately no one started to turn in front of me and I got through, of course with the van still tailgating me.

Unbelievable. See you've got your Thainess all figured out. Law breaker. Crimes like you should be banned from driving for life. Your vehicle taken away and sold to pay for some unfortunate road accident victims medical expenses.

So you're saying that If some one is tailgating me, so close I cannot see their headlights, that I should have stopped and in turn have them drive through me and possible they, myself or others are seriously injured or even killed. And it's crims not crimes, learn to write properly or at least correct you spelling.

Yes. Doubt that anybody would be injured as the speed of the tailgating vehicle would be close to yours so hardly a big crash. However because you continue through a red light protecting your beloved motor some innocent pedestrian who at that time has the legal right to cross and gets mown down by you and your tin can on 4 wheels. It doesn't take much speed to maim or kill a pedestrian. Do you want that on your mind for the rest of your life together with possibly manslaughter charges, a prison sentence, and compensation to the victims family. If it was my child you ran over I would spend the rest of my life making yours a complete misery.

Seems like you'd rather take the risk of killing a child than have your precious vehicle involved in a bender fender that would not be in anyway be your fault. The tailgating vehicle would be 100% in the wrong.

Now that you have admitted this traffic violation do you have anymore you'd like to get of your chest. Speeding, drink driving perhaps.

Damn spell checker. But you got the meaning didn't you.

Not that I am required to give you an explanation but I will, as well as a lesson as to how stopping distances are determined. And Keesters, even though you seem nice enough, what you have written is utter rubbish. You're also assuming a lot. Firstly I was not speeding, and do not drink so that dispels those theories. It's a wonder you did not accuse me of being unlicensed or driving an unregistered vehicle as well? Now, this is quite lengthy so I hope you will take the time to educate yourself.

For your benefit here is a lesson. It will show you that the total stopping distance of a vehicle is made up of four components and what can occur, so please, before you try and chastise me and carry on with the hokum you have written, absorb the lesson and think twice before you post about something you clearly have no knowledge of. .

• Human Perception Time; Is how long the driver takes to see the hazard, and the brain realize it is a hazard requiring an immediate reaction. This perception time can be as long as ¼ to ½ a second.

• Human Reaction Time; Once the brain realizes danger, the human reaction time is how long the body takes to move the foot from accelerator to brake pedal. Again this reaction time can vary from ¼ - ¾ of a second.

• Vehicle Reaction Time; These first 2 components of stopping distance are human factors and as such can be effected by tiredness, alcohol, fatigue and concentration levels. A perception and reaction time of 3 or 4 seconds is possible. 4 seconds at 100 km/hr. means the car travels 110 metres before the brakes are applied.

• Vehicle Braking Capability; Once the brake pedal is applied there is the vehicle's reaction time which depends on the brake pedal free-play, hydraulic properties of the brake fluid and working order of the braking system.

• This is why the tailgating car usually cannot stop, when the brake light came on in the car in front, this driver had already completed the perception, human and vehicle reaction periods. The following driver was perhaps 1 second to late in applying the brakes. At 100km/hr. the car required 28 metres further to stop.

  The last factor that determines the total stopping distance is the cars braking capability which depends on factors such as;

• the type of braking system,
• brake pad material,
• brake alignment,
• tyre pressures,
• tyre tread and grip,
• vehicle weight,
• suspension system,
• the co-efficient of friction of the road surface,
• wind speed,
• slope of road,
• surface smoothness
• the braking technique applied by the driver.

Worth noting is that from 50 to 100 kph the braking distance of a car will increase from 10 metres to 40 metres. When you double the speed of a car braking distance quadruples. This is based on the laws of physics. When a car is moving it has kinetic energy, ½mv2. When the velocity doubles the kinetic energy quadruples. The braking capability does not increase when driving faster, there are no reserves of friction. As such, in any vehicle, when your speed doubles braking distance is four times larger.

Now, if you have absorbed all of this and noting that I was not speeding and was there, when you were not, and I was fully aware of the circumstances around me, i.e., it was on an open six lane highway, not in a built up area and no pedestrians were in or about the immediate area and very little traffic about, with the exception of two vehicles in the left lane beside me. I was not driving to protect my beloved motor, as you call it, I was driving to the prevailing circumstances and did not want to create something that was easily avoided without placing anyone else in any type of danger.

The more I read your post the more ridiculous it is ,as you have assumed so much from so little. The other most important factor is the skills of the Thai driver. (From my experience, the majority have very little to none) I have been driving for over 50 years, cars, truck, motor cycles and have completed a number of driver training courses. I have been booked once in my life, over 40 years ago (yes speeding) and have been involved in one crash. (not at fault.) My License has never been suspended, cancelled or endorsed and I consider myself a safe driver, even though it appears you do not. In addition, I have had over 20 years experience as a crash investigator in both the police force and civilian life, and can assure you I know a lot more about crashes, vehicle dynamics and the results from crashes than you do.

And even though I understood what you meant by the incorrectly spelt word, I do object to being called such, as I have never been convicted of any criminal offense, and speeding is not such an offence, nor is my going through the red light. I also hold the office of Justice of the Peace within the New South Wales legal system (Court Officer), so I suggest you refrain from using defamatory remarks in you post, especially to someone you do not know. I could have called you some names also but I will not lower myself in doing so. Here endeth the lesson.

Not interested you have admitted to breaking the law that is enough for me. Whatever excuses you have dream up, position you have or may have held makes no difference. You broke the law to save being rear ended. Nuff said.

I no longer wish to communicate with criminals.

You're showing very little intelligence with your responses now and are just showing how foolish you can be. I provide facts that contradict the hokum you have written and all you can do is go on with the rubbish that you want to propagate. Minor offences, such as a red light matter, do not sustain a criminal conviction in Thailand, a fine, license confiscation or even a warning but no criminal conviction recorded.

You should learn not to denigrate people just because you cannot respond to legitimate argument and feel you have the right to be vitriolic toward them. Your attitude and responses say a lot about your character.

[Keesters]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

pretty &^%&% to think Beach Road is a "highway"

Traffic down Beach Road and Second Road needs to be reduced to "Access Only", through traffic needs to be routed round 3rd road or the sumkumvit, one idea would be a 30Kmh speed limit with pedestrian crossing lights every 200m that have speed detectors built in that switch the lights to red if they detect speeding vehicles

"Access only" its pretty much like that already. Nobody in their right minds would try and use beach or 2nd as through traffic road.

"30 kmph." They can't even keep it down to the current 50.

"Red light to stop speeders." Nobody stops at a red light so that's no use and what this thread is all about anyway. Unless its a 4 way junction red lights are ignored. And even at this 4 ways about 5% ignore them.

Cameras is the way. Clock the speed and send them a fine if they are over. Same goes if they jump a light. Technology is out there that makes reading plate numbers easy and virtually automatic. Don't pay the fine with 10days it stops you registering and insuring your vehicle when next due. Payment of double the ticket price at that time. More than 5 tickets in a year vehicle impounded for a month at owners cost. Tough, yes. But that is what is needed.

[Keesters]

It's the same here in the north east. Pedestrian crossings, these don't mean stop, they mean speed up and if you get in the way, bye, bye. The other day driving with a van right up my clacker, orange then red light, changed within 2 seconds. Even though I was only 30 metres off the lights, there was no way I was going to stop, I actually had to accelerate otherwise I would have been nursing the van. I just made sure I flashed the headlights so fortunately no one started to turn in front of me and I got through, of course with the van still tailgating me.

Unbelievable. See you've got your Thainess all figured out. Law breaker. Crimes like you should be banned from driving for life. Your vehicle taken away and sold to pay for some unfortunate road accident victims medical expenses.

So you're saying that If some one is tailgating me, so close I cannot see their headlights, that I should have stopped and in turn have them drive through me and possible they, myself or others are seriously injured or even killed. And it's crims not crimes, learn to write properly or at least correct you spelling.

Yes. Doubt that anybody would be injured as the speed of the tailgating vehicle would be close to yours so hardly a big crash. However because you continue through a red light protecting your beloved motor some innocent pedestrian who at that time has the legal right to cross and gets mown down by you and your tin can on 4 wheels. It doesn't take much speed to maim or kill a pedestrian. Do you want that on your mind for the rest of your life together with possibly manslaughter charges, a prison sentence, and compensation to the victims family. If it was my child you ran over I would spend the rest of my life making yours a complete misery.

Seems like you'd rather take the risk of killing a child than have your precious vehicle involved in a bender fender that would not be in anyway be your fault. The tailgating vehicle would be 100% in the wrong.

Now that you have admitted this traffic violation do you have anymore you'd like to get of your chest. Speeding, drink driving perhaps.

Damn spell checker. But you got the meaning didn't you.

Not that I am required to give you an explanation but I will, as well as a lesson as to how stopping distances are determined. And Keesters, even though you seem nice enough, what you have written is utter rubbish. You're also assuming a lot. Firstly I was not speeding, and do not drink so that dispels those theories. It's a wonder you did not accuse me of being unlicensed or driving an unregistered vehicle as well? Now, this is quite lengthy so I hope you will take the time to educate yourself.

For your benefit here is a lesson. It will show you that the total stopping distance of a vehicle is made up of four components and what can occur, so please, before you try and chastise me and carry on with the hokum you have written, absorb the lesson and think twice before you post about something you clearly have no knowledge of. .

• Human Perception Time; Is how long the driver takes to see the hazard, and the brain realize it is a hazard requiring an immediate reaction. This perception time can be as long as ¼ to ½ a second.

• Human Reaction Time; Once the brain realizes danger, the human reaction time is how long the body takes to move the foot from accelerator to brake pedal. Again this reaction time can vary from ¼ - ¾ of a second.

• Vehicle Reaction Time; These first 2 components of stopping distance are human factors and as such can be effected by tiredness, alcohol, fatigue and concentration levels. A perception and reaction time of 3 or 4 seconds is possible. 4 seconds at 100 km/hr. means the car travels 110 metres before the brakes are applied.

• Vehicle Braking Capability; Once the brake pedal is applied there is the vehicle's reaction time which depends on the brake pedal free-play, hydraulic properties of the brake fluid and working order of the braking system.
• This is why the tailgating car usually cannot stop, when the brake light came on in the car in front, this driver had already completed the perception, human and vehicle reaction periods. The following driver was perhaps 1 second to late in applying the brakes. At 100km/hr. the car required 28 metres further to stop.

  The last factor that determines the total stopping distance is the cars braking capability which depends on factors such as;

• the type of braking system,
• brake pad material,
• brake alignment,
• tyre pressures,
• tyre tread and grip,
• vehicle weight,
• suspension system,
• the co-efficient of friction of the road surface,
• wind speed,
• slope of road,
• surface smoothness
• the braking technique applied by the driver.

Worth noting is that from 50 to 100 kph the braking distance of a car will increase from 10 metres to 40 metres. When you double the speed of a car braking distance quadruples. This is based on the laws of physics. When a car is moving it has kinetic energy, ½mv2. When the velocity doubles the kinetic energy quadruples. The braking capability does not increase when driving faster, there are no reserves of friction. As such, in any vehicle, when your speed doubles braking distance is four times larger.

Now, if you have absorbed all of this and noting that I was not speeding and was there, when you were not, and I was fully aware of the circumstances around me, i.e., it was on an open six lane highway, not in a built up area and no pedestrians were in or about the immediate area and very little traffic about, with the exception of two vehicles in the left lane beside me. I was not driving to protect my beloved motor, as you call it, I was driving to the prevailing circumstances and did not want to create something that was easily avoided without placing anyone else in any type of danger.

The more I read your post the more ridiculous it is ,as you have assumed so much from so little. The other most important factor is the skills of the Thai driver. (From my experience, the majority have very little to none) I have been driving for over 50 years, cars, truck, motor cycles and have completed a number of driver training courses. I have been booked once in my life, over 40 years ago (yes speeding) and have been involved in one crash. (not at fault.) My License has never been suspended, cancelled or endorsed and I consider myself a safe driver, even though it appears you do not. In addition, I have had over 20 years experience as a crash investigator in both the police force and civilian life, and can assure you I know a lot more about crashes, vehicle dynamics and the results from crashes than you do.

And even though I understood what you meant by the incorrectly spelt word, I do object to being called such, as I have never been convicted of any criminal offense, and speeding is not such an offence, nor is my going through the red light. I also hold the office of Justice of the Peace within the New South Wales legal system (Court Officer), so I suggest you refrain from using defamatory remarks in you post, especially to someone you do not know. I could have called you some names also but I will not lower myself in doing so. Here endeth the lesson.

Not interested you have admitted to breaking the law that is enough for me. Whatever excuses you have dream up, position you have or may have held makes no difference. You broke the law to save being rear ended. Nuff said.

I no longer wish to communicate with criminals.

You're showing very little intelligence with your responses now and are just showing how foolish you can be. I provide facts that contradict the hokum you have written and all you can do is go on with the rubbish that you want to propagate. Minor offences, such as a red light matter, do not sustain a criminal conviction in Thailand, a fine, license confiscation or even a warning but no criminal conviction recorded.

You should learn not to denigrate people just because you cannot respond to legitimate argument and feel you have the right to be vitriolic toward them. Your attitude and responses say a lot about your character.

And your feeble attempts at trying to justify why it is OK for you to break the Thai law just to save your precious vehicle from being rear ended also say a lot about you.

I have a friend in UK. Over 30 years ago he drove his car up onto the footpath trying to avoid rear ending a bus. He hit and killed an old lady in front of her grandchildren and daughter. He got a 6 month suspended sentence, a huge fine, license revoked for two years. He regrets every day making that choice. He knows now he should have hit the bus.

Some of the passengers inside may have sustained some minor injuries. He may have been injured. But that would all have been better than watching those kids crying over the bloodied body of their grandmother. His company was sympathetic. Gave him a chauffer and car. He was a senior sales manager and needed to travel all over UK to do his job. After his ban was over it took him a long time before he could face getting behind a wheel again.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Keesters

[Keesters]

All the good intentions in the world won't save your life if you stop. Stop and you will be rear ended.

Maybe though it has never happened to me in 30 years driving here. And the tailgater will be at fault and it will cost him. He will probably never tail gate again.

[CapeThai]

Yeah....all depends if your driving like a maniac or not.... Red traffic lights have a purpose weather it's in your home country or in LOS.

Driving like a maniac by driving down the road at 100km/h would certainly proof disasterous should you suddenly brake in Thailand....??

[sir charles IV]

I'm a licence driving instructor in Australia. Here Amber means "stop unless stopping is deemed dangerous". Danger is interspersed as stopping past the stop line and the path of traffic at intersection or potential collision with car following you too close. In a driving test situation the testing officer makes a call on "danger" hence partly subjective. If you do not look left and right and not have your foot hovering over the brakes prior to entering the intersection you will fail your test. Also regarding pedestrians the law here says it is the driver's responsibility to avoid pedestrians regardless of the situation. Example, if a pedestrian runs across a road and you hit him the judge will make a determination on the basis "could you have avoided it?" In other words if u hit him deliberately for crossing illegally he'll get a ticket for jaywalking and you'll get sentenced for voluntary man slaughter.

Regarding the OP I believe it depends on the circumstances as many have pointed out. Avoiding collision (with vehicles or pedestrians) outweighs traffic laws particularly in a place where traffic laws are not enforced strictly [emoji12]

[sir charles IV]

Forgive a few spelling errors. Fast typing. Lol

[Basil B]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

pretty &^%&% to think Beach Road is a "highway"

Traffic down Beach Road and Second Road needs to be reduced to "Access Only", through traffic needs to be routed round 3rd road or the sumkumvit, one idea would be a 30Kmh speed limit with pedestrian crossing lights every 200m that have speed detectors built in that switch the lights to red if they detect speeding vehicles

"Access only" its pretty much like that already. Nobody in their right minds would try and use beach or 2nd as through traffic road.

"30 kmph." They can't even keep it down to the current 50.

"Red light to stop speeders." Nobody stops at a red light so that's no use and what this thread is all about anyway. Unless its a 4 way junction red lights are ignored. And even at this 4 ways about 5% ignore them.

Cameras is the way. Clock the speed and send them a fine if they are over. Same goes if they jump a light. Technology is out there that makes reading plate numbers easy and virtually automatic. Don't pay the fine with 10days it stops you registering and insuring your vehicle when next due. Payment of double the ticket price at that time. More than 5 tickets in a year vehicle impounded for a month at owners cost. Tough, yes. But that is what is needed.

Problem is the Police are not mobile, just hang around at major road junctions, pulling over the occasional rider without a helmet, the OP in my opinion was posting a "it's OK to break the law because everybody else does".

People are killed on the roads every day in Thailand because drivers and riders ignore traffic laws, time to comedown hard on those who break traffic laws, with big fines and vehicles impounding, no use suspending driving licences as many do not have a licence to suspend.

[emilymat]

Back to topic. I'm almost 100% certain there was an article in the local English paper some time ago. Don't know if I canmention it but its initials are PM.

This article stated clearly "the mayor and city council have admitted the pedestrian light scheme on Beach Road is a failure."

I know that is the case as I expected them to be removed, as indicated in the article.

We need a TVF sleuth to dig this one up out of the archives.

[Keesters]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

pretty &^%&% to think Beach Road is a "highway"

Traffic down Beach Road and Second Road needs to be reduced to "Access Only", through traffic needs to be routed round 3rd road or the sumkumvit, one idea would be a 30Kmh speed limit with pedestrian crossing lights every 200m that have speed detectors built in that switch the lights to red if they detect speeding vehicles

"Access only" its pretty much like that already. Nobody in their right minds would try and use beach or 2nd as through traffic road.

"30 kmph." They can't even keep it down to the current 50.

"Red light to stop speeders." Nobody stops at a red light so that's no use and what this thread is all about anyway. Unless its a 4 way junction red lights are ignored. And even at this 4 ways about 5% ignore them.

Cameras is the way. Clock the speed and send them a fine if they are over. Same goes if they jump a light. Technology is out there that makes reading plate numbers easy and virtually automatic. Don't pay the fine with 10days it stops you registering and insuring your vehicle when next due. Payment of double the ticket price at that time. More than 5 tickets in a year vehicle impounded for a month at owners cost. Tough, yes. But that is what is needed.

Problem is the Police are not mobile, just hang around at major road junctions, pulling over the occasional rider without a helmet, the OP in my opinion was posting a "it's OK to break the law because everybody else does".

People are killed on the roads every day in Thailand because drivers and riders ignore traffic laws, time to comedown hard on those who break traffic laws, with big fines and vehicles impounding, no use suspending driving licences as many do not have a licence to suspend.

Note only the OP has fallen into that trap of everybody else does it so why shouldn't I. Every day I see farangs who should know better break the law, double park, speeding, jump red lights. Some have even come on here and admitted their guilt.

I think you'll find few Thai drivers don't have a license nowadays. I've asked many to show me theirs if I show them mine. Driving licenses, not the other thing. All have been able except a few who say its in the car. Testing used to be easy, perhaps that explains the atrocious driving. Its tougher now but probably not tough enough. In UK I passed first time after only 10 hours instruction. My elder brother failed once and took at least 20 hours instruction. My younger sister failed three times and ended up bring taught by me as she could no longer afford lessons after 30 hours. That would have been over 40 years ago. The UK test then was probably harder than a Thai test today. They just don't like people to fail.

[Keesters]

I went along 2nd road the other day. The resurfacing is complete. But all the zebras/,pelican crossings have not been repainted. Pattaya city is just not interested in the one thing that keeps this city alive. Tourists. Tourists who in the main are pedestrians who need to cross both beach and 2nd roads as they go about their business of spending money.

I have witnessed families standing terrified of crossing the 2nd road to Central Festival. I was with visitors and got them all together with others that wanted to cross. There was a working pelican there. We pushed button. Waited. It went red. I stepped out. A tourist bus stopped for me. I beckons the rest to follow. We got to the center of the road. A baht bus approached at speed. I put a hand out asking him to stop while with the other pointed at the red light. He slowed, stopped, I beckoned my followers to make their way across. The driver shouts profanities and says get out my way. We reached the other side safely but haggared. A couple hours later had to do it all again in reverse.

Edited March 10, 2015 by Keesters

[hanno]

I went along 2nd road the other day. The resurfacing is complete. But all the zebras/,pelican crossings have not been repainted. Pattaya city is just not interested in the one thing that keeps this city alive. Tourists. Tourists who in the main are pedestrians who need to cross both beach and 2nd roads as they go about their business of spending money.

This. I like walking (though not on Walking Street) and Pattaya, and indeed many Thai cities, are absolutely not geared towards that. Crossing streets is akin to Russian roulette and sidewalks are constantly cluttered and often in poor repair.

[MRTELLYOUSTRAIGHT]

What about tunnels? Lots and lots of tunnels all over Pattaya for the rats, hookers, dealers and pedestrians to compliment the big tunnel being dug now, everyone's a winner baby.

[Keesters]

What about tunnels? Lots and lots of tunnels all over Pattaya for the rats, hookers, dealers and pedestrians to compliment the big tunnel being dug now, everyone's a winner baby.

Good idea if they can be kept flood free, gang free, mugger free, free of all undesirables etc.

[balo]

I never stop at the red lights in beach rd unless I see people crossing the road. Because I know how Thais drive . But I drive slowly so I can reduce the speed if I see someone thinking about crossing. Just use your eyes and pay attention.

[Keesters]

I never stop at the red lights in beach rd unless I see people crossing the road. Because I know how Thais drive . But I drive slowly so I can reduce the speed if I see someone thinking about crossing. Just use your eyes and pay attention.

Why would the light come on if nobody is crossing? Did they give up and go back where they came. Or did they see a break in the traffic so crossed anyway. I appreciate as a driver you wouldn't know the answer but some may have a clue if its a regular occurrence.

[Acharn]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

Well, when the road was built there weren't any hotels there. Back in 1971 several of the officers at Camp Samae San (down the road, outside Sattahip) had their wives living in rented bungalows there. JUSMAGTHAI owned a couple of compounds, one with a dozen of so bungalows that people in Bangkok Detachment could reserve for a few days. Crossing the road wasn't a problem because there weren't that many cars. Pattaya hadn't become a tourist destination yet. In 1983, after Pattaya was a Thai tourist destination, there still wasn't so much traffic. Pattaya was still a lot of fun. Since then Pattaya ceased to be fun and I haven't been back for several years, so I don't know how hard it is to cross the road, but the problem was created by building the hotels, not building the road. I agree, they should build pedestrian bridges, but the hotels won't pay taxes so the municipality has no money.

[patinseoul]

some enterprising thais should start renting out baby carriages at each end of the pedestrian crossings. i think even thai drivers (and foregners who have turned thai ) would stop or slow down for a person crossing with a baby carriage. or maybe rent out crutches. of course we all know it wouldn't stop their, and soon they would be renting out real live human trafficked cambodes or burmese children to accompany the pedestrians. gotta get creative

[Keesters]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

Well, when the road was built there weren't any hotels there. Back in 1971 several of the officers at Camp Samae San (down the road, outside Sattahip) had their wives living in rented bungalows there. JUSMAGTHAI owned a couple of compounds, one with a dozen of so bungalows that people in Bangkok Detachment could reserve for a few days. Crossing the road wasn't a problem because there weren't that many cars. Pattaya hadn't become a tourist destination yet. In 1983, after Pattaya was a Thai tourist destination, there still wasn't so much traffic. Pattaya was still a lot of fun. Since then Pattaya ceased to be fun and I haven't been back for several years, so I don't know how hard it is to cross the road, but the problem was created by building the hotels, not building the road. I agree, they should build pedestrian bridges, but the hotels won't pay taxes so the municipality has no money.

No bridges please we've done them to death here already. City has money. Just agreed to spend xxx millions on building an environmental park. The pelican crossings have already been paid for. What is need now is serious testing o motorists to obey them. No need to spend more money on alternatives. Just make them work as intended. Why give up on them.

[joesanunu]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

Well, when the road was built there weren't any hotels there. Back in 1971 several of the officers at Camp Samae San (down the road, outside Sattahip) had their wives living in rented bungalows there. JUSMAGTHAI owned a couple of compounds, one with a dozen of so bungalows that people in Bangkok Detachment could reserve for a few days. Crossing the road wasn't a problem because there weren't that many cars. Pattaya hadn't become a tourist destination yet. In 1983, after Pattaya was a Thai tourist destination, there still wasn't so much traffic. Pattaya was still a lot of fun. Since then Pattaya ceased to be fun and I haven't been back for several years, so I don't know how hard it is to cross the road, but the problem was created by building the hotels, not building the road. I agree, they should build pedestrian bridges, but the hotels won't pay taxes so the municipality has no money.

Yes. Lets give cars the priority along the beachfront.

[JSixpack]

I never stop at the red lights in beach rd unless I see people crossing the road. Because I know how Thais drive . But I drive slowly so I can reduce the speed if I see someone thinking about crossing. Just use your eyes and pay attention.

Why would the light come on if nobody is crossing? Did they give up and go back where they came. Or did they see a break in the traffic so crossed anyway. I appreciate as a driver you wouldn't know the answer but some may have a clue if its a regular occurrence.

Oh, I know the answer as I've seen exactly what often happens. Passers-by press the button just for fun as they're walking along with no intention of crossing the street. That's one of the reasons drivers don't take the light too seriously: like as not, nobody's gonna be crossing. So balo is quite right: the reasonable thing to do, consistent with best Thai driving habits , is to slow down a bit and prepare to stop (watching your back) if the light is counting down or is red, look to see if it's "real" or not, and, if not, just go right on through. If you're a pedestrian, start moving out and waving during the countdown to let drivers know that somebody really does want to cross. Most drivers will then stop, except for the kamikazes. Of course, newbies don't realize this, so, yes, it's esp dangerous for them. But TIT, such is par for the course in most Third World countries. Try crossing streets in Hanoi or Ho Chi Minh if you want to appreciate Thai driving habits.

[Rimmer]

A personal attack on another member has been removed. Please see the following rule that you agreed to when you signed up to Thai Visa:

7) You will respect fellow members and post in a civil manner. No personal attacks, hateful or insulting towards other members, (flaming) Stalking of members on either the forum or via PM will not be allowed.

[Keesters]

Pretty dumb to put a highway between the hotels and the beach.

Well, when the road was built there weren't any hotels there. Back in 1971 several of the officers at Camp Samae San (down the road, outside Sattahip) had their wives living in rented bungalows there. JUSMAGTHAI owned a couple of compounds, one with a dozen of so bungalows that people in Bangkok Detachment could reserve for a few days. Crossing the road wasn't a problem because there weren't that many cars. Pattaya hadn't become a tourist destination yet. In 1983, after Pattaya was a Thai tourist destination, there still wasn't so much traffic. Pattaya was still a lot of fun. Since then Pattaya ceased to be fun and I haven't been back for several years, so I don't know how hard it is to cross the road, but the problem was created by building the hotels, not building the road. I agree, they should build pedestrian bridges, but the hotels won't pay taxes so the municipality has no money.

Yes. Lets give cars the priority along the beachfront.

Unfortunately that is exactly what has happened. The road has been widened and widened until it is now a virtual race track. All in the name of the Gods motorcycle and motor car.

I was always taught sail before steam. A nautical rule. That would translate as pedestrian before motor vehicle. But as we can see the city council led by the Mayor have decided it should be the other way round.

No respect for the tourist without whom this city would die.

The mayor and his cronies are slowly digging its grave.