Jump to content

Thailand aims to lower road fatality rates by 80%


webfact

Recommended Posts

"So all those that keep insisting on applying ideas from the western world that do not work onto Thailand where they will work even less, how many more years do you want to keep trying? Ten? Twenty?"

THis is nonsense - the reason there has been no change is that successive goverments have failed to implrment them - they are the only way - any other suggestions either won't work or eon't be iimplemen ted.

may I suggest too that you do your homework...there are several agencies and plans both national and 'ASEAN that are targeting road safety - they all agree on the same pricipals - how long do we wait? Until they are implemented - what do you suggest?

It is easy to assume that I come here having not researched this or have no idea what I am talking about and I actually expect it. may I suggest you look up Correspondence Bias.

I am actually in discussion with various advisors Internationally. Some of whom have, or are currently working with the Thai Government.

The current misguided approach is rehashed old ideas now called 'The Safe System'.

Heres a glossy video from Australia to tell you all about it.

Now if you think Safety Cells in posh vehicles that only the Rich Elite can afford, wire rope barriers that decapitate riders and enforcing speed limits even though they do not work is going to change anything in Thailand then good luck.

To me it's just 'Same Same'

First up the video is from NZ - not Aust. small irrelevant point really.

Overall a good video irrespective of what some might say, and the analysis of the (mock-up) car crash was interesting, however the recommendations made while being valid only address that particular instance and would more than likely not be that valid for a similar situation.

Further, what was missed completely was the fact that, even though the driver was distracted and steered off the hard surface, the final outcome was poor driving skills / wrong reaction. Having 2 outside wheels off the hard surface in itself is not a problem, the vehicle was still proceeding in a straight ahead and was we can assume still under some sort of control and could have been kept under control and gradually steered back onto the hard surface. The over reaction to immediately and aggressively steer right put the vehicle into crash mode due to the sudden shifting of vehicle weight and direction - the result of this has been demonstrated.

Any one who has driven or watched rally cars / off road cars etc. will see this same scenario used - use all the road if necessary even the hard shoulder.

Sorry yes that was from New Zealand, but if you research the topic you will find it is the same approach being used in both Australia and New Zealand.

http://roadsafety.gov.au/

Another point, you are focusing on the one incident regarding the simulated car at the start of the clip. That is not what the video is about. You need to watch it further.

I also know that Road Safety Advisors from Australia travelled to Thailand to an International Seminar on Road Safety earlier this year to promote the 'Safe System Approach' to the Thai Government. like many before them, their approach only had a limited response from the Thai Government.

The same Road safety professionals are now questioning the safe system approach on the Roads of Australia as Australian government only pick the low fruit and the easy option is just to lower speed limits.

The other 'Safe System' approach offered to Thailand by these 'road safety professionals' was changing all the concrete block barriers common in Thailand for wire rope barriers. There was a backlash across Europe against wire rope barriers due to the dangers of the fixed uprights stopping a rider dead, worse injuries than they would have got if they had hit a broad flat surface like the concrete barriers the suggestion was to replace. Not to mention the huge costs of replacing barriers and up-keeping the wire barriers against low maintenance concrete.

Perhaps you'd like to point out how this isn't just a "rehashing" of the 5 Es?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 286
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The "safe system" is all well and good and certainly heading in the right direction as a means of reducing fatalities - but any "system" is only as good as the people understanding it and being the "end users".

ch it right through- my comment was on the particular analysis of the "accident" and the missed point of what contributed to the outcome. It's always easy to be clouded by theory and miss a few vital points by not carefully analysing exactly what the driver was doing or not doing.

I do agree that there are limitations with their analysis at base level. Just my point is that is only a small issue when the bigger problem is the application of the 'Safe System' approach itself.

Currently the users (drivers / riders/ enforcement officials) in Thailand are so far removed from the reality of sensible and safe driving, the introduction of a safe system (which is very unlikely to ever happen) will have about the same chance of success as winning the million Dollar / Pound lottery. The first step must be to rigidly enforce current laws, without this just forget the whole idea as all the theory of what needs to be done is a waste of time.

I cannot talk about UK, Europe, USA but in Aust. and NZ the road deaths have been reduced, by road design, tougher testing rules and very strict enforcement of the road rules, and I mean strict - designated high-way patrol cars constantly on the road, random breath testing and tough penalties, especially for repeat offenders . One thing assisting the changes was that the majority of drivers were reasonable in their approach to driving to start with - they usually obeyed stop / give way signs, red lights and drove on their side of the road and didn't have a death wish - so all that was a plus to build on.

Of course saying this I will be open to criticism by some - but who cares, at least I have made a few comments on what I think some of the answers might be, and not hide behind statement's of "theory" which in themselves do nothing to address the problem.

The 'Safe System Approach' is actually just a rehash of the old approach. As coming from an Enforcer background I would expect you to assume the approach you are taking. They are the same arguments being used in the UK and Internationally against fellow protagonists of 'No Surprise' and the 'Safety II' approaches. Fortunately for us we have science on our side and we focus on the individual rather than expecting others to change what is basic human nature.

Your quote about accident reduction around the world just proves my point, nowhere in the world has the Enforcement approach worked fully, nowhere are there Zero road accidents, countries like the UK have huge amounts of resources targeting enforcing the rules yet still pedestrians and motorcyclists are dying on the roads while the real reasons are ignored. e.g. the majority of pedestrians killed on UK roads are by normal everyday drivers doing normal everyday things.

New understanding of how the human brains work, subjects like motion camouflage and human nature are all being brought together so that we can learn new ways to keep ourselves safe. Not just rely on others to follow rules enforced upon them.

Yep, all very good but I don't see where it addresses stupidity.

Lets face some real facts:

Whatever is done by way of enforcement, design, education however or what ever you want to name it, people will still be killed on the roads, die in airplane crashes, be electrocuted, drown while swimming, fall out of windows, get hit by trains, have heart attacks while having sex. The more stupid you are the more likely you are to die or in the worst case kill others.

You cannot legislate, enforce, design against stupidity no matter what you do to beat it.

A case that I have quoted previously to highlight an act of stupid is:

A metal stamping press worker severed his hand in the stamping die, how did he do - well it wasn't easy, the working part of the press was fully protected with a safety guard which was in turn padlocked to the press. The operator entered the factory office, force entry into a secured cabinet, removed the key to the padlock and removed the guard, overrode the electric sensing switch which automatically cut power to the press if the guard was removed -- the rest is now history.

Completely incorrect - if your "theory" could hold water, death rates would be the same the world over

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow, what a dumb response. Of course you can legislate, enforce, educate, and design against stupidity. Will a small minority like the pressing stamp worker still do stupid things? Yes. But, so what. The idea is to make things safer for the vast majority--whether they are driving a car, operating machinery, using appliances, traveling by train, plane, ship, using an elevator or escalator, on an amusement ride, etc., etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry yes that was from New Zealand, but if you research the topic you will find it is the same approach being used in both Australia and New Zealand.

http://roadsafety.gov.au/

Perhaps you'd like to point out how this isn't just a "rehashing" of the 5 Es?

The Safe System approach IS just a rehashing of the 5 E's. That's my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe they should make the Google driverless car mandatory!

The Google car's are currently restricted to 25 MPH and have issues with being over cautious.

Put one in Bangkok and it would have sensory overload and be unable to go anywhere.

For all the claims self driving cars are not up to dealing with Human dominated Road Conditions yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry yes that was from New Zealand, but if you research the topic you will find it is the same approach being used in both Australia and New Zealand.

http://roadsafety.gov.au/

Perhaps you'd like to point out how this isn't just a "rehashing" of the 5 Es?

The Safe System approach IS just a rehashing of the 5 E's. That's my point.

So once Thailand adopts this system things will improve...and any suggestions/attempts to improve the situation that do not address all 5 Es are by their very nature nature doomed to failure to some degree or other.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"So all those that keep insisting on applying ideas from the western world that do not work onto Thailand where they will work even less, how many more years do you want to keep trying? Ten? Twenty?"

THis is nonsense - the reason there has been no change is that successive goverments have failed to implrment them - they are the only way - any other suggestions either won't work or eon't be iimplemen ted.

may I suggest too that you do your homework...there are several agencies and plans both national and 'ASEAN that are targeting road safety - they all agree on the same pricipals - how long do we wait? Until they are implemented - what do you suggest?

It is easy to assume that I come here having not researched this or have no idea what I am talking about and I actually expect it. may I suggest you look up Correspondence Bias.

I am actually in discussion with various advisors Internationally. Some of whom have, or are currently working with the Thai Government.

The current misguided approach is rehashed old ideas now called 'The Safe System'.

Heres a glossy video from Australia to tell you all about it.

Now if you think Safety Cells in posh vehicles that only the Rich Elite can afford, wire rope barriers that decapitate riders and enforcing speed limits even though they do not work is going to change anything in Thailand then good luck.

To me it's just 'Same Same'

First up the video is from NZ - not Aust. small irrelevant point really.

Overall a good video irrespective of what some might say, and the analysis of the (mock-up) car crash was interesting, however the recommendations made while being valid only address that particular instance and would more than likely not be that valid for a similar situation.

Further, what was missed completely was the fact that, even though the driver was distracted and steered off the hard surface, the final outcome was poor driving skills / wrong reaction. Having 2 outside wheels off the hard surface in itself is not a problem, the vehicle was still proceeding in a straight ahead and was we can assume still under some sort of control and could have been kept under control and gradually steered back onto the hard surface. The over reaction to immediately and aggressively steer right put the vehicle into crash mode due to the sudden shifting of vehicle weight and direction - the result of this has been demonstrated.

Any one who has driven or watched rally cars / off road cars etc. will see this same scenario used - use all the road if necessary even the hard shoulder.

How anyone could watch that video and not know it was from New Zealand is beyond me - a sad reflection on CJ's research.

There is not a single point in that video I haven't already made.

And No! it is NOT referring to a single instance - you would have to have little or no comprehension of what the vid is about to say that.

and Artisi's conclusions about driving with a wheel of the road is just total nonsense. It is in fact one of the most common causes of single vehicle incidents in the antipodes.....often resulting in a roll-over and death. the incident described is in fact a classic for countries with ill-defined edges to the roads.

...and this little snippet must qualify for the most facile statement of thw whole thread..........

"Any one who has driven or watched rally cars / off road cars etc. will see this same scenario used - use all the road if necessary even the hard shoulder." -

Rally cars are heavily modified to be driven at speed on widely ranging road surfacers by expert drivers specifically trained and circuits carefully designed and selected to have roadside dangers removed or protected against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think you need to stick with your theory, the magic 5E's and your criticism of every thing and everybody who disagrees with you and leave the practical aspects of driving to those qualified to comment. Yes rally cars are modified and yes they are usually professionally driven - but doesn't change the fact that they will utilise all the road including the hardshoulder - and no, the circuits are not carefully designed and selected to have the roadside dangers removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think you need to stick with your theory, the magic 5E's and your criticism of every thing and everybody who disagrees with you and leave the practical aspects of driving to those qualified to comment. Yes rally cars are modified and yes they are usually professionally driven - but doesn't change the fact that they will utilise all the road including the hardshoulder - and no, the circuits are not carefully designed and selected to have the roadside dangers removed.

If you are interested you might like to view the first video that came up when I requested "rally cars" entitled HD​ Professional Rally Racing (France) - YouTube- (sorry no quick link) this shows a sectioned road not especially designed for rally event and without all dangers removed and many instances of using the hard shoulder without problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think you need to stick with your theory, the magic 5E's and your criticism of every thing and everybody who disagrees with you and leave the practical aspects of driving to those qualified to comment. Yes rally cars are modified and yes they are usually professionally driven - but doesn't change the fact that they will utilise all the road including the hardshoulder - and no, the circuits are not carefully designed and selected to have the roadside dangers removed.

If you are interested you might like to view the first video that came up when I requested "rally cars" entitled HD​ Professional Rally Racing (France) - YouTube- (sorry no quick link) this shows a sectioned road not especially designed for rally event and without all dangers removed and many instances of using the hard shoulder without problem.

You seem to confuse pure supposition with reality......You're just underlining your lack of knowledge of rallying now, which compliments your overall lack of understanding of road safety.

BTW - it's not "my" theory - you just haven't got a handle of this topic and seem to rely on your own uninformed perceptions, which is a classic way of getting everything wrong from the outset.

Rather than just post totally erroneous statements, why not actually address some of the points made with a coherent argument.......in truth I doubt you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racing cars (and motorcycle) and rally cars generally travel in the same direction and the driver/riders have regulated safety mechanisms (personal and by vehicle) to assist them in the event of a crash.

Hardly bears any resemblance to driving on Thai roads does it?

Can any poster say that they have been invited by Thai authorities to discuss their solutions to Thai road accident problems? whistling.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Racing cars (and motorcycle) and rally cars generally travel in the same direction and the driver/riders have regulated safety mechanisms (personal and by vehicle) to assist them in the event of a crash.

Hardly bears any resemblance to driving on Thai roads does it?

Can any poster say that they have been invited by Thai authorities to discuss their solutions to Thai road accident problems? whistling.gif

Toally agree with your observations on motor-racing, but one needs to remember that TV is a discussion forum not a branch of the Thai government.

It may however filter through to some Thai people who are interested in reading the views of English-speaking foreigners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can any poster say that they have been invited by Thai authorities to discuss their solutions to Thai road accident problems? whistling.gif

Yes, at international Level only indirectly so far but working on that.

At local police level I have a some Thai Police officers who are interested in learning about British Police Advanced Roadcraft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think about it, leaving road safety to the police is a markedly irrational move.

This is an organisation that in most countries is dedicated to preventing crime.

Somehow over the years they have taken on the mantle of being the "authority" on road safety.

In truth they were simply not qualified for this role that actually requires extensive research by qualified scientists and statisticians.

If you look at early editions of police publications on driving, they are in fact a home.

Roadcraft these days is a pretty good publication.....its available on Amazon if you're interested.... But all it really is is a layman's guide based on the science of the experts...it isn't a original source in itself.

Communicating road safety science is difficult. It needs to be communicated to both public and governments...most of those trained in training are sadly trained by rote and lack the critical and analytical abilities to see further than their immediate training needs. They are great at instilling basic roadcraft... A front line if it were - as in the trenches - but more than that cannot be expected of them. Just kniwijbg the rulkes is not enough...one needs to understand the thinking behind it and the mechanisms for promoting road safety as a science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you think about it, leaving road safety to the police is a markedly irrational move.

This is an organisation that in most countries is dedicated to preventing crime.

Somehow over the years they have taken on the mantle of being the "authority" on road safety.

In truth they were simply not qualified for this role that actually requires extensive research by qualified scientists and statisticians.

If you look at early editions of police publications on driving, they are in fact a home.

Roadcraft these days is a pretty good publication.....its available on Amazon if you're interested.... But all it really is is a layman's guide based on the science of the experts...it isn't a original source in itself.

Communicating road safety science is difficult. It needs to be communicated to both public and governments...most of those trained in training are sadly trained by rote and lack the critical and analytical abilities to see further than their immediate training needs. They are great at instilling basic roadcraft... A front line if it were - as in the trenches - but more than that cannot be expected of them. Just kniwijbg the rulkes is not enough...one needs to understand the thinking behind it and the mechanisms for promoting road safety as a science.

Do agree, challenging the status quo is what we are trying to do. I have watched Roadcraft and taught it in the UK for many years. We have hundreds of trainers and assessors offering variations on the Roadcraft approach. One of my fellow protagonists for the new No Surprise / No Accident approach was a contributor to the most recent 2013 edition.

Only science is changing all the time. We are constantly growing our understanding of how the human brain works. We are also finding limitations with the Roadcraft approach.

Basically Roadcraft assumes that as long as you use the advised 'System of Motorcycle Control' then you will be safe. That has limitations even in the UK where most road users do play by the rules. In Thailand it's approach can be counter productive.

There is another problem with the application of Roadcraft in Thailand. The Police Officers I am hoping to work with (soon as funds allow) have asked me to teach them, however if I take the standard demonstrate-explain-practice approach that we tend to use in the UK then I risk causing a loss of face. My friends and I am working on a new approach and with new understanding as well.

You are also right about Police and Insurance assessors being the wrong people to be in charge of road safety. That challenge is still being done on a world stage. This is what I have been saying from the start. We are trying to get away from the blame game and play the avoidance game instead.

http://humanisticsystems.com/2014/07/12/recovery-from-command-and-control-a-twelve-step-program/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...