Almost killed somebody in a Prius yesterday

[sirwired]

Yesterday I was making a left on a solid green arrow to enter a highway entrance ramp. Down comes a red Prius making a right (under a Yield sign) to the same ramp. Luckily, I slammed on my brakes (and horn) to avoid hitting her. She drove off into the poverbial sunset with just a cursory glance over the shoulder.

Had I not seen her, the corner of my '04 Passat Wagon, with all 3,500lb of vehicle behind it, at about 20-25MPH, would have smashed directly into her driver's door. Side-impact airbags are pretty cool, but they would not have cushioned THAT. (Maybe at that speed she would have survived a more widely-dispersed t-bone, but not the corner of my car.)

[wolfie]

I've had similar experiences many times, with the following differences:

- With an empty trailer, I'm roughly 10x your weight.
- The frame rails on a highway tractor are at "greenhouse" level - in other words, ABOVE the side impact beams.

[Crossbow]

That lady should know better. Having driven one, I can say that a Prius is fucking INVISIBLE on the road. Not quite as invisible as a motorcycle, but nobody ever sees the damn things...

[wolfie]

Other vehicles that can be invisible on the road:

- 18 wheelers. I've mentioned this one before, but someone changed lanes INTO THE LANE I WAS ALREADY OCCUPYING.

- Police cars on the shoulder, with their lights flashing. I've seen the dashcam footage showing an officer walking forward to speak to the driver he pulled over, then looking back with a shocked look on his face, and jumping over the guardrail. The scene then jumps around due to the police car being hit.

Sometimes I think Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder would be better drivers than some of the people on the road.

[notalwaysright]

There's a place near my work with a yield sign... You know how normally the right hand lane is the one with the yield sign? Well, in this case the right hand lane has the right of way, and the left hand lane has the yield sign.

I can't drive that way. Pretty much no one looks at the sign. If I drive there and actually follow the rules, I am almost hit and honked at every single time. I'm really not exaggerating, it's every time. I think I posted about it before. I drive the long way around to avoid this, since I can't afford to have my car wreaked right now.

[Catwoman2965]

I saw something someone posted on FB the other day. A pickup with a horse trailer, with a teenage girl standing in front of it. It was a PSA from her parents, telling drivers hey, this is my daughter, who drives HER horses to shows etc. See that giant trailer behind the equally giant, heavy pickup track its attached to? You cut her off, and she can't stop. And iwll not only hit you and cause serious damage to your much smaller car, but more than likely injure or kill her horses. So plkease be mindful, give her space, and don't try and cut her off.

[Crossbow]

Sometimes I think Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder would be better drivers than some of the people on the road.

I don't think. I KNOW.

[Chromatix]

This reminds me of an accident report I read recently.

Railways are always vexed by the need to interface their fast, professionally-managed, and smoothly-run infrastructure with the anarchical free-for-all of the road network. Evidence for this is found in the dizzying variety of types of crossing.

The original design of level crossing (in the UK) originated from a circa-1840 law which stipulated that railways must be "fenced in". Gates were arranged to close across the road to permit trains to pass, and across the railway to let vehicles pass. A railway employee - often a signalman in a signalbox that happened to be adjacent - was responsible for operating the gates safely and at the appropriate times. Where no signalbox was nearby, it was necessary to employ a crossing-keeper, which usually involved building him a house adjacent to the crossing.

In places where a public right-of-way but no public road existed, or an "occupation crossing" had to be provided because the railway divided or blocked access to an existing property, simpler crossings were provided without the direct oversight of a railway employee. The gates of these always open *away* from the railway, so that they would not obstruct the line if accidentally left open. In modern parlance, they are called User Worked Crossings; it is the crossing user's responsibility to check for approaching trains before crossing. Some have recently been fitted with Miniature Warning Lights, which look like tiny traffic signals, to assist crossing users.

Post-war, the cost of labour rose sharply, so it was necessary to find ways to make level crossings more efficient. The heavy swinging gates of manned crossings were replaced by motor-driven lifting barriers, accompanied by flashing lights and sirens. As signalboxes were consolidated (modern technology permitting operating signals many miles away from the signalman), CCTV was used to replace the local crossing-keeper.

Some crossings were converted to a more hands-off design, either the Automatic Half-Barrier or the Automatic Open types. These are not under the direct control of a railway employee, but are triggered by approaching trains, and have the same flashing lights and sirens as a full-barrier manned crossing. The reduced or absent barriers are intended to permit a vehicle to escape the crossing if it is caught there when the crossing activates. An unfortunate side-effect is that there is no longer a physical barrier to prevent people driving or walking onto an already-active crossing.

So much for the background. This particular accident report concerned a User Worked Crossing fitted with Miniature Warning Lights. It was of a new and experimental type where the gates, instead of being worked by hand, were power-operated. The point is: this crossing was not under the direct control or observation of a railway employee, despite the power-operated gates.

The Authorised User of this crossing had been issued with remote-control keyfobs to streamline their passage, and there were roadside push-button controls for other users. Copious signage was provided at the crossing, instructing users on the correct operating procedure, and the Authorised Users were personally briefed and given instructional leaflets (as is normal practice for UWCs). The Authorised User for this crossing was reported to be quite diligent in informing his family, direct employees and contractors of these procedures - which are not complicated.

The general procedure at an MWL-fitted UWC is:

1) Check that the light is green.
2) Open the gates.
3) Check again that the light is green.
4) Cross quickly.
5) Close the gates.

It is important to note that the lights give only a modest warning interval; enough for an ordinary agricultural tractor plus trailer, or a pedestrian, to cross safely in front of a train approaching at maximum speed. When crossing quickly is not reliably possible (due to type of vehicle or when a herd of animals is involved), the signalman must be phoned for permission.

At this particular crossing, the push-buttons for operating the gates were fitted in three places on each side of the crossing: beside the gate itself, for pedestrians; a short distance back, for drivers; and a significant distance away, for closing the gates with a long vehicle well clear. The lights could be seen from any of these buttons, but it would take a significant amount of time to reach the crossing from the far buttons, during which the lights might turn red due to an approaching train. Hence the buttons nearer the gates were positioned to be easier for drivers to operate when opening the gates, and only these buttons were provided with the instructional signs.

So what happened?

A employee of a contractor, who hadn't used this crossing before, used one of the far buttons to open the gates. To do this, he had to get out of the cab of his tractor and then climb back in again. After that, he failed to notice that the MWL had turned red, and couldn't hear the warning buzzer (intended for pedestrians) over his own engine noise and through the insulated cab.

He *did* hear the train's horn, which caused him to stop with only the front half of his tractor on the crossing, but by then there was neither time to reverse off, nor for the train to stop. Indeed, the train's data recorder measured no reduction in speed before impact, even though the driver had applied the emergency brakes (being air-operated, it takes several seconds for them to become effective). It took roughly a quarter of a mile for the train to stop completely, which is actually a respectable braking distance for a train travelling at express speeds.

Luckily, there were no serious injuries. The train even managed not to derail, despite having one of the tractor's wheels wedged underneath it. The tractor's engine was neatly severed from the cab, thus narrowly avoiding having the cab dragged along or crushed by the train.

What may amuse readers here is that one of the recommendations made in the report is... to reduce the number of signs at the crossing.

Yes, seriously.

An organisation responsible for public safety is effectively saying "take the warning signs off and let nature take its course".

Apparently, hard scientific research has found that excessive signage is more of a hazard than a help, since people don't usually read them and they tend to distract from and camouflage the actual warning lights (or, on other types of crossing, actually obscure sight-lines needed when looking for approaching trains).

[Talon]

That lady should know better. Having driven one, I can say that a Prius is fucking INVISIBLE on the road. Not quite as invisible as a motorcycle, but nobody ever sees the damn things...

How do you figure that? My parents have been driving a Prius since 2005. I don't recall them complaining about not being seen.

[Crossbow]

How do you figure that? My parents have been driving a Prius since 2005. I don't recall them complaining about not being seen.

My friend has been run out of her lane multiple times, and I've been cut off pretty much every time I drive it. And it's bright red. You'd think it'd be visible...

[Ophbalance]

It's probably just a hatred for the Prius. Folks that took the south park smug episode to heart.

[notalwaysright]

My friend has been run out of her lane multiple times, and I've been cut off pretty much every time I drive it. And it's bright red. You'd think it'd be visible...

That's weird... I drove my purple Ford Escort Sport (had a plastic spoiler) for about 10 years. When I got my "new" car, a gray Chevy Malibu I noticed immediately that people didn't seem to see my car. I've had multiple instances of people making turns into my lane, or on backroads people have come to a stop as if they're checking something in the car and visibly jump when I honk. I'm totally invisible. My next car will be brighter, and ideally look like a teenagers' car.

[Chromatix]

Grey doesn't really contrast against anything - that's the problem.

Conversely, I think people *would* notice if you chrome-plated it. Shame that's so expensive to do.

[Nunavut Pants]

I owned a couple of bright-yellow Honda two-seater cars for many years. I lost track of the number of people who "didn't see" me. I'm sorry, but the only way I could make the color any brighter is to festoon it with Klieg lights shining out in every direction!

And when I b*tched about it to a car forum I'm on, people told me of full-size pickup trucks that people would regularly run into with the same excuse...

It seems that all vehicles are invisible, if you've got your head wedged far enough up your *ss.

[protege]

My next car will be brighter, and ideally look like a teenagers' car.

You could have the entire car visible from space, and you'd get people that wouldn't see it. Why? Because they don't pay attention. Either they're on the damn phone, or in too much of a hurry. I mean, I have a bright orange sports car...and I have people who will pull right out in front of me.