Bollards 1, drivers 0
- Thread starter Ev0
- Start date
Dogbreath said:
To the best of my knowledge, every Airbus accident involving the controls has beeen found to be pilot error? Now pilots understand the Airbus system better, accidents are fewer.
In the case of the bollards I've never heard of an accident where a permitted vehicle, fitted with the appropriate transponder, has come a cropper.
M
Blimey this thread gets more ridiculous. Now we're comparing the computer systems in an Airbus to a traffic control bollard? Mmmm yes, they're mighty similar.Dogbreath said:
Get a grip guys, theres millions of lines of code, miles of cable and thousands of systems to go wrong in an aircraft, how many in a bollard?
Leaving aside the argument of whether the bollards should be there or not, I only want to know if the signs clearly say "ATTEMPTING TO FOLLOW THE VEHICLE IN FRONT WILL RESULT IN SEVERE DAMAGE TO YOUR VEHICLE" or something similar.
It is all well and good saying that drivers should this or should that - the signs should take into account the reality of how drivers think and the fact that visitors will have no idea about how these bollards work. You cannot only use the normal "no entry" signs (albeit more of them) - drivers ignore them at will because they *know* that no entry signs are not backed up with immediate sanctions.
The signs should be designed to really deter drivers from attempting to sneak through and anything less than an explicit warning as above is insufficient. There is no need to be vindictive and say that anyone attempting to get through deserves the damage without doing everything you can to let drivers know that there are unusual measures in place.
Of course, the locals who know that they are there, and how these bollards work and also know that there are lots of accidents do deserve to get their cars mangled for gross stupidity.
It is all well and good saying that drivers should this or should that - the signs should take into account the reality of how drivers think and the fact that visitors will have no idea about how these bollards work. You cannot only use the normal "no entry" signs (albeit more of them) - drivers ignore them at will because they *know* that no entry signs are not backed up with immediate sanctions.
The signs should be designed to really deter drivers from attempting to sneak through and anything less than an explicit warning as above is insufficient. There is no need to be vindictive and say that anyone attempting to get through deserves the damage without doing everything you can to let drivers know that there are unusual measures in place.
Of course, the locals who know that they are there, and how these bollards work and also know that there are lots of accidents do deserve to get their cars mangled for gross stupidity.
Energize said:
I would look, personally, but it's not the same as a green man at a crossing, it's a road closed to most traffic. Well, sort of
So people are definately more likely to just step out than they usually would. Peopla re always getting hit in pedestrianised areas by vehicles that are allowed in, police, deliveries and the like.osc89er said:
There are signs that say very clearly that only one vehicle at a time may pass through. There's also signs warning of rising bollards, and signs that tell you its no entry, and some red and green signals to tell you not to go. And all the direction signs leading on to the roads clearly state its not open to traffic.
It's very clear you can't go down there.
ive got to say these are a terrible way of stopping people from using bus lanes just look at the damage they do. ok so your not meant to go down them but how many people break the speed limit? imagine if you broke the speed limit and the veichle had some device that blew a tyre of something similar that is effectively the same as this.
![[DOD]Asprilla](/styles/overclockers/avatars/8.png){kind=avatar}
Soldato
- Joined
- 10 Nov 2003
- Posts
- 14,033
- Location
- Surrey, by the river
I don't see how this really differs from those tyre shredders if you drive the wrong way out of some multistory carparks.
zenith10 said:
It is nothing like that
Having something blow a tyre when going over the speed limit, would be creating damage on purpose.
The bollards are not there to damage peoples cars, they are there to block the way until a vehicle which is allowed access passes.
It's the same as people driving onto rail road tracks when the warning signs are alight and the barriers are closing down. I.e their own blooming fault.
merlin said:Reading some of you guys post it's like none of you have ever made a mistake whilst driving, like ever.
Yes there are muppets on the road, but sometimes people get lost whilst driving and get confused and occasionally make a silly mistake.
It's just that here - making a silly mistake is going to write your car off, and just might put you and/or your passengers in hospital.
What about delivery van drivers who dont have to wear seat belts? What if one of your children undid their sealtbelt without you noticing? What if you had something heavy in the boot like a 25 kilo suitcase? I'd like to see where that ends up after your car comes to an extremely sudden stop.
What if you hit it at 30mph and the engine comes straight through the baulk head and snaps your shins clean in half? That'd teach you wouldn't it? To get lost in a strange city and make a silly mistake, pff.
But you can all rest easy because as we know - you're all absolutely 100% perfect drivers who never miss a sign
I agree 100% and i'm not a lefty liberal!
I hope the signs make it very clar your car will be damaged and you may be injured if you tailgate. If this is the case then I accept the bollards, but still think it's overkill. If there are not signs to that affect then I deffo don't agree with them.
It seems like if you get confused and follow a bus your going to recieve an injury and mashed car basically.
Pants said:
I would agree with you - if it was one sign which you would have to miss to get your car smashed up...
But it isnt!
You have to ignore a no entry sign turning into the road, drive along a short section of road ignoring several other signposts, stop behind a bus and ignore the signs left and right and THEN drive into the bollards.
Its not a case of "being confused" its a case of "If I ignore all the signs and try and get through, I will be fine". Until their car gets damaged and the Police get involved...
Damn im thankfull i've never seen them things in my country, as many said its like saying we'll smash up your car if you drive on the bus lane, also damn buslanes i always hate them no matter where, it sohuld be a normall road.
I'f i'd see a bollard near my town i'd immediatly try anything i can to destoy it/remove it/put it out of order/find a way to copy the transmitters/fight against it legally.
I've never driven a car yet im ****** off at those kinds of things, and i really don't like the guy that invented them or placed em in any public places...
I'f i'd see a bollard near my town i'd immediatly try anything i can to destoy it/remove it/put it out of order/find a way to copy the transmitters/fight against it legally.
I've never driven a car yet im ****** off at those kinds of things, and i really don't like the guy that invented them or placed em in any public places...