Comment 115800

By kevlahan (registered) | Posted December 22, 2015 at 14:41:40 in reply to Comment 115797

It is quite possible that if:

  1. The street was narrower.
  2. The street was designed for 30 km/h.

the child would not have been hit because he would have been on the street for a shorter time or the driver would have had time to react and brake to avoid the collision. Or if he was hit, he would not have been killed. There is absolutely nothing inevitable about this.

Apparently, the speed limit at the intersection is 90km/h. The reaction plus stopping time distance at 90 km/h is around 83m (103m on a wet road). Compare this to reaction plus stopping time distance at 40 km/h is only 26 m (30m on a wet road). The total stopping distance would be only around 12-15m at 30km/h.

Do you really think that the driver having an extra 56m to 73m (or even 90m) could have made no difference in the chances of avoiding a collision?

http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/Safety/Driver-...

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2015-12-22 14:45:11

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds