[phamilyman]

+1

I anyday drive much faster in city (Gurgaon expressway) in inadequate physical health than on my drives - so no problem there!

[Surprise]

http://www.hindu.com/2009/06/30/stories/2009063053 670400.htm

The bus had stopped near a hotel on the right side of the road for refreshments. After the break, it was driven on the wrong side, resulting in the collision.
The bus was dragged for some distance by the lorry before it fell into a 5-foot-deep pit.
The front portion of the bus was completely damaged. The drivers of both the vehicles were crushed to death in their seats

Chennai-Trichy-Madurai-Thirunelveli route is notorious for such regular accidents.. Its always better to have a safety conscious suspecting third eye when we were out on highway drives.

Lucky not any cars were there in place of lorry, be it a hatchback or sedan or muv or suv

[raju2512]

Just caught up with this thread today. I fully agree with Surprise. I always prefer train as my first choice. I can travel through the night, it is more comfortable and I am fresh and ready for the next day. Of course I am as much a train enthusiast as a car enthusiast and love train spotting.

But travelling by your own vehicle has its own advantages and if i have to drive, I follow the advice below.

Originally Posted by DileepKS

I strongly believe that if you practice safe and DEFENSIVE driving, the highway is as safe as a city or suburban road.

DEFENSIVE is the key. You should EXPECT the tractor/bus to come on the wrong side. You should EXPECT or even ANTICIPATE the pedestrian/cyclist/animal to jump in front of you. You should expect the car in front to crash into the next car and stop suddenly. You should expect that there will be a block on the road, unless you can clearly see otherwise. You should expect a pothole everywhere, unless you can clearly see otherwise.

Then the rest, like the loose wheel from a truck, a tree coming crashing, etc are unavoidable, and such things can happen even if you stay home.

But in our forum itself we see fellow tbhpians boasting of speeds in excess of 150 kmph on hatch backs and still higher on sedans. What they fail to understand is that they put their and others life at risk. Are our cars safe at such speeds? How many have tried to stop a hatch back without ABS from 140+ to 0 and seen how the car behaves.

A few months back, I was driving at around 90-100 kmph near Melmaruvathur on my way to Trichy. I was on the left lane and behind a STC bus doing around 70. I was quite a distance (approx 400m) behind the bus and just contemplating to move to the right and overtake when I saw two cars doing very high speeds on the right lane. I just eased off and the first car (HC) flashed past me closely followed by the second (Fiesta). The bus slowed down and moved the right lane to take a U turn and the HC driver lost his nerve and braked. The vehicle fish-tailed, hit the median and screeched to a halt in the middle of the road. The swift behind swung across the road crahed in to the fields. I was lucky because I spotted these blokes early and slowed down and I was able to stop safely. Though no one was seriously injured, every body was totally shaken up. Both the cars were driven by young fellows in their early 20s. A more seasoned driver at a lower speed would have handled the situation safely without a second thought

Now because of these idiots, I could have ended up in a seious mishap. Only very defensive driving saved me. I may reach my destination 30 min late but driving at 90-100 band is the maximum safe speed in our high ways irrespective of the car you drive.

Again your insurance can refuse coverage if it is proved that you were beyond the maximum permitted speed on the highway which is around 80 in many places. Upto 100 - 120 you my get through but if you crash at speed beyond that, you are on your own and your insurer may refuse to pay.

[n.devdath]

Looking into situations and times like these, how many of us would prefer sedans for highway travel and how many would prefer SUVs??

Lets start with me.
I would still prefer a sedan as it has better control and handling to swerve compared to an SUV generally (when priced in the same bracket)...
More views please...

[ak916]

Is public transport safer or are cars safer? Cars definitely are safer than trains/busses. Air planes are safer than trains too.

You would understand that when you look at the total number of trains in india, then see the %age of trains that meet with an accident. This percentage is higher than the total number of cars in india, and the %age of cars that end up in an accident.

Same thing with airplanes. The only difference is that airplane crash receives more airtime on news and is discussed endlessly. Which is not the case with car or train crashes. In other words, the frequency of aircrashes have little or nothing to do with public perception of the safety of an airplane.

Also to the point about a plane being manufactured in europe, a lot depends on the maintenance of the plane than the company/country that manufactured the plane. An airbus/boeing can and will crash if maintained poorly.

All said n done, I love to travel by my car on highways. I feel a lot more in control than when i travel in a bus, whose driver is having an animated conversation with the cleaner, while shooting down the wrong way.

I hate train travel because
- I dont like paying money to beggars/eunuchs, neither am i amused when they harass me
- I dont like the smell of human waste, which is the case even in a/c coaches.
- The food is horrible, but that is the least of my worries.
- mugging/stealing is a common and something I always worry about in the night, when I am supposed to be sleeping 'peacefully'.
- In a country where women are treated as objects, I prefer going by cars when I am travelling with any female member of my family.

In short, I have less things to worry about in my own car, so long as I drive defensive, as rightly pointed by dileep.

[raju2512]

Originally Posted by ak916

Is public transport safer or are cars safer? Cars definitely are safer than trains/busses. Air planes are safer than trains too.

You would understand that when you look at the total number of trains in india, then see the %age of trains that meet with an accident. This percentage is higher than the total number of cars in india, and the %age of cars that end up in an accident.

Interesting. Can you provide the data please.

[reignofchaos]

I hate trains - I'll never travel by them. If the distance to the place is under 1k km, I drive else I take a flight. Driving on highways is a pleasurable activity for me and its never really stressful. I don't mind driving all alone either. I've done a couple of blore-hyd trips all alone without any stops other than fuel stops in probably 2/3rd the time that a train or a bus takes to do the same.

As someone pointed out - the key to good driving is reflexes - you can avoid a lot of problems by having good reflexes and also a car that responds to those quick actions. If the car itself bogs you down, driving is no fun anymore.

Trains are just hopeless - dirty, slow and painful in general. Once I started earning myself, I vowed that I'll never ever travel by train in India again.

Buses are extremely scary for me - Most of these volvo drivers have totally no clue about how to drive. I'd rather not leave my life at the hands of such idiots.

[Thad E Ginathom]

Most of these volvo drivers have totally no clue about how to drive. I'd rather not leave my life at the hands of such idiots.

But you do! Every time you drive on the same road!

[ak916]

Originally Posted by raju2512

Interesting. Can you provide the data please.

There are plenty of statistics available. But there is a debate is on what is the more reliable way to see the fatality rate. For instance, you can measure fatality rate by looking at the number of deaths per km traveled or you can look at the deaths per trip. yet another way is to check the number of deaths per hour traveled. An airplane is the safest in terms of the number of km it travels. So its really a matter of interpretation left to each individual. here is a link for you to check on some statistics. Please have a look at the statistics for motorcycles.

The risks of travel

If you ask the airline industry, they will say that it is safest mode of travel. So will the automobile industry.... since it depends on how what you want to portray.

A good example is this joke of when someone once told a smoker, that smoking is responsible for 10% of deaths... he replied saying that if he continues to smoke, he has a 90% survival rate. lol

[jimmy_iaf]

This thread reminded me of something I read in 'Book of Questions' a long time back. I quote:

"Assume there were a technological breakthrough that would allow people to travel as easily and cheaply between continents as between nearby cities. Unfortunately there would also be 100,000 deaths a year from the device. Would you try to prevent its use?

In the mid 1800s , had you been able to look into the future and see that the automobile would cause 5 million fatalities in the next century how would you have felt about this new device. Is there scientific knowledge that is best left undiscovered ? If so what areas of research do you feel should be restricted?"

I am sure all of us her being automobile enthusiasts, would agree with the first part yet support the use of the automobile, per se. As regards not driving long distances and only use the car for drives within the city...I really don't consider city driving as 'fun' - you are crawling in traffic, or braking for the errant pedestrian, autorickshaw or car driver for that matter. Its more relaxed driving outside of city limits (but not your limits). There may be the odd risk of an accident - but that can occur anywhere. You can't not do something just because there could be the chance of an accident. Life wouldn't be worth living!

I quite agree with murali, perevez and goswami in their earlier posts.

[shishya]

I have joined Team-BHP very recently. I found this thread very interesting. I have had the opportunity to use village roads, single tarred roads, double roads and the multiple lane highways and expressways in India. I have had opportunity to ride (not drive) in Europe on similar roads stated above. Over the years, I realised that one has to hone one's SIXTH SENSE for driving. I have been involved in accidents, "mostly" not my fault, but the damage has been minimal, as the sixth sense has helped me. Anticipation of "accident like situations" and reacting to it quickly is easy to say, but difficult to translate. But one has to develop it. I have had opportunity to teach defensive driving to my friends and family members and then "exposed" them to accident prone situations and they too have learnt to react to their sixth sense. Unfortunately, this is not being taught in any of the "driving schools" except very, very few which can be counted on the fingers in India. In driving schools in India, fifteen minutes a day for 30 days and one day of "RTO rules" and your fees covers the clearance of driving test on first attempt. Abroad, children are taught discipline by parents, before they even go to school, as this is a very NORMAL thing to do. I have discussed this aspect with many parents in and from Europe. I see children there, walking in groups till they reach a road junction and cross the road only when the "WALK" sign glows. I know there may be places abroad with similar conditions as in India, but let us not take those examples. In India, I notice that 3-4 kids on one motor-cycle or scooter, the parent (gentlemen and ladies) zooming through "red light" and halting haphazardly in front of the school gate. What do we expect the children in India, to do when they reach the age to drive. We say, the police should do the monitoring. This is possible only when there is an occasional errant driver. Otherwise, they are only too human and work on statistics to "catch" a fixed number of cases a month. Please, I humbly request all of us to inculcate restraint and discipline, and let us start by demonstrating to our children first. It is possible to do it, and the children will be grateful to us. Please develop the sixth sense, if not for anything else, it is the least one can do for our family, which is always waiting for our safe return at home.

[Archer2005]

Let me just paraphrase the point with a poignant fable I recently heard.

A crow was sitting on a tree, when he saw 'Yamraj' ( the God of Death) approach. The crow froze in fright. Yamraj stopped on his way, stared at the crow for a good two minutes, then continued on his journey.

The crow went into a funk, having seen the Lord of Death at such close quarters. Along came a 'Garuda', and the crow cried out to him for help. " See, Lord Yamraj came and looked at me. I am lucky I am not dead; but I wish to get away as far as possible, so that Yamraj cannot find me. Garuda, can you help me by ferrying me across the seven seas?"

The Garuda obliges the crow. He ferries the poor fellow across the seven seas at supersonic speeds.

On return, the Garuda meets Yamraj. He accosts Yamraj , " Yamraj, why did you scare the poor crow so much ?"

To which Yamraj replied , " I was not scaring him. I only stopped to wonder what he was doing here. He was destined to die after twenty minutes across the seven seas. I was only wondering how the crow would get there in such a short time!"


In short, do what you must do ( with due care and attention to detail and common sense, of course); after that, leave the worry to the Gods!

Originally Posted by prince_pervez

If s**t is going to happen, believe you me, no amount
of anything can stop it even if it is a train or a plane.

Here is a take from Driving or Flying? Plane vs. Car Accident Statistics | all crash of the world.
Make your own conclusions.

Choosing “mile to mile” as the more appropriate comparison for differing modes of transportation (and overlooking that small planes often takeoff and land at the same airport, without ever really “going anywhere”), let’s review the fatality rates:
driving: 1.32 fatal accidents and 1.47 fatalities per 100 million miles
airlines: .05 fatal accidents and 1.57 fatalities per 100 million miles
GA: 7.46 fatal accidents and 13.1 fatalities per 100 million miles
So mile per mile, GA flying has about 5 times as many fatal accidents, and 9 times as many fatalities, as compared to travel by motor vehicle. The airlines have about the same fatality rate as driving, but a much lower fatal accident rate (by virtue of a large number of fatalities per accident)

Originally Posted by ak916

There are plenty of statistics available. But there is a debate is on what is the more reliable way to see the fatality rate....

If you ask the airline industry, they will say that it is safest mode of travel. So will the automobile industry.... since it depends on how what you want to portray.

[Speed Pujari]

A little math may work here since I have lesser belief in destiny and other bookish stuffs.
In Bangalore-
The probablity of dying is .7 out of 1 if you are driving in ORR against .6 in IRR so you can take alternative.

Probability of dying in Mysore road is .9 out of 1 when on a two wheeler, .8 out of 1 when in a small car like 800, .7 in a MUV (The indianised SUV like scorpio) , .25 out of 1 when in a car full of balloons (read airbags) .. BUT the probablity of dying is .01 out of 1 while taking trains to mysore. So make a choice , I dont think destiny plays any role here, you write your destiny.

Probablity of dying is .001 out of 1 due to domestic accidents if you stay at home .

So in all the places chances of dying or meeting accidents is not zero, but there are ways to reduce the chances.
It depends on individuals how much risk they want to take. Having a term insurance works best in high risk scenarios.

[greenh0rn]

Originally Posted by ak916

Is public transport safer or are cars safer? Cars definitely are safer than trains/busses. Air planes are safer than trains too.

You would understand that when you look at the total number of trains in india, then see the %age of trains that meet with an accident. This percentage is higher than the total number of cars in india, and the %age of cars that end up in an accident.

Ak916, that's a flawed way of making a comparison. If you had to, you should compare the number of train travellers every year and calculate the %age who die in an accident, and compare it to %age of (private) road transport deaths as a fraction of total cars in India. You don't even have to hunt for numbers here, it is obvious that more people die in road accidents than in train accidents. Infact, the gap might just shock you. How's this for a fact, 10% of all road accident deaths in the world occur in India?

In my view, you can stick to a simple statistic like number of road accident deaths in a year vs number of train accident deaths. If you agree with this, here is the stat:

In 2006 alone, 100,000 people died in road accidents in India. Source: BBC NEWS | South Asia | Death on India's roads

I agree with those who recommend defensive driving on highways. I practise the same. Last time when I was coming from Karnal side, just before Panipat in the middle of the highway (GT Road, no less) a cow came running across the length from right to left. I had to madly swerve first left (instinctive) and then right, while braking hard. Had I been close to another moving vehicle, there'd surely be a collision, could even be fatal. Thankfully my speed was 100-110 before I spotted the cow.

Indian highways are just not built for high speeds, even though we might have Fortuner, Accord, E-class, S-class, Cayenne, insert-your-favorite-safe-car-here. Guys, please don't exceed 100-110 kmph for your own and your loved ones' safety.

[prince_pervez]

Well the angel of death ain't going to do math when the time has come. He'd snuff it out anyway. Doesn't mean we have to be carefree. Better practice safety than being crippled/maimed for the rest of your life. I have started.