[vasudeva]

Unsurprisingly, India has perhaps the highest number of road accident deaths in the world with 98254 killed in 2005. Of these, 8.9% were pedestrians, 3% on cycle, 16.4% on 2W, 5% on 3W. 30% on trucks/tempos, 12.5% on buses, and 7.7% on cars.

India's pattern of road deaths in terms of speeding, time of death, and age at death are similar in pattern worldwide (so much for irrelevance). The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) has reported 98254 deaths in 2005 with a rate of 1.5 per thousand vehicles. Deaths due to road accidents increased in India from 40,000 in 1986. Nearly two-thirds of deaths occurred among those 16–44 years of age, with the highest rate among 30–44 year-olds (35%). The states recording highest number of deaths caused by road accidents were Tamil Nadu, Maharashtra , Kerala, Karnataka, AP, and Gujarat.

Earlier 1998 figures by the Registrar General of India revealed that 2.6% of total deaths were due to vehicular accidents. The highest number of deaths were reported in those 25–34 years of age (21%), followed by 15–24-year-olds (19%), and 35–44-year-olds (16%).

Recent estimates from Global Road Safety Programme indicate the costs of road traffic injuries (RTIs) in India alone to be 1% of the total GDP. Nearly 75% of RTI victims are earning members, with 9–45% being sole earners. In a population-based survey of 96,569 individuals from 19,919 households, the incidence of death due to RTIs was 23/100,000, with rates in poor and non-poor communities being 31 and 17/100,000, respectively. The incidence of serious injuries was 212/100,000, with a higher rate among poor communities (238 versus 186). The majority of households reported a decline in earnings after injury; further, many had to borrow money from external sources for survival and only 5% received compensation from insurance agencies or their employers. The poor spent Rs 6000–25,000 (average Rs 18,000), while the non-poor spent Rs 32,000 (average Rs 27,000) on medical costs. The costs of property and vehicle damage varied from Rs 10,000 to Rs 25,000 across different groups.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by Hyundai.Lover

For the 2nd point you mentioned... no need to look into the rear mirrors? Please tell me why? Are you the one who is fast? What if another car approaching you?

I mentioned no such thing for high speeds - I suggest you read my
post once more.

Originally Posted by Hyundai.Lover

Now for the 3rd point... We can again assume the situation like this...

Again, I suggest you read my posts once more.

[vasudeva]

Based on Indian stats on road deaths, some key points are:

States with rapid increase in motorisation rates have experienced greater deaths and injuries indicating that higher exposure combined with the absence of safety norms are a major factor.

Even though Indian highways comprise only 2% of the total road network, they account for more than 25% of fatal injuries.

People at risk are pedestrians, riders and pillion riders of motorised two-wheelers and bicyclists.

30-40% of total deaths and injuries among motorised two-wheeler riders and pillion riders occur due to absence and poor enforcement of laws related to helmet use.

High speeds along with the absence of traffic coordination are estimated to be responsible for around 34% of deaths.

Alcohol consumption by road users is a major risk factor and causes nearly 30%–40% of night-time road crashes.

More accidents and deaths occur during night and early morning hours due to poor visibility of vehicles and roads.

[blorebuddy]

Originally Posted by neoonwheels

Perhaps people are more interested in saving 1/2 hour to reach somewhere by gambling their life as well as others..That even saves a bit of natural resource called gas from this planet earth

Completely agree..How much time you are going to save by going on dangerous speed..may be half an hour or one hour. IMHO it is not worth risk return ratio

[msdivy]

Originally Posted by blorebuddy

Completely agree..How much time you are going to save by going on dangerous speed..may be half an hour or one hour. IMHO it is not worth risk return ratio

You said hours, I thought they could save at most 5~10 minutes for every 100Km.

[sbasak]

For speeding to be safe, all of these criteria need to be fulfilled

* Good road
* Sparse traffic
* Good car
* Skilled and sensible driver

Now, how do you define good and sensible is again subjective.

There's another point to consider. When we say like going over 80 km/h to 100 km/h over 200 km only saves 30 minutes, we tend to get time = distance/speed , but this may not always be true!

By going slowly you may encounter a road block, traffic signal etc. which may actually delay journey time much more.

However, please don't see this as advocating driving faster. Everything should be treated on its own context.

[apachelongbow]

Originally Posted by sujaylahiri

T
Also, the Autobahns despite of having no speed limits in the majority of the highways experience lesser accidents than North American or other European highways which have a fixed speed limit (source: Wikipedia).

In USA the accidents are majorly caused due to DUI and influence of drugs. Mostly DUI. So we cant compare German autobahns and US freeways.

[apachelongbow]

[quote=vasudeva;597600]

Originally Posted by razor4077

Very informative thread. Thank you vasudeva for digging up so much of data for our benefit.
My observation - I noticed that a lot of the stats/data were obtained from studies carried out in countries in North America and Europe. IMHO, what is applicable in one country may not be applicable in another.

Take India vs the US for example...
Anyone who has seen the road network in America would not even start to compare it with Indian roads. While the highways are in much better shape here nowadays than they used to be even 5 years ago, they still have a way to go before they reach US standards. I won't even bother talking about city/suburban/rural roads. Second would be the population - not just of people alone, but of cars and people combined (since they share the roads). I think it's fair to say that this density is far more in India than in the States... less road surface/car+person.


The points you are making are valid but the laws of physics do apply everywhere, and humans are also spongy everywhere. In fact given the road conditions here everywhere even on the so called expressways, with a human missile coming out of nowhere just when you think that there is not a soul in sight, highway safe speeds should be even lower. Consider this, of the 1.2 million dead in road accidents worldwide, 1.07 million are in developing countries, out of which 0.25 million are in South Asia. The fatalities per 100000 and fatalities per km traveled are amongst the highest in South Asia which incl. India.

My 2 cents. Road fatalities in India are high because we have no emergency response system and people are afraid to help the injured because of police hassles. The first 30 mins post accident/trauma are most crucial for saving a person's life. For the statistics, USA has a far higher percentage of accidents compared to India but a far lower fatality rate. So lets not confuse or compare between these 2 nations

[anupmathur]

[quote=apachelongbow;598120]

Originally Posted by vasudeva

For the statistics, USA has a far higher percentage of accidents compared to India but a far lower fatality rate.

!!! Is this correct?? Where are these figures from?

[vasudeva]

Originally Posted by apachelongbow

In USA the accidents are majorly caused due to DUI and influence of drugs. Mostly DUI. So we cant compare German autobahns and US freeways.

Really!. Well speeding caused 32-33% of fatal deaths, while alcohol caused 38%. In 2005, 86 percent of speeding-related fatalities occurred on roads that were not Interstate highways. In addition, as may be aware, alcohol and speeding are clearly a deadly combination. In 2005, 40% of the drivers with over limit alcohol in blood who were involved in fatal crashes were speeding, compared with only 14% of the drivers with no alcohol in their blood.

It would perhaps be better if the real issue of overspeeding (which is the subject here) is discussed rather than saying this is not relevant or that is not comparable. Me and other members have given enough data and research from many countries including India for people to draw their own informed conclusions.

[tsk1979]

Lets take the figures with a pinch of salt.
Let me explain how figures are arrived.
Lets say there are 10 accidents on a road.
Out of these 6 people were overspeeding.
Out of these 6, 5 were drunk.
Do you know how the statistics will be written?
"60% of accidents had overspeeding as the cause."

If a drunk driver crashes at 100mph into somebody and kills that person, it does not mean that overspeeding is the cause. It means drunk driving were the cause.

I would like to see some relevant figures
1. Out of the X percentage of accidents due to high speed(overspeeding) how many drivers were sober.
2. In on road fatalities in India, how many accidents are caused by overspeeding.

Point 1 is don't care. In the USA or Europe or Autobhans, 100% of all fatalities may be due to speeding. It does not matter for us. Our road infrastructure is totally different.
So what matters is that what percentage of highway accidents are "caused due to speeding".
Now "Caused due to speeding" is also a little funny thing.
Suppose a car doing 20kmph over the speed limit rams into a tractor in the fast lane coming the wrong way without headlights(I have almost crashed into such a bullock cart at night). Will this accident be marked "Due to over speeding?"

In most cases yes. This is the reason all statistics can be twisted to ones needs and need to be taken with a pinch of salt.

Speed limit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In Australia Police attribute speed as the main cause in 30% of crashes, even though speeding is a cause in only 20% of those cases (or 6% of total cases). This is due to an extremely wide-ranging definition of speed, in order to explain fixed speed cameras and zero-discretion traffic policing.


Statistics can be twisted to any length.
http://www.uctc.net/papers/069.pdf

Some facts about accident rate. These statistics are not really modifiable, because these are the body count and not the cause(which can be twisted)

"Prior to the (now defunct) 1974 national 55 mph (88 km/h) speed limit in the U.S., German Autobahns had a higher fatality rate than U.S. Interstates; however, a few years later, the Autobahn rate fell below that of (then) 55 mph (88 km/h) limited U.S. Interstates. IRTAD records show the U.S. rate remains higher than that on the largely unrestricted German Autobahn network. While the fatality rate on the UK's 70 mph (112 km/h) speed-limited motorways is about half of Germany's, the 60 mph (96 km/h) limit in rule-conscious Japan corresponds to a motorway fatality rate greater than Germany's. However, simple comparisons of fatality rates between countries neglect to account for differences in traffic density, quality of medical care, and Smeed's law.

I hope you are aware that even if the cause of the accident is something else, if one of the vehicles was speeding, the statistic count increases for the "Speed related pool".

So if a car going at 70mph(speed limit) loses control, and crashes into a faster car(lets say 80mph) the cause is listed as "speeding", even though overspeeding was not the cause of the accident.

[vivekiny2k]

Originally Posted by Hyundai.Lover

In Delhi we have a good amount of Road Rage too, and don't mind mods and other people.

Her bonut was touching the sky like a tent. haha

now we know where it comes from

[Hyundai.Lover]

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Lets take the figures with a pinch of salt.
Let me explain how figures are arrived.
Lets say there are 10 accidents on a road.
Out of these 6 people were overspeeding.
Out of these 6, 5 were drunk.
Do you know how the statistics will be written?
"60% of accidents had overspeeding as the cause."

If a drunk driver crashes at 100mph into somebody and kills that person, it does not mean that overspeeding is the cause. It means drunk driving were the cause.



So if a car going at 70mph(speed limit) loses control, and crashes into a faster car(lets say 80mph) the cause is listed as "speeding", even though overspeeding was not the cause of the accident.

Really Impressive... Well Said.

Originally Posted by vivekiny2k

now we know where it comes from

this thread is becoming famous and hot. lol

[vivekiny2k]

Originally Posted by rks

But my view is that if you are at a higher speed than the average speed of the traffic (but not *too* much higher), then you rely on your skills to avert accidents. All this is within sane limits, of course.

because you are "the smart one", isn't it? and all others are the immature drivers.

inmagine if everybody starts following your view, and tries to keep 5+ kmph over everybody else......cascaded amplification?

[vivekiny2k]

Originally Posted by Hyundai.Lover

You are correct. But one should take the precautions. While overtaking use Dipper and Horn both, you will come to know if the driver is mature or not.
Sign of immature driver on highways while overtaking
1. He will not give you side unless you come very close to his car or Blows a good horns and dippers. #$%#$% to these kinda immature behavior.
2. He will hit the gas.

So, Experience and Skills counts.:

So you do agree that our roads are full of inexperienced drivers. Care to ask ANY driver on the road if he is immature? I will be interested in knowing how many drivers accept they are immature/inexperienced.

Here is my answer: I think I am safe and mature and experienced, although at times I take my car to 180 kmph.

Sorry, but this is a totally different kind of society than the "developed countries" where kids see there parents driving since childhood, they know a car is a means for transportation, not a toy to satisfy somebody's adrenaline rush and give sense of so called freedom. (being able to piss on public roads in public view shud give enough sense of freedom )

and then there is a concept called defensive driving. which essentially enforces the fact that staying defensive, losing on a couple of seconds from another car is a good thing to do if it saves lives. Being courteous to fellow road users is another point, But I am not sure how feasible it will be on indian roads.

I am not saying we are inferior to those countries. But We definitely lack these common sensical facts.