[Gansan]

The Adyar flyover, as one climbs it from the RA Puram side, also takes a sharp split towards Thiruvanmiyur, while the main ramp continues towards Adyar bus terminus. This is one more flyover one has to be careful about.

But we must remember these are "after thought" flyovers i,e, design modified mid-way to accommodate someone's whim, and not very wide. So it is imperative to maintain moderate speeds on them. I take them at about 40-50 KM on my bike. If driving my car, I do no more than 40, in third gear.

[IronH4WK]

Originally Posted by binand

But we're talking of speeds of 40 - 50 kmph. And a driver like me. One who's familiar with this side of Chennai intimately. I have trouble maintaining control on this flyover at these speeds (so I usually take it at lower speeds - 30 or below).

that wasn't a poke at you mate, just a general comment as a rule, i never take chances when i'm driving through unfamiliar territory; you never know what to expect.

way back in 2002, one of my colleagues had just bought a Ikon and had planned a Bangalore - Chennai trip. he wasn't familiar with the roads, but that didn't stop him from driving the wheels off that car. on one section, he misjudged the road and ended up on the divider after a overtaking maneuver went wrong. there were no major injuries, but the engine was damaged!

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by longhorn

Anything above 40 kmph is very risky on that flyover

As mentioned, 40kph is the speed limit, so where does the "anything over" come into it? Anything over the speed limit is always risky. Anything under the limit can be too.

Originally Posted by MotoNanu

I am not from Chennai, neither have I visited this flyover ever. What I wanted to know is, does it have sufficient banking? ... logically it MUST have a good banking. If not, then you cannot always blame the riders, even at normal speeds, it would be dangerous.

Again, "even at normal speeds"?

This is a city flyover, not a race track. It does not have adverse camber, which would be dangerous. Its design may be old, but it is perfectly safe, and anyone who finds it not to be should examine their driving and not blame the road. There have been around three accidents on this flyover. Consider the millions of times it must have been used in that time: it points to the accidents being driver error. Most accidents are driver error

Originally Posted by IronH4WK

Unless you're playing NFS and have a map which shows your the road ahead Speeding/ overtaking without line of sight is definitely asking for trouble. It's common sense, but again you know what people say about that, eh.

People want risk designed out of their roads. However much design may help, ultimately, the risk is with the driver, not the road.

[longhorn]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

As mentioned, 40kph is the speed limit, so where does the "anything over" come into it? Anything over the speed limit is always risky. Anything under the limit can be too.

If a road is designed for a speed of 100 kmph, you don't automatically set the speed limit at 100. You will normally set a speed limit of ~80 kmph. At least this is what people who put their grey matter to use do. If they have set a speed limit of 40 kmph, you should be able to do atleast 45 kmph there without any drama. This is definitely not the case with that flyover. I wouldn't advocate anything more that 25-30 kmph on that flyover on a four wheeler. Everything is fine till you make that climb and reach the top. Once you take that left turn, its a totally different story altogether. There is absolutely no margin for error. Zilch.

[gurudutt]

Mumbai: Speeding Audi rams into barricade, four policemen injured

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/mumbai-sp...377-3-237.html

[Thad E Ginathom]

If a road is designed for a speed of 100 kmph, you don't automatically set the speed limit at 100. You will normally set a speed limit of ~80 kmph. At least this is what people who put their grey matter to use do. If they have set a speed limit of 40 kmph, you should be able to do atleast 45 kmph there without any drama. This is definitely not the case with that flyover. I wouldn't advocate anything more that 25-30 kmph on that flyover on a four wheeler.

Speed limit does not indicate safe speed to drive. Learnt this lesson the hard way, smashing up the front of a VW Passat in the process.

Speed limit is about law only. Driving limit is about seeing, thinking, evaluation, common sense. It even varies for the same place, according to traffic, conditions, weather. Consequences of exceeding speed limit can be a fine: consequences of exceeding driving limit can be turning up in this thread.

[mannubhai]

Originally Posted by Gansan

I

The boy will walk off; a fall guy will take his place.

There is already claims that the boy was not behind the wheel. Even the ownership of the vehicle is under dispute.

How easy it is for the powerful to use the loopholes in the system.

I read in another forum, where the girl who died and the other pedestrians were portrayed as the guilty, for having been on the road for the SUV to hit them.

[longhorn]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Speed limit does not indicate safe speed to drive.

Agreed. At the least, it should indicate the maximum safe speed in the best of conditions. As far as that flyover is concerned, this does not match up.

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

Speed limit is about law only. Driving limit is about seeing, thinking, evaluation, common sense. It even varies for the same place, according to traffic, conditions, weather. Consequences of exceeding speed limit can be a fine: consequences of exceeding driving limit can be turning up in this thread.

I'm with you 100 % on this. All I'm saying is that for that flyover design, 40kmph is over the top even in the best of conditions. I'm in no way suggesting that there was no fault on the part of the driver, but I'm pretty sure the design of the flyover played an important role in what happened. The condition of the vehicle played an even more important role. He wouldn't have had to pay with his life if
(a) he had worn a seatbelt (as per newspaper reports - the army auctioned vehicle didn't have one) OR
(b) the driver door was locked (assuming the lock was working)

The shape of the vehicle after the accident was not such as to result in a loss of life - far from it. It's just the fact that he was thrown off from the vehicle from that height onto the road below that resulted in him paying with his life.

[GTO]

Mod Note : Please stick to the topic. Thanks!

[clevermax]

A heart surgeon was rushing to hospital in the middle of the night for an emergency surgery, crashes his car, walks out of it, reaches hospital, performs the surgery and saves the life of a woman.

[Soumyajit9]

Originally Posted by clevermax

A heart surgeon was rushing to hospital in the middle of the night for an emergency surgery, crashes his car, walks out of it, reaches hospital, performs the surgery and saves the life of a woman.

Faith in God and Humanity is restored ! Although I couldn't read the details from the clipping, but I am extremely overjoyed that the doctor was unscathed and saved the woman's life too. The accident looks ghastly !! Surely a miracle.

[ontheroad]

About the accident discussed above - It was mentioned in "Mathrubhumi" Kollam edition that the Doctor was wearing seatbelt at the time of accident. Media should highlight such things also so that the masses will understand the importance of seatbelts and helmets.

[KiloAlpha]

Originally Posted by Soumyajit9

Faith in God and Humanity is restored ! Although I couldn't read the details from the clipping, but I am extremely overjoyed that the doctor was unscathed and saved the woman's life too. The accident looks ghastly !! Surely a miracle.

No. Most definitely NOT a miracle!! I am pretty sure the good doctor was wearing his seatbelt. That, combined with airbags (deployed - see pic in OP's newspaper clipping) would have ensured that the doctor could get out with max a few cuts/bruises.

And I wouldn't use the term "ghastly" - the passenger cell looks pretty intact to me.

I am sure, in a rush to get to hospital, he would've driven just a tad too fast to end up in that situation.

But in the end, it made me happy to know that the situation worked out the way it did. Quite filmy, actually

[silversteed]

Originally Posted by ontheroad

About the accident discussed above - It was mentioned in "Mathrubhumi" Kollam edition that the Doctor was wearing seatbelt at the time of accident. Media should highlight such things also so that the masses will understand the importance of seatbelts and helmets.

Sadly, media such as the one quoted here put little to no emphasis on such IMPORTANT facts, but instead focus only on the masala and hype. They won't even hesitate to go gaga over the build quality of that particular car too, if they get paid. Pathetic!

This accident is proof enough that seatbelts save lives. The famous Malayalam actor Jagathy Sreekumar wouldn't have had to endure all that trauma he was/is going through if only he had worn the seat-belt in the Innova in which he was travelling on the fateful day.

[PapaBravo]

Originally Posted by PC77

This video on Youtube captures most of the reasons why accidents happen in India

There are one or two clips which do not belong to India

What I infer from the accidents in the video is that most of the accidents happen at the traffic signal, when people think they can make it.

I make it a point that whenever the lights turn yellow, I stop. I keep hearing a lot from the vehicles behind but I prioritize safety over 120 seconds of Delay.

Also, when stopping at a signal, I always have an eye on my RVMs to make sure that some over-speeding fellow is not going to bang me from behind.

Traffic Signal is one place where one has to look all around & not take chances thinking they'll make it.

Just my two cents.