Important rules and behaviours for driving in Thailand

[Vince]

13 hours ago, Marble-eye said:

Anybody that has driven on Thai roads must be a pretty bad drivers themselves if they think that the Thai drivers are capable, they are not. And before the usual chant of 'racist' get's shouted from the rooftops I would just like to say that it is not their fault, it is the complete system that is at fault.

Richard Barrow has made a good point when he says:

"In the UK, the majority of people fail their driving test the first time. In Thailand, most people pass the practical test first time. A Thai friend told me he failed his multiple choice theory test and the examiner told him to pay her 500 baht and she would do it for him."

And he goes to say:

"my wife had her first driving lesson on a tuesday. I went away the following day and by the time I came back on the sunday she had passed her test. Couldn't even back the car out of the drive."

These are not isolated incidents, it is the norm and anybody that cannot see this is a ........., you fill in the blank.

In the US, 16 year olds can pass a driver's license test and drive. Yet teens have a high motor vehicle accident rate despite the quality of their test & instructions. 

In some US cities it is widely observed that the very things taught in US driving schools and required on exams aren't followed (e.g. "space cushion", adequate following distance for braking given weather, etc). 

[cowslip]

1 hour ago, ctxa said:

Honestly I think a first important step would be banning petrol motorbikes from the big cities. China did it a few years ago, and now those who used to ride motorcycles, have to ride electrical motorcycles which aren't even as fast as their petrol counterparts. Road deaths went down by a lot in those cities. 

Then as you say, they need to invest in the 5 Es, and put money into campaigns that range from education, to inspections, to policing, etc etc... 

But you have to consider how you would ban them - this is not China and the road systems, where people live and public transport system to replace them just aren't available - so it would all have to be built - government contracts - in Thailand? with corruption? I think it would not actually happen.

It has to be a holistic approach - there have been loads of single issue approaches which simply don't get significant results

[Vince]

7 hours ago, Marble-eye said:

One of the biggest problems here in Thailand is that Thais are not trained to drive but merely to pass a test. [...]

A great point but not limited to Thailand or even driving. I'm reminded of the karate kata vs actual sparring or the rigors of Muay Thai training and how well it stood up in the UFC. It is said that dirt motorbike riders have a much lower accident rate when riding full size street bikes and maybe thats directly related. 

Theres little good training for most things I think. 

[cowslip]

3 hours ago, ctxa said:

40% of motorcyclists deaths happen because of head injuries and 64% of them were not wearing a helmet.

100 deaths = 40 from head injuries - 25 of those not wearing a helmet.

[cowslip]

2 hours ago, ctxa said:

It's not me saying it, it's "Thai officials" which are supposed to have access to much more detailed stats: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/world/asia/thailand-inequality-road-fatalities.html

I am well aware of the difference between "road safety" and "driving". But many here claim that what causes the "road safety issue" is that Thais are bad drivers. I don't agree with that , and I don't even think they are that bad drivers. 

where the data comes from is seldom considered - Thai authorities jut don't hack it

 

Crash data can be extremely useful to a number of agencies and individuals, including:

• traffic engineers – in the identification, analysis and treatment of existing risks and the prevention of future risk problems;
• policy-makers – at national, regional and local levels in setting crash reduction targets, developing road safety action plans, and monitoring performance;
• police – in the identification of problem locations and times for enforcement;
• health sector – for resource planning, injury surveillance, health promotion and injury prevention interventions;
• research community – in preventative studies and in testing and improving the effectiveness of road safety treatments;
• insurance companies – in setting insurance rates and premiums;
• vehicle manufacturers – in the development of safer vehicles;
• prosecutors – in the use of data as evidence.

 

These are the main data sources for road safety statistics in Thailand

1. Police Information System (POLIS) - Royal Thai Police
2. TRAMS - Ministry of Transport
3. E-Claim - Road Victim Protection Company
4. Injury Surveillance (IS) - Ministry of Public Health
5. Trauma Registry - Ministry of Public Health
6. 19 External Causes of Injury - Ministry of Public Health
7. Information Technology for Emergency Medical System (ITEMS) - Emergency Medical Institute of Thailand
8. Emergency Claim Online (EMCO) - National Health Security Office
9. OP/PP Individual Record - National Health Security Office
10. Death Certificates - Ministry of Interior

They are seldom used or even acknowledged by the mainstream media.

 

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

1 hour ago, Khunwilko said:

100 deaths = 40 from head injuries - 25 of those not wearing a helmet.

And the other 15 of those wearing a helmet that's not appropriate - aka virtually not wearing a helmet. 

If you wear a proper helmet it's very hard to suffer a fatal head injury (albeit not impossible).

[cowslip]

People keep saying things like "one of the biggest problems" = in most cases it is a purely subjective comment they actually means it is the last idea to drop into their head; there needs to be hard evidence to support it

[cowslip]

8 hours ago, Marble-eye said:

Reality will trump number crunching any time.

and there you have it - it is perception over reality. You cannot get an accurate picture without statistical analysis but what you see is perception and confirmation bias - until you realise this you can't get a good picture.

[cowslip]

5 minutes ago, ctxa said:

And the other 15 of those wearing a helmet that's not appropriate - aka virtually not wearing a helmet. 

If you wear a proper helmet it's very hard to suffer a fatal head injury (albeit not impossible).

Firstly it was driving tests and now it is helmets - firstly, you won't solve the road safety problems of Thailand on single issues - and you also are turning into a "one stat wonder" - you stats have no context, no source - thy don't even have a year or country.

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

1 hour ago, Khunwilko said:

Firstly it was driving tests and now it is helmets - firstly, you won't solve the road safety problems of Thailand on single issues - and you also are turning into a "one stat wonder" - you stats have no context, no source - thy don't even have a year or country.

Chill out bro. 

I never said anything about driving tests, and neither am I saying now anything about helmets in Thailand. 

All I'm saying is helmets save lives, you don't need a country or a year for that statistic, it's irrelevant. In any country in the world where a motorcyclist wears a helmet, he is 40% less like to die. It's all I said, nothing more nothing less. And that statistic proves how many helmeted vs non-helmeted suffer TBIs. Just that.

Think twice before hitting submit in a condescending tone, aye? 

[cowslip]

20 minutes ago, ctxa said:

If you wear a proper helmet it's very hard to suffer a fatal head injury (albeit not impossible).

That is so untrue as to be bizarre.

The one principal the protects you in ANY form of accident - car, bike, whatever is the shock absorption properties of whatever your'e in or wearing.  THat's why cars look so dreadful after even a minor collision - they have shock absorption zones. A body in a car at 40 mph will continue at that speed when a car comes to an abrupt halt. All you internal organs and everything will continue until they hit something (like the car interior) That's why seatbelts stretch, why zones crumple  - it's to slow you down as gradually as possible to minimise injury.,  If you stopped abruptly with no shock absorption you'd just be a heap of broken bones and mushed up guts  A motorcycle helmet is very similar but it can only absorb so much shock. It's surface is designed to be slippery and to save you from glancing blows or allow you to slide down the road without testing and breaking your neck. With more severe or direct hits the skull can still be protected but the brain crumbles like a jelly or onion layers. 

It is not uncommon to find a motorcyclist lying in the road after an accident apparently totally uninjured but totally dead from internal brain injury- The hole body and skull are fine but massive internal injuries have put an end the life. This is even with the most expensive and hi-tech helmets.

Even if you drop a helmet by accident onto a hard surface, you should replace it as the structure of the surface and internal tensions can be damaged.

If you want to get an idea of how useful a helmet can be consider standing up and falling flat on your face with bracing your fall. think what would happen to your head. A major part in any motorcycle accident is not just the forward distance, it's the drop from where you were on the motorcycle to the ground about 4 ft at 33 ft per second per second, without any extra forward speed, that is enough to turn your brain to mush.

the principal is the same as a bullet from a gun - if you fire a bullet parallel to the ground and simultaneously drop one from the end of the barrel, they will hit the ground at the same time.

 

 

Edited January 12, 2022 by Khunwilko

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

1 hour ago, Khunwilko said:

That is so untrue as to be bizarre.

The one principal the protects you in ANY form of accident - car, bike, whatever is the shock absorption properties of whatever your'e in or wearing.  THat's why cars look so dreadful after even a minor collision - they have shock absorption zones. A body in a car at 40 mph will continue at that speed when a car comes to an abrupt halt. All you internal organs and everything will continue until they hit something (like the car interior) That's why seatbelts stretch, why zones crumple  - it's to slow you down as gradually as possible to minimise injury.,  If you stopped abruptly with no shock absorption you'd just be a heap of broken bones and mushed up guts  A motorcycle helmet is very similar but it can only absorb so much shock. It's surface is designed to be slippery and to save you from glancing blows or allow you to slide down the road without testing and breaking your neck. With more severe or direct hits the skull can still be protected but the brain crumbles like a jelly or onion layers. 

It is not uncommon to find a motorcyclist lying in the road after an accident apparently totally uninjured but totally dead from internal brain injury- The hole body and skull are fine but massive internal injuries have put an end the life. This is even with the most expensive and hi-tech helmets

Ouch mate, you're so thick. 

Then don't wear a helmet, do whatever you want 

If the impact is big enough to cause a fatal head injury while wearing a helmet, you will have several other things to worry apart from the brain (chest injuries for example). Helmets may not crumple like cars do, but their absorbing capability is still impressive. 

Everything you said isn't entirely true, Formula 1 cars barely crumple and drivers have been known to survive crazy impacts, based on a carbon fiber monocoque which is extremely strong and doesn't crumple at all. A human body can take extreme G forces (even in the hundredths) if only for a fraction of a second. 

Wearing a helmet and thus not spilling your brains out on the floor upon impact surely helps the cause. 

Edit: If tomorrow the government gifts proper helmets to every rider in Thailand, and the BiB severely punish those who don't wear it, you will have a reduction of around 40% on those riders who die by brain injuries. 

If tomorrow the BiB start testing and severely punishing those drink driving you will have another reduction of X%. 

If you stop people from sitting in the back of pick-up trucks you will have another reduction of X%. 

If you improve your ambulances and response times you will have another reduction of X%. 

If you fix potholes in certain roads another X%. 

etc etc....

There's a million things that need to be done, the key point is that they should at least start by doing something and making it constant. Not just the days before New Year.

Edited January 12, 2022 by ctxa

[cowslip]

35 minutes ago, ctxa said:

If the impact is big enough to cause a fatal head injury while wearing a helmet,

You could be in for a very unpleasant surprise.

"Human brains can be injured by impact, of course, or by exceptionally violent rotation of the head, when the brain remains stationary, giving blood vessels and nerves a yank. Internal blood vessels and nerves yank parts of the brain around too in different ways, straining the vessels and nerves in the process.

Helmets designed to handle major crash energy generally contain a layer of crushable foam. When you crash and hit a hard surface, the foam part of a helmet crushes, controlling the crash energy and extending your head's stopping time by about six thousandths of a second (6 ms) to reduce the peak impact to the brain. Rotational forces and internal strains are likely to be reduced by the crushing. - https://helmets.org/general.htm

 

Edited January 12, 2022 by Khunwilko

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

1 hour ago, Khunwilko said:

You could be in for a very unpleasant surprise.

"Human brains can be injured by impact, of course, or by exceptionally violent rotation of the head, when the brain remains stationary, giving blood vessels and nerves a yank. Internal blood vessels and nerves yank parts of the brain around too in different ways, straining the vessels and nerves in the process.

Helmets designed to handle major crash energy generally contain a layer of crushable foam. When you crash and hit a hard surface, the foam part of a helmet crushes, controlling the crash energy and extending your head's stopping time by about six thousandths of a second (6 ms) to reduce the peak impact to the brain. Rotational forces and internal strains are likely to be reduced by the crushing. - https://helmets.org/general.htm

Once again, I am well aware you can suffer a brain injury while wearing a helmet. BUT it's not only gonna be your brain that is damaged. Who cares if your brain mushed inside your head when you have chest injuries incompatible with life (flail chest, perforated lung, perforated heart, torn aortas...). 

You can have an unhelmeted rider die from a brain injury alone, but statistically it's rare to have a helmeted rider die from a brain injury alone (they have a brain injury yes, followed by neck injuries, chest injuries, everything is injured essentially).

Seriously, if even a helmet isn't enough to save your brain from a fatal injury, what's gonna happen to your unprotected chest where most of your vital organs reside? 

Edited January 12, 2022 by ctxa

[cowslip]

39 minutes ago, ctxa said:

Everything you said isn't entirely true, Formula 1 cars barely crumple and drivers have been known to survive crazy impacts, based on a carbon fiber monocoque which is extremely strong and doesn't crumple at all. A human body can take extreme G forces (even in the hundredths) if only for a fraction of a second.

this is incorrect - in order to ensure the driver’s safety in case of high-speed crashes, special impact structures are designed to absorb the race car’s kinetic energy and limit the decelerations acting on the human body. this is crucial to all impacts and is particularly hi-tech in F1

The organs of the body could be travelling up to 200 mph on impact - the sides of race tracks are themselves designed to absorb impact as it the chassis of the car. Unless there is shock absorption the innards will turn to mush - try just throwing a fresh pigs liver at away.

 

a serious problem on Thai roads and probably a explanation of the high death rate to number of crashes is that Thai roads give scant regard to what happens to a car onvce control is lost Armco barriers are relatively new and are in Thailand whereas trees at the sides and centres of roads are common - the shock absorption properties are nil and the fatalities high.

[cowslip]

Just now, ctxa said:

Once again, I am well aware you can suffer a brain injury while wearing a helmet. BUT it's not only gonna be your brain that is damaged. Who cares if your brain mushed inside your head when you have chest injuries incompatible with life (flail chest, perforated lung, perforated heart, torn aortas...). 

this has got nothing to do with you original statement 

"If you wear a proper helmet it's very hard to suffer a fatal head injury (albeit not impossible)." -  you are moving the goalposts.

[cowslip]

organs most at risk in car crash

 

The spleen, kidneys, liver - they are the soft organs that continue in the direction of travel until they hit something - te inside of your ribcage - they can then rupture, burst or tear

NB - Organ damage may not present right away!

Although certain injuries to internal organs are immediately evident, sometimes symptoms are delayed. These injuries are often referred to as hidden injuries due to the fact that symptoms may not start to develop for several hours or days after a collision. For this reason, it is always important to obtain a thorough medical checkup after any involvement in a car crash, particularly if you have experienced any type of pain, weakness, or dizziness in its aftermath.

This site has a good summary - https://studentedge.org/article/let-science-explain-what-happens-to-your-body-in-a-car-crash

 

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

1 hour ago, Khunwilko said:

this has got nothing to do with you original statement 

"If you wear a proper helmet it's very hard to suffer a fatal head injury (albeit not impossible)." -  you are moving the goalposts.

Sure it is. If you are wearing a helmet and you die with a mushed brain + a torn aorta. Then even if you didn't have a mushed brain, you would be dead anyway, who cares about the helmet. 

Crash at 200 kph against a wall wearing a helmet and see if you have a fatal head injury or not, is this the point you're trying to make? You think the rest of us are silly or mentally handicapped or how does this work? You're trying to be smart by making an obvious point, lol. 

My original point still stands. Motorbike accidents in which the rider dies with a brain injury ONLY are mostly prevented by wearing a helmet. (brain injury only is the key) - if you still don't get it go look at some stats.

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

1 hour ago, Khunwilko said:

this is incorrect - in order to ensure the driver’s safety in case of high-speed crashes, special impact structures are designed to absorb the race car’s kinetic energy and limit the decelerations acting on the human body. this is crucial to all impacts and is particularly hi-tech in F1

The organs of the body could be travelling up to 200 mph on impact - the sides of race tracks are themselves designed to absorb impact as it the chassis of the car. Unless there is shock absorption the innards will turn to mush - try just throwing a fresh pigs liver at away.

a serious problem on Thai roads and probably a explanation of the high death rate to number of crashes is that Thai roads give scant regard to what happens to a car onvce control is lost Armco barriers are relatively new and are in Thailand whereas trees at the sides and centres of roads are common - the shock absorption properties are nil and the fatalities high.

I agree with you. But still there are cases where F1 drivers or Indycar drivers have experienced up to 200G for a fraction of a second. You can calculate the deceleration yourself. 

Take Max Verstappen's accident at Silverston this year for example. We know he experienced 51G for 0.099 seconds. The final speed was 0kph. We can calculate the initial speed at impact (around 180kph). 

He decelerated from 180 kph to 0 kph in 0.099 seconds, and so did his brain, his liver, his spleen, his heart, his aorta, yet he managed to survive.

Don't you think a system like HANS may have played a key role in his survival? (A system which btw has nothing to do with crumpling and/or absorbing) - not everything is about absorbing. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by ctxa

[cowslip]

4 minutes ago, ctxa said:

My original point still stands. Motorbike accidents in which the rider dies with a brain injury ONLY are mostly prevented by wearing a helmet

Oh dear - you said something "bizarre" and it is in black and white - 

"If you wear a proper helmet it's very hard to suffer a fatal head injury (albeit not impossible)." - it's nonsense and you can'y unsay it.

 

it sees to have a lot of presumptions and preconceived ideas on safety gear that actually have no basis in fact.

BTW - I spent 4 years working for a manufacturer of high tech composite materials  with  customers like BMW and Ferrari

[cowslip]

11 minutes ago, ctxa said:

HANS

HANS is PRECISELY a shock absorption system - the idea is to keep the head from whipping in a crash, preventing excessive rotational movement  - it absorbs the energy that used to result in whiplash when the head just CONTINUED IN THE DIRECTION the car was travelling - of course the energy was than transferred to the neck which was in turn attached to the spine which was strapped into the seat. I don't think you understand shock absorption - a seat belt is a shock absorber in exactly the same way.

heres an explanation of how it absorbs impact.

"which consists of several interconnected components, thus prevents extreme accelerations of the head in the event of an accident. At the same time, as already mentioned, forces acting on the neck and head area are absorbed. In addition, it prevents the driver in the event of an accident with his head on the steering wheel bounces." - https://www.tuningblog.eu/en/kategorien/tuning-wiki/hans-sicherheitssystem-253217/

Edited January 12, 2022 by Khunwilko

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

6 minutes ago, Khunwilko said:

HANS is PRECISELY a shock absorption system - the idea is to keep the head from whipping in a crash, preventing excessive rotational movement  - it absorbs the energy that used to result in whiplash when the head just CONTINUED IN THE DIRECTION the car was travelling - of course the energy was than transferred to the neck which was in turn attached to the spine which was strapped into the seat. I don't think you understand shock absorption - a seat belt is a shock absorber in exactly the same way.

HANS just like a seat belt are RESTRAINT systems. In the case of the seat belt to prevent you from flying off the car through the windshield mainly. 
 

Both HANS and seat belt absorb jackshit cuz they are not at all dynamic shock absorption system. (Zero, nada, nothing). 
 

Airbag on the other side ARE shock absorption. 
 

Climbing rope unlike seat belts DO provide dynamic shock absorption because they stretch and make for a softer stop.

Edited January 12, 2022 by ctxa

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

14 minutes ago, Khunwilko said:

Oh dear - you said something "bizarre" and it is in black and white - 

"If you wear a proper helmet it's very hard to suffer a fatal head injury (albeit not impossible)." - it's nonsense and you can'y unsay it.

it sees to have a lot of presumptions and preconceived ideas on safety gear that actually have no basis in fact.

BTW - I spent 4 years working for a manufacturer of high tech composite materials  with  customers like BMW and Ferrari

You’re just trying to “find the fifth leg on a cat”.

 

We both seem to agree that helmets save lives, yet we’ve spent the night arguing about something pointless which is the fact that helmets can only do so much. 
 

isn’t that obvious for gods sake? Helmets are great but they are no magic thing. 

Edited January 12, 2022 by ctxa

[cowslip]

5 minutes ago, ctxa said:

Both HANS and seat belt absorb jackshit cuz they are not at all dynamic shock absorption system. (Zero, nada, nothing). 

I'm a little bemused as almost everything you say is actually incorrect - you don't seem to understand the physics -  that restraint systems absorb shock to work if they didn't they would break you up.

the HANS system BTW actually has the same effect as an airbag.

Your theories on this are subjective, based on observation not on the science which is the same way people look at road safety in Thailand which is why they don't actually understand what is going on.

You really need to go back to school on this.

Edited January 12, 2022 by Khunwilko

[Lyp14 [ctxa]]

Just now, Khunwilko said:

I'm a little bemused as almost everything you say is actually incorrect - you don't seem to understand the physics -  that restraint systems absorb shock to work if they didn't they would break you up.

the HANS system BTW actually has te same effect as an airbag.

You really need to go back to school on this.

LMAO. 

 

Then why don’t you replace the shock absorbers in your car with a solid steel rod? 
 

according to your theory it would be the same thing, because even though now there’s 0 dynamic shock absorption, your cars wheel is not moving either side so it’s absorbing the shocks from potholes or whatever and everything is fine….