Taxi Driver Online

www.rospa.com/roadsafety/advice/motorvehicles/abs.htm

Says ABS fitted vehicles do NOT stop any quicker than non ABS. Depends upon the skill of driver to avoid fierce braking.

_________________
Former taxi driver

Aren't the two parts of the highlighted text contradictory?

But while 'cadence' braking is all very well with a skilled driver, the average driver just slams the breaks on in an emergency.

Thus surely the point is that while normal breaking systems may be adequate for skilled drivers, for Mr Average ABS means shorter stopping distances?

Thus jimbo may be correct when saying that the need for ABS depends on the skill of the driver, but to suggest that this means that ABS is not generally required is a non sequitur, surely?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

"Average" drivers are, as I stated previously, lulled into a false sense of security, believing ABS will save them. It won't.

_________________
Former taxi driver

But would you rather get hit by a car doing 70 mph, or one doing 40 mph?

And would you prefer getting hit walking down the pavement, or rather the 'out of control' motor stayed on the road?

_________________
IDFIMH

Try the rospa link I found just for you.

_________________
Former taxi driver

So you would rather get hit at 70 mph, than 40 mph?

And would prefer to get hit while walking, rather than being missed?

_________________
IDFIMH

If I'm ever hit by a car travelling down the path at 70 mph, I will be praying it's got ABS.

_________________
Former taxi driver

The point is, if it has got ABS, then hopefully for you it will have slowed down in an ordered manner.

_________________
IDFIMH

So is that every average driver, and how 'lulled' are they, and is the extent of the lulling such that it makes these drivers more dangerous than without the more effective braking system?

You may be correct to an extent, but I suspect that overall the more effective braking more than makes up for the lulling effect.

Personally, I'm quite sure I didn't speed up when I went from a standard car to an ABS one, and indeed I rarely think about it when I'm driving.

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

The ones that are lulled, are the ones, like Sussex, for instance who believe that ABS is better, and more efficient, than a standard braking system. They are lulled into believing that ABS stops a vehicle in a shorter braking distance than standard brakes, when this patently is not the case. Where ABS does work, is when driver error has occured, such as not driving to the conditions on an icy road, or a wet, greasy road. If drivers were to slow down in heavy rain, and leave a greater distance between vehicles, ABS would not be required. Are the only vehicles involved in shunts non ABS? Or as I still suspect, the ones being driven by tailgaiters who are overconfident in their vehicles and their own driving abilities. In accidents, or more correctly crashes, surely the only common denominator is that each vehicle has a driver? Whilst ABS is useful, to call it a lifesaver, as Sussex has, is surely an exaggerated claim. Would you refuse to drive a non ABS vehicle because it was not, in your view, "safe"?
Guns don't kill, people do. Surely the same logic should be applied to vehicles?

_________________
Former taxi driver

OK, so you've outlined how drivers can be lulled into a false sense of security, but I for one never doubted that, did I?

So what about the real question that I posed above?

_________________
Taxi Driver Online
www.taxi-driver.co.uk

Can we take it that Jimbo believes ABS is not a necessity? Then again, no one ever suggested it was. If ABS is not a necessity, then is the turning circle a necessity? If the turning circle is a necessity why is it not mandatory in every licensing authority in the UK?

Regards

JD

It would depend on what you define as neccessary.

ABS is not. A comfort blanket for some it may be, but under normal driving conditions, it does not reduce stopping distances.

I did not bring the turning circle into this thread, but as it is now on the table, I believe the turning circle is used more frequently by me, than ABS would be, and is therefore more of a neccessity than ABS would be. As I have stated on several previous occaisions, the 25ft turning circle is not just about a 180 degree turn, but offers the driver a degree of manoeverability into, and out of traffic that the E7 type can only dream of. Neccessary? No. useful? Yes. I have used the turning circle to full effect several times today, and every day that I have driven Metrocabs. There has not been one single time that I could have, or would have, needed ABS, in the last 14 years of metro driving.

A few years ago, my then neighbour put a massive totem pole in his garden. I asked him why, and he said," I'ts an elephant scarer" I said, "There aren't any elephants around here!" he replied, "it works!!!"

_________________
Former taxi driver

The turning circle was introduced into the debate on or around the fourth post when I asked you "is there a difference between LTI insisting on a turning circle requirement" and the council insisting on ABS? The question was designed to get your opinion on why one should be mandatory and the other shouldn't? I take it now that you believe the Turning Circle is not necessary, that you agree with me anything not necessary should not be mandatory? So why do we have councils insisting on turning circles when turning circles as Edinburgh has concluded are unnecessary?

JD

Jimbo wrote



I have to agree with jimbos points JD. My private car has ABS and I feel no differance when braking from the taxi I drive.
It wasn't until the the removal of the turning circle debate, that I really thought about was it really neccesary. And I must agree with jimbo that it is more than just the 180 degree turn.
How many times I have to get out of tight situations that with a normal vehicle would be near impossible.
How quick I can reverse into a parking space or rank etc.....
ABS doesn't help me get around every day obsticals, the turning circle does.

Here's one I would like to throw into the pot. with all these new vehicles coming onto the streets of Edinburgh, will the council extend the ranks as the distance behind the taxi in front will have to be greater to accomodate the vehicle without the turning circle?

JD I could pick holes in the Buchanan report but in my opinion there was other influences behind the council decision.
The disability groups had a big say but had no survey to back their arguements. Their arguement that the E7 could take bigger wheelchairs was laughable. Yes it can take bigger chairs but can drivers push these chairs into the vehicle. Bigger chairs means more weight. more weight means a higher risk of refusal.

Then there was their arguement about more choice of vehicle.
How many differant styles of wheelchair are there?
Does the cab trade have to change the vehicle every time a new wheelchair comes on the market?.
what percentage of wheelchair users can't use the present models of taxis?.
Can the council not get buses that carry more than one wheelchair?.