Time to disallow 'Right Turn' without the indicator shown at traffic light junction?

[nfshp253]

This I agree totally.

 

[AL5509]

Thus, a politically correct statement should be:

The careless behaviour of a small minority of vehicles turning right at junctions has led to accidents that have resulted in a public backlash for the ban of vehicles turning right simultaneously as pedestrians cross the roads at junctions. It would be unfortunate if we allowed the careless behaviour of this small minority to prevent the large majority of responsible and considerate drivers from enjoying the benefits of infrastructure.

Used safely and responsibly, right turns controlled by a single green arrow offer great convenience and benefits. They are essential to Singapore's transition to world class mobility, centred on public transport.

Reference:
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/small-minority-of-cyclists-mobility-device-users-careless

Chim...
My england really no good de lo.

Likewise, to me personally what a word to say? No?

It would be unfortunate if we allowed the careless behaviour of this small minority to prevent the large majority of responsible and considerate drivers from enjoying the benefits of infrastructure.

Such careless behaviour of just that small minority could easily take a life from our loved ones.

Yes many will start debating again, accidents happened anywhere, everywhere but seen there really seem to be a problem, why not fix it?

Or only til we kanna it personally then we feel THAT pain?
"No pain No gain" =/

Imagine if Ms Kathy will to be your grand daughter, daughter, sister, relative, friend?
http://stomp.straitstimes.com/singapore-seen/nus-student-who-died-in-clementi-crash-was-only-child-she-is-my-source-of-joy

Can any find a suitable method to prevent such cases(as much as we could) to happen again?

Some will said/commented/blamed the 2 drivers for not being experienced or not up to 'their level of driving skill'.

To me it a worse HUMAN's error aka mis-judgement for this to happen.
People take risk and chance/choice trying to reach home faster:

-if the taxi can wait for 10 secs later, the mpv would had speed by the traffic hence safer to go; yes sadly everyone in the taxi will be 10 secs later to reach destination.
"Be late than Never"?

-The MPV maybe rushing to somewhere to meet his friends or whoever and drive abit faster aka speeding, given it is green light(of his favour).
But if that driver will to drive slower and be more denfensive which cost 10-20-30-40-60 secs or even a few more minutes of his precious time being late for his meeting, he could save a life too.
"Be Late and not Regretted"?

Hence the point is as you mentioned:

"Be safe Not sorry"

It would be unfortunate if we allowed the careless behaviour of this small minority to prevent the large majority of responsible and considerate drivers from enjoying the benefits of infrastructure.


And again, a small group of the "large majority" may have forgotten the meaning of being "responsible and considerate"?

Being "responsible and considerate" costs time too?
Defensive driving is being responsible, so slow down when reaching junction, give way, dont tail gate, etc etc
Being considerate may costs more time of your watch? Need to give way by not road hogging, signal before turn, wait for traffic to clear before moving off or turn, park the car nicely as not to blck others, etc etc.

So it a point to tell others how you are with your driving skill as we are not on the race track, it how to minimize/reduce getting things wrong for others ba.

Hence using only the controlled single green arrow for right turn as I had too mentioned in my 1st post for this thread is to try to ensure safety yet can still enjoying the benefits of infrastructure, no?

Used safely and responsibly, right turns controlled by a single green arrow offer great convenience and benefits. They are essential to Singapore's transition to world class mobility, centred on public transport.

Anyway it just a discuss.
If no, no lo.
=p

 

[Philipkee]

Sorry if I am off topic but using the excuse that only a minority of drivers cause the accident does not fly.

Perhaps that is why they never maintain mrt. Cos only a minority of train rides end up in breakdowns. Delay maintenance until breakdowns occur almost every week.

I support the turn only on green arrow cos it makes things safer because I hope no one is doing an analysis that xx number of people must die first before it becomes worth it to change the system.

 

[edwinttt1978]

Rethink how right turns are regulated

I read with sadness the accident involving a taxi and a car at the junction of Commonwealth Avenue West and Clementi Road, leading to the loss of a life (NUS undergrad dies, 5 injured in accident at Clementi junction, April 21; and A nature lover who put others first, April 22).

With roads becoming wider and the emergence of many kinds of personal mobility devices (PMDs), I urge a rethink on right turns controlled by a single green arrow.

It is time to regulate right turns using red-amber-green traffic signals, especially at large, complex junctions.

Drivers waiting to turn right have to look out for vehicles going straight while estimating their speed, be aware of pedestrians crossing the road they are turning into, and react quickly to fast motorised PMDs that could venture onto the road in a flash. That places a lot of strain on the driver.

The driver's point of view is also often blocked by large vehicles waiting to turn right from the opposite direction. A large tipper truck can block the view of the front driver. Just a tiny lapse in concentration can lead to an accident.

The situation is often made worse when the front driver is pressured into making the right turn before the green arrow comes on by impatient drivers honking behind him.

The drivers at the back may have a relatively clearer view as they are some distance away, and may become impatient when they perceive the front driver as being too cautious.

Changing the way large junctions are regulated will reduce stress on drivers and leave less to human judgment.

Allowing right turns only when traffic lights signal all vehicles travelling in the opposite direction - as well as crossing pedestrians - to stop will not only reduce accidents, but could also save lives.

Lim Kong Hiong

http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/rethink-how-right-turns-are-regulated

Green man light doesn't mean it's safe to cross

I agree with Mr Lim Kong Hiong (Rethink how right turns are regulated; April 22).

Speaking from the viewpoint of a pedestrian and a mother with young children, I do not like the current right-turn rule too.

Every morning, I walk my two boys - who are eight and 10 years of age - to school, even though the school is only a 10-minute walk away and it seems they can go on their own.

The reason is the big traffic junction they have to cross.

I have no faith in the green man light at the junction.

Often, impatient drivers inch close to the pedestrians who are still walking across the road. This is unsafe for pedestrians, and I have to pay extra attention when crossing.

I lived in Hong Kong for many years and never saw such a thing there. There, a green man means all cars have to stop to let the pedestrians cross the road safely.

This is not the case in Singapore. The meaning of the green man here is unclear.

Traffic laws should be clear and unambiguous. As pedestrians are more vulnerable on the road than cars, traffic laws should offer protection to the pedestrians.

Kwok So Ha (Madam)

http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/green-man-light-doesnt-mean-its-safe-to-cross

 

[edwinttt1978]

Do away with discretionary right turns

I read with dismay about the accident that resulted in the death of a 19-year-old woman last Thursday (NUS undergrad dies, 5 injured in accident at Clementi junction; April 21).

One important contributing factor in this and many other accidents is that drivers in Singapore are allowed to turn right at traffic junctions when the green light is in their favour.

This is provided there is no oncoming traffic in the opposite direction, there is no red arrow disallowing right turns and there are no pedestrians crossing the road they are turning into.

Under ideal conditions, it is possible for drivers to keep an eye out for all these and avoid accidents.

However, often, the view of oncoming traffic is obstructed by a curve in the road or a large vehicle, or when drivers are speeding or in a rush.
Then, the discretionary right turn becomes more risky.

The main problem is that when the lights are green in one's favour, they are also green for oncoming traffic and for pedestrians to cross the road on the right.

The system in Malaysia is safer - the green light is granted only to traffic coming from one direction.

So, if drivers get a green light in their favour, the lights for all the other roads leading to the junction are red.

With this system, the risk of accidents involving vehicles making discretionary right turns is reduced.

Drivers may need to wait longer when the light is red, but congestion-management software for traffic lights can help ease congestion.

I appeal to the Land Transport Authority to seriously consider doing away with discretionary right turns.

It does not require any large investment in infrastructure, and I am sure that many drivers and pedestrians will agree that this is the safest option for all road users.

Terence Tan Hwa Min (Dr)

http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/do-away-with-discretionary-right-turns

 

[edwinttt1978]

Implement red arrow at all right turns

There are two types of right-turn arrows at traffic junctions in Singapore - one that shows only a green arrow and another that shows both red and green arrows (NUS undergrad dies, 5 injured in accident at Clementi junction; April 21).

I hope that the authorities will consider implementing both the red and green right-turn arrows at all junctions.

At junctions with only green arrows, drivers can take the right turn at any time, regardless of whether the arrow appears, as long as there are no oncoming vehicles.

I have often observed cars inching into the yellow box and hastily turning right or even making a quick U-turn to avoid oncoming vehicles.

This is a cause for concern, especially if the driver behind blindly follows the car in front without checking, or assumes that the green arrow has come on.

I have even encountered instances where drivers at the back get impatient with the front car and start honking.

All these problems can be solved with the implementation of the red arrow, as drivers then are allowed to turn right only when the green arrow appears and the roads are truly clear.

I hope the Land Transport Authority will look at this problem and resolve the inconsistency over right turns at junctions.

It may add a few minutes to our daily drive but it is worth the trouble if we can prevent tragedies from happening.

Raymond Ng Teck Wei

http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/implement-red-arrow-at-all-right-turns

 

[edwinttt1978]

Chim...
My england really no good de lo.

Likewise, to me personally what a word to say? No?

It would be unfortunate if we allowed the careless behaviour of this small minority to prevent the large majority of responsible and considerate drivers from enjoying the benefits of infrastructure.

Such careless behaviour of just that small minority could easily take a life from our loved ones.

Yes many will start debating again, accidents happened anywhere, everywhere but seen there really seem to be a problem, why not fix it?

Or only til we kanna it personally then we feel THAT pain?
"No pain No gain" =/

Imagine if Ms Kathy will to be your grand daughter, daughter, sister, relative, friend?
http://stomp.straitstimes.com/singa...-crash-was-only-child-she-is-my-source-of-joy

Can any find a suitable method to prevent such cases(as much as we could) to happen again?

Some will said/commented/blamed the 2 drivers for not being experienced or not up to 'their level of driving skill'.

To me it a worse HUMAN's error aka mis-judgement for this to happen.
People take risk and chance/choice trying to reach home faster:

-if the taxi can wait for 10 secs later, the mpv would had speed by the traffic hence safer to go; yes sadly everyone in the taxi will be 10 secs later to reach destination.
"Be late than Never"?

-The MPV maybe rushing to somewhere to meet his friends or whoever and drive abit faster aka speeding, given it is green light(of his favour).
But if that driver will to drive slower and be more denfensive which cost 10-20-30-40-60 secs or even a few more minutes of his precious time being late for his meeting, he could save a life too.
"Be Late and not Regretted"?

Hence the point is as you mentioned:

"Be safe Not sorry"

It would be unfortunate if we allowed the careless behaviour of this small minority to prevent the large majority of responsible and considerate drivers from enjoying the benefits of infrastructure.


And again, a small group of the "large majority" may have forgotten the meaning of being "responsible and considerate"?

Being "responsible and considerate" costs time too?
Defensive driving is being responsible, so slow down when reaching junction, give way, dont tail gate, etc etc
Being considerate may costs more time of your watch? Need to give way by not road hogging, signal before turn, wait for traffic to clear before moving off or turn, park the car nicely as not to blck others, etc etc.

So it a point to tell others how you are with your driving skill as we are not on the race track, it how to minimize/reduce getting things wrong for others ba.

Hence using only the controlled single green arrow for right turn as I had too mentioned in my 1st post for this thread is to try to ensure safety yet can still enjoying the benefits of infrastructure, no?

Used safely and responsibly, right turns controlled by a single green arrow offer great convenience and benefits. They are essential to Singapore's transition to world class mobility, centred on public transport.

Anyway it just a discuss.
If no, no lo.
=p

Waiting for somebody to write to ST Forum regarding “the careless behaviour of a small minority” or somebody similar to Mrs Josephine Teo to make a real statement on this issue.

Mrs Josephine Teo, of course, has been promoted after making many politically correct comments, including the famous “You don’t need much space to have sex”, and is no longer the Senior Minister of State for Transport.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ministers-rejoinder-to-no-flat-no-child-belief

 

[AL5509]

Waiting for somebody to write to ST Forum regarding “the careless behaviour of a small minority” or somebody similar to Mrs Josephine Teo to make a real statement on this issue.

Mrs Josephine Teo, of course, has been promoted after making many politically correct comments, including the famous “You don’t need much space to have sex”, and is no longer the Senior Minister of State for Transport.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/ministers-rejoinder-to-no-flat-no-child-belief

Hopefully.

 

[edwinttt1978]

Sorry if I am off topic but using the excuse that only a minority of drivers cause the accident does not fly.

Perhaps that is why they never maintain mrt. Cos only a minority of train rides end up in breakdowns. Delay maintenance until breakdowns occur almost every week.

I support the turn only on green arrow cos it makes things safer because I hope no one is doing an analysis that xx number of people must die first before it becomes worth it to change the system.

At least on the issue of e-scooters, it did fly until it landed badly, prompting the Minister of Transport Mr Khaw Boon Wah a rethink on the growing danger of e-scooters.

Fortunately for Mrs Teo, she is no longer involved in such flying/mobility exercises.

 

[edwinttt1978]

Now, it is naive to think that speed reminder signs will deter unsafe driving. The true deterrent can only be traffic camera reminder signs.

——————
Insufficient signs on roads to remind drivers of speed limits

The recent reports of tragic accidents on our roads raise the issue of road safety and the speeding culture of drivers here.

The speed limit of all roads in Singapore is 50kmh unless otherwise stated and or if the area is a School Zone or Silver Zone. These two zones have a speed limit of 40kmh.

Yet, if one were to stand at any stretch of road and observe, one would notice vehicles including, public buses, zooming past at speeds in excess of these limits.

Unlike many other cities overseas, we do not have enough markings on the roads to remind drivers of the speed limits.

We also do not have enough signs showing the speed limits, and drivers are often left to guess what the speed limit is.

Even our school zones lack these signs to remind drivers.

In the United States, reducing driving speed by half in a school zone is required by law.

But in Singapore, we seem to take it for granted that a road hump or a generic "Reduce Speed Limit" sign is sufficient to get drivers to slow down. It is not.

The Land Transport Authority and the police need to work together to work out tougher measures to deter unsafe driving.

Brown Pereira

http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/l...ns-on-roads-to-remind-drivers-of-speed-limits

 

[Tyrian]

So after one incident many monkey come out and say change is needed?

I'd say 1 is an exception. There are tons of cars who pass by this road with no issues. Just because of 1 incident and we need to change the rule?

We need to learn something out of it and that's not to take safety for granted.

The question I'll ask if seat belt was worn at the time of accident.

 

[superman]

If you have no confident to turn right across a junction then wait for the green arrow. If you don't have confident to drive at 90km/h on the expressway then keep left and drive at 50km/h. Do we have to reduce the speed limit of the expressway to 50km/h just because some crash into the barrier at 90km/h.

 

[AL5509]

So after one incident many monkey come out and say change is needed?

I'd say 1 is an exception. There are tons of cars who pass by this road with no issues. Just because of 1 incident and we need to change the rule?

We need to learn something out of it and that's not to take safety for granted.

The question I'll ask if seat belt was worn at the time of accident.

Ya lo ya lo.

Think you can approach the dad to ask him personally?

http://stomp.straitstimes.com/singapore-seen/father-of-nus-girl-killed-in-clementi-crash-i-hope-to-see-hear-and-feel-you-soon

 

[AL5509]

If you have no confident to turn right across a junction then wait for the green arrow. If you don't have confident to drive at 90km/h on the expressway then keep left and drive at 50km/h. Do we have to reduce the speed limit of the expressway to 50km/h just because some crash into the barrier at 90km/h.

I agreed lo.
But why keep speed at only 90km/hour?

I THINK I can drive confidently at 100~110~120~130km/hour with no issue de.
Who is the one who set only at 90km/hr?

Belittle us; Singaporean's drivers ability.

 

[nfshp253]

I don't think it's likely for anyone to be flung out of a window if they were wearing a seat belt.

 

[li9ht5peed]

I agreed lo.
But why keep speed at only 90km/hour?

I THINK I can drive confidently at 100~110~120~130km/hour with no issue de.
Who is the one who set only at 90km/hr?

Belittle us; Singaporean's drivers ability.

Under the current rules, you can drive as fast as you want, or as slow as you want. It is up to your skill and safety judgement, and also whether you are willing to pay the fines as they come. If you go fast, nobody will be impressed. But if you go slow, be ready to get honked and shown sign language.

You have no appreciation for what a great job LTA did with our road infrastructure (except MRT lo). Try comparing with China, India or Malaysia. Our road design and traffic signalling algorithms is really no horse run. I dare say - lumber ONE on this planet.

If you keep condemning our traffic lights - please go get a job with LTA and tell them what you will do.

Do not "speak with the privilege of watching things rather than being responsible to make it happen. I think we know it's a very serious matter"

 

[edwinttt1978]

I don't think it's likely for anyone to be flung out of a window if they were wearing a seat belt.

Expert opinion is needed on this as it involves the law of physics, taking into account the speed the cars were travelling in at the point of impact, the G-force generated, the rebound effect, etc, and in their expert opinion, whether or not the use of a seat belt would have helped in those circumstances.

 

[edwinttt1978]

Close to 800 cases of seat belt violations every month; safety experts stress importance of buckling up

SINGAPORE - Every month, there are close to 800 cases of passengers and drivers caught by the authorities for failing to belt up in their vehicles.

While last year's 9,541 cases formed a slight dip from the 9,836 cases in 2016, road safety experts reiterated the importance of wearing seat belts in reducing the severity of accident injuries, in the wake of a number of fatal accidents recently.

The Traffic Police, in providing the numbers, said: "The simple act of wearing seat belts can make the difference between life and death in the event of an accident."

Singapore Road Safety Council's chairman Bernard Tay said in a statement on Monday (April 23): "All persons travelling in vehicles, irrespective of their age, should be appropriately belted up... to lower the risk of injury in the event of an accident."

Mr Tay said drivers have a "duty and responsibility" to prevent accidents at all times, must always travel at safe speeds and keep a careful lookout for other road users.

His comments come after two recent fatal incidents: A 19-year-old died after being nearly flung out of the window of the taxi she was in when it collided with a car; and a 23-year-old woman, also a back-seat passenger, died after the car she was in collided with a bus.

It is, however, unclear if the two victims had belted up or not.

Dr Victor Ong, a senior consultant at National University Hospital's Emergency Medicine Department, said the hospital's data showed that in similar accident types, passengers tended to have more severe and varied injuries when not wearing seat belts.

This was derived from a study of about 2,600 patients treated from 2014 to 2016.

"In a head-on collision, the vehicle's forward momentum is suddenly slowed and stopped. However, for the passengers, their forward motion continues unless something stops it," said Dr Ong.

He said that "unrestrained passengers tend to be thrown about in the car and become projectiles as well".

Rear-seat passengers could suffer injuries such as thoracic and lumbar spinal injuries, in addition to chest and abdominal trauma as well as fractures of the limbs, he added.

Despite the threat of such severe injuries and the possibility of a $120 fine, The Straits Times found that more than half of the 30 people it polled admitted to not belting up when sitting in the back seat of taxis, private-hire cars or cars driven by people they knew.

Most of the respondents cited the "discomfort and inconvenience" of wearing a seat belt, or that there was no culture of belting up.

"It is inconvenient and restricts my movements. If the journey is short, I don't bother," said Ms Chong Hwee Lin, an accountant in her 40s.

Secondary 3 student Rainee Quek, 15, said she knew it was important to belt up but did not do so "because there is no culture of wearing seat belts in my family".

Ms Crystal Ong, 19, however, said she did not have the habit of belting up till she was involved in a near accident about two months ago.

The Institute of Technical Education student said she was sitting in a private-hire car when the driver, who was speeding, slammed on the brakes to avoid a collision with a bus turning out from a bus bay.

"I slid forward and hit the (back of the) front passenger seat," she said, adding that she belts up all the time now.

"It just takes one incident to be scared," said Ms Ong.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapo...ery-month-safety-experts-stress-importance-of

 

[edwinttt1978]

So after one incident many monkey come out and say change is needed?

I'd say 1 is an exception. There are tons of cars who pass by this road with no issues. Just because of 1 incident and we need to change the rule?

We need to learn something out of it and that's not to take safety for granted.

The question I'll ask if seat belt was worn at the time of accident.

Written Reply by Minister for Transport Khaw Boon Wan to Parliamentary Question on Accidents at Junctions Where Pedestrians and Turning Vehicles Share Green Time
06 Nov 2017 In Parliament

Mr Png Eng Huat asked the Minister for Transport

a. for the past 10 years, what is the number of accidents involving pedestrians or multiple vehicles at junctions where pedestrians and turning vehicles share the same green time versus junctions where they do not; and

b. what is the number and percentage of signalised junctions with shared green time on Singapore roads to date.

Reply by Minister for Transport Khaw Boon Wan:

1. There are about 1,500 signalised junctions with shared green time. This is about 90% of all signalised junctions. Such junctions allow vehicles to turn when there are no pedestrians crossing during the green man phase, ensuring smoother traffic flow on our roads.

2. Over the last 10 years, there were on average about 3 fatal accidents and 40 injury accidents per year at signalised junctions involving a pedestrian or cyclist, and vehicles turning right during the green man phase. However, we do not have the breakdown of whether these accidents occurred at junctions with or without shared green time.

3. To enhance pedestrians' safety at signalised junctions with shared green time, LTA has adjusted traffic light timings to give pedestrians a head start in crossing the road. LTA has also installed lighted road studs as well as additional road markings and signs at higher risk junctions to remind motorists to give way.

https://www.mot.gov.sg/news-centre/...trians-and-turning-vehicles-share-green-time/

 

[edwinttt1978]

There is even a petition calling for a change in traffic light rules to prevent further casualties.
11,322 have signed so far!

Fortunately, Singapore makes strikes illegal, else the police will be kept busy with strikes every now and then.

https://www.change.org/p/land-trans...rther-casualties-singapore?recruiter=21252883