You shouldn’t pull through if you can’t see what’s coming from both directions on the other side.
That people who would never go roaring through to the other side of the parking aisle without looking think it’s appropriate to regularly back out into traffic – which is a guarantee that you are driving blind, and will cause an incident if there is any traffic in the lane at all as opposed to only if someone is pulling into that one space – is the insane part of the discussion.
A question.
When parking in a roundabout, should one park straight in or park backing in?
A poor unsophisticated southern drive would like to know.
Is this a sincere question?
If sincere, how are the parking spaces aligned in relation to the roundabout’s flow of traffic?
(A) Tangentially, along the roundabout flow?
(B) Perpendicularly to the roundabout flow? This is also radially, along a line connecting the center of the roundabout’s circle to the roundabout.
(C) Diagonally, such that if one were to back into such a spot the nose of their car would be pointing towards the oncoming traffic in the roundabout?
Or some other way?
The numbers don’t say how many accidents happen going in vs. pulling out or where they occur. But they do state that in over 70% of backover accidents the driver is a parent or close relative. This would imply that backover tend to happen in people’s own driveways.
Again, for all the claims that backing in is statistically safer no one has been able to provide a link to any statistics. Not here, not in any article on the subject I’ve ever seen.
Like I mentioned, I’ve driven for two couriers services and both of their insurance companies required backing, claiming it reduces accidents.
I would think that of all entities, an insurance company would know the actual risk of various driving practices.
There is no question that more accidents occur when the vehicle is in reverse as opposed to in a forward gear, particularly when you factor in the amount of time a vehicle is moving in reverse versus a forward gear. The question is, did these occur while the vehicle was trying to go into or out of a parking space?
I doubt you will find any legitimate statistics on this, since it would be terribly difficult to control all the factors needed for a fair comparison. You could look at the number of accidents that occur in parking lots that require back-in parking and compare that to similarly laid-out parking lots that do not, but one could argue that in the parking lot that does not require back-in parking have accidents because of the few people are allowed to back-in while the majority pulls-in.
You could also compare parking lot accident rates for companies that require all parking to be back-in to general parking lot accidents, but as these companies tend to have a very strong safety culture, one could argue that it is the strong safety culture that reduces the accidents, not the back-in parking.
But, companies that have a strong safety culture (UPS, BP, and others) tend to also require back-in parking. I am told they have done analyses that has shown this to be safer, but I haven’t seen any of them. It could be just that requiring back-in parking, they sub-consciously enforce a safety mindset to the employees when the get to work, which benefits them not only in fewer parking lot incidents, but a safer workplace on the whole.
Probably ten. me going maybe three. Enough that it would have caused significant damage.
And yes, in a parking lot it is NOT expected or predictable that someone is going to cross into the space associated with the other aisle. Spaces are associated with aisles. Is there and official law about this. Probably not but it is clearly NOT the usual and customary, the expected, to cross over to the space associated with the other aisle. Again doing the unexpected by other drivers creates danger.
Amazingly when parked I look to where traffic is expected to be coming from when I open my door.
As has been mentioned, there is no such convincing data.
One other issue … the fallacious point has been raised that it is the same time either way. I dispute that.
Backing in you are making traffic wait for you to finish up. Backing out you wait for the opening to back out safely. Yes it is from that POV an efficient decision but I wonder if the fact that it feels like cheating on the social norm that drives the anger at the behavior that we see here.
I would say it is(or should be) expected. Some parking lots are not 2 cars wide in the aisle and most drivers go down the middle both to allow space to react to someone backing out and also to give room to pull into a space.
Well, good luck, and let me know how all that works out for you! :D:D:D
No, you’re rolling into traffic you can’t see, which then waits for you to finish the turn and clear the lane, assuming they’re lucky enough to stop in time. You don’t perceive this as happening the way you perceive the car in front of you signalling a reverse turn, because front-in parkers haven’t developed the cognitive capacity to understand that things continue to exist even when they can’t see them.
I can not support this rant. I’m a backer-inner whenever I can be. I see it like this: You’re gonna have to back up at some point anyway. If you back in, you’ve done it. If you pull in forward, you’ll have to back up to get out. Why do you care about the order in which it happens? As a bonus, if I need to make a quick Dukes Of Hazzard style exit, I’m already pointing the right way, and I can burn rubber out of there.
Interesting that this should come up. On another site I frequent they are having the same discussion, with backing in the dominant opinion.
My opinion: I don’t care one way or the other unless the driver is a buffoon and can’t do it quickly. You get one shot, and if you can’t do it stop trying. I typically pull in nose-first myself, but that’s not because it’s a preference, it’s just what I always do. It wouldn’t take me but an extra 5 seconds to back into a normal-sized space.
The numbers I’ve seen were for non-traffic accidents, meaning mainly parking lots and driveways. If the numbers quoted from NPR are correct, more than 94% of people leaving parking spaces are backing out. I’ve not heard of any pedestrians being hit by cars entering parking spaces, so I think it’s safe to assume it doesn’t happen very often. That leaves us with less than 6% of vehicles being responsible for nearly 45% of fatal rollovers (with the caveat that those numbers are only for accidents where children were the victims).
I’d love to see more complete statistics, but I don’t think they exist. If they did someone would have produced them at some point during these discussions.
Where in the hell does that come from?
From this NPR link, posted by DSEID in post 72:
And this chart mentioned in post 88 stating that from 2006 to 2010 there were 448 backover fatalities and 358 frontover fatalities involving children.
And I just found this from NHTA
From 2008 to 2011:
1,029 people killed by forward moving vehicles, 926 by backward moving vehicles.
63,000 people injured by forward moving vehicles, 52,000 by backward moving vehicles.
Note that these are stats for non traffic accidents, so almost certainly mostly parking lots and driveways.
It would be nice to find the raw data, but I would strongly suspect that the overwhelming majority of the accidents of backward moving vehicles were vehicles backing out of their parking place (or driveway).
Just because a vehicle is moving backwards does not mean it is backing into a parking place. Nearly everyone who pulls head-in a parking place will back out, and that is where the accidents happen. This is the reason that nearly all safety experts agree that, where appropriate, it is much safer to back into a parking place than out of one.
(My bolding)
That’s easy to say, but where are the numbers to back this up?
The front-in parkers literally don’t understand this. They lack object permanence. They think that once you are in the parking space you are later magically teleported to your next destination, and don’t understand the reality that the amount of driving forward and driving in reverse is always the same, you’re just choosing the circumstances of the reverse driving to be more or less safe. The part where “doing the reversing when you can see in all directions and other drivers understand your intentions is obviously safer” doesn’t even get to them, because they think on some level that if you park front-in, you never have to reverse at all.
THIS. Oh, so much, this.