In England They Do Fake Emergent Driving In Public!

[zippyRN]

Don't be silly, Scott. The proof burden swings both ways. You have failed to show that the risk-to-benefit ratio of this practice justifies its use. We can't even prove that the use of lights and sirens is justified in real emergencies. In fact, multiple studies contradict that belief. So how exactly do you intend to prove that it is justified in practice?

are any of these studies relevant to the UK setting ?

as has been posted in this thread previously individual Uk ambulance services run several thousand calls / day day in day out across the dozen or so Uk services , an emergency driving related fatality in the Uk is National News becasue iot happens so infrequently

But I'd like for you to cite some credible references that this practice results in a significantly better outcome than the same amount of training done without faking emergencies. The burden of proof is not on us to disprove it. The burden of proof is on you to prove it.

how can you do the same training without live emergency conditions runs

do you really feel confident aobut the prosepct of the first time someone uses warning devices and claims exemptions on the public road being aginst the whatever arbitrary figure your service wishes to see on the stopwatch in Comms ?

if these 'fake' runs were 'joy rides' and were being undertaken by unsupervised staff rather than being supervised by Training officers or Specialist instructors ther might perhaps be some justification in the criticism, but for anyone from the vast majority of the USA to suggest that any Uk practice regarding warning devices is excessive is living in a dreamworld.

and the Ambulance run in the you tube clip is not in the UK looks to be France , based on

-LHD vehicle

-French Registration plates

- the type of bus that passes the other way ...

the EFAD run is in the Uk

the maximum speed noted on the video i saw oin the first stretch of single carriageway road is 67 mph

the speed limit for a car on that road would be 60 , for a none emergency vehicle HGV 40 mph, the average UK fire appliance even if it; is Volvo or Scania is a custom designed and built vehicle and enginerred to perform appropraitely under EFAD conditions

aslo note that the heavy, standing traffic at 2:58 they Stop dead, and switch off warning devices rather than blow through the temporary traffic lights ( no exemption same as when you reach a railway crossing)

it is also notable that the in town stretch following the temporary traffic lights is condiucted at below the speed limit although other exemptions are claimed

6:02 another dead stop

as for the camera view , that is the camera you would get from any Operational vehicle in the locla fire service fleet as they all have them ... to aid accident investigation and provide evidence against those who obstruct them

[scott33]

Dust, I will forever treasure the initial misconceptions I had about you

I can only deduce from your reply that you are out to ruffle feathers, and that you don't honestly believe the crap this troll has been spouting.

As for the OP, I am not out to prove anything, merely replying to his verbal diarrhea about a system he knows absolutely nothing about, as perfectly illustrated by his "geographically-challenged" comments here and on YouTube. He doesn't even have an argument; more an opinion which sounds more like a 4 year old wanting to know why the moon keeps following them.

For those who live in boxes, a good starting point would be here.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari...-8&oe=UTF-8

See any trends?

[scott33]

My English friend agrees with every one of the items I listed.

And where are they?

Just because less-enlightened people agree with these public exercises does not make it right.

Less enlightened people who do the job for a living, not vollying from home.

References? We don't need no stinkin' references.

Of course, how stupid of me

I am an emergency vehicle driver instructor.

No you are not

I know all of these concepts and maneuvers can be accomplished without subjecting the public to FAKE runs.

And with a greater risk to the public...

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari...-8&oe=UTF-8

[mrmeaner]

I have seen a couple driving course programs and have been fairly impressed, even though I'm not a 12-week medic. The driver training programs as described does seem to go well above and beyond most programs in the states. Is this the standard practice in the UK or just for government run operations?

The two biggest issues, (or at least causes of concern), I would see are:

1) Secondary accidents caused by emergent ambulance training. I don't have statistical data, and any is welcome, but the anecdotal information I have is that for every accident an ambulance is in, it causes ten.

2) Liability (legal and ethical) regarding a fatal accident caused by training. I would think it would be difficult to defend the reasoning for emergent travel as a part of training. There was a point made that the training was done without a patient because then a patient is not endangered. While this is true, it does nothing for the other occupants of the ambulance, other drivers, pedestrians, etc. By that reasoning, wouldn't it make more sense to perform the training during the lowest traffic levels of a day? Or is that already done.

Have either of these conditions existed? And if so, were the driver and trainer defended and recused by laws that have been stated? Did/Would the law protect them in a civil suit?

Edited because I spelled "practice" with an s. Dammit Dust!

[Dustdevil]

I can only deduce from your reply that you are out to ruffle feathers, and that you don't honestly believe the crap this troll has been spouting.

Hell, I'm not even sure which troll you're arguing with anymore. I thought you were arguing with Zippy, as usual, but now Zippy is arguing with me. This whole thread has me confused now.

Regardless, until someone can present me with clear, convincing, and scientifically valid evidence that lights and sirens make a consistent and statistically significant positive difference in our patients' outcomes, then there can be no valid theory that risking lives to practise running hot like that, when no emergency exists, is justified on any level.

[robert gift]

I have seen a couple driving course programs and have been fairly impressed, even though I'm not a 12-week medic. The driver training programs as described does seem to go well above and beyond most programs in the states. Is this the standard practice in the UK or just for government run operations?

The two biggest issues, (or at least causes of concern), I would see are:

1) Secondary accidents caused by emergent ambulance training. I don't have statistical data, and any is welcome, but the anecdotal information I have is that for every accident an ambulance is in, it causes ten.

2) Liability (legal and ethical) regarding a fatal accident caused by training. I would think it would be difficult to defend the reasoning for emergent travel as a part of training. There was a point made that the training was done without a patient because then a patient is not endangered. While this is true, it does nothing for the other occupants of the ambulance, other drivers, pedestrians, etc. By that reasoning, wouldn't it make more sense to perform the training during the lowest traffic levels of a day? Or is that already done.

Have either of these conditions existed? And if so, were the driver and trainer defended and recused by laws that have been stated? Did/Would the law protect them in a civil suit?

Edited because I spelled "practice" with an s. Dammit Dust!

My English friends object to being forced to yield "give way" for something not an emergency.

They object to being put at needless risk.

(Presumbly, hopefully, these joy rides have never led to any mishaps.)

But what of the driver who interrupts his progress and pulls onto a motorway shoulder and gets a flat tire?

Does he know his sacrifice was for nothing?

What of the car which bumped the other vehicle which unexpectedly stopped before a green signal, because a fire truck was taking right-of-way.

Sure, it is the trailing driver's fault.

None of these drivers suspects this could be anything other than a real emergency.

What of the car moving out of the way and scratched another vehicle?

Will those conducting this faulty practice know of the flat tire, the two cars bumping, or the car damaging the other?

Learning emergent driving can be accomplished without this obnoxious nonsense.

[theotherphil]

Learning emergent driving can be accomplished without this obnoxious nonsense.

You're obviously not reading any of the replies, so what's the point in discussing this any further? To me, it looks like you'd really like this system and are a little annoyed that you don't have the authority to do it in your part of the world.

As you keep quoting your "English Friends" being forced to give way and being unaware - I'd just like to add, yet again, that the vehicles are fully marked up as TRAINING vehicles. Nobody in the UK is forced to yield/ give way to emergency vehicles. If they don't want to, they don't have to and that's why we stop at red lights and proceed when safe.

Dust: We are not debating whether using L&S is of any benefit for the patient. We know it isn't and it bugs the hell out of us. What we are debating is whether advanced driving courses is a good idea to lower accident rates/ personal injury claims/ reduce insurance costs. The evidence is clear....over 100,000 L&S runs in the UK daily, from the Ambulance service alone, with nary an incident.

[Dustdevil]

You're obviously not reading any of the replies, so what's the point in discussing this any further? To me, it looks like you'd really like this system and are a little annoyed that you don't have the authority to do it in your part of the world.

Come on, Phil. You're better than that. The jealousy argument is always such a stinker. Do you really believe that Spenac or I give a rat's arse about missing any opportunities to play with the siren?

As you keep quoting your "English Friends" being forced to give way and being unaware - I'd just like to add, yet again, that the vehicles are fully marked up as TRAINING vehicles. Nobody in the UK is forced to yield/ give way to emergency vehicles. If they don't want to, they don't have to and that's why we stop at red lights and proceed when safe.

Doesn't matter how they are marked. They are still disrupting the natural flow of traffic, causing drivers to take evasive action, and generally creating a lot of obnoxious and unnecessary noise pollution to do something that simply doesn't need to be done. They can be doing all of this without the lights and siren. Is it the same? It should be. Because if your drivers are being trained properly, they are being trained that there is almost no difference between how they drive with the siren on, and how they drive with no siren. When that switch gets flipped on, nothing should change. When the n00b gets to his field preceptorship, then they can start turning the siren on when needed. Again, his driving should be just the same as it were when the siren was off. And there will be plenty of real runs for him to practise on without making fake runs to do so. Again, I can find absolutely NO justification for playing like this on the public roads. If your instructors can't properly train people without it, then your instructors and their programme clearly suck.

What we are debating is whether advanced driving courses is a good idea to lower accident rates/ personal injury claims/ reduce insurance costs. The evidence is clear....over 100,000 L&S runs in the UK daily, from the Ambulance service alone, with nary an incident.

No argument there. I am a huge proponent of advanced driver training. And I would never suggest that we have anything nearly as good in the U.S. We don't. But this is clearly a weak link in your training system. It's not necessary. It adds nothing to the programme that cannot be had without the risk and inconvenience to the public.

[robert gift]

You're obviously not reading any of the replies, so what's the point in discussing this any further? To me, it looks like you'd really like this system and are a little annoyed that you don't have the authority to do it in your part of the world.

As you keep quoting your "English Friends" being forced to give way and being unaware - I'd just like to add, yet again, that the vehicles are fully marked up as TRAINING vehicles. Nobody in the UK is forced to yield/ give way to emergency vehicles. If they don't want to, they don't have to and that's why we stop at red lights and proceed when safe.

Dust: We are not debating whether using L&S is of any benefit for the patient. We know it isn't and it bugs the hell out of us. What we are debating is whether advanced driving courses is a good idea to lower accident rates/ personal injury claims/ reduce insurance costs. The evidence is clear....over 100,000 L&S runs in the UK daily, from the Ambulance service alone, with nary an incident.

I appreciate every one of your and others' points.

I suffer enough REAL emergent responses that I am not envious of anyone who would risk FAKE ones in public.

Do you really believe that drivers and pedestrians notice and comprehend any "TRAINING" markings?

If so, why would anyone interrupt their rightful progress and willingly make risky evasive maneuvers?

All they know is there are operating emergency lights and sirens compelling them to

stop for their green signal,

pull over and stop at the side of the street,

accelerate down the street to get to an area were they can get out of your way (smart move by that autoist seen in a video!)

or perform whatever obligations necessary to yield or nervously squeeze out of your way.

United States emergency vehicles are also "asking" for right-of-way.

But a driver can receive a 4-point Failure to Yield Right of Way to an Emergency Vehicle citation.

Did that lorry stopped on the on-ramp shoulder become a hazard to accelerating motorists by starting from a dead stop and trying to get back onto his on-ramp?

(On Interstate highways, I regret tractor-trailer rigs slowing and stopping on the shoulders. Trying to accelerate from zero back to 55 mph not only costs them a lot of their expensive fuel and causes pollution, the rig can present a hazard to speeding motorists, especially on upgrades.)

(When there are no vehicles in lane 1 on Interstates, I turn off our wig-wagging headlights and some other lights so that truckers and vehicles in other lanes will not slow or pull off and stop. Only enough lights to remain legal do I keep in operation. As necessary, I turn the lights back on when approaching within 100 yards of vehicles in lane 1.)

So, it is not only the problems of yielding to and making way for your firetrucks, it is also the complications of trying to get back into traffic - all for nothing.

You can practice emergent driving without imposing upon others.

Are you sure the claim of over 100,000 emergent responses in the UK daily is correct?

[zippyRN]

I appreciate every one of your and others' points.

I suffer enough REAL emergent responses that I am not envious of anyone who would risk FAKE ones in public.

Do you really believe that drivers and pedestrians notice and comprehend any "TRAINING" markings?

it's some what irrelevant

If so, why would anyone interrupt their rightful progress and willingly make risky evasive maneuvers?

'right of way' is a set of rules for agreeing who goes first , not an absolute rigid code

Uk emergency vehicles 'request' the right of way by use of warning devices and their positioning

what happened to the rule of 'space and time to stop'

All they know is there are operating emergency lights and sirens compelling them to

stop for their green signal,

pull over and stop at the side of the street,

accelerate down the street to get to an area were they can get out of your way (smart move by that autoist seen in a video!)

or perform whatever obligations necessary to yield or nervously squeeze out of your way.

for the umpteenth time the use of warning devices is a request for other road users to allow the emergency vehicle through ...

United States emergency vehicles are also "asking" for right-of-way.

But a driver can receive a 4-point Failure to Yield Right of Way to an Emergency Vehicle citation.

but not in the UK unless they willfully obstruct a specificed Emergency worker or Police Constable in the execution of their duty ...

You can practice emergent driving without imposing upon others.

Are you sure the claim of over 100,000 emergent responses in the UK daily is correct?

11 or 12 regional Ambulance services undertaking 2000 -4500 emergency and urgent details a day - a significant proportion of which will attract at least one if not more emergent responses ( one scene = one detail whether it;s a cut finger or 60 casualty Mass casualty incident with 20 front line vehicles, control and equipment tenders etc etc)

30 odd regional fire and rescue services, 30 odd regional police services plus coastguard, search and rescue, national blood service , various military vehicles ...

plus the private and voluntary sector in EMS and Fire 100 k is a ball park figure, possibly a little optimistic.