The safety to drive old cars on public roads

I appreciate that any accident is also a personal tragedy and my thoughts go to the Carey family. As many have noted I am going to try and avoid making assumptions about what happened. As an event organiser now and in the past I am always conscious that there are always risks, particularly when it involves moving vehicles. Taking 1500 motorcycles into London without a police escort was interesting, so I appreciate the position of the organisers.

Looking at the vehicles I dont see that visibility is a major issue as most were appropriate for the planned roads and there is an element of safety in numbers, having so many on the same day means other drivers are aware. The concern has to be when old cars are in places people don’t expect them to be as traffic around the route is difficult for those seeking to work etc. Yes we all have a right to drive when and where we like and take a view of the risks. However around the L2B is a bit different because of the concentration of cars that day.

As an organiser one of my key roles is the risk assessment of the event. I could be wrong but the London bit seems to be working OK, its as you leave the built up area that things go wrong. For me that is where the risks need to be reviewed. This will mean increasing the number of marshals at key risk points, and that may include the junction in question as I take David’s point about where it happened and the others experience of errors there in the past. I am not suggesting a marshal at every junction, just the ones where there have been issues.

This leads to two questions/suggestions. Is there an opportunity for participants to feedback on any problems they experience? Listening to this year is essential to planning the risk assessment next year. I see the same problem at the lights in Burgess Hill with cars struggling to brake when they change so I do wonder if that has been included in the risk assessment as it really need to be actively managed.

This brings up another point from the discussion - costs. Yes over the last 15 years the organisation has become more commercial and is at risk of losing its engagement with the old car movement, your second tier stakeholders. This event garners huge support from a range of clubs and branches, what role can they play to support the event? They could be your route marshals, support for entrants between service stops and managers of the many visitors. They could help the event grow and still be safe and fun.

So the message from this year is that the cars are fine as they are; this event and others have to be promoted to retain the profile of our hobby, but we have to keep learning and evolving to keep it relevant. I will continue to support the run but the organisers will need to step up to to retain this commitment. Afterall this is our flagship event, it needs to be a premium experience.

My thoughts are with both family's for this tragic accident.
The veteran car driver made a easy mistake, and cost him dearly, the HGV driver did not go out to work that morning to kill someone, we should leave the investigation for the police and organisers to make the conclusion to what happened, not to assume that the Knox car driver could of fell asleep at the wheel or the HGV driver was on the phone etc etc etc !
Everyone who has been on the L2B road run and other runs, has had near misses in some way, coursed by other modern car road uses and even a veteran car driver not obeying the high way code, going round bollards through red lights, just to get in the front ? Car Stewards have been put in place and I hope they have reported there number to to the organisers.
Why has it taken a tragic accident , to high light an improvement that others have even done the same thing, but never reported it to the organisers, so Stewards or better Signage could be at the danger points to assist the L2B drivers for a safer run.
So report them now , rather than being to late.
I wish everyone a safe journey in future events and enjoy life while you can, we are so lucky to be apart of the veteran car community.

This could just as easily have happened on an LCES event, despite there being no motorways or usually even dual carriageways, and events taking place in remote rural areas, the roads in the UK are far too congested and people drive far too fast, and too close, simple as that. As other comments have suggested, few people under 55 will have had any experience of elderly vehicles, and even less interest in the problems associated with driving and using them. I have sold my vintage cars, as living in Normandy and participating in LCES events is getting ridiculously expensive, and likely post -Brexit to be even more difficult, however I have been increasingly concerned at the dangers of driving on UK roads, and not just in vintage cars, but even driving our 4x4 up to Scotland every year I find the driving conditions and behaviour on English roads quite appalling, far too much traffic for the poor roads ( and don't get me started on the deathtrap " smart motorways on which it is only a matter of time before an accident happens with the most appalling carnage?) , potholes, broken surfaces , impatient drivers driving in your boot, and boorish , aggressive truck drivers (all too often clearly watching their smartphones as they veer towards the hard shoulder, if you are fortunate enough to be driving on a motorway that still has one, only to put a "tack" in to get back into the lane?)

I used, as another comment suggests, a magnetic amber tractor beacon with a cigarette lighter plug on it, stuck on the o/s rear wing of my very pedestrian Calthorpe as the less heavily trafficked roads here in France pose, if anything, an even greater hazard on Nationales or Departementales as traffic is travelling relatively fast and people's concentration wanes through the ennui of driving at 80 or 90 km//h, leaving all too much time to fiddle with smartphones, GPS, ipod etc. I don't know what the answer is, I am reluctant to suggest that old car events be reduced to the inevitable parade with outriders and people closing junctions, (which in France makes any old vehicle event too dull for words !) as I feel that will be the thin end of the wedge for "authorised events only" usage and the death of using old cars in an everyday fashion. But I feel it is something inevitable unfortunately, far too attractive to the bureaucrats and "Do-Gooders" of the modern world. With the unceasing assault on our freedoms and liberties it is, perhaps, only a minor skirmish in a far bigger war?

This is indeed a tragedy and an accident: no amount of legislation or good intentions have stopped accidents, nor will they ever do so. The sympathies of all of us who enjoy our classic cars of all ages go out to the berieved families.

I'm increasingly of the opinion that drivers of larger faster vehicles often do not see smaller vehicles. As well as diving an MX5, a very capable modern sports car of modest size, I also enjoying driving a prewar Minor and a couple of other classics in between age-wise. I've had more experiences of not being seen in the MX5 than in the Minor - which I put down to its lower profile - so now always drive with dipped beams. I also learned vey soon after acquiring the Minor over twenty years ago that, with an effective speed of 40mph, dual carriageways (let alone motorways) are best avoided: drivers of far faster vehicles just don' appreciate how slow an older car is travelling.

I'm well aware that all our roads ore speed limited, i.e. maximum speeds limits are generally well signed and increasingly well enforced. Minimum speed limits ar rarer. Indeed, very few of our motorways or dual carriageways have signs showing a minimum speed - although ther are some. One has to read the highway code for this information. Had the slip road to the start of the M23 had a signage to indicate a minimum speed, it might have been more obvious to Mr Carey

As others have remarked, this tragic accident happened on a gloriously sunny morning. While the exact details of what occurred will be under investigation, and posibly will never be published, it seems the cause is the inevitable combination of a number of errors - as is always the case with accidents. Just as cyclists keep cycling despite far too many accidents involving cyclists occurring, those of us who enjoy our classic vehicles of widely varying ages certain wish to keep enjoying them. Any thought of restricting the use of our public roads is truely unacceptable - but we should be looking at ways of making them safer for the wide variety of vehicles that use them.

As much as I can see this article was well-intentioned, I can't help thinking it was somewhat misguided. It has attracted a lot of comments which have their foundations in speculation or assumption, and one or two statements appear to present facts but are misleading or totally false. Blaming the organisers for insufficient signage and marshalling works on the assumption that no other measures are taken to ensure that cars stay on the correct road. In fact, there is a briefing for drivers on Saturday and all have a detailed map to follow at the very least. They will know not to just follow signs to Brighton unquestioningly because there are several instances besides the M23 junction when they will be required to avoid the main road to Brighton, such as in parts of London and just before Handcross. Based on the fact that drivers should know to be following signs for the A23 and not necessarily for Brighton, I would not say that the sign at the M23 junction is unclear. Clearly, people unfamiliar with the junction have come a cropper there before - did they feed their experience back to the organisers?

Secondly, we are discussing flashing lights, LEDs and such as if they accident might have occurred because the car was difficult to see. Since the accident occurred at 10am in sunny weather, I would suggest that visibility was not a factor. The original article asks if the Run should accept LED lights and improved brakes. It already does. Several of the cars taking part had LEDs and discreet disc brakes, but such should most definitely not be obligated.

One particular sentence causes me concern, viz. 'Old cars are always going to be more dangerous than new ones.' That is not true. Old cars are more difficult to drive than new ones and they offer less protection in the event of an accident, but that does not make them dangerous. Of course, we all understood what was meant there, but if that view was offered to the mainstream press, it would be easy to imagine the next day's headline as 'Vintage car owner confesses: our cars are dangerous'. If that sounds far-fetched, bear in mind that the Daily Mail published an article entitled 'Friends of the man... slam safety record at event'. In reality one friend stated that he believed there were 'shortcomings' in the organisation. Hardly 'slamming' and definitely not 'friends' plural. If the press can cause consternation to sell copy they will, and won't worry about letting the truth get in the way.

What I'm saying is that we don't know why Mr Carey left the route or why, having left the route, he had the accident, but we're still seeing a lot of opinions shared that singularly fail to consider all variables, from the organisation to the weather conditions, and from the road layout to the actions of Mr Carey and the lorry driver. I do not think it's wise to attempt to give answers before we have asked all the necessary questions.

If I haven't already gone on too much, I would like one final word on the subject of modifying old cars for use in modern traffic. It has been stated, correctly, that many modern drivers are ignorant of how our cars work and couldn't care less, either. However, preservation should be our first and foremost objective, followed by promotion of the cars through their public use. These are reasonable objectives that we should not have to compromise. The correct approach to this problem is to educate modern drivers about our vehicles so that they know to be respectful and take care. There are few things more terrible than a world in which the intelligent and knowledgeable must answer to the ignorant. At this point, I expect people would tell me I'm fighting a losing battle. I say that it's better to fight a battle and lose than to prostrate ourselves and give in.

Four years ago, on my first participation, I did the same mistake and drove 10 to 20 miles on the motorway safety lane.
I was very dangerous and we were extra careful. It served as a lesson and I was more aware of directions on the following participations.
Passenger attention is also critical to avoir such errors ...
I also agree that driving in modern traffic is dangerous because other cars don't know the veteran cars limitations. I drove my 1901 De Dion via a vis in Paris only a couple of times, is incredibly dangerous. Cars pass you fast then brake hard with their ABS so the rear passenger has a closer shot !!

With our cars WE are the exception on the road…WE have to take our responsability … and calculate the possible risks. Do not expect the other drivers of modern cars to understand us… they cannot and we cannot blame them. WE have to decide if we can, if we dare, if we want to go to an event and follow an imposed route.
Indeed Compiègne is a good exemple, Here in Belgium we have our annual 1900 rally in the same way... the route is chosen for our old crocks…peaceful roads with little traffic, no difficult situations . If the L2B does so it will not be the L2B any longer.
I did the L2B 12 times and experienced more stress each year. So I decided to stop. It is now the Bonhams Veteran Car run with big money and a lot of publicity bringing more and more people on the route....best garanty fot still more stress and difficulty to keep concentrated all the way.

I feel very sorry for the victims

It is nonsense to disregard the potential of a Marshall simply because others did not make the mistake. I very nearly did the exact same thing on Sunday, and it was my 9th time participating!

They provided Marshall’s at many other interactions, where the consequence of a wrong turn were far less dangerous.

As much as I love this event, cost cutting has led to a reduction in safety. They no longer use police to control the route whilst still in London. Cost saving. Too few Marshall’s. Cost saving. No attempt at controlling tender vehicles on the route. Small and poorly placed signage. I can list many more.

In 2014 I drove my 1914 Stutz.from Baltimore to Los Angeles to celebrate its 100th. birthday. The car cruises happily at 55 to 60mph. I used freeways and had not a moment's worry during the 9 days it took, without any back-up. I think the probable cause of the accident, sadly, was lack of experience of driving old cars, as well as lack of experience of driving on the left.Similar lack of experience manifests itself on the Mille Miglia, where I have participated 7 times in my Bugatti, a car well capable of keeping up with modern traffic. In this event it is obvious that many participants, with very fast cars, drive them seldom, once a year for some. Accidents are inevitable. An added problem in the Mille Miglia are the lunatic motorcyclists who turn out on the Sunday to mix it with the cars, as though it were a race. (many think it is). I would suggest more experience required of the drivers and better marshalling for the L to B given how slow some of the cars are. Just recently there was the death of a motorcyclist apparently caused by an American woman driving on the wrong side of the road. I hear no calls for special rules for those used to driving on one side of the road when going to a country when going somewhere where one drives on the right. Lastly I would extend my condolences to the family of the unfortunate victims in the present case.

Having driven the London to Brighton for the last 30 odd years I hope I can add to some of the good comments here. In particular that of David Green. He has described the Motorway junction very well but it is where the A23/M23 split where some drivers can get confused.

In the past 20 years I have helped 5 overseas entrants reverse (gingerly) having mistaken the Route at that point. Thankfully with a large Veteran blocking the road and understanding modern car drivers this was achieved without incident. The problem with that junction is, in my opinion is that it is inadequately signed and what signs are there are far too small. Experience has shown me that that is fact.

The London to Brighton is a unique Event in the UK in so far as there are cars with a speed range of 10 to 70 mph. Modern car drivers are cocooned in a modern box with little concept of speed. When they see ANY old car they immediately think old car= slow although as we know that is not always the case. There were many cases of classic cars being driven appallingly last Sunday as well. We have video evidence of a 1950's Sunbeam Talbot being driven by an elderly person pulling out of a junction and forcing a veteran over double white lines and then not letting it pull back in. Same driver later pulled out to overtake another forcing me to take evasive action as I was already going past.

Some years ago there was a discussion in the VCC Gazette about safety. I suggested at the time, and am seriously considering it now, about fitted a small amber flashing beacon to the rear of a couple of my slower vintage cars. It would be similar to that which agricultural vehicles have and abnormal loads have. It would not detract from originality as it can easily be removed once stopped and give adequate warning to others of a slower vehicle ahead. Many older cars are now fitted with directional indicators for safety so not that much different.

We are lucky in the UK to have very few restrictions on when and where we use our cars. But for the L2B the organisers would do well to visit the Teuf Teuf Compeigne Event and see how they do it safely.

Finally my Thanks to all the Marshalls last Sunday on the L2B. You were all stars. And sympathies to the family of Mr Carey and I hope his wife has a speedy physical recovery.

Although we do not know the full facts surrounding this incident we cannot assume that it happened simply because one vehicle was a Veteran car. I doubt very much that if this accident was between two 'moderns' it would have attracted little press coverage if at all. Common sense suggests that drivers of historic vehicles should consider the limitations of their vehicles in determining the type of road they drive on. If your vehicle can keep up with modern traffic then by all means use motorways etc. However , vehicles with much lower cruising speeds should avoid busy motorways . To echo some of the comments already made - many of today's motorists cocooned in their high tech vehicles have no understanding of the skills required to drive historic vehicles. I do hope that this isolated incident does not attract the 'health & safety' zealots we who would impose all sorts of limitations. We may yet see the return of the 'Red Flag Act ' .

My sincere commiserations to the family concerned.
But in this country there is no minimum speed limit on M ways so had he been driving at 5-10-15-20 mph or even static surely the lorry driver was obviously not concentrating on his driving and not looking ahead if there had been a slow queue of moderns would he have plowed into them, quite possibly, that is why accidents happen because a lack of concentration, people are not drivers any more they are just pointers, every thing is done for them so they just doze off. tragically. I dont know whether the m way concerned was a smart motorway if so that would not have helped in this situation. but definately more marshalling at that point would have averted this catastrophy.

I drive a Mk8 jag which compared to the car that had the accident is basically a modern car , there are certain conditions I would not drive in because to put it mildly it’s bloody dangerous, I think maybe if you have a car of a certain age you should have some sort of competency test for that era of car , I hold a full bike licence and am allowed to drive what is known as a suicide shift, a name well chosen , for those not in the know it’s a bike with a gear stick and foot clutch and despite having no tuition if you hold a full bike licence you can drive one , trust me it’s not the easiest thing in the world to do until you get the hang of it , but my point is you could easily kill yourself or others

We have the same problem on Mille Miglia each year. Traffic (Italian) is getting more and more dangerous.

As an old car driver - some 15k miles a year in ore war cars - I feel were all too close to this sad tragedy to add much value.

We don't know what caused the accident. Mistake? Age? Bad marshalling and road-marking? Or was it simply bad driving (by either party).

But to judge a whole event (and the practices associated with it) by something about which we only have the most superficial knowledge of seems to me to be premature.

The magnitude of this event should be run on a secured route, no modern traffic, bicycle and running events have closed routes why not for this event.

I am familiar with the point at which the M23 diverges left off the A23, shortly after which I understand that the terrible accident occurred; it is in effect a straight road with two lanes in which lane 1 becomes the M23 and lane 2 the A23. The driver of the Knox apparently omitted to take lane 2. He did not need to have made a turn to have done so, merely to have navigated into lane 2 in good time. Had there been a temporary marshalled pinch-point in lane 1 before the divergence, all the traffic including the veterans would have been in lane 2 to enable safe continuation on the A23. The motorway traffic could then have exited onto their motorway lane without the possibility of a lorry or other vehicle running into the back of a veteran due to an unexpected lane change. Perhaps this is a case of insufficient forethought being undertaken in planning the route for the veterans, including provision for more appropriate marshalling and signage.

However, until we are made aware of the full circumstances of this tragedy, it is hard to comment further - we simply do not have possession of the full facts.

We need to be calmly analytical before rushing to judgement. There is a very clear, long-distance view of the crash site in the Surrey News for 5 November 2019. On the basis of this view, taken by some-one in the second lane, the co-ordinates of the photographer were 51.270783, -0.142311 or thereabouts. The crash was a little further east. I encourage anyone interested in the origins of this crash to go into StreetView and look at the M23 at this point. It is a four-lane motorway. Moreover, it is just about to divide, with the outer two lanes going on to Brighton. For a car travelling at, perhaps, 5 miles an hour, any manoeuvre to occupy the third fastest lane would have been disastrous, as, indeed, it was.

What were the seeds of this tragedy? If one goes back to the temporal origins of the disaster, they must surely have started at the point where the A23 (the Brighton Road) and M23 separate. The A23 is the major road and requires taking the right-hand lane as the two diverge. Unfortunately, although the A23 is the major road, it has signage only for Redhill. The M23 detaches to the left, but has signage to Gatwick and Brighton. However, this signage is clearly on a blue Motorway background. It seems to me that Mr Carey must have misunderstood matters at this point. Having made the mistake of bearing left onto the M23, his best bet would have been either to stop and seek help, or to continue in the service lane until he could leave the motorway. Occupation of any of the running lanes would have been extraordinarily dangerous, given that almost all vehicles would be travelling quite legally at high speed.

I thought your article was emotive and confused, and did the cause of driving a vintage car on modern roads no service at all. I am 75 and I drive a 3 litre Bentley, mainly in France. There are some simple rules. One is never to drive on a motorway where speeds of 130 KPH are legally permitted.

In the introduction to this piece the words, ( and why should he ) were used to justify a car driver not expecting a slow moving vehicle to be on the highway. If this car driver had ploughed into a horse he did not expect on a country road, or a child he did not expect to walk into the road, or collide with an ambulance he didn't expect to weave through traffic, would the same justification be used ? I was under the impression that we motorists were supposed to watch out for developing hazards, the new-ish theory test specifically tests hazard awareness.
But this was not a dog running out or a bouncing ball, this was a road near a vintage car rally, where it might not be completely unexpected to find vintage cars. It was a Sunday when there are often a higher percentage of (weekend drivers) learner drivers etc, so perhaps keeping an eye open for the slightly unexpected might have been a good idea.
Now that is not to say that just because you drive a car you have the right to drive it where and how you like, especially if it dates from the 19th century, but it is sensible to realize that you are very vulnerable.
Just as motorcyclist may well have right of way, but proving the point with a 30 ton truck is unwise.
Two deaths in recent years would seem to suggest that there is room for improvement.
Early starts at a time of year when it is dark and wet may not be such a good idea, especially as the route out of London is such a busy one.
Yes they have the right, but is it wise or even pleasant to drive it ?
In this Health and Safety world of Just Ban Everything, I wonder how long before the do gooders try to save us from harm.

The London to Brighton Run is most certainly not the only collector car event with casualties. The Mille Miglia sees casualties almost evry year but they are barely reported. There are three reasons ; Speed (although not officially allowed), fatigue and a plethory of "modern" cars that follow or come from the opposite side. The solution to me would be to move these events to areas without much traffic like Scotland, Sardinia, Norway etc.

My sincerest condolences to the family.
I think we need to face up and action a London Marathon type closing of roads (the running event held every year in which roads are closed off for the safety of the runners).
For this one day a year which is truly a remarkable occasion, this will make it more fun (and safer) for the Veteran cars with less traffic and stopping and starting, testing their pre-1905 clutches. As well as cut off and cut out posers in non-Veteran/eligible cars who clog up the roads, and most of all, enhance a glorious event for all with a route filled with only Veterans.

It was an accident plain and simple.....they happen thousands of times every day all over the world...

My condolences to this driver's family.
Were veteran car brakes a factor in this accident? I doubt it! Were lorry brakes a factor? I doubt it.
It would not be possible to improve the braking on a veteran car as there are no brakes on the front wheels.
The fitting of seat belts is probably impossible on most veterans as there is no suitable anchorage point, especially for the shoulder mounting.
Flashing lights are of doubtful legality but may help.
As long as humans are involved, accidents will happen, but we have come a long way in road fatality reduction since the 1930s.
Human error seems to have been the most important factor here, firstly on the part of the veteran driver taking a wrong turn, possibly also on joining the motorway main carriageway, and possibly on the part of the truck driver not realising that veteran cars are slow. I can't see how further measures would help apart from the flashing lights and a marshal directing drivers at the junction.
It would be sad if this incident were the catalyst that began any restriction on the use of old cars on our roads because it's not so much the cars that unsafe but humans.

Joseph Faulkner hand signals are still in the Highway Code but are unfortunately not part of the driving test. Novice drivers need to be taught to realise they will sometimes encounter slow vehicles on the road. Common sense sadly often doesn’t seem to prevail..

There are a lot more factors than simply the car being old. The driver too was old (80), as was his passenger, and Canadian so more used to driving on the other side of the road. Plus, the accident didn't occur on the designated route. Why this driver took a wrong turn when, so far as I'm aware, none of the other drivers did is yet to be answered.

A lot has changed on the roads, I drive a 1936 Austin seven Ulster rep. I have now fitted indicators for safety but people still pull out on you and overtake in dangerous places at times. I enjoy driving in the summer months and try not to be out in the dark plus tend to avoid busy roads if possible,I feel sorry for all involved in last weeks accident which resulted in someone losing their life. I feel now driving a pre war car or any type of classic nowadays you have to really pay attention to other road users and the silly things they do sometimes, perhaps educating the younger generation about vintage and classic cars then maybe people would understand that you havent got the stopping power like modern cars have. The other point to make is that no one seems to understand hand signals these days, the left hand turn one can be particularly dangerous as people think that you are just waving them by.

Antique vehicles absolutely should be on the roads with the exception of motorways. There are so many options now for lighting that can be very well hidden or fitted within existing light housings that maybe marker lights should be compulsory. If horses, cycles and 50cc mopeds are allowed to use roads then so should antique and vintage cars. Maybe they should be limited to daylight running.(presumably some are?)

Just to clarify please, was the London to Brighton 1903 Knox accident which resulted in the tragic loss of life, a result of an old car being involved or some other factor? Even if it was an old car with modern fittings and components would that have prevented such a tragedy? Or was it a case of driver error, which is possible given the very different driving constraints for the driver's country of origin and UK? Right hand vs left hand lane usage? Is there anything race Marshalls and Organisors could do to clarify route markings? Could the same thing have happened to a driver of a modern car? So what exactly were the factors which caused this tragedy?

Oh no! I have a friend who has a 1903 Knox. Hope it wasn't either of them.

Met betere remmen, verlichting e.d. zou dit tragische ongeluk m.i. niet te vermijden zijn geweest. Tenzij je antieke en klassieke auto's aanpast aan de huidige vereisten t.a.v. gemotoriseerd verkeer. Maar dan hou je geen klassieker meer over!

Toby Bruce could not agree more the mad desire to get past or pull out in front in case they get delayed for a second is madness

Toby Bruce cant be more precise

A bit of an odd article... you say it was an accident caused by a wrong turn and speed differential (which it was) then immediately use that to suggest mechanical changes to such cars (modern brakes etc) and more rigorous scrutineering etc. This incident had nothing to do with that.

Anyway, I don't think there's much of a problem. Old cars are always going to be more dangerous than new ones, but old car drivers know that anyway and still use them.

I've done about 20,000 miles in pre-war cars over the last year and haven't had any near-misses, apart from with idiot lorry drivers. In fast pre-war cars, the main annoyance I find is people who won't allow themselves to be overtaken - mainly sales reps in Audis who are quite content trundling along at 65 on the motorway, until they see something old coming past them at 70, then they feel compelled to put their foot down, I guess to preserve their pride or something.

You always get the odd idiot on the road, and you yourself can always make massive mistakes. But as long as you drive sensibly, then you're giving yourself the best chance of staying safe. Bad luck can always strike, but there's no point worrying about something you can't control. Knee-jerk changes to further restrict old car usage are not needed.

An elegant solution to all participants in an old car run such as LB is to supply every entrant with the authorised route on satnav. As for the other elements on the route such as modern traffic, well, that's up to the old car drivers to negotiate safely. This latest fatality is a tragedy for the family.

I share the opinion that accidents do happen and the drivers of old cars have to accept the risk of a serious accident as a possibility. Even though the accident in LB is tragic and should not have happened, it’s impossible to stop these things from happening, therefore it’s called an accident.
I am not a fan of mandatory changes to cars like upgraded brakes etc. An operator has the responsibility to decide if their car can be driven safe or not. There is no way to adequately check this on another persons car at such an event. It would move the liability of an accident towards the organizers while there is no way to know if “improved brakes” for example are made in a good and safe way(, or will fail after 20 miles..
However visibilty is a good improvement to start with. Flashing LED lights on the back of the car is a very easy way of adding visibility to your vehicle! It has helped cyclists a lot also.

Notwithstanding the sadness of this tragic accident and the previous one in 2017, I am compelled to write to you because of my concerns as to the effect of these accidents on the old car movement generally and the future use of our old cars on the public highway.

It was apparent as far back as 1986 when I last took our 1899 Arnold on the Brighton Run that the driving conditions even in dry weather in modern traffic were at best marginal.

In the old days the Run was a dignified event and the cars were generally speaking owned by families who had been involved in the motor industry from the early days. The passage of time has seen the dignified old event replaced by an event that has as much to do with showing off as the history of motoring.

What other veteran car event has been involved in two fatal accidents in the past two years? Something needs to change before the Brighton Run does does any further damage to the reputation of the old car movement.

I would suggest that a major part of the problem is that modern motorists have no understanding about vintage and veteran cars - and frankly they are not interested.. Drivers of modern vehicles have probably learnt to drive in almost idiot proof cars, have no idea how they work or understand that early machines cannot stop on a sixpence, cannot generally drive as quickly and need concentration to drive.

Over the years I have observed many times on the Brighton run, for example, drivers of moderns following very close to "view the old crocks race". They have little idea that it's the modern drivers and their lack of understanding that is the risk to safety. They weave in and out of traffic as if they are on a fairground ride. Most of them seem to have their finger up their backside and their mind in neutral.

Only last year my wife whilst driving her 1927 Austin 7 Chummy here in France was harassed by a local tractor driver because he thought it funny. No doubt in this case as is very common here, too much alcohol at lunchtime. But the principal is the same, it's not the old vehicles that is the problem, it's the general public's ignorance.

This tragedy highlights the issue that there are many vulnerable road users. As well as veteran car drivers, they include cyclists and pedestrians.
In a situation such as this a relatively small group, like historic vehicles, is potentially vulnerable to simplistic knee-jerk reactions which do not address the elephant in the room in that modern vehicles on highways are operated optimistically in a manner which assumes that all is clear beyond the immediate sight-lines and that humans, with our palaeolithic neurology, can process multiple information inputs in high speed situations like purpose-built computers. Humans can only process high-speed information in regulated systems like railways, airports, racing circuits or motorways and not on normal public highways with their competing needs of which veteran cars are one. We are at risk of blaming the victims (historic vehicle users, cyclists, pedestrians, etc.) when the whole system is at fault in the way it is being operated.
The cycling lobby has been vocal for decades that public highways are not just for fast modern traffic alone.