Car cop's lethal death toll -- The Welsh Traffic Talban speaks..

I am too annoyed at being blinded during the day by an ill aimed dipped or
main beam headlamp. However I am quite happy for them to be on as long as
they are on dipped and the aim is correct. After all they are more
difficult to see and I personally have known two drivers to pull out in
front of bikes causing injury.

 

OK, wonderbrian, wrap your thought process around this.

Cars have become safer in an accident due to airbags , crumple zones,
etc. Motorcycles do not have these features so have become no safer,
however the riders have not been crashing any more or less.

So essentially what we're talking about is both car drivers and
motorcyclists are no better, but car drivers are better protected.

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^

Are we allowed to go back to the "driving is a privilege, not a right"
and "lets raise the driving test standard" arguments now then?

 

MrBitsy says...

That's enough to make anyone anti-bike. You should have bought the
Yamaha RD.

 

I remember reading research showing that drivers find it more difficult to
judge the speed and distance of a bike with headlights on. I was not
suprised.

At short distances daytime lights just add confusion, at great distance
they make you visible, but who cares, there are no threats at great
distance.

 

No argument here.. not after one of my best friends was killed last
year by an idiot who pulled out of a side road in front of him.
On a nice, long, straight road, in 'perfect' conditions.

Phil

--
Phil Launchbury, Network & Infrastructure PHB
Triumph Tiger 955i
"I'm training the bats who live in my cubicle
to juggle mushrooms"
Remove sick person to email me

 

We know you meant "vulnerable", only a moron would suggest otherwise.

Yes, we know larger, faster, bikes are safer than small, slow ones.

 

He's dead.

 

Another good reason not to ride irresponsibly and at an inapropriate
speed, past roadside items capable of causing such injuries. The rider
should be able to judge an appropriate speed - if they don't then its
hardly surprising the reaction is 'lower speed to save lives'.

Inapropriate speed. Wasn't it obvious black ice was a probability? If
such injuries can be caused at such a low speed, why are bikers changing
routes so they can brake the law?

I have been stopped by the police for a vehicle safety check - no problem
at all. I wish we had more of them to get the dangerous vehicles off the
roads.

Nobody should have a loud exhaust and it has been proven that black
visors reduce visibilty - again, the bikers are not taking responsibilty
for their actions so someone else is!

Irelevent, that is the law.

MrBitsy.

 

I can agree with that. It was the 'ram air' bit that got me going!

MrBitsy.

 

The figures I quoted from dft_transstats_024328.pdf were accident rates for
all motorcycles. The vehicle population according to
dft_transstats_024260.pdf shows a decline in mopeds between 1992 and 2002
from 174,000 to 155,000. For bikes from 50 to 125cc the decline was from
221,000 to 177,000. The increase in the over 125cc class is from 293,000 to
609,000.

The link you quoted today points particularly at the rise of accidents in
the over 500cc class (paragraph 203, page 69) and the changes in accident
rates. I note that it also says there is a 40% rise in deaths between 1997
and 2002 from machines 501-1000cc. But the death rate for bikes under 500cc
and above 1000cc remained the same. As can be seen in Paragraph 28 to
Appendix 2.

I also note that in Paragraph 30 to Appendix 2; Police investigators
concluded that in 73% of accidents involving motorcycles were the fault of
the rider. In 64% they lost control. Paragraph 31 states that 45% of
accidents resulted from excessive speed.

Ian

 

Yep, bikers using dipped beam is fine - its the twits who use full beam
that are the problem. I gues they are from the same school as those using
fog lights when it isn't foggy.

MrBitsy

 

Ian wrote

Dead bikers don't give statements.

 

Andrewr At Work wrote

I don't use a tinted visor, I think they are a silly idea for road use.
I would be lost without my Reactolites though.

 

You may find that what you think is a bike with full beam on is in
fact a bike with dipped beam which happens to be accelerating; the
weight transfer making the light point upwards.

But don't let that stop you from making uninformed criticisms.

 

Perhaps you'd like to advise us all - from the perspective of your
obvious vast experience of motorcycling - what would be an appropriate
speed.

 

What could the police do if you attempt to walk off,
pushing your luggage along with you?

 

That's my point exactly. The rise in biker deaths most likely has
bugger all to do with speed cameras.

Jim.

 

iirc, "excessive speed" is actually a shortening of what is
on the form, which is "excessive speed for the conditions"...
So imagine two accidents. One at 60mph on a dry road on sunny day.
Bike overtakes car whilst car driver is reaching for sweet in
passenger footwell and swerves. Bike comes off. Reason for
accident is not "excessive speed".

Second accident; at 30 mph on a rainy day; bike goes for overtake,
inexperienced rider looses rear grip and goes into back of
car. Reason for accident would then be "excessive speed for
conditions".

 

It's death, Jim, but not as you know it. I'll have you know that the
last twice I've died coming off my bike, I've headbutted the steel
post supporting a camera.
I say that the camera is responsible. So there.