A Sobering article for NSC Bikers and Motorists

[Shropshire Seagull]

Easy to detect the responses of the non-motorcyclists on this thread.

Everyone quick to say the bike speed was the cause.
I'll agree it may have been contributory / foolish, even reckless, but if he'd been doing 160 mph and the driver HAD seen him, there would have been no collision. So the critical "failure" must sit with the car driver and I believe this was the outcome [causing death by careless driving]

Very sad when a "should have gone to spec savers" incident costs someone [else] their life.

 

[Hyperion]

Very sad footage and sorry that someone has lost their life but they are both at fault.
One went too fast the other did not pay enough attention
One paid with his life the other paid a lot less.

Speed restrictions are there to protect all.

 

[Easy 10]

Easy to detect the responses of the non-motorcyclists on this thread.

Everyone quick to say the bike speed was the cause.
I'll agree it may have been contributory / foolish, even reckless, but if he'd been doing 160 mph and the driver HAD seen him, there would have been no collision. So the critical "failure" must sit with the car driver and I believe this was the outcome [causing death by careless driving]

Very sad when a "should have gone to spec savers" incident costs someone [else] their life.

Not having that.

If he was doing 160mph, he'd have been a tiny speck in the distance before arriving at the point of impact a mere split second later - that would've been almost impossible to judge for anyone making that turn. As it happens, he was clobbering along at an absolutely INSANE rate of knots for a single carriageway with junctions. At that speed, the biker is completely, 100% reliant on other road users making all the allowances for him - to allow the fact that he was riding like a total dick.

I nearly totalled a bike last year who undertook me on the A23 southbound, just as I was moving from the outside lane back to the inside. He was doing WELL over a ton, I saw him at the last possible second in my wing mirror as he flashed past, and narrowly avoided sending him on an airbourne visit into the M&S garage - I suppose that would have been MY fault for not seeing him though.

This was a tragic accident, but I struggle to have complete sympathy for the biker when they are riding like complete and utter maniacs.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Easy to detect the responses of the non-motorcyclists on this thread.

Everyone quick to say the bike speed was the cause.
I'll agree it may have been contributory / foolish, even reckless, but if he'd been doing 160 mph and the driver HAD seen him, there would have been no collision. So the critical "failure" must sit with the car driver and I believe this was the outcome [causing death by careless driving]

Very sad when a "should have gone to spec savers" incident costs someone [else] their life.

He was indeed convicted of careless driving, and investigators asserted he would have had 7 seconds to have seen him. Nonetheless, the critical failure wouldn't have been critical or even a collision had the motorcyclist been doing the speed limit, or approaching with caution. I think this is the whole point of releasing the video. Should have gone to specsavers/should have obeyed the speed limit cost him his life.

 

[TimWatt]

Interesting that the DT showed far more of this that the BBC - although freezing a fraction of a second before the inevitable almost seems worse.

Obviously the message is stop the stupid speed - but it's also noteworthy just how dumb, lazy and careless the car driver is, but the sort of cutting corners laziness you see all about the place...

For instance, the driver cuts the 90 degree turn by turning in earlier than is safe - perhaps, if he was not looking properly, he expected the traffic to be bullied into giving way as such bad drivers sometimes do.

The motorcyclist was using both hands - it's just the camera isn't straight.
The motorcyclist has a very hi viz helmet.
Other cars on the road had lights on, the collided Renault didn't.

Concentrate on your way home people.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

Whatever the rights and wrongs, it's a fact that a motorbike is harder to see than a car and so a biker has to be aware that car drivers might not be using sufficient care and ride accordingly. That's certainly the view I take when cycling. I can be as morally superior as I want, but in general I'd prefer to stay out of hospital or worse.

I've had one narrow escape when driving. I was pulling out of a side road very carefully, intending to turn right, and edging out very slowly as there were parked cars on the main road obscuring my view. Even so, I amost pulled out into the path of a motorbike and he was almost on top of me before I could see him. Afterwards I thought that he must have been able to see me as his point of view was higher than mine but I had no chance of seeing him because he was keeping well to the left and so the parked cars blocked my view. he gave me a mouthful of abuse, but I'm not sure what else I could have done short of getting out of the car and looking down the road. Maybe that's what I should have done.

Now in that video, the car driver had no such excuse, but I imagine the speed of the bike made it hard to judge how quickly he was closing.

 

[Stat Brother]

Easy to detect the responses of the non-motorcyclists on this thread.

Everyone quick to say the bike speed was the cause.
I'll agree it may have been contributory / foolish, even reckless, but if he'd been doing 160 mph and the driver HAD seen him, there would have been no collision. So the critical "failure" must sit with the car driver and I believe this was the outcome [causing death by careless driving]

Very sad when a "should have gone to spec savers" incident costs someone [else] their life.

That's pleasing to see you feel the speed MIGHT have contributed to the accident.
I guess it's ok then to thrash around at 97+mph because all drivers should see you.

That fact that he made it at least 25% more difficult to be spotted is neither here or there.

The fact that the motorcyclist is so reckless with his own life and the lives of others doesn't amount to much because it was all someone else's fault.

 

[WhingForPresident]

Easy to detect the responses of the non-motorcyclists on this thread.

Everyone quick to say the bike speed was the cause.
I'll agree it may have been contributory / foolish, even reckless, but if he'd been doing 160 mph and the driver HAD seen him, there would have been no collision. So the critical "failure" must sit with the car driver and I believe this was the outcome [causing death by careless driving]

Very sad when a "should have gone to spec savers" incident costs someone [else] their life.

Easy to detect the responses of motorcyclists on this thread as well..

The guy was going nearly FORTY mph over the speed limit and you are practically absolving him of any wrongdoing. Seems a pretty idiotic opinion from where I'm sitting.

This video should serve as a lesson for both motorists and motorcyclists- motorists should always ensure their path is clear before making ANY maneuver, especially when turning into junctions etc, and motorcyclists should actually abide by the laws of the road rather than feeling they have the right to weave in and out of traffic and travel at ridiculous speeds because they're on a bike.

If the driver was completely at fault as you are pretty much implying, do you not think he would have received more than a 1 year community order and a driving ban?

 

[Stat Brother]

All vulnerable road users and pedestrians need to be thinking along the lines of:-

'what's the worst thing that can happen now?', and act accordingly.

Not only do you have to think for yourself, you have to be thinking for christ knows how many other people, in your field of vision.

Barreling along at 97mph is just sticking 2 fingers up at everybody else, sadly though, this time, someone wasn't watching.

 

[daveinprague]

Interesting that the DT showed far more of this that the BBC - although freezing a fraction of a second before the inevitable almost seems worse.

Obviously the message is stop the stupid speed - but it's also noteworthy just how dumb, lazy and careless the car driver is, but the sort of cutting corners laziness you see all about the place...

For instance, the driver cuts the 90 degree turn by turning in earlier than is safe - perhaps, if he was not looking properly, he expected the traffic to be bullied into giving way as such bad drivers sometimes do.

The motorcyclist was using both hands - it's just the camera isn't straight.
The motorcyclist has a very hi viz helmet.
Other cars on the road had lights on, the collided Renault didn't.

Concentrate on your way home people.

The biker wasnt using both hands less than 5 secs before the collision when overtaking the silver vehicle.

 

[jfs]

I would say it's 90% car driver's fault and 10% the biker's. The biker should have slowed down, not just for the junction but because he can see a car there waiting to turn. But that wouldn't have avoided the accident since the driver didn't see him at all (not saw him but thought he had time to cross because he misjudged biker's speed).

I do hope that if I'm in that position I will have the chance to jump so that I go over the car not into it. I'll break lots of bones when I land and lose some skin and more sliding down the road but avoiding the 97 to 0 mph in 0.1 secs will probably save my life. Other bikers may agree or disagree but either way it's worth thinking about in advance, especially you younger bikers.

Some of the comments on here about speed are a bit dumb. 97 mph is too fast in that particular circumstance as I said but not fast overall. Germany with similar road standards, traffic levels and driver standards has long stretches of un-restricted dual carriageway and imposing limits isn't even on the agenda. I've done 150mph+ on English roads when safe to do so hundreds of times without even a 'near miss' in 25 years of riding. It's not speed that dangerous, it's inappropriate use of speed that heightens risk. I think this 'speed kills' nonsense is just evidence of not thinking seriously about the issue.

 

[Guy Fawkes]

I have always wondered if more should be done to make motorbikes more visible to other road users and hopefully this will mean they have a greater chance of being spotted earlier and accidents can be avoided. A few years ago i went to Australia and when travelling through the mountains there, you had to have your headlights on at all times when driving, regardless of the weather or lighting conditions. Would legislating so that motorbikes (and maybe all vehicles including cars too) should always have their headlights on when in use increase visibility and help to save lives?

The car driver was at fault here, even when maneuvering he could have and maybe should have looked up again to make sure the road was still clear of traffic in the lane he was crossing and as he wasn't moving that fast, he would have been able to stop and leave room for the bike to pass. (This reminds me of the supercar crash in London that was on here a while ago but with a far more tragic outcome)

Because there is a slow sign on the road, how many drivers actually slow down, especially when they would be travelling in a straight line and not needing to slow to make a maneuver. I doubt any car drivers slow so why should everyone expect a biker to slow?

The sad fact is that people don't pay much attention at junctions, the number of times i have been travelling around a roundabout in a car and someone has pulled out in front of me and almost collided with me because they had only looked to their right and not thought that there may be a vehicle heading around that started from opposite them.

Cars offer a lot of crash protection nowadays and has this lead to people subconsiously thinking that they don't have to be so thorough in their observations because if they were to crash, they would escape ralatively unharmed? If you thought you could be seriously hurt from a relatively slow speed crash, they would be extra careful when maneurering. Again with speed, vehicles manage it so easily that people don't notice how fast they are sometimes going and it is easy to break the speed limit because you are sealed into a box and don't notice the windspeed as you drive. - Is driving less safe because people pay less attention because cars are so safe nowadays?

 

[GingerBeerMan]

The biker wasnt using both hands less than 5 secs before the collision when overtaking the silver vehicle.

He overtook with both hands then signalled a "thanks" to the silver car. It's pretty common. At them speeds you don't turn with the handlebars anyway so it's neither here nor there. He shouldn't have been doing 97MPH.

Apparently he was an experienced rider, and hearing that I'm surprised he lasted so long on the road. I always, always slow down when approaching a junction because car drivers can't be trusted. It's called defensive driving and if he had practised it here he'd probably be here today. He was driving like an idiot, anyone can see that, but it's sad that he died nonetheless.

 

[Easy 10]

I would say it's 90% car driver's fault and 10% the biker's. The biker should have slowed down, not just for the junction but because he can see a car there waiting to turn. But that wouldn't have avoided the accident since the driver didn't see him at all (not saw him but thought he had time to cross because he misjudged biker's speed).

I do hope that if I'm in that position I will have the chance to jump so that I go over the car not into it. I'll break lots of bones when I land and lose some skin and more sliding down the road but avoiding the 97 to 0 mph in 0.1 secs will probably save my life. Other bikers may agree or disagree but either way it's worth thinking about in advance, especially you younger bikers.

Some of the comments on here about speed are a bit dumb. 97 mph is too fast in that particular circumstance as I said but not fast overall. Germany with similar road standards, traffic levels and driver standards has long stretches of un-restricted dual carriageway and imposing limits isn't even on the agenda. I've done 150mph+ on English roads when safe to do so hundreds of times without even a 'near miss' in 25 years of riding. It's not speed that dangerous, it's inappropriate use of speed that heightens risk. I think this 'speed kills' nonsense is just evidence of not thinking seriously about the issue.

The driver is not without blame, but to say he is 90% at fault when the cyclist was doing NINETY-SEVEN MPH, on a single carriageway through heavy traffic and approaching a junction - that is an INSANE speed to be doing in those circumstances. The fact that you claim this is "not fast overall" and then go on to say how totally safe it is to do 150mph+ on a public road just suggests to me that you're a bit of a nutjob, a dangerous accident waiting to happen. I just hope to christ I'm not anywhere in the vicinity when it happens.

 

[daveinprague]

Fair enough...can see that now somebody with experience has pointed out. Like you say. Its the speed that was the issue.
Im not a biker or a driver. If I was a witness to the accident, I would have said the biker was a fault, rather than the motorist.
Way too fast for a single carriage, and that would have stood out more in my mind than the actions, or non actions of the driver.

 

[Sheebo]

One thing that upsets me is most people (prob myself included) ask what happened when they hear of a RTA - it's spoke about fairly blasé as some on this thread are. Often I don't care what happened as such really, as the end result is the key thing. How badly hurt people were or god forbid if they survived. I guess it's human nature in a way though and I appreciate the purpose of this thread and that video is to learn from errors here and save lives... Maybe I'm caught in 2 minds here tbh...

Something similar happened to a mate of mine (altho don think the speeds were that high) one day. A car pulled out and 'didn't see him'. I don't know the ins and outs because it didn't matter to me one bit - the end result was he lost his life & left many friends & family behind, and that was the only thing that mattered to me.

 

[daveinprague]

If it makes one biker ride more sensibly, and one driver give more attention (however, how many times is the bike 'not seen'), then it should be shown.

 

[drew]

The crash, in my opinion, was caused by the car not making effective observations however the consequences of the crash has to go down to the rider going to fast and not anticipating the problem. The road says slow which he ignored. He also came from behind the car and whilst he the other driver should have seen him, I suspect he had really determined that the other car was far enough away for him to turn and was then looking into the side road. Absolute tragedy. However, I'm not sure there is any evidence that he was riding with only one hand. At one point he uses his hand to lower his visor but after that looks like he has both hands on the handlebars.

 

[Spider]

'I hope car drivers watch this and look carefully for motorbikes'

I would tend to go with 'I hope other motorcycle drivers watch this and stop driving like pricks'

At the speed he was going, the car driver might have seen him, but assumed he was going at the maximum permitted speed and therefore calculated that he had time to get across. Feel sorry for both - car driver for being charged and emotionally scarred, motorcyclist for not realising he wasn't invincible.

 

[Bry Nylon]

I've done 150mph+ on English roads when safe to do so hundreds of times without even a 'near miss' in 25 years of riding. It's not speed that dangerous, it's inappropriate use of speed that heightens risk. I think this 'speed kills' nonsense is just evidence of not thinking seriously about the issue.

Wow. I would say it's never safe to do 150mph on a public road. The stopping distance for a motorcycle at that speed is about 350 metres. That's three and half times the length of the Wembley pitch. Insane. If people want to ride at that speed then for the sake of me and my two kids I wish they would go and do 'track days' and not do it on the road space that we share.

I agree that speed it itself doesn't kill - it tends to be the sudden stop. Over the years I've poured the shattered bodies of countless motorcyclists into bodybags. And you really do pour deceased motorcyclists into bodybags. Their riding leathers tend to keep all the bits inside but when you pick them up it's like handling a carrier bag full of blancmange.