Slow down!

CrazyRabbit

Yet another 2 preventable deaths. Just a reminder to everyone what can happen when you drive too fast.

And I've personally seen two other motorcycle crashes in the past 10 days. Thankfully nobody killed, but the injuries were quite bad in one of the accidents.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0730/rta.html?rss

Two dead after motorcycle crashes

Two men have died in hospital following separate motorcycle accidents yesterday.
A 34-year-old man died when he lost control of his motorcycle and crashed into a ditch in Tomriland near Roundwood at 11.30am yesterday morning.
No other vehicle was involved in the crash.
And a 36-year-old man died after another motorcycle accident in Ballinasloe Co Galway.
He lost control of his vehicle and crashed in Sralea at around 11.45pm.
He was removed to Portiuncula Hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Owen

Both articles you list state "Loss of control". Hows is this related to speed? More to the point, what has speed got to do with safety? It's inappropriate speed that causes road deaths, not general speed. On top of that, 'loss of control' could be anything from brakes failing, to chains snapping, diesel on the road, gravel, potholes, you name it.

seamus

You'll find that the bulk of people who "leave the road" in any vehicle are either pissed or tired. Speed and other factors don't come into it so often.

CrazyRabbit

If both drivers were driving at a slower (safer) speed they would not be dead right now. Injured yes, but not dead. I'm 100% sure that speed was indeed a factor in these two deaths.

I know there are many reasons for loosing control of your bike. Accidents happen, many times through no fault of the driver. My point is that accidents while traveling at high speed (within legal limits or not) are much more likely to result in death. Dropping your speed by 10-15 mph could mean the difference between life and death.

spockety

yes, you are correct alright. If they were riding at 5mph they would almost certainly not have died.

:rolleyes:

Pigeon Reaper

According to the radio one was avoiding Gardai. The other may be attributable to speed but other factors may be in play too. I do agree that inappropiate speed can be a major contributing factor but we cannot say in this case for sure. Just don't push your limits otherwise you may meet with the sausage creature.

MrPudding

First of all RIP, always sad to see someone lose their life on the roads.

CrazyRabbit wrote:

If both drivers were driving at a slower (safer) speed they would not be dead right now. Injured yes, but not dead. I'm 100% sure that speed was indeed a factor in these two deaths.

I am interested to know how you can be 100% certain that both these men would still be alive if they had been travelling slower. I have a number of questions for you, as the answers do not appear in the article and you seem to have access to additional information.

1. Are you a crash investigator?
2. Were you involved with either of the incidents?
3. What were the injuries sustained / cause of death in both cases?
4. What speed where the motorcyclists travelling at when the loss of control occurred
5. What kind of loss of control was it? "Loss of control" is a very vague term.

CrazyRabbit wrote:

I know there are many reasons for loosing control of your bike. Accidents happen, many times through no fault of the driver. My point is that accidents while traveling at high speed (within legal limits or not) are much more likely to result in death. Dropping your speed by 10-15 mph could mean the difference between life and death.

I personally am getting pretty fed up with the whining about speed kills. As has been pointed out, inappropriate speed kills, that is speed that is inappropriate to the conditions you are travelling in or even inappropriate to you level of skill or the abilities of your machine. Simply telling everyone to slow down is a complete cop out and a load of balls. This is something I have come to expect from idiot politicians trying to appease the idiot masses by giving the impression that they are doing something by identifying the one unifying feature of every road death and screaming about it so it appear that they are doing something. Christ, even the NRA & RSA figures do not support the claim that speed is the overriding factor in most road deaths.

As for your “dropping you speed by 10-15 mph…….” suggestion, do you want everyone travelling at 75mph on the motorway to slow down to 60mph? Having a blanket drop you speed by 15mph is fcuking stupid. If it is safe to travel at a certain speed what is point in slowing down?

MrP

CrazyRabbit

No matter the cause of the accidents, the fact is that the drivers were going fast enough to be killed. Granted, I don't know the specifics of these crashes, but obviously they were exceeding the limits of their bikes, the road surface or their riding skills (No 3rd party involvement in these crashes). A little less speed MIGHT have allowed them to keep control (depending on the cause). A little less speed could very well have made for a happier ending to these accidents.

By making this post, I was simply trying to highlight that what we think might be safe speed, might not be correct. So, if you think you can safely drive at XXX mph in XXX conditions, try easing off by 10-15 mph and putting yourself back well with your limits and the bike's limits. If these 2 guys had done this, they may still be alive.

In hindsight, I should have posted "Just a reminder to everyone what can happen when you drive too fast for your skill or road conditions"

Very generally speaking, I feel that motorcylists are overly confident in their machines abilities and in their driving skills. This is why so many motorcyle accidents don't involve other drivers....it's just the motorcyclist 'losing control'. Mostly from speed, poor road surface or both.

seamus

CrazyRabbit wrote:

By making this post, I was simply trying to highlight that what we think might be safe speed, might not be correct. So, if you think you can safely drive at XXX mph in XXX conditions, try easing off by 10-15 mph and putting yourself back well with your limits and the bike's limits. If these 2 guys had done this, they may still be alive.

Well, you hit a bit of a connundrum at that point. Most people who've lost control because they were driving beyond their limits, thought that they were driving well within their limits. It's a bit useless to try to tell people, "You may be driving outside of your limits". Ask them to check again, and they'll tell you, "I'm driving well within my limits".

Very generally speaking, I feel that motorcylists are overly confident in their machines abilities and in their driving skills. This is why so many motorcyle accidents don't involve other drivers....it's just the motorcyclist 'losing control'. Mostly from speed, poor road surface or both.

I think that's a fair generalisation to make about any single-vehicle accidents though. I would say the rate of single-vehicle accidents for cars is equally as high as for motorcycles, but the fatality rate is far less.
Motorcycles have a problem in that they don't protect you. This needs to be offset with proper training for newer riders and perhaps government-sponsored "refresher" courses for people who want them.

The statistics show that there's a sharp spike in motorcyclist fatalities for the 30-something age group. This represents those people who gave up in their twenties, and jump onto a huge bike in their thirties, or all those who always wanted a bike but never had the spare cash. It's fair to say that inexperience and lack of training, above anything, is the main cause of this spike.

Krusty_Clown

CrazyRabbit wrote:

Very generally speaking, I feel that motorcylists are overly confident in their machines abilities and in their driving skills. This is why so many motorcyle accidents don't involve other drivers....it's just the motorcyclist 'losing control'. Mostly from speed, poor road surface or both.

Are you a fellow motorcyclist or a concerned citizen, just passing on some insightful observations? Generally (and there's been a lot of generalizing already) only those people who ride bikes every day can grasp the vulnerability of riding a motorcycle. A spill at 30mph can kill you if you hit a tree, whereas a spill at 30mph in a car is unlikely to do significant damage to the vehicle not to mind the driver. Speed doesn't kill. Contact with large immovable objects kills.

I often wonder how many of these single vehicle accidents are in fact single vehicle accidents. I have become blase about the number of times these days that I have to take evasive action while riding within the speed-limit on my commute to work. Vehicles over taking on the wrong side of the road, vehicles invading my personal space (changing lanes directly into my path).
Sure, like every other road user, we have our fair share of speeders, learners, and over-confidence, but reporting accidents tends towards the hysterical and the biased.

RIP Fellas..

CrazyRabbit

Krusty_Clown wrote:

Are you a fellow motorcyclist or a concerned citizen, just passing on some insightful observations? Generally (and there's been a lot of generalizing already) only those people who ride bikes every day can grasp the vulnerability of riding a motorcycle. A spill at 30mph can kill you if you hit a tree, whereas a spill at 30mph in a car is unlikely to do significant damage to the vehicle not to mind the driver. Speed doesn't kill. Contact with large immovable objects kills.

I often wonder how many of these single vehicle accidents are in fact single vehicle accidents. I have become blase about the number of times these days that I have to take evasive action while riding within the speed-limit on my commute to work. Vehicles over taking on the wrong side of the road, vehicles invading my personal space (changing lanes directly into my path).
Sure, like every other road user, we have our fair share of speeders, learners, and over-confidence, but reporting accidents tends towards the hysterical and the biased.

RIP Fellas..

I've been driving motorbikes for 7 years. 'Lost control' twice (oil slick & gravel on a main road). Been hit once (muppet overtaking me while going through a one-lane left hand turn).

bushy...

CrazyRabbit wrote:

Yet another 2 preventable deaths. Just a reminder to everyone what can happen when you drive too fast.

Can't be bothered ranting, maybe later ....meanwhile some potentially fatal stuff that wouldn't have left much trace/not be conclusive i've seen or been on go wrong ( all different bikes btw)

Guy gets highsided , new bike , casting flash in gearbox caused it to lock up .Roadrace
Sudden fuel leak over back tyre , main road ,<100k , not great in dry , well dodgy if wet.
Front brake seal failing turning bike around in yard.
Front master cylinder failing after been out for a test spin
Clip on breaking moving bike around yard.
Internal pin breaking in steering damper.< 100k
Rear shock linkage breaking .
Coolant hose splitting , a)hot b) slippery
Oil hose rupturing ( older type gsxr , oil pump of doom in them , can vomit oil at a serious rate). a) very hot b) very slippery
Cracked headstock bearing race
Immobiliser disabling ignition while in motion
Hairline crack in resistor in ignition switch causing bike to occassionly lose power/come back to life suddenly .

Not always speed you see , and i suppose often no-one looks a bit deeper because its not going to help much.

murphaph

CrazyRabbit wrote:

No matter the cause of the accidents, the fact is that the drivers were going fast enough to be killed.

But that's a 'contract' we enter into when we step into/onto any motorised vehicle. Human beings are not designed to travel faster than walking pace and if something goes wrong, the body does not react well to decelerating from even moderate speeds to 0mph in 0.25 seconds.

The road surfaces in general in the RoI are very poor and tar banding abounds. Little if any heed is paid to particular dangers faced by PTWs by the local authorities and I know I've had a few scary moments on gravel that had accumulated at junctions because the LA simply hadn't made any attempt to remove it in years!

We still see untextured steel plate being used to cover excavated road surfaces. Fine and dandy in a car-lethal in the wet on a bike.

These bikers may have had an input into their own deaths, but I'm willing to wager the road engineering (or lack of it) was reaponsible too. As one poster already pointed out-we'd all be fine if we pootled about at 5mph.

fergusdo

bushy... wrote:

QUOTE=CrazyRabbit]Yet another 2 preventable deaths. Just a reminder to everyone what can happen when you drive too fast.

Can't be bothered ranting, maybe later ....meanwhile some potentially fatal stuff that wouldn't have left much trace/not be conclusive i've seen or been on go wrong ( all different bikes btw)

Guy gets highsided , new bike , casting flash in gearbox caused it to lock up .Roadrace
Sudden fuel leak over back tyre , main road ,<100k , not great in dry , well dodgy if wet.
Front brake seal failing turning bike around in yard.
Front master cylinder failing after been out for a test spin
Clip on breaking moving bike around yard.
Internal pin breaking in steering damper.< 100k
Rear shock linkage breaking .
Coolant hose splitting , a)hot b) slippery
Oil hose rupturing ( older type gsxr , oil pump of doom in them , can vomit oil at a serious rate). a) very hot b) very slippery
Cracked headstock bearing race
Immobiliser disabling ignition while in motion
Hairline crack in resistor in ignition switch causing bike to occassionly lose power/come back to life suddenly .

Not always speed you see , and i suppose often no-one looks a bit deeper because its not going to help much.[/QUOTE]




Christ, I've just made it in from work - don't think I'll venture out tomorrow and I thought that to fly in the Shuttle was dangerous!


Of course your right, it's not always speed but - which is the more/most likely/most common cause? Drink and speed or some of the more exotic above.

More years ago than I want to think about, I remeber one of my instructors saying to me that the seriously big difference between an accident in car and one on a bike is that it's very difficult to have a minor accident on a bike! I still think it's one of the best pieces of 'advice' I have ever been given.

Idleater

CrazyRabbit wrote:

I've been driving motorbikes for 7 years. 'Lost control' twice (oil slick & gravel on a main road). Been hit once (muppet overtaking me while going through a one-lane left hand turn).

And just out of interest, could these incidents where you " 'Lost control' " have been avoided if you had been going slower?

If so, why were you not driving slower in order to prevent these incidents happening?

GreeBo

Any accident will nearly always be less damaging the slower your speed.
From a simple thing like hitting a wall to having to do an emergency stop.
The slower your are moving the less dangerous the accident will be.

"Appropriate speed" is a great slogan to let you drive at whatever speed you like.
Who decides whats appropriate?

The only time speed is important is when you have an accident, then you can decide if your speed was appropriate or not.:cool:

Krusty_Clown

GreeBo wrote:

Any accident will nearly always be less damaging the slower your speed.

Not entirely correct. If you ride too slow you are creating a brand new set of hazards. See CrazyRabbits experiences. Not all accidents involve the motorcyclist hitting objects, sometimes we're the victims. Remember those two unfortunate riders killed last year on their cruisers, when someone hit them head on, on the wrong side of the road?

GreeBo

Krusty_Clown wrote:

Not entirely correct. If you ride too slow you are creating a brand new set of hazards. See CrazyRabbits experiences. Not all accidents involve the motorcyclist hitting objects, sometimes we're the victims. Remember those two unfortunate riders killed last year on their cruisers, when someone hit them head on, on the wrong side of the road?

But in a head on collision your speed is just as important.
Two vehicles travelling at 100kph = hitting a wall at 200kph

Obviously "too" slow creates a hazard, but you cannot argue against the fact that if everyone drove slowly there would be far less fatal crashes.

Krusty_Clown

GreeBo wrote:

But in a head on collision your speed is just as important.
Two vehicles travelling at 100kph = hitting a wall at 200kph

Obviously "too" slow creates a hazard, but you cannot argue against the fact that if everyone drove slowly there would be far less fatal crashes.

I wouldn't fancy my chances being hit head-on at 100km/hr, regardless of whether I was stationary or riding at the speed limit.

GreeBo wrote:

...that if everyone drove slowly there would be far less fatal crashes.

Agreed. Throw in road improvements and tackle drink driving and poor driving, too though.

Anyone know what the fatality rates are like in Jersey? They have a maximum speed of 40mph. All the same, don't think I'd enjoy living there.

GreeBo

Krusty_Clown wrote:

I wouldn't fancy my chances being hit head-on at 100km/hr, regardless of whether I was stationary or riding at the speed limit.

I think your best bet would be turn around and try go at least 100km/hr in that direction

MrPudding

GreeBo wrote:

But in a head on collision your speed is just as important.
Two vehicles travelling at 100kph = hitting a wall at 200kph

Ok then, I am being really really safe. I have followed your advice and I am doing 5kph. w00t! How safe must I be? So, I get hit bt an oncoming car that is doing 120kph. How much have I increased my chance of survival by travelling at 5kph?

MrP

GreeBo

MrPudding wrote:

Ok then, I am being really really safe. I have followed your advice and I am doing 5kph. w00t! How safe must I be? So, I get hit bt an oncoming car that is doing 120kph. How much have I increased my chance of survival by travelling at 5kph?

MrP

27.6% increased survival rate.

MrPudding

GreeBo wrote:

27.6% increased survival rate.

I would hazard it would not make the slightest bit of difference.

Personally I think the single greatest contribution you can make to your chances of survival on a bike is training.

I don't think appropriate speed is a cop out or an excuse. Training is a tool that will allow you to work out what the appropriate speed is for a certain set of conditions.

The "just slow down" mantra is a bit of an insult and is an easy way for the government to appear to be doing something when in fact they are not.

To be honest reckless speeding is not a problem, it is a symptom of a problem. The problem is a lack of training and a bad attitude.

MrP

GreeBo

MrPudding wrote:

To be honest reckless speeding is not a problem, it is a symptom of a problem. The problem is a lack of training and a bad attitude.

Too true, but I still maintain that the faster you are going the worse any crash or incident is going to be.
I dont believe that "going fast" necessarily causes crashes, it just makes them worse and harder to avoid.

seamus

GreeBo wrote:

27.6% increased survival rate.

What was the survival rate before the increase? 0.00001%?

CrazyRabbit

nereid wrote:

And just out of interest, could these incidents where you " 'Lost control' " have been avoided if you had been going slower?

If so, why were you not driving slower in order to prevent these incidents happening?

No, the accidents were not preventable unless perhaps I was driving at 10mph which is unreasonable. But at the time, I would have thought that 60-70mph would be an 'appropriate' and 'safe' speed to travel on the road where these two accidents happened (same road, 2 months apart). I had regularly driven on this road at that speed. I stick to 50mph now. Safer, doesn't cause problems for other drivers, and adds maybe 2-3 mins to my journey.

The only reason I was traveling much slower on the days I had the accidents, was due to heavy traffic one one occasion and very heavy rain on the other. If I had been traveling at 60-70mph I might have been killed or at the very least I would have been more seriously injured. I consider myself very lucky and never curse slow moving cars anymore

I'm not suggesting that we should all drive around at a snails pace, and accidents can happen at any speed and for 100's of reasons. All I would suggest is to not be in such a hurry, and don't push yourself or your bike to the limit. Stay well within your skill and your bike's ability. If you are in an accident, that 10-15 mph speed reduction might just be enough to save your life or someone elses.

Idleater

CrazyRabbit wrote:

If you are in an accident, that 10-15 mph speed reduction might just be enough to save your life or someone elses.

I am with Mr P on this one.

If we all have proper training, so that we can learn how to judge the road conditions dynamically as we drive them then we will be less at risk of causing an accident (due to whatever speed) and we will also be able to mitigate any circumstances outside our control so that we stand the best possible chance of not getting killed.

Ask any racer who will tell you there is a big difference between being quick and being fast. Any biker is fast, being quick on the other hand involves reading the road, the conditions and many many other factors, and combining them all together to make progress.

L.

GreeBo

nereid wrote:

I am with Mr P on this one.

If we all have proper training, so that we can learn how to judge the road conditions dynamically as we drive them then we will be less at risk of causing an accident (due to whatever speed) and we will also be able to mitigate any circumstances outside our control so that we stand the best possible chance of not getting killed.

I think you are still missing the point though.
Im not saying that speeding will cause you to have an accident (though it might) I am saying that an accident at a higher speed will be a worse accident than an accident at lower speed.
Its also harder to avoid something the faster you are going.

MrPudding

GreeBo wrote:

I think you are still missing the point though.
Im not saying that speeding will cause you to have an accident (though it might) I am saying that an accident at a higher speed will be a worse accident than an accident at lower speed.
Its also harder to avoid something the faster you are going.

The point nereid and myself are trying to make, I think, is that simply saying slow down is dumbing down the message. If everyone had decent training they would be travelling at a speed which is appropriate for their skill, their machine and the conditions they are travelling in.

What you are saying is that if I am travelling along the M1 doing 120 or 130, that I should slowdown to 105 or 115. Why, what is the point. I am constantly checking my environment and I believe I can travel safely at 120 or 130. Should something change I will reassess and perhaps decide to drop my speed.

If you have poor observation and planning skills the chances are the car pulling out in front of you will hit you anyway, regardless of your speed unless you are talking about a huge differential, plus, if this one doesn’t hit you the next one might.

I would prefer if we all rode at a level where we were safe because of the action we take to be safe rather than internally saying I reckon 120 is safe so I will slow down to 105. To me that is just stupid.

MrP

GreeBo

ok well whats the difference in stopping distances for your bike when travelling at 100kp/h versus 120 kp/h?

MrPudding

Off the top of my head I don't know, but then if it is safe to do 120 I won't have to find out will I?

MrP