Another bike downed by car driver

Zebbedee

Both parties at fault here I think.
The old biddy driving the car was at fault for pulling across the bikers path and the biker could have avoided her in my opinion if he took evasive action quickly instead of dithering about whether to brake or go around her. He only had 1 or 2 seconds to decide.
The biker was ok but his brand new yamaha mt01 was totalled. She actually drove up over his bike and continued on her way and had to be waved down by another motorist.
It's a good case for leaving a camera recording while you're riding I think...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu7jzKsjs7M

650Ginge

Seen a similar uk vid with a cyclist hit by one car then another drives over him and doesn't seem to notice.

They should lose there privilege to drive.

BrokenArrows

It was the drivers fault but it does look like he could have avoided it.

Seem like he was caught in two mindes whether to break or go around.

drunkmonkey

Looks like an insurance scam, there's no reason he couldn't have stopped in time or at the very least avoided the car.

Bigcheeze

Zebbedee wrote: »

Both parties at fault here I think.

Well then change the retarded thread title!

KTRIC

I watched and watched it and he had loooooooads of time to stop. He's doing just 20mph and you could see her miles off.

He definitely dropped the MT and then she ran over the wheel. Clearly no idea how to drive.

minidazzler

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Looks like an insurance scam, there's no reason he couldn't have stopped in time or at the very least avoided the car.

I was about to argue this (the insurance scam bit) but then I saw the bit where he said "I've got everything on camera" now I'm not so sure. I don't think that's the first thing anyone would do after an accident.

She was already halfway in his riding lane when he saw her, certainly could have braked, so either he was playing chicken and hoping for the best or it was an insurance scam. That said, she should have seen him, not just looked in his general direction.

If it was an accident it's probably a case of "I've been driving 40 years, I know what I'm doing" as if being able to move a vehicle grants you automatic insight into how to drive well.

paddy147

And the car driver still drives accross the junction after the impact.Never even got out of the car to see where and how the biker was.

God forbid that the bikers leg,arm of head could had have been under the car.
Some people really are clueless and dont think.



Biker tried to stop/slam on the brakes as best as he could.The very second the car crosses the central line,the biker is on the brakes. (you can clearly see and hear it in the video)

You can hear the back wheel locking up from hard braking and skidding in the video

paddy147

minidazzler wrote: »

I was about to argue this (the insurance scam bit) but then I saw the bit where he said "I've got everything on camera" now I'm not so sure. I don't think that's the first thing anyone would do after an accident.

She was already halfway in his riding lane when he saw her, certainly could have braked, so either he was playing chicken and hoping for the best or it was an insurance scam. That said, she should have seen him, not just looked in his general direction.

If it was an accident it's probably a case of "I've been driving 40 years, I know what I'm doing" as if being able to move a vehicle grants you automatic insight into how to drive well.

HE DID BRAKE...the very second that the car turned accross/over the centre line

Watch and listen carefully to the video again.

Zebbedee

Here's a vid of the damage caused.
The insurance company did write it off eventually.
It was only 5 days old.
Certainly was a crackin lookin bike..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yigkjokAz0s

positron

It's very simple - the car should not have crossed his lane when he was about to go. If the car driver judged that he could get cross well before the bike get there, they got that wrong, which caused the biker to try and avoid the collision and that didn't help. I bed the car driver would have waited if it was a articulated truck coming down towards them instead of a bike.

arybvtcw0eolkf

Looks like an accident which an experienced rider could have very easily avoided. Looked like he had bags of space to take evasive action, and/or apply his brakes to avoid that collision.

Nice weather, clear view ahead and dry clean road.. He'll live and learn.

Hardly any damage to the buy, nice one ~ buy it back from the insurance company at scrap value and hey presto you've a nice bike back on the road at minimal cost plus compo

Faith+1

Zebbedee wrote: »

Here's a vid of the damage caused.
The insurance company did write it off eventually.
It was only 5 days old.
Certainly was a crackin lookin bike..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yigkjokAz0s

paddy147

Faith+1 wrote: »

Possible frame/structural damage/kinking and too much hassle for insurance company to sort out perhaps?

IF that was the case,then its not noticible from that very short video clip.

paddy147

Maybe he should have had a shotgun with him and riden his bike like this then???:pac::D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0JMVal0cdY

Zebbedee

positron wrote: »

I bed the car driver would have waited if it was a articulated truck coming down towards them instead of a bike.

Well said.

Max Headroom

The driver was in the wrong...nuff said..

Having said that, modern bike modern brakes dry road..the biker should have been able to stop..no question..
The driver was probably blinded by the low sun...check out the shadows...
In fact they might not even have seen a truck...;)
Ride like everyone is going to cut you up...:)

ratracer

Whatever about the auld wan driving the car, the biker had loads of time to react and didn't. So either he's a very inexperienced pilot or just a bad pilot. Absolutely no reason for this collision to have happened. He had plenty of time to react. I also agree with an earlier post, the riders comment of 'I have it all on tape' is a very strange reaction, is he trying to intimidate the auld biddy??

rat_race

Zebbedee wrote: »

Both parties at fault here I think.
The old biddy driving the car was at fault for pulling across the bikers path and the biker could have avoided her in my opinion if he took evasive action quickly instead of dithering about whether to brake or go around her. He only had 1 or 2 seconds to decide.
The biker was ok but his brand new yamaha mt01 was totalled. She actually drove up over his bike and continued on her way and had to be waved down by another motorist.
It's a good case for leaving a camera recording while you're riding I think...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nu7jzKsjs7M

Agree. The biker had plenty of time to emergency brake, or evade. He also should have used his horn which could have stopped her in her tracks.

paddy147

Cameras on cars,trucks,bikes etc is now a common thing for the purpose of sorting insurance claims.

Its a massive thing in the USA with the insurance firms now.

They (insurance companies) even install dash cams focused on the driver,so they can see if the driver nods of or gets distracted and causes an accident.


So thats why the rider mentioned about having it on camera/tape??

arybvtcw0eolkf

Just looked at that again, the rider actually has little chance to react.

From the time the lady starts her move (@7 secs) the rider applies his brakes right away, you can't hear them but his rev's immediately drop and the collision occures at 9 seconds leaving the rider little time or space to take evasive action.

There's probably less than 50 meters from himself and the lady when she starts her turn, so those with forensic minds can work out the distance and time traveled before the collision and come back with the rides speed

daenerysstormborn3

Did the old bitch even have her indicator on? I can't really see it properly.

Wonda-Boy

Hope he had ATGATT.............:pac::pac::pac:

CarrickMcJoe

BrokenArrows wrote: »

It was the drivers fault but it does look like he could have avoided it.

Seem like he was caught in two mindes whether to break or go around.

Yes he could have avoided it, but then what would he put up on youtube from his fancy camera.
No way would I get one as they seemm to all have acciddents.

AgileMyth

ratracer wrote: »

I also agree with an earlier post, the riders comment of 'I have it all on tape' is a very strange reaction, is he trying to intimidate the auld biddy??

Unless shes denied being to blame. Then its perfectly logical to point out the camera.

paddy147

AgileMyth wrote: »

Unless shes denied being to blame. Then its perfectly logical to point out the camera.

The elderly lady driver seems to be very confused or in denial of what she did (1 minute 27 seconds onwards).A male voice (at that same time too) seems to also try to start a sentence by saying that somebody (biker or lady driver,dont know???) did something wrong or was somehow in the wrong.

So the motorbiker interupts and says he has everything on camera.


The motorbiker could also be well and truely pi55ed off that she continued to drive off,and over his bike and away from the accident scene,even after the accident had occured.

Hes very lucky that no part of his body was trapped under the bike or worse still,under the car,as she drove off over the bike.:eek::mad:

Thank god the the biker was lucky enough and quick enouigh to get out of the cars way/wheels and get to his feet.



So he was making her and the men aware of the situation by stating that he had it all on video/camera.

Rightly and fairly too.

Cienciano

Jasus, how the hell do people think it's the bikers fault??
I'm with paddy147 on this one, the second she looks like she's about to turn he hits the brakes. Obviously that reduces your chance to swerve around her. Old woman shouldn't be driving if she didn't see him, she's 100% to blame here.
Only way to avoid it was to nail the throttle and try and get past her before she turns!

KTRIC wrote: »

I watched and watched it and he had loooooooads of time to stop. He's doing just 20mph and you could see her miles off.

He definitely dropped the MT and then she ran over the wheel. Clearly no idea how to drive.

You're looking at his rev counter

batman_oh

Her fault entirely but he easily could have avoided it by accelerating through the gap (best idea). Could have stopped if he hit the brakes harder too (although this is harder to do unless you practice it). From 20mph on a modern bike in the dry it takes no length to stop if you apply the brakes as hard as possible.

Still her fault though

Cuddlesworth

Cienciano wrote: »

Jasus, how the hell do people think it's the bikers fault??

A mature rider will always be critical of their own and others actions, to change habits for the better. It doesn't mean he was in the wrong.

sf80

batman_oh wrote: »

Her fault entirely but he easily could have avoided it by accelerating through the gap (best idea).

Not the best idea, you'll probably just increase the speed of the impact; you have no idea if the driver will brake, accelerate or maintain speed at that point. Someone merging in on top of you engage warp speed, but a possible impact up ahead scrub off as much speed as you can.

professore

I'd say he's doing about 60 MPH (dial is the rev counter, not the speedo) which is far too fast on a road like that with lots of exits.

Whether or not the old biddy is at fault is academic (she is BTW - especially driving off) if you're dead or seriously injured.

ratracer

I suppose it's very easy to analyse a video after the event and try to decide the correct course of action to take. Looking at the video, the rider was doing 50 km/h at the time he dropped the bike. Given that the rev counter was at 2000 rpm, accelerating past the car was not going to be an option as he was in the wrong gear and too low down the rev counter for quick acceleration. I do think he could have stopped the bike on his own side of the road close to the white line if he'd went to the right. But again, this would come down to the rider responsiveness/experience/judgement/reaction time.

The car driver was completely in the wrong and luckily the biker got away relatively lightly. It just goes to show that you can never be paying enough attention to all road situations. Treat all drivers as not seeing you!!

Hotblack Desiato

paddy147 wrote: »

Biker tried to stop/slam on the brakes as best as he could.The very second the car crosses the central line,the biker is on the brakes. (you can clearly see and hear it in the video)

You can hear the back wheel locking up from hard braking and skidding in the video

Maybe he's one of those riders who is so afraid of locking the front brake they don't use it at all or do most of their braking with the rear. That's not appropriate on a dry road when you need to stop quickly.

Star Lord

ratracer wrote: »

I do think he could have stopped the bike on his own side of the road close to the white line if he'd went to the right. But again, this would come down to the rider responsiveness/experience/judgement/reaction time.

It looked to me like the driver came out a bit and stopped/slowed, which is when he started to slow, and he went to the left, and she came on out then, which is when he had to try to brake hard/cut to the right, but went down instead.

paddy147

Raises a question though..........


Should people over a "certain age" be made by law to do a test and have eyesight and hearing tested every 2-3 years or so????

Blondie919

I read through some of the replies before I watched the vid so maybe my mind was already made up. But I think it does look like a scam. The rider had loads of time to see what was happening and should have at least guessed the car would pull across him. Most bikers have a second instinct.

But what really seems suspect to me is that within seconds of it happening a guy wearing a motorcycle t-shirt stops to help the rider. I can't read the name on the badge but it looks like a motorcycle workshop staff t-shirt. Add to that the fact that the first thing he says is he got it all on camera. I don't know though, maybe I'm just a skeptic.

Topper Harley

Here are some of the biker's comments on YouTube regarding the crash. It explains why he did what he did, which sounds reasonable enough to me and keep in mind he obviously was inexperienced on this particular bike (if it was only five days old).

Also explains that that he was doing 45-60km/h after braking and he doesn't sound like he's trying to embellish his injuries.

And I can't imagine that he (or anyone) would do this as an insurance scam. Even a low speed collision with a car and you're taking your life into your own hands.

Hey all, again thanks for all the wishes, 24hrs on I can say, mild knee pain, whiplash, full body stiffness, seems 40 is not a good age to practice the Kick-n-Roll para-shoot roll on tarmac Thanks all once again for spreading this clip, near 1000 views, if even only one biker reconsidered ATTGAT or his riding style, then it was a win for all us bikers. Keep sharing it, let my loss be someone elses win at least. Ride safe and keep the rubber on the tar.. BOTH sets of rubber Regards Chris

Thank you all for the wishes and referred mojo. I don't harbour anyone any ill will in this matter. motorcycling by its very definition is a risky business, and no matter how well you prepare yourself the road will throw sick randomness at you. Always ride expecting it. Better yet, do defensive riding courses, especially a track day after buying a new ride. Please feel free to reshare this as much as you like in the right spirit, not to slam the cager, to teach other riders.
Thank you all.

I did try that, thinking she would see me and give me gap around left, but halfway in was apparent she still didn't, imminent T-Bone, so tried to flick her up to go around back on right.. 270kg at 45-60km/h does NOT want to be flicked that hard. so. inverted lowside .very difficult to make judgement calls in these scenarios.. get to pick HOW you fall, not IF you fall,. TBONE, Lowside under, or flick into oncoming traffic and take chances.. I am here typing this, so made right choice i hope.

Hotblack Desiato

Topper Harley wrote: »

Here are some of the biker's comments on YouTube regarding the crash.

Did he mention using the front brake at all? :rolleyes:

There's a big thing among cruiser riders in the US about 'laying the bike down' in an impending crash situation like that - preferable to a highside but it's still a collision and unpredictable, if they knew how to use their brakes properly they'd be much better off.

And I can't imagine that he (or anyone) would do this as an insurance scam. Even a low speed collision with a car and you're taking your life into your own hands.

Couldn't agree more, it's just stupid to suggest it was an insurance scam. Nobody in their right mind would deliberately crash a motorcycle in the hope of making money.
Nobody running a scam would have a cam running either, they'd make sure to have 'reliable' witnesses around but nothing on tape.

Del2005

ninja900 wrote: »

Did he mention using the front brake at all? :rolleyes:

There's a big thing among cruiser riders in the US about 'laying the bike down' in an impending crash situation like that - preferable to a highside but it's still a collision and unpredictable, if they knew how to use their brakes properly they'd be much better off.

Most Harley's don't have breaks or handle well, so they can't avoid crashes as easily as a modern(ish) Euro/Jap machine.

batman_oh

sf80 wrote: »

Not the best idea, you'll probably just increase the speed of the impact; you have no idea if the driver will brake, accelerate or maintain speed at that point. Someone merging in on top of you engage warp speed, but a possible impact up ahead scrub off as much speed as you can.

I'll always try to avoid it and it has saved me a few times thankfully. But i guess having a fast sportsbike helps as it's easy to move and you can get instant acceleration to get you through gaps. On a big slow bike like that you are probably fooked alright

Syllabus

target fixation imo

he shoulda just got the left knee down and taken the turn she was trying to take and avoided the crash. he wasnt even going that fast

Syllabus

paddy147 wrote: »

Raises a question though..........


Should people over a "certain age" be made by law to do a test and have eyesight and hearing tested every 2-3 years or so????

all women over 15, all asians;) over 25 and all men over 50






imo

Tigger

Is everyone reading the rev counter as speed ?

He should have gone straight to the brakes but he wasn't planning ahead so he wasn't constantly evaluating ( if this idiot Turns now ill go right ) ( if that car pulls out ill brake etc)
I'm afraid that you have to set yourself up that cars are constantly going to cut accross you and that pedestrians are going to run out in front of you

Drive accordingly and plan your escape

But that Disney make it the bikes fault if just means he hasn't learned to decide in advance rather than react . Experiance is very important.