Page 1 of 1
We know stats can prove anything you wish ...
Posted: Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:07 pm
by Samray
... but there are a few different ones here.
A quarter of motorcycle casualties came from accidents at T-junctions.
The main contributory factor to the accident was the motorcyclists' loss of control of the machine (linked to 16% of all casualties). This is mentioned twice as often as any other factor followed by rider failed to look properly, inexperienced rider, poor manoeuvre, travelling too fast for conditions, rider failed to judge another's path or speed and rider careless, reckless, or in a hurry.
For once speed is well down the list.
I guess it is the riders fault for losing control when smidsy pulls out at a junction?
http://www.newswales.co.uk/?section=Com ... 1&id=13516
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 5:48 pm
by Samray
Well somebody agreed with me.
Letter to the Editor
And my response to this. Quote " It is a shame we lose control of our bike by slamming on the brakes when some blind idiot in a car did not look properly, causing us to skid and crash into said idiot."
Patrick Reilly
http://www.newswales.co.uk/?section=Com ... 1&id=13529
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:01 pm
by Kwackerz
In defence of the drivers, if the riders
had been speeding, they'd have arrived at the juntion well before the car..
But seriously..
Im sure half the accidents we have today are due to speed reducing measures.
The car drivers no longer see 'major roads' as such as theyre speed reduced down to 40..50.. the drivers then view the roads akin to 30 limits and will pull out, fully expecting vehicles not to be travelling fast... more erring to the lower end of the scale
The riders are the other end of the spectrum, they still view the road as a 'major' road, albeit limited to 50 or 40. they'll be expecting cars to not pull out as it's still a major road..the mindset is erring to the higher end of the scale...
See what I mean? No speeding involved, just two different mindsets involved on the same stretch of road.
It's all the Government's fault and the PM should be shot.
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:10 pm
by Samray
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 6:14 pm
by Kwackerz
The overall cost of the scheme was £140,000.
What, for a bit of fekkin' Hessian spread over some poles?!
I couldve done that for about 280 quid.
I dont know what disgusts me more.. the actual barrier design or the sodding cost!!
Posted: Mon Mar 10, 2008 7:29 pm
by Gio
There was a very interesting accident in Thorpe today, a Ferrari reversed out onto the main road and reversed into a motorbike solo bay, whoops.
6 bikes down and a bent Ferrari.
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:53 pm
by Fausto
Hope he/she had insurance.
I heard that quite a few supercars are being driven 'self-insured' due to the very high (but surely relative) price of cover.
Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:58 pm
by paddyz1
Samray wrote:Well somebody agreed with me.
Letter to the Editor
And my response to this. Quote " It is a shame we lose control of our bike by slamming on the brakes when some blind idiot in a car did not look properly, causing us to skid and crash into said idiot."
Patrick Reilly
http://www.newswales.co.uk/?section=Com ... 1&id=13529
Twas me I am afraid. After reading the artical I just had to state my personal opinium. Your post had some influence though
Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:03 am
by Samray
Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:44 pm
by BikerGran
It aims to reduce rear end shunts as motorists will slow down when approaching the roundabout - the scene of 20 recent accidents - because the wall reduces their vision to the right.
Do they really believe that not being able to see will stop drivers pulling out without looking???????????? That's a triumph of hope over experience! - speaking as one who has suffered!
