A recent fatal bike crash case that may be of interest

[slickliner6]

IMO

everyone over the age of 65 should be sight and hearing tested.......

Not a bad idea but given that most fatalities are the result of accidents involving the young not the old, I reckon people should not be able to ride a bike until aged 35 at least. By that age they can be assumed to have become a bit more sensible - something they definitely arent at 20.

Most accidents that happen when youngsters are involved,are because of stupidness and the thought that they are better drivers than they actually are.....

And you really aint serious about the comment of 35 years......are you ?????

[lazarus]

And you really aint serious about the comment of 35 years......are you ?????

No I'm not , but its no more stupid and prejudiced than the comments we have had about 65 year olds or older people earlier on in the thread. Whats next - they all smell of wee?


P.S. I think you could make a serious safety case for saying that youngsters should not have a bike licence until they had driven a car for 3 years or more. Both my kids, and myself for that matter a few decades ago, had accidents within a few months of passing the test. I used to find the same syndrome in industry where the most accident prone werent the beginners on a machine or those approaching retirement but those who had just got to the point where they thought they knew what they were doing. So to put youngsters in a tin box to learn about the roads is not a bad idea - bikes are inherently more dangerous for lack of physical protection.

[MartDude]

P.S. I think you could make a serious safety case for saying that youngsters should not have a bike licence until they had driven a car for 3 years or more. Both my kids, and myself for that matter a few decades ago, had accidents within a few months of passing the test. I used to find the same syndrome in industry where the most accident prone werent the beginners on a machine or those approaching retirement but those who had just got to the point where they thought they knew what they were doing. So to put youngsters in a tin box to learn about the roads is not a bad idea - bikes are inherently more dangerous for lack of physical protection.

I believe it should start at a much earlier age - revive the Cycling Proficiency test, get youngsters out on the road - properly supervised - and let them develop their observational skills, roadcraft, whatever you want to call it, from an early age.

As for starting in cars, then moving to bikes - sorry, but I think you've got that the wrong way round. However, it could prove be an interesting large scale demonstration of Darwinian evolution

[randomsquid]

Mandatory pedestrian training first.

[BikerGran]

I wouldn't want any child of mine cycling on the roads round here - far to much heavy traffic. Even my daughter gave up cycling to work as an adult because she had so many near misses with lorries she decided she was running out of lives.

(She's never had an accident on her motorcycle though)

[Dalemac]

IMO

everyone over the age of 65 should be sight and hearing tested.......

Not a bad idea but given that most fatalities are the result of accidents involving the young not the old, I reckon people should not be able to ride a bike until aged 35 at least. By that age they can be assumed to have become a bit more sensible - something they definitely arent at 20.

Right. And how many people in their 40's get on a motorbike for the first time and end up in a hedge? Probably a damn site more than the younger riders do.

[T.C.]

Right. And how many people in their 40's get on a motorbike for the first time and end up in a hedge? Probably a damn site more than the younger riders do.

Actually it is a pretty even spread based on the number of crashes involving inexperienced riders I deal with.

In the younger age groups, you have those who have gone from no experience to a full unrestricted licence in a few days, think they are indestructible and and ride way above their limits because with many their confidence is higher than their ability.

With the older generation, they have a bit of road savvy, but their control and co-ordination lets them down.

The biggest problem with the older riders is that many are born again, they recall the bendy frames and 99% nylon tyres of their youth and forget that things have changed significantly in respect of technology, handling and road users. They get on a modern bike and get caught out because the new bikes catch them unaware.

So, as I say, pretty much an even split.

[Dalemac]

Right. And how many people in their 40's get on a motorbike for the first time and end up in a hedge? Probably a damn site more than the younger riders do.

Actually it is a pretty even spread based on the number of crashes involving inexperienced riders I deal with.

In the younger age groups, you have those who have gone from no experience to a full unrestricted licence in a few days, think they are indestructible and and ride way above their limits because with many their confidence is higher than their ability.

With the older generation, they have a bit of road savvy, but their control and co-ordination lets them down.

The biggest problem with the older riders is that many are born again, they recall the bendy frames and 99% nylon tyres of their youth and forget that things have changed significantly in respect of technology, handling and road users. They get on a modern bike and get caught out because the new bikes catch them unaware.

So, as I say, pretty much an even split.

This surprises me, especially with the tiered licensing and restrictions we have had for years, especially 33bhp if under 21 when test is passed.

IMO the two most dangerous categories are less than 125cc, which are pretty much death traps with either no power or ridiculously skinny tyres, or unrestricted first timer's who decide to go and buy a gixxer one day.

[Aladinsaneuk]

i hate to quote teflon tony BUT

education, education, education

we do have a problem that the less experienced drivers do not have any road sense - both on cars and bikes

we also have a problem that as we age, our faculties diminish - I myself have started to mutter about buying some sodium glasses for night driving - at least I am aware of it

finally, much of our traffic law is old - and modern vehicles are a damn sight swifter ... back when i had my first car, it was dead posh - it had a heater that worked and a radio... now a days, the kids have all sorts of toys and performance that we could only dream of

as for bikes - yes i have a bike that will do silly speeds and has a huge amount of power - some of you will remember that I made hanna ride her SV650 for 3000 miles before she first rode her falco..... and the scary thing is that the SV would do 110 mph.....

[T.C.]

education, education, education

You are absolutely right.

However, the problem we have with many road users in this country is that many believe that once they have passed their test there is nothing more to learn, and those who passed their test many years ago believe that because they have been on the road for so long there is nothing mote they can be taught.

So both classed or road users have perceived knowledge or ability and fail to recognise that the learning process is ongoing.

It is the old story that you can criticise a mans family or his pets, job or whatever, but criticising his/her driving/riding or driving/riding ability is a no go area.

I come across this regularly when I interview someone and they proceed to tell me how the crash was not their fault because........ They then become quite indignant when it is pointed out that what they did was actually dangerous, wrong or illegal.

Yes, some of our current traffic legislation is old, but it still works because whilst technology has moved on, the basic driver ability and skills has stagnated and not moved at the same pace, and of course the legislation has to be aimed at the lowest common denominator, the idiot who thinks he/she is Gods gift to driving/riding!!!!!

[D-Rider]

..... aimed at the lowest common denominator, the idiot who thinks he/she is Gods gift to driving/riding!!!!!

Ah ... but maybe there is a logic there .... they tend to be the ones that get to see Him first .........

[Cathcart]

Personally, I think you learn a lot from having a crash. It then makes you a better/safer rider and way more aware of your surroundings.
Unfortunately, some people have a crash that kills or seriously hurts them.

For instance, I thought I was bouncy... I done really stupid things on an R6 (had hornet for about a month prior and it wasn't quick enough), and think I was lucky to walk away.

Quickest way to educate and make it stick is to have an off. Unfortunately.

[Aladinsaneuk]

that get to see Him first

well, thats a set of theological conundrums opened....

[T.C.]

Personally, I think you learn a lot from having a crash. It then makes you a better/safer rider and way more aware of your surroundings.

This observation is very much open to debate unfortunately as there is no evidence to support this theory.

Many of the younger riders who have a crash and walk away often brag about how they crashed and fail to learn the lessons or even bother to try and understand what caused the crash.

I have had one big crash in my life which left me crippled but from which I survived, and fortunately there was nothing I could do about it (I got deliberately T Boned by a stolen vehicle), but was one of those crashes that no lessons could be learnt from, apart from the fact that when you he "ECILOP" down the side of bike, you are a target

But to say that it makes people better and safer is a bit of a sweeping statement. I would say that it is preferable to be better and safer through education, rather than learn the hard way through broken bones or worst even end up losing your life period!!!

[MartDude]

Personally, I think you learn a lot from having a crash. It then makes you a better/safer rider and way more aware of your surroundings.
Unfortunately, some people have a crash that kills or seriously hurts them.

For instance, I thought I was bouncy... I done really stupid things on an R6 (had hornet for about a month prior and it wasn't quick enough), and think I was lucky to walk away.

Quickest way to educate and make it stick is to have an off. Unfortunately.

Definitely - 20 years I caused a crash - didn't wait the extra half-second to make sure my way was clear - other car ploughed into me at 50 mph - very unpleasantly memorable experience to find one's car suddenly spinning round and round with bits falling off it. Plus going to the garage a few days later to retrieve belongings from it - garage owner said 'we didn't think we'd see you walking again'. Had flashbacks for years, and to this day it pops up in my mind when I'm on the road, car or bike; it reminds me to watch and wait. And the knee, still painful, when the knee armour presses on it a bit, after the bike crash 5 years ago, reminds me to keep scanning the road surface.

If it were possible to safely engineer such incidents, I'd support a campaign to make them mandatory components of driver/rider training.