Suspended term for 156mph motorbiker

[Proto]

Any motorcyclist will tell you that you have to treat every car driver as if they are very likely to do something stupid. This fellow must have forgotten that lesson. Some blame may be attributable to the Astra driver, but not very much. The speed difference between the Astra and the bike may only have been 15 or 29 mile an hour, but enough to remove from the biker and margin for error and he paid a horrendous price. His fault. End of.

I'm a habitual speeder myself, on bike (Fireblade) and car, it's a matter of time and place. Busy, fast single carriage way is never the right place, but there are miles and miles of roads here in Oxfordshire that are stupidly restricted to 50 mph, and I'm not ashamed to say that I ignore the speed limits on those.

 

[thomas]

talking about hatchings. I swear loads of people don't understand them. If they turn onto a road with them they cut across them - scared of just following it round and then going to the inside lane once you've actually made it around the corner.

It does really annoy me (well, it doesn't really), but it slows me down by like 2 seconds about half a mile from work as the dippy drivers stop and then cut across them, rather than just going around the corner and pulling into the other lane on the straight.

I'm a habitual speeder myself, on bike (Fireblade) and car, it's a matter of time and place. Busy, fast single carriage way is never the right place, but there are miles and miles of roads here in Oxfordshire that are stupidly restricted to 50 mph, and I'm not ashamed to say that I ignore the speed limits on those.

I'd agree that speeding isn't a bad thing or that dangerous. It depends when, where and how. Some roads around me are stupidly restricted, just because some moron boy racer drove his car into a wall at 90mph they make it 30, when 40 would be perfectly safe (it isn't right next to houses or anything like that either).

 

[marinyork]

I think that's true of lines in general Thomas .

 

[Crankarm]

Have watched the footage a few more times on freeze frame and the motorcyclist definitely rides into the rear of the car striking the rear corner. The Astra was no way at fault. It is irrelevant whether the Astra straddles or drives over the hatchings which if broken he can do. The biker was behind him and failed to keep sufficient look out, failed to anticipate and failed to exercise reasonable care. The Astra appears to indicate before he pulls out to pass the silver car in front of him which was slowing and keeping very close to the nearside. At 4'26" seconds the motorbike's brake light comes on. He is still behind the Astra car with some margin between them and in line with the middle of it. So he has slowed. Brake light then goes off and he then appears to try to ride around the Astra car whose off side wheels are just on or straddling the broken white lines of the edge of the hatching in the middle of the carriageway. The motorbike is extremely close to the back of this car. He must have only been a couple of feet as he moves to the right to try to ride around it but the car moves a couple of feet to the right to give more room to the silver car on the nearside it is passing. No brake light shows on the motorbike so he didn’t brake. The motorcyclist has committed himself to passing the Astra so must be accelerating hard to try to pass but sees oncoming camper vans and collides with rear offside corner of the Astra. No brake light showing so he must have ridden with power into the back offside corner/quarter of the Astra causing his bike to travel onto the other side of the road into the path of the oncoming camper van.

It is difficult to see whether there is a nearside lane as there might be a broken white line on the nearside of the carriageway or alternatively a fault with the footage or a filter lane to leave this road or a parking area. Although previously there are no road signs or road markings to indicate parking lay by, dual carriageway or exit slip. The only sign is a white circular with diagonal black line national speed limit sign indicating 60mph max on the left having just joined the road from exiting the roundabout. The following bike’s speedo shows the speed prior to collision of 100 or maybe 108mph. It's a 60mph speed limit remember. The Astra couldn't have been doing more than 50-60 mph maybe not even as much as this. The cars following on the nearside are all aware of the bikers presence as they keep close to the nearside and are well spaced.

The motorcyclist just made a monumental bad error of judgement . It is a miracle that no one else was injured or killed. Given his prediliction for speed and taking risks he was an accident waiting to happen. A contender for a Darwin Award me thinks.

 

[Proto]

I haven't watched the video, but are we now suggesting that the collision occured not because of excessive speed but because of very poor riding skills?

 

[Crankarm]

It would appear so. Watch the video "frame by frame" from them exiting the roundabout or use play/pause/play/pause really quickly.

 

[marinyork]

I refer people to post #58.

 

[MacB]

Many of us may not have chosen to overtake as the Astra did but there was no infringement in law by the driver. Both bikes accelerated extremely rapidly from the roundabout and seemed focused on getting ahead rather than reading the road. Any experienced road user on here would have been able to anticipate the move from the Astra. Had they not been 'high' on speed and adrenalin the bikers would have anticipated it as well.

Saying the Astra driver should share blame, or be prosecuted, indicates that they behaved in an unreasonable or unsafe manner. I would of said most of us would have failed to see/anticipate the bike in that situation. Whether we would have made the overtake is immaterial.

 

[campbellab]

Saying the Astra driver should share blame, or be prosecuted, indicates that they behaved in an unreasonable or unsafe manner.

Unfortunatly they did act in an unsafe manner you can see that from the results.

Was it an unreasonable maneuvre?
I think it was unreasonable to overtake with oncoming traffic on hatched seperating lines unless the car infront was well below the speed limit or stopping.

Was it an illegal maneuvre? No

Do I think they could have reasonably seen the motorbike when attemping the maneuvre (including mirror/signal/man)? No

Do I think they reasonably could have judged the speed of the bike had they seen it? No

Did the driver think it was safe to move out? Yes

Would it have been safe to move out without the biker there? Most probably

Do I think the Astra driver should be prosecuted? Even with my first statements? Hell no, if he was overtaking a tractor the majority of drivers would have done the same thing with an identical outcome.

 

[Mr Celine]

What part of if you have an accident and the highway code is used as a guide of culpability do you not understand?

I don't understand any of that.

IF the crash had been caused by the Astra then the guidance in the highway code could have been used to help decide if its driver had driven carelessly or dangerously. But as the crash was so obviously entirely the fault of the numpty riding the bike the question doesn't arise.

 

[asterix]

As for your 'all bikers who break the speed limit deserve to die' attitude, i'm really trying to figure out if you are just a keyboard warrior, a total twat, or both![/B]

Linfordlunchbox, or LLB or Linf or very-near or whatever your next identity becomes, having read the posts of the person you are abusing I'd suggest that they are useful and legitimate posters on this forum. You on the other hand use this forum purely and simply to push your own propaganda about topics that have very little to do with cycling.

If anyone is what you describe as a 'keyboard warrior' and/or 'total twat' I'd say you are by far the best candidate.

 

[johnnyh]

A contender for a Darwin Award me thinks.

sums it up nicely.

 

[thomas]

We're going to have to disagree. The difference between your "the car should not have been overtaking there", and the HC's use of the word is subtle but very significant.

The other point is, the driver didn't cross over into the other lane. The car in front of the astra had pulled into the kerb which is a suggestion that the car behind may overtake. I don't think the Astra did a dangerous manoeuvre.

I haven't watched the video, but are we now suggesting that the collision occured not because of excessive speed but because of very poor riding skills?

I think a combination of the two. From their past behaviour I have little sympathy. I think the speed showed poor riding skills. If the bikes hadn't been passing so close, so fast then they would have had more time to react. I'd when i drove I was always quite aware on the roads and when there were motorbikes behind (however far behind) I would make sure not to overtake/move further out in the lane if I didn't know where they were. If however, the motorbike was excessively speeding I may never of had a chance to see them or prepare for them.

Many of us may not have chosen to overtake as the Astra did but there was no infringement in law by the driver.

+1...if you're going to fuss about the astra overtaking the same blame lies with the biker. Either all can overtake, or none. The motorbike may be able to squeeze past without crossing the lines, but this obviously wasn't safe.

 

[Bigtwin]

Well, I've been riding a motorbike almost daily for about 30 years. Done the advanced riding courses and all that stuff. And for what it's worth, here's my opinion.

When you ride, you know you are doing something dangerous. You know you have to anticipate, expect the unexpected, and think for everyone around you, as well as yourself. You know that minor errors and stupidity can have massive consequences. Also, anyone with a bit of experience and an IQ of 10+ knows broadly when they are riding safe, and riding stupid. You just do.

That is a classic, and tragic, but of riding like a complete idiot. Yes the Astra may have been a bit iffy, but it seems to me that the was well out before the bike hit him, there was time to avoid the situation, those bikes have excellent brakes, and sensible riding would have dealt with it. You don't overtake 3 abreast - it's totally unnecessary - on a bike like that, you hang back 10 secs, roll the throttle, and overtake fast and safe leaving plenty of room; job done safely.

If you want to ride at 150mph, go to a track and do it. Several time Word Champion Carl Foggarty was asked in an interview which bike he rode on the road. His answer? "A Volvo - it's too bloody dangerous".

We had a saying when I was a pilot - same goes for bikes: "There are old pilots, and there are bold pilots, but there are no old, bold pilots".

Tragically for all concerned, this has been proved true yet again.

 

[cannondale boy]

Anyone seen that advert on how you are meant to look out for bikers twice. But what happens if one is going over the speed limit? who is at fault the driver or the motorcyclist.

I know most bikers take great care when out and about, but you do get the few muppets that spoil it on our roads for everyone.