Suspended term for 156mph motorbiker

[very-near]

Similar things happen at the Bassett's Pole, north of Brum.

I've been there 'once' about 5 years ago.

We have regular bike meetings down this way at various different pubs in the area, but 'stunt pilots' are told to take a hike and 'not' to come back if they start to mess around.

 

[very-near]

That is awful.

When I'm on my (motor)bike I am very aware of just how fast it can go and just how much it would hurt if I collided with a car. For that reason, I only open the throttle on empty roads. Also, I don't have a sports bike, I have a "street" bike - designed for lots of low-end torque (i.e. shedloads of low-end acceleration), but not insane top speed - which is nice, because I can out-accelerate anything on four wheels from a standing start at traffic lights - even the lotus elise that tried to race me off the lights the other day . He then overtook me when I'd got up to 70, but I didn't care.

I think these two guys were just nuts. Really, really nuts. I feel sorry for the guy who died, he never got the chance to learn his lesson. I feel very sorry for the poor innocent people in the car that he slammed into. The Astra driver was an unobservant idiot, but then he probably didn't expect to have a nutcase biker trying to overtake him at 100+mph in traffic. I should imagine that the guy who got the three year ban will need to take an extended test to get his licence back - and he might even be compulsory restricted to an A2 licence for two years.

From the still frame, you cannot tell if he just swerved into the path of the bike to get past the other car, or was already there. I suspect he did the former as the bike would have had chance to jump on the brakes and scrub the speed off if he was approaching the Astra which was already 'out there'

As for racing cars off the lights, why bother ?
You know you already have the performance to always leave them standing. It is also a criminal offence in its own right and not something I'd want to own up to on a public BB.

 

[XmisterIS]

He tried to race me, not the other way around!

 

[Watt-O]

That is awful.

When I'm on my (motor)bike I am very aware of just how fast it can go and just how much it would hurt if I collided with a car. For that reason, I only open the throttle on empty roads. Also, I don't have a sports bike, I have a "street" bike - designed for lots of low-end torque (i.e. shedloads of low-end acceleration), but not insane top speed - which is nice, because I can out-accelerate anything on four wheels from a standing start at traffic lights - even the lotus elise that tried to race me off the lights the other day . He then overtook me when I'd got up to 70, but I didn't care.

I think these two guys were just nuts. Really, really nuts. I feel sorry for the guy who died, he never got the chance to learn his lesson. I feel very sorry for the poor innocent people in the car that he slammed into. The Astra driver was an unobservant idiot, but then he probably didn't expect to have a nutcase biker trying to overtake him at 100+mph in traffic. I should imagine that the guy who got the three year ban will need to take an extended test to get his licence back - and he might even be compulsory restricted to an A2 licence for two years.

The rider was 46 years old when he died. Clearly he was a slow learner. I gave up motor bikes when I was 17, they were just too much fun to drive I felt I couldn't trust myself on them.

 

[Crankarm]

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!

I don't think I've suggested that at all. You are clearly not an objective observer. Travelling at twice the legal speed limit on public highway amongst other road users is insane behaviour. The consequences of such excessive speed are obvious to the reasonable minded person. You blame everyone except the motorcyclist. Your comments clearly add a thick slice of partiality being a petrol head biker yourself and your insults clearly reveal you as an ignorant knuckle dragger.

 

[XmisterIS]

Very slow learner!

I am 33 and started riding motorbikes last year (I got a 50cc 'ped and just got "the bug"!).

I am very glad that I came to it now rather than earlier in life ... if I'd started at 17 I am sure I would have killed myself by now. I can see myself riding my current bike until it dies of old age, then I'll probably get a nice comfy tourer - probably a Honda Deauville, or something similar.

EDIT: This is in response to Watt-O's post!

 

[very-near]

I don't think I've suggested that at all. You are clearly not an objective observer. Travelling at twice the legal speed limit on public highway amongst other road users is insane behaviour. The consequences of such excessive speed are obvious to the reasonable minded person. You blame everyone except the motorcyclist. Your comments clearly add a thick slice of partiality being a petrol head biker yourself and your insults clearly reveal you as an ignorant knuckle dragger.

In my opinion shouldn't be allowed to a ride rocking horse let alone a high powered motor bike. The more that come a cropper the better

I've re-quoted you to refresh your memory - your impartiality is clear to see

I am not absolving the biker of his actions - he paid the ultimate price, but I am merely trying to draw a more balanced viewpoint given the limited information available.

The bikers actions alone were clearly not the reason why he ended up under the wheels of the camper van.

 

[thomas]

The bikers actions alone were clearly not the reason why he ended up under the wheels of the camper van.

I assume the result would have been the same if he was travelling at a sensible speed and didn't overtake, unsafely?

 

[very-near]

I assume the result would have been the same if he was travelling at a sensible speed and didn't overtake, unsafely?

That would entirely depend on whether the Astra decided to move out as he was coming past. It is customary to indicate your intention when overtaking a slower moving vehicle if your actions put you into a space which is likely to be occupied by a car coming in the other direction, or that of a vehicle which is already overtaking you.

 

[thomas]

That would entirely depend on whether the Astra decided to move out as he was coming past. It is customary to indicate your intention when overtaking a slower moving vehicle if your actions put you into a space which is likely to be occupied by a car coming in the other direction, or that of a vehicle which is already overtaking you.

My point was, hatchings generally indicate hazards so you shouldn't overtake. If it was a tractor or something, fair enough, but I bet the cars were doing the speed limit, so there was no need to overtake.

If the biker wasn't at a ridiculous speed and clearly performing for the camera, he'd still be alive.

It's as simple as that.

+1

 

[Crankarm]

In my opinion shouldn't be allowed to a ride rocking horse let alone a high powered motor bike. The more that come a cropper the better

I've re-quoted you to refresh your memory - your impartiality is clear to see

You have indeed been very selective only quoting what suits you. You have selectively omitted the first part which is crucial.

......but there are a few who are total nutters who scare the sh1t out of me. In my opinion (they) shouldn't be allowed to a ride rocking horse let alone a high powered motor bike. The more that come a cropper the better. I just hope they don't take anyone with them who happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

I am not absolving the biker of his actions - he paid the ultimate price,

He was the author of his own demise.

but I am merely trying to draw a more balanced viewpoint given the limited information available.

Are you?

The bikers actions alone were clearly not the reason why he ended up under the wheels of the camper van.

They were indeed. Had he been riding responsibly he would have been able to anticipate the situation infront and take evasive action. How can he do this travelling 86mph over the speed limit on a motorbike? Perhaps you would like to enlighten us? The court seem to have taken the same view.

 

[marinyork]

My point was, hatchings generally indicate hazards so you shouldn't overtake. If it was a tractor or something, fair enough, but I bet the cars were doing the speed limit, so there was no need to overtake.

The bike did actually need to overtake the astra to avoid a crash whereas I'm guessing the astra didn't actually need to overtake the other car at all and it wasn't safe for it to do so. If the astra wasn't there the bike could have fully legally overtaken the other car (minus the 100+ mph) bit. Whereas the astra didn't fully legally overtake the other car. The astra's maneuver might be regarded as a minor thing, naughty but harmless as most people get away with it, the astra driver didn't and should really be getting a punishment for it.

 

[very-near]

You have indeed been very selective only quoting what suits you. You have selectively omitted the first part which is crucial.




He was the author of his own demise.



Are you?



They were indeed. Had he been riding responsibly he would have been able to anticipate the situation infront and take evasive action. How can he do this travelling 86mph over the speed limit on a motorbike? Perhaps you would like to enlighten us? The court seem to have taken the same view.

Given that the bike following was indicating 97mph prior to the overtake (allowing for speedo error about 87mph), and not 146mph as you seem to imply, I think your numbers are a bit off.

Were you not taught the drill 'mirror, signal, maneuver' when learning to drive as this bit clearly has passed the Astra driver bye.

The question being put is that the rider has already paid the ultimate price for his poor judgment - where does that leave the Astra driver as he clearly paid a part in the incident ?

 

[thomas]

The bike did actually need to overtake the astra to avoid a crash whereas I'm guessing the astra didn't actually need to overtake the other car at all and it wasn't safe for it to do so. If the astra wasn't there the bike could have fully legally overtaken the other car (minus the 100+ mph) bit. Whereas the astra didn't fully legally overtake the other car. The astra's maneuver might be regarded as a minor thing, naughty but harmless as most people get away with it, the astra driver didn't and should really be getting a punishment for it.

Why did the bike need to overtake anyone to begin with?

You can't just minus the speed. Assuming the cars were doing the speed limit there would be no need to overtake and it would not be safe!

I'm guessing you think the car didn't check their mirror properly? It might be seen as a minor thing but it had my Dad off his motorbike a few years back. It's a minor thing, but terrible results.

 

[very-near]

Bollox! Yet again you fail to realsie the part that speed plays in an incident.

Here's a question for you Linf - If the Biker had been travelling at the correct speed would He still be alive now?

If he had been travelling at the speed of the rest of the traffic, he wouldn't have been overtaking D'oh

I am not excusing his speeding - he has already paid the ultimate price for his poor judgment.

Why not answer the question about the Astra driver who also chose to put himself in the middle of the road into the path of oncoming traffic, and did not check his mirror prior to this ?

Had the Astra stayed put, and used his observation before moving into the hatched area in the centre of the road (where the bikes already where), the biker wouldn't have ended up on the far side of the road under the wheels of the camper van.

I am not the only one putting the question so try and wind your spite and venom in for a minute will you Lee.