|
|
Just mental reckless speed, sorry but when you know car drivers are blind. Yes of course it's very sad, sorry not to be all "I hate car drivers" but riders like that are asking for it and in away it wasn't a suprise... Hope it does help make reckless riders think about their own lives.. But I doubt it.
So...new facts. We now have evidence that the car driver was concentrating on something else.Originally Posted by wiltshire builders
Also that the bike was 'clearly visible' for 7 secs. That puts the distance at over 330 yds !!.
How many times has anyone turned right onto or off of a road having 'clearly seen' a vehicle 330 yds away ?
I know that I have - thousands of times. However, thankfully, those vehicles were not doing 100 mph.
I think the report was stating that the driver would have had the bike (and other car) visible for about 7 seconds as it was approaching to turn right, I think they pulled out well within 100 yards as the bike had about a second to try and react.
So the driver would have had time to "see" other traffic if they were paying attention, by their own admission they stated that they didn't see them. A bit different from actually seeing them over 300 yrds away. Saying that the driver deserved something but not the death of another human.
To keep things in balance the same report stated that if the bike was doing 60 it would have probably been able to avoid the car.
I used to reduce speed when near junctions and keep a close eye on any traffic waiting to turn or pull out, it was noted on Sunday by the Mrs (riding pillion) that I was a lot more cautious and one time almost came to a stop as the car was "creeping". I think this is the most important effect that we should all be thinking about so well done to the family of David for allowing this video to go out and causing the debate. We can thrash out the details and everyones opinions for ages but great news if it makes us think more. Also confirms the fact that a "lot" of drivers are idiots, like the ones this morning driving in thick fog without lights...
Think Bike, Think Biker - Biker Think! Where as cyclists are fair game and should all be shot...
I think this is getting out of hand, yes they are both in the wrong, there is no question as 1 was not watching and 1 was speeding, if a motorbike had pulled out with out looking fully and a car hit it at 97mph, who would you blame then, at the end of the day, a mother has lost a son and want she is trying to do is show that everyone needs to THINK when on the road.
Now that's a whole new kettle of ball games. Agree completely...well maybe 90% of the idiots. Get registered, get insured, get taxed.Think Bike, Think Biker - Biker Think! Where as cyclists are fair game and should all be shot...
Have you actually watched the video or are you just trying to be clever?
The car starts turning immediately infront of the bike.
Not 330yards as you're trying to state.
If that was the case any modern bike would have been able to stop in time.
Thinking and braking distance at 90 mph is 100 yards so clearly you are basing good mathematics on bad information.
As for you comment regarding "expressing your opinion" you didn't. You made a statement saying that David was 100% to blame.
Unfortunately there are comments like that surrounding this story which probably make his parents wish that hadn't been so brave as to release the footage.
It's easy to forget that the people left behind to pick up the pieces also have to read comments like this.
That can't be very nice.
Probably just stoking the fire here but for anyone doubting the car drivers entire fault for the accident itself (not the consequence of the accident which is a different thing), a driving examiner will fail you if you fail to
"Judge both speed and distance of approaching vehicles, take advantage of safe gaps in the traffic but you must not cause others to change speed or direction because of your action"
The car driver didn't look but if they had the speed is still irrelevant there is no mention in the above about it not needing to be applied because the approaching vehicle is speeding.
Don't know why, but the positioning of that car and the awkward way it went across the junction suggests an elderly driver. We need to remember that however we think people should react, or whatever the law says they should be doing, not every one does or even can react as per the highway code, or in the case of a lot of older folk, can. Even if you are on the ball at 80, if you started driving with traffic moving at 50mph high speeds will be impossible to comprehend
My father spent his entire life as a professional driver on rigid and then articulated lorries after leaving the army in 1951, some years back and aged around 74 he misjudged the speed of a rep mobile when on his way to Nortree Motors for petrol (yes, I can almost guarantee he was speeding, my Dad had not lost his faculties) and pulled into it's path. He was heart broken that he had damaged his beloved Rover 400, and worse, his pride as he had never had an accident of his doing in all that time. We all know what we should be doing but not everyone can do that
Aside from the old folk we need to be aware of the non-UK drivers (unfamiliar confusing roads,road markings or maybe a bit of bravado as powerful cars are cheap in the UK for a young bloke) Depressingly they have done a grand job in upping the fatal RTAs in Wiltshire in the last 2 years
When I am out on my bike in my head I am a Spitfire pilot - everyone else is there to try and take me out, or for me to take out and everything is at stake
Benjamin Austin, the driver of the Renault Clio was 29 years old. From what I can see, there's nothing in the video footage that suggests anything whatsoever about the drivers age, but don't let that stop the WB Accident Investigation Unit from mooting their opinion's on the cause of this accident
Last edited by Snowy; 13-09-14 at 08:43 AM.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
