So, speeding kills does it?
 

Interesting article - it seems that the most common contributory factor to accidents is failing to look - as I suspect ost of us here already knew.

click here

Dont forget that that failing to look also applies to motorcyclists.........

I'm sure it does but, that's not the point of the post, is it? It's not about who the blame is apportioned to, it's about the erroneous claims that speeding kills and how it seems that the governments own stats show this to be the case.

Its because people fail to look, or have poor observation skills that there has to be a limit on speed..............ie, more time to react!

:rolleyes:

Heres a question........and its not aimed at anyone..........

Are you as good a driver/rider as you think you are?

Yes. I've been riding 25 years. I last fell off 16 years ago (racing excluded). I used to instruct including at advanced level. I have an IAM ticket. I hold an international race permit entitlement (point being that you don't get to that level by having rubbish machine control)

I've won umpteen road riding safety competitions. My riding will happily stand scrutiny even though I admit I have some very bad habits - like a love for riding fast on the road.

Next?

Maybe just maybe there is a glimmer of hope that the loud chants of the Speed kills mantra are reducing.

Some pretty general terms used Loss of control covers a multitude is sins as it were, root causes and effects.

I wonder what effect the major strides being taken in road car safety are having on the KSI figures.


er anyone know what the speed record is for blind drivers at the mo' well over 150MPH last time I heard.

Failing to "see" the accident coming is the problem, a combination of what the eye sees (plus other other inputs) and what the brain makes of that information.

If you see something you need to be able to assess the image to take the necessary action.

Thats why I mentioned the speed record, no visual inputs, they rely on other inputs such as feel, sound and have a helper to do SOME of the calculation about what action to take.

Hence the noisy can debate, Motorcyclists can't always rely on others seeing them, so some hope they can hear them, with a V twin booming away some might even be able to feel them!!

Ray.

So excessive speed is a factor in 26% of all fatal accidents and loss of control is a factor in 35% of fatal accidents.

Surely a loss of control could also result from driving / riding at an excessive speed for the conditions.

Having some experience of writing off / causing major damage to several cars and a couple of bikes ( In my youth, and thankfully no one else was hurt ) I can honestly say that they were all as a result of loss of control due to excessive speed.

As Andy says, a lower speed gives all of us more time to react to situations that we find ourselves in, whether due to our own or other peoples mistakes / bad driving.

And that is my excuse for riding like an old woman :lol:

Whats a Good driver???

One who doesn't have any accidents, one who never speeds, one who doesn't cause others to have accidents, one who can drive without stressing the vehicle, and so on.

Using some of those criteria One could say they are are good driver, other using other's bad driver.

It's far too simplistic a term and means different things to different people.

Ray.

Absolutely, speed may be a factor in loss of control and I'm sure that they'll have accounted for this in the "excessive speed" stats, but the point I was making (and which andyb seems unable to grasp) is that the government's own figures do not back up the assertion that they make regarding speeding when it comes to the implementation of speeding controls vis a vis cameras.

Don't discount steering failure or mechanical failure, tyres, brakes, stuck throttle, best drive at walking pace..........just in case ya need to jump clear:D

Loss of control can be due to lack of skill and experience, get two people to drive on the same skid pan at 30 MPH, one spins off the other other doesn't nowt to do with speed.

Ray.

Speed is easily measured and can be objectively recorded - lack of observation is not something than can easily be either measured or proven.

Hence if the only thing you can measure is speed, that is what any prosecutions/judgement will be based.

Actually now that you mention it, I'm far better than i think.................









but i don't think a lot....................







and i've never reached my better side anyway.............







This is of course a light hearted reply just in case anyone has a sense of humour failure.

As a police instructor said to me once limits are set for the lowest common denominator, and that can be pretty low in many cases, but everyone thinks they're well above that level.

Of course....but again...that's not the point of the post.

Let's assume that the stats are accurate because the government does when it comes to using them to justify safety measures they implement....they're the best tool we have available for all parties. The authorities justify speed cameras and the clampdown on speeding on the basis that their figures support the assertion that speeding kills - well, it looks like this is not the case when the figures are looked at.

What we need is a truly independent and qualified inspection of these figures.

....a point which twpd is struggling to grasp.......;)

No. Not at all. You seem totally incapable of understanding that just because one factor can be more easily measured it does not mean it is the main contributing factor. The the main tenet of my argument being that the government's figures do not support their argument and therefore their whole argument and the basis upon which it is made is fallacious. If you'd like more help in understanding this very simple point I can write this is large letters and simple words. ;)

Give this some thought.

SPEED = CASH in the pots of the goverment = TAX

Well now, if there's a question to start a riot.
As most bods on here know I stuffed into the side of a car Oct last year.
Consequence of that was, I was put on the DIP as you also know.
Got tested by grade 1 ex-bike cop (he left the feds because he was sick to death of chasing targets and not the **** driving he was observing- quote). I was assessed as 80% exceptional and 20% consistently good. Moreover I didn't ride any differently the days I was on the course than I do normally.
I still class myself as an average driver, but treat everyone else on the road as a complete driving no hoper until I know better.
I learned that the hard way. Observation does NOT help you when you've looked once decided they have seen you because they are stopping, and are not going to move further, so you look for the next hazard and the blo*dy fool changes their mind then drives across you, especially when you've got the green light. Who got done, the bloke on two wheels of course. Did you expect any other outcome?

Ains.

Far too many variables to ever get a definitive answer IMHO.

Assume nothing question everything. Having done a bit of number crunching in the public sector the first thing an old cynic like me asks is what do ya want to prove with these numbers. Any number cruncher can use the same data to either support or debunk any given theory with "variable" factors at work or known unknowns if ya like.

With the KSI stats the variables are improvements in vehicle safety, the variable of average speed of impacts ( maybe brought down by rigerous enforcement or maybe just more congestion reducing speeds generally), the success of safety campaigns like THINK, and so on, The more inventive might even say that the species has evolved so that we can survive accidents better!!

What I am saying is that the govt make the links they want to, in the absence of a "control".

There is no threshold speed at which an accident becomes inevitable, that is the crux of the matter. All speed does is make the consequences of another event, collision, accident or whatever you like to call it more serious.
This is the concept that some organisations have failed to grasp fully.

Yes, we all want to reduce the potential consequences of speed but there the arguement arises of how far do you go, and what about making efforts to remove the potential consequences completely by removing some of the factors and events that are causation.

Speed + Collision = consequences related to speed ( laws of Physics apply)

Speed + no collision = no consequences. ( simple equation)

The govt go for the easy option that brings in the cash, not the expensive option such as education, better training, better infrastructure.

Nurse...............me blood pressure tablets,

Ray.

TW

O.K. I accept your point that speeding is part of the picture, but lack of observation is a higher %.

I drive for a living and am well aware that I am sharing the roads with drunks, druggies, people on medication, bullies, 4wd owners , aggresive drivers and people who shouldn't be in charge of a chair let alone a car.

So what do the government do? Raise the standard of driving? In the real world it just won't happen.

I don't see what all the fuss is about with speed cameras. I must go through hundreds and hundreds every year and have never had a ticket. If you are looking where you are going you will see them and if you are not speeding you don't need to look out for them. It's as easy as that.

What we do need is a lot more unmarked police cars to catch the idiots and long prison sentences for those who drive while banned.

But that's only my opinion:D

Crikey, I think I lost the will to live trying to read this thread!

:lol: :lol: :lol:

To make the roads safer, make vehicles less safer put a 12" spike in the centre of the steering wheel no seat belts and glass doors,that way every one driving will be to scared to go fast just in case there involved in an accident and end up a goverment statistic. Less face it no one is perfect,we all have off days,but the spike in the centre would be there and if you 8ucked up, its you that would pay the price for your stupidity now one else . Are we to molecoduled nowadays with to much safety and regs, do we allways have to cater for the moron and the absentminded Im begining to loose faith in the Human race . God nows what we will be like in 20/30 years time . 4D

<applause>

Stone me, Ray. Well done!

<more applause>

still...you cant forget that motorcyclists make up 1% of road users and account for 21% of RTA`s....

And your studies into the statistics have led you to what conclusions, Van?

Assuming that the quoted statistics are accurate (and I have no reason to doubt that they are).

86% of statistics are made up on the spot, including this one.

i aint no rocket scientist but-------surely the biggest contributory factor to being involved in an accident is failing to avoid such an occurence in the first instance:rolleyes:

my ha'pennies worth

ie, lack of planning which is down to lack of observation which is more difficult the faster you go which is why there are speed limits..................:D

Take that to its logical conclusion and we put all our motorised vehicles away and walk to the bus stop/railway station/wherever because the standard of driving has dropped so low nowadays that even drivers that are moderately competent are not safe from complete imbeciles.
E.g. Yemeni driver does U-turn on M4 and drives 8.5 miles up the wrong carriageway causing upteen collisions.
How the freakin hell did he obtain a UK driving licence?
Totally blind Iraqi driving with his mate telling him which way to go.

Trackdays on the bike only for me, and a saracen armoured car for any other road trips if it carries on, and this govt. have the bare faced audacity to say the roads are getting safer?
Grabs hat, coat and wonders off sticking close to the hedges and away from the kerbside. :)
Ains.

Andy,if you no all this, how come Joe Public does'nt seam to have grasped any of it Planning and Observation are the key factures in any driving skills. First thing I was taught in the SF was now your enemy,that works on the road as well. Do you not think that some people are too dumb to be behind a wheel and more selection should be the thing or is it a human right to be able to drive a 1/2 tonne machine on a public road? whether or not that driver has a brain in its head that can even understand Planning and Observation 4D

I used to do quite a bit if work for the met, and spent quite bit of time lounging around receiption at New Scotland Yard reading the police trade paper. Without fail, every article I read about RTAs blamed fatigue not speed as the biggest factor. Some cynics might suggest that its easier to raise cash from speeding than a "fatigue index"

Andy's point might be that observation and planning (on the part of the motorcyclist) is key to avoiding getting tangled up with an accident. Observation of hazards is crucial - planning for things ranging from gravel on the bend up ahead to the posting of a t-junction sign notifying you that there maybe traffic pulling out just around the corner. These are hazards you can plan for. Naturally, there are hazards that can defeat any strategy on the part of the biker, but you do what you can.
However, as a member of one of the more vulnerable group of road users, bikers also need to plan for poor driving by other road users. Has that car driver seen me? You should be planning for the possibility that someone hasn't seen you, or hasn't sufficiently taken into account the speed you are going.
I don't feel that it is entirely the motorcyclist's responsibility to make the roads safer for his own use. Driving awareness and standards need to be raised far above what they are currently. But, until that day comes, if ever, it is the motorcyclist's responsibility to do all he can to ensure his own safety. This is achieved through planning, observation and hazard awareness (hazards in all their forms).
I am not morally opposed to speeding (with respect to legal speed limits), but I do oppose inappropriate speeding, where you are not giving yourself a safety margin with regard to reaction times, or your ability (or your bike's capacity) to negotiate a hazard.