|
CBR JGWRR
5,074 posts
18 months
|
Vipers said: Is this during the TT or after/before it?  If I meant the TT, I would have said TT. I was thinking of an even faster road race...
|
|
|
topless_mx5
1,979 posts
87 months
|
bull996 said: topless_mx5 said: but it just takes 1 bit of bad luck at the wrong time to end a life. And the point is that it could happen at 40 as well as 120.  Of course it could. But the chances of a fatality in a 120mph crash are much higher than in a 40mph crash. Also, I'm no tyre expert but I would guess the chances of a blowout occuring are higher at 120mph also.
|
|
|
Vipers
15,488 posts
97 months
|
CBR JGWRR said: Vipers said: Is this during the TT or after/before it? If I meant the TT, I would have said TT. I was thinking of an even faster road race... So,are we talking an un official road race, please enlighten me, please.
|
|
|
bull996
1,442 posts
78 months
|
topless_mx5 said: but I would guess the chances  This-too much of this going on. Guessing. You haven't a clue.
|
|
|
CBR JGWRR
5,074 posts
18 months
|
Vipers said: CBR JGWRR said: Vipers said: Is this during the TT or after/before it? If I meant the TT, I would have said TT. I was thinking of an even faster road race... So,are we talking an un official road race, please enlighten me, please. Ulster GP, 90 years old this year. It's faster than the TT, a bit safer at only 16 rider fatalities, and massed start. 3 weeks to go... http://www.ulstergrandprix.net/
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
topless_mx5
1,979 posts
87 months
|
bull996 said: topless_mx5 said: but I would guess the chances This-too much of this going on. Guessing. You haven't a clue. Care to elaborate?
|
|
|
redgriff500
6,902 posts
132 months
|
topless_mx5 said: bull996 said: topless_mx5 said: but I would guess the chances This-too much of this going on. Guessing. You haven't a clue. Care to elaborate? Read your posts, then read the replies. TBH I've pleasantly surprised there haven't been more posts like yours. Do you really think people buy superbikes, GT3s etc and then drive at 60 on good NSL roads ?
|
|
|
J4CKO
7,336 posts
69 months
|
Twincam16 said: J4CKO said: I agree with most of that but a lot of drivers just arent interested, having some lairy RWD beats shorn of all the "Nannying" isnt going to help, the average car operator will, once every twn years probably be in a situation where they will lose control so the electronics can help here as with 20 odd million drivers thats a lot of potential incidents, the idea being that they dont have to know ultimate car control and never will learn it, they wont push the envelope and rely on it as its all a bit mysterious, they dont even know which set of wheels drive the car, if they have afour wheel drive, even that obvious phrase doesnt guarantee any comprehension of what that means, I dotn understand the washign machine and it is the same for them, but with a little bit of image involved.
In the meantime we know either to buy a car without or where the button is, I tend to drive with it on if I have it.
We can moan about education but it is like telling the dog to clear up his toys, never going to happen, I saw a young girl texting the other day, whilst piloting her cycloptic 206 at dusk adn that is what we have to contend with. But don't skidpans usually use a FWD car with those rig-things attached to the wheelarches? Mondeos seem to be fairly common. Also, I reckon lift-off oversteer is probably the most common kind of oversteer most motorists will encounter. They're in a FWD car, they'll come round a corner too fast, lift off and lose the back end. You talk about the rare incidences of losing control, but I bet they're up there with the incidences of needing to do a proper emergency stop. I honestly can't remember the last time I needed to do one of those outside of a test centre. And yet would you let anyone out on the roads not knowing how to do an emergency stop? And re. nannying technology. I know people who don't have a clue what any of it does or how it works, but seem to think it'll completely stop them from ever losing control or hitting anyone. I'd say that's as dangerous if not more dangerous than going out there not knowing how to correct a skid. ESP and traction control will take wild guesses at what's going on and try to sort it out, but if you just sit there like a lemon expecting the car to get you out of trouble, you'll have an even bigger accident than you would if you were properly in control in the first place. I don't think they think that deeply about the electronics, cant imagine the average 18 year old girl texting on her iPhone has really got that much time for considering stuff like that, as long as they can get about I dont think they care.
|
|
|
CBR JGWRR
5,074 posts
18 months
|
J4CKO said: Twincam16 said: J4CKO said: I agree with most of that but a lot of drivers just arent interested, having some lairy RWD beats shorn of all the "Nannying" isnt going to help, the average car operator will, once every twn years probably be in a situation where they will lose control so the electronics can help here as with 20 odd million drivers thats a lot of potential incidents, the idea being that they dont have to know ultimate car control and never will learn it, they wont push the envelope and rely on it as its all a bit mysterious, they dont even know which set of wheels drive the car, if they have afour wheel drive, even that obvious phrase doesnt guarantee any comprehension of what that means, I dotn understand the washign machine and it is the same for them, but with a little bit of image involved.
In the meantime we know either to buy a car without or where the button is, I tend to drive with it on if I have it.
We can moan about education but it is like telling the dog to clear up his toys, never going to happen, I saw a young girl texting the other day, whilst piloting her cycloptic 206 at dusk adn that is what we have to contend with. But don't skidpans usually use a FWD car with those rig-things attached to the wheelarches? Mondeos seem to be fairly common. Also, I reckon lift-off oversteer is probably the most common kind of oversteer most motorists will encounter. They're in a FWD car, they'll come round a corner too fast, lift off and lose the back end. You talk about the rare incidences of losing control, but I bet they're up there with the incidences of needing to do a proper emergency stop. I honestly can't remember the last time I needed to do one of those outside of a test centre. And yet would you let anyone out on the roads not knowing how to do an emergency stop? And re. nannying technology. I know people who don't have a clue what any of it does or how it works, but seem to think it'll completely stop them from ever losing control or hitting anyone. I'd say that's as dangerous if not more dangerous than going out there not knowing how to correct a skid. ESP and traction control will take wild guesses at what's going on and try to sort it out, but if you just sit there like a lemon expecting the car to get you out of trouble, you'll have an even bigger accident than you would if you were properly in control in the first place. I don't think they think that deeply about the electronics, cant imagine the average 18 year old girl texting on her iPhone has really got that much time for considering stuff like that, as long as they can get about I dont think they care. Instead of electronics, the best safety feature to do would be a great big spike in the steering wheel.
|
|
|
otolith
19,343 posts
73 months
|
CBR JGWRR said: Instead of electronics, the best safety feature to do would be a great big spike in the steering wheel. The problem with that theory is that it should make motorcyclists the least irresponsible of all road users.
|
|
|
CBR JGWRR
5,074 posts
18 months
|
otolith said: CBR JGWRR said: Instead of electronics, the best safety feature to do would be a great big spike in the steering wheel. The problem with that theory is that it should make motorcyclists the least irresponsible of all road users. Most irresponsible surely? All the cars are only doing 5 mph because of the spike...
|
|
|
Efbe
4,858 posts
35 months
|
CBR JGWRR said: otolith said: CBR JGWRR said: Instead of electronics, the best safety feature to do would be a great big spike in the steering wheel. The problem with that theory is that it should make motorcyclists the least irresponsible of all road users. Most irresponsible surely? All the cars are only doing 5 mph because of the spike... the cause of most motorcycle accidents is cars, not themselves
|
|
|
CBR JGWRR
5,074 posts
18 months
|
Efbe said: the cause of most motorcycle accidents is cars, not themselves Maybe, but that'll be balanced by the fact that now everyone will be focused on what they are doing, so there won't be anymore bike/car interactions...
|
|
|
Pothole
18,003 posts
151 months
|
Vipers said: With all these reduction in speed limits, with regards the "20's plenty", what is being done to educate pedestrians, like take thumb out of arse, take the bloody earphones off, put the mobile away and look where your going. Answer SOD ALL,. Sorry wrong thread but I feel better now for saying that. The main one, if they are on quiet rural roads is to follow the highway code and walk on the right, facing oncoming traffic. I love on a quiet rural NSL road and the sheer number of walkers (some with dogs), runners etc on the wrong side of the road is staggering. I get a varying mix from blank looks to outright aggression if I mention it to any of them. I stopped 4 times in two weeks for one old boy...the 4th time he told me to f  k off 'if I want to risk my life it's none of your business' he says.
|
|
|
otolith
19,343 posts
73 months
|
Efbe said: CBR JGWRR said: otolith said: CBR JGWRR said: Instead of electronics, the best safety feature to do would be a great big spike in the steering wheel. The problem with that theory is that it should make motorcyclists the least irresponsible of all road users. Most irresponsible surely? All the cars are only doing 5 mph because of the spike... the cause of most motorcycle accidents is cars, not themselves How do the statistics for fatalities involving no other vehicles compare?
|
|
|
Efbe
4,858 posts
35 months
|
otolith said: Efbe said: CBR JGWRR said: otolith said: CBR JGWRR said: Instead of electronics, the best safety feature to do would be a great big spike in the steering wheel. The problem with that theory is that it should make motorcyclists the least irresponsible of all road users. Most irresponsible surely? All the cars are only doing 5 mph because of the spike... the cause of most motorcycle accidents is cars, not themselves How do the statistics for fatalities involving no other vehicles compare? It's been a while since I looked through it all, and this data is not from the latest gvmt info, but the one before last IIRC. anyhow Accident type----------------Frequency----% total L/hand bend lose control-------127------- 7.1 R/hand bend lose control-------97 --------5.4 Rear-end shunt-----------------204 -------11.4 ROWV---------------------------681 -------38.0 Overtaking accidents-----------260--------14.5 Pedestrian related accidents---47---------2.6
|
|
|
otolith
19,343 posts
73 months
|
Thisput fatal single vehicle accidents at about 25% of a fatality rate 30 times that of car drivers - so a person is about 7.5 times more likely to kill himself on a bike than he is to die in any circumstances in a car. That's why I don't think high risk of death if one screws up (spike in steering wheel) is a great deterrent to screwing up!
|
|
|
redgriff500
6,902 posts
132 months
|
I find it interesting that people / stats focus on Death rates - as if that's the worst that can happen.
I don't ride a bike not because I'm afraid of dying - but because I'm afraid of losing limbs, losing the ability to walk etc
|
|
|
Finlandia
4,353 posts
100 months
|
redgriff500 said: I find it interesting that people / stats focus on Death rates - as if that's the worst that can happen.
I don't ride a bike not because I'm afraid of dying - but because I'm afraid of losing limbs, losing the ability to walk etc Pretty much my theory too, I'd rather die in a fireball at 120mph than end up paralysed from the eyebrows down after a crash at 40.
|
|
|
interloper
2,067 posts
124 months
|
Efbe said: It's been a while since I looked through it all, and this data is not from the latest gvmt info, but the one before last IIRC. anyhow
Accident type----------------Frequency----% total
L/hand bend lose control-------127------- 7.1
R/hand bend lose control-------97 --------5.4
Rear-end shunt-----------------204 -------11.4
ROWV---------------------------681 -------38.0
Overtaking accidents-----------260--------14.5
Pedestrian related accidents---47---------2.6 Call me thicky Mcthick but what does ROWV stand for?
|
|
