Watch your back, my friends.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-07/p ... ap/9845200The police spokesman said this year more than 25 per cent of all fatal crashes in WA had involved motorcycles, which was an increase on previous years.
Postby Tequestra » Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:05 pm
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-07/p ... ap/9845200The police spokesman said this year more than 25 per cent of all fatal crashes in WA had involved motorcycles, which was an increase on previous years.
Postby human909 » Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:41 pm
I think there is plenty of comparisons to be made and shared concerns. In fact the most common causes of two vehicle accidents for both are SMIDSY accidents. And in the case of motorcycling the consequences are often be much worse. A car failing to give way when you are travelling at 80-100kph is much worse than 25-35kph.Tequestra wrote:Just a point that you all may or may not relate to cyclists, whether motorised or not. Especially if you commute in Perth like me. I don't expect this thread to become a major discussion, but I feel that considering the proportion of cars to motorbikes in Perth, this 25% figure is some kind of social wind vane that anyone on two wheels might consider worthy of consideration.
Watch your back, my friends.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-07/p ... ap/9845200The police spokesman said this year more than 25 per cent of all fatal crashes in WA had involved motorcycles, which was an increase on previous years.
Postby human909 » Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:58 pm
Postby Jmuzz » Fri Jun 08, 2018 10:27 am
Motorcycle statistics do tend to lean heavily towards single vehicle though.human909 wrote: How about targeting the number one thing that is killing motorcyclists on the roads? Bad driving from four (or motor) wheeled vehicles.
Postby Thoglette » Fri Jun 08, 2018 10:44 am
Yup. There's two stereotypical demographics: the "I'm immortal and !! BAN ME NOW FOR SWEARING !! hot" late teens/twenties riders and that certain percentage (about 1%) of the m'cycle population who simply DGAF about road rules (or ADRs around mufflers, for that matter).human909 wrote: the majority of motor cyclists do have a greater appetite for risk. All or which skews the statistics
Yup.Jmuzz wrote:Motorcycle statistics do tend to lean heavily towards single vehicle though.
Postby Mububban » Fri Jun 08, 2018 10:57 am
I always pay attention whenever I hear that one of our two-wheeled brethren has been killed, and commonly/sadly hear the term "the rider lost control" regularlyJmuzz wrote: Motorcycle statistics do tend to lean heavily towards single vehicle though.
Postby human909 » Fri Jun 08, 2018 3:29 pm
Yep and that was my implied point. We have scared many of the more cautious motorcyclists off the roads by our hostile environment.Jmuzz wrote:Motorcycle statistics do tend to lean heavily towards single vehicle though.
Postby Tequestra » Mon Jun 11, 2018 12:53 pm
I am interested in these statistics because they never fail to bring to my mind the old adage that dead men tell no tales. No doubt there are cases of motorcyclists overestimating the traction around corners on wet roads etc., but I can't help but wondering how many of these 'single vehicle' statistics result from a clip on the handlebars from someone's side-mirror; someone who just kept on driving after the contact equals single-vehicle statistic.Jmuzz wrote:Motorcycle statistics do tend to lean heavily towards single vehicle though.
Postby Jmuzz » Tue Jun 12, 2018 10:24 am
I've had a lot to do with motorbike riding and groups and live in weekend motorbike territory.Tequestra wrote: I am interested in these statistics because they never fail to bring to my mind the old adage that dead men tell no tales. No doubt there are cases of motorcyclists overestimating the traction around corners on wet roads etc., but I can't help but wondering how many of these 'single vehicle' statistics result from a clip on the handlebars from someone's side-mirror; someone who just kept on driving after the contact equals single-vehicle statistic.
Postby human909 » Tue Jun 12, 2018 11:02 am
That all sounds like aggressive and fast riding and the consequences resulting from it. Compare that with your typical motorcyclist or scooter rider in Europe, Asia or many other places. I don't agree with the concept that a motorcycle goes down easily, cars also fly off the track easily if pushed to their limits too.Jmuzz wrote:I've had a lot to do with motorbike riding and groups and live in weekend motorbike territory.
It's mostly the bikes themselves, or their own mates.
A motorbike goes down so easy on things which wouldn't even unsettle a car, or just result in a bit of skid.
A bike gets some slip on front wheel and it's gone. Most riders don't cope with rear wheel stepping out under power, chop the throttle and it will buck you off. Deciding to slow down mid corner makes bike stand up and run wide.
Often riding faster than you would drive a car.
Makes plenty of sense. But that aspect is part of the problem. (Again meaning to shoot the messenger.)Jmuzz wrote:I wouldn't ride a cute little scooter because that will get picked on, got to look a bit road warrior it makes a difference.
Very peculiar. I though the same too.Tequestra wrote:The ABC story had a photo which seemed peculiar to me, so I have added the link there, even though the image has failed to render.
Postby Tequestra » Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:11 pm
I conceed to your superior experience with road motorcycling, Jmuzz. I've been riding motorbikes since I was five but only offroad. I do not have a motorcycle license in Australia because I refuse to conceed to what I believe is the ridiculous new ruling that the rider must stop with only their left foot on the ground to steady the lopsided apparatus without the gyroscopics.Jmuzz wrote: I've had a lot to do with motorbike riding and groups and live in weekend motorbike territory.
It's mostly the bikes themselves, or their own mates.
I agree that the attitude of most car drivers in Australia is twenty times more respectful of motorcyclists than the attitude of car drivers in some Asian countries. I have overstressed the Asian situation without doubt, however I would still imagine that quite a few of those 25% fatality statistics may have been recorded as single-vehicle deaths according to the law, when the laws of physics suggest that a mystery second party may have contributed in some way.Jmuzz wrote: Motorbike has a very different road presence than bicycle due to being faster than the cars, and mostly more intimidating to the bullys who seek a weaker target rather than someone who seems a bit menacing.
I wouldn't ride a cute little scooter because that will get picked on, got to look a bit road warrior it makes a difference.
Postby Thoglette » Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:23 pm
<curmudgeon>Tequestra wrote:what I believe is the ridiculous new ruling that the rider must stop with only their left foot on the ground to steady the lopsided apparatus without the gyroscopics.
Postby Tequestra » Tue Jun 12, 2018 5:47 pm
Thanks mate. Could you please explain to me the reason why it is better to stop in a lopsided position than maintain the motorbike in the upright position, allowing gravity to do the work rather than the left leg muscles? All I can think of is that it allows a car that stops too close on the right to knock off the rider's kneecap instead of running over their foot. I really cannot fathom any reason for such a lopsided posture. What do you do if the crosswind blows and knocks you over in front of a truck pulling up in the right lane?Thoglette wrote: [curmudgeon]
It's not new. It's been the standard technique for (well-trained) road m'cyclists for many decades. The old guy who taught me (and that was some decades ago) taught the plod and the Honda rider training people. Stop with both brakes then put your left foot down.
None of this dragging both feet crap like you see in SEAsia, either. Both feet up as the clutch is released. You can't control the bike properly if your feet aren't on the pegs.
[/curmudgeon]
Postby human909 » Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:01 pm
Postby Thoglette » Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:10 pm
There is no 'lopsidedness' required. The bike is still almost entirely supported by it's wheels - there's just enough imbalance to keep it from blowing over.Tequestra wrote:Could you please explain to me the reason why it is better to stop in a lopsided position than maintain the motorbike in the upright position, allowing gravity to do the work rather than the left leg muscles?
Postby Tequestra » Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:16 pm
It's okay. I just looked up 'curmudgeon' in the dictionary. He was just bored and trolling I suppose. There is no valid reason why it is necessary to stop your motorbike in the lopsided position leaning leftward. It is obviously some official doctrine from the so-called 'well-trained' plod to screw over the real riders.human909 wrote: Sound like too many rules.
Postby Tequestra » Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:23 pm
Okay I forgive you. I will add to this in a sec, but I shouldn't have used that word in that way, so I best get in quick.Thoglette wrote:I didn't know that it had entered the rule books. Which regulation is that under? Certainly a case of over regulation.
Is that not a contradiction? What about a gust? Why not put both feet on the ground the moment the bike comes to a halt so that you do not get blown over by such a common natural event?There is no 'lopsidedness' required. The bike is still almost entirely supported by it's wheels - there's just enough imbalance to keep it from blowing over.
Postby human909 » Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:24 pm
I honestly know very little about specific rules regarding motorcycles. But what I do know and is quickly confirmed by a quick review of the local road authority website is that the rules for motorcycle license are more comprehensive/stringent/thorough than driving.Thoglette wrote:I didn't know that it had entered the rule books. Which regulation is that under?
Postby Scott_C » Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:37 pm
In WA it is 245(1)(c)Thoglette wrote:I didn't know that it had entered the rule books. Which regulation is that under? Certainly a case of over regulation.
Code: Select all
(1) The rider of a motor cycle that is moving, or the rider of a motor cycle that is stationary but not parked, shall —
(a) sit astride the rider’s seat facing forwards; and
(b) ride with at least one hand on the handlebars; and
(c) if the motor cycle is moving — keep both feet on the footrests designed for use by the rider of the motor cycle,
while the motor cycle is on a road.
Postby Tequestra » Tue Jun 12, 2018 6:46 pm
So much for that Back to the Bicycles' business. It doesn't say anything in the rules about the need to keep the right foot on the footpeg when stationary, which is the one and only reason why I refuse to condone these bullies' penchant for such a stupid unwritten rule.Scott_C wrote:In WA it is 245(1)(c)Thoglette wrote:I didn't know that it had entered the rule books. Which regulation is that under? Certainly a case of over regulation.
The penalty for breaking 245(1) is 3 demerits and a $100 fine.Code: Select all
(1) The rider of a motor cycle that is moving, or the rider of a motor cycle that is stationary but not parked, shall — (a) sit astride the rider’s seat facing forwards; and (b) ride with at least one hand on the handlebars; and (c) if the motor cycle is moving — keep both feet on the footrests designed for use by the rider of the motor cycle, while the motor cycle is on a road.
Postby Thoglette » Tue Jun 12, 2018 7:41 pm
As you pointed out, the rear brake is multo importanto at low speed, especially if you're stopped on a slope. I can't use it if both feet are on the ground.Tequestra wrote:Is that not a contradiction? What about a gust? Why not put both feet on the ground the moment the bike comes to a halt so that you do not get blown over by such a common natural event?Thoglette wrote:There is no 'lopsidedness' required. The bike is still almost entirely supported by it's wheels - there's just enough imbalance to keep it from blowing over.
Postby Tequestra » Tue Jun 12, 2018 8:06 pm
Let's be friend, Mr Thoglette. I would agree that if it is a very steep up-hill then it would be natural for a properly experienced 'well-trained' motorcyclist to lean the bike, to the left, and use the back brake with the right foot, which is quite an exceptional situation - too steep for a front wheel to hold traction.Thoglette wrote: As you pointed out, the rear brake is multo importanto at low speed, especially if you're stopped pointing up hill.
The only time I'll have both feet on the ground is if I need to swap feet (because I forgot to change into first before stopping ) .
But then I'm old fashioned.
Return to “Cycling Safety and Advocacy”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
The Australian Cycling Forums is a welcoming community where you can ask questions and talk about the type of bikes and cycling topics you like.