Motorbikes and fatal accidents

[EmmaDilemma5]

The vast majority of fatal accidents I read about involve a motorbike (and often a lorry).

Motorcyclists seem so vulnerable on the roads. AIBU to think something should be done about this?

I'm not trying to victim blame, but I often see motorcyclists weaving around the queues, speeding ridiculous speeds on motorways and generally not abiding by the usual rules of the road.

It's a bit like XL bullies. When you hear of a fatal dog attack, you can almost guarantee it includes a Bully. Same with fatal road accidents, it seems nearly each time it involves a motorbike.

AIBU to think, for their sakes, those of their families and for those traumatised by killing cyclists, that something needs to be addressed?

PinkFootstool · Yesterday 14:09

The problems remain with idiot vehicle drivers who don't look around themselves properly and that's out of our control.

And the ones who just don't care and have the attitude of "You can get out of my way."

Last Saturday, I was going to the Tyne Tunnel at the 40mph limit, a woman came speeding down the slip road, with no intent to stop - there was a car close behind me and traffic in the right hand lane. I beeped her and she stuck two fingers up and I had to go close to the white line. She then followed me too closely and moved to the right hand lane dangerously, pulled alongside me and leant over her passenger to hurl abuse and give it more V signs.

I can't count how many similar incidents like that I've had after 30 years of riding!

I've been knocked off three times, none of them were my fault. One guy pulled out of a side road, I'd already slowed in anticipation and he looked me in the eye as he pulled out.

The Police arrived and he was still ranting and swearing, blaming me, saying it was my own fault, as bikes are dangerous and we don't pay road tax....

Despite many posters anecdotes about how bikers are only at risk because terrible drivers fail to look properly, the table posted yesterday showed that 22% of motorbike fatalities involved no other vehicles. Plenty of bikers are a significant hazard to themselves. To pretend otherwise is plain daft.

You're aware they died while racing right? They weren't pootling and dicking about on a trip to Tesco... The Dunlops are incredible and Michael, having seen his uncle, dad and brother die due to racing is particularly special as far as I'm concerned. But it's not the same thing as a normal RTA

So nearly 80% aren't? And some of that percentage will include mechanical failure, sudden illness and things like freak weather, falling trees, etc.

JemimaTiggywinkles · Today 11:39

Despite many posters anecdotes about how bikers are only at risk because terrible drivers fail to look properly, the table posted yesterday showed that 22% of motorbike fatalities involved no other vehicles. Plenty of bikers are a significant hazard to themselves. To pretend otherwise is plain daft.

I agree, many "born again" bikers are a menace to themselves and not a few die on country roads, overtaking on blind bends, or overcooking it and hitting a wall.

Then again, when there's a car, or van involved, the biker is innocent in a majority of cases.

The one time I came off a bike was when it was wet and I hit a patch of diesel. There was no way to avoid it, and I was literally grinding to a halt in traffic anyway.
Had it been on a roundabout, with other traffic about going at normal speed, then I may not be here typing about it.

Basically, you can't say that the 22% of fatalities are the biker's fault. Sometimes it is the environment (or mechanical issues).

I cannot believe they don’t have to wear hi-viz, in fact I think every a-typical road user should legally have to (horse, bike, that twat who was jogging in the road last week, back to the traffic, wearing grey and with the worlds weakest head torch on his head).

If you open your eyes and look further than your nose, they don't need to wear hi viz. some people miss cars if they're not bright yellow...

So that's what I've been doing wrong, all I needed to do was wear hi viz and other road users would see me.....

No dice.

I can categorically state, it literally doesn't matter what we wear, people just don't see us, because they don't LOOK.

>people just don't see us, because they don't LOOK.

Many cases perhaps but in many cases 'look' simply does not spot the bike. Bikes are less than 1/3 the width of a car, front view with rider is almost always dark - you only need a road with dark metal surface, dark hedging on the verge for the bike to be effectively invisible to the normal "look".

OK the "look" should be more specific but the vast majority of times there isn't a bike there and learned behaviour means the "look" gets briefer.

Combine that with bike going faster than the normal traffic flow (which it always is) and you have at best a near miss.

Do drivers have to be perfect for bikes to be safe?

I have had cause to spend many hours over 20 years in orthopaedic wards and limb reconstruction clinics

Top 3 causes of smashed limbs amongst those I talk to: motorbike accidents, construction site accidents, football!

The fact that you class perfectly normal and legal road users as “atypical” speaks volumes about your attitude to other road users.

@BCCoach don't think that was meant for me. @LouOrange described as atypical.

FrankieStein403 · Today 10:49

Combine that with bike going faster than the normal traffic flow (which it always is) and you have at best a near miss.

So, when I'm doing 20 in a 20 limit, or 30 in a 30 limit (which I always am) and some wanker comes hooning up behind to sit 2 feet off my back wheel, it's, erm, my fault for speeding. OK, I see.

Because all car driver always drive at, or below the speed limit, don't they?

"What's that, Lassie? The poster's stuck down a well with a strawman?"

Apologies @ReturnOfTheRainMac I clearly responded to the wrong post in my rage at the othering 😁

If motorcyclists are 50x more likely to die on the roads that car drivers, something needs to be done?

Yes! Drivers need to actually LOOK and be better drivers and be much more aware of motorbikes.

The majority of accidents are CAR/LORRY drivers at fault.

You clearly know nothing if you're victim blaming motorcycle riders.

Incorrect, they're not a hazard to themselves, they're more vulnerable.

Avoiding debris, potholes, having to emergency break because some dickhead driver has pulled in front of them, drivers going well over their lane, literally dozens of hazards you can easily swerve in a car, you can't do on a motorbike.

I think every driver should complete at least a CBT on a moped before getting a car licence.

>So, when I'm doing 20 in a 20 limit, or 30 in a 30 limit (which I always am) and some wanker comes hooning up behind to sit 2 feet off my back wheel, it's, erm, my fault for speeding. OK, I see.

Because all car driver always drive at, or below the speed limit, don't they?

More drivers get closer to the speed limits these days but yes IMHO the vast majority of car drivers run above the speed limit - some very much above the limit.

However I wasn't saying that bikers exceed the speed limit I was saying that they usually significantly exceed the traffic speed - cf I was coming down a wet M1 this pm, traffic was reasonably heavy North of Luton but in one of those spells where 4 lanes were running at around 55 the gantries saying 'reports of debris'.

Presumably the superhero biker batting down the outside at 70 thought he could dodge round flying bits of tyre - as if that would be the only risk he was taking.

Wanker bikers, wanker car drivers, wanker lorry drivers wanker cyclists, wanker Amazon drivers. All absolutely 100% representative of their cohorts...

Absolutely this. But you missed wanker pedestrians. A percentage of all road users, of all kinds, are an absolute liability to themselves and everyone around them.

When driving young children about teach to play ispy motorbike.

Shout when they see a bike.

Bikes frighten the hell out of me and generally I just want to let them past/get away from them if on a motorway. If I am on a single lane A road and a bike is close behind generally I will slow and pull over to give them room to overtake as soon as possible (most of the time they want to). Watch out for them, steer clear of them as much as possible.

As regards whether stuff should be banned. Well the world would start to get to be a pretty boring place if everything dangerous was banned. Drinking. Smoking. Takeaways. Sugary drinks. Chocolate. Crisps. Skiing. Sitting on your arse watching TV. The list would be pretty much endless.

A friend of mine recently spent time in an orthopedic ward and the vast majority of patients were there because motorbike accidents. Maybe traffic police need to do their job better and I would suggest that delivery companies need to accept their share of the blame.

Please don't slow down or pull over. If its safe to overtake they will do so. You xliwing down and pulling over means we've got to work out if you're turning/stopping as well as checking we're clear to overtaken. Just concentrate on your own driving.

Can you show me the evidence that a cyclist is more likely to harm the pedestrians than themselves? I’ve always been lead to believe the reverse is true due to the cyclist being higher up & likely to fall, I turn harming themselves more. It would be good to show local highways as I’m not in favour of shared pavements for cycling & walking