EuroKClub
General forum area => The Euro K Club Lounge => Topic started by: gibbo on April 16, 2017, 11:49:51 am
-
A chap on the Zed Forum who's doing a Phd on this subject wants as many bike riders as possible to complete this poll, so I thought of you lot on here might be able to join in. It takes a matter of minutes to fill in. :)
Go to https://kwiksurveys.com/s/2vDuOyxp
-
Done.
-
completed
-
Done.
-
Done, not sure who currently causes Bike accidents ? On this club I would go for drivers/road surface other genre's of bikers I would go for the bikers themselves.
IAOST
-
Unless you are rear-ended sitting at lights (Tim et al), I would think virtually all motorcycle accidents are avoidable and as such are caused by the rider.
Some cars do cross the white line but most conflicts with cars are caused by the bike crossing the line.
Many more bikes leave the road on bends than do cars.
Interestingly he didn't ask about whether drivers see bikes or vice-versa.
-
Done. Having guided a few folks through aspects of their PHDs it's a bit basic as a piece of research though. No doubt more will follow.
-
Yeah Paul, but PhD's ain't wot they used to be ;D
-
done might do a phd do you have to do anything else!!!
-
Done.
My reason for riding motorcycles is, " for the thrill of it".
-
I would think virtually all motorcycle accidents are avoidable and as such are caused by the rider.
Not sure I agree.
From 2012 Motorcycle Accident Statistics for Great Britain (but I'm darned if I can find the original source on the UK Gov web site):
'The most common reason for accidents caused by car drivers was by failing to look properly (24%), whereas apart from bus and coach drivers, motorcyclists were the road users least likely to cause an accident for the same reason (16%).' Source: http://www.motorcyclenews.com/news/2015/march/new-accident-stats-show-large-decrease/
24% sound like they might not have been avoidable by any motorcyclist involved, at the very least.
Many more bikes leave the road on bends than do cars.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/568484/rrcgb-2015.pdf
page 112
(I had to calculate the percentages myself)
Going ahead on a left-hand bend:
% of motorbike accidents = 4.9%
% of car accidents = 3.2%
Going ahead on a right-hand bend:
% of motorbike accidents = 4.8%
% of car accidents = 3.7%
The rate of bike crashes on bends is definitely higher than for cars, but maybe not at the level of 'many'.
Definitely below 'twice as many' for example. I was expecting it to be higher too.
-
Done.
T.
-
Done :o
-
Unless you are rear-ended sitting at lights (Tim et al), I would think virtually all motorcycle accidents are avoidable and as such are caused by the rider.
That statement is way to simplistic. When sharing a road, regardless of the vehicle being used, every road user has to make certain assumptions regarding both what other road users will do and what the road will be like. Those assumptions are informed by what can and can't be observed and, from those assumptions decisions are made. Like all assumptions some can be wrong thus the decisions based upon them can be wrong. If the assumptions are reasonable and the decisions based upon them are sensible then, the fact that they subsequently prove to be wrong, means the accident was not necessarily avoidable.
-
I'll try and forward some further info from this chap in due course.
-
I'll try and forward some further info from this chap in due course.
Right then. Here's his latest findings. (as copied)
Results Update! Now with nascent hypotheses
THANK YOU to you all - the response has been above and beyond.
Hypothesis 1 : Motorcycles are primarily ridden by men, for leisure and commuting purposes.
This matters
So far, all respondents to this survey are men and only 2% of responses use the bike for anything other than leisure or commuting.
This matters because leisure and commuting are statistically more 'risky' than other journey types. Gender can affect a range of factors including attitude to risk and the kind of riding undertaken.
This matters because if we are looking for true comparisons of 'risk' we need to isolate and compare statistically similar groups. In other words, the fact that motorcyclists are a relatively homogeneous group undertaking a fairly specific activity, using powerful machines matters significantly.
If you want to accurately compare 'risk' with other transport modes, you need to compare transport modes displaying similar characteristics. Currently, that does not happen.
Hypothesis 2 : Motorcyclists are seen as young and reckless or old and 'born again'.
It seems that this is untrue. The average age of the respondents so far is 52, so we're not spring chickens. BUT, we're not 'born again' either as the average uninterrupted riding experience is 27 years. So, we're not young, nor are we born again. Accepted, this try-out is being conducted on a ZZR forum so is very likely to involve older riders due to the experience required to ride one, cost of purchase and insurance factors associated with these bikes.
When it comes to being reckless, again the data suggests this is not the case. 74% of riders ATGATT and 59% have taken post-test training.
So are we risk takers? Well, like any other group of people, no doubt risk will be a factor here. But when asked to speak about why they ride motorcycles, the respondents did not mention risk as a factor that interested them in 98% of cases. 28% mentioned the 'thrill' of riding but this does not necessarily equate to an attitude to take risks. Further, deeper questioning and comparison with previous studies would be useful.
Hypothesis 3 : Motorcyclists are seen to cause their own problems (accidents)
Well, again this seems hard to support. In fact the interesting thing for me is that the responses tend to underestimate the situations in which cars are responsible for accidents, placing the responsibility on drivers in c.50% of cases when official stats show nearer 60%.
This is very interesting to me as we can get into this psychology in a number of different ways. Riders tend to over-estimate how much they are responsible for accidents, and take a great deal of responsibility for themselves by taking up post-test training and using proper gear. As we've established in this group we are also older and highly experienced.
So, thanks again to everyone and please do spread the word-any biker is more than welcome to complete the survey and this will help develop the ideas. I can't stress enough that this is purely a look-see as preparation for a potential and much more formal and in-depth study complete with statistical rigour and the usual academic oversight.
End.
-
Interesting findings, thanks Gibbo.
> Motorcyclists are seen as young and reckless or old and 'born again'.
Old and 'still alive'.
As the 27 years average experience suggests - ZZRs and Ks are for the, er, 'mature' rider, i.e. people who like a bit of power but know that this year's shiny rocket isn't needed to enjoy the ride.
The trial might want to try targeting smaller bikes (600cc say) to get closer to the average age range of bikers, which I'm guessing is closer to 40 years.
-
Never trust such surveys as imho are always aiming to something other that what they claim. But did it for the trill of it.......
-
Unless you are rear-ended sitting at lights (Tim et al), I would think virtually all motorcycle accidents are avoidable and as such are caused by the rider.
That statement is way to simplistic. When sharing a road, regardless of the vehicle being used, every road user has to make certain assumptions regarding both what other road users will do and what the road will be like. Those assumptions are informed by what can and can't be observed and, from those assumptions decisions are made. Like all assumptions some can be wrong thus the decisions based upon them can be wrong. If the assumptions are reasonable and the decisions based upon them are sensible then, the fact that they subsequently prove to be wrong, means the accident was not necessarily avoidable.
You know me ;D
I don't consider things like sliding off on diesel or collapsing at the bars or car park incidents to be 'accidents' and motorway traffic pile-ups are way too complex to include in simple 'blame' games as are the increasing numbers of rear-enders caused by the use of mobile phones etc. Drunk/drug riding and driving must also be out with the scope of such simple analysis.
The above notwithstanding, apart from the rear-enders we have had in here and a couple of reports of 'odd' incidents of cars crossing the white line on bends, I can't recall a single bike accident where I didn't think 'daft sod' of the rider.
Vehicles pulling out in front of us is what we should be expecting, I always am and so are you.
I'm not an accident investigator and I don't 'collect' accident scenarios for a hobby so please list the real accidents you personally have experience of where it wasn't the rider's fault at some stage of IPSGA.
I told the survey that I thought riders were responsible for bike accidents, based on my own experience since 1964. I also think most car accidents are caused by car drivers etc etc.
Only when it comes to horse riders/drivers do I accept that it may not be the rider's/driver's fault because horses have free will and anyone who thinks they are in control of them is deluding themselves.
I bet every 'moment' that you have with other traffic, you curse the idiot but then think 'I should have seen that coming'. I know I do and there are lots of 'moments'.
-
I've posted the original post up on our club forum as well.
-
Interesting findings, thanks Gibbo.
> Motorcyclists are seen as young and reckless or old and 'born again'.
Old and 'still alive'.
As the 27 years average experience suggests - ZZRs and Ks are for the, er, 'mature' rider, i.e. people who like a bit of power but know that this year's shiny rocket isn't needed to enjoy the ride.
The trial might want to try targeting smaller bikes (600cc say) to get closer to the average age range of bikers, which I'm guessing is closer to 40 years.
I'll suggest that to him Rich and await his reply.
-
Rich. He seems to have taken your suggestion with great gusto. He's also stated his intention of posting his latest findings in due course, so I'll copy it to the forum when received.
Rae. Perhaps you could link the rider survey to the FJR forum which might produce some replies. :)
-
I've added the link to the Piston Heads Biker Banter forum as well. Wide range of ages, bike types and experience on there.
-
Unless you are rear-ended sitting at lights (Tim et al), I would think virtually all motorcycle accidents are avoidable and as such are caused by the rider.
That statement is way to simplistic. When sharing a road, regardless of the vehicle being used, every road user has to make certain assumptions regarding both what other road users will do and what the road will be like. Those assumptions are informed by what can and can't be observed and, from those assumptions decisions are made. Like all assumptions some can be wrong thus the decisions based upon them can be wrong. If the assumptions are reasonable and the decisions based upon them are sensible then, the fact that they subsequently prove to be wrong, means the accident was not necessarily avoidable.
You know me ;D
I don't consider things like sliding off on diesel or collapsing at the bars or car park incidents to be 'accidents' and motorway traffic pile-ups are way too complex to include in simple 'blame' games as are the increasing numbers of rear-enders caused by the use of mobile phones etc. Drunk/drug riding and driving must also be out with the scope of such simple analysis.
The above notwithstanding, apart from the rear-enders we have had in here and a couple of reports of 'odd' incidents of cars crossing the white line on bends, I can't recall a single bike accident where I didn't think 'daft sod' of the rider.
Vehicles pulling out in front of us is what we should be expecting, I always am and so are you.
I'm not an accident investigator and I don't 'collect' accident scenarios for a hobby so please list the real accidents you personally have experience of where it wasn't the rider's fault at some stage of IPSGA.
I told the survey that I thought riders were responsible for bike accidents, based on my own experience since 1964. I also think most car accidents are caused by car drivers etc etc.
Only when it comes to horse riders/drivers do I accept that it may not be the rider's/driver's fault because horses have free will and anyone who thinks they are in control of them is deluding themselves.
I bet every 'moment' that you have with other traffic, you curse the idiot but then think 'I should have seen that coming'. I know I do and there are lots of 'moments'.
Again, this is still too simplistic. In almost all accidents, things could have been done better, the accident could have been avoided or results minimised, but saying that, as an afterthought with time to consider and a knowledge of what had happened misses the point.
When it comes to apportioning blame for an accident, what should be asked is whether or not what each person involved did was reasonable. Not the best decision, not the right decision but a reasonable decision.
We need to separate blame/responsibility for an accident from doing the absolute best. Both the law and insurance companies make such a distinction. That means that the car pulling out of the side road into the path of the rider does not make the rider responsible for the subsequent accident. Yes, they probably should have anticipated such a manoeuvre but not doing so does not make them responsible for the accident. The car should not have pulled out and it’s reasonable for the rider to assume it’s not going to.
I know Brian, because I’ve seen you do it, that you don’t ride all the time in the way you describe. That doesn’t mean that, had an accident occurred, it would have automatically been your fault, only that you hadn’t done the absolute best you could to ensure that an accident didn’t occur.
While we all aspire to be perfect riders, none of us will make it. Not being perfect does not make us responsible for anything that happens. Not being good enough does make us responsible.
-
As I said, there are lots of moments where you don't, but should, have seen something coming and lots of times where you are not riding as you should.
As for the side-road issue, I disagree that it is reasonable for a rider to assume a car driver won't pull out. We know from way too many studies that drivers often don't see bikes whether they specifically look for them or not. There are very few bikes on the road in comparison to other vehicles, they are very narrow in a driver's field of view, are mostly not easily visible anyway (black bike and black clothing anyone?) and not what drivers are looking for and we should expect to not be seen. I have failed to see bikes approaching too many times, both in the car and on the bike, to expect others to see me.
I'm still waiting for the examples of biking accidents where at some level of IPSGA etc. it wasn't the rider's fault.
The innocent-rider motorcycle accidents I have personal experience of where I know the person involved are:
Member of this forum stopped at a red light. Car behind didn't. Bike and rider punted into busy junction. No injuries. Substantial damage to bike, thankfully not to my 'on loan' Sargent seat!
Timbox's numerous occurrences of being hit while stationary :o
Other motorcycle accidents I have personal experience of down the years where I saw what happened, spoke to witnesses who saw what happened or know the person involved include:
Rider in same group rode into ditch - no apparent reason, no other vehicle involved. Minor injuries.
Friend fell asleep on motorway and rode into ditch, no other vehicle involved. Major injuries to rider, minor injuries to young pillion.
Experienced rider over-cooked it coming out of roundabout on A34 in damp conditions, hit Armco on off-side. No other vehicles involved. Broken limbs.
Very experienced rider and racer leading tour (to see bike in incident below, following its rebuild) overtook, in frustration, an aged meandering local driver (who had been holding the traffic up) on an unsighted left hand bend following last hairpin on descent of Grimsel Pass only to encounter local GS coming toward him. Ensuing low'ish-speed crunch (thank heavens for ABS) resulted in minor injuries to rider's wife on pillion and a bent but still mobile GS and an incontinent K13S.
Very experienced forum member lost control of bike on bend at top of hill. Rider separated from bike. No injuries. Following 80m slide down hill, damage to both sides of bike ( ::) )
Experienced rider on new-to-him big, powerful German sports-tourer, following friend on similar machine. Enters very tight 90 left, opens throttle to accelerate away, engine does not respond, rider picks bike up to stop it falling over, power comes in with a bang and flicks the bike across the road and up against large, dense hedge in verge, rider wobbles on along hedge as huge SUV passes him in opposite direction. Rider regains correct side of road, catches up with friend and picks leaves and twigs out of fairing. I didn't ride it again until the lousy fuelling problem on the K12 had been fixed and the dreadful Bridgestone BT014's had been binned.
Rider pulled out to overtake cars at excessive speed on 50mph two-lane, up-hill, dual-carriageway approaching roundabout. Car in stream of traffic ahead, already indicating and moving out, continued to move out to turn right at r/about, 'forcing' rider into Armco. Serious injuries to rider, pillion killed. Rider didn't brake, appeared to freeze at the controls.
Same place, rider approaching roundabout at high speed, moved out to overtake slow-moving truck in lane one. Mis-judged manoeuvre, hit back of truck with left shoulder. Left arm amputated by truck body. Major injuries.
Busy, winding, minor road commuter route. Rider 'going very quickly' pulled out to overtake a truck on blind, left hand bend without slowing. Failed to regain correct side of road and died in collision with oncoming bus. Driving instructor/biking neighbour witnessed incident.
Inexperienced friend on a Welsh tour with father and brothers failed to see a tight, 90 right bend ahead of him on a country road, despite having seen me disappear round it ahead of him, rode into ditch, along ditch and back onto road without falling off. No injuries apart from thick ear from me and his father!
Friend separated from companions leaving The Nurburgring, 'riding quickly' to catch them up, involved in high-speed, head-on collision with oncoming car on its correct side of the road. Major injuries. He was riding on the left, in Germany!
Friend commuting into work in queueing traffic in town, filtering slowly up nearside to turn left ahead. Passenger opened car door without looking. Big, low-speed crunch. Bike and rider fell over. No injuries.
Same friend riding alone to a company motor-sport function failed to negotiate right hand bend and rode into ditch on left at by-then slow speed. Eventually rode out. No injuries.
Same friend, following me at a distance along cobbled road through sleepy French village. Bus very slowly eased out of a turning on left and despite seeing him, kept on coming across road to turn to his right. Rider took evasive action and 'parked' bike up against petrol pump in small filling station on right. Slight damage to bike, no injuries but pride.
Friend driving home late at night swerved to miss a red football in the road. Also being a biker, he stopped and reversed to move the ball out of the road. The football was a crash helmet with a head inside it. Subsequent police search discovered decapitated rider in field with virtually undamaged Gold Star nearby. Next morning a local car driver came forward to tell police he was involved in a near-miss with a bike travelling in the opposite direction, which passed him on his near-side between his car and the kerb, as he was rounding a left hand bend. There was no contact and the driver didn't realise that the bike had crashed. Police discovered a 'bloodied dent' in a steel sign post in the pavement on the driver's nearside and rider's offside of road. Concluded bike was cutting right hand bend in a big way and at big speed.
Inexperienced rider dazzled by glare from opposing headlights at night in wet on otherwise deserted country road. Rider eased brakes on, scooter contacted kerb and threw rider from machine which carried on with its wheels in the gutter, its footboard resting on the kerb. Rider chased after bike, vaulted onto rear and brought machine to halt. Most heroic, thought I, until I felt blood dripping down my left shin from bad gash on knee.
Long, straight, unlit narrow road, acquaintance riding at excessive speed at night, bike took off, deliberately, over hump-back bridge and landed in the front of car travelling in opposite direction. Rider killed. (Numerous similar incidents at this spot with similar 'acquaintances' of colleagues before my time.)
Rider failed to negotiate a right hand bend coming into village at high-speed, crossed grass verge, went through barbed-wire fence into river. Rider drowned. Girlfriend on pillion, a neighbour of mine, was partially decapitated. (Many similar incidents during the Rocker years along same stretch of road.)
Schoolfriend left road at high speed on left hand bend, missed all opposing vehicles, rider thrown into concrete post supporting high, wire mesh fence. Rider killed, bike virtually unmarked as it landed in and was held by the fence, six feet off the ground. (ditto in the late '50's and '60's.)
As you can understand, my perception is that the vast majority of motorcycle accidents are either directly avoidable by, or are caused by, the rider.
It may be simplistic, but my perception is my only reality.
-
Tottaly Aggre with you.
-
Just received the latest info from this chap.
Vapour's survey thread (copied)
Once again, a massive THANK YOU to everyone who has completed the survey and spread the word. We now have well over 350 responses, so the data is starting to mean something and will (as mentioned) help to form the basis of a much more comprehensive and formal study. I'm doing this to (try to) contribute positively to overall thinking and the discussion on bikes.
Results update!
99% of responses are from men, 1% from women.
It seems we're an experienced lot in life and biking. Average age is now 45 and average riding experience of 17 years. 40% of us have taken up some form of post-test training; this is a large drop from the previous update (18% down) and is probably reflected in the age of riders coming down. We obviously like motorcycles, reflected in the fact we own a couple of bikes each (on average) but only 20% of us use the bike as our main vehicle.
Overwhelmingly, 97% ride for leisure/pleasure purposes, although 45% of us also commute. We're covering around 5,800 per year, although I think there might be some typos in the inputs and we actually ride further. 57% of us will ride at night, and a similar number (54%) ride in the rain. Personally I am interested in this and will look into it more.
77% of us ATGATT; reflected in the 45% of us who see our passion as dangerous. 36% of us place the blame for accidents primarily with drivers, which is letting them off significantly. Again I will look into this further as it's really interesting - I suspect this reflects the high degree of personal responsibility already voiced (i.e. the view that even if the driver is technically at fault, the rider is ultimately responsible for his/her safety).
Overwhelmingly, we ride for enjoyment, freedom, the unique experience and the friendship and camaraderie. (End copy)
-
77% of us ATGATT; reflected in the 45% of us who see our passion as dangerous.
In case anyone else had to look it up:
ATGATT: All the gear, all the time. Shorthand for a philosophy that complete motorcycle safety gear should be worn at all times, and gear should not be reduced at times when the perceived risk is less.
-
...as opposed to ATGNI, which applies to many of us 8)
-
Ok I finally filled it in to get that age average down a bit! :D
-
I could fill it in to get it back up again ;D
-
Done