Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
its hard to see but that overtaking car was actually indicating, and the bike was still acellerating when the car tried to overtake.....
Probably why I won't ride a crotch rocket
- Thread starter Dorje
- Start date
- Status
Atleast construct your argument with some valid points and stop being silly. Of course it was an illegal overtake. I don't think anybody here disputes that the biker was going too fast and filtering too aggressively, but this anti biker attitude is uncalled for and the car driver was also clearly in the wrong, regardless of what you think he could or could not see at a given time his overtake was dangerous and lacked observation.
only for a split second, a lot of drivers out there assume because they are indicating those behind must give way to them.. you see this all the time on motorways.
1. How exactly do you think he got the white car to move? Magic of his mind? More likely it moved over to the left to give him room. Polite driving there.
2. He hasn't entered the lane of the oncoming cars so how exactly has he made them make room.
He probably shouldn't have crossed into the hatched area, but it's not illegal and it's not dangerous. Only the biker travelling at excessive speed with limited awareness of what was going on caused his death.
Fact 1:
The bike crashed into the car because he was going to quick for the road and didn't have the space or time to react. THIS is poor riding.
Fact 2:
The car was driving aggressively. If either the car being overtaken or mobile home coming towards him had not moved left there would have been contact. THIS is aggressive driving and had it been a police bike with the camera and no other bike, he would most likely have pulled him for careless or worse.
Fact 3:
Accidents happen when a number of unplanned events come together at the wrong time to the detriment of one or many people. THIS is one such example.
The bike crashed into the car because he was going to quick for the road and didn't have the space or time to react. THIS is poor riding.
Fact 2:
The car was driving aggressively. If either the car being overtaken or mobile home coming towards him had not moved left there would have been contact. THIS is aggressive driving and had it been a police bike with the camera and no other bike, he would most likely have pulled him for careless or worse.
Fact 3:
Accidents happen when a number of unplanned events come together at the wrong time to the detriment of one or many people. THIS is one such example.
Anti biker? I'm very pro biker. That does not mean it changes the situation. the car is clearly not at fault and as such was not prosecuted. The bike is blind, travelling far to fast. the car driver has no chance of seeing him or reacting to him.
so your saying even if oncoming traffic if you think you can squeeze care down middle it's ok ?, I don't think it is
the hatched areas are not a extra overtaking lane... they are to keep traffic seperated
if they meant for him to overtake like that they would have build a 3rd overtaking lane (shared both directions)
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
oh i realise that. my point was why was the biker acellerating when the car was indicating to overtake, rightly or wrongly, the car in front? the biker only let off at the last possible moment and even then he didnt really try to stop, instead trying to get around the overtaking car, all whilst doing 70+. its a hard one but id put that at 50-50.
if you look purely at the distance, the overtaking car was indicating when the biker just overtook the pug - why did the biker continue on? although the time between that and the biker being up his arse was just over a second....
Last edited:
Yup indicators (even this late) or no exscuse to pull out on someone. Unless you drive a Bm then its ok
LOL I've had that happen to me a lot. The old "as long as I flick the indicator stalk as my hand turns the wheel right to pull out it's legal" attitude. Absolutely insane.
Wrong. He isn't in the other lane; he's a good foot or two our of it. No way would there be contact with oncoming traffic.
Look at the picture above. Look where the right hand edge of his car is! It's in the hatched area not in the oncoming lane.
He was driving aggressively though.
Well unless you want a car overtaking about 1 inch from your car you would move too lol! the white car only moved over to the white line when the car started to overtake, same goes for the otherside, if you see on oncoming car close your going to move, and if the biker didnt hit him he most definatelly would have crossed the white line he was basically on the white line and he wasnt fully overtaking yet.
I have seen this happen all to often, only a few months ago a car forced my mum and another car into the verge because he 'Thought' he could go down the middle.
Last edited:
if that was me, I must admit I would have assumed no cars would have been overtaking as no third lane and there was oncoming traffic.
usually bikes freely pass on these kinds of roads...
This accident was clearly the fault of the guy on the loin lance. He was driving at a dangerous speed - well over the national limit - and attempted to pass an overtaking vehicle without warning. Even if the hatchback had seen him, its driver had no time to react.
so your saying even if oncoming traffic if you think you can squeeze care down middle it's ok ?, I don't think it is
It's not a move I would make; I tend to be cautious about overtaking - I don't see much point taking any extra risk for a minute less journey time. But there is space for him to do it.
Then you will get yourself killed. Especially as he was indicating and you can;'t tell how long for. especially when you are clearly hidden from view and especially when you have a closing speed way outside of what would reasonably be considered.
Anyway I'm going to stay out of this thread. It's the bikes fault, the courts found it was the cars fault and you lot are just so anti car it's unbelievable.
IMO from looking at the video - even when the chase bike was @ 90 the one ahead was still pulling away - the decelleration from 100 was due to him reaction to the impending crash.
The chase bike had a better idea of the possible dangers and reacted accordingly - the other did not.
The car pulling out did not help the situation but the speed of the bike meant a collision could not be avoided.
gt
1 inch? Don't be spastic. Look at the video: 2:20 when we first get a clear view of the oncoming vehicle, there's a good metre or more between it and the hashed line the overtaking car isn't crossing. And the white car didn't only move over when the overtaking car starts its move, look at 2:19 when we first see it, its already well over to the left.
No denying it does happen; this isn't such a case.
Soldato
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2003
- Posts
- 20,160
- Location
- Woburn Sand Dunes
indicating when the bike overtook the pug
about 1.2 seconds between the bike being behind the pug and the bike trying to overtake the overtaking car
at that point, the chase cam was doing an indicated ~98mph and the biker in front was pulling away, probably an indicated 105-110.... 1.1 seconds give or take to cover probably 4-5 car lengths - not a huge amount of time to react if the driver had already checked his blind spot and resumed to overtake. thats got to be a 50-50, they are both at fault.
about 1.2 seconds between the bike being behind the pug and the bike trying to overtake the overtaking car
at that point, the chase cam was doing an indicated ~98mph and the biker in front was pulling away, probably an indicated 105-110.... 1.1 seconds give or take to cover probably 4-5 car lengths - not a huge amount of time to react if the driver had already checked his blind spot and resumed to overtake. thats got to be a 50-50, they are both at fault.
Last edited:
- Status