Virginia Tec motorcycle accident study

Steven

Member
Decent article and a lot of comments on ABS. Personally I keep as much distance from the cars in front of me as possible so I rarely have to hit my brakes very hard and I don't trust anyone coming from the side. Still, things happen that I don't expect. I also rarely ride with a car next to me in the other lane unless I'm far enough forwards that they can see me without their mirrors, I've had too many change into my lane without looking. Here in Illinois it seems that (when out of town) the DOT puts gravel on pull offs on curves and at intersections which means cars drag the gravel onto the road so bikes can fall over if the rider doesn't see it. I know they don't mean for that to happen but that's what they do.

It also seems like most people drive fairly well unless there is a lot of traffic (think rush hour) and then they begin driving aggressively, which makes no sense. If anything, it should be the other way around.
 

ofdave

Member
A good read. Thanks for posting.
Am surprised by the number of dropped bikes and maybe more surprised at the mount of rear-enders by bikes. Had no idea they are so common.
The results for aggressive riding should be no surprise to any. Wonder if there were a way to factor age into that. I know I see the wild and young get pretty aggressive around here. Us old farts seem to be more laid back.
It answers questions and leaves us with more.
I enjoy reading accident studies-makes me think and wonder.
 

Merlin III

New member
A good read. Thanks for posting.
Am surprised by the number of dropped bikes and maybe more surprised at the mount of rear-enders by bikes. Had no idea they are so common.
The results for aggressive riding should be no surprise to any. Wonder if there were a way to factor age into that. I know I see the wild and young get pretty aggressive around here. Us old farts seem to be more laid back.
It answers questions and leaves us with more.
I enjoy reading accident studies-makes me think and wonder.

I have made the observation about driving that older people (60-75) drive more carefully than younger people (18-40), but as you get older there is no doubt that your reflexes and perception slow way down. Therefore, I think the age factor and aggressiveness balance each other out.
 

randy1149

New member
Turn off the phones?

To add to the vehicle accidents and the lives lost and has been increased by the 21st century communication called "Texting" while driving. We all get the 30 second TV adds we get from private organization and our government, the theme being how bad texting is and it's up there with Driving Wwhile Iintoxicated. (alcohol % drugs).

I know it's illegal in some states and people are fined for texting. And we're told texting is as bad a DWI. Inconsistently however the penalties for texting are no where near fines for DWI. It appears to me all our government cares about testing is the money they can make? BTW any time of cellphone use by the driver increases the probability to accident.

That being said, this cellphone problem can be fixed nation wide in about 30 seconds. Here's how: All cell phones have GPS function including the speed the vehicle is going, divide the distance by the time to get MPH. If you have a navigation app already it's doing that math right now. The next step is apply a mandatory algorithm (NOT AN APP) in the phone that shuts off all type of outgoing calls with the exception of 911 when the car reaches 10 MPH. This will affect all passenger phones also... they can stop the car if it's that important. This is something the cellphones don't need any expensive modifications to the phone, just software.

How much does our nation want to fix this? I have sent this fix information to: Oprah Winfrey, NY Gov. Cuomo, NY Senators Schumer and Gillabrand and all major news anchors, (ABS, CBS, NBC). None of them responded.

I can understand the problem. None of the cellphone providers want to turn off the customers if it's not a industry mandatory application and the politicians are afraid of the lobbyist power... but it looks like nobody wants to fix it.
 
Last edited:

Shanghai Dan

New member
Yet another reason why we should have lane splitting legalized nation-wide. I had a LOT more close-call rear-enders when living in Washington before I lived overseas (and now in California) and learned to lane split. There's a mental shift - when traffic starts to get thick, you naturally start to move BETWEEN the lanes, so you can split if traffic really slows. But that also means that IF there is a car coming up behind you - you're already out of the way, passing other cars OR you are at least out of the lane to not be hit.
 

Steven

Member
To add to the vehicle accidents and the lives lost and has been increased by the 21st century communication called "Texting" while driving. We all get the 30 second TV adds we get from private organization and our government, the theme being how bad texting is and it's up there with Driving Wwhile Iintoxicated. (alcohol % drugs).

I know it's illegal in some states and people are fined for texting. And we're told texting is as bad a DWI. Inconsistently however the penalties for texting are no where near fines for DWI. It appears to me all our government cares about testing is the money they can make? BTW any time of cellphone use by the driver increases the probability to accident.

That being said, this cellphone problem can be fixed nation wide in about 30 seconds. Here's how: All cell phones have GPS function including the speed the vehicle is going, divide the distance by the time to get MPH. If you have a navigation app already it's doing that math right now. The next step is apply a mandatory algorithm (NOT AN APP) in the phone that shuts off all type of outgoing calls with the exception of 911 when the car reaches 10 MPH. This will affect all passenger phones also... they can stop the car if it's that important. This is something the cellphones don't need any expensive modifications to the phone, just software.

How much does our nation want to fix this? I have sent this fix information to: Oprah Winfrey, NY Gov. Cuomo, NY Senators Schumer and Gillabrand and all major news anchors, (ABS, CBS, NBC). None of them responded.

I can understand the problem. None of the cellphone providers want to turn off the customers if it's not a industry mandatory application and the politicians are afraid of the lobbyist power... but it looks like nobody wants to fix it.

A while back I suggested the same thing and I got a lot of flack from people, even people that were complaining about people using their phones while driving. However, I also suggested stopping incoming calls, but allowing a signal that informs the owner of the phone that someone is trying to call, they just can't answer until they stop.
 

Steven

Member
Yet another reason why we should have lane splitting legalized nation-wide. I had a LOT more close-call rear-enders when living in Washington before I lived overseas (and now in California) and learned to lane split. There's a mental shift - when traffic starts to get thick, you naturally start to move BETWEEN the lanes, so you can split if traffic really slows. But that also means that IF there is a car coming up behind you - you're already out of the way, passing other cars OR you are at least out of the lane to not be hit.

The only thing I don't like about lane sharing when I drive a car is that to have someone suddenly right next to me might startle me and cause me to swerve. If they do it at a low speed, let's say 15mph, then it's not so much a problem, but I've seen people doing it at much faster speeds (on youtube). I've had cars share my lane numerous times when I'm on the bike and it was a dangerous thing to do since I often use the entire lane due to road irregularities or if the wind is gusting. I have no problem with filtering since all the cars are stopped.
 

Steven

Member
As for rear ending a car, I've known a few people over the years that have done that, but I honestly believe they were following too close when the car in front of them suddenly stopped. I still see a few bikers following too close and many cars doing it everyday. I really don't understand why they do it because whether they are 20 feet or 50 feet behind the car in front of them, they are going the same speed. Oh well?
 

randy1149

New member
As for rear ending a car, I've known a few people over the years that have done that, but I honestly believe they were following too close when the car in front of them suddenly stopped. I still see a few bikers following too close and many cars doing it everyday. I really don't understand why they do it because whether they are 20 feet or 50 feet behind the car in front of them, they are going the same speed. Oh well?

The new collision radar should make an improvement on the rear end collisions by the millisecond reaction of speed difference between the front and rear cars. That option should be mandatory on all cars and motorcycles.

I have it in my car and at times I get the collision warning when I didn't even notice the car in front of me slowed or stopped even though I had my eyes on the road. The electronics sees it before me.
 

randy1149

New member
A while back I suggested the same thing and I got a lot of flack from people, even people that were complaining about people using their phones while driving. However, I also suggested stopping incoming calls, but allowing a signal that informs the owner of the phone that someone is trying to call, they just can't answer until they stop.

At the end of the day it is very obvious to me these politicians and celebrities all had some sort of public programming begging people to stop using the cellphone while driving. It has just collapsed to be another public obligation with no real sincerity or teeth. They just don't give a $hit. Past history says it takes a Senator or a high politician has to loose a love one and then the ball will start rolling again. A slap on the wrist for involuntary homicide... it doesn't make sense.
 
Last edited:

Steven

Member
The new collision radar should make an improvement on the rear end collisions by the millisecond reaction of speed difference between the front and rear cars. That option should be mandatory on all cars and motorcycles.

I have it in my car and at times I get the collision warning when I didn't even notice the car in front of me slowed or stopped even though I had my eyes on the road. The electronics sees it before me.

Besides what you have, some cars will brake, but it only works at lower speeds. Honda has a system that (when in cruise) it will slow the car down to match the vehicle speed in front when that vehicle is going slower, but it won't work under 30 mph. What's cool about it is that when the driver changes lanes, it automatically goes back to the preset speed, assuming there isn't a car in front.

Anyhow, we have the technology to prevent many collisions.
 

Steven

Member
At the end of the day it is very obvious to me these politicians and celebrities all had some sort of public programming begging people to stop using the cellphone while driving. It has just collapsed to be another public obligation with no real sincerity or teeth. They just don't give a $hit. Past history says it takes a Senator or a high politician has to loose a love one and then the ball will start rolling again. A slap on the wrist for involuntary homicide... it doesn't make sense.

You're right... The real solution isn't tickets, it's what you suggested. Beyond that, what would work better is to immobilize a persons car for let's say for a week after an infraction, like the boots they put on cars.
 

Merlin III

New member
.......................... A slap on the wrist for involuntary homicide... it doesn't make sense.

I disagree with your last sentence. When there is an actual accident caused by someone using a phone while driving, the accident is treated pretty close to the same as an accident caused by someone impaired by drugs or alcohol. Here is a quick Google citation. I read of similar cases all the time. The real issue for me is the lack of citations when people are seen driving and using a phone. Even more frustrating for me is the lack of a law mandating that cellphones be inoperable at speeds of over ,say, 10 MPH.

http://www.courts.state.nh.us/press/2013/ORT-Case-1-Summary-2013.pdf
 

randy1149

New member
Besides what you have, some cars will brake, but it only works at lower speeds. Honda has a system that (when in cruise) it will slow the car down to match the vehicle speed in front when that vehicle is going slower, but it won't work under 30 mph. What's cool about it is that when the driver changes lanes, it automatically goes back to the preset speed, assuming there isn't a car in front.

Anyhow, we have the technology to prevent many collisions.

Steven, the collision warning on my car does include emergency braking automatically should I not take action. Including with this "Technical" package in front, rear and side warnings. Also in the package is the Lane Departure Activation along with Interactive Cruise Control. Set them both and the car will maintain an adjustable distance from the car in front of you (including coming to a complete top) and the car will automatically steer itself to stay in your lane. The lane departure control is not GPS, it maintains the lane by the painted lines, the system alternately activates itself by the lines.
 

randy1149

New member
I disagree with your last sentence. When there is an actual accident caused by someone using a phone while driving, the accident is treated pretty close to the same as an accident caused by someone impaired by drugs or alcohol. Here is a quick Google citation. I read of similar cases all the time. The real issue for me is the lack of citations when people are seen driving and using a phone. Even more frustrating for me is the lack of a law mandating that cellphones be inoperable at speeds of over ,say, 10 MPH.



http://www.courts.state.nh.us/press/2013/ORT-Case-1-Summary-2013.pdf

To a degree and the situation of the accident the law is applied the same as DWI, mostly when there's a fatality. But in general the non-fatal accident the driver walks away with a fine (if any).

I can say with some factuality the general public does not take the cellphone laws and it's application seriously.
If your stopped because of tail light and the cop smells booze on you your probably going to jail. That doesn't happen when your caught texting. You even get to go with the phone to do it again 2 minutes later. Cellphone laws are not applied as DWI laws.

The textors also have ways to circumvent the law which now creates another problem of traffic and road rage and that is texting at the red light. In my heavily populated area with people and cars you can stop for a read light and there will be people in front of you texting and not paying attention to the light. What you get sometime are 2-3 people doing the same thing and when the light turns green horns start blowing. At times the textors take an extra 5-10 seconds after the light turns green to finish their texting. At times I see 3-4-5 people texting at the light... a good start for road raging.


Yosemite-Sam-Quotes-300x281.jpg
 

Merlin III

New member
To a degree and the situation of the accident the law is applied the same as DWI, mostly when there's a fatality. But in general the non-fatal accident the driver walks away with a fine (if any).

I can say with some factuality the general public does not take the cellphone laws and it's application seriously.
If your stopped because of tail light and the cop smells booze on you your probably going to jail. That doesn't happen when your caught texting. You even get to go with the phone to do it again 2 minutes later. Cellphone laws are not applied as DWI laws.

The textors also have ways to circumvent the law which now creates another problem of traffic and road rage and that is texting at the red light. In my heavily populated area with people and cars you can stop for a read light and there will be people in front of you texting and not paying attention to the light. What you get sometime are 2-3 people doing the same thing and when the light turns green horns start blowing. At times the textors take an extra 5-10 seconds after the light turns green to finish their texting. At times I see 3-4-5 people texting at the light... a good start for road raging.


View attachment 526
From the Maine Statute:
3. Penalties. The following penalties apply to a violation of this section.
A. A person who violates this section commits a traffic infraction for which a fine of not less than $250 may be adjudged. [2013, c. 188, §1 (NEW).]
B. A person who violates this section after previously having been adjudicated as violating this section within a 3-year period commits a traffic infraction for which a fine of not less than $500 may be adjudged, and the Secretary of State shall suspend the license of that person without right to hearing. The minimum periods of license suspension are:
(1) Thirty days, if the person has 2 adjudications for a violation of this section within a 3-year period;
(2) Sixty days, if the person has 3 adjudications for a violation of this section within a 3-year period; and
(3) Ninety days, if the person has 4 or more adjudications for a violation of this section within a 3-year period.
 

randy1149

New member
The laws on paper are not always the laws enforced on the streets. Also cellphone laws vary by state. LINK
 
Last edited:
Top