(Please visit one of our advertisers)

No donations or subscriptions are required

   OR   
   
Subscription choices:
Board Karma = 40  (3453 positive of 3835 votes is 40 %pts higher than a neutral 50%)
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle   
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

You can the entire collection of Safety Tip articles in a 33 Megabyte PDF Portfolio

 All Forums
 50 Most Recent Posts
Motorcycle Safety / General Discussion
Helmet color and visibility
bachman1961
07/14/2019  12:55 AM
Bright orange isn't a bad choice IMO.
In fact, it would be my 2nd choice against the day-glo yellow or yellow-green ? .. whatever it's classification.

I say the yellow shade takes first place and trumps orange but not by a wide margin. So why a first and second choice?
If I were on KTM or anything with orange in the color family, I'd go by matching color. Otherwise I'd hedge my safety bets with yellow.
* Yes, I said 'trumps orange' but not meaning to start any trouble.

Incidentally, my grandson has some Oakley specs with that yellow shade on the ear pads and lost one at school. I was amazed it 'disappeared' since the color stands out so brilliantly.
When I ordered spares, I discovered the actual color is called Retina Burn.



NMI - Just how dangerous is it?
bachman1961
07/13/2019  3:16 AM
I salute you all for safe riding, riding in traffic, commuting and being active here to keep up the good work (posts and info). Good to see many of the same names, avatars or faces - lol.

Just wanted to drop in and say Hello.
Been off the m/c for a while but haven't lost the love. Just busy at work, home and at play with grandpa daycare a few weekdays and 4 grandkids these days. Still full time at the work place on nights.

I'll get back to perusing and restocking my tool box of good input and refreshers here. My bike is fully gassed, and charged at all times to go anytime, just have been buried in other things and my brain has to re-up the whole m/c thing. I have to get my head back in the game as it's been out of that particular loop for a while.

On topic of stats mentioned, Colorado Springs has had a rough few years with traffic deaths. Cars and occupant not wearing seatbelts accounted for many, pedestrian or bicycle versus car were up and lately, m/c crashes or fatalities and a few recent as single vehicle are ticking up. Biker on a curve / curb as single and non-helmet a few weeks ago and tonight coming to work, I was diverted to a re-route for Police activity and blocking the road.
Thought it was crime related like some Bozo on the loose but sadly, a group of riders out where one hit a curb on a turn, was thrown and updated news states they died. Rider was wearing a helmet.

I used to be much better and on top of the numbers locally and am humbled to say I've lost touch. Part of it is the happy life of being somewhat distant from everyday news.

I haven't been too distant from the dangers, scrapes and minor injuries of bicycling the trails here but it's the adventure and fitness that keeps me going. I should be too embarrassed to be out there with a ratio of crashes more so than any respectable 58 year-old should allow but NOPE !

Bitcoins
Vlad
06/29/2019  8:54 AM
Thanks, a lot of information to consider when thinking about future
Near miss this morning
tmonroe
06/28/2019  3:39 PM
I just thought of something that is relevant to this. I would imagine that it might seem unusual that I picked up on this guy passing in my lane. This might explain why I saw this happening: I have a Reevu helmet. It has a mirrors and fiber-optic system that gives you a rear-view mirror in the center top of your peripheral vision. I've found it gives me a lot more awareness of what's going on behind me. Yes, I know, I have the geekiest helmet setup imaginable (Nuviz heads-up display on a Reevu rearview helmet). The Nuviz is pretty bleeding edge technology, but I do like the traffic density heads-up map, and the fact that I can record pictures and video using a remote. Overall this setup is a little heavy though - I've had to switch back and forth with a lighter helmet when I start to feel neck strain.
Bitcoins
James R. Davis
06/27/2019  8:10 PM
You might think that the Libra idea is actually pretty good. Think, however, VERY BIG.

If the Libra is created and is successful, then Facebook and those 'insider investors' would become the most powerful financial 'people' in the world - MUCH MORE POWERFUL than most governments!

Consider, for example, that Venezuela decides to buy (thus, creates) a few billion dollars worth of Libra and then makes it LEGAL TENDER there. Instead of fighting a million percent rate of inflation, their populous would do whatever they could to get some Libra and suddenly they will become immune from inflation. Or what if Iran buys a trillion dollars worth of Libra and does the same thing. No more worries about financial sanctions!

Oh, and Facebook and their investors make $50 or $60 million per year of interest on their $10 million investment.

Do you think governments and their banking systems will not put up a fight? The prospect of a healthy Libra is scary as hell.
Bitcoins
James R. Davis
06/27/2019  7:21 AM
About Libra ...

First, let's talk about Facebook and its group of 100 (potentially) deep pocket investors in this plan. These investors (typically corporations such as VISA and PayPal) must put up $10,000,000 each in order to buy a different 'coin' (absolutely NOT Libra). They can trade these 'coins' any way they wish. What these coin holders are buying is the interest the fiat currency they invested in the coins earn as deposits in banks as well as the right to manage the Libra program.

So, for example, banks are paying about 0.2% for deposited money of this size. Therefor, buying $10,000,000 worth of these coins will earn about $20,000 per year in interest. Not a big deal at all. So why bother?

That's where the Libra comes in. Each Libra is a 'stable-coin' which means it is backed up by fiat currency. For example, one Libra is worth $1.00. That means the market does not determine its value - governments do. The 'common man' can buy/sell/trade Libra anyway they wish. They could, for example, store $10.00 worth of Libra on their cellphones and use the cellphone to buy lunch or transfer Libra to others and those Libra will be worth $10.00 at the time.

The Libra they buy (with fiat currency, typically) are fungible - meaning they are all the same; your Libra are EXACTLY the same as my Libra. (Sound like fiat currency to you?)

Where does the fiat currency you used to buy Libra go? Why into a bank, of course. The MUST, because that is what backs up the Libra.

Facebook is looking to create ONE TRILLION DOLLARS worth of Libra, or more. That, because there are about SIX TRILLION DOLLARS worth of transactions A DAY in the world and Facebook wants to 'control' a significant portion of ALL transactions in the world.

And just like those investor funds, the expectation is that this one trillion dollars of bank deposits will earn about 0.2% interest. BUT THAT INTEREST IS NOT PAID TO LIBRA OWNERS. It is paid to the holders of those investor coins. That's right, once a full trillion of Libra are sold, EACH $10,000,000 investor coin will earn $20,000,000 PER YEAR - doubling their worth annually!!! Of course it won't start out that big. Estimates are that the investors will 'only' earn about 30% per year. Not bad, is it?

Don't you wish you could reliably double your worth each year? All you need is $10,000,000 to start with.

Oh, and let's not forget that Facebook makes a ton of money by selling information about its users. Imagine what they can learn about you if they know how much money you spend and on what. And, finally, Facebook is also well known for CENSORSHIP. Could it be that if you are a gun owner, you will find it difficult to buy guns - or cars, or homes, or your kids' tuition - using Libra?
Bitcoins
Vlad
06/27/2019  2:15 AM
Please do elaborate on Libra.

Sure it is far from gold, gold is exactly what you wrote;
But is Bitcoin store of value ? To volatile for that

- will its price stabilise (and do we even want that)
- will its price go "forever up" as it has limited supply
- will it go into obscurity and become worthless

No crystal ball to look into, though I think it will long term be worth more and more, but my belief is not so strong that I'll go in it with more than 10-20% of what I have of "free money".

Now it is an high risk volatile investment.

Just my thoughts/views

Vlad
Bitcoins
James R. Davis
06/26/2019  8:01 PM
Back to bitcoins ...

I've recently heard otherwise very bright financial people characterize bitcoins in a most inappropriate way; they are calling bitcoins DIGITAL GOLD.

WRONG!!!

For a couple of years I found myself buying 1 ounce gold ingots as a 'retirement investment' - you know, SAFE.

I was paying a little over $1,200 per ounce when I started. After two years they were worth about $1,200 per ounce. Only because inflation was so low did I figure I hadn't lost money doing this. But what really opened my eyes was when I realized that you almost cannot spend gold anywhere, and you certainly cannot easily transfer it to someone else (safely), if at all. I sold all of that gold.

Bitcoins can be spent (not in many places, but can be exchanged easily), can be transferred safely instantly anywhere in the world, can be converted to fiat currency (USD, EUR, etc.) just as easily, and so on.

Bitcoins are NOT digital gold.
Bitcoins
James R. Davis
06/26/2019  7:40 PM
This thread has just gotten very interesting!

I'd like to explain a few things to our readers based on what you just said.

As to that remarkable bitcoin (BTC) price gain. Eleven days ago I mentioned that it had risen to $9,000. Right now the price is $13,200. That's astounding growth. And though there was a terrific fall back this morning, the price is more than $1,000 higher right now than it was the same time yesterday.

Why is that? My opinion is that this uptrend is primarily the result of Facebook's announcement of its intention to create a new 'cryptocurrency' called the Libra next year. (The Libra is NOT a cryptocurrency. It would NOT be decentralized from a control point of view. It would NOT be market priced.) It is an attempt to CONTROL financial transaction all over the world! There are about 6 TRILLION dollars worth of transactions around the world every day. Facebook, along with about 100 deep pocket investors (at $10,000,000 each) want to replace fiat currency transactions with their Libra and in the process become the LARGEST MONEY TRANSFER 'company' in the world (and MOST INFLUENTIAL COMPANY AS A RESULT).

Can they do it? It's possible, but UNLIKELY, in my opinion. Why? Because, unlike bitcoin, for example, their plan depends on user TRUST. (Bitcoin transactions are trustless - their are NO MIDDLE-MEN making huge profits and delaying those transactions.) Furthermore, there is an almost certain regulatory hurdle that they will be unable to ignore - the Travel Path requirement that insists that exchanges (money transfer agents) must know BOTH who sends money to them as well as who sends money from them at the same time. Libra is expected to be used largely by people who cannot even get a bank account - thus, they will be 'unknown'.

Anyway, by making their announcement, Facebook has suddenly made a huge part of the world aware of cryptocurrencies like bitcoin. And made arguments that suddenly make the world aware that cryptocurrencies are not JUST a way to gamble. The result, bitcoin prices have risen spectacularly of late.

If interested, I'll explain how Facebook and their 100 deep pocket investors will make a killing with this plan. (Hint: it's called INTEREST.)
Bitcoins
Vlad
06/26/2019  6:37 PM
Not sure what connotations picking has :)
Not promising anything as you know or even asking.

Just offering gateway

Think I read somewhere that Bitcoin will be (or is) banned in India and that made India citizens even more curios on subject...though something like BTC can hardly be made unavailable to people if they really want. But those KYC regulations will make things complicated for buyers as they will have to resort to less reputable exchange (I assume)

Who knows, though I expect some "fear of missing out" will drive price up a bit more.

After 40% gain in 7 days, todays drop is not so unexpected.
Bitcoins
James R. Davis
06/26/2019  6:12 PM
Ha! Picking on US citizens, are you?

Just because you are earning about 20% APR on YOUR money now, that can always drop to 2% in a matter of days - but not likely.

Anyway, I mentioned that bitcoin has often risen (or fallen) by 5% in a day, today was a spectacular example of that. It rose more than 11% today from $12,500 to $13,900, then within a period of just 15 minutes it fell by $2,000 from $13,900 to $11,500, then rose back up to $13,300.

But the interest rate paid for USD stayed nearly constant at 21%.

What a day!!
Bitcoins
Vlad
06/26/2019  5:22 PM

James thank you for sharing your views and thoughts, always a good read.

To me it looks that Bitcoin will again reach it's high price levels so I'll put few hundreds more in it, which is what I can afford to lose in some part if things go south.

If any of you guys who are US residents wish to take part in those loans James mentioned I as non US resident could take a loan from you.... and put it to work




NMI - Just how dangerous is it?
scottrnelson
06/21/2019  5:50 AM
quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

Like you, I find the concept of 'motorcycle societal danger' to be specious and unfounded. But, unlike you, I am of the opinion that riding has become more dangerous than it was in the past. By past, I mean recent years ago.

A few years ago there were NO automobile (or truck) drivers texting or reading smartphone messages while 'controlling' their vehicles. Speed limits are often higher commensurate with increased traffic densities. And yes, we are getting older - meaning our reaction speeds and responses are less and less adequate.
I think I would qualify this as riding being more dangerous "in town". I don't see drivers using cell phones out on the highways and especially the remote roads that I try to seek out where there usually is no cell phone reception.

I'm about to leave for a 600 mile round trip to another state and I'll try to keep track of any cell phone usage that I observe on the freeways - to see if my past observations are accurate.

I absolutely agree that way too many drivers in town are staring at their phones while driving.
NMI - Just how dangerous is it?
James R. Davis
06/20/2019  11:05 AM
Bravo, sir. Again you have demonstrated why your presence here is so much appreciated.

Like you, I find the concept of 'motorcycle societal danger' to be specious and unfounded. But, unlike you, I am of the opinion that riding has become more dangerous than it was in the past. By past, I mean recent years ago.

A few years ago there were NO automobile (or truck) drivers texting or reading smartphone messages while 'controlling' their vehicles. Speed limits are often higher commensurate with increased traffic densities. And yes, we are getting older - meaning our reaction speeds and responses are less and less adequate.

But besides those things mentioned above, there are some constants that remain ignored by those teaching 'motorcycle safety'. The single most frequent cause of student injury during training is the result of dropping a bike. Though the MSF has known this for DECADES, they REFUSE to teach students how to get away from a falling bike without ending up under it and remaining on their feet.

I believe that the MSF beginner rider classes are modestly better than they have been, particularly with their newfound emphasis on attitude, but SELLING MOTORCYCLES should not be part of motorcycle safety training. The inclusion of a tour of a Harely-Davidson sales floor as part of the Rider's Edge curriculum is an obvious example of that.
NMI - Just how dangerous is it?
DataDan
06/20/2019  9:33 AM
quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

In any event, what seems to you to be an inappropriate indicator of danger that they relied upon, VMD, I wonder if you would be so kind as to dissuade me of its significance. It 'seems' a valid perspective, so what am I missing?

I agree with their assessment of rider risk, and I agree with their use of fatalities per vehicle-mile traveled as a metric. On average, we motorcyclists are indeed 38 times as likely to die per mile traveled as car drivers are.

My objections start with their use of motorcycle fatalities per million population, what they call "motorcycle societal danger", in a scary graph purporting to show "an alarming doubling of the motorcycle crash fatality rate of 20 years ago". Deaths per population is NOT a measure of motorcycling risk; it's a measure of motorcycling "burden on society". It has doubled over the past 20 years because the sport has doubled--twice as many riders, twice as many miles ridden.

In fact, the motorcyclist fatality rate (per billion vehicle-miles) is about 20% higher than it was 20 years ago but 45% LOWER than 30 years ago. Further discussion of that difference might be interesting, but the point is that motorcycling is not much more dangerous today than in the past.

I object also to their demonizing of training:

Every state has shown a dramatic increase in motorcycle crash fatalities whenever beginner motorcycle "safety" training has become popular. There are no exceptions.
They offer no evidence for that claim, and I haven't found any elsewhere. The assertion that teaching people how to ride motorcycles causes motorcycle crashes makes as much sense as saying that teaching people how to ski causes skiing mishaps or that teaching people how to write causes spelling errors.


In other threads over the past year I believe I have shown that motorcycling crash risk (not fatality risk) has fallen considerably over the past 30 years--we are less likely to crash per mile ridden than we were in the 1980s. For whatever reason, we've become better riders. But at the same time, lethality--the likelihood of death in the event of a crash--has increased. That I attribute to age and sharing the road vehicles that are less crash-friendly.

quote:
That, I hasten to add, is not an idle or merely courteous request for your feedback, Dan. In our two decades of existence there has never been a member here who has so conistently posted valuable insights and analysis with verifiable data backing up those insights than you. (Thank you, again.)


And thank you.
NMI - Just how dangerous is it?
James R. Davis
06/19/2019  8:20 PM
Maybe it's just my old age, but I confess that I'd forgotten about that old thread.

Further, I found that NMI paper recently and thought, incorrectly, that it was published this month rather than last year. I even edited my post here and added the 2018 date when I realized my error.

In any event, what seems to you to be an inappropriate indicator of danger that they relied upon, VMD, I wonder if you would be so kind as to dissuade me of its significance. It 'seems' a valid perspective, so what am I missing?

That, I hasten to add, is not an idle or merely courteous request for your feedback, Dan. In our two decades of existence there has never been a member here who has so conistently posted valuable insights and analysis with verifiable data backing up those insights than you. (Thank you, again.)
NMI - Just how dangerous is it?
DataDan
06/19/2019  8:00 PM
I'm going to refrain for commenting on the organization and the paper any further than I did in this thread from last year: Nobody Told Me That Motorcycles Are So Dangerous
NMI - Just how dangerous is it?
rkfire
06/18/2019  3:46 PM
Somehow I survived. Imagine 35 years in the construction business of one sort or another, and full time firefighter. I wonder what the death rate of those, compared to say an office job. AND I rode a motorcycle all those years and then some too.

There are parallels in them all too, in that, whether construction, firefighting, or motorcycling, it was learn as you go for me, back in the day. A little different these days.


It took me a few incidents in each to appreciate the danger. Luckily fairly minor ones.


I agree that the MSF should go well beyond what they do in the Basic Class, especially here where the State has mandated all license testing is to be done in the class. No more inspectors to watch riders challenge the skills test.


I had a hunch the extra layer and cost of the MSF class would hinder new riders. There is one big parking lot of a closed factory near me, that they use for the class and there's been some weekends I see no bikes or newbies at all.


I have another hunch. Up here, a lot of new riders are just not bothering to get their M endorsement. It apparently isn't much of a fine, isn't much enforced. I know some of them, and apparently the bike can be registered and insured, even when the owner has no endorsement. Seems odd to me.


It's a small state, so, not sure accident and death rates will show as a trend.
NMI - Just how dangerous is it?
James R. Davis
06/17/2019  9:29 AM
The National Motorcycle Institute (NMI) published an article in June of 2018 that should scare the daylights out of you as riders. Instead of being a biased (for or against) opinion piece, this uses science to analyze data to draw its conclusions. And those conclusions are AWESOME!

They show that in the United States, on a Vehicle Miles Driven basis, motorcycle riders have a greater than 38 (THIRTY EIGHT!!!) times higher fatality expectation than do automobile drivers. You are 38 times more likely to DIE from riding a motorcycle than driving an automobile.

Did that get your attention?

See the article here:
https://www.motorcycleinstitute.org...-told-me.pdf

I have the highest regard possible for the folks at NMI. This paper is an example of why that's so.

In the 38 motorcycle civil cases I've worked as an expert witness, I found that in ONLY ONE case the motorcyclist did not in any way contribute to the cause of the accident - JUST ONE!!!

Note, that does not mean that motorcyclists CAUSED the accidents (though in several cases they did), just that their behaviors contributed to that cause or to the severity of injuries that resulted.

We can do better than that. And the MSF can do a lot more to help reduce motorcycle 'accidents' than simply teaching 'fundamentals'. SAFETY is in their name - but SALES would be more meaningful.
Bitcoins
James R. Davis
06/15/2019  7:09 PM
Hmmmm. I can't figure out why members here would send me an e-mail instead of posting to the thread so that others can benefit. In any event, I just got an e-mail that said that the writer doubted anybody would pay me 1% A DAY for USD (365% APR).

Believe it! When someone borrows fiat (USD) on an exchange it can ONLY be used to buy a cryptocurrency - in other words, use somebody else's money along with their own to margin buy more than they can using only their own money.

Suppose that you believe that BTC will go up in price by 5% in a day, then the 1% they pay in interest is a GREAT DEAL for them - if they're right. Many, many times, BTC will move at least 5% in one day - but remember, that goes both ways (up and down).

Anyway, traders can do margin trades on virtually any cryptocurrency, which means they sometimes borrow BTC, for example, instead of fiat (USD). They would do that if they thought that the BTC would go down instead of up. In other words, they borrow 'expensive' BTC so that they can sell it, then, after it has gone down, buy the 'cheaper' BTC to liquidate their loan.

Bitcoins
James R. Davis
06/15/2019  4:48 PM
Though I'm disappointed in what appears to be a lack of interest by our members relative to cryptocurrencies (Bitcoin, Ethereum, etc.), the posts that have been made here evidence some strong knowledge about them and so I think a more generalized post is in order.

At the end of 2017 a single bitcoin was worth over $19,000. One year later that single bitcoin was worth only $3,900. A huge decrease, to be sure. Today, a single bitcoin is worth $9,000.

That's volatility personified.

But things beside volatility have also happened. For example, there are now 'side chains' and a 'lighting network' that have come into being in order to handle huge volumes of bitcoin transactions without slowing transaction speeds. When the blockchain transactions got high, the cost to make a transfer rose as miners accepted transactions not on a first-come-first-served basis, but based on the attached transaction fees and bandwidth of the network was inadequate to handle all transactions immediately. The cost of transactions has returned to trivial levels as a result of the new methods.

Interestingly, to me, is that the IRS has had absolutely no idea how to handle gains and losses of cryptocurrency transactions. Treating them like they were commodity transactions required that you had to document the buy and sell prices on each transaction. I had over 35,000 trades (transactions) in 2017 and more than half were between different cryptocurrencies (BTC/ETH, for example). It took me over a month of effort to prepare my tax return for that reason. The IRS is expected to publish a whitepaper on the subject later this year.

Cryptocurrency transactions are often used by the criminal element because they are NEARLY anonymous. (They are not, actually, but they are hard to follow - usually.) For that reason the US regulators have made it increasingly difficult for its citizens to participate in this ecosystem. Indeed, many foreign exchanges have decided to simply no longer allow US citizens to use their facilities. Bitfinex, one of the earliest and largest exchanges, no longer allows a US citizen to participate on their sites at all while Poloniex will allow them to trade (buy/sell) but no longer allows them to use margin or to fund margin transactions.

Soon, the regulators will require that exchanges know BOTH their clients and the recipients of any transfers of cryptocurrencies. That's one step beyond 'Know Your Customer' requirements. When that happens you can expect more exchanges to prohibit US citizens from using their sites.

I mentioned margin trading earlier. A word about that ...

I would never, personally, trade margin. Pure gambling and dangerous as could be. But huge profits and losses are easily obtained doing so and for those who wish to do so, have at it. On the other hand, I financed OTHERS who wanted to do so. That is, I lent USD to traders for use in their margin trading. No matter what happened to those margin trades (win or lose), I was ALWAYS paid my interest, and paid FIRST. For two years in a row I earned well over 20% per year in interest doing that. On rare occasion I earned over 1% PER DAY on my money doing that. The regulators here in the US have put a stop to that. Period. (Bitfinex is currently paying 16% APR for USD margin funds.)

In other words, bitcoins are alive and thriving and their trading created interesting (pun intended) side markets.

So there ... a few generalized words to play with.
Near miss this morning
scottrnelson
06/11/2019  6:30 PM
quote:
Originally posted by tmonroe

Actually Scott, I sort of half-way expected you might give me a little grief for occasionally glancing down at my phone.
If you're not touching it, you'll get no grief from me. No different from using a GPS in my book. And I'm occasionally guilty of touching a few GPS buttons while riding, which probably isn't the safest thing to do if anything is happening at the time. But today I was a good boy and stopped the few times I needed to fiddle with my GPS.
Near miss this morning
tmonroe
06/11/2019  5:34 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scottrnelson

It appears that the guy was making a lane change from behind you and cut it a bit close. Did you have less than two feet of clearance? If not, I would call that normal commute traffic, at least based on when I used to commute in California.

I don't see anything that you should have done differently. I would have been shaking my head after that, but otherwise keep on riding.



Actually Scott, I sort of half-way expected you might give me a little grief for occasionally glancing down at my phone. I don't think you can see it in the video, but I have an app called "Waze" open, and it gives me information about traffic volume and hazards in more-or-less real time. I'll check it from time to time to give me an idea if there is heavy traffic (or anything else) coming up. If I know there is an upcoming backup, I can start adjusting for the possibility of having to stop quickly.
Near miss this morning
tmonroe
06/11/2019  5:26 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scottrnelson

It appears that the guy was making a lane change from behind you and cut it a bit close. Did you have less than two feet of clearance? If not, I would call that normal commute traffic, at least based on when I used to commute in California.

I don't see anything that you should have done differently. I would have been shaking my head after that, but otherwise keep on riding.



I could have easily reached out and touched his car.

I'm actually very used to vehicles I'm overtaking coming into my lane - I don't even consider those close cases anymore.

I posted video, and the original video is high enough quality that his plate number is easily readable. Plus I posted this on a few forums where LEOs might see. I figure I've done my part - if this guy is a habitual offender, it will catch up with him eventually.
Near miss this morning
kilodelta
06/09/2019  9:06 PM
I think it's ironic that the guy had a "Share the Road" plate.
Near miss this morning
scottrnelson
06/07/2019  10:38 AM
It appears that the guy was making a lane change from behind you and cut it a bit close. Did you have less than two feet of clearance? If not, I would call that normal commute traffic, at least based on when I used to commute in California.

I don't see anything that you should have done differently. I would have been shaking my head after that, but otherwise keep on riding.
Near miss this morning
tmonroe
06/06/2019  10:12 PM
https://youtu.be/j0babxtIRVM

I uploaded 3 minutes - the first 2 and a half minutes are very boring - just wanted to show that this was completely out of the blue.


The driver had a Washington State "Share the road with bicyclists" plate

I have the plate number - and a high quality, full video of my entire commute - does anybody have any idea where I could report this (would like the driver to at least get some kind of warning about this).
Wendy Moon Archive / Wendy Moon Obituary
Wendy Moon's Obituary
CrtrTylr
05/29/2019  4:55 PM
10 years later and I'm reading this for the first time.

A peek inside the mind of a very passionate rider/writer. Strongly suggest "I am a motorcycle" when you have time.
[/quote]
Motorcycle Safety / General Discussion
Indiana motorcycle crash data 2018
DataDan
05/23/2019  8:46 AM
Very well done state crash data publication from Indiana, via Indiana University, here: Indiana Traffic Safety Facts--Motorcycles 2018 (300K PDF).

Bottom line: Crashes and crash rate are down 2014-2018. It also covers subjects motorcyclists often ask about beyond the basic counts and rates--age, alcohol, at-fault %, helmet use, licensing.

It's a nicely designed document, too. Thumbs-up to the Indiana University Public Policy Institute.
Helmet color and visibility
scottrnelson
05/22/2019  2:56 PM
Comparing any light color to black doesn't answer my original question.

In any case, I received my new fluorescent orange dual sport helmet recently and that thing is bright. I'm sure it will stand out from other traffic enough to help me get noticed. Not that I count on anybody noticing me, but every little advantage I can get is a good thing.
Helmet color and visibility
Baggsy
05/21/2019  7:03 PM
It's possible that people look for white helmets more, because in some jurisdictions that's what motorcycle police officers wear. Here's a New Zealand study that makes claims about white helmets: https://www.bmj.com/content/328/7444/857

"Compared with wearing a black helmet, use of a white helmet was associated with a 24% lower risk (multivariate odds ratio 0.76, 0.57 to 0.99). "
Helmet color and visibility
scottrnelson
05/04/2019  4:18 PM
I asked this question on another forum, got a whole lot of opinions, some conflicting with others, and one good link: http://smarter-usa.org/research/con...ity-highviz/

That link didn't directly cover helmet color and which is most visible, but it covered a lot of related stuff and had links to a lot of different studies. Some of them even mentioned helmet color, but I couldn't find any conclusions about the helmet color specifically. Interesting light configurations and bright riding gear were covered in several.

Ultimately I didn't find the answer to whether or not white helmets are more visible than other bright colors. And next time somebody makes that claim based on "a study", I'm going to call them on it an see if they can point me at even a single one.
Helmet color and visibility
rkfire
05/03/2019  3:55 PM
Purely based on decades old memory, I remember it being said there was a study of what color made the most noticeable fire engine. The yellowish/greenish version won. I have no link or anything to corroborate.
Helmet color and visibility
Alan_Hepburn
05/01/2019  9:57 AM
Don't know of any studies, but our helmets are what BILT calls "day-glo" - bright yellow - and we find they are very visible. Especially to bugs!
NTSB investigates multiple-vehicle motorcycle crash in Maine
DataDan
05/01/2019  9:27 AM
quote:
Originally posted by onthebeach

The NTSB report lists 3,000 motorcyclists. I don't know if that is 3,000 motorcycles or potentially 1,5000 motorcycles each with a rider/passenger pair. Either way a lot of motorcycles. So one take away would be that riding in a really large group should be carefully considered as you are at risk from other riders. I suspect there is added danger from riders trying to stay together which will be quite difficult without dedicated traffic control.

The NTSB report listed 5 motorcycles with 5 operators, 4 passengers. Only one operator was using a helmet as was one passenger on a different bike. The report only called out one rider and passenger as being required to wear a helmet, neither were. So 2 helmets for 9 people.

I would guess that in a state in which only SOME riders are required to wear a helmet compliance may be low due to police not being able to look at a rider and immediately know if they are required to use one.

I am not claiming that helmets would have prevented death or injury in this event, just commenting on the lack of helmet use even by those for whom required.

You make a good point about enforcement when a helmet law has exceptions. In practice, the requirement becomes an add-on ticket when a motorcyclist gets pulled over for something else. Michigan's 2012 helmet law repeal (see this thread) requires a helmet for motorcyclists under age 21, but from 2012-2017, 20% of crash-involved riders under 21 were unhelmeted.

The unhlemeted Sportster rider in this crash was required to wear one because it had been less than a year since he got his motorcycle endorsement. His passenger, also unhelmeted, was required to wear one because he was. He died from "blunt force trauma to the chest", according to the NTSB report. She bailed (at 25mph) before impact and broke her ankle.

The second rider killed collided with the pickup in the #3 lane, after it had caromed off the median guardrail. He was wearing a full-face helmet and died of "multiple blunt force injuries".
NTSB investigates multiple-vehicle motorcycle crash in Maine
onthebeach
04/30/2019  3:22 PM
The NTSB report lists 3,000 motorcyclists. I don't know if that is 3,000 motorcycles or potentially 1,5000 motorcycles each with a rider/passenger pair. Either way a lot of motorcycles. So one take away would be that riding in a really large group should be carefully considered as you are at risk from other riders. I suspect there is added danger from riders trying to stay together which will be quite difficult without dedicated traffic control.

The NTSB report listed 5 motorcycles with 5 operators, 4 passengers. Only one operator was using a helmet as was one passenger on a different bike. The report only called out one rider and passenger as being required to wear a helmet, neither were. So 2 helmets for 9 people.

I would guess that in a state in which only SOME riders are required to wear a helmet compliance may be low due to police not being able to look at a rider and immediately know if they are required to use one.

I am not claiming that helmets would have prevented death or injury in this event, just commenting on the lack of helmet use even by those for whom required.

Helmet color and visibility
scottrnelson
04/30/2019  3:22 PM
I was recently at the local Cycle Gear store getting a new rear tire for my KTM (original lasted 3200 miles) and was looking at their helmets. I'm due for a new dual sport helmet and was trying to find the right one.

While trying on helmets I determined the Shoei Hornet fits right, but they're only available in black, grey, or white. I want bright yellow or orange.

The sales guy said that studies have determined that white is the most visible helmet color, but I don't believe it. If I'm riding in traffic and one fourth of the cars and trucks are white, I believe that I blend right in with traffic, while a yellow or orange helmet stands out more because the color is different from just about everything in the background. I know that yellow shows up a bit better than orange in overcast conditions, but I feel that my orange helmet is just as bright in full sunlight.

So I've been trying to find a study that has determined which motorcycle helmet colors are most visible and I can't seem to find anything. Do any of you know of such a study? And does it say that white is the most visible?
NTSB investigates multiple-vehicle motorcycle crash in Maine
Alan_Hepburn
04/30/2019  10:48 AM
Seems to me that a run of that size absollutely NEEDS a police presence for traffic control if nothing else...
NTSB investigates multiple-vehicle motorcycle crash in Maine
DataDan
04/29/2019  9:46 AM
In September 2017, the United Bikers of Maine held their annual toy run to collect Christmas gifts for needy kids. During the ride, in which 3000 motorcyclists participated, an accident involving five motorcycles and a pickup killed two and injured four. In addition to the normal investigation by state authorities, the US DOT's National Transportation Safety Board also looked into the incident. Though better known for probing plane crashes, the NTSB also sometimes investigates highway crashes. Readers here may be interested in the results.

I have included the NTSB's summary below. The full report (15-page PDF) includes much more detail, and crash scene photos (PDF, vehicles not victims) are also available. The crash occurred here (Google Maps link).

As a result of the NTSB investigation, UBM have excluded the group ride from their planned 2019 event, though donations will still be collected, according to this story in the Brunswick Times Record.




Motorcycle and Pickup Truck Crash During "Toy Run" Group Ride

Executive Summary

About noon on Sunday, September 10, 2017, an estimated 3,000 motorcyclists gathered at the Augusta Civic Center in Augusta, Kennebec County, Maine, to participate in the 36th annual United Bikers of Maine (UBM) Toy Run, a charity event in which motorcyclists join in a group ride, bringing a toy to the gathering. From the civic center, the motorcyclists were first to travel north on Interstate 95 (I-95) between exits 112B and 113. They were to enter I-95 using the on-ramp north of exit 112B and to depart I-95 at exit 113. After leaving the interstate, the motorcyclists were to proceed east on Route 3/202 and then south on Route 32, reaching their destination at the Windsor Fairgrounds.

As the UBM Toy Run began, the large number of motorcyclists merging onto the interstate caused a traffic queue on northbound I-95 between exits 112B and 113. The motorcycles were queued in a staggered formation. The distance between the exits is only about 0.5 mile and, in the northbound merge area, the roadway transitions from four to three lanes (left, center, and right lanes). At the crash location, the northbound roadway consisted of these three lanes. There was no traffic control, lane closure, or law enforcement presence on I-95 to provide warning, management, or protection for the queue of motorcyclists.

About 12:05 p.m., a 2007 Harley-Davidson XL 1200 motorcycle (vehicle 1), which was participating in the group ride, suddenly moved out of the right lane, traveled across the center lane, and entered the left lane in front of a 2008 Ford F250 pickup truck (vehicle 2), occupied by a 67-year-old male driver and a 99-year-old female passenger, which was traveling north on I-95. The motorcycle was carrying a 25-year-old male operator and a 26-year-old female passenger. Based on skid mark evidence, the pickup truck driver attempted an evasive maneuver but collided with the motorcycle at about mile marker 112.5, losing control of his vehicle, in part because the pickup truck had "collected" the Harley-Davidson XL 1200 motorcycle, causing the pickup truck to rotate clockwise. The pickup truck veered out of the left lane to the right and traveled across the center and right northbound lanes, striking four other motorcycles.

The pickup truck then went through the right guardrail, overturned, and came to rest on its passenger side. The 2007 Harley-Davidson motorcycle traveled through the guardrail and came to rest on its right side in a ditch beside the pickup truck.

As a result of the crash, two motorcyclists died. One motorcyclist and the pickup truck passenger received serious injuries. The pickup truck driver and four motorcyclists received minor injuries.

Probable Cause

The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of the Augusta, Maine, crash was the motorcycle operator's unsafe maneuver in moving in front of the pickup truck. Contributing to this crash was the failure of the city of Augusta Police Department and the Toy Run event organizer, United Bikers of Maine, to identify and mitigate the risks associated with routing a group ride onto an interstate without providing supplemental traffic control or state police oversight.


US motorcycle crash data 2017
DataDan
04/17/2019  12:28 PM
Crashes by motorcycle type and rider age

Which bikes crash most, cruisers or sportbikes? That provocative question has been a hot topic of discussion since before the internet. I'm afraid I can't answer it because there is no data available on exposure--annual miles ridden by motorcycle type. Counts can be compared--more of these crash than those--but likelihood of a crash can't be compared without additional information.

Nevertheless, I offer this for your consideration:

Crash Involvement by Motorcycle Style and Rider Age, 2013-2017

STYLE................%CRASHES.....%FATALS....CRASH AGE...FATAL AGE
------------------------------------------------------------------
cruiser.................41%.........40%..........44..........48
sport...................29%.........36%..........30..........31
touring.................16%.........15%..........50..........54
scooter..................5%..........2%..........42..........50
traditional..............4%..........3%..........37..........40
enduro...................2%..........2%..........38..........46
dirt.....................2%..........2%..........25..........29

combined...............100%........100%..........40..........43

Percentages are fraction of all police-reported motorcycle crashes by bike type. This breakdown is possible because "style" is now a published datum in the NHTSA databases, via auto industry marketing information company R.L. Polk. We probably wouldn't agree with all the classifications, but they seem to reflect a good understanding of the market.

Cruisers are mostly Harleys, 67%, but some Harleys are touring. Sportbikes are the Gixxers you expect, but also my FJR. Traditionals are standards, including most older bikes. Dirt bikes are mostly street legal but also include motorcrossers. Enduros comprise the full range of adventure bikes, from 250s up to BMW R1200GS.

A few observations: For all classes except sportbikes, fatal crash involvement is lower than all crash involvement. IOW, sportbike crashes tend to be deadlier. OTOH, scooter crashes are much less likely to be fatal. Ages are pretty much what you'd expect from knowing who usually rides what. One exception is scooters; crash age is older than I would have expected. Note that for all groups, fatality age is higher than crash age. This supports my claim that crash lethality increases with age, discussed in the thread Vulnerability of older riders in motorcycle crashes.


Data from NHTSA's Crash Report Sampling System (2016-2017), General Estimates System, Fatality Analysis Reporting System.
Iowa Motorcycle Safety Event
Linacruise1467
04/12/2019  5:23 AM

When will next event happen again? I have attended this event, it was great for all bike lovers. It got a ticket of this event after facing many difficulties from https://www.reecoupons.com/view/flo...cket-station, please do notify me whenever it will happen.




Motorcycle Crash Causation Study--NTSB recommendations
DataDan
04/08/2019  12:06 PM
The 351 Orange County, CA, crashes investigated for the MCCS, by design, all resulted in motorcyclist injury. Thus, they are not quite representative of all motorcycle crashes, since around 15% of police-reported crashes in the area are non-injury. Moreover, they also involve a greater percentage of fatalities, 11.4%, while state records show that 2.7% of motorcycle crashes in the county were fatal, 2015-2017.

As part of the study, 702 non-crashers were interviewed at times and places similar to the crashes as a sample of the population from which the riders came. Here are a few crasher/non-crasher comparisons:

.......................|...more likely..|..less likely..
.......................|....to crash....|...to crash....
group ride.............|................|.......X.......
no training............|.......X........|...............
self-taught............|................|.......X.......
< 3 years experience...|.......X........|...............
age <= 30..............|.......X........|...............


Here are some results that need elaboration:
  • Attention failure contributed to 32% of crashes.

  • Motorcyclist's traffic scan contributed significantly to multiple-vehicle crashes.

  • Motorcycle speed compared to surrounding traffic contributed significantly (though it doesn't say "high" or "low").

  • Alcohol or drugs involved in 13% of crashes.

Finally, here are two inscrutable conclusions, interpretation of which I leave to you:
  • Situation incompatibility contributed to 25% of crashes.

  • Compensation failure contributed to 23% of crashes.
Motorcycle Crash Causation Study--NTSB recommendations
DataDan
04/05/2019  7:41 PM
quote:
Originally posted by scottrnelson

Page 37:
quote:
38 - If First Harmful Event Is a Noncollision

Overturns (90 percent) were the dominant type of the first harmful event for the MC or OV in noncollision.

I'm trying to understand this one. Motorcycles pretty much always tip over when you crash them. Were there 10 percent of cases where the bike somehow stayed upright?


Probably not. I don't know how the term is defined for these investigations, but NHTSA documents on their crash data publications define it thusly: The First Harmful Event is defined as the first injury or damage producing event of the crash. NHTSA also refers to an ANSI manual, so it is apparently a standard term.

From NHTSA, here is a list of possible First Harmful Events for a non-collision:

rollover/overturn
fire/explosion
immersion or partial immersion
gas inhalation
jackknife (harmful to this vehicle)
injured in vehicle (non-collision)
pavement surface irregularity (ruts, potholes, grates, etc.)
other non-collision
thrown or falling object
cargo/equipment loss or shift (harmful to this vehicle)
fell/jumped from vehicle
Motorcycle Crash Causation Study--NTSB recommendations
scottrnelson
04/05/2019  6:48 AM
quote:
Originally posted by DataDan

I hereby resolve to find 3 things and post them up on Monday!

Okay, here are the first three interesting things that I found in the report.

Page 31:
quote:
3 - First Harmful Event for Motorcycle

95.1 percent of single-vehicle crashes first collided with a "Fixed Roadside Object."
I find that interesting because two out of three times that I've managed to crash a motorcycle the only object I hit was the road. The other time it was a guard rail.

Page 32:
quote:
10 - Crash Configuration

Left-turn scenarios were the most common crash configuration, followed by falling to avoid crash and running off the roadway.

I also find this intersting - "falling to avoid crash". That has to be a training problem when a rider basically crashes to avoid crashing. Maybe it has to do with poor braking skills. I learned from lots of dirt bike riding that you don't ever give up. There's always hope of "saving it".

Page 37:
quote:
38 - If First Harmful Event Is a Noncollision

Overturns (90 percent) were the dominant type of the first harmful event for the MC or OV in noncollision.

I'm trying to understand this one. Motorcycles pretty much always tip over when you crash them. Were there 10 percent of cases where the bike somehow stayed upright?
Motorcycle Crash Causation Study--NTSB recommendations
DataDan
04/04/2019  7:02 PM
The final report is now available from the Federal Highway Administration here: Motorcycle Crash Causation Study: Final Report. Two other big documents are available on the project website, but seem to be more about conduct of the study than information of interest to motorcyclists. Raw data is available, but only on special request.

I could say I was "disappointed" but that's not true, because my expectations had dropped to about zero over the past 10+ years. The 100-page report isn't remotely near the standard set by Hurt--scoff as you may at his archaic data compilation methods on 1970s computers, or production with hand-drawn graphs and IBM Selectric "typesetting". Hurt was a motorcyclist, and he produced his report for other motorcyclists. We learned a great deal from it.

This one was done by the federal government to satisfy the requirements of pork-barrel legislation. Not only that, the project was handed off to a state agency, where it was run by a goldbrick equally uninterested in motorcycles. Further, the real work--the same kind done by Hurt's motivated crew of grad students--was contracted out, again, to parties with no interest, no skin in the game. And it cost so much more than Hurt's that only 351 crashes were investigated, compared to 900 in Hurt, and is thus much lower in statistical power.

I haven't looked closely at the report yet. However, I did a search for "experience" since that's a Hurt result I'm familiar with. Very little turned up. Same with "age". I'll be looking for more in the next few days.

Here's my challenge to those of you left on this forum: Find something interesting in it. Something that makes you a better rider, makes you go "huh!", explains a phenomenon you've observed--and report back in this thread. The report's findings are in section 3, starting on page 31. They are divided into: time and place, environment, contributing factors, comparison to controls, and some stuff about passengers I skimmed right past.

I hereby resolve to find 3 things and post them up on Monday!
Bitcoins
James R. Davis
03/03/2019  7:50 PM
Thank you.

Now what would be nice is if the value of bitcoins and Ethereum would recover some of what they lost in the last year.
Bitcoins
Night Train
03/03/2019  3:53 PM
James, I've been away for awhile and just stopped by the check things out and pick up some refreshers for the upcoming riding season.

I came across this post and I have to tell you it's one of the best pieces of news I've seen for a long time. Glad to hear you are cancer free and was in a position to avail of the experimental procedure.

All the best to you and yours,

quote:
Originally posted by James R. Davis

Let me tell you a story. (Another example of being in the right place at the right time.)

Six months ago I was diagnosed with cancer. At my age (74) there are only two standard medical procedures to deal with it: radical surgery and Radiation. Typically, with a slowly growing cancer, the doctors recommend 'do nothing' but monitor it (quality of life issues). But there is an experimental procedure available that has far fewer side-effects than those other procedures. The problem is that no insurance company will pay for it and the procedure costs $30,000.

I elected to have that procedure performed. I sold $30,000 worth of Ethereum and withdrew the cash into my bank. Within a few days, I paid my doctor $30,000 for the procedure. Three weeks ago my lab tests verified that I am now cancer free.

Oh, within two months of my USD withdrawal I had earned more than the $30,000 I took out.

In a way, one could argue that Ethereum saved my life. (Exaggeration, of course.)

Motorcycle Safety and Dynamics - available now
scottrnelson
01/31/2019  2:22 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Linacruise1467

From where I can get your book? Its available on online stores?

Go here https://www.msgroup.org/ and click on the book that you want to buy. It will point you in the right direction.

I have both books and have shared them with other riders over the years.
Motorcycle Safety and Dynamics - available now
Linacruise1467
01/17/2019  2:08 AM
From where I can get your book? Its available on online stores?
US motorcycle crash data 2017
DataDan
01/15/2019  10:09 AM
Well, I procrastinated for 3 months after downloading the database. So there's that.

The crash investigation itself takes a while for a fatality. The California crash database published by CHP has both the crash date and the date processed into the database. For fatalities it takes an average of 5 months to be entered, for minor injury crashes 1.5 months.

After the investigation is complete and the report written, it goes to NHTSA (part of US DOT) to be transformed into FARS database format. Some of that process is automated, of course. Date, time, location, etc. are just moved from one place to another. Coded items are easy, too: "M" for male in the CHP database becomes "1" in FARS.

Then comes the hard part: turning the investigating officer's words and pictures into numeric codes. Here's an example of how one crash appears. From the illustrated crash narrative, someone had to describe it in numbers (which I then translated back to words):

vehicle number.....................|1............................................|2
direction of travel................|east.........................................|west
trafficway flow....................|two-way, not divided.........................|two-way, not divided
roadway alignment..................|curve right .................................|straight
roadway profile....................|level........................................|level
relation to junction...............|non-junction ................................|non-junction
traffic control device.............|warning sign.................................|warning sign
body type..........................|two-wheel motorcycle.........................|light pickup
vehicle model year.................|1991.........................................|1991
vehicle make.......................|Harley-Davidson..............................|Toyota
model..............................|FLSTF........................................|PICKUP
age................................|36...........................................|40
sex................................|male.........................................|male
driver drinking....................|drinking.....................................|not drinking
alcohol test result................|0.08.........................................|not tested
protection system use..............|DOT-compliant motorcycle helmet .............|lap and shoulder belt used
driver injury severity.............|fatal........................................|none
occupant deaths....................|1............................................|0
registered owner...................|driver registered owner......................|driver registered owner
non-CDL license status.............|valid........................................|valid
driver license type compliance.....|valid license for this class vehicle.........|valid license for this class vehicle
previous suspensions...............|0............................................|2
manner of collision................|not collision with motor vehicle.............|not collision with motor vehicle
first harmful event................|overturn/rollover............................|overturn/rollover
most harmful event.................|motor vehicle in transport on same roadway...|motor vehicle in transport on same roadway
lane splitting.....................|no...........................................|
pre-event movement.................|negotiating a curve .........................|going straight
critical pre-crash event...........|lost control--unknown cause..................|other vehicle encroaching from opposite
...................................|.............................................|direction over left lane line
crash avoidance maneuver...........|unknown......................................|no avoidance maneuver
pre-crash stability................|skidding laterally, clockwise rotation ......|tracking
pre-impact location................|stayed on roadway; left original travel lane |stayed in original travel lane
crash type.........................|other........................................|other
initial contact point..............|non-collision ...............................|12 o'clock
speed limit........................|55...........................................|55
travel speed.......................|55...........................................|35
speed related......................|no...........................................|no
primary collision factor...........|under the influence of alcohol or drug.......|not at fault
driver related factors.............|none.........................................|none
driver distracted by...............|not distracted...............................|not distracted
driver impaired by.................|unknown if impaired..........................|none/apparently normal
violations charged.................|none.........................................|none
vision obscured by.................|no obstruction noted.........................|no obstruction noted
vehicle factors....................|none ........................................|none
...................................|.............................................|
event sequence.....................|striking vehicle: impact point...............|struck vehicle: impact point
cross centerline ..................|1:non-harmful event..........................|
rollover/overturn .................|1:non-collision..............................|
vehicle strikes object ............|1:other objects set-in-motion................|2:12 o'clock
set in motion by another...........|.............................................|
motor vehicle in transport ........|1:6 o'clock..................................|2:12 o'clock
  Jump To:
All Things (Safety Oriented) Motorcycle © Master Strategy Group Go To Top Of Page
  This page was generated in 1.16 seconds. Powered By: Snitz Forums 2000 Version 3.4.05