quote:Originally posted by James R. DavisLike 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.
quote:Originally posted by James R. DavisIn 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?
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.)
quote:Originally posted by tmonroeActually Scott, I sort of half-way expected you might give me a little grief for occasionally glancing down at my phone.
quote:Originally posted by scottrnelsonIt 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.
quote:Originally posted by onthebeachThe 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.
quote:Originally posted by scottrnelsonPage 37:quote:38 - If First Harmful Event Is a NoncollisionOverturns (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?
quote:38 - If First Harmful Event Is a NoncollisionOverturns (90 percent) were the dominant type of the first harmful event for the MC or OV in noncollision.
quote:Originally posted by DataDanI hereby resolve to find 3 things and post them up on Monday!
quote:3 - First Harmful Event for Motorcycle95.1 percent of single-vehicle crashes first collided with a "Fixed Roadside Object."
quote:10 - Crash ConfigurationLeft-turn scenarios were the most common crash configuration, followed by falling to avoid crash and running off the roadway.
quote:Originally posted by James R. DavisLet 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.)
quote:Originally posted by Linacruise1467From where I can get your book? Its available on online stores?