| Member |
 Discussion Topic  |
|
gymnast
Moderator
4260 Posts
[Mentor]
Meridian, Idaho
USA
Harley-Davidson
Sportster Sport
|
 Posted - 09/02/2009 : 5:15 PM
|
Rtbain, your comments seem to have strayed off from a drill related to early hazard detection and sub-threshold braking to a discussion of your braking on dry lake surfaces at speeds that have no relevance to riding a motorcycle within three standard deviations of normal conditions of use. Do you have a rational conclusion to your comments?
Are you familiar with the term "Roadcraft" which is the title of this particular Forum and the context in which the original post was presented? |
Edited by - gymnast on 09/02/2009 5:22 PM |
 |
|
redsled
Ex-Member
|
Posted - 09/09/2009 : 10:49 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Niebor
...
What I rode off with: It seems far more important we focus on early recognition and slow braking, rather than personal best for braking threshold. By challenging myself to average under .3, and to consider .5g utter failure, I give myself a much greater margin.
Thoughts?
I like this approach. For daily freeway commuting I have adopted a philosophy that treats the need for *any* braking as a crash - in other words, I should always be anticipating far enough ahead to avoid the need for using my brakes at all. And if I do need them then it's a "crash." Slightly different take on your concept, but directionally similar. Remember Top Gun and the 10,000' hard floor they practiced with? Same idea. |
|
|
galileo
Ex-Member
|
Posted - 09/23/2009 : 2:01 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by Niebor
Three of us met today in Colorado Springs, intent on working a braking skills challenge. This challenge had a little twist. Instead of trying to see how fast we could stop, the focus was keeping peak braking level below given thresholds. We made some very interesting observations. Among them was that our practical limit with no lockup was about .7g. We worked out in the range of 2.5 to just over .7gs. All three of us were very comfortable at .5gs. When we neared .7 each of us either had a lockup or felt lockup was impending. Indeed, one each; front, rear, lockup impending. The front lockup appeared to be induced by a roughly 3/8 crack in the pavement.
What I rode off with: It seems far more important we focus on early recognition and slow braking, rather than personal best for braking threshold. By challenging myself to average under .3, and to consider .5g utter failure, I give myself a much greater margin.
Thoughts?
Finally, I found some research that proves this concept which can be seen here:
http://ppc.uiowa.edu/driving-assess...nMortons.pdf
They used .45 g's as the cut-off so it could be compared with previous studies. They also looked at .3 g's.
The findings were for newer teenage drivers. About 95% of the braking incidents above .45 g's were due driver error as documented by videos taken of the incidents.
|
|
|
galileo
Ex-Member
|
Posted - 09/23/2009 : 9:19 PM
|
Here is another study done by the NHTSA published in February 2009. It applies to cars, but I think a lot would apply to motorcycles.
http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/DO...9/811091.pdf
This is a chart which summarizes a critical idea. Baseline epoch events include more than .3 g's on any axis as well as other things such as the eyes moving to a distracted place, and a whole bunch of other stuff that can't be measured easily.
What amazes me is there are drivers who only exceed .3 g's in any axis plus all the other conditions once about every 5,000 miles. (The events on the chart are per million vehicle miles.) These are also the safest drivers.
I know some people don't like technology, but when I get the g-meter, I'll be able to answer the question "Am I a safe rider" fairly scientifically. I'll also be able to get the data that will help me become safer. |
|
|
|
Discussion Topic |
|
|
|
Braking Skills Challenge