Didn't have a chance! [Archive]

Crazy Steve

31st January 2011, 11:59

http://www.bikerpunks.com/mediaviewer/2982/car-passes-motorcycles-and-causes-two-crashes.html
:shit:

Looks like the rider put the bike down before the crash and if he hadn't done that he would of surley been killed..

I also notice the guy that gets out of the Car dosn't run to the motorcyclist and check if he ok....

Over taking a motorbike on a blind corner.. that make me so made ! I would punch fck out of that driver untill he or she was with in a inch of there life !

Crazy Steve.

Edbear

31st January 2011, 12:06

Looks like the rider put the bike down before the crash and if he hadn't done that he would of surley been killed..

I also notice the guy that gets out of the Car dosn't run to the motorcyclist and check if he ok....

Over taking a motorbike on a blind corner.. that make me so made ! I would punch fck out of that driver untill he or she was with in a inch of there life !

Crazy Steve.

Whether overtaking a bike, car, any vehicle at all or simply cutting a blind corner like that makes the driver automatically an idiot of the highest order and leaves one gobsmacked that anyone can drive in such a manner!

Sadly Scummy's right, too, this type of incompetent is found in all countries with a sizeable number in this country! Biggest problem on our roads by far, is the lack of working brain cells in so many people behind the wheel! (Or handlebars too!)

Ronin

31st January 2011, 12:08

I want to see the bit where someone gave the car drive a well deserved assholing.

Interesting to note, the bike in front of the camera car started breaking as soon as the car pulled out, ready for something to go wrong. Well done him.

MIXONE

31st January 2011, 12:09

Where is Katman?I'm sure he would be able to point out the rider's failings in not be able to avoid such an incident.

Kiwi675

31st January 2011, 12:12

Where is Katman?I'm sure he would be able to point out the rider's failings in not be able to avoid such an incident.

Was waiting for that call........:corn:

bogan

31st January 2011, 12:17

Where is Katman?I'm sure he would be able to point out the rider's failings in not be able to avoid such an incident.

which one? cos both of the riders had fuck all foolproof options, hope the driver gets the book thrown at em.

martybabe

31st January 2011, 12:20

Bastard. :mad:

PrincessBandit

31st January 2011, 12:27

Cars, motorcyclists, treadlies, tractors, horses....all have potentially fuckwit operators. Well, maybe not the horses as they can think and move for themselves without a rider.

The driver was a total dick but I *555ed a guy in his shitty WRX who did exactly what that driver did passing us then another car in the same manner through the Parapara's recently. It was just sheer luck that another vehicle (of any kind) wasn't coming when he passed us. As he passed the car in front of us, also on a blind, that car and the oncoming one had to run their left wheels off their respective sides of the road for him to squeeze through.

All it shows is that dicks are found on saddles and behind steering wheels.

blackdog

31st January 2011, 12:30

Could almost have been in NZ - same standard of driving...

"OH, I can't see any oncoming danger so I guess there isn't any danger..."

Sorry SB but this post kind of irks me.

Yes, it could've been in NZ. Equally it could have happened in any country in the world. We don't have a monopoly on fuckwits. For every driver here that might be that completely incompetent there are 1000 (ok maybe 500) others looking at the clip thinking the same as us.

MSTRS

31st January 2011, 12:31

What some of us would like to know is why were the bikes going so slowly that the car driver felt the need to pass them?
:innocent:

Kiwi675

31st January 2011, 12:33

What some of us would like to know is why were the bikes going so slowly that the car driver felt the need to pass them?
:innocent:

Ask Katman:innocent:

MSTRS

31st January 2011, 12:37

Doubt he could help...now that he has renounced speeding and general hooliganism on bikes. He's on 95 points, don't you know?

NighthawkNZ

31st January 2011, 12:39

According some on here it is okay to over take on a blind corner... so what if there is anything coming the other.... :gob:

Seen this before and have the same reaction every time I see it :facepalm:

PrincessBandit

31st January 2011, 12:41

Ask Katman:innocent:

He'll no doubt offer words of wisdom once he's back home. he's just pulled into my driveway.

martybabe

31st January 2011, 12:47

He'll no doubt offer words of wisdom once he's back home. he's just pulled into my driveway.

Quick, draw the curtains and hide!:shit:

Ronin

31st January 2011, 12:53

Quick, draw the curtains and hide!:shit:

Thats not very sisterly.

rustic101

31st January 2011, 18:19

sickening to watch...:sick:

Katman

31st January 2011, 18:27

bogan

31st January 2011, 18:41

Edbear

31st January 2011, 19:19

While I'm not condoning the actions of the car driver in the slightest, did anyone notice the fact that at the start of the clip there is no motorcycle in front of the car?

The bike pulled straight out from the side of the road in front of the car.

well spotted!

I've gone back and looked again, it actually looks as though the car and following bikes caught up to the front bike which was travelling slow whereupon the car driver decided to overtake rather than slow down and wait. Have another look.

Katman

31st January 2011, 19:23

I've gone back and looked again, it actually looks as though the car and following bikes caught up to the front bike which was travelling slow whereupon the car driver decided to overtake rather than slow down and wait. Have another look.

Bullshit - at the 2 second mark you can see the bike parked on the side of the road up ahead.

Kiwi Graham

31st January 2011, 19:37

Yep, sadly Steve is right.
The cause of the accident is a motorcyclist :facepalm:

Edbear

31st January 2011, 19:40

Bullshit - at the 2 second mark you can see the bike parked on the side of the road up ahead.

Although there's no need for profanity, you are possibly correct. After switching to full screen and putting my other specs on, (:innocent:), I can see the bike at that point but the time available isn't enough to be sure it was stationary. Certainly it was on the white line and could have been, however it could also have been moving as it was definitely going slow and the rider didn't seem to be very confident.

paturoa

31st January 2011, 19:43

I'm a fan of keeping to the left hand wheel track for this reason.

PrincessBandit

31st January 2011, 19:48

Yep, sadly Steve is right.
The cause of the accident is a motorcyclist :facepalm:

I don't think Steve actually said outright the bike was the cause - it certainly contributed though. My take is that the car should have been able to see the bike on the side and been prepared for the possibility that it could pull out unexpectedly (hazard awareness and all that). However the bike from the side of the road seems to have picked an extremely bad moment in time to join the traffic flow.

I was trying to work out how soon into his lean the oncoming rider knew he was going to go down. As the OP said, it didn't look like he stood a chance; he was well within his lane - the car should not have been there.

Edbear

31st January 2011, 20:16

I don't think Steve actually said outright the bike was the cause - it certainly contributed though. My take is that the car should have been able to see the bike on the side and been prepared for the possibility that it could pull out unexpectedly (hazard awareness and all that). However the bike from the side of the road seems to have picked an extremely bad moment in time to join the traffic flow.

I was trying to work out how soon into his lean the oncoming rider knew he was going to go down. As the OP said, it didn't look like he stood a chance; he was well within his lane - the car should not have been there.

I agree. The car driver should have braked, yet it seems he/she didn't even slow down. To cross double yellow lines on a blind corner like that amounts to suicide. Imagine if it had been a truck coming the other way?

Madness

31st January 2011, 20:26

I'd like to point out that the vehicle the car was attempting (very badly) to overtake wasn't just a bike, it was a fecking scooter!

musicman

31st January 2011, 20:30

What some of us would like to know is why were the bikes going so slowly that the car driver felt the need to pass them?
:innocent:

This happened in Taiwan, the front 'bike' is in fact a scooter, two-up.

Banditbandit

1st February 2011, 09:38

Where is Katman?I'm sure he would be able to point out the rider's failings in not be able to avoid such an incident.

The riders had no chance ... fuckwit car driver ... by the time the front bike would have seen the car passsing it was way too late to do anything ...

idb

1st February 2011, 10:41

Why were they all on the wrong side of the road...all excepting the car?

onearmedbandit

1st February 2011, 11:28

Fucking Labour party.

idb

1st February 2011, 11:32

Fucking Labour party.

That's not fair - you can't blame global warming on them...

Tink

1st February 2011, 11:59

Interesting to note, the bike in front of the camera car started breaking as soon as the car pulled out, ready for something to go wrong. Well done him.

Good on him... still looking from where that scooter came from, and I got good eyesight! hmmmm

Yep, sadly Steve is right.
The cause of the accident is a motorcyclist :facepalm:

Scooter... I think though if your in a bullet like a car, no matter what idiotic things bikers do, you should have defensive driving up your sleeve, can't change other people but we can change ourselves. (that car could have avoided the scooter surely).

MSTRS

1st February 2011, 12:23

... (that car could have avoided the scooter surely).

To be fair - he nearly did. It was just that inconvenient bike coming the other way...

Banditbandit

1st February 2011, 12:47

Fucking Labour party.

That's not fair - you can't blame global warming on them...

I'm really not sure what the Labour party and Global Warming have to do with this accident ?

Banditbandit

1st February 2011, 12:53

Bullshit - at the 2 second mark you can see the bike parked on the side of the road up ahead.

Yes - I wondered about that - when I first saw the clip I was under the impression there was no bike infront of the car ...

Yep, sadly Steve is right.
The cause of the accident is a motorcyclist :facepalm:

NO! The car did not have to pull out - merely slow down. Yes, the scooter Rider did pull out, but there are no signs of any brake lights on the car or the bikes. You can clearly see the rear bike brake lights come on as the car pulls across the centre line and the rider anticipates trouble (well done) ..

However, the car should never never never have crossed the centre line ... the car was in no danger of running into the scooter - and never braked, just slowed a little then accelerated into a dangerous pass ...

oneofsix

1st February 2011, 13:09

The bike pulled straight out from the side of the road in front of the car.

There is no side road! The scooter is well ahead of the car when first seen so plenty of room for the rider to join traffic, if that is what happened, and the car to react. It more appears to me that the car caught up with the slower bike but didn't give it due regard of being a follow road user.

idb

1st February 2011, 13:10

I'm really not sure what the Labour party and Global Warming have to do with this accident ?

Yes

678910

idb

1st February 2011, 13:11

The NZ rule, as I understand it, is that the following vehicle is always at fault.

Swoop

1st February 2011, 13:14

The cause of the accident is a motorcyclist :facepalm:
I'm sure double yellow lines still mean the same thing in other countries.
The cause of the accident is the (impatient) person failing to keep right.

Katman

1st February 2011, 13:14

There is no side road!

Is English your second language?

bogan

1st February 2011, 13:16

The NZ rule, as I understand it, is that the following vehicle is always at fault.

Which only counts if they are following the vehicle, something pulling out in front does not. Also if the car you're following stops abruptly from hitting something, it generally isn't your fault either.

oneofsix

1st February 2011, 13:20

Also if the car you're following stops abruptly from hitting something, it generally isn't your fault either.

Yeah right, the insurance company that payed out on my car wouldn't argee, neither the cop that attended. You have to travel at speed and distance that allows you to react and stop in the following distance there is no allowance for the reason the front person stops.

bogan

1st February 2011, 13:24

Yeah right, the insurance company that payed out on my car wouldn't argee, neither the cop that attended. You have to travel at speed and distance that allows you to react and stop in the following distance there is no allowance for the reason the front person stops.

I mean stopping really abruptly, as in what they hit caused the car to scrub off a great amount of speed. Numerous nose to tail pile-ups have all been the fault of only the second car back for this reason.

oneofsix

1st February 2011, 13:29

I mean stopping really abruptly, as in what they hit caused the car to scrub off a great amount of speed. Numerous nose to tail pile-ups have all been the fault of only the second car back for this reason.

Think you will find in those cases it is blamed on shunting. The second car back gets the rap cause its deemed they shunted the middle car into the rear of the lead car.

bogan

1st February 2011, 13:33

Think you will find in those cases it is blamed on shunting. The second car back gets the rap cause its deemed they shunted the middle car into the rear of the lead car.

um, the second car back is the middle car. It depends on the order of events whether it was shunting, or a pile up.

idb

1st February 2011, 13:44

Which only counts if they are following the vehicle, something pulling out in front does not. Also if the car you're following stops abruptly from hitting something, it generally isn't your fault either.

It's hard to tell if that's the case here but you might be right.
Sorry, I wasn't paying enought attention to the discussion.

YellowDog

1st February 2011, 13:51

You are not allowed to cross a double centre line.

This is the case in all countries, without exception :yes:

steelphoenix

1st February 2011, 14:38

I think the important thing here is that nobody appears to be seriously injured! You see the oncoming biker stand up, and both the scooter (?) rider and pillion appear to get up okay.

It does appear the scooter pulls out. I can see the car braking (as do the following bikers), and it appears that the entire convoy slows to an adequate speed to match the scooter (judging from the pace of the following bikes matching that of the scooter at the time that the car pulls out). It then appears that the car driver then decides that they want to overtake, and pulls out - into the path of an oncoming bike.

I agree that the scooter's timing was shit, but I also feel that the car may not have had to overtake for safety reasons.

I feel sorry for the poor bastard on the oncoming bike who has the repair bill because of someone else's idiocy! :facepalm:

mattian

1st February 2011, 14:51

I'd like to point out that the vehicle the car was attempting (very badly) to overtake wasn't just a bike, it was a fecking scooter!

Which is probably why Mr. small penis just HAD to get in front of it,.... come hell or high water.

The Stranger

1st February 2011, 15:07

Could almost have been in NZ - same standard of driving...

Was the cage driver a cop?

MSTRS

1st February 2011, 15:08

Also if the car you're following stops abruptly from hitting something, it generally isn't your fault either.

I think you are wrong. You must travel at such distance from the vehicle in front that you can stop short of it, if it stops for any reason.
Generally speaking, in a typical nose to tail, the hind-most car in the pile up gets the blame for all the cars in front. The assumption being that those in the sandwich did stop but got shunted by the last car.

You are not allowed to cross a double centre line.

This is the case in all countries, without exception :yes:

No No NO....
You are not allowed to cross a yellow on your side of the centre line.
A double yellow simply means that neither direction can cross.

Edbear

1st February 2011, 15:13

No No NO....
You are not allowed to cross a yellow on your side of the centre line.
A double yellow simply means that neither direction can cross.

That's a good thing, right...? :yes:

MSTRS

1st February 2011, 15:14

In some places - yes.

Tink

1st February 2011, 15:42

To be fair - he nearly did. It was just that inconvenient bike coming the other way...

I have seen this done in real life! Yet wasnt' a bike was a Ute v Car.

There is no side road! .

I couldn't see the side road either... hmmmmm

I'm sure double yellow lines still mean the same thing in other countries.
.

Driven in America, Germany, England, I wouldn't over take unless the traffic was going in the same direction as me... simple safety.

Is English your second language?

Ok Don't get it!!!!

YellowDog

1st February 2011, 15:47

I think you are wrong. You must travel at such distance from the vehicle in front that you can stop short of it, if it stops for any reason.
Generally speaking, in a typical nose to tail, the hind-most car in the pile up gets the blame for all the cars in front. The assumption being that those in the sandwich did stop but got shunted by the last car.

No No NO....
You are not allowed to cross a yellow on your side of the centre line.
A double yellow simply means that neither direction can cross.

'cos if it was a broken line on one side, they only could cross it.

But this was approaching a blind bend and regardless of lines..................

I downloaded the video and it appears there are some merged breaks in the clip, which makes it hard to get the full picture. The scooter may have been stopped on the dirty stuff on the side of the road. You'd have to wonder why?

There was no road to pull out from. The impatient car driver makes a serious error of judgement. He may have got passed if he hadn't slowed before attempting the manoeuvre.

Amazing how he didn't rush to see if he had killed anyone :no:

Perhaps he was more concerned about the health of his passengers.

Katman

1st February 2011, 15:49

Ok Don't get it!!!!

Where did I say anything about a side-road?

Tink

1st February 2011, 15:52

Where did I say anything about a side-road?

aha! I must have missed the missed part of the missing side road :)

2wheeldrifter

1st February 2011, 16:22

MSTRS

1st February 2011, 16:29

'cos if it was a broken line on one side, they only could cross it.

A broken yellow simply means a solid yellow is being approached. If you are already overtaking, you have the length of the broken to get back on your correct side. (of course, if you have a quick bike, and you can start/complete your passing manouevre in the length of the broken yellow...go for it)

There really is no mystery about what the various yellows mean.

YellowDog

1st February 2011, 16:42

A broken yellow simply means a solid yellow is being approached. If you are already overtaking, you have the length of the broken to get back on your correct side. (of course, if you have a quick bike, and you can start/complete your passing manouevre in the length of the broken yellow...go for it)

There really is no mystery about what the various yellows mean.

Quote from UK Highway code: "Double centre lines where the line nearest to you is broken. This means you may cross the lines to overtake if it is safe, provided you can complete the manoeuvre before reaching a solid line on your side."

I was assuming the rules would be the same for most countries (except for the colour of the lines).

MSTRS

1st February 2011, 16:49

Isn't that what I just said?

Kiwi Graham

1st February 2011, 16:55

Good on him... still looking from where that scooter came from, and I got good eyesight! hmmmm

Scooter... I think though if your in a bullet like a car, no matter what idiotic things bikers do, you should have defensive driving up your sleeve, can't change other people but we can change ourselves. (that car could have avoided the scooter surely).

Yes - I wondered about that - when I first saw the clip I was under the impression there was no bike infront of the car ...

NO! The car did not have to pull out - merely slow down. Yes, the scooter Rider did pull out, but there are no signs of any brake lights on the car or the bikes. You can clearly see the rear bike brake lights come on as the car pulls across the centre line and the rider anticipates trouble (well done) ..

However, the car should never never never have crossed the centre line ... the car was in no danger of running into the scooter - and never braked, just slowed a little then accelerated into a dangerous pass ...

I'm sure double yellow lines still mean the same thing in other countries.
The cause of the accident is the (impatient) person failing to keep right.

people I was using irony here!
Based on the fact Katman appears to blame the motorcyclist in the first instance in motorcycle accidents.
Quite clearly the car crossing the centre line is at fault.
However had it been a motorcyclist that had crossed the centre line in steve's view would have been to blame for not anticipating the scooter pulling out. You just have to try and figure how his mind works that's all, as yout were.

paturoa

1st February 2011, 17:25

I've watched it a couple of dozen times and the cager was actually starting to turn even further left to go around the corner!

Also the biker looks to missing the apex / already be hard on the picks before front wheel lock and looses the front.

A few years back I changed from riding in the right hand wheel track to the left hand wheel track for exactly this scenario. So I've been asking myself could I have avoided if I was the rider and how I ride????

Maybe, but probably not with my reaction times. It happened pretty quick.

YellowDog

1st February 2011, 18:24

Aviodable with hindsight and on the action replay!

As you say, the cornering line gave him very little margin to adjust.

Could have been much worse.

fuknKIWI

1st February 2011, 20:36

I might have known...

# This should inspire some pointless drivel.
http://bikerpunks.com/mediaviewer/29...o-crashes.html

R-Soul

3rd February 2011, 16:48

You are not allowed to cross a double centre line.

This is the case in all countries, without exception :yes:

When a scooter pulls out abruptly in front of you, you might be allowed to swerve to prevent hitting it. But then you should brake and get back into your lane, not carry on in the opposite lane, and try to overtake scooter ina blind corner.

The scooter was a numpty, and deserved to get shunted off their bike. The car was a complete twat though and deserves a jail sentence for that kind of driving.

PrincessBandit

3rd February 2011, 20:47

The scooter was a numpty, and deserved to get shunted off their bike. The car was a complete twat though and deserves a jail sentence for that kind of driving.

Agreed. The only rationale I can imagine for what the driver did is perhaps they were inexperienced and the pulling out into the wrong lane was an act of panic. Not justifying it at all, but a greenhorn behind the wheel might well react very badly to that situation (to the detriment of other motorists in the vicinity).

Max Preload

4th February 2011, 00:50

Agreed. The only rationale I can imagine for what the driver did is perhaps they were inexperienced and the pulling out into the wrong lane was an act of panic. Not justifying it at all, but a greenhorn behind the wheel might well react very badly to that situation (to the detriment of other motorists in the vicinity).Don't think so. I carjammed it (https://www.carjam.co.nz/report/?ref=6B5A8E97) and it's had such unbelievably steady but low odometer reading increases between WoFs it's almost certain to just be some doddery old goat who just isn't self-aware enough to know it's well past time to pack it in.

PrincessBandit

4th February 2011, 05:51

Don't think so. I carjammed it (https://www.carjam.co.nz/report/?ref=6B5A8E97) and it's had such unbelievably steady but low odometer reading increases between WoFs it's almost certain to just be some doddery old goat who just isn't self-aware enough to know it's well past time to pack it in.

Fair enough - I was only putting it forward as a possible scenario which might explain the actions of the driver. I don't have the computer nouse of such clever folk as yourself in order to investigate - I accept your explanation that my suggestion, in this case, is highly unlikely.

Katman

4th February 2011, 07:31

monkeymcbean

4th February 2011, 09:50

Banditbandit

4th February 2011, 11:24

I was assuming the rules would be the same for most countries (except for the colour of the lines).

That's a very dangerous assumption . and leads to accidents ..

Banditbandit

4th February 2011, 11:28

I think unfortunately this accident, choosing to ride a motorbike as your form of transport/pleasure you have to accept that this could happen to you.
I think it is out of ones control on how people will drive and the decisions they make at the time stupid or not, there can be so many 'numpties' out there.

Naaa .. like this .."I think unfortunately this accident, choosing to be on the road you have to accept that this could happen to you."

It could have just as easily been a car coming the other way - and then there definately would have been a different end. The bike rider slides down the road and away from the car while his bike hits the front ... if it had been a car coming it would have been a head-on collission ...

DangerMouseNZ

4th February 2011, 11:47

Car Driver = Fool!

Sure there is an arguement that the moped pulled out but, unless the car driver was actually gonna wipe the moped out, he should've just hung back until he could see the road ahead.

monkeymcbean

4th February 2011, 13:16

Naaa .. like this .."I think unfortunately this accident, choosing to be on the road you have to accept that this could happen to you."

It could have just as easily been a car coming the other way - and then there definately would have been a different end. The bike rider slides down the road and away from the car while his bike hits the front ... if it had been a car coming it would have been a head-on collission ...

Well thats one way of looking at it. In this type accident I would sooner have been in a car, it seems a little more equal in protection. :bash: