Go Pros create unsafe riders

[onearmedbandit]

I find I am not debating with anyone very bright on here

Here we go, clear evidence of just how deluded you actually are.

[FJRider]

My argument is about those NOT AT FAULT in an accident not having time to brake or swerve always.

If you ride in traffic ... leaving yourself NO time to brake or swerve ... YOU ARE AT FAULT ...

I find I am not debating with anyone very bright on here which may include you

That exact thought crossed OUR minds too ...

if you don't understand how the situation is different for those not at fault as they are not the ones in control

Unless you have NO control of the throttle or brakes ... YOU HAVE CONTROL ... !!! Use that control to your advantage.

of any time lag between a possible impact.

Between possible impact and what ... ???

[Moi]

What I wrote:

Provide a scenario...

... explain why you believe you'd not have time to brake or swerve

... explain why you'd not have "any time lag between [you mean before?] a possible impact"?

You replied:

It would perhaps be easier for you to say why you will always have time to brake or swerve if a dog runs out or a car does a u turn without seeing you or a car comes onto a one way bridge without giving way from around a bend at the the end of the bridge that you are approaching the end of?. These are real accidents through the fault of others plus a dog.

I'm not going to say anything at present except: You choose one of the above incidents and explain why you believe you were totally unable to avoid an "accident".

[flashg]

i've known many people involved in traffic collisions, 2-18 wheels.

the only one stupid enough yet to claim there was nothing they could have done to mitigate or avoid, is very "OLD" c*ssina.

Fixed that for ya.
Can't teach an old dog new tricks, they say

[FJRider]

It would perhaps be easier for you to say why you will always have time to brake or swerve if a dog runs out or a car does a u turn without seeing you or a car comes onto a one way bridge without giving way from around a bend at the the end of the bridge that you are approaching the end of?. These are real accidents through the fault of others plus a dog.

In rural and residential areas ... it's a good idea to scan the sides of the road/street for animals. Farmed/wild/domestic animals all have a desire to go home if they are scared (noisy motorcycles can do this) . Some dogs just like to chase vehicles. Such is life in the animal kingdom.

If you are scared a moving vehicle might U-turn .. back off a bit. If the vehicles are parked at the side of the road ... flash your lights, cover your front and rear brakes ... and button off a bit. Look for the drivers face in their mirror. If you can see them ...

Be assured .. you will not always have right of way given ... even if you are entitled to it. As far as bridges go ... first on does not have right of way in legislation. Remember ... Courtesy keeps you intact.
Few bridges have blind corners off the end. Which one did you have an issue with .. ???

Accidents can be avoided. Not attempting to avoid them makes you one of the causes.

[Luckylegs]

It would perhaps be easier for you to say why you will always have time to brake or swerve if a dog runs out or a car does a u turn without seeing you or a car comes onto a one way bridge without giving way from around a bend at the the end of the bridge that you are approaching the end of?. These are real accidents through the fault of others plus a dog.

Again, cos dogs dont appear out of thin air. Like you said, a dog RAN out. That implies running, that implies moving from one place to another, that means it must have been visible before it magically appeared under the front wheel of your bike. As for thd u turning car. A car on the side of the road doesnt just magically appear in front of you. It, out of neccessity (again, physics) cant go sideways across the road. There is an arc, therefore there is time, and anyway. For the car to move its wheels have to move. You should see this long before you notice the car moving too.

[Akzle]

Again, cos dogs dont appear out of thin air. Like you said, a dog RAN out. That implies running, that implies moving from one place to another, that means it must have been visible before it magically appeared under the front wheel of your bike. As for thd u turning car. A car on the side of the road doesnt just magically appear in front of you. It, out of neccessity (again, physics) cant go sideways across the road. There is an arc, therefore there is time, and anyway. For the car to move its wheels have to move. You should see this long before you notice the car moving too.

fletchers paradox son.

[Luckylegs]

fletchers paradox son.

Because. Ignorant... wtf cunt?

[Berries]

And a giant loop going for several years is closed. The fact that dogs run out of driveways and cars do u-turns from the side of the road has been explained to cassina in detail with great patience a multitude of times. I can guess the response already. Pointless even trying to enter in to conversation, I won't call it debate because that requires two open minds.

[Luckylegs]

You miss another point I mentioned in that whether you have time to brake or swerve for the dog or car is highly dependant on how far away you are from them when they make their move which can be quite quick if you have never seen a dog run across the road or a car do a u turn. Things that happen on the road when someone screws up do not happen in slow motion despite what you believe otherwise I will say again there would be no crashes at all by anyone as we would always be able to brake or swerve to avoid them wouldn't we?

1. I didnt miss your point about the distance between you and the teleporting objects.
2. You must be living in a bubble if you can assume someone else has never seen a dog run across the road, or a car do a u turn.
3.funny you mention that others screw ups dont happen in slow motion cos thats exactly what it feels like when shit happens (that'd be chemistry and biology) - Fuck it would be ironic if it turned out you were a science teacher

What im still left wondering is do you mean stop or swerve around or brake and swerve. Im in two minds as to wether i should qualify that for you, as youre so thick youll probably miss the subtle difference but since its you im probably wasting my time.

[FJRider]

I have had the recommendation before on here to look up driveways for dogs

No need to look up the driveways ... they'll be standing by the open gate ...

Slowing down to allow the driver to pull out from the side of the road will just lessen the impact if they hit you

Got it in one ... how very perceptive of you. But it gets really spectacular at 140 km/r ...

I was hit by someone that forgot it was one way. The bridge was over the Hurinui River SH1. I read in the paper last year that locals in the area have wanted it to be made 2 way as a result of accidents on it. So I am not the only victim of a muppet failing to give way on that bridge.

I know that bridge very well. And the "Please Give Way" sign is on the Rotherham end. There is a give way sign at one end only on one way bridges. The road approaches are double (and level) right up to the bridge with good visibility at both ends. The 50 km/hr zone begins at the township end. So 100 km/hr traffic is coming off the bridge head on to slow traffic. There is a bend at the village end ... but the traffic starts winding up the speed before the bridge. Locals removed the 100 km signs to slow traffic at that end ... but still up their speed at that end. The plan worked (sort of) but the earthquakes in Kaikoura increased the traffic on that road considerably. There are TWO passing bays on the bridge ... but the modern motorist has no idea what they are for. If they do ... they have no inclination or intention of ever using them. That might mean a few minutes delay in their busy lives. So with the increased traffic ... comes increased accidents from stupid people that wont follow the simple rules on one way bridges (that also includes you). When you use that bridge ... SLOW DOWN. A friend of mine died on that bridge.

[Moi]

Thanks to google maps I now have an appreciation of the bridge...

If I was travelling north as I approached the bridge I can see its full length and can also see if there is any south-bound traffic approaching from the north. Although I do not have a Give Way facing me as I approach the bridge I would need to do so if there was south bound traffic on the bridge.

Or even if I was in a car and a large truck was approaching from the north I'd probably pull over and let him have the "right of way" - provided I could do so without endangering myself with following traffic. If there was nothing behind me and I can see him approaching the bridge, I'd try to pull off the roadway so as to make it obvious I was going to let him go first. He has to not only negotiate the bridge but then start a climb away from it. Much easier for me to pull away after the truck has crossed the bridge than to make him stop.

I'm not going to drive or ride across the bridge at speed as I've seen from my vantage point on the southern approach that there's a bend just after the end of the bridge on the northern side. Because of that bend I'm going to be cautious as I approach the northern end of the bridge just in case a south bound driver is not aware that I am approaching. Perhaps even sound the horn, though that can be a little fruitless with people driving with the car stereo turned up to "LOUD", so that I am announcing my presence on the bridge.

However, if I was travelling south I have to re-think what I would do. First, I have a Give Way sign facing me at the northern end of the bridge and I also have a left hand bend to negotiate as I drive onto the bridge. My view across the bridge is restricted and so I'm going to slow down as I approach the bridge, prepared to stop to give way to north bound traffic. If there was no traffic visible and I'm in a car I'd move as close to the centre line of the roadway as possible as I get closer to the Give Way limit line to enhance my view across the bridge and I'd do this at a slow speed - allowing me plenty of time to react to what ever is happening ahead of me. If there is north bound traffic I'd pull over to the left to allow them as much room as possible to exit the bridge and negotiate the right turn they have. If there was no traffic north bound traffic I'd proceed, but I'd be doing all of this at a speed that if I need to stop I can do so without having to execute an emergency stop. Once on the bridge I'd increase my speed but probably not much above 30 to 40km/h - because if "shit did happen" as in someone driving onto the bridge north bound then I have time to stop, flash headlights, before we meet bumper to bumper. Also, if necessary, I'd pull into the passing bay and just wonder about their driving skills...

Of course, on a bike I'd have the advantage of height and have a better view across the bridge from either end - but that doesn't mean that I'd not be cautious about what I was doing. I am quite attached to my skin and have no desire to have any of it peeled off or bruised or damaged in anyway...

[nzspokes]

Slowing down to allow the driver to pull out from the side of the road will just lessen the impact if they hit you and there is no gurantee they will check their mirror anyway.

WTF? If the driver is coming from a side road they wouldn't see you in the mirror.......

Oh and its guarantee by the way. Speeling tiz a fing.............

[neil.]

brake OR swerve?

are the two mutually exclusive? fuck I hope not


[/B]

So thats where you get your theory from that you can always swerve or brake when shit happens because your science teacher told you it happens in slow motion? As for your confusion about braking and swerving it depends on how far you are away from the shit when it happens the further away you are the more likley you will be able to brake but closer you may have to swerve as you would not have enough stopping distance. Going to a riding school will teach you about that. I consider those like yourself equally as thick if you think I am.

[Moi]

I was not speeding over the bridge as I was in a line of traffic and I had just cleared the end of the bridge heading north before the lane splits into 2. If I had been going any slower the muppet that hit me may have actually hit me on the bridge knocking me off it. A witness told me that the driver in front of me thought they were going to get it so the muppet must have squeezed through a very narrow gap. The muppet and not me was prosecuted. Sadly I was only awarded a small amount in damages due to our weak justice system. I bet I would have no opposition to my views on this site if all those I debate with were to experience such an accident.

Discussing and clarifying what you wrote above:
* I'm presuming you were in a car rather than on a bike - even though you say "knocking me off" - would your vehicle have been knocked off the road?
* where you the last in the line of traffic?
* going slower - you might have been better off if you were the last and had a bigger gap between you and the vehicle ahead - time to stop even if you were facing the oncoming vehicle
* despite you being not prosecuted, and consequently legally not at fault - what would you do differently if you were in such a position again, either on that bridge or another single lane bridge?

But if you were in a line of traffic as I was, going over the bridge you would think you would be far safer than crossing on your own which was what I was in. Even if I had seen the muppet coming around the bend from the north end of the bridge there was no where to swerve off the road as there is armco barriers at both ends of the bridge. He shunted the rear of my car into the armco barrier as it was. If I had been on a bike and not a lowish car I would be dead even though I may have seen him sooner as I said there was no where to swerve off the bridge/road. I did check after impact that my headlight switch was on and it was so I should have been easily visible.

* in a line of traffic or the last vehicle?
* this is the google view of the northern end of the bridge [hope this works] - so you where actually off the bridge, not on the bridge as suggested by you saying: "Even if I had seen the muppet coming around the bend from the north end of the bridge there was no where to swerve off the road as there is armco barriers at both ends of the bridge."
* perhaps on a bike you might have been safer, he may have missed you altogether, or you might have seen him moving off and been able to sound your horn or accelerate out of the way
* as I said above, perhaps a "note on the horn" might have been in order.
* about what speed do you estimate you were doing as left the bridge? what about the other vehicle?

Again, thinking about the incident it is not a case of saying "I couldn't do anything" but rather a case of "I didn't do this or that which may have made a difference to the outcome".

Certainly an unfortunate crash for you, but as others have said both on this thread and other threads - there is often time to do something to avoid a crash or to lessen the impact...