MOT- Motorcycle crash report

[The Stranger:Me]

I thought this one interesting.

I wonder why it is so at odds with the Hurt report.

Ok The Hurt report is American and is older, but even now still recognised as the best of it's kind.

[Titanium]

Wow ..... wait for the flame war.

Very interesting.

Cheers

[BeakerRAT]

Mmmmmmm, it's all in how you want to interperet the data.

[Ozzie]

we need more ammo, send out the dogs!

[bugjuice]

In 96% of fatal crashes involving motorcyclists, the motorcyclist or a pillion passenger was among those killed (2001-2005 data)

So the other 4% are.......?????????

A rider without a helmet is six times more likely to suffer brain damage than a helmeted rider blah blah...

so they killed a load of people to prove this point?

I can see the graph has rose slightly since the Gixer became more popular, and more still when Dover got one..

Interesting stats about achamahol and speed being the cause.. Would have thought the speed would have been a bigger part

pah, what do they know...

[Macktheknife]

Is it just me or is there a slight bias coming thru in the tone of the MOT report? On first read it does not seem to be a true representation of the data. I will have to read this again more thoroughly and get back to you guys.
The Hurt report, is I think a little outdated now and may not be something to rely on overly much, interesting reading though.

[Ixion]

So the other 4% are.......????????? :weirdo:


...

Pedestrians. Bike hits pedestrian, biker survives pedestrian dies. Or cyclist, ditto .There have also been rare cases of bike vs car where the car driver (or passenger) has dies and the biker survived.

[madboy]

What those stats say are that disqualified 15-19yos should all speed in urban areas on their 1000cc motorcycles at 8am on a Monday morning. Much less chance of dying than a 50yo fully licensed male with a 400cc motorcycle ridden on the open road, at the speed limit, on a lazy Sunday afternoon.

That's my interpretation. You prove me wrong.

[Ozzie]

nice interpretation madboy, i like it, are you on safeas? i think perhaps you should be, with your analytical mind and all!

[paturoa]

I have several major problems with these statistics and how they are presented, or more precisely how they are not qualified.

Comparing percentage or number/populations stats is just total bollocks, if the base population or other significant factors are not known.

for example detah by age for 2005,

13 for age 40 & over, and 19 for under 40

- looks like youngers are more at risk?????? but are there simply more under 40's riding? or are they doing more riding?

Likewise for every stat. Has anyone got a link to the full stats?

p.s. I havent seen any media on this, will be interesting if it does get mainstream media coverage.

[Ozzie]

Please view this thread here

[Brian d marge]

Toot tooot sunday afternoonn to dangerous to ride so Ill stay at home Smoke some weeed and catch up with some paper work ....I worrk for the LTSA ......


96% of fatalities resulted in either the pillion or rider dying,,,,, um yup thats why is called a fatality

Then it waffles on about more serius crashes the rider was likely to be at fault

Funny the pie charts didnt look like it to me ... Seemed the biggest one was no rider responsibility ..ie a Friggen car driver pulling out

Though I will agree wit the over 40 bit , I reckon as the biker demographics have changed so will the graphs

I am sorrty but its the ...Oh I used to ride bikes when I was younger , I am 40 no so will get back into biking ,,lets see this ZX!@ looks nice ......

Thems the fellas who need to do a training course IMHO

we all know about the teen on a Iminvincable250rr , but its the returnees that I worry about

Stephen

If the LTSA smoke sh1t like that regular like , then I want to work there

[MacD]

The main problem with the report is that it doesn't tell us how rider numbers or miles ridden per year has changed relative to the number of injuries or fatalities. So we can't tell if the average rider is at a greater or lesser risk of injury/death now or not.

However, 35 fatalities in 2005. That's one very 10 days on average. Given the size and spread of KB it's really not surprising that we are seeing the number of rider fatality threads that we do. Do we as a group underestimate just how risky riding is? Maybe we do given the responses we get to fatality threads (I'm not referring to the statements of sympathy, more the comments about the frequency of deaths). Just human nature I imagine.