National Radio interviews Tooman and BRONZ re: fatal biker accident

[Brian d marge]

Not sure anyone has pointed this out in such a tragic set of circumstances
but the police , did a u turn to catch another car that was doing 154 km/h over or even before a crest of a rise ,,,the alleged speeder would have airborne

This whole revenue gathering rort in NZ does have to change ,

Stephen

[StoneY]

Imagine you are following a car along a road and every time that car reaches a crest of a hill they slow down to about 30kmph, then speed up to 100kmph, then slow down again at the next crest / corner etc.

what's the bet you would get angry and pass that car...?

Being careful and alert is one thing but being pedantic about stopping distances is simply not practical. The rider was not to blame for this incident.

Good post DD

Add to the picture:
Double yellow lines either side of the crest for a few hundred meters, is it illegal to do a U-Turn on Double Yellows?
I believe it is
Reason for those double yellows and no 'speed suggestion' sign as in at corners, is its set up to ALLOW you to carry on over that crest AT 100 KMH

I am sure we all know the spots on the Desert road that are signed as "SLOW DOWN NOW STEEP CURVE" etc?
Does such a sign exist where Paul was riding?
I believe not

Cannot blame anyone for driving/riding at the posted speed limit if no speed warning/danger sign says 'take this crest at 30kmh in case someones done a u turn on the other side' can you?


And Katman I care not what you think, your a dickhead and everyone on these forums knows it, man we laugh our nuts off at your arrogant self flattering dribble in the Pub every weekend, so keep it up we appreciate the light entertainment

[twotyred]

I have updated the OP with todays Morning Report piece speaking to Brent Russell and also Paul Browns brother in law.

[R6_kid:Me]

Being careful and alert is one thing but being pedantic about stopping distances is simply not practical. The rider was not to blame for this incident.

Really? Do you know something that the rest of us don't?

The only thing that is clear is that if the cop wasn't doing the three point turn that this wouldn't have happened. That doesn't automatically obsolve all blame from the other party and put it on the police officer. It just means that their actions were contributing factors in the accident - and not a single thing more.

[peasea]

I find it disturbing that someone with such a blinkered viewpoint and, at times, such a laughable grasp of logic and understanding, could consider themselves in any way suitable to be in a position where they speak on behalf of all NZ motorcyclists.

Perfect I would have said; that way we can deal with the 'powers that be' on a level playing field.

[discodan]

if the cop wasn't doing the three point turn that this wouldn't have happened.

That's what I mean.

That doesn't automatically obsolve all blame from the other party and put it on the police officer. It just means that their actions were contributing factors in the accident - and not a single thing more.

I don't think you can refer to the u-turn as a 'contributing factor', it was the CAUSE of the accident.

This was a clear demonstration that speed doesn't kill - stupidity does.

[terbang]

I find it disturbing that someone with such a blinkered viewpoint and, at times, such a laughable grasp of logic and understanding, could consider themselves in any way suitable to be in a position where they speak on behalf of all NZ motorcyclists.

Of course we need a narrow minded zealot instead.

[PirateJafa]

Imagine you are following a car along a road and every time that car reaches a crest of a hill they slow down to about 30kmph, then speed up to 100kmph, then slow down again at the next crest / corner etc.

what's the bet you would get angry and pass that car...?

Being careful and alert is one thing but being pedantic about stopping distances is simply not practical. The rider was not to blame for this incident.

I regularly button off when cresting blind rises. It's no different to approaching a blind corner.

I cringe when I see people gunning it over blind crests - some tools even use them for power wheelies.

What about people whose driveway are at the top of a blind crest? Do they deserve to have a fucktard like you plowing into their drivers door when they leave their own home?

What about farmers, driving their tractor along the road? Do they deserve to have to clean pieces of you and your SV out of the back of their tractor while they move between parts of their farm?

What about those farmers that have to move stock along the road? Do they deserve to have you suddenly plowing through their herd, slaughtering their livestock as you do it?

Pull your head in mate - your "I'm the most important person in the world, everyone else takes a backseat to me" attitude is pathetic.

[discodan]

I regularly button off when cresting blind rises. It's no different to approaching a blind corner.

I cringe when I see people gunning it over blind crests - some tools even use them for power wheelies.

What about people whose driveway is at the top of a blind crest? Do they deserve to have a fucktard like you plowing into their drivers door when they leave their own home?

What about farmers, driving their tractor along the road? Do they deserve to have to clean pieces of you and your SV out of the back of their tractor while they move between parts of their farm?

What about those farmers that have to move stock along the road? Do they deserve to have you suddenly plowing through their herd, slaughtering their livestock as you do it?

Pull your head in mate - your "I'm the most important person in the world, everyone else takes a backseat to me" attitude is pathetic.

So sorry that I quoted your post when trying to make my point... which was obviously lost on you during your fit of rage.

In this case the driver was at fault and if you suggest otherwise then you are dellusional.

[PirateJafa]

So sorry that I quoted your post when trying to make my point... which was obviously lost on you during your fit of rage.

In this case the driver was at fault and if you suggest otherwise then you are dellusional.

Indeed, I believe the car driver is at fault in this case (yellow lines on his side, lack of visibility - it's plain stupid). I guess that when I saw you had quoted my post, it may have meant you had actually read it. I guess that that would be beyond you, however.

But I am waiting to see what the actual facts are before I decide on how much at fault the biker is as well.

There is very little excuse for coming upon a stationary hazard and not being able to stop in time.

[R6_kid:Me]

the police , did a u turn to catch another car that was doing 154 km/h over or even before a crest of a rise ,,,the alleged speeder would have airborne

This whole revenue gathering rort in NZ does have to change

WTF... what gives you the idea that a 1.5 possibly 2+ton ute would be airborne at 154kmh over the crest pictured- it's not an FMX ramp. As far as I'm aware 154kmh is well above the 'grey area' of speed that most people associate with revenue gathering.

The problem is that the police officer had a brain explosion when the vehicle went past at this alleged speed. Isn't it intriguing that nearly everyone on KB experiences a similar phenomenon whenever a biker is killed and another vehicle is involved.

[Ixion]

.. There is very little excuse for coming upon a stationary hazard and not being able to stop in time.

There is no evidence that the hazard was stationary , and perhaps some that it was not. That is, the car may have turned across the path of the bike (the driver admits he never saw the bike). And this would all have happened very fast, a different scenario to the broken down truck

Someone said that it would take three seconds to do the turn. I'm doubtful of that myself, but assuming it is, that would mean that if the car was stationary across the road it had completed half its turn. So it would have completed the turn and been accelerating away within 1.5 to 2 seconds.

Now the rider would have had at least 2 , probably 3 seconds after cresting the hill before impact, even if he didn't brake. At 100 kph he's travelling very roughly 30 metres per second. The visibility would have been 60 or 70 metres, depending on height etc . So that would be at least 2 seconds to reach the car. But if the car only needed 1.5 seconds to complete its turn, either the crash would not have happened, or it would have been a tail end crash.

The imponderables are too great to say that with certainty (in particular that three second figure, which is not mine). But equally, I don't think it can be said to be a case of a stationary obstruction.

And the one case where the 'able to stop" always rule fails, is if a car turns in front of an oncoming vehicle.

[Crasherfromwayback]

There is very little excuse for coming upon a stationary hazard and not being able to stop in time.

You're kidding us right? If not...you've got poo on the end of your knob. You'll cause a massive accident if you slow to 20kph over every rise in the fucking road.

[Brian d marge]

WTF... what gives you the idea that a 1.5 possibly 2+ton ute would be airborne at 154kmh over the crest pictured- it's not an FMX ramp. As far as I'm aware 154kmh is well above the 'grey area' of speed that most people associate with revenue gathering.

The problem is that the police officer had a brain explosion when the vehicle went past at this alleged speed. Isn't it intriguing that nearly everyone on KB experiences a similar phenomenon whenever a biker is killed and another vehicle is involved.

154 kmh

Not talking about the actions of the police officer , goes with out being said , but I do find that 154 kmh that was quoted , a little strange

now having cleared up that area

Dont involve me in idiotic 3 word posts

Stephen

[Squiggles]

I regularly button off when cresting blind rises. It's no different to approaching a blind corner.

Dont you be bringing sense into this....

Burn burn burn!