Of course motorcyclists have defences. There is a huge difference betweena Rossi wannabe and somebody who knows how to ride defensively and read whats going on in the road. There is also a huge difference in people that decide to ride in shorts and sandals, and then require huge skin grafts as compared to someone who wore appropriate gear.
I've ridden bikes for many years and the only bin I've had was due to my own fault.I've had many cars decide I haven't been there when they pull out - but I treat every intersection etc. as such and in 99% of cases I am already well prepared for it. You could get hit buy a bus when you cross your street tomorrow - there are risks in everything. However the onus is on you to minimise those to keep on walking the next day. And sadly that isn't always clear to many riders.
gunhand,
Dec 2, 10:05am
I surely can do that.
superfreek,
Dec 2, 10:06am
And to boot I believe I know one of the guys in that Van quite well. It was a bunch of young guys that were on their way from the Naki' Skids. I would be surprised if they were NOT doing something stupid on the roads knowing them.
jkm,
Dec 2, 10:13am
Heres my theory; 2 or 3 vehicles heading North, No1 decides it is turning right off the main road and pulls into the center of the lane., No2 not paying attention and has to stop suddenly behind the first vehicle instead of going around no1 on the left. No3 stops behind 1 and 2 lane is now blocked. Van arrives accelerating from 70km zone relises he cant stop intime, chooses to pull out into opposite lane to avoid nose to tail collision. Unfortunately large group of bikes coming the other wayresult is head on carnage. The bikes being in a large group would also have made it harder for some of the riders to take evassive action. Disclaimer; This is just my theory from what I read of the article.
smac,
Dec 2, 10:28am
Don't follow you sorry. Yes death are usually cheaper than injuries, but both have to be covered.!
smac,
Dec 2, 10:30am
What spin! I simply stated the numbers are in line with what I have heard people offer up as theories.If you think there's a different reason why the rider is more often at fault in fatals, go for it.
superfreek,
Dec 2, 12:14pm
Just an update for anyone who's interested. This is what one of the passengers has just written. He claimed they were following at 100/km/h and the car in front braked to 80km/h and they had to swerve to avoid the driver of the van getting crushed and said they didn't see the motorcyclists.
splinter67,
Dec 2, 12:19pm
following too close no excuses why didnt he put it in the ditch
drgl33t,
Dec 2, 12:30pm
stupid fricken boy racing hoons. every time ferndene hosts the skids you get young fwit c@nts in convoys from the wanganui n further south driving dangerously through taranaki
snoopy221,
Dec 2, 12:47pm
Well reality is pulling out on to the WRONG side of the road on an essentialy BLIND corner for the length of THREE vehicles when what! Your brakes and reactions are less than the 2 drivers in front- Not the RIGHT call-R.I.P.
mrfxit,
Dec 2, 1:02pm
I nearly got cleaned up by THAT same reaction a few months ago AND it was a van heading my way. They were following to close when the car in front slowed suddenly & the van had to swerve around the front car . headed our way. clipped the back wheel on the car in front & managed to pull the van back left again. Shattered left front suspension & wheel on the van & same for the right rear on the front car. Yep ON A BEND.
If they hadn't been able to pull the van left, my surf would have cleaned up THROUGH the right front corner of the van
Swinging right is a pretty risky thing to do, but then again, shouldn't be that close to NEED to swing out like that.
meathead_timaru,
Dec 2, 1:04pm
Yet motorcyclists are being asked to pay for the full amount of their INJURIES alone when in fact when they're at fault more often than not they die, not just get injured. Thus even though more than half the fatalities are the motorcyclist's fault, those incidents cost ACC very little compared to even a broken bone.
The problem with the statistics is that they don't recognise the worst combination of risks and provide numbers on each group of recognised risk factors. They're effectively being cherry picked to portray only that which TPTB wish us to see.
dr.doolittle,
Dec 2, 1:13pm
That is so wrong. A fatality will often cost considerably more than a " broken bone". All comments aside. My heart goes out to the families & friends of the victims.
mrfxit,
Dec 2, 1:31pm
Average $2800 cremation, loaner casket, no service, 3 days from death ************ just done that 2 months ago.
jojo76,
Dec 2, 1:36pm
The van load of people were of to the 'skid' event at the old Ferndene speedway.I have'nt read the whole thread, but there is one above that mentions a passenger of the van claims they were travelling at 100km.Some one will correct me if im wrong but im sure the limit has been reduced around that area to 70 or 80 because if the overbridge.
meathead_timaru,
Dec 2, 1:47pm
You clearly have no idea of the costs. Humans are notoriously expensive to repair. Just think what it costs to repair a pet. And they don't even have income that need substituting.
Some of you guys are confusing cost of a death with cost of a death to ACC. Social cost of a NZ life is millions (I forget exactly how many, somewhere around 3-5 I think), but meathead's point is this is not a cost borne by ACC. ACC are only paying for the injuries, which are not always the motorcyclists fault.
I THINK what they may factor in is that even if it wasn't the bike's fault, the seriousness of the crash may well be because a bike was involved. Dunno. Need an ACC actuary on here.
meathead_timaru,
Dec 2, 2:01pm
It goes without saying that the more vulnerable motorcyclist is going to come off worse. But of those injury crashes involving motorcycles and another vehicle, what is the cost of recovery where 1) the motorcyclist is at fault and 2) when the motorcyclist isn't at fault.
The Ministry of Transport or ACC simply can't provide those figures. So the whole ACC hike is based on spurious reasoning.
smac,
Dec 2, 2:04pm
Yep dunno. I would say that ACC can very accurately calculate the costs they pay out to fixing and burying motorcyclists. However I wouldn't see how they could factor in 'blame'.
meathead_timaru,
Dec 2, 2:13pm
And that's the real issue. Like I said very early on, the victims are being made to fund their own costs in a system where it's claimed there is 'no fault'. That's patently false.
smac,
Dec 2, 2:40pm
Maybe at first look.but hold on, ACC is basically a govt funded insurance scheme yeah! So who pays for insurance even where their is no fault! The insured.
You drive a modified or oft stolen car, you pay a higher premium, regardless of whether any eventual claim was your fault.
So if ACC is broken, so is the world wide insurance model.
meathead_timaru,
Dec 2, 2:48pm
Insurance isn't a no-fault compulsory scheme though.
theram1,
Dec 2, 2:57pm
Two second rule springs to mind. Only a fool.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.