The Scottish biker caught speeding

[Red Herring]

Originally Posted by phil24_7

Those figures were also taken from autocar 2004. So that's old data, from a car mag!

Just remember that most bike crashes where the rider runs out of room to stop didn't involve stopping in a straight line, it involved them coming round a corner to find the road wasn't where they expected it to be, or if it was somebody else was on the bit they wanted.

I really hope for your sake that you're as good as you think you are. Good luck!

Originally Posted by Red Herring

Just remember that most bike crashes where the rider runs out of room to stop didn't involve stopping in a straight line, it involved them coming round a corner to find the road wasn't where they expected it to be, or if it was somebody else was on the bit they wanted.

I really hope for your sake that you're as good as you think you are. Good luck!

I don't believe I'm that good, just questioning those figures, with a well constructed argument (seeing as you haven't dismissed or argued them). I am fully aware of the unpredictability of the real world, but I also know you don't have to stop to avoid many accidents. Hazard perception/awareness is the key to staying alive, as well as quickly evaluating an exit strategy, and this, I believe I do 'reasonably' well.

At no point did I say I'm good, that speeding in certain circumstances isn't dangerous or that I travel at those speeds, so your final paragraph seems to be an ill educated comment.

I don't ride with luck, though I'm sure one day, it'll come in handy!

Regards
Phil

[Red Herring]

Sorry Phil, you're right, that was a bit uncalled for.

I do appreciate that most of the time we manage to ride around problems, and I don't dispute what you say about stopping distances, I just know that the average rider doesn't stand a chance of coming close to those figures, especially when it's unexpected. The ability to brake hard, stay in control and even turn on the brakes is the one skill that transfers readily from the track to the road with real safety benefits.

Few... Thought I was gonna have a falling out with a boy in blue then!

I don't dispute you points either and I wish more riders would try to acquire some of these skills, even if they never intended to use them under 'normal' riding conditions. The more tools we have at our disposal, the safer we can ride.

Now back on track... 9 months is OTT, especially when you look at other sentences handed out for dangerous driving incidents. Surely a suspended sentence/community service, long ban and a big fine would have been more than enough?

[Red Herring]

I don't know enough about the blokes history or the circumstances of the case to want to comment on the sentence although on the face of it you'd like to hope that wasn't his first offence or there were some serious aggravating factors...

Originally Posted by squirrel_hunter

Unfortunately I would say that a video such as that isn't a very good example of what any speed is like, only that the indicated speed was attained.

I've watched many on board videos at many different speeds and can say from my experience it is very different to the real thing as the videos field of vision and focus is fixed. When riding you are able to focus on an object and change your direction of view to suit the conditions and enable you mitigate the potential hazards that arise.

Maybe you are able to focus, but at those speeds I'm fairly certain you will be well and truely focused on whats approaching in the far distance. One thing that these videos shows you is quite how fast junction wing by, and cars in the opposite direction. Probably gives you a good indication on how he missed the police car!

Phil, Suspended sentences don't exist in this country Once you hear the Sheriff speak from on high, a nice Reliance chappy puts a pair of bracelets on you and off you go...

My beef about this whole case isn't so much the sentence - I already said in my first post that I thought it was harsh, and theres probably more to it than meets the eye - more that there are people on here who still think that doing these speeds is not dangerous. I can understand RH's argument that speed per se is not dangerous, as in Andy Green speed, but the circumstances, such as doing nearly 3 times the legal limit on a busy two way carriageway.

Sentencing is always a moot point. It's usually the other way around that other people whinge about - "That bloke that assaulted me didn't get the jail" etc etc, but when someone actually does get a sentence, the unduly lenient ones suddenly become the benchmark! Wierd huh? Write to your MSP or your local Sheriff...

Whats even more frustrating is that people are still getting caught doing silly speeds on this stretch. You'd think they'd learn with all the media attention!

[Red Herring]

Sorry Nelson, you and I are just going to have to agree to differ. I'm not saying that to do those speeds is safe, all I saying is that in this particular case I haven't seen enough evidence to convince me what he did was dangerous. There's been a lot of speculation about what if... but nobody has said there was a specific danger that only didn't lead to disaster by chance. I've looked at the venue on the link someone provided and if he was going northbound then there are several stretches free of nearside junctions (I appreciate I can't see the level changes, brows etc) and even the farms to the offside are far enough apart for him to have done those speeds between them. Remember, he was pinged over a short distance, I'm not sure how but someone mentioned average speed so probably VASCAR, in which case the officer needs to be able to see the start and finish points, again implying there was an open view at that point. The very fact that you say riders continue to get clocked there tends to suggest the nature of the road lends itself to speed. I'm sorry, in my view charges of dangerous driving/riding should be reserved for cases where the driver/rider displays continued poor decision making, or where one decision was so dangerous there could only be one conclusion and it either happened, or it was down to pure chance it didn't, and this one doesn't fit that bill.

I think it all boils down to whether doing that speed is dangerous or not, no matter whereabouts.

[squirrel_hunter]

Originally Posted by Nelson

Maybe you are able to focus, but at those speeds I'm fairly certain you will be well and truely focused on whats approaching in the far distance. One thing that these videos shows you is quite how fast junction wing by, and cars in the opposite direction. Probably gives you a good indication on how he missed the police car!

At any speed it should be possible to focus not just on the distance, but on the near and mid ground also, this is what a rider should be doing in order to take in all the information available to them in order to use it. Even at any speed you should be able to see for example a junction ahead and then make a decision based on what you see if the speed you are at is appropriate for the potential hazard that is presenting itself. This is all down to observation and hazard mitigation which a video like that fails to show as the focus and view is fixed.

Furthermore, consider looking out the window of a train or car. Looking into the distance the scenery looks as if it is barely moving, while looking directly out of the window to the near side will show all manor of items whizzing by. It’s all about perspective and again that video and videos like it fail to illustrate this point.

Originally Posted by squirrel_hunter

However I must add that from reading the abstract of the report it would appear that they were studying if the field of vision deteriorates with the prolongation of the monotonous simulated driving task. I doubt any road rider would describe 166mph as monotonous

I realise this was the key aim of the study, but they do state part of the research looks specifically at "The second aim was to discover if this field also deteriorates as a function of the driver’s age and of the vehicle’s speed"

Age, eye health, glasses and prescription, could all be factors I would guess. I also watched a programme on it once where they concluded that sports bike riders suffered from deteriorated eyesight due to the fact they spend a whole ride with the head down whilst looking out of the top of their eyes in a similar way that a snooker player looks down his cue. After a couple of hours riding they were suffering significantly from eye fatigue. May we should start a new thread on it so as not to derail this one, it's an interesting topic.

Focus is maybe not just a derail, but maybe not that relevant anyway as this is certainly true

Originally Posted by Nelson

Maybe you are able to focus, but at those speeds I'm fairly certain you will be well and truely focused on whats approaching in the far distance. One thing that these videos shows you is quite how fast junction wing by, and cars in the opposite direction. Probably gives you a good indication on how he missed the police car!

So whether you clearly see hazards in your peripheral vision or not, at 166mph, there is sweet FA you are going to be able to do about them. Thinking distance is about 10 feet for every 10mph of speed, so this guy would have travelled 166 feet before he even touched the brakes or tried to change direction.


.