.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Last edited:
|
|
|
cop that crashed
- Thread starter ToSlow
- Start date
Possibly all of the above, but it's early and nothing has been released yet. The only certain thing is that the truck was turning left onto a driveway, and was over half way across the three eastbound lanes when the crash occurred. From the pictures it looks like the rider was in the middle lane and he ran into the side of the truck's rear tires.
Crashes often have multiple contributing faults of varying degrees by multiple drivers. There would have been plenty of witnesses also on the road at the time of the crash to help fill in the details, plus there is info that can be gleaned from forensic reconstruction of the crash.
Any witness statements and crash reconstruction data would be available to the defence and would come out at trial if the truck driver chooses to fight whatever he is charged with, assuming he is even charged at all. If the witness statements and crash reconstruction data point to grossly excessive speed by the motorcycle prior to the crash, it's quite possible that the truck driver might not be charged at all.
Last edited:
The news article I read said that the motorcycle was eastbound on Hwy 7, just east of Hwy 50. The dumptruck was westbound. The dumptruck turned left into a driveway, and the motorcycle hit the left-turning truck.
The article didn't say anything about a second motorcycle (although there was one in the photo with the article), nor did it mention, speed, alcohol, or clothing of the rider.
My guess is that you won't hear any additional details on this one, particularly if the rider did something not-quite-right.
--- D
The article didn't say anything about a second motorcycle (although there was one in the photo with the article), nor did it mention, speed, alcohol, or clothing of the rider.
My guess is that you won't hear any additional details on this one, particularly if the rider did something not-quite-right.
--- D
Did the claimed weaving occur immediately before the crash and possibly be a factor in the crash, or did it occur further back where it would not be a factor in the crash but might indicate a pattern of riding behaviour that might have contributed to the crash? There's not enough information to say either way.
The witnesses on the CITY-TV news clip did say that the two riders were both beside their car when they were stopped at a red light just before the crash location. I'm assuming that red light referred to was at highways 7 and 50, about 300 meters before the crash site, but I supposed it could also be referring to the Gore Rd intersection another 600 or so meters further back.
Police say he likely died instantly on impact. Gear does little to protect against massive blunt force trauma into an solid immovable wall. The rear of the truck was effectively that solid immovable wall. Even if the gear managed to protected his skin and bones from breakage and rash, the hard sudden stop would have probably caused irreparable damage to his organs and other soft tissues. Picture shaken baby syndrome on a much more catastrophically violent scale.
We'll probably never hear the whole truth on this one.
A dump truck doesn't do anything quickly, and if it was across the road sufficiently for the rider to hit the REAR tires while in the center lane, it would have taken a fair bit of time to go across the road and get that far across the lanes. Doesn't make sense.
Side-by-side riding bothers me. On any ride that I have any say in, that sort of thing is a "never-never-never". We don't know if that was a factor or not. But, I've seen other riders do it - I've seen the cops do it. Not for me. I want that escape route available. I normally try to have space not only in my own lane but also in the next lanes - I don't like being beside cars.
FWIW the bike in question was a cruiser of some sort.
A dump truck doesn't do anything quickly, and if it was across the road sufficiently for the rider to hit the REAR tires while in the center lane, it would have taken a fair bit of time to go across the road and get that far across the lanes. Doesn't make sense.
Side-by-side riding bothers me. On any ride that I have any say in, that sort of thing is a "never-never-never". We don't know if that was a factor or not. But, I've seen other riders do it - I've seen the cops do it. Not for me. I want that escape route available. I normally try to have space not only in my own lane but also in the next lanes - I don't like being beside cars.
FWIW the bike in question was a cruiser of some sort.
F4IZZY
Active member
Excessive speed by the motorcyclist and not paying attention or not looking far up ahead enough. Lack of riding skill is obvious. Officers are trained to drive at the college (car mind you). Has nothing to do with safety gear at all. Dump trucks are slow moving especially while turning. A lapse of judgement even for a split second combined with lack of skill... watch out. Im not hating just stating my opinion. In reality speed is the #1 factor of most bike crashes. Why didnt they post his class of bike license? Im curious about that.
Dohhh
Banned
Easy to say when sitting in a comfy chair typing on the computer. A lot harder to do and think straight when you're barreling down towards the side of a dump truck...
You practice so that you react without thinking.
I don't think there's anything wrong with anything written here. Some are critiquing what happened and what could have prevented it. It may sound harsh to you, but to me I'm very interested in how this happened so that we can all learn from it.
I heard on the news that the rider possibly layed the bike down because he couldn't stop in time. From what I've read (and what seems common sense to me) is that is the last thing you want to do. I would think the tires and brakes would do a better job at slowing down then just the friction of the bike sliding on the pavement.
wonder how fast one has to be going to leave a very long skid mark and still carry enough speed to do serious trauma to one's organs....
I didn't know cruisers can go that fast
only 205 km/h is that fast enough to leave a skid mark and kill on impact?
invictus43
Well-known member
A friend of mine crashed a long time ago..100m skid mark..he was afraid to use the front brake in case the bike "flipped over". Not saying that's what happened here, but some people just aren't that skilled at riding..
Green Meenie
Well-known member
A lot of good and interesting speculation here on this crash. As already stated, we will probably never hear the results of the investigation unless there is a court case and you go as an observer to that trial. If in fact there was a long skid mark I would assume the bike traveled through the intersection of Hwy. 50 and Hwy 7 on a green light as he wasn't far enough east of the intersection to gain all that much speed if the light at 7&50 was red. The skid mark issue certainly suggests he braked hard with the rear rather than using both brakes. I immediately thought of a friend of mine that I ride with sometimes. He rides a cruiser and he uses his rear brake almost exclusively. Is that a cruiser thing or an experience thing? My friend has been riding for about 6 years so is not a newbie by any means. In any case; I really hope that guy's buddy wasn't beside him blocking his only exit option. He would have realized that after the crash and that would be a horrible thing to have to live with.
It doesn't necessarily take much speed at moment of impact for blunt force trauma to kill a person. It takes even less to kill by broken a neck, and even less if the blunt force trauma is focused to the front of a rider's forehead. That is also the part of a rider's head that is often most exposed with minimal beanie or half-helmets.
You can kill yourself fairly easily on your Nike's (never mind your motorcycle) by either broken neck or head injury just by running head-first into a brick wall.
Granted, and that's why you practice and do things during your normal riding that are still the correct things to be doing in an emergency situation, just even more so.
Every motorcycle I own is capable of lifting the rear wheel off the ground using the front brake only, on dry pavement. Consequently, I use only the front brake. Long, low bikes may not have that situation, they may still require some rear brake for maximum stopping, but still, the front one will do enormously more than the rear.
It's an "unfamiliarity with the outer limits of your own vehicle's performance" thing.
Riders who NEVER challenge those limits will never know what they are. You can putter along slowly for 20 years without ever testing the limits, with bad habits the whole way along, and be lucky by never having a situation demanding the limits be utilized or which reveals why those habits are bad. It's quite possible ... until that one bad day where the wrong circumstances arise.
There's probably a demographic or statistical argument that cruiser/touring riders are less likely to challenge performance limits, but there are more than enough sport riders with bad habits, too.
I've come to a moderately-quick front-brake-only stop at a yellow traffic signal, only to have another rider slide past beside me and into the intersection with the rear brake locked ...
It is easy to say that when you have years of experience riding.
This collision sounds like excessive speed, inexperienced rider and target fixation. Popular cause for a crash.
He hit the rear wheel of a dump truck that turned left in front of him. Buddy probably couldn't see anything but the truck... 'cause that is all that he was concentrating on.
If he hit the gas instead of the brake and turned left about 2 meters we wouldn't be reading about a dump truck driver out of a job 'cause the evil cops took his license.
Brakes are highly over rated.
|
|
|
|
|