Head-cam footage of fatal crash from BBC

[Mongrel]

Right hand switchgear:

Well, we don't have the same switch here. That vertical ridge on your switch doesn't exist and ours just have the two positions mentioned earlier - also our headlight is on the left, (probably related to the fact that everything is reversed for UK models). It's interesting, because Canada received the European models, but for little things like that we received US spec.

I can see times that no light would be better, but I have the stock sealed beam, which is really quite weak, so I'm not very worried about blinding people.

The picture above is on the right hand side, where the 'euro' spec have a lights on/off control switch. In addition we have the left switch which controls high/low/flash, the same as yours:



So, all the switchgear is identical - none of it is reversed, we simply have the addition of a 'lights off' control on the right.

In fact, between US and UK models nothing is actually reversed control wise on bikes or in cars. On 'mainland' Europe most countries drive on the right side of the road as you do (whereas we in the UK drive on the correct side :hehehe ). UK spec cars have the controls on the other side of the car, but for instance the pedals still go "clutch, brake, accelerator" from left to right, and 1st gear position on a manual shift car is still left and forward - everthing except the gearstick is just unbolted and moved 3 feet to the right.

On UK motorbikes, is the gearshift pedal and clutch not on the right and the footbrake, handbrake, and throttle not on the left? Every British bike I've seen here has that configuration, although none of them have been new bikes - did that change since the 70's/80's?

[pdg]

I've had a few brit bikes from the 40's to the 70's and not had to relearn which hand does what... On older british bikes it was only the foot controls that are 'reversed' - gear shifter on the right, rear brake on the left. But in common with most bikes the handlebar controls are the same - front brake on the right with the throttle, clutch on the left. 'Modern' british bikes (new Triumph etc.) have completely standard control placement.

Some bikes (certain OSSA (Italian) engines for example) had a gear shift shaft that goes all way through the casings so you could choose which side the lever went on, but as standard they still had left clutch, right throttle/brake...

The only time I have ever seen a front brake lever on the left is on US spec bicycles (or on hipster bicycles because the owner thinks the US handing of brake levers 'looks cool'). And, the only bike I am aware of with a left hand throttle from the factory is an Indian ("America's first motorcycle") or as an option on very early Harleys. As far as I know, anything else with the throttle on the left is either an intentional modification (i.e. because of a disability etc.) or a restoration mistake.

Of course, with real veteran bikes (e.g. pre-1915), anything goes with regards to control placement, and there were a LOT of things to manually control back then.......

[Bokobob]

The video does not show the crash and it is stopped just as the oncoming vehicle enters the lane in which the biker is riding and he yells and the bike turns a tiny bit and then it is over..He is still a good ways from the oncoming verhicle....no crash...I confess I very often ride too fast, especially at my age, nearly 80, but I am quite cautious when it comes to crossroads.

[pdg]

There are other copies around that show the full impact - not in a morbid multi angle way, but the camera kept recording... None of them show anything disturbing, the only sound he appears to make is the 'whoa' and that's it.

[Motorhobo]

The video does not show the crash and it is stopped just as the oncoming vehicle enters the lane in which the biker is riding and he yells and the bike turns a tiny bit and then it is over..He is still a good ways from the oncoming verhicle....no crash...I confess I very often ride too fast, especially at my age, nearly 80, but I am quite cautious when it comes to crossroads.

That's not too fast -- too fast is a situation-dependent term, IMO. There's a threat-speed analysis involved. The greater the number of cages on or with access to the roadway, the higher the threat index desto lower the recommended speed until you reach the flow of traffic.

[pdg]

too fast is a situation-dependent term, IMO.

Well put I must say.

There are roads very near me that have a 60mph speed limit on, unless you get someone to go and close the road for you 30mph is 'too fast' for the road. In contrast, there are plenty of other roads with the same speed limit, but are straight, wide and have no junctions so a "little" over 60 is perfectly safe -- in fact, there are times when the traffic dictates that anything under 50 is dangerously slow...

[jacksdad1963]

'Too fast' applies in this instance: doing 97 in a 60 zone approaching a crossroads says it all.
I've watched the full vid, as said before it doesn't show anything other than the impact, then a still image of the edge of the guys helmet/shoulder. Very sad and thought-provoking.....hopefully everyone who watches it will learn from it

[Motorhobo]

...there are times when the traffic dictates that anything under 50 is dangerously slow...

I remember riding through LA a few years ago. I was going 75mph and the cars were passing me left and right at 90 before I got the message and picked up my tempo to match -- there was no slow lane there. Same was true recently on 295 in NJ - flow of traffic was 85, the slow lane was the hazard because people were using it to weave. In those cases IMO it's safer to go with the flow whatever it is than to be a sitting duck off on the right.

[jacksdad1963]

I can sort of agree with the above comment...but the guy was just blasting though traffic which was doing the legal 60 mph...he went across the SLOW sign at the junction well in excess of 'SLOW'  :nono

[Duc750]

No sense in speculating. But I'd like to think I wouldn't have out myself "on offer" in the same way. It's also worth noting that in the uk we do not a is commonly misconceived have "laws" we have guidance in the Highway Code. Road traffic law is a little different. Either way though you ride as fast as the conditions and your capability will allow.

I liken it to a glass of beer (I'd say a pint but that'll just confuse on an international forum).  The glass has a finite capacity. Speed adds beer to the glass, road conditions, road hazards and other drivers add beer, distractions like sat NAV and farkles add beer. Eventually if you don't get a bigger glass or stop adding beer you get wet feet. You are entirely in control of what goes in the glass and the size of that glass through attitude,training and self awareness

[pdg]

It's also worth noting that in the uk we do not a is commonly misconceived have "laws" we have guidance in the Highway Code. Road traffic law is a little different.

There is guidance in the highway code, and there are legal requirements in there too ('laws' if you will). I think the following quote from the introduction to the online version provided on gov.uk sums it up rather well...

"Many of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements, and if you disobey these rules you are committing a criminal offence. You may be fined, given penalty points on your licence or be disqualified from driving. In the most serious cases you may be sent to prison. Such rules are identified by the use of the words ‘MUST/MUST NOT’. In addition, the rule includes an abbreviated reference to the legislation which creates the offence.

Although failure to comply with the other rules of The Highway Code will not, in itself, cause a person to be prosecuted, The Highway Code may be used in evidence in any court proceedings under the Traffic Acts (see The road user and the law) to establish liability. This includes rules which use advisory wording such as ‘should/should not’ or ‘do/do not’."

I would like to see the "but it's only guidance from the highway code, not a law" used as a defence, especially if the highway code says 'MUST NOT'........

Edit to add:

LAW
noun
1 [mass noun] (often the law) The system of rules which a particular country or community recognises as regulating the actions of its members and which it may enforce by the imposition of penalties

So, by that definition it appears we do have "laws" which pertain to behaviour on the highway network.

[Motorhobo]

I can sort of agree with the above comment...but the guy was just blasting though traffic which was doing the legal 60 mph...he went across the SLOW sign at the junction well in excess of 'SLOW'  :nono

I totally agree with you -- I was commenting on Bokobo's comment that 80mph is too fast. Again, it's situation-dependent. Sometimes it's safer to go 80 if that's what the flow of traffic dictates. The video bloke was riding recklessly with excessive speed for that situation, I think that's pretty clear.