Are you sure? There are lots of qualified instructors on this board....
|
|
|
Quebec Trial - Car Stops to help ducks, Motorcycle hits car (fatality)
- Thread starter DECIMIS
- Start date
Are you sure? There are lots of qualified instructors on this board....
A shoulder check should not be a decision it should be a reflex.If you dont think about it's a problem.If you do there is a bigger issue.A shoulder check would take about as much time to as it takes for the thought to cross your mind .
I agree you should be moving to avoid the car as soon as you see it but think you should also be looking where you going while you're doing it if riding with another bike.Move your head the the bike will start follow,you avoid target fixation, see what's next to you and hopefully not plow the other rider off the road or yourself back into the parked car.If you have to push them at least you can try not to wash them out or brace for being hit yourself.You'er also supposed switch back to keep the obstacle in sight as you pass by it.
In the m1 exit course the obstacle is an instructor standing at the point of a triangle who at the last second he raises his hand to indicate your direction of escape.
Last edited:
Apparently you think its okay not to shoulder check in and emergency and endanger others around you if they happen to be in your way.This occurred at highway speed,a side swipe on a bike a speeds as low as 20kph can take a leg and cause you to bleed out in 10 minutes. A collision at 40 can easily kill you.You are not motorcyclist anyone would want to ride with.
This is how chain reaction accidents occur.An ESCAPE ROUTE is not An ESCAPE ROUTE if it's already occupied.Why should others pay the price because you want move into their without looking space to get yourself out of a bad situation.Had he move into her tire track or lane and killed his wife what would that accomplish.You are somebody nobody should ride with and your mentality here is the definition of a SQUID.There is no qualified instructor on the planet that would condone doing what you say you would do in this situation.
I have said the same thing, I would move over with or without a shoulder check. Some members are saying he had less than a split second to avoid the car, that isn't enough time to turn on signal do a shoulder check then move over. As you SHOULD do in a normal situation. This was NOT a normal situation it amounted to an EMERGENCY collision avoidance.
Your right a collision at 20 KM could case the loss of a leg. A collision at 40 km/h "COULD" kill you. BUT hitting a parked car at 113 km/h WILL kill you. If that makes me a poor rider then I WANT to be a poor rider. Bottom line is you would be able to ride again if you made the move, and side swiped a car, your NOT going to ride again if you hit a parked car at 113 Km/h.
Although this is all a moot point, He didn't do a shoulder check he didn't side swipe a car, he didn't knock his wife down. He DID hit a parked car at 110 - 113 km/h. We can monday morning quarter back and say what "should" have been done. But none of those things were done. To argue weather a shoulder check is pointless. In a perfect world, she wouldn't have had her car there, the truck and camper wouldn't have barely avoided her, He wouldn't have been following the trailer so closely. He would have done a shoulder check rather than guestering to his wife about the lady on the highway, he would have seen teh car. He would have avoided the collision. Him and his daughter would still be alive today.
You are pointing out the obvious. The will to survive is stronger then the will to do a split second shoulder check. In this case it may have been the difference between a collision you :may: have survived as opposed to a collision you are NOT going to survive.
This is how chain reaction accidents occur.An ESCAPE ROUTE is not An ESCAPE ROUTE if it's already occupied.Why should others pay the price because you want move into their without looking space to get yourself out of a bad situation.Had he move into her tire track or lane and killed his wife what would that accomplish.You are somebody nobody should ride with and your mentality here is the definition of a SQUID.There is no qualified instructor on the planet that would condone doing what you say you would do in this situation.
I have said the same thing, I would move over with or without a shoulder check. Some members are saying he had less than a split second to avoid the car, that isn't enough time to turn on signal do a shoulder check then move over. As you SHOULD do in a normal situation. This was NOT a normal situation it amounted to an EMERGENCY collision avoidance.
Your right a collision at 20 KM could case the loss of a leg. A collision at 40 km/h "COULD" kill you. BUT hitting a parked car at 113 km/h WILL kill you. If that makes me a poor rider then I WANT to be a poor rider. Bottom line is you would be able to ride again if you made the move, and side swiped a car, your NOT going to ride again if you hit a parked car at 113 Km/h.
Although this is all a moot point, He didn't do a shoulder check he didn't side swipe a car, he didn't knock his wife down. He DID hit a parked car at 110 - 113 km/h. We can monday morning quarter back and say what "should" have been done. But none of those things were done. To argue weather a shoulder check is pointless. In a perfect world, she wouldn't have had her car there, the truck and camper wouldn't have barely avoided her, He wouldn't have been following the trailer so closely. He would have done a shoulder check rather than guestering to his wife about the lady on the highway, he would have seen teh car. He would have avoided the collision. Him and his daughter would still be alive today.
You are pointing out the obvious. The will to survive is stronger then the will to do a split second shoulder check. In this case it may have been the difference between a collision you :may: have survived as opposed to a collision you are NOT going to survive.
There is no need to pause shoulder,check then change direction i never said that.Are you saying you cant move your head and look over you shoulder as you move over. The act of moving you head changes pressure on the bars, the bikes direction and keeps the suspension neutral.Your not supposed to have to think about it .How do you know he didn't look?How do you know he wasn't target fixated on the car because he didn't look where he wanted to go?How do you know what he was thinking ?The old adage look where you want going still applies and target fixation is a very really real survival reaction that kills.In the end no matter what he did there still may have been no chance of escape once he saw the car.
Your right I don't know if he looked over, (although given that he was gesturing to his wife, as one poster stated earlier MOST times when we gesture to the trailing bike the instinct is to look at your mirror to see if they understood, At least that is what I do after 30+ years of riding). We are merely saying that we understand what your "taught" to do is sometimes VERY VERY different than what helps you survive. I would rather survive than to care what some instructor is going to tell me or think of my actions.
If I live, then what I did was right IN THAT EMERGENCY situation. I doubt, (from the trial and the press, he had time to "target fixate" he saw the car for a split second, (mainly IMHO because he wasn't maintaining a safe following distance and his field of sight was restricted. I am sure an instructor would say he should have left more distance between him and the camper, and that he should have deteced a potential danger when he saw a person on foot on a restricted access highway.
If I live, then what I did was right IN THAT EMERGENCY situation. I doubt, (from the trial and the press, he had time to "target fixate" he saw the car for a split second, (mainly IMHO because he wasn't maintaining a safe following distance and his field of sight was restricted. I am sure an instructor would say he should have left more distance between him and the camper, and that he should have deteced a potential danger when he saw a person on foot on a restricted access highway.
Riceburner
Well-known member
I've had to do emergency swerves at one point or another...due to actions by another vehicle. I didn't have time to shoulder check and watch where I was going at the same time, but most of the time I'm aware of what's around me by scanning constantly, so the swerve is going into open space.
Don't forget to assign some blame to Walt Disney. We have been brainwashed into cutesy "Baby animal" crap for generations. The duck lady hadn't a clue as to how the DUCKLINGS were going to react to her help. They would have scattered and she's be chasing them all over the highway.
A few years back a racoon got stuck up a light pole on the 401 and people were bringing it food etc to "Help" it. The OPP showed up and shot the damn thing. Bang. Thud. Nothing to see folks.
A few years back a racoon got stuck up a light pole on the 401 and people were bringing it food etc to "Help" it. The OPP showed up and shot the damn thing. Bang. Thud. Nothing to see folks.
sid_for_speed
Well-known member
Goose is the national bird of Canada ( correct?) You cannot kill them....
...they'd be on the menu of every summerlicious restraunt otherwise!
Riceburner
Well-known member
Canada Goose is greasy...and watch out for the pellets....
It didn't happen on hwy 30, it happened on the 930 which is just a short connector between the 30 and 132. Right here to be exact;
https://www.google.com/maps/dir//45.3738806,-73.5115597/@45.3737035,-73.5110555,17z/
This is the correct answer. All road users should be aware of our surroundings at all times. If you have to do a shoulder check in an emergency situation, you've already lost.
I was also in a situation where I was going to rear-end someone if I didn't swerve, but I didn't know if anyone was next to me. In that instant, my reaction wasn't to check over my shoulder, it was to swerve. Luckily no one was there but I still clipped the corner of the car in front of me. A better driver than myself would have known if someone was there or not. Maybe it caused me to hesitate for 0.1 seconds and caused me to hit the car.
Any way you look at it, the rider screwed up. I'd love to see the duck lady counter-sue the estate of the biker for his share of responsibility, since it seems that's all people do any more.
Last edited:
LOL yup. One day I was cycling with a group and a lady ran over a squirrel who tried to scamper across the road but timed it wrong. He was obviously injured and the lady got off her bike and ran to it to "help" but it just bolted up a tree despite it's obvious injury to get away from her. She probably caused more harm to it by trying to help!
People really need to learn when they can't help a situation and that's true for all life events, not just animal rescue.
Thanks to both MarscoSantiago and fastar1 for the clarifications. i hadn't been following this trial, and therefore hadn't dug too deeply into it. Thos posts help to put things in proper context.
Regarding other posts with respect to evasion techniques I have heard some singularly stupid remarks be issued by 'qualified instructors.' Some organizations teach based on theory, without consideration of real world situations. Then again some instructors believe that their personal views supersede well proven techniques, that are actually taught by the schools they work for. Ask 3 people about a situation and you're likely to get four opinions.
Regarding other posts with respect to evasion techniques I have heard some singularly stupid remarks be issued by 'qualified instructors.' Some organizations teach based on theory, without consideration of real world situations. Then again some instructors believe that their personal views supersede well proven techniques, that are actually taught by the schools they work for. Ask 3 people about a situation and you're likely to get four opinions.
DECIMIS
Well-known member
Update from Tuesday (6/17/2014) - Judges instructions for Jury:
The presiding judge in the Emma Czornobaj trial has given the jury another option to convict the accused.
On Tuesday, while providing the jury with her final instructions, Superior Court Justice Éliane Perreault opened a door that allows the jury to find Czornobaj guilty of a lesser offence — dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.
The option is significant because the jury has heard evidence that Roy was traveling at above the speed limit when he slammed on the brakes of his Harley Davidson and crashed into the car. The jury was told that an analysis of the accident showed Roy’s Harley did a nine-metre skid and yet still struck the Civic at 105 kilometres per hour.
Czornobaj’s lawyer highlighted this fact in his final arguments to the jury last week.
The new option allows the jury the option of finding Czornobaj guilty of operating a vehicle in a dangerous manner but that her actions did not necessarily contribute to Roy’s death
(http://www.montrealgazette.com/news...s+door+lesser+offence+jury/9946931/story.html)
The presiding judge in the Emma Czornobaj trial has given the jury another option to convict the accused.
On Tuesday, while providing the jury with her final instructions, Superior Court Justice Éliane Perreault opened a door that allows the jury to find Czornobaj guilty of a lesser offence — dangerous operation of a motor vehicle.
The option is significant because the jury has heard evidence that Roy was traveling at above the speed limit when he slammed on the brakes of his Harley Davidson and crashed into the car. The jury was told that an analysis of the accident showed Roy’s Harley did a nine-metre skid and yet still struck the Civic at 105 kilometres per hour.
Czornobaj’s lawyer highlighted this fact in his final arguments to the jury last week.
The new option allows the jury the option of finding Czornobaj guilty of operating a vehicle in a dangerous manner but that her actions did not necessarily contribute to Roy’s death
(http://www.montrealgazette.com/news...s+door+lesser+offence+jury/9946931/story.html)
Nine Metres.
Thirty feet.
Even from 100 Kmh, rather than 120 Kmh+, you haven't scrubbed off any significant amount of speed. At 100 Kmh you travel a little under 28 Metres in just one second.
Thirty feet.
Even from 100 Kmh, rather than 120 Kmh+, you haven't scrubbed off any significant amount of speed. At 100 Kmh you travel a little under 28 Metres in just one second.
According to this article, http://globalnews.ca/news/1386181/i...river-in-duck-linked-highway-crash-testifies/
the speed limit in that area is 100km/h, therefore 115-120km/h is not something unreasonable.
Not unreasonable, but not legal. That's what the defence appears to have hammered on. As I indicated with my simple little calculation we're talking about a third of a second or quarter of a second, human reaction times make it largely immaterial.
What ever happened to that dude that reversed on the 401(?) trying to commit insurance fraud and make the guy he backed into pay him? Other than him complaining to the media that everyone was hating on him for being brown.
|
|
|
|
|