From: George W Frost on 12 Apr 2010 20:02
"Lars Chance" <lars.chance(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message
> Milton wrote:
>> It has always been my policy not to use right indicators on a bike but a
>> hand signal instead for the reason, too many accidentally leave there
>> right indicator on and when approaching an intersection with an oncoming
>> right turning vehicle, of course they are assuming you are turning right
>> as well and progress around the corner in front of you.
> It's a good idea in principle but it must take a long time to train
> yourself to stop indicating.
> (I've been indicating on roads for 35 years and I reckon it'd be almost
> impossible to stop, short of removing the right-hand bulbs!)
I use the indicators on the bike,
because I find it very hard to locate any bulbs which will plug into my
From: Zebee Johnstone on 12 Apr 2010 21:38
In aus.motorcycles on Tue, 13 Apr 2010 08:55:14 +1000
CrazyCam <CrazyCam(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> Nev.. wrote:
> So, assuming the CTP rates are actually based on real numbers, then that
> says the cops crash less than the average bikie.
> > No doubt reflective of the high level of police rider training.
> Well, I dunno if that's the only story.
I'd say it was solidly down to the type of work done.
You don't do car chases with police bikes... They mostly spend their
time doing slow escort work, a bit of hair dryer handling, and maybe
some lanesplitting to get to where they direct traffic holdups.
At least so the SA cops I talked to said, complaining that they never
got to *use* their training.
They were mightily pissed off when Oktoberfest moved from Hahndorf to
the city. When it was in the hills they had a lot of fun "policing
the roads" by touching their crashbars in the corners.
> The apparent high visibility of a police bike would seem to be a likely
> factor as well. My translation of that goes back to the "threat" aspect.
It's about what the filter passes.
The road environment is full of clutter. If you go as a passenger
along a route you usually travel as a driver/rider you are likely to
notice things you never did when in charge of the go juice. You
filtered them out as not interesting.
A "threat" might get through the filters, but if it did then no one
would be booked for speeding in NSW via a fixed camera... and they get
about 1200 a month apparently.
I find that being predictable myself means that the ones who don't
have really draconian filters can see and behave properly, and using
road positioning and general smarts means the ones that do filter me
out can't hurt me without trying very hard indeed.
From: Nev.. on 13 Apr 2010 03:50
On 13/04/2010 9:26 AM, Capt About Lunchtime wrote:
> I'm aware of a BMW R100RS that was white with a black and white chequred
> stipe placed horozontially across the front with the word POLITE in large
> type above.
> Traffic parted in his way as he rode through giving motorists a gental nod
> or wave.
> I was later told that he was "politely" asked to remove the stripe and
> lettering. Something along the lines of impersonating a tax collector or
> Gov. intimidator or the like.
Just because they threaten him with some offence doesn't mean he is
actually committing it. Just because he's being perceived to be a cop
doesn't mean that he's impersonating one. Try driving down a freeway in
a black current model SS Commodore with dark tinted windows and
travelling at or slightly above the limit and see who the public
perceive to be a cop.
From: Yeebok on 13 Apr 2010 03:51
On 9/04/2010 7:36 AM, Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:13:35 GMT
> Kevin Gleeson<kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote:
>> The only thing I'd add is that; think of Doppler effect as well, you
>> only really hear that noisy bike as it passes you, ie by the time it
>> is way too late. As a safety factor it is total bollocks.
> Same same properly adjusted headlight in daylight conditions in the
> city. You can see them far away, but when it's close enough to
> matter they make no difference, catch no attention, give no
> If someone turning across you worries you, then use the design of the
> human visual system: jink in your lane so you change from a small
> oncoming that doesn't change size much and so looks still to a
> laterally moving item that the visual system is designed to notice.
> Of course that means you have to be paying attention to the car in
> question to realise it is there and might do the wrong thing. It's
> way easier to deafen yourself with loud pipes and then say it is all
> someone else's fault.
Yes, or at least something that'll get you noticed - and a good way to
catch someone's attention is to "move unexpectedly". Saw Yellowcake do
that once :)
From: F Murtz on 13 Apr 2010 05:30
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:48:32 +1000
> CrazyCam<CrazyCam(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>>> In aus.motorcycles on Mon, 12 Apr 2010 08:26:53 +1000
>>> CrazyCam<CrazyCam(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>>> The figures for police motorcycle crashes should be fairly available,
>>>> and they'd qualify as being a potential "threat" to many car drivers.
>>>> Are they better or worse than the general bike crashing population?
>>> are all other factors: training, exposure, type of riding, type of
>>> crash, the same?
>>> I somehow doubt it...
>> Of course all the other factors aren't the same, but I'd still like to
>> see a comparison of their crash rate with the rest of the motorcyclists
>> crash rate.
>> It would give us a starting point.
>> Then we could test various factors.
>> I volunteer to try out carrying a Glock!
>> I reckon that could discourage all sorts of silliness on the road around me.
> Just borrow an ex-police BMW.
> I have seen the results, and it's clearly a very safe bike.
I have got one and when it was white it was a blessed nuisance, people
did all sorts of stupid things when they spotted it, propped in front of
me etc. now it is black no one knows that I am there, the traffic
behaves normally and I have no more trouble.