The old horey "lane splitting"
in [Aussie Motorcycles]
|
From: Kevin Gleeson on 23 Dec 2009 19:50 On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 23:40:16 +0000 (UTC), Zebee Johnstone <zebeej(a)gmail.com> wrote: >In aus.motorcycles on Wed, 23 Dec 2009 22:00:50 GMT >Kevin Gleeson <kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: >> >> I normally only ever lane split in stopped traffic or crawling >> traffic. Were you in the latter or were you at indicated speed limit. >> If traffic was slow, go for it I reckon. But you have to be aware that >> cars that are crawling through heavy traffic are often populated by >> drivers that are bored and not paying as much attention as they would >> be at normal speed limits. You takes your chances. And yeah, if I was > >Well... > >most drivers who are moving above a walking pace are pretty good at >not deviating in the lane. It's fairly hard to do in fact as the car >tends to go straight unless you move the wheel a chunk. > >They aren't going to deliberately move in their lane unless there's a >reason. That reason is usually them wanting to move from one lane to >another which they don't do unless there's a gap. > >So if you are in a stream of traffic that has no gaps the cars aren't >going to move and you can split them as safely as splitting ever is. > >Of course this means you need to be sure there are no gaps, not just >ones you think are gaps but ones everyone else thinks are gaps. > >Then you have to have a plan if someone does start moving. HOw much >time and room do you need at the speed you are going? > >We don't have figures for crashes that happened while someone was >lanesplitting. > >I do know they happen, but all the ones I've heard of have been in >stopped traffic where the traffic has stopped with enough room for a >right turning car to turn across the stream, a car has done so, and >collected a moving bike. > >I know personally of 2 such crashes. One caught a lanesplitter and >one caught a rider legitimately riding as the only vehicle in the >kerbside lane. (It was the right turn only lane that was full and let >the turning car through) > >Make of that what you will.... At 10 km/h I've seen plenty of people think they are going slow enough that they can now take care of other things than concentrating on the road. Like I said, I've been hit by someone getting stuff out of the glovebox. I've had my foot run over by a dude when I was lane splitting. I'm not sure what he was doing in the car, but he was not looking ahead and and was slowly coming to a halt at lights. He was looking to the left to something on the passenger seat. I was coming up on his left. As the car came to a halt he had drifted enough to the left that I could no longer fit between parked cars and him and had to stop. At the same time he did. I put my right foot down and he nicely parked his rear left wheel on it. Unfortunately it was hot day in Sydney and I was out for a quick run down to the shops so didn't put bike boots on, was just in sandshoes, jean and leather jacket. No nice protective footwear. A some what nice thump on his back door got the old fool to move forward a bit and get back into his proper lane.
From: atec 7 7 "atec on 23 Dec 2009 21:17 BT Humble wrote: > Kevin Gleeson wrote: >> But a bike's ability to outperform a car when needed is a safety >> factor I reckon. I know a lot will disagree, especially those in blue >> uniforms. > > Oh no, he's started another "power my way out of trouble" thread! The > "loud pipes save lives" one will be arriving any minute! > > Flee, you fools! > > > BTH > perhaps in this case he was not heard until passes and did not have the headlights on either
From: Zebee Johnstone on 23 Dec 2009 23:32 In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:50:37 GMT Kevin Gleeson <kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: > > At 10 km/h I've seen plenty of people think they are going slow enough > that they can now take care of other things than concentrating on the > road. Like I said, I've been hit by someone getting stuff out of the which isn't high speed as such. is low speed therefore more dangerous? Zebee
From: Kevin Gleeson on 24 Dec 2009 00:33 On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 04:32:19 +0000 (UTC), Zebee Johnstone <zebeej(a)gmail.com> wrote: >In aus.motorcycles on Thu, 24 Dec 2009 00:50:37 GMT >Kevin Gleeson <kevingleeson(a)imagine-it.com.au> wrote: >> >> At 10 km/h I've seen plenty of people think they are going slow enough >> that they can now take care of other things than concentrating on the >> road. Like I said, I've been hit by someone getting stuff out of the > >which isn't high speed as such. > >is low speed therefore more dangerous? It can be. The point I was trying to make is as all the cars slow down, they figure they can do other things. Leaning over to a glovebox while not looking ahead to the road, you can veer across a lane without knowing it. It doesn't have to be much even at low speed to affect a lane-splitting bike. Been there, paid for it. If the car is travelling at 60k's then they will pay more attention. As the traffic gets more dense and slower the logic is to look for something else to do. Get a ciggy, look for a different radio station, wonder whether that bag is on the back seat. They might feel that they are holding the steering wheel directly ahead, but a lot of the times they are not, especially if there is a head turn involved. My young flatmate (well ex-flatmate now as she is in LA) was going through her L's this year. I had her car for most of the last year and took her driving for her hour update from time to time, but noticed as traffic got heavier she got distracted and paid less attention. That's where lane-splitting bikes can get in trouble. My theory anyway. And as I said before, I've paid the price for it twice. Not serious injuries or damage. But at higher speeds I have never had an incident. If a car is doing 80 km/h I am not going to lane split (unless it is a Tas midlands Toy Run, but that's another story).
From: Knobdoodle on 24 Dec 2009 03:12
"GWD" <gwd(a)nsw.chariot.net.au> wrote in message news:da95j5lt4oa7nftfqhrap63e6171j3vd9r(a)4ax.com... > On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 15:07:31 -0800 (PST), BT Humble wrote: > >>Kevin Gleeson wrote: >>> But a bike's ability to outperform a car when needed is a safety >>> factor I reckon. I know a lot will disagree, especially those in blue >>> uniforms. >> >>Oh no, he's started another "power my way out of trouble" thread! The >>"loud pipes save lives" one will be arriving any minute! >> >>Flee, you fools! > > What's the best oil for my bike? > Dunno but Optimax rots your sprockets! -- Clem (http://xkcd.com/621/) |