Drinking=+49%, Speeding=+40%, Helmet-50%, Cage=-360%, There's a pattern here...

[oldcarkook]

This is an interesting article (http://www.soundrider.com/archive/safety-skills/nw_motorcycle_fatalities.htm).
NW Motorcycle Fatalities
How to Decrease Your Chances of Becoming A Statistic
Motorcyclists have a 360% greater chance of being killed in a collision than a motorist. How can you better your chances?

There's been a lot of numbers flying around in the last 60 days since the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released its 80 page report on trends in motorcycle fatalities nationwide.

AP writer Jonathan Salant recently did a comparison of numbers against what the Washington State Traffic Safety Commission has on record and released a piece over the wire with a lot of numbers, but little commentary.

You probably won't take the time to read all these reports (the links are provided below), but this article will cover 5 critical points that can lessen your chances of getting whacked. Some are relatively elementary, other points you may not be aware of.

Undivided Rural Roadways
Many Sound RIDER! readers enjoying taking a trip beyond the metropolitan areas to destinations like Snohomish, The Olympic Peninsula, The Cascade Loop and otherwise. 42% of fatal accidents occur on undivided roadways in rural areas such as these. While you're having fun on SR2, SR20, 101 and any back road be sure to use extra caution.

Speeding & Engine Displacement
Once you wrap your machine over the posted speed limit you just increased your chances of being involved in a fatal accident by 40%. 40% is a great number if you're playing the stock market, not so good if you're speeding on a motorcycle.

More and more people are buying larger bikes these days. What I've personally found is that riding a smaller bike at the posted speed limit is a lot more fun than operating a Godzilla sport bike within the law. The gigantic machine was made for high speed work on the track and is pretty boring at typical posted speeds, but a small bike lets you feel your speed at lower levels, thus providing a thrill while you're still in a safe zone of movement. I also find my pleasure in turns and not on straights. David Hough's insight into this has enlightened me and thus provided some great riding moments.

Endorsement Status
Are you riding without a motorcycle endorsement? At least one out of four riders in the state is and you just increased your chances of being involved in a fatal motorcycle accident by 28% for not learning the proper techniques and getting the required state endorsement. You're not only endangering yourself in this scenario, but you're also endangering the other riders around you.

WSP knows this number all too well. If you think it's wrong that WSP is pulling over motorcyclists who exceed the speed by just 5 mph, think again. They're not looking for speeders, they're looking to get non-endorsed riders off the road. If you were "Home Schooled" and never took the time to get an endorsement, do yourself, and the rest of us a favor and get down to the DOL for a #3 endorsement on your license. Citations for riding without an endorsement start at $71 and the fee to get your bike out of impound runs around $200.

You'd also be doing yourself a service to sign up for an MSF course sooner than later. The extra benefit of the knowledge you'll learn is worth the time. In addition you save money on your insurance policy through most companies for completing the course.

Endorsed riders may want to heed my own personal rule: if I know you're not endorsed, you won't ride with me or my group.

Blood Alcohol Content
According to the AMA 49% of motorcyclists involved in fatal accidents have alcohol in their blood at .08 or above. If you're drinking and driving you've greatly increased your chances. As we learned at MSF, you need twice as many motor skills to ride a bike as you do a car, so even if you're at the state limit of .08, you're greatly impaired.

Helmet Stuff
Your chances of a fatal accident in the state of Washington are reduced by about half with a helmet on according to state by state comparisons with the other 30 states in the US who do not require a helmet. Because... by law you are required to wear a helmet here. If you'd like to keep your risk factor low, leave your helmet on when you enter non-helmet required states where the choice is yours.

So in conclusion you'd have to figure if you're riding the speed limit, wearing the helmet, not drinking, carrying a motorcycle endorsement and being careful wherever you ride, I'd say your chances are good you'll be having a good time on a motorcycle for a long time to come.

On the other hand, if you're un-endorsed, drinking and driving, speeding and leaving your helmet behind in Washington, then as they say in the orient, "It's time to get your house in order."

Patrick Thomas


However, in the interest of balanced reporting, I also add these humorous bits of useless drivel to ponder...

Beemer Baby (http://www.petrolheadsmcc.co.uk/images/humor/ride-a-harley.jpg)
Cracked me up.

This bike (http://www.petrolheadsmcc.co.uk/images/humor/ridingkitty.jpg) was only used on Sundays to take the cat for a ride.

Missed Turn (http://www.tech-sol.net/humor/crash.jpg)

[Cliffy777]

Thanks for the reminder(s). The only one I have a hard time with is the undivided state roads. Me, I am not fond of the slabs, but I promise to not drink, wear my helmet, not speed (too often), and I do have my license.
Thanks for sharing the heads up.

[DesertRider]

Originally posted by Cliffy777
The only one I have a hard time with is the undivided state roads.

I think that one bears qualification. According to the DOT stats, the one large contributor to fatal crashes on rural roads is collisions with stationary objects off the road, particularly after failing to negotiate a turn. More plainly put, overcooking turns and crashing. Sounds like it's exactly the same cause as people just plain going too fast, and this is the result when you do it in turns. It all gets back to the old adage (hugely ignored every weekend on every twisty road) that the highway is not a racetrack.

There's a significant subset of riders (and I don't mean Harley riders) who believe in the notion that if faster is better, then too fast is just right. The numbers in these death statistics show how stupid that is. And as the Honda ads say, stupid hurts.

[kbasa]

It would be interesting to see if folks killed in deaths attributed to speed (in single vehicle accidents) had had any form of advanced high performance riding or track time.

[ian408]

Originally posted by KBasa
It would be interesting to see if folks killed in deaths attributed to speed (in single vehicle accidents) had had any form of advanced high performance riding or track time.

I can't remember where I saw it posted but there was some
correlation between training and accidents. The higher level
training you'd received, the more likely you'd be involved in an
accident.

I have a hard time with that. Maybe what they mean is that
a rider, having attended "higher level training", is more likely to
be involved in an accident for some period after training?

Ian

[sgborgstrom]

I have a hard time with that. Maybe what they mean is that
a rider, having attended "higher level training", is more likely to
be involved in an accident for some period after training?

Ian



Joe Speedy takes a couple of "Track Day" classes and learns just how fast he can go around corners without crashing. The following weekend he heads out, freshly educated, ready to test his new found confidence and skills on the local backroads. Forgotten is that in class he was on a carefully prepared surface; no gravel, leaves or cowflop in the corners, plenty of run-off space
if he did over-cook the turn, no oncoming traffic to distract his attention away from the road ahead. So there's Joe, picking up the pace, thinking about moving his butt off the seat, looking through the corners-all that stuff he just learned- and then he hits a blind, decreasing radius curve with a bunch of crud from the local gravel trucks strewn across the road and winds up in the ditch because he forgot to pay attention to what was 20 feet in front of his speedy self.

Training is good. Learning where the limits are and being able to push them in a controlled environment brings confidence you can apply in the "Real World". BUT.... you have to remember there is a world difference between training and reality.

The ""Keep your head up and look through the turn" mantra works great on an open parking lot, just remember to keep an eye out for the pot hole that's hiding in the dappled tree shadows running across your path.



Steve

[knary]

First, Speed doesn't kill. The wrong speed for the situation, including the rider's skill, kills.

Second, the statistics in regards to training and accident rates is complicated. "Training" can mean all sorts of things for all sorts of riders. It's a rather broad brush that would include new riders that have taken an MSF class to squids that have done some track days to veteran riders that have broadened their skills with CLASS.

Third, training, such as what you'd get in the MSF, typically includes alot more than "keep your head up".

Personally, I'm a statistic. I have fallen down - a few too many times. Some of it was dumb/bad luck, some of it was pilot error. Riding is a risky activity, but so is most of life.

One thought keeps popping up in my mind:
The more experienced you are, hopefully, the less likely you are to be involved in an accident. But the more time you put in the saddle, the greater the time you are at risk. Here are some made up stats to better illustrate this:
1. A newbie rider has a 1% chance of falling down in any given 1,000 miles. He rides 2,000 miles per year.
2. An experienced rider has a .1% chance of falling down in any given 1,000 miles. He rides 20,000 miles per year.

How do the stats carkook bring up deal with this?

[trmptrmrk]

Originally posted by knary
First, Speed doesn't kill. The wrong speed for the situation, including the rider's skill, kills.

Second, the statistics in regards to training and accident rates is complicated. "Training" can mean all sorts of things for all sorts of riders. It's a rather broad brush that would include new riders that have taken an MSF class to squids that have done some track days to veteran riders that have broadened their skills with CLASS.

Third, training, such as what you'd get in the MSF, typically includes alot more than "keep your head up".

Personally, I'm a statistic. I have fallen down - a few too many times. Some of it was dumb/bad luck, some of it was pilot error. Riding is a risky activity, but so is most of life.

One thought keeps popping up in my mind:
The more experienced you are, hopefully, the less likely you are to be involved in an accident. But the more time you put in the saddle, the greater the time you are at risk. Here are some made up stats to better illustrate this:
1. A newbie rider has a 1% chance of falling down in any given 1,000 miles. He rides 2,000 miles per year.
2. An experienced rider has a .1% chance of falling down in any given 1,000 miles. He rides 20,000 miles per year.

How do the stats carkook bring up deal with this?

That's what I was about to say! Riding considerably more means more chances to tip over.

Interesting article. I also wonder about the speeding stat for the exact same reason. If speed limits are set artificially low and most of the traffic is speeding then, it makes perfect sense that 40% of the crashes were people speeding (think off all the times when more than 40% of the traffic out there is speeding).

I wouldn't ride without a helmet, but it's also fishy to compare states with helmet laws vs. no laws to come up with stats on the effectiveness of helmet use.

The stats are interesting, but it's often not hard to come up with stats that support both sides.

[knary]

Originally posted by trmptrmrk
Interesting article. I also wonder about the speeding stat for the exact same reason. If speed limits are set artificially low and most of the traffic is speeding then, it makes perfect sense that 40% of the crashes were people speeding (think off all the times when more than 40% of the traffic out there is speeding).

Interesting point!

If anyone falls down while traveling with traffic around here, chances are, they fall down while speeding. The clumsy inference would be that speeding was part of the problem.

[username]

what would be interesting, and what probably isnt possible to figure out with accuracy, is what is the probability of a given rider on a given day in a given situation that he will encounter an emergency situation and emerge unscathed. this is what i try to do. i have a probability cloud in my mind. it's a complex mutlivariable function that i am always striving to minimize and have no expecation that it can ever reach zero. im always in some sort of danger.

so when im going 30 mph on clean dry road, there are no turns, no intersections, i can see 12 seconds ahead of me, and im well rested and comfortable, it's a dot. basically what will happen is my bike will fall apart, or a deer will run out, or something really wierd/sudden requiring me to brake/swerve into well-defined and visible spaces. as i approach an intersection, my cloud gets bigger. with cars around, it's bigger. if it rains, it's bigger. in the hill country near sunrise/sunset with the deer all over the place - bigger. if im trying to be sort of fast, it's bigger. it never drops below a certain size for me, because im a new rider, have only taken the basic rider course, and havent had any *really* scary emergencies to deal with, (i still have the original seat on the bike, i havent used my butt-cheeks to rip the upholstery off the seat pan. :) ) so i dont know what i will do in them. (i practice quick stops and swerving once a month, trying to build good habits.) so a more experienced rider might have a smaller cloud than me if he were in my place. and i think the cloud has a minimum size for all of us who ride in traffic. there are certain dangerous situations that can only be avoided by leaving the bike at home. (that would be an interesting list.) riding through town my cloud is a big function of other driver behavior. riding out of town, it's a big function of animal/surface/rider conditions.

you can see the manifestation of the cloud in where i place my hands. when my cloud gets above a certain size, i cover the controls. bigger, i slow down. really big i swerve or brake. someday im sure i'll rip my seat off the bike.

having those reports numbers helps me size my cloud, so thanks for posting this.

and part of me hopes that by riding and thinking this way, my cummulative cloud gets smaller, even though in my mind it is still big. i guess having a healthy probability cloud is important in keeping the real one as small as possible.

and FWIW, i dont like to ride to avoid being *killed,* i like to ride to avoid permanent injury. those are other interesting stats to me that are likely unavailable. im guessing fewer motorcycle wrecks are reported if theyre minor and no one is hurt. (ATGATT, right?) but the whole notion of not getting killed is weird. i try to aim a little higher! let's say if i go into a turn at 90, i die. if i go in at 70, i sustain permanent injuries. if i go in at 50, i go out at 55. im gonna go in at 50. and if im not sure how fast i should go in, i go at most the posted limit, probably below, and then slow down as a function of visibility/conditions. and then...

what a second, what the hell am i saying? everyone, especially the insurance companies know that my risk on a motorcycle is directly proportional to my credit rating. thus the best way to stay alive is to pay my bills on time. :brow

[oldcarkook]

I posted this because it was interesting, enlightening, and thought provoking. I frankly expected it to die with only one or two followups because it's not all that easy to digest.

There is more to this than meets the eye and I think that when these figures are adjusted for dramatic increase in new/inexperienced riders, they will show that the trend is still on the way down. My MSF Trainer stated that 94% of the accidents on a bike happen in the first four years of ownership and that MSF training automatically moves you to the six percentile.

Some things that affect the numbers are the "Fast & Furious Mentality"; http://204.193.156.25/forum/smiles/nuts.gif I believe that movies that promote street racing beget more street racing - both cages and bikes.

I went to the NHTSA's website and did some research and reading and it's interesting stuff. The death rate in single motorcycle crashes dropped steadily from '90 to '96 then began to climb again, and realize that this is weighted against the number of registered bikes and riders. But it does not have any way of accounting for rider experience or training. Were most of these newbies? I was saddened to read about the 75 yr old Calif. member that was killed in NZ on a tour by head on in the wrong lane - seems like an easy mistake to make in a relaxed back road in NZ when you are suddenly facing an on-coming car you would instintively dive right, or at least I would.

Here's a link to the single bike fatality report:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2001/809-360.pdf

It's an interesting read. Here are some bullet points that are of interest:
Findings from FARS data provide insight into possible reasons for motorcyclist fatalities
in single vehicle motorcycle crashes and could aid in the design of crash prevention
programs:
Ø More riders age 40 and over are getting killed;
Ø More motorcyclist fatalities are occurring on rural roads;
Ø High BAC levels are a major problem among motorcycle operators;
Ø Half of the fatalities are related to negotiating a curve prior to the crash;
Ø Over 80 percent of the fatalities occur off roadway;
Ø Undivided roadways account for a majority of the fatalities;
Ø Almost two thirds of the fatalities were associated with speeding as an operator
contributing factor in the crash;
Ø Almost 60 percent of motorcyclist fatalities occur at night;
Ø Collision with a fixed object is a significant factor in over half of the fatalities;
Ø Braking and steering maneuvers possibly contribute for almost 25 percent of the
fatalities;
Ø Helmet use among fatally injured motorcyclists below 50 percent; and,
Ø Almost one third of the fatally injured operators did not have a proper license.

Yea - check that last one! 1/3rd were not properly licensed. Rookie mistakes? Wannabe out for a quick spin? I don't know.:dunno

In any event, here's the link the NHTSA's motorcycle research section of their website so you can read the same documents and draw your own conclusions.
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/pedbimot/motorcycle/research.htm

http://204.193.156.25/forum/smiles/rdr.gif

[Cliffy777]

to find out how many riders do not have the proper endorsement. I have a family member who has several years of riding experience. He owns a 1000cc machine. He does not drink and ride, always wears a helmet...but is not properly licensed here in Michigan. He has vowed to complete the MSF class this year before using his bike again.
Just made me wonder how many are out there? When I bought my first beemer three years ago, I was not able to test drive it on account of not having my license validated for motorcycle operation. I drove it off the lot illegally, but took the proper steps within days.
How many out there aren't licensed? Any beemer riders not properly documented???
(This thread has a lot of rabbits for us to chase down and ponder, doesn't it?)

[oldcarkook]

A strong clue to your answer lies in the NHTSA links I gave:

1.2.9 - Motorcycle operators, especially in the under 20 and 20-29 age groups, are often improperly licensed to operate motorcycles.
1.2.6 - Speeding is still one of the major factors in motorcycle crashes especially among riders under the age of 30;
1.2.7 - High BAC levels continues to be a major problem among motorcycle operators;



Here's the link:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/Rpts/2001/809-271.pdf

See, just like I keep telling my kids; "getting old is a good thing!"

[DesertRider]

Originally posted by oldcarkook
Some things that affect the numbers are the "Fast & Furious Mentality"; http://204.193.156.25/forum/smiles/nuts.gif I believe that movies that promote street racing beget more street racing - both cages and bikes.

Absolutely right. Some of the people I've ridden with seem to assume that the proper speed is whatever you can get away with. On open roads they're often at 90+, and I wave goodbye. They seem to think that going fast on a highway makes them some kind of superhero or shows an advanced level or riding, when in fact going fast in a straight line takes no skill at all -- a trained monkey could do it. What it does do is expose you to an inordinate level of risk because there are just too many things that can happen on the street that you might avoid if going 70 or 75, but you will never avoid going 90 or 100. On the track haulin' a** is fun and fairly safe; on the street there are just too many uncontrollable factors.

Ø More riders age 40 and over are getting killed;
Ø More motorcyclist fatalities are occurring on rural roads;
Ø High BAC levels are a major problem among motorcycle operators;
Ø Half of the fatalities are related to negotiating a curve prior to the crash;
Ø Over 80 percent of the fatalities occur off roadway;
Ø Undivided roadways account for a majority of the fatalities;
Ø Almost two thirds of the fatalities were associated with speeding as an operator
contributing factor in the crash;
Ø Almost 60 percent of motorcyclist fatalities occur at night;
Ø Collision with a fixed object is a significant factor in over half of the fatalities;
Ø Braking and steering maneuvers possibly contribute for almost 25 percent of the
fatalities;
Ø Helmet use among fatally injured motorcyclists below 50 percent
[/i][/b]

Summary of all the above: Aging riders on big bikes going fast around corners on back roads, possibly after drinking and/or at night, are really dangerous. Unfortunately such riders in such situations are also quite common.

Conversely, if you keep speeds moderate, don't drink, and avoid night riding on back roads, you avoid most of the major risk factors and are probably way, way down in risk. I do like to ride at night, but there's no deying that riding fast on a back road at night is a really, really dangerous combination, even when fully sober.

----

Aside to Username:

Originally posted by username you can see the manifestation of the cloud in where i place my hands. when my cloud gets above a certain size, i cover the controls. bigger, i slow down. really big i swerve or brake. someday im sure i'll rip my seat off the bike.

Suggestion: You should cover the controls ALL the time. Most experienced riders ride with two fingers on the brake lever at all times because it significantly shortens reaction time (try it and see). Most experienced riders cover the clutch, too, because in a maximum-reaction situation you not only need to brake quickly, you also need to downshift quickly. I know the MSF teaches beginners to keep all fingers on the grips except when all fingers are on the levers, and that's fine when you're getting started. But over time as you gain better control feel you can learn to brake with two fingers and you'll find you can stop shorter that way -- not because the brakes stop quicker, but because you can apply the brakes sooner.

Also, in many situations slowing down is exactly the wrong thing to do. If nothing else, always be aware of what is coming up behind you. In many emergency situations slowing down or hard braking may seem the thing to do, but all it may do is get you slammed by the idiot behind you who couldn't stop as fast as you and maybe wasn't even paying attention. Every moment of every ride you should be continually updating your "escape plan" in case something happens, and slowing/braking is only one of your options. Always keep assessing, keep re-planning, and keep adjusting your position in traffic for maximum safety.