. I believe that many 'unavoidable' accidents can be avoided with defensive riding, although it does require constant concentration.

 

The problem is that you don't have to avoid 'many' unavoidable accidents to escape injury, you have to avoid all of them. It only takes one!

 

I've cycled on public roads since I was 7, going a couple of miles each way to school and back then and I'm now 65. Cycling has been a major part of my life, for recreation and day to day transport rather than sport. I have never had an accident on a cycle. I don't ride in any particular way, I just ride.

 

On my motorcycle I was stationary in an outside lane at lights when a car coming along the inside lane decided he would change lanes without bothering to look. I was occupying the space he turned into. The first I knew was seeing a car in my mirror proceeding perfectly normally along the inside lane. Adjacent to me, he swerved right. I do not see how I could have avoided this no matter what my riding style.

 

I was just unlucky but in my view this was an unavoidable accident for my part.

The problem is that you don't have to avoid 'many' unavoidable accidents to escape injury, you have to avoid all of them. It only takes one!

 

It's not about eliminating risk, that is impossible, it is about reducing it effectively, and at a cost which is acceptable. For me, I believe that riding style is an effective way to reduce that risk.

 

I was actually making a joke rather than a serious point!

 

In real life an accident is not something we choose

 

I was also joking, upon your joke. . Sorry it wasn't apparent.

 

Accidents are largely something we choose though, they don't always just "happen" and John's points are valid (no offence taken from your quoting me John).

 

I once ran a fleet of some 140 sales and engineer cars in Southern England and my driver's accident rates were consistently one per three years per driver average, while mine as ever was nil as it had been even when I was doing up to 35,000 miles of car driving a year at one time. Their accident rate appalled me, but I understood from insurance companies that it was perfectly normal.

 

You might deduce that I am a slow driver, but nothing could be further from the truth, I'm no stranger to 70 mph averages driving cross country on mixed roads, two hours for the 139 miles to my brother's place in Dorset for example.

 

The secret John has alluded to, attentiveness at all times. I don't drink alcohol at all. I never drive tired. I never tackle a run too long for my attention to be maintained at a high level. I won't have any form of in-car adornment, danglers, window stickers etc. I try to avoid having passengers for runs of any length. I think all in-car entertainment is the invention of the devil, never even using a car radio and I think all ICE should be banned, as should all forms of in-car telephones and radio. One thing I believe is a good addition and I use it to the full, GPS on voice commands, since it's far safer to take a voice instruction than drive along peering at inadequate signage.

 

The only thing a driver should ever attend to is what is the other side of the glass, and they should do that all of the time without fail. Driving or riding is a deadly business and should always be treated as such, using the same care as we would when handling guns and live ammunition.

 

As for secondary safety like helmets, seat belts, crash protection etc, it should have little of our attention, all of our emphasis should be on primary safety, not having the accident in the first place. Rather than cars having crash protection, it would be better to save the extra weight and fuel and mount the driver in a separate glass box on the front. That would do wonders for the accident rates.

.

Edited November 17, 200916 yr by flecc

On my motorcycle I was stationary in an outside lane at lights when a car coming along the inside lane decided he would change lanes without bothering to look. I was occupying the space he turned into. The first I knew was seeing a car in my mirror proceeding perfectly normally along the inside lane. Adjacent to me, he swerved right. I do not see how I could have avoided this no matter what my riding style.

 

I was just unlucky but in my view this was an unavoidable accident for my part.

I've had a couple of accidents like that where I've been waiting in a queue or at the lights and someone has run into the back of me. It's happened to me in the car and on the motorbike so it's not that they can't see me, some people just don't pay attention. One time I was in a queue with cars behind me and a motorbike crashed in the next lane, it slid on it's side neatly into the gap I was waiting in and took out my back wheel.

My other problem on two wheels is frost, ice and snow, some are lucky enough not to have to ride in bad conditions but my bike disappeared from under me a few times last winter. Winter tyres help but they aren't ideal.

It's for those types of accidents that I wear a helmet, I know banging my head on the tarmac (or windscreen) will hurt and I know it is likely so I take steps to reduce the risk.

I also know lots of people don't ride like me and there is much less chance of the unexpected happening so I'd never advocate compulsory wearing.

Well said Flecc!! I just wish the majority of drivers took it so seriously. Mitigating factors aside, I blame my recent high speed embrace with the tarmac on a momentary lapse of my own attention, and know from past experience that my subconcious will now be on the alert for this in future. For example, several years ago in London, my front wheel caught the edge of a manhole cover that was actualy raised above the road surface, causing me and my bike to do an almost complete somersault. Ever since, I've found myself avoiding them like the plague instictively.

 

I do feel that driver training should include lessons in loss of control and awareness, along the lines of Finland where it is mandatory to have lessons on a skidpan. Only by making mistakes I think do people truly understand the nature of the ever present danger that is only a heartbeat away.

 

As an aside, I also think that modern cars are just too damn comfortable, more like rolling sitting rooms than simply tools for getting from A to B, it's my oppinion that this leads to further complacency.

Edited November 17, 200916 yr by Straylight

 

I do feel that driver training should include lessons in loss of control and awareness, along the lines of Finland where it is mandatory to have lessons on a skidpan. Only by making mistakes I think do people truly understand the nature of the ever present danger that is only a heartbeat away.

 

I fully agree and I've driven and ridden in competition in the past which is an excellent way to hone skills. I've also privately trained young drivers on odd occasions and always take them up to advanced skills like anti-ambush skid "J" turns at speed, plus rear slide control on turns (On private or restricted land of course). That way I know they are much safer for the future through instinctively reacting correctly in an emergency.

.

I was also joking, upon your joke. . Sorry it wasn't apparent.

You might deduce that I am a slow driver, but nothing could be further from the truth, I'm no stranger to 70 mph averages driving cross country on mixed roads, two hours for the 139 miles to my brother's place in Dorset for example.

.

Not that it wasn't apparent - mea culpa.

 

Are you sure you mean a 70mph average?

 

It either entails your vehicle attaining 70mph in seconds of leaving your home and then never slowing down during the entire journey or you travel at highly illegal speeds;) I'd hazard a guess that for a 70mph average over such a journey, you'd need to be hitting 140mph at times!

 

If it is so, no wonder you can't have any distraction!

As an aside, I also think that modern cars are just too damn comfortable, more like rolling sitting rooms than simply tools for getting from A to B, it's my oppinion that this leads to further complacency.

 

 

That's very true. One of the main reasons I enjoy cycling is it's in the moment. You have to pay attention. You're not day dreaming, You're not listening to the radio or chatting to a passenger or dozing off. I personally find car driving boring and that can't be good.

I don't mind whether people wear helmets or not. I do find some people go a bit over the top with the safety stuff though. I've seen people sporting enough kit to fill my council wheely bin. My christmas tree has less flashing lights than a cyclist I came accross recently.

Maybe that was the 15% free safety kit they got on the Halfords Cycling scheme though:D

Caution - No hand signals...

 

Air bags! Fantastic! I've been in touch with my MP already.

 

With air bags front, back and sides, a new full face helmet, knee and elbow padding and sturdy leather boots my cycling will be much safer than it is now.

 

.......

 

All round airbags.... splendid idea, how about this.....?

 

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3087/2658790481_10588344b8_o.jpg

 

probably wouldn't need a helmet,

 

beeps

 

Are you sure you mean a 70mph average?

 

It either entails your vehicle attaining 70mph in seconds of leaving your home and then never slowing down during the entire journey or you travel at highly illegal speeds;) I'd hazard a guess that for a 70mph average over such a journey, you'd need to be hitting 140mph at times!

 

Quite sure, done two hours and even a couple of minutes below on that run a number of times. It doesn't need anything like 140 though, just maintaining around 95 to 100 consistently where possible and trying to stay well over 60/70 at other times. Speeds used to be higher on my motorbike though, cruising at 115/120 for long periods.

.

Edited November 17, 200916 yr by flecc

Quite sure, done two hours and even a couple of minutes below on that run a number of times times. It doesn't need anything like 140 though, just maintaining around 95 to 100 consistently where possible and trying to stay well over 60/70 at other times. Speeds used to be higher on my motorbike though, cruising at 115/120 for long periods.

.

 

But doesn't the law apply here?

But doesn't the law apply here?

 

Of course, I apply the time honoured interpretation, the law is for the obedience of the foolish and the guidance of the wise. My long term safe driving and riding record specifies me as one of the wise, so I use it as a guide to match it to my abilities.

 

My abilities change with age and circumstances, so though I'm still safe at high speeds, the length of time I can maintain optimum concentration has changed so the maximum journey length I undertake is much shorter now than it once was. I will continue to adjust speed and endurance over time until I determine that I should stop driving altogether and will then sell my cars and take taxis or other public transport instead.

 

If others would pay a little less attention to the letter of the law and take more personal responsibility for their behaviour as I do, the UK accident rate could fall much further from it's present low levels. My decisions are not all about high speed of course, sometimes 30 mph isn't safe and I even know one spot at school chucking out time where the 20 limit is just too fast and you'll see me trickling through at 8 to 10 mph maximum.

.

Of course, I apply the time honoured interpretation, the law is for the obedience of the foolish and the guidance of the wise.

.

 

One thing I've found as I've got older is that I find less and less call to speed. I used to jump in the car with family and drive straight to the south of France, for example. Comfortable 16 hour journey with stops for children and so on.

 

I do the trip two or three times a year and these days I take 3 days over it! Just for the sheer pleasure of enjoying the beauty of the country. I don't know what average speed that works out to but it isn't much!

I do that sort of thing too since I love the countryside, and spend lots of time walking in it. That's where I've been for a couple of hours before the last post I made. It's the A to B longer boring runs which I prefer to get out of the way at speed, our motorways in particular win no prizes for their beauty, and there's nothing to be seen when driving in the dark either.

.

Of course, I apply the time honoured interpretation, the law is for the obedience of the foolish and the guidance of the wise. My long term safe driving and riding record specifies me as one of the wise, so I use it as a guide to match it to my abilities.

That's what they all say.

Quite sure, done two hours and even a couple of minutes below on that run a number of times times. It doesn't need anything like 140 though, just maintaining around 95 to 100 consistently where possible and trying to stay well over 60/70 at other times. Speeds used to be higher on my motorbike though, cruising at 115/120 for long periods.

Sadly, this proves otherwise.

Much as I admire your expertise in many fields, no-one is infallible.

The only place I enjoy driving now is France. And astonishly, they drive better in general than the British these days.

 

Not because they've improved but because our standards have deteriorated so much.

 

You don't notice it until you've lived in France for a few years and you come back here. It hits you in the face, the level of aggression and the sheer weight of surveillance.

Lemmy - I love the French motorways - of course the fact that my regular run, Geneva to Paris and back costs 85 Euros in tolls might explain why there are not more cars on the road.

 

However I have experienced more road rage and speeding tickets here in 2 years than in the 30 years or so I drove on British roads.

 

The French can be very aggressive drivers - just this week I had one overtake me and slam on his brakes, force me to a stop and then get out and shout unintelligibly at me (he did give up when I explained I couldn't understand French) for the sin of pulling out of a blind side road entrance and causing him to brake.

The French certainly can be aggressive but the standard of driving in the London suburbs now has to be seen to be believed.

 

I lived there for 5 years - not in Paris - but I've never seen the desperate driving that I see here now.

 

Obviously all this is anecdotal but my brother and I were going for a couple of pints when a truck practically knocked us down on the pavement, going at high speed round a junction. My brother yelled careful, the guy tried to reverse into us and we backed against a wall so he couldn't. The tattooed gentleman then jumped out and asked what our problem was etc...we went on our way, he followed us screaming abuse before getting back in his lorry and steaming off. Scary.

 

Off the track but I had to go to Wimbledon one Friday evening at about midnight. I've never seen anything like it. Vomiting drunks, sobbing girls it was something out of Hogarth cartoon. When did that start?

 

Re the motorways, I love the tolls. It means people don't just go out aimlessly so the motorway remains a usable highway for travellers and business.

 

I speak French more or less fluently which made my stay there much more pleasant than otherwise it would have been - since no one round my way spoke English!

 

That's what they all say.

 

Sadly, this proves otherwise.

Much as I admire your expertise in many fields, no-one is infallible.

 

I'm certainly not infallible and I always say I'm a learner driver, since that is what I am, fully prepared to learn something fresh every time I go on the road, and act upon what I learn. I never claim to be an expert and on principle do not support the Institute of Advanced Motorists since passing their test implies being an expert.

 

That said, your above assessment is clearly wrong, it proves nothing of the sort since the wisdom I refer to is proved by the record. Cycling 63 years without a single injury, motorcycling for 52 years without ever coming off on the road, driving for 59 years without ever hurting myself or anyone else and all of it with full no-claims bonus throughout, plus an extra preferred policyholder discount when that was also available. That proves road usage wisdom, obedience to the law does not as you imply, since all that proves is subservience.

 

Speed limits are almost always wrong, sometimes too high or too low for the weather or road conditions, often to high or too low for the vehicle and it's load, usually too high or too low for the ability of any one individual driver. "One size fits all" doesn't work well and never will, and the arbitrary speed limits cause as many accidents as they prevent as drivers so often see them as the desirable speed to travel at, regardless of the circumstances.

 

Our fastest roads by far are our motorways, but they are also by far the safest, amply illustrating that speed alone is not a cause of accidents. The primary cause of accidents is drivers and riders, and admitting to that is the first step to a safer driving and riding life. Relying on adherence to speed limits is a first step to nowhere.

.

Originally Posted by bode

 

"That's what they all say.

 

Sadly, this proves otherwise.

Much as I admire your expertise in many fields, no-one is infallible."

 

And a previous terse comment "does not compute"

 

Consider (or if you will 'compute'). Driving without a seatbelt does not attract the attention of the law enforcement agencies. Try riding a motorcycle on the roads without a helmet and see if the same applies..

 

Are you the same Bode who recently took a nasty tumble at near walking pace? Presumably speed was not a factor?

 

You are welcome to express your opinion, but you should realise that so are others. Your posts imply an unpleasant intolerance for opinions which do not concur with your own.

 

I have been driving for over 25 years, with an average annual mileage in excess of 35k. I have been e-biking for over 4 years with an average annual mileage in excess of 5k. NO accidents. Please do not judge others by your own yardstick with such unnecessary vitriol.

Your record may well be immaculate, as you say. But if everyone decides for themself whether or not they are competent, and that they can best decide how they will behave on the roads and elsewhere, total anarchy is the result.

Not everyone has the finely-tuned self-awareness necessary to regulate to a nicety their each and every potentially dangerous action, and, in the absence of rules, it will be difficult to predict how others might be expected to act.

I'd stop short of anarchy, but that is a well-reasoned response, and more appropriate to this forum.

 

Regards,

Edited November 17, 200916 yr by themutiny

 

if everyone decides for themself whether or not they are competent, and that they can best decide how they will behave on the roads and elsewhere, total anarchy is the result.

Not everyone has the finely-tuned self-awareness necessary to regulate to a nicety their each and every potentially dangerous action, and, in the absence of rules, it will be difficult to predict how others might be expected to act.

 

I agree with this, and that's why I don't totally ignore the law. As I said, I use it as a guide, so if I judge that the conditions are right to travel 20% faster than the speed limit I do so. After all, the authorities permit me my judgement in the other direction, if conditions mean 20% slower is the safe limit I do that, as we nearly all do. So if my judgment is good enough for the latter, what is it that you or the government think that makes it invalid for the former?

 

The answer is nothing! My judgement is either valid or invalid, no ifs or buts.

 

If my judgement has no validity, it means I must travel at the indicated speed limit at all times, since without my judgement nothing else is possible, I must just blindly obey dictates like a zombie or robot.

.

'The answer is nothing! My judgement is either valid or invalid, no ifs or buts.'

 

Your judgement is SOMETIMES valid or invalid-no ifs or buts.There are no absolutes---other than there are no absolutes !

Let me word it in full then, if it is permissible for me to use my judgement, it is valid, no ifs or buts about plus or minus.

.