Before I begin, let it be known that I am *not* a motorcycle-hating lunatic and it is not my intention to enrage or provoke anyone or say anything negative about motorcyclists, I am simply asking a question and would like people's views on it. So here goes..
I'm sure you've all seen the advert about looking out for motorbikes ("Now you see him, now you see him...", etc) but my question is this:
I've watched the advert several times and as far as I can see, the accident was entirely the fault of the motorcyclist, not the driver. It appears the bike rider didn't see that the car was turning right and drove straight into the side of it. But the driver of the car indicated his intention to turn right in plenty of time, so surely it is the responsibility of the motorcyclist to notice this and slow down (i.e. not drive into the car). Yet the advert is aimed at car drivers and the message is to watch out for motorbikes... am I missing something?
|
I was thinking the same thing when i last watched that ad.It certainly is the fault of the motorcyclist if he hits you when you have indiceted in good time.My friend had this happen to him on a busy, fast road near where i live. Indicated,slowed down and turned right to have a motorcycle hit the right wing at about 50mph. Motorcyclist flew down the hill at a similar speed.
Couple of broken bones but otherwise ok (miraculously) I suppose the message from the ad is - Through good observation accidents can be prevented even if they are not your fault (or would not have been your fault)
|
Overtaking at a junction is clearly wrong, but the car driver did not check his blind spot, so could have also avoided the collision. The advert is supposed to promote defensive driving - the fact that you can prevent accidents that are not your fault if you look where you're going is, unfortunately, an alien concept to many.
Mind you if the driver hadn't hit the scooter he would have taken out the pedestrian who steps out to cross the side road... watch carefully next time!
I think one positive from that advert, is that it shows the reality of an accident (sort of). A lot of car drivers seem to be quite blase about hitting a bike, as long as they're in the right that's all there is to it. The reality, when we step out of our car having just punted someone off, seeing someone lying there in a pool of blood and not breathing would actually scare us to death if it really happened.
Gareth
|
|
|
|
Mirror - signal - manoeuvre.
Bloke looks in mirror; sees motorbike behind him; bloke indicates to turn right. Another look in the door mirror and the motorbike has now vanished - where?
Chances are the motorbike has started to carry out his overtaking manoeuvre between bloke in car taking his eyes off the mirror and indicating he's turning right which is why;-
a) the motorbike hasn't seen the car driver indicate,
b) the car driver can no longer see him in his door mirror.
I think the advert is trying to get the message across that motorcylists are vunerable, and if you see them behind you one minute, then not the next, then use a bit of common sense and ask yourself where the hell did he go? Chances are the motorbike is in your blind spot, so be careful.
ps, yes, I agree, the motorbike was in the wrong for overtaking at an aproach to a junction.
|
I haven't seen the ad but I can only assume from what's been said that this is a fairly common type of accident, whether it be a motorcycle, pedal cycle, 118 118 running duo (Straight thru 118), attempting to overtake a car when it is actually turning right.
Suggest that the ad tries to make people carrying out this type of manuvre extra vigelant. Although cars are unlikely to pass a vehicle turning right, cyclists and motorbikes do this all the time, and so are at a greater risk.
I remember an ad that ran "Think one, think twice, think bike!"
Bikes are far less visable than other cars.
H
|
|
This forum introduced me to the (to my mind) huge pleasure that is www.sniffpetrol.com - if you scroll through back issues there is a wicked spoof of that ad - warning - the site doesn't hold back on language so if that thing offends you, you WILL be offended.
|
|
|
|
A good point DD. In that case I think it is best that the driver does not make the turn until he sees the cyclist go passed him, then he can be sure where he is ( unless he has stopped, intending to turn right also).
A similar experience happened to me this morning; I was in stationary traffic and had left a gap between myself and the car in front in order to not block a college driveway on my left. A car turns into the driveway and very nearly collides with a cyclist who was hurtling down the inside of the stationary vehicles. The other driver shook his head in disbeleif and completed his turn. A few moments later the cyclist returned to the scene ( I guess his momentum had carried him a way down the road) and went down the driveway after the car that nearly hit him. Judging by the look on his face, I think fisticuffs were in the offing. Perfect start to the day.
|
The message here is not very good for bikers/ scooter-riders, but is an important one.
First, this. When on my bike, I do filter around slow/ stationary traffic sometimes (that is a large part of why to have a bike these days), but I am always ULTRA paranoid. You get it drummed into you when you learn (I trained over 10 years ago and still do this)- assume that the car in the side road WILL pull out, the car in the right lane not indicating WILL turn right. Assume everyone is an idiot, and then you won't get caught out by the one that is.
In that ad, a particularly modern problem is highlighted- that bikers can be reckless (not good publicity, but in my experience can be VERY true of younger scooter-riders).
The final take-away message is very important- just because a biker or scooter-rider is being unaware or just plain stupid, they shouldn't die for it, and if this means checking once more before turning, then that's a price worth paying.
Phew! Need a lie down now.
--
Dr Alex Mears
Seat Leon Cupra
If you are in a hole stop digging...unless
you are a miner.
|
|
|
|
|
What makes me laugh is that these adverts are targeted at car drivers.
Yes, they need to be careful of motorbikers - but this is the same kind of "approach", if you can call it that as regards idiotic pedestrians etc.
Why not target the advert at motorbike drivers? Likewise why not target similar campaigns against those who are, more often than, not, responsible for the incident?
I am not for one moment trying to say that car drivers don't hold as much responsibility, because they do, just that is where the "finger of blame" always seems to be pointed!
|
|
Dan J - that's exactly what prompted me to start the thread in the first place. It would make more sense to me if the message behind the advert was "motorcyclists, don't overtake cars down the right hand side that are clearly going to turning right", but instead it seems to be "stupid car driver, you should have known that the bike was going to try a suicidal overtaking manoeuvre and taken evasive action".
|
Dan J, what makes you think the advert isn't targeted at motorcyclists too?
robzilla, unfortunately it looks like the message of driving defensively isn't getting through. I don't want to repeat myself but the fact that you can prevent accidents that are not your fault if you look where you're going is, unfortunately, an alien concept to many.
If I made a mistake in my car and the driver of a 38 tonne truck made the tiny effort of checking his blind spot to avoid killing me, I'd be very grateful. Or do you think he should have killed me anyway?
|
Garethj - The message of defensive driving is getting through loud and clear - to me anyway. Your closing comment is exactly the sort of snide remark I had in mind, and hoped to prevent, while I composed my opening statement. FYI, I practice defensive driving every time I get in the car and so far I have managed not to kill a single other road user.
Of course I am not so stupid as to think that you cannot help prevent accidents that are not your fault and no, I don't think the driver of the 38-tonne truck should kill you.
While I agree that the advert should not be aimed solely at car drivers (I think that was my original point, wasn't it?), it is obvious that the advert IS aimed solely at car drivers ("Now you see him, now you see him, now you see him..." i.e. "You didn't see him until he rode into the side of your car did you?")
|
Rob, my apologies
Garethj
|
|
|
|
I'd like to make a distinction between sorts of biker here. Most what I'd call 'proper' bikers would not take these kinds of risks, being very aware of the consequences of an accident such as this. These are the sort of biker that always wear proper protective clothing and keep their machine in top condition. Exceptions are 2 main categories: new scooter riders, who often won't have had the requisite training about such things, and won't have developed their road skills (THIS is the group that as you say should be targetted), and DRs (despatch riders), for whom the time saved may worth the risk- it's a calculated decision. Largely, DRs are very experienced riders, and develop a very keen road sense and given the mileage they do, don't have that many accidents. Having said that, I have witnessed DRs taking what I consider ludicrous risks, but there you are.
In terms of raising awareness, target the scooter-riders. DRs are unlikely to change their behaviour!
--
Dr Alex Mears
Seat Leon Cupra
If you are in a hole stop digging...unless
you are a miner.
|
3 lane roundabout, me in the right hand lane going right... a motorbike came up my right hand side and went straight on just as I pulled out. I still don't know how anyone on the roundabout managed to avoid him, and he still found time to give us all a friendly one fingered wave as he sped away. No doubt had he been hit and injured, it would have somehow been the fault of one of the car drivers.
Oh and I'm sick of riders squeezing past my car in traffic too - next one that does it will find me running a key down his paintwork as soon as traffic slows again, and see how he likes it.
Grr... can you tell I've had a bad day?!
|
|
I think its fair to say bikers aren't keen on the advert either - we agree the bike is at fault and therefore the message to the car driver is at best confused... but then they don't seem to have consulted anyone who has ever ridden one, so I suppose that was always a possibility - from the people who brought you the 'locked wheels - but not the back one's we've doctored' advert...!
|
|
|
C'mon, lane-splitting is what you have a bike for. Can't beat 'em, join 'em.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I need help.
I am somewhat confused by one of the latest Road Safety advert, "Now you see him, now you don't", where some geezer is driving down the road while noticing a scooter appearing and disappearing out of view behind him.
It all ends with him turning right and hitting the scooter who must have been overtaking him on his off-side. The final message being," Look out for each other", and thats what confuses me.
The way the advert is narrated as the person steps out of his car suggests to me it implies the driver of the car was at fault, yet shouldn't the scooter have been watching what the car was doing too?
I fail to see what the car was doing wrong, he was checking his mirrors and you can audibly here him use the indicator before he/she turned. Perhaps he could have had one final check but surely the responsibilty must lie with the rider who should have noticed his indicator.
Could somebody please point out what I am missing here, as I have a really stupid vacant look on my face everytime I watch the advert, and its scaring my girlfriend.
Mobile Office
|
|
The bike rider should anticipate car turning etc, but driver should not rely on mirrors alone due to blind spot. A simple 'over the shoulder' check can make all the difference.
|
|
|
Previous discussion on it here:-
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=16180
{and now combined into one thread.}
|
I know what you mean about it seeming to be aimed at the car driver, but the important point from it is that regardless of whose fault it is, we should all try to be as observant as possible. If some one elses mistake could have led to an accident, but your good observation avoids it, it's just as good a thing as if the accident would have been your fault.
Maybe the advertisers feel that the onus is more on the car driver since he drives a vehicle which is much more capable of severely injuring or killing another?
|
I think the point of the advert is that not everyone on the road is a good driver/rider, so make sure you look out for them. Obeying the rules of the road doesn't always prevent you from being in an accident, as others can do silly things - like the scooter overtaking a right-turning car in this example.
Hopefully scooter riders will also learn that overtaking cars which may turn right is a pretty daft thing to do.
|
What happens in this advert is exactly what happened to my partner (but luckily he wasn't hurt too seriously).
He was filtering past a line of stationary traffic when a woman decided to do a 3 point turn in the road. She pulled out without looking or indicating when he was very close to her and him and his bike ended up doing a superman impression over her car until being stopped by a shop window. Her first comment was I didn't see him, his reply was you didn't look either!
|
|
|
|
|
