careless operation

[bigeasy]

speed limit was 55 n i was prolly at 70 so yes i was over limit but even at 55 ida hit the wreck it was just too close. ive been nofd for a very long time and this particular bridge has always been an issue. yes i should have been more vigilant but twas late id been workin for 36 hours n it was after 1am veryvery lite traffic. though ill admit none of that in court. leo ems and nofd were on scene and no one had the foresight to post a warning vehicle at the peak. so thats what ill argue might getta break might not but gonna take a shot. ive a throttlemeister on the new bike im hopin that helps with my right wrist problem.

 

[Josh]

let me just ask how many members here slow down on every hill bridge or overpass they come to when they cant see whats on the other side? bet not many n those that do r the ones that cause accidents by suddenly slowing for no reason

First off, sorry about your crash.

I am one who slows down under NORMAL riding conditions when my vision of the route is obscured. Not always without exception and not always at or below the posted limit, but generally to a speed within what I think is my ability to handle. In this case, you mention being 15 MPH over and the situation was beyond your ability to handle so you jumped. From my perspective, you had the ability to shed 15 MPH for that obstruction and still be at the speed limit. The conditions probably called for even less than the posted limit, so you didn't really leave yourself any room for error and you took it on the chin. The line about accidents caused by slowing is self-delusion in this case. Stupid hurts, man. We're all stupid from time to time. The important thing is to admit it, accept it, and put it in the back of your mind for the next time you can't see around an obstruction. Blaming anything but your own decisions and abilities in this case is cheating yourself. Experience is valuable, but sometimes it hurts to get it.

I'm also in the camp that believes it is best to stay ON the bike and do everything you can to bring it under control. Maybe if I was headed for a cliff I would jump off. I dunno. I figure I'd probably just roll off after the bike. In your situation, I'd rather slow my whip down and let it absorb most of the impact if I couldn't avoid the impact altogether. But I'm not in the camp that accepts bailing off as the appropriate response to much of anything. If you can't get it under control in time, you're bailing off anyway. Why cut steps and go straight to failure?

I don't mean any of this as an insult. I'm mostly joining in the effort to get you to consider that there were a few mistakes here that you should learn from and avoid in the future. Heal up quickly and like new, and good luck with everything. In the case of the ticket: I think you should focus on the fact that personnel were on-scene for X amount of time, and that no traffic control was in place. If they'd been there a while, they should have at least had up some cones or flares. I agree with what GNBRETT said about it still being your responsibility to adjust to conditions, but I think you could probably acknowledge that lesson in this without having to pay a ticket on top of it.

 

[Tufbusa]

yes there were leo on scene they were on the down hill side of the wreck guess it was too far to park on the uphill side and walk all that way. much shorter walk if they stayed on downhill side.i dont know how long u been riding but i do know how to brake and how to bail out before contact. itsa split second decision u really dont wanna b on the bike when it makes contact.so let me just ask how many members here slow down on every hill bridge or overpass they come to when they cant see whats on the other side? bet not many n those that do r the ones that cause accidents by suddenly slowing for no reason

Really now?

Let me help you out a little with your fairy tale. At your proclaimed 70 mph you were traveling 102 fps. The HURTS report says the "Average" (Apparently you are much better than average) rider needs 182 ft to reach a full stop. You being on a sport bike and knowing how to brake should be able to shave some time off that distance. At 70 mph it takes 1.8 seconds to cover the 182 ft stopping distance.

You were on an overpass with a 55 mph speed limit where the visibility was apparently less than 182 ft? In less than 1.8 seconds you were able to analyze the situation, determine impact was eminent and bail off the bike? I'm no crash detective but I would think most riders who "Know how to brake" would have been busy burning off all the speed they could with the brakes to minimize the impact while looking for any sort of escape route available.

Since you are the very first person I have ever read or heard of bailing off a bike to avoid impact, what are the benifits of bailing and giving up the ability to burn off speed with the brakes before impact? I'm totally lost of reasoning.

While I'm far from being a professional, I like to think I do a decent job on the brakes and if I have 182 feetto work with at 70 mph on dry pavement I can easily avoid impact.

I think once you regain all your faculties from the head impact you will remember latching onto that front brake lever just before the lights went out.