TC1474

You cannot ride without counter steering regardless of whether you have been taught or not. Someone (Very eminent medical man) did once explain how certain things become automatic without having been taught, and countere steering whether on a motorcycle or pedal cycles is one of those things we do without thinking. For some people to have it explained actually upsets their natural flow and rythym and there have been some crashes because they have worried about doing it so much even though they were still doing it as a natural instinct.

There are some quite wide fitting boots out there, for example Daytona (which are quite expensive) or a better bet (I also have a wide foot because of my disability) is a brand called Prexport from Italy which I think are still imported by Fowlers of Bristol. A good leather boot will be tight to start with, but with wear it will give and mould to the shape of your foot and become snug but comfortable.

One of the main benefits of riding a motorcycle is the fact that unlike our 4 wheeled counterparts, when we come upon lines of stationary traffic, we can still make progress and filter through towards the front of the queue. Filtering has been the cause of many a debate over the years with many arguing about the legitimacy of such an action. So what is the legal position? Well for those of you who are unsure, let me ask you a question! What is filtering? In simple terms it is an overtaking manoeuvre, and in most cases it is perfectly legal provided: You don't cross over or straddle a solid centre white line system. You don't overtake after a 'No Overtaking' sign. You do not overtake the lead vehicle within the confines of the zigzags of a pedestrian/pelican crossing as it may have stopped to allow pedestrians to cross. No danger is caused to other road users and no vehicle is caused to alter course or speed. So in short, providing those 4 conditions are complied with then there shouldn't be a problem, however when it comes to accidents, civil liability can paint a somewhat different picture. When a motorcyclist is involved in a filtering accident, most insurance companies will try and use the case law of Powell v Moody which dates back to 1966 to mitigate their losses. In that case a motorcyclist was overtaking a line of stationary traffic and was found to be 80% to blame when he hit a car which was 'inching out' into the carriageway after a milk tanker signalled to him to pull out. The court felt that the motorcyclist was undertaking an 'operation' which is fraught with great hazard and which needed to be carried out with great care. In the case of Clarke v Whinchurch in 1969, an overtaking motorcyclist (Moped) in similar circumstances was found to be 100% to blame. The judge ruled that he (the motorcyclist) should have realised something was happening up ahead when a bus in a line of slow moving traffic stopped to let a vehicle out from a side road on his left. The car came out quite slowly in front of the bus and was hit by the moped. (f you are ever involved in a filtering accident, you probably won't want to quote this case to the other side). In more recent cases (Leeson v Bevis Transport 1972) the motorcycle and emerging vehicle were found equally responsible. The court said that the motorcyclist did nothing wrong in overtaking the line of stationary vehicles, but needed to keep an effective lookout, whilst the van driver should have been aware of the possibility of vehicles overtaking in this way. The most recent case of this kind was in 1980 in the case of Worsford v Howe. In this instance the motorcyclist was in a separate lane intended for vehicles turning right, when he was hit by a car which was intending to cross both lanes of traffic and turn right. The court found once again that both rider and driver were equally to blame and settled 50/50, however this was superceded by DAVIS - v - SCHROGIN (2006) which found 100% in favour of the filtering motorcyclist. In filtering cases, the court will when deciding who is to blame will look at: The speed and position of the motorcycle in the road. Whether the stream of traffic was stationary or moving. How fast the other vehicle emerged from the side road or from the line of traffic. Filtering is an accepted and legitimate practice, and unless there is a case of dangerous or careless driving to answer, or one of the 4 conditions mentioned previously have been breached, then it is very rare that a Police prosecution will follow, but in terms of a civil action, then this is where the real headache can begin. As it stands at the moment, although some of the most recent cases have found both parties equally responsible, and in some cases they courts have found 100% in favour of the motorcyclist, you have to bear in mind that you could still end up bearing 80% or even 100% of the blame depending on the evidence. So to sum up, filtering in most cases is perfectly legal, is accepted as being a benefit of riding a motorcycle and is something that just about every rider has done at some stage without any problems, but, should you be unfortunate to have a collision whilst filtering, then just be aware of the pitfalls you are likely to encounter until such time as current case law is updated again.

A heavy guage cordura (textile) is actually 5 times more abrasive resistant than leather. The downside is that because cordura does notn give or mould to the body the same way as leather does, you can't wear textiles tight like you do leather hence the reason for the compromise between leather and textile. As an all rounder, a good quality textile is a dam good option.

Think of it as a slighty modified DAS. if you want to enhance your skills consider enrolling withyour local IAM or RoSPA group.

Bit of a sweeping statement You obviously are not aware that some strap on back protectors can cause more problems than they solve in road use, whereas a lot of in built back protectors are actually safer, particularly those made of memory foam which is standard on a lot of garments these days.

It was actually a well maintained and lubricated chain, but there was a manufacturing fault which did not come to light until it was too late. And it was some 20+ years ago and technology has moved on since then.

As some of you may know I am heavily involved in the study of motorcycle protective clothing for over 25 years with over 20,000 investigations behind me and as a result I act as a consultant to various bodies on what is good, what is bad and how clothing reacts in crash situations. I have just been going through some old files, updating and adding to the reports and I came a cross a few real cases which I thought you might be interested in, and which may convince or remind some of you the importance of being properly protected, but without the sales/racing/ publicity hype that tends to be rammed down the throat particularly to those of you who are perhaps new to riding. So, I hope you find them interesting and of some help. Case study 1 An experienced rider having recently passed his RoSPA advanced riding test, is riding to work one morning on his Honda CBX550. He is wearing his leather jacket and leather trousers purchased a few weeks before, having previously not been convinced of the value of leathers! As he commenced to overtake a slower moving vehicle on a main A class road, he misjudged the speed and distance of an approaching vehicle and collided head on with a closing impact speed of about 120 MPH. The rider was found lying in a ditch about 200 yards from point if impact suffering multiple fractures to his left leg, knee, right arm as well as severe internal injuries. He was conveyed to hospital where his family were advised that if he survived they would have to consider the amputation of both his arm and leg, particularly his leg. He was admitted into theatre and as they commenced cutting of his leather trousers he lost in excess of three pints of blood in less than 30 seconds. They also found that his leg was more severely injured than they at first thought, but due to the close fitting of his trousers, they had actually acted as a splint and restricted the loss of blood giving him vital time to get Hospital treatment. Because both his trousers and jacket had fitted so well, the requirement to amputate either his leg or arm was eliminated. An estimated 12 month stay in Hospital was reduced to 6 weeks, and within 10 weeks he was driving again, albeit an automatic, and within 16 weeks he was driving manual gearboxes. His speedy recovery was attributed to good well fitting leathers. Had he been wearing anything else, as he had done only a few weeks earlier, it is thought that he would have bled to death at the side of the road. Although he is now permanently disabled, he is for the main part able to live a normal life although he will never ride a motorcycle again. Interestingly, his trousers were not armoured or padded, they were simple “Texas” style jeans, and given the severity of the impact it is thought that armour would not have made that much difference. What was his saving grace was the fact that he had leather trousers on which fitted well. This accident occurred about 18 years ago! This was my Brother in laws accident, and he now lives happily in Austria with his second wife and young son. I am delighted that I was able to talk him into wearing the correct kit. Case Study 2 A Police rider was issued with a very expensive pair of black leather full length touring boots as part of his riding uniform. They took about 2 months to break in due to the hardness of the leather, but as soon as they had bedded in they started to collapse and fold reducing the support around the ankle. However this particular force only issued 1 pair of boots a year, and therefore the rider had no option but to continue wearing the boots until he received his next issue. About 4 months after the date of these boots being issued, the rider was involved in a crash and received serious injuries to his left leg. Despite the high purchase price of the boots, they had failed to afford the full degree of protection that would normally be expected. The sloppy fit had not held his foot together or prevented crush injuries. This accident caused 5 ligaments to become detached, calcifying of the bone amongst many other injuries, as a result of which he was pensioned off from the Police service with a registered 25% disability. The rider to this day still walks with a limp, has a size 14 left foot instead of a normal size 11, is in constant pain and will require the foot to be amputated at some time in the future. there are also other associated back and joint problems as a result of this injury. Specialist safety footwear manufacturers examined the boots worn at the time of the accident along with medical professionals, and confirmed that had the rider been wearing footwear even a cheap but protective boot, then the chances are that the rider would have made a full recovery and would probably still be serving to this day. The rider in question was me! Case Study 3 A young man was out riding his motorcycle (not me this time ) one sunny summer afternoon, wearing a pair of jeans and training shoes. He was travelling at a speed when the bike lost power despite the fact that the engine was revving quite freely. The rider coasted to a halt at the side of the road in order to investigate the problem. As he stopped, he put his left leg down to support the machine and promptly fell onto the floor with the motorcycle falling on top of him. The mechanical problem was due to the final drive chain snapping. As it broke, it smashed its way through the left hand engine casing and then sliced through the riders lower left leg like a knife through butter. As it had happened so quickly and suddenly the rider had not felt his lower limb being suddenly amputated and had tried to stop normally. His foot and ankle were found some 250 yards back down the road still wearing the training shoe and a rather bloodied sock. The surgeons were unable to reattach the severed foot, but they went onto confirm that had the rider been wearing a good quality leather boot, it would have been unlikely that the chain would have managed to penetrate the leather, although he would have probably been very bruised, but! His foot would have remained attached to his left leg. On the subject of gloves, for you then A rider wearing proper protective clothing and lightly padded leather motorcycle summer gloves is travelling down a main road, when another motorcycle in front throws up a loose sharp stone chipping from the back wheel, hitting the following riders middle finger. The rider flinches at the initial impact but gives it no further thought until he arrives home an hour or so later, although he did find it increasingly difficult to operate the clutch lever. On arriving home he notices that his middle finger is becoming quite painful and swollen, and severe bruising is starting to appear. Examination of his glove reveals a razor sharp cut from just below the knuckle of the middle finger to the tip of his finger with the cut extending through the full layer of leather and the lining, although the skin on his finger had not been broken. The finger took about 10 days to heal properly, but the question is still asked to this day, how much more severe would the injury have been had the rider not been wearing gloves, motorcycle or otherwise. Heavily padded gloves would have made no difference at it was the section from the knuckle to the tip of the finger that was injured. In another case relating to helmets  A Police motorcyclist with over 20 years operational experience (Not me I hasten to add, but a good friend) attended his annual audiometric test, only to be told that his hearing was at least 30% defective at certain frequencies. During his service, he had never worn any form of ear defender, and in the days of issue open face helmets, no noticeable degradation of his hearing had been recorded, although he had been wearing a flip style helmet for the previous 3 years. Because of the type of helmet, his helmet radio earpiece volume varied according to the type of riding. The two tone horns/sirens required the radio volume to be louder than would normally be expected, the wind noise passing through this particular style of helmet also increased the wind noise level well above that accepted as a safe level. He was subsequently suspended from riding and his condition was recorded as an industrial injury. It was then made a condition of appointment to the motorcycle wing that all riders must wear some form of ear defender, and flip front helmets were withdrawn from service. The rider who first raised the problem is now retired and is currently in the process of suing his force for his disability which was ignored by health and safety experts within the force. On the subject of riding without any protective clothing on at all. One hot summer afternoon, a young female provisional licence holder who rode a 100cc machine decided to nip down to the local shop on her motorcycle for a packet of cigarettes. Rather than change into suitable clothing, she decided to put on her crash helmet as was required by law, but otherwise she was dressed in nothing more than a bikini. about a mile into her journey, she was travelling at about 50 MPH on a national speed limit road. A car pulled out of a minor road into her path causing her to brake and lose control. She fell from the machine and slid for about 100 feet rolling over and over as she went. On arrival at Hospital it was found that not one part of her body had escaped being either torn, burnt, bruised or otherwise damaged. For three years after the accident she was admitted to Hospital on a regular basis for plastic surgery and skin grafts. It is probably fair to assume that had she been wearing clothing a little more substantial than her bikini, whilst she may still have been injured, the long lasting damage would have been far less severe. I attended this accident, and I have to say that the young lady had a body to die for, she was drop dead beautiful prior to the accident (and I don't mean this in any sexist way, it is just a fact). I still see her from time to time even now and she still bears the scars of that horrible day. Not surprisingly she has never ridden a motorcycle since, but before the accident she was a bike nut, but was one of those believed that accidents always happened to other people, she learnt the hard way. All too often riders will spend large amounts of money on the latest high specification motorcycle and pay scant attention to the equipment they wear. many times a rider may have nothing more than a plastic shell on his head, covering his body with a pair of jeans, trainers and a lightweight jacket. Too many riders think that the helmet and jacket are the most important items of kit, rather than recognising that head, legs and feet are the parts of the body that receive 90% of all serious injuries, not the upper body. It should perhaps be remembered that a motorcycle can be repaired or replaced, but your skin is a dam site harder to put right. The advice should always be, Buy the best quality at a price you can afford, not because it is a fancy label. Ensure that it fits correctly. If it becomes damaged or worn, replace it straight away. If you have friends or family considering taking up motorcycling, then advise them to consider buying their protective clothing first, and then use the balance of their budget to buy the bike rather than the other way round.

Screeching rubber on tarmac and locking brakes shatters the May air as you wrestle desperately to avoid hitting the young child who suddenly appeared from nowhere right in front of you. A near miss that could have been so much worse had you not been obeying the speed limit. But shouldn’t you have been expecting something like this to happen? After all it’s 3.30 in the afternoon and children just out of school always hang around sweet shops like the one you just passed. You just weren’t being observant enough! As a motorcyclist, “observation” is a word you hear time and again. As a learner you are told to regularly take “rear observation” so that you are aware of what is behind you. At advanced level you are advised to develop your level of observation further up the road to give yourself more time to plan. However, an area of observation that is often overlooked is the ability to link what you are seeing to circumstances that may develop as the ride progresses. For example let’s take a country road on a crisp winter’s day (well not everyone hangs up their leathers at the end of October!). You’re riding along when suddenly you are confronted by a large slurry of steaming cow dung in the middle of the carriageway. What would be your first thought? For many, it would be how to avoid passing through the slurry as it is often slippery and certainly not very pleasant. Others may ask where the cows are. It would be fair to assume that if the slurry is still steaming, then it will have been recently deposited, therefore there is a better than evens chance that the cows are still in the vicinity. Taking the link a stage further. Does the slurry cross the road from one side to another or is the road covered for some distance ahead? This will indicate to you where the cows have gone. There is also activity around the farm at the moment so you should be on the look out for farm machinery moving around the area or workers crossing the road. Potential dangers may lie ahead and the warning signs are there for you to see. On a more routine basis, how many times have you followed behind a bus and observed a passenger stand up and move towards the exit door? If you ask the majority of riders what their thoughts might be, many would be thinking about finding a safe place to pass the bus. Before we even think about overtaking it would be worth considering the possibility of passengers running from the other side of the road to catch the bus you are following. Also look out for buses travelling the other way as bus stops are often opposite one another. Garage Forecourts? What is the likelihood of a vehicle pulling out in front of you? Has any petrol or diesel been spilt across the road as a result of a driver’s failure to secure the filler cap? If you are on a fast section of country road and ahead you see a solitary house standing by itself just before a bend, it may be a farmhouse set back off the road. Therefore look out for slow moving farm vehicles in the area. However, it could also be the start of a small town or village so start preparing yourself for speed limits and pedestrians. What is important is that having looked at the situation, considered the possibilities, and acted accordingly, nothing has been left to chance, and therefore there should be no nasty surprises around the corner. Here are a few other examples: A row of parked vehicles - doors may open, there is a possibility a vehicle may move off, pedestrians may step out into the road and small children may be hidden from view. Ice Cream vans, mobile shops, school buses - beware of pedestrians, particularly children. Following behind a van or lorry - look at its livery for pointers as to where it might stop. For example post boxes, shops, public houses, garages or building sites. Traffic Accident – look out for other drivers slowing down to have a look. If used correctly, observation links are invaluable in helping you to anticipate potential problems. By recognising where problems might arise you can give yourself that all-important ingredient - time to react. Try putting it to the test, you may surprise yourself as to how many problems you anticipate before they actually occur.

Those instructors who shout or lose their tempers are thankfully in the minority. The majority appreciate and realise that you are firstly inexperienced, and secondly on a very sharp learning curve and mistakes are bound to happen. Where patience can sometimes be in a little bit of short supply is usually during CBT when the 16 year old tetostorone filled youngsters come along and think they know it all or want to show off in front of their mates or fellow students and don't listen to a word they are being told. Those doing DAS are not usually a problem because they are at a different level and are willing learners, particularly bearing in mind the money they have paid. If you do get a problem, then this is something that can be addressed later on as their are channels that can be used, but probably the best advice is in order to find the school that best suits your requirements, is give a few of them a call, arrange to go and have a chat where you can express your concerns and see how you get on.

Although this thread is now quite old, I am a new boy, so I thought you might find it beneficial if I gave you my perspective as both an IAM and RoSPA examiner and as someone who has been involved with the DSA, DIA and BMF regarding post test training and instruction. The two recognised advanced bodies are RoSPA and the IAM, RoSPA being the oldest by about a year and both are coming up to 50 years old. Both bodies use Police qualified class 1 riders such as myself, but the IAM is a simple pass or fail whereas the RoSPA test is graded bronze, silver and gold. There is a retest requirement for RoSPA riders every three years maximum, there is no such requirement for the IAM. Both groups use Roadcraft as their bible simply because it has stood the test of time with the most recent re-write bringing it bang up to date (which I was involved in for my sins) as opposed to the old blue book. When the new definition was agreed about 9 years ago between RoSPA, The IAM, BMF, DIA and the DSA, it was accepted by all that most organisations would have difficulty competing with RoSPA and the IAM simply because of their wealth of experience and knowledge, but it was also agreed on a minimum standard, namely that the RoSPA bronze grade would be the equal of the IAM pass, although there would be riders with (and there are|) capable of holding the higher gold were they to take the test. It was also agreed that the RoSPA gold is the civillian equal of a Police class 2 and is therefore universally recognised as being the highest riding qualification outside of the Police service. The RoSPA test is also somewhat more intense than the IAM test, but the procedures are more or less identical. With regards to instruction, as with all types of teaching there is good and bad. 14 years ago I was tasked with setting up, writing and running the RoSPA diploma for advanced instructors which I also had accredited by Btec. The aim was to produce instructors who were recognised as having proved themselves not only in their riding, but their knowledge, presentation and instructional skills. Over the first couple of years of running the course I and my team learnt many lessons and it developed very quickly, but it has become accepted by the DSA and others as one of the major advanced trainer qualifications. The IAM were fairly slow off the mark and it has taken them a while to catch up, but they are slowly getting there. Unfortunately they relied for a long time on downtraining within their groups and so the quality of their instruction was only as good as their chief instructor which in many cases was appaling, but again this is slowly changing. However, as with all groups there are good and bad, but with a RoSPA diploma holder they are subject to a three yearly retest of their instructional ability as well as their riding so they are kept on the boil. The DSA decided that they wanted control over all training which included post test training, so they sent two of their examiners to Devizes to the Police advanced course so that they had an understanding of what we are about. My contacts at Devizes told me that they lasted about 10 days as everything went straight over the top and they never completed, but they felt they had sufficient information to be able to devize their own advanced qualification. I am told by many that what the DSA is doing is simply providing an enhanced DAS training facility and is nothing like the recognised perception of advanced training. Bikesafe was set up about 6 years ago as a PR excercise in Thames Valley (who have now dropped it) but was taken up by many other forces. Initialy it was very encouraging, but many of the riders used do not hold a class 1 ticket just a standard (class 3 or 4) so they are not advanced, and many bikesafe instructors openly encourage excess speed on open roads and it will not be long before there is litigation for a bad crash. The biggest problem however is that many riders do a 1 or 2 day course with Bikesafe and believe they have been trained when in fact all that is happening is that they are being introduced to the principles of advanced training and you are not going to learn everything in a few hours. BMF, DIA and the like offer post test training, but by their own admittance they are limited in many cases because they don't have the background or training at advanced level and their examiners are non Police trained, however, there is some usefull information that can be taken away from these courses providing it is the right information. I will post a couple of items up later to help you decide how to ensure your instructor is suitably qualified, and as a matter of interest you might be interested to know what we examiners look for and how we conduct the advanced riding test. The bottom line is that some training is better than no training, just make sure that you have the right instructor or group.

The absolute offence of the nearside overtake (Undertaking) was removed from the statute book on the inroduction of the 1972 Road Traffic Act, but prior to that act it was an absolute offence. Instead, the prosecution had to show that the vehicle carrying out the undertake drove in such a manner that it was likely to cause danger to other road users, and then in 1992 when the old section 2 offence of Reckless driving was replaced with dangerous, the prosecution had to show that the standard of riding of driving fell well below that considered reasonable for an average driver. So for example, it can be perfectly acceptable on a Motorway or Dual Carriageway to carry out a nearside overtake if someone is sat in lane 2 but lane 1 is empty, or if traffic is queuing in lane 3 (as is often the case on the M4) but lanes 1 and 2 are moving freely. It is also perfectly acceptable to undertake when directed to do so by a filter light or lane. In the case of filtering, again a perfectly legal thing to do providing certain conditions are complied with (as has already been mentioned), but from a civil law point of view, in the past if an accident occured as a result of filtering, then the case law of Powell v Moody (1966) would be quoted as the statutory defence. In this case, the filtering motorcyclisy was held as 100% liable. However, in 2006, the case of Farley v Buckley changed all that and the filtering motorcyclist was found to be 100% blameless so Powell v Moody was thrown out of the door. In 2007 this was addressed again when another filtering case went against the rider, and so the Royal Courts of Justice (RCJ) issued an instruction that all cases had to be decided on its merits and the evidence not merley on the principle of the case law that had gone before. Hence why at the moment some filtering cases will go for the motorcyclist, some will go against, some will get settlement but with a degree of contributory negligence, but this is a better state of affairs than we had previously. I have jsut finsihed a case in Lincoln where a motorcyclist was filtering down lane 1 of a two lane dual carriageway and a stationary car pulled out of the line of traffic and hit the bike. Liability was settled in favour of the motorcyclist and he received £20,000 compensation plus all out of pocket expenses. This is an area where I can ramble on for hours, so I won't bore you, but I do hope it has given you an idea thagt if you are hit whilst filtering, don't assume that you are going to be immidiatelym held liable. PM me if that is the case and I will be delighted to help.