The Government “Compendium of Motorcycle Statistics 2007” confirms that exceeding the speed limit is a contributory factor of just 4 percent of motorcycle crashes. It was jointly rated as the lowest contributory factor along with following too closely.

The biggest factors are failure to look properly, in 15 percent of bike crashes, and loss of control at 14 percent.

'Failed to judge other persons path or speed' is at 11 percent along with careless, reckless or in a hurry, although this doesn’t mean actually breaking the speed limit.

The findings come despite surveys showing that large proportions of bikers do speed – the Government figures showing as many as 25 percent go more than 10mph over motorway speed limits. Logical, as speed obviously isn't a major cause of accidents. We all know speeding is only a political football, and a jolly effective source of tax to boot.

Other information in the report includes the fact the riders are less likely than other road users to drink and drive, with just 1.5 percent of those tested failing breath tests, against an average of 1.9 percent for all road users.

As you'll read from other stories on the site, we've experienced a few prangs and yes, in a way speed was a factor in all of them, so it's difficult to stand up and shout "Bollocks to speed controls!" although we'd like to. The speeds involved in our little escapades weren't particularly high, just too high for the situation. A couple of our incidents involved less experienced riders who tagged on to our group, rode beyond their limitations and took out some of our guys when they crashed. Both crashes resulted in serious injury. Other prangs were down to bad judgement, going into a situation without assessing it properly and getting caught out either by a tightening bend or an extra bit of vehicle - like a trailer!

We spend a lot of our time riding on minor roads, often with high banks and hedges and restricted visibility round corners. If we know the road we can remember where the dangers are, like driveways, junctions, tightening corners etc., and ride accordingly. On roads we don't know speeds naturally drop as no-one knows what's round the next bend. But if you get a guy in a group who doesn't know the road but who wants to mix it at the front, well that's a problem as he will get caught out a some point and be heading for a crash.

The police have instigated massive speed enforcement over the past few years with speed cameras, laser guns, camera cars, reduced speed limits etc. etc. etc. but it all seems to miss the point a bit. None of the plethora of traffic calming measures have reduced bike accidents, so why don't we simply teach people to ride? The present test in the UK is laughable ... wobble round some cones at 5 mph, plod around a town at 25 mph and poddle along a bit of open road at 45 mph. Do that without falling off and bingo! - you've got your licence. Then go out on the nearest decent bit of road, whack open the throttle and hit 100 mph for the first time in your life. No training, no experience, no chance!

So, my suggestion is this: add a few days on a circuit to the rider training. Once the novice has mastered basic machine control and can plod around the roads without trouble, get them on a race circuit and teach them to ride safely at higher speeds. They'll learn about bends and braking in a safe environment and it should also make them realise how scary too much speed can be in the wrong place. At least when they fall off they won't hit a tree or get run over by an oncoming truck. And when they ride on road it'll seem a bloody sight more dangerous after the relative calm of a race track, so hopefully they'll ride with more attention to their surroundings.

I've followed a couple of riders who have lost confidence entering a bend, hit the front brake and crashed. All quite unnecessary, they could have just leant the bike over and ridden through the bend. A race track is a great place to gradually learn just how much you can push the front and how far over you can lean the bike. Then when you get caught out on the road by a tricky bend you have a decent chance of getting round safely.

To continue the theme, perhaps riders should have to attend at least one track day every year, to keep them learning about machine control at higher speeds and to remind them that there are plenty of people out there who are a lot faster. Too many newish riders have got their R1 or GSXR1000 and think that because they've been driving a car for years they can ride a bike fast. But you rarely get to drive a car anywhere near its limits on the road because its acceleration is so limited and other road users get in the way, so speeds are controlled. Bikes don't suffer these limitations. 0-60 mph times under 3 seconds and the ability to duck round other traffic allows the bike to reach three figure speeds very easily. Suddenly the inexperienced rider has entered a whole new realm and left his experience well behind. If he's been sucked in chasing a quick rider, he's in trouble. There's nothing like a quick spin in the fast group on a trackday to show newer riders just how slow they are.

One recent bonus for us, government has finally realised that drivers under the influence of prescribed drugs and with shit eyesight contribute to accidents! So plod are having a bit of a clampdown, testing likely looking motorists for fuddled brains and defective vision.

A favourite police prosecution - crossing double white lines. Now we all know that double white lines are placed on roads to prevent drivers trying to overtake each other in their cars. So the markings reflect their likely level of performance (or lack of it), width of vehicle, ability of driver, etc. - in short, they are painted on the road because the highway authority assesses that a car of modest performance will not be able to complete the overtake in the distance he can see to be clear, especially if the driver is arguing with his wife or dialling his mobile phone at the time.

Motorcycles of course have far greater acceleration and are much narrower than cars. In the picture above the bikes represent no danger, either to themselves or anyone else. They can see the road is clear and they are afforded ample time to overtake, bearing in mind their rate of acceleration. In the picture on the right the second bike is holding back as he can not see round the bend. Notice that the police driver is overtaking anyway! He poses a danger to any oncoming vehicle and threatens the car he is overtaking.

Here the bike is again crossing the white line - there is no oncoming traffic and his manoeuvre is perfectly safe. The police car is not going to have time to complete his overtake before the intersection ahead and will force the vehicle on the left to brake to allow him in.
In this short chase the only vehicle which presented a danger to anyone was the police pursuit vehicle. The bikes were not speeding, were ridden well within their riders' capability and were a danger to no-one.

The second bike stopped when he realised the police were chasing him. They cautioned him for crossing white lines, which he accepted. At court they changed their prosecution to dangerous driving (wankers). The motorcyclist defended this and the jury found him not guilty - quite logical as nothing he did was dangerous. So the police wasted a huge amount of time and (your) money. Why?

Double white lines are becoming increasingly common on UK roads. Although they may be of some benefit to car drivers, constant erosion of drivers' need to make decisions for themselves leads to a dumbing down of driving ability and consequently the potential for more accidents. This probably explains why all the recent "safety" measures introduced on our roads have not reduced accidents. Of course, because of their vastly greater performance (non bikers may be surprised to learn that modern sports bike will accelerate from 0 to 60mph in under 3 seconds - half the time of the most powerful cars) and narrow width, bike riders do not see double white lines as particularly relevant, as they are designed for the needs of cars, not bikes.

We've all been stopped by traffic police at one time or another, and the overbearing officer who lectured you doubtless gave the impression that he and his chums are all highly skilled and responsible drivers able to impart their wisdom and knowledge to less able road users. But these pictures tell rather a different story. Taken from on-board an unmarked police car, the first two photos show the driver executing blind overtakes across double white lines whilst approaching bends. The copper can not see if there is any oncoming traffic and is endangering the car he is overtaking. And any vehicle coming round the bend will be forced to brake heavily to avoid a collision. In the photo on the left the highly trained police driver is travelling through a village at 111mph. There are blind junctions on both the left and right ahead, plus residential buildings. And remember, this is an UNMARKED car - no lights on the roof or bright orange flashes. Again, he has crossed a solid white line. Now he's at 123mph as the car crests the brow of a hill. There are blind junctions ahead and more houses. If anyone emerges ahead the driver will be hard pressed to take avoiding action - no way will he be able to stop. And if he loses control trying, what happens to any poor soul who appears over the horizon? Entering a village at 122mph - the yellow road marking, bollards and cross hatching are all there to indicate a hazard and warn drivers to proceed with caution in a built-up area. 122mph in such a situation seems a bit steep - specially as he's probably just bollocked someone for doing 40 in a 30 limit! On a major road now, and the police car carves between vehicles at 99mph. The driver in the car on the left has panicked and is braking hard, actually leaving the road in the process! If he wavers in his panic and diverts the police car into the oncoming traffic, what consequences a head-on impact at a combined speed of 160mph? The inevitable result of dangerous driving. The police driver brakes violently at 90mph and loses control. The car spins in the road and crashes headfirst into a ditch. Luckily there were no other road users in his path of destruction. The car was written off. During the chase the driver was repeatedly warned by his controller not to endanger himself or other road users. Did he? There are many police chases shown on TV and the public get the impression that police drivers are able to maintain control of their vehicles at high speed. Unfortunately you don't get to see all the videos which end with the police car crashing.

And why, you ask yourself, was Mr. Plod driving like this? Was he chasing dangerous armed criminals? Terrorists perhaps? Nope, he was chasing a motorcycle for the offence of overtaking over a double white line. This used to carry a fixed penalty fine and an endorsement of 3 points on your licence. However, in their supreme ignorance plod now prosecute such an offence as Dangerous Driving, which carries a long ban, a re-test afterwards and greatly increased insurance premiums as and when you get your licence back. So, if you realise you're being chased for such a tedious offence all you can do is run, otherwise you'll lose your licence, your job .... and your home when you can't keep up the mortgage payments! Trouble is, everyone in the area is exposed to stupid, unnecessary dangers just because the police enjoy a good chase.

 

I am emailing to express concern over your attitude towards speed enforcement. Consider this: Recently observed motorcyclists travelling at speeds of approx 90mph in a 40mph limit (2 schools are located in this area) Maybe you should consider this before making such dangerous comments? 90mph - not bad but I still think that the copper at 122mph in 2 tons of lardy Volvo in a 30 limit beats it.

24 June 2005
The number of people injured or killed in accidents involving police cars in England and Wales rose by more than 60% last year. The figures, revealed in a Parliamentary answer by Home Office Minister Hazel Blears, showed that 31 people were killed in collisions involving police cars and there were over 2,000 casualties from such accidents, in the year to April 2004. This was an increase of 11 deaths and more than 700 casualties from the previous year’s figures.

The announcement of the figures has prompted the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) call for improvements to training and risk assessment. IPCC Chair Nick Hardwick said: “Training and risk assessment are the keys to reducing deaths and serious injuries involving police drivers. “We all accept that in emergencies police officers have to speed and go through red lights, but they must not take unacceptable risks, either for themselves or the public. Control rooms have to play a central role in dictating pursuits. “The IPCC will continue to manage or independently investigate the most serious collisions involving police driving. We are ensuring that the lessons learned will benefit the police service.”

According to the Home Office, a total of 126 people have now lost their lives in accidents involving police vehicles in England and Wales since 2000.

The number of deaths caused by crashes involving police cars has fallen significantly but is still "far too high", according to the Police Complaints Authority. It said that over the last year (2004/5) the number of people killed in police chases fell from 42 to 31, adding "the trend may now have begun to move in the right direction". But the PCA also pointed out the number was still far greater than in 1997-98, when nine people were killed.

Driver training

A new police driver training course has been launched after an alarming rise in the number of deaths caused by police crashes. Between April 1999 and March 2000, 24 people were killed by police cars, a 300% rise on the figures for 1998/99.

The Association of Chief Police Officers hopes a new universal standard for driving in England and Wales will help reduce the number of deaths and injuries from police car crashes. The document will be unveiled at the Metropolitan Police Driving School shortly.

The guide is the latest in a series of periodic reviews of police driver training since the first driving schools were set up just after World War II.

Britain's largest police force, the Metropolitan Police, is already trialing black boxes that will give more details of car crashes. The Met hopes the black boxes can reduce police car collisions by 20% and repair costs by 40%.

In tests carried out last March, half of all Metropolitan Police patrol cars were found to be defective

The Police Complaints Authority raised concerns last month about police driving skills, after its own figures revealed it was asked to investigate 24 deaths in the last recorded year. It blames poor training and response times, which are 10 minutes in city areas and 20 minutes in the countryside."There is worrying evidence that the skill and judgement of some police drivers are open to question and criticism," PCA chairman Sir Alastair Graham said.

Britain's largest police force will have its patrol cars fitted with black boxes. London's Metropolitan Police will have the devices fitted into 2,900 of its cars over the next three years. The introduction of the black boxes is aimed at reducing the number of collisions involving police cars.

Patrol cars are involved in an average of three crashes a day in London and last year 21 people were killed by speeding police cars in the capital.

The new recorders will register information on speed, acceleration, whether the siren and warning lights were being used and other details which will help accident investigators. The data will show how the car was being driven 30 seconds before the accident and 15 seconds afterwards. Commander Graham James, head of the safe driving policy, said: "This only serves to reiterate to both officers and members of the public that the Met is committed to improving and maintaining its driving standards."

The fitting of such devices into cars in Berlin has led to a large reduction in the number of accidents.

In March this year every front-line police vehicle in London was taken off the road for mechanical checks after fears that poor maintenance has made them dangerous. The Met's 20,000 police drivers are also being retrained and retested in high speed driving. Along with a tough new retraining course, officers must now pass strict day-long assessments and a written exam before being allowed back behind the wheel.

Government figures show there were 20,221 accidents among the estimated 25,000 police cars, vans or motorcycles in England and Wales in the last recorded year, 2003.

Following the installation of five new speed cameras in East London in February 2003, Chief Superintendent Les Owen, head of the Metropolitan Police Traffic Division stated, "Having witnessed first hand the suffering of families whose loved ones have been seriously injured or tragically killed, I would strongly urge all motorists not to speed"

Owen is currently facing a misconduct hearing after the car he was a passenger in was caught speeding at 82mph in a 40mph zone. His driver, PC Mark Bradley, has been fined £250 and given three points on his licence after magistrates heard that he was speeding because the Chief Superintendant was late for a meeting.

In a seperate case, a policeman who drove his squad car at an ‘eye-watering' 159mph along a motorway was cleared of dangerous driving and speeding yesterday.

Mark Milton, 38, activated a dashboard video camera which recorded him shattering every speed limit he passed through – including 131mph in a 60mph zone and an 84mph dash through a 30mph area.

The officer, an advanced driver, claimed he was ‘familiarising himself' with the newly-delivered 3.2 litre Vauxhall Vectra GSI and seeking to assess its capabilities in the early hours of the morning.

A police officer driving instructor told Ludlow magistrates court in Shropshire that PC Milton would probably have been unable to stop safely at such speeds and should have carried out road tests during daylight hours. But district judge Bruce Morgan found him not guilty yesterday. He described advanced police drivers as the ‘crème de la crème' who must be allowed to practise. However, he harshly criticised the lack of official policy on the subject – the officer was prosecuted by his own force after the video of his 90-minute journey was examined.

The outcome of the case will outrage members of the public prosecuted for exceeding the speed limit only slightly.

An RAC spokesman said: “Most ordinary motorists will just interpret this as ‘one rule for him, another for everyone else.'”

And the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents expressed shock that 159mph was not regarded as dangerous by the court and called for a limit of 100mph on police speeds even in emergencies.

The case has also embarrassed ministers and severely undermined the Government's crackdown on speeding drivers – with 2million prosecutions a year and the 6000 speed cameras already in action likely to double to 12000.

It was at about 1am on Friday December 5, 2003 that PC Milton of West Mercia Police, took the newly-commissioned GSI – described as ‘a beast of a car' – on the road for the first time.

The £21,900 vehicle has a top speed for civilian use, limited by the manufacturer, of 154mph and can accelerate from rest to 60mph in 7.2 seconds. But souped-up police versions are de-restricted with a top speed nearer 170mph.

Under existing guidelines, advanced police drivers testing cars can travel on public roads at speeds they believe is safe to themselves and other motorists. PC Milton, a Grade 1 advanced driver since 1995, is believed to have reached 60mph in St George's Road, Telford, and 84mph in Redhill Way – both 30mph zones. His speed on the 60mph A5 was recorded at 131mph and he hit 159mph on the M54.

Giving his verdicts, Mr Morgan said PC Milton had driven at ‘eye-watering' speeds, but had the skill to do so and needed to practise in conditions similar to those he might face on operational duties. “He was driving early in the morning when most people were in bed. The roads were totally and utterly deserted.”

The level of training required to perform as an advanced police driver was likened by Mr Morgan to that undertaken by concert pianists. “Police drivers have to go out on public roads and that's where they have to do their practise. It would be futile to argue that they can go on race tracks or that the road can be closed off.”

But Mr Morgan expressed deep concern at the force's ‘do your own thing' policy on when and where police drivers should practise at high speeds. He said it followed that ‘any advanced driver can never be prosecuted for speeding as you will always be able to raise the defence that he is practising his skills at this time. Surely this should not happen?”

PC Milton, of Bratton, Telford, left court with his wife without comment other than to say he was relieved. He has remained at work since the incident and has passed a refresher course in advanced driving.

But Brigitte Chaudhary, president of the crash victims' charity Road Peace, said: The acquittal is irresponsible. If he wants to drive like a racing driver why doesn't he practise on a race track?” And Kevin Clinton, head of road safety for RoSPA, said, “We don't believe 159mph can ever be justified on public roads. Even in emergencies, we consider that driving at 100mph or more is too dangerous.”

A series of accidents involving police vehicles in recent years have led the Daily Mail to campaign for a rethink on how the emergency services respond to 999 calls.

The Association of British Drivers welcomes PC Milton's acquittal but condemned the ‘double standards' which see motorists fined for ‘trivial' offences. A spokesman said: “Drivers are facing hard-line enforcement for speeds just a few miles per hour over limits – often limits the local authority has lowered way below what is reasonable.”

(Daily Mail, Thursday May 19, 2005 By David Wilkes and Ray Massey)

Marom
Measures vehicle speed and detects tailgating. Observes traffic via two invisible infrared beams across a traffic lane to measure the behaviour of vehicles. It's directed at a lane with two retro-reflectors mounted in the road surface from a field unit mounted at the roadside or on a bridge. Every vehicle passing between the unit and the reflectors breaks the two beams and triggers the unit computer to measure speed, acceleration, headway and vehicle length. The device captures a digital image of vehicles exceeding pre-set limits. Operates 24 hours a day in all lighting and weather conditions.

DS2 (TruVelo)
Portable attended or unattended trap using a set of three rubber hoses. At one end are Piezo-electric Sensors, being either permanent or a moveable system. Look for the three strips 1 metre apart on the tarmac, at the permanent sites look for the small grey pillar about two foot high. These sites can be linked to Portable Autovision or Autovision 2 allowing the Police to gather video evidence and sometimes these sites will be left unattended.

Autovision
Used to obtain video evidence. A portable video camera or a fixed camera inside a police car. Can be hooked up to most speed trap equipment including VASCAR 5000. If connected to Speedmaster it can grab five vehicles a second.

Speedmaster
Much as DS2, a portable attended or unattended trap using a set of three rubber strips. Usually sited in set locations where the local council and police have decided to put them. Buried in the road, the only give-away can be a small grey box by the side of the road.

VASCAR 5000
Visual Average Speed Computer And Recorder. Has to be set for known distance points, between a bridge and a marker post for example. Police trigger the Vascar at the start of the timed position when the target vehicle passes. When the vehicle reaches the second position the unit is triggered again and gives an instant average speed between the two points. Units deactivate automatically after 7 days which means the operators have to recalibrate them, although most are tested at the start of each shift. Commonly used on motorways, where a police car will wait just out of sight on a slip road and time the target vehicle between two points, usually the white painted square or round markings on the road. They can also use it when following or being followed. Minimum check distance is 1/8th mile. Vascar is also used in police helicopters and motorcycles. Easy for the police to adjust your speed to suit their requirements by simply punching the button a little late at the start and a little early at the end.

VASCAR V Plus
Refinement of the existing system of Vascar - with video. More compact, easier to operate and has a larger display. The system includes a video processor which allows input of data onto the screen. A small CCD camera is at the heart of the system, mounted near the rear view mirror of a police car. A keypad allows the operator to input time, date and operator/area codes. At night, no flash or continuous light is required. An offence may be played back to the unlucky offender on the spot. Not limited to speeding as it records all actions of the errant target vehicle. As with Vascar, plod can easily adjust your speed, but the end result looks far more technical (and therefore accurate) in court.

ProViDa
In car video system fitted to marked and unmarked patrol cars and motorcycles. Consists of colour video cameras front and back, video data generator which records date and time, Police Pilot speed detection device and speed indicator, mobile VHS recorder and 2 colour monitors, one each for front and rear seat occupants. Recorded offences are replayed to offenders and the video can be used in court. The catch here is that Plod don't maintain a constant distance. They can adjust their closing speed to increase your apparent speed by 10 or 15 mph easily. They normally do not use the target vehicle speed indicator (that's why most videos of car chases you see on TV show 0.00 mph as PP speed) and simply prosecute on the basis of the police car's speed, also shown on the video. Courts are always fascinated (and of course horrified) by speeds over 100mph, so if you're doing 85 and plod is slowly catching you .... he only needs to gain a couple of hundred yards to add 20 mph to your "speed"! And the court won't give a toss that he didn't maintain a constant distance ... "Ooh, 100 mph. Terrible. You must be punished severly!"

Robic
Basically a stopwatch, mostly used by foot patrols and bike plod. Can be used over a shorter distance than Vascar, and they do not need to be calibrated. Works in exactly the same way as Vascar, taking a reading of time over distance and then computing the speed.

Calibrated Speedometer
Found in traffic patrol cars. The minimum distance over which a calibrated speedometer reading should be taken is 2/10 of a mile. The police car must be following the target vehicle maintaining a constant distance. Often they are tested against Vascar units or with the help of another device such as a laser gun. Certified calibration is carried out on a rolling road. Complete bollocks as Plod can decrease their distance to up the speed of the target vehicle. It's your word against their's, chum. And you know who'll win that one!

Speed cameras
You've seen plenty, so we won't go on about them. They're a parasitic money-extorting joke - no-one believes they contribute to road safety, but they make the UK Nanny Government feel smug because they're "doing something to reduce road casualties". Bollocks. Luckily, most other European govenments are democratic and so don't have these rubbish cameras. Do yourself and them a favour, go and spend all your money in France, Germany, Italy .... anywhere but blighted old Blighty. God save us, our fathers and grandfathers fought and died in 2 bloody world wars to stop fascist bastards taking over our country, but the Polizi have done it anyway!!

No. We don't condone speeding. But we have a big problem with the authorities' unceasing desire to stamp down on speeding when accidents are caused by tiredness (the biggest killer), defective eyesight (the next biggest), distraction by conversation with passenger, mobile phone, CD changer, girl with big tits, etc., influence of prescribed and illegal drugs, influence of alcohol (suprisingly long way down the list of causes), and poor mechanical repair of vehicle. Sure, high speed will create more damage, but it's very seldom the cause of the accident .... best estimates are around 4%. But hey, not much fun chasing some old boy at 35 mph who's blind as a bat, is it?

Hampshire police force has been fined £500 because they refused to divulge the name of the officer in an unmarked police car caught speeding at 48mph in a 30mph zone on the A27 near Fareham. Hampshire deputy chief constable Ian Readhead told Aldershot magistrates that despite an "exhaustive" four-month investigation the guilty officer has not been found. Oh, how surprising. About 100 officers who were on duty on the day could, in theory, have used the vehicle. Hmm ....

Motorists have been given fines of up to £300 after a special court was convened to deal with 40 people caught speeding along a stretch of road on the A130 Rettendon by-pass. Magistrates in Witham, Essex, handed out fines and bans ranging from three weeks to six months. Each of the drivers and motorcycle riders were caught travelling in excess of 100 mph. In best police tradition there weren't any signs on the completely straight bit of dual carriageway. Inspector Noorman Crabb, of Essex Police, said: "When we had more than 6,500 people injured on Essex roads last year, we felt it was important we targeted this part of road where we had increased incidents of people going above the limit. It's a high quality road of motorway standard but it's encouraging less than high quality drivers who drive along and fail to exercise safe control." Interestingly, there have been absolutely no accidents on this road, so why was it so attractive to plod? Because they knew they'd get lots of easy nickings over 100mph and therefore lots of bans! "The hearing is bringing a concentrated number of motorists together in one sitting to get maximum publicity about driving at such silly speeds." So, nothing at all to do with accident rates, then ....