Just read and saw a photo online of a very nice 42 Harley rear ended by a citroen in France. The rear end of the bike is in the engine compartment and the biker is deceased, was wondering if it's someone known to the forum. RIP

Nearly home and then run into from behind. The motorcyle was dragged along for some 200 meters?
See article in French:
http://www.lindependant.fr/2013/11/24/espira-de-l-agly-un-motard-mortellement-percute,1816318.php

With some of the obvious comments in the digital response column:
On the assumption that the original lights were used, poor rearlights is a f.cking poor excuse for running into somebody. Next we will have to compensate the car driver for the scare he got....

email (option): rpa@robvanmeel.nl

That's really tragic.

As to whether 1940's rear lighting was the cause, is debatable; the car surely had modern headlights which would have illuminated the bike, which after all, could have been a pedestian or a cyclist.

For all the tales of persecution trotted out by 'plastic rocket' riders returning from France, it is a very bike-friendly country, and the emotive nature of this incident will, no doubt, ensure that the authorities will certainly go to great lengths to find the car driver, who was very likely either asleep or drunk.

Scorp.

Google translate:

Dramatic end weekend on the roads department. A motorcyclist was killed around 19h in circumstances that the investigation must refine. But the first observations made by the gendarmerie de Rivesaltes leave no room for doubt. The accident involved a motorcycle and a car traveling on county road 117 in the direction Peyrestortes - Espira-de-l'Agly. For an unknown reason, the light vehicle struck from behind the rider, who was returning from a day of commemoration in memory of Jews deported from France. Both vehicles, a Citroën Xantia registered in the Aveyron and a Harley Davidson 1942 were literally built into each other. When help arrived, they found about 200 m from the body lying Rider, reflecting the strength of the impact. Worse: Xantia was empty, the driver who fled after the accident, taking care to remove the keys from the ignition ... On site at 18h, fire brigade Rivesaltes dispatched a dozen men to rescue the wounded, along with doctors Samu. Unfortunately, after an hour of effort, the biker, who had only a few hundred yards to go to get home, was declared dead.

Very sad...

I don't know why Governments have spent millions on developing 'cloaking' technology..just issue everyone with a motorcycle and they'll become immediately invisible.. ...

Sadly, one of the great misconceptions of our times and one perpetuated by governments, Police forces and other drivers...Ian

not all the Old Bill ...vis me and Steve M ?

we loves 2 wheels !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

email (option): chris.astinbarker at btinternet.com

Very sad, and they still haven't caught the car driver.

http://www.lindependant.fr/2013/11/25/espira-de-l-agly-appel-a-temoins-suite-a-la-collision-mortelle,1816748.php

It was clear from the front photo that the bike had Commonwealth markings. It carries a Canadian prefixed census number.

Just unbelievable.

If the bike was going about 50-60KpH in this dark country road,
Then the criminal driver must have been doing at least 150KpH,
In order to get the bike embedded into it like that.

email (option): noam10@gmail.com

what a sad story and what a shocking picture. as has been said what speed was the car doing to crush so far into a moving motorbike. rest in peace to the poor rider.

email (option): peter.beresford3@btopenworld.com

do they know who the driver was and do they(French police) think drink driving was in volved

email (option): roger.beck@node6.com

They've just got him...a 19 year old in custody. The victim was a 49 year old school teacher.

He's given no explanation of events.

http://www.lindependant.fr/2013/11/26/l-automobiliste-en-fuite-apres-l-accident-qui-a-coute-la-vie-a-un-motard-a-espira-de-l-agly-s-est-rendu,1817162.php

I'd estimate that the car must've been travelling thirty to forty miles an hour faster than the bike and the distance travelled after the impact (200m)is more than double what the UK Highway Code gives as typical for a car travelling at 70 mph (and that figure was arrived at using drum-braked cars on crossplies).

I think it's fair to say that the bastard was pissed or drugged but they'll never be able to prove it now.

If the rider didn't have his reflective patches on his helmet (you all do have for next year, don't you ?), the driver will probably get off.

You can get hit from behind by a car with good lights, brakes and a driver who, presumably, isn't registered blind but obviously was speeding... Furthermore,you have your lights on and are a large enough object to be clearly seen but are not speeding yourself..

So, how is it exactly that the inference can still be made that it's your fault because you weren't wearing a 2" square patch of reflective material on your crash helmet...

I will always utterly refuse to accept the argument you are difficult to see..a belief that even many motorcyclists argue in favour of as they have been brainwashed to accept that clearly illogical statement. One that cannot be proven by any scientific test......

YOU ARE NOT DIFFICULT TO SEE!!!!...YOU ARE NOT F******G INVISIBLE...YOU ARE JUST AS VISIBLE AS EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND YOU!!!!..

If you are hit by a driver because they didn't see you it's their fault for not looking properly..not yours for being invisible.....It's about time that 'Sorry I didn't see you' resulted in a serious conviction for driving without due care and attention....Ian

Interesting that the French want reflective stickers on helmets, I always understood that stickers on Polycarbonate helmets "Of which a lot of helmets are" was a no no.

The french wanted dayglo vests where did they get with that.When your out at night next time count the cars with one headlight you will be very surprised how many their are.

Ian (Wright), I'm not making a case for it, but living in a country that has also barely progressed from the original Code Napoleon, I despair of the use that can be made of the letter of the law over common-sense and tiny distinctions which cause whole trials to collapse.

This particular driver would probably've driven into the back of the Coca-Cola artic.

The 'no stickers' on polycarbonate thing seems to have been quietly dropped. it's a bit like mobile phones in hospitals.

Ime not standing up for this driver but when we are out on are old bikes doing say forty to forty five miles an hour we are all in danger of getting hit with most cars doing say sixty to seventy miles an hour. I will get slated for this but if all you ride is an old bike now and then i would say your road craft on a bike might not be that good .There is a hell of a lot of cars out their ready to knock you of.

Lorries do 56 mph, not to many cars run into them. I don't know about France but on single carriage way roads max speed is 60 mph most now are 50mph if the car is doing 70 mph why isn't the driver being done for speeding. Lots of slow vehicles on the roads tractors, buses, milk floats, cyclists, horses and joggers, the fact that an old motorcycle is doing 45mph has nothing to do with it. The fact is many people who drive cars shouldn't.

My point is if a car hits a lorry doing 56 mph the lorry driver wont be killed but if it hits a bike doing 45 well you see what happens .And the fear of getting done for speeding will not slow a lot of drivers down.

I understand what you are saying but unfortunately that's a chance everyone using the roads takes, we either consign our old bikes to the scrap heap and take up knitting or keep doing that which we like doing best.

There is absolutely no justification for a car driver running into anything because it is going slower than he is...Pedestrians, cyclists, moped riders, horses, motorcyclists on old bikes...They are all entitled to use the road and other road users such as car drivers should be aware of that fact and constantly taking care to take account of those other road users and the prevailing conditions....

I can hardly imagine anyone blaming a pedestrian that got run over because he was travelling slower than the vehicle that hit him...

You have to get this idea out of your head that you are in any way responsible for the low standards of driving displayed by some car drivers...or anyone else that causes an accident through their negligence...

Once that negligence is recognised when an accident occurs there is some chance of the law being targeted in the correct direction...

However,as long as people think motorcycles/pedestrians etc. are somehow invisible or partially visible and are therefore to blame because they are not dressed up like a christmas tree (for no reason) then we will continue to be blamed for something that is clearly not our fault...

If a driver is paying attention and being observant he will see everything in front of him...When he fails to do that he will hit things..
By my reckoning in the latter situation that makes the resulting collision entirely his fault....

I suspect if you took the body off a car, threw away the airbags and seatbelts and ensured the driver was positioned for maximum injury in an impact there would be a sudden and miraculous increase in the visibility of those 'difficult to see' road users....Ian

Ian, you are absolutely right there is no excuse. But the fact is that the roads are mainly populated by people in some sort of rush who are pig ignorant of any other sort of road user and drive aggressively if they get slowed down by the slightest amount.
On my old slow bikes I get over taken inches from my elbow, cut up, and pulled out in front of in a way that just doesn't happen when I'm on a big fast modern bike with headlights on, a more aggressive appearance and road presence.
I put it down to their accepted risk perception and level of personal aggression, but they just have to get past despite whatever danger they put me in.

And those are just the sane ones. There is of course the dunk, drugged, mobile using, overly aggressive psychopaths as well which I bet is the category that Xantia driver fits into. In my towns local paper every week the court report is full of people with Asian or Eastern European names getting done for drink driving or other driving offences who think that the laws don't apply to them. And I don't think they could care any less about anybody but themselves. Young white women drive with surprising aggression and carelessness as well.

This story has played on my mind since I first read about it as it is one of those " there but for the grace of God go I " situations. I absolutely love riding my old rigid singles about, and use them on an almost daily basis, but the experience is spoilt by modern traffic

From what I can make out from the comments on the French papers website, he was a teacher, well respected and loved in his community. What an atrocious crime carried out by some worthless scumbag.

I have been following this post And so sorry to hear about this accident, and I too believe any one who runs into the back of a bike or any other stationary or moving object is totally at fault , My son in law and myself were run into whilst on an m20 and a CO, whilst waiting and stationary at a railway crossing , The arxhole was on a mobile phone we found out afterwards,The driver behind him made him fess up. Whilst thinking about this accident and ours driving home last night I came up behind a cyclist, and noticed how obvious he was, because his rear light was flashing,perhaps that might be the way to go,How legal are flashing red rear marker lights,andrew.h.

email (option): warbikes@gmail.com

I sometimes use a bicycle flashing red light clipped to the back of my jacket when out on my motorbikes to help visibility. School kids sometimes use them as well, on the way to school in winter. I'm pretty sure it's not legal on a motorbike -here in Germany nothing is!- but I'd rather have a small fine than get rear-ended.
I totally agree with Ian, if you can't see something as big as a bike then you shouldn't be driving. I'm also of the opinion that anyone causing an accident on a motorway should face an immediate ban - if you can't drive in a straight line with everyone else going in the same direction then there is something seriously wrong with your ability to control a vehicle!
Cheers
Pete

email (option): petercomley@web.de

Most of the lamp posts round here are either grey or green. Perhaps they should all have dayglo jackets fitted for those motorists who can't see them. Ron

email (option): ronpier@talk21.com

People like this driver who run away from an accident and then turn up later when they have sobered up and the drugs have left their system should feel the full weight of the law. It should be assumed that they were pissed up at the time of the accident and they should be charged accordingly. There should also be an immediate ban and a prison sentence for anyone who uses 'I didn't see you mate' as a defence. I was once shunted from behind by a woman in a van who hadn't seen me and the police and my insurance company both told me that no matter what the other circumstances were, such an accident is always the fault of the driver who hits the other from behind. If you are sober, awake, not of the phone, travelling at a sensible speed, paying attention and have left enough room for manoeuvre, everything should be OK.

Hi Bill
I had always assumed that if you are hit from behind then the driver in the vehicle behind is at fault. However here in Germany they go on the principle that all participants in an accident are to some degree responsible, as merely by partaking in the activity of using the roads you to some extent responsible for whatever happens to you. I think its so that they can always find a reason to put up insurance premiums.

I would love to test theory this by ramming a police car from behind at a traffic light then get out and tell the plod that is was his fault.

Unfortunately I do need my license

Pete

email (option): petercomley@web.de

Having ridden just motorcycles and mainly old motorcycles as my only form of transport since the 70s I am well aware of the realities of what is going on out on the road...and I would be a fool if I argued there was no risk, or shouldn't be purely because I thought everyone else should behave responsibly...That is never going to happen fully...

However, I don't accept the solution to other peoples poor driving etc. is to ban me from the road, make me wear reflective clothing, attach flashing lights to my motorcycle or any other strategy that involves a change to my behaviour...I am using the road in exactly the way I am entitled to and in a responsible fashion...

The whole point of my argument is focused on the fact that in the current distorted way of thinking the completely innocent party is held in some way to blame..(Going too slowly, being partly invisible?..etc. etc.).
The comments in this thread clearly indicate an acceptance of this on the part of some contributors....

The solution to bad driving is better training...Something which motorcyclists have already been subjected to far more than car drivers...

The second course of action is to stop thinking victims of bad driving are to blame and prosecute the offences of the people who are actually responsible in a meaningful way, which will act as a deterrent, help to concentrate the mind whilst on the road and will ultimately make it a safer place...

The Government thought the strategy of 'increasing the cost' for drinking and driving would work and that has proven to be the case, with a drop in offences for that particular misdemeanour...Why not the same attitude to careless driving?....Ian

I agree with everything Peter Stowe said.

I also support his remarks re young women drivers who in my part of the world are also very agressive drivers. Say anything to them and they start screaming male aggression into their phones, and police love that.

I also believe bad driving has got a lot to do with the make of car they drive, contentious as that may seem, they do not buy transport they buy a perceived image, a statement of social status.

Its the way these cars are advertised,Audi being some of the worst culprits producing soem of the worst driving.
Agressive macho names also reflect in the driving, just look at the daft names they give large pick up trucks, I almost believe tatoos and vests are obligatory.
I won't ride my bike around wiltshire lanes around school run times or saturady mornings when the weekenders are belting around the lanes in their just valeted 4x4's.

If you cannot see a bike, then you shouldn't be on the road.

I also find it ironic,the event the driver of this car was returning from.
I wonder how that and his age co-relate?

There was a time when cars were expensive luxuries and most people on the road had had experience of riding lowly motorcycles out of economic necessity. They, at least, had some idea of the difficulties and dangers that confront motorcycle riders and were more likely to behave in a sympathetic manner towards riders.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of car drivers now, have no experience of motorcycling. Add to that the small minority of riders who do give the rest of us a bad name and we end up with a road going population who are at the best oblivious and at the worst antagonistic towards anyone on 2 wheels.
How about new legislation requiring 6 months of documented motorcycle use before anyone gets a car license??

email (option): petercomley@web.de

All the points of visibility , reflectors stickers or whatever.

The mean problem with 90% of all the car drivers is there PHONE.
I am mostly driving in a VW van so can look good around in the most cars, and if you see
how many drivers are watching there phone, email or twitter or whatever when they are driving
and supposed to look on the road!

There must be coming a law for it that when they are doing it, its the same as trying to kill someone!

So when you on your bike always LOOK even notify the traffic behind you.
Thats for me the best opportunity to keep out of accidents .

When I on my one on the bike I drive a minimum of 55 miles, beter to restore the engine one more time
then something like this.

Bram

email (option): bram@ockhuizen.com

I agree, there is certainly a culture of blaming the victim in such accidents. It's almost as though it is the motorcyclists fault that they are on the road, so must accept the fact that they will probably be killed. We need to change attitudes and get all motorists, no matter what they are driving, to take their responsibilities seriously and stop blaming others when they do wrong. It shouldn't matter if you are wearing a flashing light or a scrap of reflective material, if people took the time to put the phone down, look around them and think about other road users, things would be a lot less dangerous.

So right about blaming the victim.

pal of mine was wiped off his classic bike by an oncoming lorry, considerable injuries.

lorry driver apologised, attending motorcycle cop supported my pal, lorry ahd no less than three on board cameras showing the driver was at fault and on the wrong side of the road as he rounded a corner of the lane.
exerienced rider, lots of long distance riding under his OAP belt, open and shut you'd think?
no way
they otehr sides insurance argued [unsuccessfully] that it was the riders fault evn though he was riding under the speed limit, well on his side of the white line, it was his fault beacuse he was on the wrong part of road on the right side of that line.

You couldn't make it up.

The fact is that car drivers of certain types of vehicle are bloody dangererous, selfish and incompetant and couldnt give a damn about bike riders.

Our local paper regularly carries pictures of Audi A3 cars in the side of someones house.If its upside down its nearly always a BMW,

ride carefully and wear hobnail boots.

This car driver is a criminal. Full stop.

He took the life for a rider, no justification or
relief circumstances about it.

The law in most countries is stating the MAXIMUM SPEED ALLOWED,
And immediately say "Depending on the conditions"

Meaning-
If you are allowed to do 70MpH, you do not do it when:
It is dark, and the there are no light poles by the side of the road,
The road is slippery,
When the sun is in your eyes, and so on.
You cannot justify running someone over not because the sun blinds you,
Nor because it was too dark to see.

You should always limit yourself to a "controlled speed"
in which you can safely control your vehicle, taking into confederation-
The road (Potholes, dirt, sand)Ambient conditions(Rain, snow, sun)
And the safe control of the vehicle.(Unstable, poor brakes, high/low clearance and height..)

If there is a slow and dark turtle on a dark road, with no reflectors on the shell,
You should be able to see far enough and good enough not run in over.

Noam.

email (option): noam10@gmail.com

Hi,

Sorry for the spelling:
Confederation instead of consideration,
Run in over and not him and so on..

I wrote fast and did not chack the spelling..

Cheers,
Noam.

email (option): noam10@gmail.com

With all the gadgets out there today could not something be used to disable mobile phones as soon as a car engine was started .No mobile phone call yet has been worth somebodies life.

Re. the visibility, even road workers with full reflective gear and police cars with blue lights flashing get hit a lot of times, and the statement that motorists claim, they did not see anything, may be true, try this test:

http://www.msf-usa.org/motion.html

It's called motion induced blindness, some more research by goverments here would be helpfull!! (no helmet stickers will help for this!)

This phenomena was already known during WW2 by fighter plane pilots!!

Not excusing the driver of the car here, don't get me wrong, but there is some kind of explanation.

Cheers, (not while on the road!)

Lex

email (option): welbike at same.net

"The solution to bad driving is better training...Something which motorcyclists have already been subjected to far more than car drivers..."

Ian's comment (above) has some truth to it, but there is a point where all the training in the world won't make much difference. For some people, poor driving behaviour is hard-wired into their psyche.

You can't reason with these people. You can't change their behaviour. You can't get them to look ahead into the future and see the accident that's waiting for them down the road.

Ultimately, the only real solution is to design-out the accidents, and that's on the way with new intelligent computers that will do the braking (and even the steering) for the driver in an emergency.

It's a small consolation now that this poor sod is dead. But there is some hope that a new generation of motor vehicles is coming that will, when necessary, take away the control from the moron behind the wheel.

Most of us, I suspect, will be suspicious of this new technology. My guess is that it will have many failures, but its successes will far outweigh them. In less than a decade probably, and maybe less than a couple of years, when the idiot tells you that he "didn't see the bike", we'll be able to take comfort from the fact that the on-board radar DID and took the necessary action to avoid it.

Lastly, the greater danger from cars probably isn't top speed, and maybe not even mobile phones. It's acceleration. Drivers can simply move too fast from zero to sixty, and that's where the vast majority of accidents are happening. Traffic is too spamodic. It rushes from situation to situation. The pressure is always on. And acceleration is largely at the root of it.

We need to legislate super-fast accelerating vehicles off the road, and that probably includes bikes.

That won't be popular. And I loathe legislation. But it's a bitter bill that, sooner or later, we're all going to have to swallow.

For now, however, the mainstream motor lobby is still too powerful. All you can do is ride ultra-defensively. And pray.

email (option): dannydefazio@sumpmagazine.com

['We need to legislate super-fast accelerating vehicles off the road']...

What?..No more M20s?... ...

Your right Danny...But the downside of the computer is the ability it gives officialdom to control every aspect of your life and many of your actions and behaviours...and they intend to...

We have bikes with ABS..a 'rider aid' that is soon to be made compulsory..as no doubt traction control will be, and semi active suspension, and speed and acceleration limiters etc. etc.

If that's the brave new world of motorcycling...and it certainly seems to be shaping up for it, I think I'll pass, I'd rather lead a more risky but interesting life....

Thankfully I'll probably have stopped riding by the time they make compulsory removal of your testicles law to reduce the testosterone level in the blood stream. Just in case it leads to aggressive riding behaviour on your restricted computer controlled moped...Strictly for your own safety of course... ....Ian

Hi Ian, I'm broadly in agreement. But I'm hoping to steer a course that keeps me behind current legislation. In other words, I want everyone else to have the computers and spyware so that I can stay "beneath the radar" on my old BSA and Triumphs.

The ABS, you mention, will be compulsory only on new bikes, and that doesn't affect me too much. I just want the morons in the cars to have mechanisms that limited their ability to hurt me and other people on bikes.

email (option): dannydefazio@sumpmagazine.com

This really is a very sad occurrence, makes all of us riders have the same feelings at the end of the day, anger, upset and makes you think about the guy who was killed, his family and freinds, its terribly sad.

Everytime I go out its pretty clear to me that the majority of drivers in cars simply don't have the right levels of aptitude, are aware enough or even responsible enough to be in charge of a vehicle, a machine capable of causing death. Thats not a rant its a subjective observation through experience, add drink/drugs and it will end badly, we all have lapses of concentration. I hate reading about deaths on the roads, young people and fellow riders, I understand why traffic cops get so angry. My street is a regular terraced residential road wide enough for one car, it really angers me the speeds people drive up and down, peoples pets, children. I've often walked up to residents about how fast they drive and often they have no idea or are just clueless kids. Being on the roads at anytime can end badly, people cocooned in cars are more detracted from reality. Many of you know I have a couple of rather fast motorcycles and I expect people not to see me, stop without warning, brake first then indicate or just turn, what really gets me is the inability to indicate on round-abouts. Ive experienced all sorts, one incident that sticks in my mind was when over taking a car last year the driver swerved at me just because I was overtaking him, I had to swerve to miss him, needless to say I stopped all the traffic on the A5 rather quickley, walked up to him said some rather loud things & wanted to beat him to death with my helmet as he cowerd in his seat apologising, I remember arriving in Normandy and seeing a bent motorcycle after a drunk driver crashed into it. It's just horrible, poor guy riding home, it's a terrible reminder of how things that can end, he really was one of us, this could have been you or me. It is a jungle out there a fellow rider once told me.

email (option): Kit247@hotmail.com

In 1964, I lost two close friends within the space of three months, both died as a result of the stupidity of car drivers. We used to meet at a pub called the Men Of Kent in Rainham, before heading out to one of the many biker's cafes, and after the deaths, there was talk about "there's bound to be a third", "these things go in threes" etc.

These thoughts later went through my head, in v e r y s l o w m o t i o n , when a car pulled out of a side street crossroad in front of me, and having nowhere to go, I planted my Bonnevilles front wheel in the rear door of the car and somersaulted (according to witnesses) over the car. Having been unconscious for two weeks with a badly fractured skull at the age of nine, a head landing would probably have been fatal, however, I landed more or less on my feet with only a bleeding finger to show for my excursion.

A motorbike policeman arrived on the scene, and, after checking that I was okay, went to see how bad the Bonnie had faired. He came back to me and said that it wasn't too bad, but the forks had "had it". After taking statements from the many witnesses, he returned to me and said I'd have no trouble with the insurance, because there was nothing much I could have done to avoid the collision, but he then gave the inexperienced lad of nineteen some advice that has stayed with me all my riding and driving life - "treat everyone on the road as, potentially, your enemy, and be prepared for the worst thing they could do if they wanted to harm you".

Scorp.

You are spot on there, I've always said the same thing. But unfortunately that thinking wouldn't have helped the poor bloke that got rammed from behind

email (option): horror@blueyonder.co.uk

Aparently the poor chap involved was looking forward to taking part in the Harley-Boys equivalent of the 200 for 70 event. (You can probably only open the link if you have a Facebook account).

https://www.facebook.com/events/487951101284861/?source=1

I wonder if his bike will be restored? I'd like to think that my old Matchless would live again if the worst ever happened to me.