Anonymous man down

[pdsquire]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

At about 8:20 this morning a biker was hurrying to work Eastwards along the Albert Embankment in London. He didn't get there.

What happened at the junction of Savoy Place I do not know, but by the time I was there all I could see were a pile of his (inadequate) clothes and the front and back of the bike about 20 yards apart.

It had been designated a fatal accident scene.

R.I.P.

Be vigilant, stay vigilant, stay alive.

(Update: perhaps this may not be quite so bad: wrong information given by policeman manning the road closure. See below)

[StumpyFingers]

Thoughts go out to his family. RIP

[ADE THE BLADE]

not good..........out and about yesterday.....lots of bikers ( moreso sportsbikers) wearing the famous shorts, t shirt and trainers "uniform". why do they do it? it doesnt look cool it just makes other bikers think " what a t#sser ". i for one will wear proper gear whether im roasting in the sun or not for all day rides or short trips locally. me thinks a slight change in the law is needed.......not just the compulsory lid. whats everyones thoughts about this ?

[Lutin]

... me thinks a slight change in the law is needed.......not just the compulsory lid. what's everyone's thoughts about this ?

There is a consultation document from our Road Safety Authority (Rep. of Ireland) that is suggesting exactly that. About time too!

[pdsquire]

I for one will wear proper gear whether im roasting in the sun or not for all day rides or short trips locally. me thinks a slight change in the law is needed.......not just the compulsory lid. whats everyones thoughts about this ?

This poor chap would have been toast whatever he was wearing: you don't break a bike in two and survive. I regret that you probably don't break a bike in two at 30mph either.

I don't agree about gear. Without a helmet you can get brain damage falling from a bike at 10mph, so that's essential. And pillions (particularly children) should be specced-up to the nines as they are entirely vulnerable to the rider's and others' mistakes. But riders' limbs etc are not so vulnerable as their heads, and easier to fix. If we allow contact sports, climbing and fell-running (which we must), we must also allow people to take their own risks when they ride.

I never ride without gloves, but my five minute journey to the office would take more like 15 if I had to wear ATTGATT. Sometimes I ride five or six times in a day between clients and it just wouldn't work to continually be putting gear on over a suit and having to find a place to store it at the other end. On a longer route and at higher speeds I put it all on, but legislation would not make that distinction.

So I'd be against.

[Yahoo]

Yea its nuts innit?

As long as you've strapped down your helmet your legally fine. Insane.

What about the other 90% of you?

I quite like dressing up...

[StumpyFingers]

I hate the idea of being told you must do this you must do that.
But I do think it is important to wear the correct gear when riding a bike.
If it takes a law to make people do so it may help save lives and save the NHS some money from having to treat the gravel rash brigade.

[AlanH]

Is this the location...

Biker fights for life after head-on crash with car | News

If so then maybe not fatal so fingers crossed.

whats everyones thoughts about this ?

Some random thoughts on compulsory protective clothing...

It'll mean no VAT on legally required protective clothing so it may save a few quid.

Do you think the typical muppet wearing shorts and a t-shirt will give a to$$ about getting a fixed penalty for a non-endorsable offence?

It's also not the sort of thing that a camera will pick up on so will there be more police employed to assess riders' kit?

Looking at it from a slightly cynical point of view, is a dead motorcyclist less of a drain on NHS resources than a wounded one requiring rehab? That's one for the bean counters I suppose.

[ADE THE BLADE]

This poor chap would have been toast whatever he was wearing: you don't break a bike in two and survive. I regret that you probably don't break a bike in two at 30mph either.

I don't agree about gear. Without a helmet you can get brain damage falling from a bike at 10mph, so that's essential. And pillions (particularly children) should be specced-up to the nines as they are entirely vulnerable to the rider's and others' mistakes. But riders' limbs etc are not so vulnerable as their heads, and easier to fix. If we allow contact sports, climbing and fell-running (which we must), we must also allow people to take their own risks when they ride.

I never ride without gloves, but my five minute journey to the office would take more like 15 if I had to wear ATTGATT. Sometimes I ride five or six times in a day between clients and it just wouldn't work to continually be putting gear on over a suit and having to find a place to store it at the other end. On a longer route and at higher speeds I put it all on, but legislation would not make that distinction.

So I'd be against.

i can appreciate the inconvenience of putting on / taking off gear between clients but how often have you thought about how vulnerable you may be for those 5 mins travelling to work ? just take lulu"s ( sorry lulu ) little off at maybe 5-10 mph max. ripped jeans and grazed knee to show for it. i should imagine your speed in those 5 mins exceeds 10 mph ?

[StumpyFingers]

The news report is a head on with a car, most of that road is dual carriage-way. Therefore Someone was definitely in the wrong.