In order to have any frame of reference of the subject, it’s important to look at as much of the available information as possible. Even though I don’t want to degenerate into a dry statistical analysis, it’s important to look at one of the only credible and thoroughly researched studies performed in our country. When anyone talks about motorcycle studies on accidents in the United States, more than likely they are citing the famous “Hurt Report”, originally published in 1981.
Why are we even talking about a report that’s a shade under 30 years old? Because it’s all we have right now. The Hurt report remains the only motorcycle accident focused study performed in this country. Limited funding has recently been approved for an additional study, but because we’re many years away from any outcome of that study, all we have to work with is the Hurt report:
Actually titled “Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures, Volume 1: Technical Report” - it quickly earned the moniker “Hurt report” named for its primary author, Professor Harry Hurt.
Now that we’ve got the fun trivia out of the way, go and read the entire 435 page report.
For those of you who don’t want to spend the time, it’s Wikipedia to the recue. The report was summarized into a 55 point list, which is still too long for me as well. So here’s an abbreviated summary, combing similar information in order to be brief:
1) 3/4 of accidents involved a car, the other 1/4 were a solo-rider accident
2) Of these “multi-vehicle accidents” (car hits bike, etc) the 2/3 majority were the driver’s fault; they either violated the motorcycle’s right of way, or failed to see them until it was too late.
a. The most frequent form of this is the left-hand turn in front of an approaching motorcycle form of an accident, making the front left hand area the most likely area to be hit. This also makes intersections the most likely area for an accident.
3) Most accidents are likely to happen within a short time, close to the origin of the trip (Which throws a monkey-wrench into that age old argument: I’m just going around the block or down the street).
4) There are several mentions on the subject of conspicuity; the use of lights, bright colors, and the rider positioning him/herself in an area where they are not obscured by other objects.
5) The median crash speed was 29.8 mph (At first, I was surprised to read this, but think about how many accidents happen after an operator emergency brakes).
6) Riders 16 – 24 were overrepresented, 30 – 50 years old were underrepresented (This finding now has thought to have reversed, I’ll talk more about this later)
7) Accident riders were mostly from males from lower economic classes, generally without a college degree and from non-professional jobs. They were likely to have recent traffic citations and/or accidents, and they were most likely had less than 5 months of riding experience. Half of them had something to drink before riding.
8) A VAST majority had essentially no formal training; they were either self taught or taught by friends – 92% total. A significant number did not have a license. (This was has been a rallying cry for the MSF for years!)
9) The drivers of cars were a rather random lot, though over 65 drivers were overrepresented (think about how many more of those are around these days vs. 1978.
10) In regards to motorcycle types, touring bikes with a fairing and windshields are underrepresented, while choppers or café racers were overrepresented.
11) In 98% of multi vehicle collisions, some injury occurred, 45% resulted in a severe injury.
12) There were about 12 more points about gear. In a nutshell – gear is good; it significantly reduces injury and helped people survive. Wear your gear!
There you are; the hurt report in 12 points. Now we know everything; wear your gear, grow up, get your license, don’t let your buddy train you, finish college, make sure you have a touring bike, and by all means avoid intersections and we’re golden, right?
Well, not necessarily - though the Hurt report remains the most comprehensive, we need to look at some other information, which tends to reflect the changing nature of our culture. We’ve grown by about 70 million people in the last 30 years, population density has shifted around, and our standard of living has changed. The automobile has become more attainable for all, thus placing more cars of the road, though keep in mind that there are more miles of road as well.
Does that have an effect on the findings of the study? Professor Hurt asserts in some interviews that while we as a county have changed, the fundamental ideas in the report are still applicable today.
On the subject of our culture, with Professor Hurt’s report and the modern interpretation of his work, we should spend some thought on our culture and how our ideas of the motorcycle may have some influence on the way to ride (and crash).
0 comments:
Post a Comment