DualSportBiker

We can't tell if there is a "no right turn" sign outside of frame. It is also plausible that the solid line is not parallel, but a badly painted replacement as someone else suggested.

Fixing Thailand's road safety problems will not be done overnight or with an all-encompassing campaign. It needs to be done incrementally. A reasonable place to start is where enforcement can be done by a system with a high degree of accuracy. Add high-volume and visibility and there might be a recognition that discipline is a requirement, not an option. Lane changes and traffic lights are two areas with massive volume of infractions, high impact on traffic flow, significant numbers of accidents. Both can be automated easily and accurately.

gr8fldanielle asked what the problem with merging over a solid line is - does it kill anyone? One key purpose for road markings is to define standard and therefore predictable behaviours. If drivers can ignore one rule, why not all? Every time you enter an area with specific markings, you should expect most if not all road users to act in a predictable way. That makes spotting the exceptions easier. When the majority of drivers do precisely what they want and precisely what is prohibited, we have to pay attention to every car in more detail and that makes spotting exceptions harder. So to repeat, they need to start somewhere and this automated system should reduce the problem of commissions and corruption.

12 minutes ago, Kurtf said:

That's the way I was taught to interpret two lines side by side like that.

I've been in Phuket once a month for 6 months for work - you are right. I see groups of young tourists chasing and racing each other along the coast road. They have no discipline, no helmets, flip-flops and t-shirts on. It is no wonder so many are injured or worse. I've only spotted a couple of tourist riders who could obviously ride - and guess what - they were riding sensibly... Phuket is the only place where I am happy to see the BiB out in force stopping rented cars and bikes and looking for proper licenses. 

I read that renters of bikes need to validate a proper bike license before renting now - highly appropriate. It was a massive scam before. Hopefully there will be fewer rented bikes on the roads when I go back in April.

10 minutes ago, GarryP said:

I was in Phuket a couple of weeks ago and rented a motorcycle. I was very shocked by the idiocy displayed by bike/scooter riders.  But what was even more surprising/shocking to me was that 9 out of 10 of the idiots who were riding in a crazy fashion as if they were taking part in the Manx TT and coming out of junctions without looking, were the foreigners not the locals. I assume that most were tourists. I also saw quite a few in bandages and casts from what I assume were motorcycle accidents. Unbloodybelievable.  

I second that. It looks to me as if the bike should have had a full view of the white car by the 7 second mark on the clip, perhaps slightly before. He is clearly paying no attention to oncoming traffic, saunters out slowly and at an 45º angle rather than straight across with purpose. He does not alter direction; the car being overtaken was moving at a snail's pace and was not a threat for several seconds to come. 

His first mistake was pulling out without proper observation, his second was not monitoring the changing situation and third was not reacting, either early pulling right, or late by accelerating left away from the car. After a long night shift he could easily be overly tired. Whilst he made a series of errors, it is a sad waste of life. And yes the car was driving rather fast, but the vast majority of the blame lies with the rider.

6 hours ago, Dexlowe said:

The truck wasn't obscuring very much, and it seems to me that the rider had very good line of sight (I base this on 50 years of motorcycle riding under my belt, including 30 years in Thailand). The only two mitigating factors for the rider are the speed of the white car and that it was overtaking. Even then, the rider should have waited a bit longer for the cam car to get clear. Sorry, but I have to say that the rider is completely at fault for not having exercised appropriate caution before pulling out into traffic.

 

It is a peculiarity of riders here (as witnessed in hundreds of videos) to simply and blindly pull into traffic and rely on the blessings of Buddha to protect them.

I can't walk my dogs as there are three packs on my soi alone. A neighbour walks his siberian and is hounded the entire way. I read of a project to neuter stray dogs - that is a practical way forward and our Thai hosts will not euthanise even a terminally ill animal. Don't hold your breath though...

As always Sir, you are most expedient and complete in your response! Thank you.

1 minute ago, ubonjoe said:

The form you posted is for Vientiane and it is not the correct one for there now.

This form is the same one shown on the conulates website. Savannakhet 2501-01-31.PDF

For Vientiane this is the current form (print in color). Vientiane visa form.pdf 

On 21/02/2018 at 10:34 AM, recom273 said:

Just to add, I was at Savannakhet last Wednesday, I rocked up at 9.30 and there was one guy at the window. After a friendly chat I was given no.11 ticket to use the next day.

 

When I returned at 2.00 the next day, there were a handful of people, I waited for all to rush and collect their passports, which was a as usual a quick and efficient, all out within a few minutes. 

 

Someone asked about Vientienne, hell, I remember rushing to the embassy, wasting the morning queuing, staying in an overpriced guest house and then returning the next day, standing in the mid-day sun, to pickup. 

 

No comparison, never again. 

 

I was surprised by the lack of activity, Monday mornings are traditionally  the busiest, i also noted some requirements for tourist visas posted, such as financial proof, rental agreements, etc. maybe there are less tourists using the consulate. 

 

The town seemed busy with westerners, clean guest houses, good restaurants, helpful locals. 

Hi, did you get the application form on-line? I am struggling to find one that seems up to date! The one I downloaded last year has its bottom cut off, the one I found this morning has no date and is different from the one last year... Does this one look right to you?

Thai Visa Application Form Savannakhet.pdf

5 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

should have done the country a favor and put it down!

killing someone's dog isn't doing anyone a favour. increase your dose...

1 minute ago, DefaultName said:

But it's being used on the outside to keep it pretty, not on the bit you eat (or drink), so that doesn't really apply here.

Really? I thought the sodium meta bisulfite solution is a 'bath' that the prepared coconuts are soaked in to maintain a white external appearance... So that would be the same as soaking in salt water. The nut is waterproof and so either solution will not get to the meat or coconut water...

Just now, Dante99 said:

The FDA for what country?

Sorry - US of A.

Doesn't salt water have the same effect? My mate brings me coconuts every so often and those go brown pretty quick after I prepare them. The ones I buy locally remain white for days... My Thai mate suggested salt water...

I found this on a health site " the FDA prohibits the use of sodium bisulfite in meats, vitamin B-1 food sources, and raw fruits and vegetables..." and "The Food and Drug Administration regulates sulfite-based compounds and requires companies to list on their products sulfites with a concentration of at least 10 parts per million"

So you think lane splitting should be at the same speed as the traffic? What is the point of legal lane splitting if not to overtake? Watch the vdo again with the sound off. The sound of that engine is misleading. He was only traveling 10-15 km/h faster than the majority of the cars, accelerated and slowed every encounter to pass at a more appropriate speed. 

And again, the prize of 'driving selfishly' in your opinion is what? Being knocked off? Being chased by a coward in a car who can kill you yet only suffer a scratch on their car? Can you justify that thought? Don't you think it just slightly disproportional? Do you think you and your cage should be squashed by an articulated truck if you pass them on the inside without a signal? Let me know, I'll drive the truck...

21 hours ago, canuckamuck said:

Clearly he was driving selfishly and not trying to indicate or match speed of the traffic zigging in and out. Lane splitting isn't a problem, but you don't drive like the other cars are slalom poles for your entertainment.

That being said, the old guy did deserve the punch in the face for the attempted bump. And the bike driver also accepted the risk of being killed when he confronted the driver. He's lucky it wasn't a gun or a baseball bat.

 

So what do you suggest as a penalty for not signalling? Being run off the road? Bumped from behind in heavy traffic? Keep trying until you make contact? What about extra points if you knock them under a truck?

You can't see the turn signals on that dash, nor his hands. But regardless, let's say you are right and he did not signal. Do you think it acceptable that those committing minor traffic offenses should be put at physical risk in retaliation? Your response to "he used his car as a weapon" is "the rider did not use his signals" What do you suggest if his headlight is out?

As for 'no excuse to ride like that' I beg to differ. If you are going to pass a car in traffic on a bike, get it over and done with and get into a space where you are more visible. Lane splitting is legal, but that does not mean it is as safe as other positions on the road. Pass, be visible, pass again. If the cars are nose to tail, just keep passing, but try and make yourself visible or audible at all times.

32 minutes ago, seajae said:

you ignore the fact the rider was not indicating what he was going to do and not doing it when safe to do so, ,I ride and drive so I see both sides,  the rider was not riding safely or indicating his moves as well as going way to close to the cars, all illegal here, he was also outside the left lane, also against thai laws. The old fart was also in the wrong but so was the biker, both should be charged, as for the biker, there is no excuse to ride like that, he was lucky he wasnt  cleaned up by a car changing lanes or moving over slightly in the lane they were in, the only ones that cant see that the rider was also at fault or riding badly  are those that ride the same way, some of these idiots have death wishes the way they ride, the laws are there to be followed, neither was doing that

You seem to avoid mentioning the car driver trying to hit the bike two times. Is that an act of bravery? or how do you factor that? How about the coma from the stab wound?

Oh BTW, lane splitting is legal here.  Overseas is irrelevant. 

5 minutes ago, seajae said:

both in the wrong, biker was taking quite a few risks lane splitting, it is ok as long as it is safe to do so, at the corner he undercut the car as well, was he visible to the driver, that is one major question. Another thai law states bikes are supposed to stay in the left hand lane, in this case he only did that just before the fight, problems in Thailand are that many of these idiots that try to do all these moves at speed without knowing what the car is going to do, while legal here it is not overseas as it is considered too dangerous, was the bike indicating all his moves, I doubt it very much. Cars and bikes have a very bad habit of not letting other road users know what they are going to do(can be seen everyday when a bike passes you on the lefft then tries to turn in front of you when you are going straight ahead), this doesnt help at all. both are in the wrong but the fight was the bikers fault, he bashed up a smaller old guy with glasses, that in itself is a cowardly act, no wonder he grabbed the knife to defend himself but that too was not the smartest thing to do, once again we see face and and making oneself out to be a "big" man  showing how pathetic some thai males really are. No excuses for the way either behaved

But that is the point right, it is up to the police to deal with any infractions of the driving code. The only role a citizen should have is the reporting of an incident. Judgement and sentence is the role of authorities...

As for the law, it contains so many contradictions it is clearly designed for wiggle room for the authorities to decide as they see fit for each case - that should be a surprise to nobody. For example, how do you lane split without tailgating first?

You'd see me if I was on your left - 3,900 lumens at mirror height. But I'd be smiling under my helmet... and only passing on the left if you were hogging the right lane :)

22 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Understood.  But I'm not so sure if a cop here reviewed the bikers moves he would call them all legal.  There are laws here about tailgating, quick lane changes, slow traffic, etc.

 

Too many times I've signaled to move left, only to see a bike undercutting me.  No signal, no quarter, etc.  It's very hard to see scooters undercutting you.  Or, splitting lanes at high speeds.

I think a car driver's perception is likely affected by the noise of the bike. That particular bike is a high-revving powerful bike and the mic is on the engine... 

As a longtime rider in Bangkok's traffic I can assure you that riding slightly aggressively is the only way to survive. Car drivers will cut up a bike without a second thought unless the bike is moving confidently and/or is bright and/or is loud. Any mistake made by either is paid for by the rider (not financially, but physically.) 

I don't condone the riders response, but he was wearing a t-shirt... but that is besides the point. The prof used a car as a weapon and a weapon. Both are inexcusable.

20 minutes ago, PaDavid said:

  I guess your perception of who was driving/riding badly will depend on which form of conveyance you prefer. As a car driver, I perceive the bikey to be riding aggressively. 

 

As to what happened after the motoring incident, all I can say is a younger man protected by leathers and a crash helmet should not go around throwing punches and kicks at a much older and smaller guy wearing glasses, regardless of what went on before. I think if the bikey approached my car in such an aggressive fashion, I too would have grabbed the nearest thing I could to protect myself. 

Here we go again!

Caveat - there are too many poor drivers and riders here. I am not defending them all. Specific to this case, the rider was not doing anything technically or legally wrong. However all riders have the legal right to lane-split, and all your car journeys would be longer if that was not the case.

It is irrelevant to the law and to any ethical model if anyone hates what bikers do here. Lane splitting is legal - get over it. Without lane splitting, riding a bike would offer no benefit and there would be more cars on the roads, so be grateful for the risk others take that you benefit from.

It is morally abhorrent to suggest that anyone doing something legal but not liked or annoying should be convicted and physically punished by the observer/recipient/general population. Splitting lanes is legal (did we deal with that yet?), changing gears is legal, changing lanes to keep going is legal, accelerating (revving up) and deaccelerating (revving down) are also legal and expected. 

Chasing a bike, or a car, and just tailgating is bad, let alone trying to bump them in frustration cannot be excused under any circumstance. The consequences of the potential accident are too extreme to consider. The driver was in two lanes and was reminded by the rider. He took umbrage to an action that was benign and non-threatening and responded with two acts of violence that could harm the rider.

Once off the bike I think the rider was an idiot to respond as he did, but up to that point he had the legal and moral highground. As for using a car and then a knife, the professor is a complete douche. The second use of the car and the use of a knife are premeditated and should be treated as such.

A friend of mine was arrested and deported for not having their passport with them when caught in a raid at a Thai restaurant. She got a bit snippy with the guy, that did not help. PNG stamp in her passport!

How much time do you have on scooters and big bikes? I'm going to make a guess that you have low-to-no experience on a large bike. If that is the case, you might want to have a more open mind. "Thai drivers are awful, and that is why riding slowly is mandatory imo- big bike or small" is as dangerous a strategy on the road as you can have. 

I rode a Vespa in Singapore for 2 years after 6 years on a 650 chopper here. Since returning here I've been on a 650 Dualsport for 7 years and put in 50,000 k.m. Riding a fat and heavy 125 in traffic was suboptimal to say the least. Not being able to keep up means you are constantly looking for potential problems behind. I am guessing, but I don't you can envisage the added safety you gain by being able to concentrate more on what is in front of you. Riding as fast and slightly faster than the majority of cars on a road allows you to shift your attention forward. Unless you try it, you won't get it.

Anyhow, I'm done arguing with someone who does not have sufficient rubber on the road to make a bike-educated or experienced point. Ride safe and don't get rear-ended.

6 hours ago, mommysboy said:

I'm not making a judgement call or playing guessing games; it's simple logic that can't really be faulted as a generalization.  Of course there are exceptions such as accelerating away from trouble, but why are you in potential trouble in the first place?  Of course Thai drivers are awful, and that is why riding slowly is mandatory imo- big bike or small you are in a vulnerable position.

 

I agree with much of what you say about stability.  Scooters should not be used for anything other than town riding at slow speed imo.

 

Possibly some of what I've written needs to be watered down when considering highway riding.

Believe it or not, those experienced bikers that are expressing educated opinions are trying to keep others alive...  Driving too slowly is dangerous. This is not a point of discussion or bickering, it is a lesson to be remembered.

1 hour ago, mommysboy said:

In what respect? Too fast? Too slow?

 

I don't see any point in bickering like this.

So you are going to use this scenario to make a judgement call about bike in general... 

Small bikes lack both the braking and acceleration to apply proper defensive driving techniques. Riding slowly as you suggest may reduce the impact of an accident, or the likelihood that one occurs in some situations. However, riding slowly also means that vehicles are significantly more likely to pull out ahead of you, judge your speed slow enough to pass your or turn into your path making the assumption 'they will just slow/stop.' Small bikes don't cause other road users to take a second look - they don't have 'presence' and just blend into the background traffic.

Small bikes don't have ABS, handle unseen bumps and holes poorly, and can't keep up with traffic when it is moving at pace. Driving at 50 as you suggest exposes you to close encounters and potential accidents from behind. Being passed closely by a car from behind is not the same as you passing them closely. You don't control the encounter; when, the difference in speed, or the distance.

If you want to play a guessing game, try this: Had the KTM rider been riding at 40 all day long, he might well have been cut up by a dozen other road users already and had a couple of bumps before he got there...

1 minute ago, mommysboy said:

I understand and agree about scooters being somewhat unstable- I would say 50kmh max on open road, and 20kmh in tight situations.  Nevertheless, in essence you are arguing that speed is safe or better.  As we have seen in this tragic case, it isn't.  For example, had the big bike been going 40 kmh, then the accident likely would not have happened, or there might not have been the same carnage.

I can't see what he meant. The nationality of the people involved is as germane to the cause of the accident as the brand of bikes they were riding or their body mass indexes. We know for a fact that the KTM rider was an experienced and trained rider with many years riding here. We know that the police consider the Thai rider as the cause of the accident.

There are degrees of idiots, and some that cannot be avoided. That is where 'accidents' happen. One can assume that a vehicle or pedestrian ahead will pull out and adjust accordingly, up to a point. Eventually you are close enough that the chance they do something stupid diminishes significantly. At around that same point, regardless of speed, a false move will result in an accident. The only alternative is to slow to a crawl as you approach and ensure you have space to stop. Does that work on roads with legal and logical speed limits of 80 to 110 km/h? How many side streets, driveways or roadside stalls are there along highways? How do you compensate for increasing the chances of being rear-ended when slowing to a crawl on a highway?

There are thousands more big bikes on the roads these days. Most residents along highways similar to where this accident happened are more than familiar with larger bikes traveling at higher speeds. 90%++ of the riders are local, ride fast, and have accidents for just the same reasons. Your fixation of the nationality of the rider is beyond me.

That specific area is the gateway to one of Thailand's most popular spots for riding. Almost every weekend there are multiple convoys of larger bikes. I rode through there with 200 big bikes 5/6 years ago and we passed multiple other biker groups in each direction... If you think riders with less knowledge of the area should be more careful, what about people with low knowledge of large and fast bikes? How do you set relative speed limits based on knowledge and skill? Are you seriously advocating race-based rules? Are you happy with double pricing for national parks? or paying extra for clothes at the market because you're not a local? That is the wrong direction to head.

Accidents are unfortunate, regrettable, but natural. They can only be reduced in likelihood and impact, not completely obviated.

1 hour ago, bamukloy said:

The poster you reply to took it a bit far but i can see what he mean.

 

In a lot of the remote Isaan countryside you simply do not see bikes going huge speed.

They travel real slow to avoid burning gas.

(Except maybe on occasion some kid on way home from school showing off to friends.)

 

My point, (and what thais will probably say):

  the old guy is obviously been doing this for years. everyone else there probably putters around at 30ks an hour so they easy avoid him.

Along come a farang screaming around at xxx kmph. Someone sure to get collected.

 

Im sure by farang standard and spirit of the law, the old guy is in the wrong for a very bad illegal moove..but its accepted here as the police do nothing about it.

 

But as many say already, you know 100% some thais will pull krap like this so must drive always as if an idiot is around the corner.

 

I guess it come down to.. you are in their country you must adjust to their way

Personally i think  farangs and big bikes should be on a special speed limit here

 

They may have good skills but obvious even after many years they still dont know and dont allow for the driving habits of thais

Your guess is wrong! Experienced rider on roads he was familiar with. "To (sic) fast" is an assumption. If the old guy had neck problems he should be compensating for his ailment in some way, or not riding that is not possible.

56 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

wild guess; foreigner going too fast in an area he didnt know= primary responsibility; contributory negligence to the thai for not looking (rumored that thai do not look both ways when crossing a street due to neck problems)

4 hours ago, dexjnr555 said:

My point is that if the foreigner had not been in Thailand, the old Thai man would still be alive.

Unbelievable! If the foreigner who practised safe riding techniques his entire riding-life was not here, then the careless, skill-free, lackadaisical local would be ok? Two men are dead as the result of one's scant respect for the law, common sense and basic road safety and you want to equate this to trespassing?

How can you turn this into an issue of nationality? Are you seriously suggesting that people should not travel outside their country of origin? Or should only use public transport or hire a local driver whether on holiday or a long-term resident? It beggars belief that you can utter such twaddle, let alone take the time to type it and not see how fatuous your argument it. When your taxi driver pulls an illegal u-turn and kills a rider, will you step up and take responsibility? After all, if you were not here and commanding the driver to take you somewhere the accident would not have happened.

1 hour ago, 01322521959 said:

I now feel that the ability to ride big bikes here is pointless. Most roads just aren't designed for high speed. I have a 300, ride mostly in Bangkok and prefer to use my other smaller bike. Add to this Thais on the road and it all becomes a serious joke.

Sent from my i-mobile_i-STYLE_219 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

All is not lost. Whilst this was a senseless and tragic accident, it was just that. For every accident here, there are millions of kilometers ridden everyday.

Invest a little time in planning your route and loading it to your GPS. There are plenty of small roads that crisscross the country. You can still make pace while avoiding Fortuners, large coaches, and high volumes of minivans. For example, I ride to Mae Sot from Bangkok and only use the highway as far as Suphanburi town. I'm on 3 and 4 digit roads all the way to the Tak-Mae Sot road. It takes me an extra hour at max and some extra 80 km, but the roads are virtually empty by comparison the main road from Nakhon Sawan to Tak.

Be careful though, there are people here who will question if your 300 is a 'big bike'! 

You won't be passing any physics exams soon...

Friction is a function of weight and surface-area interaction. An object that slides with a large surface area touching the ground will slow faster than an object of the same weight with less area touching the ground. Speed, weight and surface interaction are the factors involved; speed and weight alone are insufficient.

The bend in question is on a dual-carriageway with a 110 speed limit. It is not a tight, low-speed corner. It is not a 'country road' by any UK definition. The heuristic I use is that I must always be able to come to a full stop in the road-space I can see. That means by the 'disappearing point' where the two curbs intersect. I've attached a sample from the road where the accident happened. 

Many posters are suggesting that road users to prepare for every eventuality and pick a speed for that. Given that cars, trucks and bikes mount the insufficient central divide often here, that would mean we all drive or ride at 40 in the left lane to allow sufficient time to stop when a Fortuner mounts the divide and flies in our direction at 140. Whether you can evade is another matter, but at least the armchair motorists of TV will not apportion to much blame provided you can provide evidence that you were riding to the conditions.

The road was dry, is not typically busy (I've ridden it a dozen times), and the corner offers sufficient visibility to drive or ride safely at close to 100 km/h. We know that the impact was hard and at speed so it is safe to assume that KTM was riding fast. What we don't know is if he had previously been riding much faster and had slowed for the corner, or the bike waiting to/crossing, or was riding at a consistent fast rate. We don't know how hard he was braking at impact, or for how long. You have convinced yourself that the only possible reason is excess speed and use your poor understanding of bikes and physics to justify it.

I suggest you stay on the soi, big roads might be too much for you.

6 hours ago, onthesoi said:

 

The fact he wasn't able to avoid what lay on the other side of a blind bend and killed both himself and someone else proves he was speeding, have you never heard of the term  'driving to the conditions'?... the additional fact that his bike took 100m to stop after a collision(not just sliding) just backs this up further.  There could have been an accident on the other side of the blind, if he'd came round that bend and ran into a stationary vehicle which had just been involved in accident would you still be saying he wasn't speeding?

 

Some basic physics, a stationary bike does not slide very far regardles of how heavy it is, in fact a heavy bike will brake itself more than a lighter bike due to the incontravertable laws of friction.... the force that allows a bike to carry on for 100m after a collision and against the laws of friction is, wait for it,.... speed at point of impact.  The point being weight is nothing without speed.

 

It's kinda hilarious you making all these posts about what a safe and experienced driver you are but you don't have the first clue about what you should be doing when approaching a blind bend.

 

59% of all fatalities occur on country roads. These roads often have sharp bends and blind bends which can hide unexpected hazards. Stay in control and give yourself time to react because you never know what’s around the corner. THINK! Brake before the bend, not on it.

http://think.direct.gov.uk/country-roads.html