Video: New Zealander collides with Thai motorcyclist going the wrong way on bridge in Rayong

[overherebc]

55 minutes ago, Catkiwi said:

Hopefully that is some black humour there. Otherwise it is one of the most illogical things that I have ever heard. I guess he had no right to be in the fast lane since that is where motor bikes are supposed to travel the wrong way....?

No such thing as a 'fast' lane.

Outside lane yes and in reality people should not be using it 'if' the lanes to the left are clear of traffic. That's why you use an indicator to signal your intention to overtake but there is no requirement to indicate left to return to the centre or left hand lane after overtaking because that's where you 'should' be.

[steve73]

I'm sure everyone who drives here expects to meet oncoming motorcycles, bicycles, (and even occasionally cars) in the inside lane (especially where there is a hard shoulder).  TBH, if I'm cycling I often prefer to do this myself to be better able to keep an eye on on-coming traffic, rather than being rammed by some idiot who decides to undertake traffic on his hard shoulder.

 

But to meet an oncoming vehicle in the FAST/OUTSIDE lane is almost unheard of... especially on a bridge where there is very little "spare" room.

 

The kiwi had just overtaken a truck, and then himself been UNDERTAKEN by another.  It can often be very distracting trying to merge back into the middle lane, when many more cars keep undertaking, and it's possible that he was concentrating too much on his mirror to react to the sudden appearance of the oncoming motorcyclist, other than just braking.  It's not even clear if there was another vehicle coming up his inside that could have prevented him swerving.

 

Certainly I can see very little to criticise the kiwi from what I could see. 

 

[tigerfeet]

8 hours ago, wgdanson said:

However, the Kiwi was driving in the 'fast' lane with a clear 'middle' lane, he had just overtaken the light coloured pick-up. Why didn't he move over. He had 4 or 5 seconds to take evasive action

how do we know he had got past the truck on the inside?we have all seen it you go past them and they go past you on the left,the truck could of accelerated .only the driver will know .if you look in your mirror put your indicator on look again that takes 6/8 sec.if you do it safely no the kiwi is not to blame and and when in thailand hold your lane as you never know whats coming on the inside .

[AL]

Not only in Thailand. Unfortunately a similar accident has occured yesterday on a french highway near Avignon. A car was going the wrong way, it collided and killed a motorcyclist .... 

It is very rare. About 3000 die on the french roads every year, 25000 in Thailand. For approximately the same population. 

 

[overherebc]

2 hours ago, willow wilson said:

Unfortunately he may have been wearing one of those 200bt helmets.

 

I still think it looks like V guard site safety hat.

[BTB1977]

No way or time  to avoid the motorcycle. With the two driving at lets say 80 kph that would make the closing rate of speed around 160 kph. Try missing something coming at you at 160. 

[Hoppyone]

9 hours ago, wgdanson said:

However, the Kiwi was driving in the 'fast' lane with a clear 'middle' lane, he had just overtaken the light coloured pick-up. Why didn't he move over. He had 4 or 5 seconds to take evasive action

In a perfect world he would have

[Moonlover]

10 hours ago, Thian said:

This movie should be on the thai news every day again....too many idiots drive against traffic...Thailand only...

I agree with much of what you say, but not the last bit.

 

India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Egypt,. To name just a few I've known and I'm sure there are many more.

[overherebc]

5 minutes ago, Catkiwi said:

Whatever professor...fast / overtaking, call it what you want. I also know very well what an indicator is for and indicating is a requirement for all changes in direction however, that strays far from the point that the motor bike rider has no right to be travelling in the wrong direction, in any lane. 

In that case you indicate going around a bend in the road because it's a change in direction????

And probably brake as well???

[wgdanson]

20 minutes ago, tigerfeet said:

and when in thailand hold your lane as you never know whats coming on the inside .

Or towards you.

[oldlakey]

10 minutes ago, AL said:

Not only in Thailand. Unfortunately a similar accident has occured yesterday on a french highway near Avignon. A car was going the wrong way, it collided and killed a motorcyclist .... 

It is very rare. About 3000 die on the french roads every year, 25000 in Thailand. For approximately the same population. 

 

I bet that was a genuine mistake by the car driver

[wgdanson]

Just now, overherebc said:

In that case you indicate going around a bend in the road because it's a change in direction????

Stop being a pratt, you know exactly what he means.

[Tongjaw]

49 minutes ago, tropo said:

So what's your point? Anything the Thai did or didn't do doesn't change the fact that the Kiwi had some time to react and possibly avoid the collision. By the looks of it, he didn't even try. Maybe he was playing a game of chicken - who's going to move over first.

My point is that the Kiwi might not have had time to react. Can you see what was to the left or the rear of the Kiwi? Can you see his speedometer if he was braking or not? Do you know if the Kiwi was playing a game of chicken?  Most probably the answer is no, yet you continually thoughout this thread claim he did have time to react. So either you know something others don’t or your deliberately trying to be antagonistic with your comments. My bet is on the latter. 

[dinsdale]

2 hours ago, mrfill said:

You do realise that the helpful circle around the motorcycle was added later, I trust. With a likely closing speed around 120mph and no headlight, it is not easy to see and reaction time would have to include the time taken to realise that it was really happening.

It's actually easier to see the closing speed of a motorcycle (or any vehicle) in daylight without lights on. Again difficult to to tell but the bike (you can just see before 'the helpful circle') is maybe 100+ metres down the road. Also I would guess that 75% of the closing speed you mention was the car. Bit slower i.e. speed limit it may have been a different outcome.?

[dinsdale]

1 hour ago, Catkiwi said:

So the Kiwi was speeding, in the lane reserved for idiots going the wrong way and recklessly drove straight into the bike on purpose? Right then, case closed!

Fantastic paraphrasing.?  Yes, it sure looks like the Kiwi was speeding and yes the idiot on the bike was going the wrong way (not uncommon here and something you should keep in mind, even crossing a road on foot) but could you please show where I stated; recklessly drove straight into the bike on purpose.

[oldlakey]

7 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

It's actually easier to see the closing speed of a motorcycle (or any vehicle) in daylight without lights on. Again difficult to to tell but the bike (you can just see before 'the helpful circle') is maybe 100+ metres down the road. Also I would guess that 75% of the closing speed you mention was the car. Bit slower i.e. speed limit it may have been a different outcome.?

You are correct different actions lead to different outcomes, with hindsight

Foresight is much better as far as life expectancy and road usage is concerned though

[hotchilli]

Just an everyday occurrence here in the the land of carnage!

[Fairynuff]

I’ve had two accidents so far in my time here. The first time a guy overtaking me forgot he had a trailer and pulled  in front too soon hitting my front wing. He agreed it was his fault until his boss turned up at the police station and changed his story for him. The police took some time but agreed he was wrong. The second time I was hit by a teenager on a motorcycle. The police tore a strip off him and so did his dad. Nobody tried to blame me. The foreigner doesn’t always get blamed, only sometimes.

[oldlakey]

2 minutes ago, Fairynuff said:

I’ve had two accidents so far in my time here. The first time a guy overtaking me forgot he had a trailer and pulled him n front too soon hitting my front wing. He agreed it was his fault until his boss turned up at the police station and changed his story for him. The police took some time but agreed he was wrong. The second time I was hit by a teenager on a motorcycle. The police tore a strip off him and so did his dad. Nobody tried to blame me. The foreigner doesn’t always get blamed, only sometimes.

No deaths involved just might help a little

[Catkiwi]

4 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Fantastic paraphrasing.?  Yes, it sure looks like the Kiwi was speeding and yes the idiot on the bike was going the wrong way (not uncommon here and something you should keep in mind, even crossing a road on foot) but could you please show where I stated; recklessly drove straight into the bike on purpose.

Without scouring back through the posts, I think that was what was being implied by a statement that the guy had 4 or 5 seconds to react (can't recall if that was you or not) and just summarising, therefore it must have been a reckless act...right?

[Spidey]

5 hours ago, wgdanson said:

And vice versa.

Exactly. What do you do in a situation like that? If you both pull over, you still hit each other. The natural reaction is to stay on course and expect the other person to pull over. Reaction time plus "rabbit in the headlights" syndrome were major factors in the accident.

 

Also, I feel that the Kiwi didn't return to the middle lane after overtaking a slower vehicle he had another vehicle undertaking him at speed an deemed it safer to allow faster moving traffic on his inside to clear him before safely returning to the middle lane. No one knows how they would react to a situation like that unless they have been in that situation.

 

It was much more difficult for the Kiwi to avoid the accident than it appears on the video. Even harder if you are some decerped old man like say...….Tropo? 555

[overherebc]

41 minutes ago, Catkiwi said:

What are you on man? Give it a rest and come back when or if you ever have something sensible to say.

OK. How's this, at least the Kiwi guy didn't flee the scene.

[dinsdale]

2 minutes ago, Catkiwi said:

Without scouring back through the posts, I think that was what was being implied by a statement that the guy had 4 or 5 seconds to react (can't recall if that was you or not) and just summarising, therefore it must have been a reckless act...right?

It does seem that his full attention was not on the road for whatever reason and he sure seems to be speeding. So, reckless yes. But the dick on the bike is also reckless. Riding on the wrong side of the road is common place and stupid but he should have been to the left hand side as we see it. His right. He's not even fully over to his left. He's smack bang in the middle of the lane. Never thought I'd say this on TV but could this have been suicide?

[moe666]

7 hours ago, sanemax said:

The reality is that most of the time they do not .

Its just a TVF myth that keeps on getting repeated by forum posters 

The car camera is the game changer, happen to a guy I know in CM he hit a bicyclist who was on the main road drunk. the cops looked at the camera and put in the report bicycle guy at fault. The guy I know did give the family 50,000b but that was the end of it.

[overherebc]

46 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

It's actually easier to see the closing speed of a motorcycle (or any vehicle) in daylight without lights on. Again difficult to to tell but the bike (you can just see before 'the helpful circle') is maybe 100+ metres down the road. Also I would guess that 75% of the closing speed you mention was the car. Bit slower i.e. speed limit it may have been a different outcome.?

100 metres and both doing 100 kph takes roughly one and a half seconds before they are both trying to occupy the same bit of road.

[wgdanson]

4 minutes ago, overherebc said:

100 metres and both doing 100 kph takes roughly one and a half seconds before they are both trying to occupy the same bit of road.

There was more time than that between the bike being visible (on the video) to the collision.

[Spidey]

14 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

It does seem that his full attention was not on the road for whatever reason and he sure seems to be speeding. So, reckless yes.

I see zero evidence for either. May have had some of his attention diverted to the faster moving vehicle on his inside, and rightly so. Check the time, in real time, from when you clearly see the bike to moment of impact, a couple of seconds, no time to react.

 

Speed limit 90kpm, overtaken by a faster vehicle, in the outside lane, sounds and looks about right to me.

[overherebc]

9 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

There was more time than that between the bike being visible (on the video) to the collision.

Agree but throw in the 'what the hell time' say a second, realisation time, say another second, not much time left for moving foot to brake, different for every driver and it doesn't leave much to get both slowed and stopped.

Best conditions stopping from say 65 mph/100+kph.

Thinking distance 20 metres, stopping distance 80metres.

That applies to both vehicles, you work it out if heading towards each other.

[wgdanson]

4 minutes ago, overherebc said:

Agree but throw in the 'what the hell time' say a second, realisation time, say another second, not much time left for moving foot to brake, different for every driver and it doesn't leave much to get both slowed and stopped.

Stopping in this situation was impossible, but a slight change of direction on the part of one or both drivers, indicated or not, could have prevented the collision.

[Lupatria]

11 hours ago, colinneil said:

Another life lost due to stupidity, the motorcyclist was 100% at fault.

What was he doing riding in the fast lane against oncoming traffic?

The dead mans family are not pursuing the case, it would be pointless anyway.

...and here is our neighborhood suicide squad. One truck fits all: