Sad Biker Day in Oregon

[Boone60]

Multiple motorcycles crash in a pile-up

[FLTRI]

Am I the only one that read this story/watched the video and think it may have been an intentional act by the SUV?

[RBertalotto]

"Riding in STANDARD formation..........."

 

Be careful out there.............ATGATT

[John Ferris]

"The two lead motorcyclists were able to avoid a collision by maneuvering clear of the stopped traffic, but the rest of the motorcyclists could not stop in time, causing a chain-reaction of crashes with the rest of the group."

 

The 2 lead bikes avoided the collision.

How is it the SUV's fault ?

 

 

 

[marcopolo]

The first things that pop into my mind are following too closely, not paying sufficient attention etc. Another reminder to avoid large groups like the plague.

[decorbin]

I won't ride with large groups for this very reason. Used to ride with a large group in FL, but after several similar accidents, I stopped. I think people tend to get focused on the bike in front of them and not the potential problems ahead of the group. It may be that the person in the SUV did stop suddenly and on purpose because they got irritated with the large group of bikes behind them.

 

[TandemGeek]

Not enough facts that I've seen at this point to suggest what actually happened with even low certainty.

 

However, as to the according-effect crash behind the first two riders: can you say "reaction time / following too closely"? If memory serves, when motorcycle clubs travel in a pack there is rarely any buffer space between the bikes... a recipe for disaster if a sudden stop begins at the front of the pack because there's not enough time for the trailing riders to (a) recognize the threat, (b) take action and (b) actually come to a stop before hitting the bike ahead.

 

In these situations the closest-following bikes are the ones who have the best chance of 'seeing' what's happening and having enough reaction time to take evasive actions. However, every following rider has less information and less time to react, hence the according effect of accidents. You can see it in reverse at every stop light as you see the tightly packed line of parked cars string out... see, react and then action follows.

 

You can see the same thing play itself out in professional bike races where helicopter shots will show how the tightly packed bicycles are always decimated when anything happens that upsets the flow up ahead.

 

As for what the Northbound motorist saw... we don't know if it was only the SUV that stopped or slowed suddenly because like the motorcycles in front of him if the SUV was large enough or had darkly tinted windows anyone following behind would not have seen what was going on in front of the SUV on what I believe is a ruler-straight section of I-5. To assume it was malicious at this point and without further details is premature.

 

Another news outlet characterized the accident this way:

 

Lt. Gregg Hastings, Oregon State Police spokesman, said 26 motorcycles were traveling north in the left lane, following a car, when traffic ahead began slowing. The car and the bikers all tried to slow down, but collided, piling up on the road. A vehicle in the middle northbound lane was reportedly struck by one of the motorcycles, Hastings said.

 

Of course, then there's irony... from the same article:

 

The bikers were heading north to take part in the Portland chapter's annual birthday bash and a weekend demolition derby, according to one law enforcement official.

[David13]

FLTR, Corbin. I think that was what I understood. If you stop in the road and obstruct or impede the reasonable movement of traffic, you have violated the statute; if you stop in the roadway, causing an accident, you have violated the statute on reckless driving.

The chain reaction behind somewhere becomes the fault of the motorcyclists, but look at the initial cause.

I think this was unnecessary or intentional.

The eyewitness (a person there who saw) said there was no slowing of traffic in front of the suv, no reason for them to stop in the road.

dc

[DaveC]

The first things that pop into my mind are following too closely, not paying sufficient attention etc. Another reminder to avoid large groups like the plague.

 

+1

 

I visualize a large group of slow reacting slow whitted bikers who were following too close together to respond to an emergency ahead of them.

Maybe this will be a lesson to the "biker" community how dangerous it is to ride in a pack of two columns.

 

Police ride like this in special events, but they are trained on how to do it and how to react to a problem.

 

 

[Paul Mihalka]

"Police ride like this in special events, but they are trained on how to do it and how to react to a problem."

And they don't have anybody in front of them with or without bad intentions.

 

PS In this case I don't think loud pipes saved lifes - they even may have contributed to the problem.

[Uncle Beemer]

Am I the only one that read this story/watched the video and think it may have been an intentional act by the SUV?

That was my first thought. I hope the driver was not that immature.

[TandemGeek]

The eyewitness (a person there who saw) said there was no slowing of traffic in front of the suv, no reason for them to stop in the road.

dc

 

Where did you see that quote? The only eye witness account I've read was this:

 

A witness to the crash, Terry Scott, said he and his girlfriend were driving northbound from Salem behind the motorcycles when he witnessed an SUV, that was driving in front of the group of motorcycles, suddenly slow down or slam on its brakes.

 

There's nothing in that statement that suggests the motorist behind the bikes and behind the SUV could see what was ahead of the SUV or offered any statement regarding why the SUV was slowing.

[bmwsit]

Anyone who has ever driven on I-5 in the Portland area knows that it is prone to sudden slow downs for now reason other than that Oregonians in general don't know how to drive in congested areas. And yes, I am a born and raised Oregonian. The only quote I have seen about the SUV slowing for no reason came from someon behind the bikes, like they could really tell what was going on in front of a SUV that at best is 15 bike lengths further down the road if they were side by side, if staggered, the SUV was even further down the road. Seems to me since the first couple of bikes avoided the SUV, it was a case of others not looking ahead, but riding their ride off of the bike in front of them.

 

Boils down to, hope they all recover and get their bikes fixed and maybe we all can learn a bit from it.

[nrp]

The dynamics of multiple vehicles moving on a freeway are very subtle. Maximum road capacity (number of vehicles per hour per lane) for typical drivers will be about 40 mph - but assuming there are no other complicating factors such as diversions or restricted sight lines.

 

In other words, when you load a freeway with traffic to the extent that it begins to slow down - watch out! At about 45 mph it will suddenly jump to zero. All it takes is a car parked on the road side, some interesting skid marks, another lane of merging traffic being added, or a slight reduction in sight line or any other diversion.

 

It isn't just poor drivers, it is all of us that make this problem.

[Bill_Walker]

Anyone who has ever driven on I-5 in the Portland area knows that it is prone to sudden slow downs for now reason other than that Oregonians in general don't know how to drive in congested areas.

 

It's not just Oregon. Driving through LA, I've often felt that every car should have a bumper sticker saying "Warning! I brake for the hell of it."

 

Of course, the reality, as nrp points out, is that when the freeway is full it doesn't take much to start the accordion effect. One driver lifts off the throttle because he can't see over a rise, the one behind slightly taps the brakes, the ones behind that see brake lights and hit the brakes harder, and suddenly you've got panic braking a few hundred yards back.

 

As to the incident in question, formation riding and following too closely had to be major factors.

[FLTRI]

The eyewitness (a person there who saw) said there was no slowing of traffic in front of the suv, no reason for them to stop in the road.

dc

 

Where did you see that quote? The only eye witness account I've read was this:

 

A witness to the crash, Terry Scott, said he and his girlfriend were driving northbound from Salem behind the motorcycles when he witnessed an SUV, that was driving in front of the group of motorcycles, suddenly slow down or slam on its brakes.

 

There's nothing in that statement that suggests the motorist behind the bikes and behind the SUV could see what was ahead of the SUV or offered any statement regarding why the SUV was slowing.

 

I think the quote was from the video news story at the bottom of the page. He also said something to the effect that he (the witness) was driving parallel to the SUV, giving him a view of what was ahead of it...

[David13]

The witness was interviewed (audio) for one of the stations. He was specifically asked, did the traffic in front of the suv slow, was there congestion in front of the suv, was there a reason for the suv to slow or stop, he said no.

He previously said that he was behind the motorcycle group for a long time, 40 or 50 miles.

According to that witness there is a least a very strong suggestion of intentional misconduct.

dc

[philbytx]

It do sound like the traditional Cruiser Crowd "Riding Posse"

i.e 2 abreast and 2 close.

 

We see it all the time around here and, IMHO, given our abundance of the local blue rinsed crowd and wildlife, these "parades" are just an accident waiting to happen.

 

I do group ride most Monday's with a bunch of experienced riders. We ride in smaller groupings and always staggered with appropriate distances and sightlines.

 

 

 

[smiller]

these "parades" are just an accident waiting to happen.

Yep.

[TandemGeek]

I think the quote was from the video news story at the bottom of the page. He also said something to the effect that he (the witness) was driving parallel to the SUV, giving him a view of what was ahead of it...

 

Thanks for pointing out the video at the bottom of the article; I'd missed the audio interview.

[upflying]

DaveC says

"Police ride like this in special events, but they are trained on how to do it and how to react to a problem."

 

Not just special events. Anytime a pair or more of motors are riding together, we always ride in formation, side by side in the same lane.

 

Having ridden like this a lot, I can say a motor tends to fixate on the motor directly ahead, sometimes only 20' separate the pairs. You can't see far enough ahead to see hazards..often at 70-75 mph speeds. Not enough reaction time should the lead motor need to suddenly decelerate. We are all on the same comm channel and the lead motor (usually a supervisor) warns those behind of hazards, slowing, lane changes etc.

 

Motors do it because we know each other and received the same training. Civilians with their varied training and experience is a crap shoot.

 

If this was an organized ride, I will bet some lawsuits will be filed against the ride captain and the organization(s) that hosted the ride.

[bmwsit]

I don't know that a Brother Speed member would sue another Brother Speed, after all BSFFBS. Something tells me they take care of disputes internally, outside of the courts.

[bayoubengal]

I recently participated in a large group ride (`150 bikes) originating from and sponsored by my USAF base safety office. It was a rider awareness ride to say to the community "hey we are out hear watch for us". It was about an hour ride winding thru the three communities nearest the base and went off without a hitch. What struck me though was the attitude one group of riders had toward the "mandatory safety briefing". You know being sponsored by the base SE office it was going to be required in order to participate, even though the ride was open to the public. When this one group didn't walk over to hear the brief, the briefer stopped and called them over. They came over complaining the whole way about wasting there time. I'm not knocking the cruiser crowd or Harley rider, but that is who this group was. It was a "you can't teach me anything" attitide. I did not ride near these guys.

[Jazzy]

"Traffic was moving at 70 mph and suddenly the SUV stops or slows down?" Probably a woman who got a cell phone or text message. The following bikes should have all been within braking distance, but that's for the court now to decide. Tailgating seems to be the norm now.

 

Granted, Harleys have some of the worst brakes out there and most owners panic brake by using the rear pedal which will bring the thing around in short order and often in a high-side situation. ABS might have helped, but we'll never know.

 

Also, the police are not to be looked on as "Professional riders." Only part of professional is they are paid to ride. Their gear - with the exception of European ones - often sucks and they could refuse to ride with the crap they give them but they don't. OSHA could intervene on their behalf for better gear, but they just go with the flow albeit it being "unsafe" to the point of being laughable at a track day. Also, ask a shop how much damage comes in on their patrol bikes and be prepared to get a shock. Even some Iron Butt riders who do far more miles than law enforcement types do considerably less damage to their own bikes over a year - but they don't have the free health care afforded by taxpayers for their own rides either.

 

I've heard the "We ride side-by-side all the time and we trust each other's riding ability" hypothesis. Even watched my side-by-side buddy of ten years blow through I light that I braked for with him leaving a nice skid mark all the way through the intersection. Also, too bad the guy in the vehicle who serves into your lane and causes you to take out your bike and your buddy by your lack to "stay put" didn't know about it. Stagger is better in any language than side-by-side. A wayward wandering cager or blown tire will make you think again about side-by-side.

 

Jazzy.

[gottabmw]

"Traffic was moving at 70 mph and suddenly the SUV stops or slows down?" Probably a woman who got a cell phone or text message. The following bikes should have all been within braking distance, but that's for the court now to decide. Tailgating seems to be the norm now.

 

Granted, Harleys have some of the worst brakes out there and most owners panic brake by using the rear pedal which will bring the thing around in short order and often in a high-side situation. ABS might have helped, but we'll never know.

 

Also, the police are not to be looked on as "Professional riders." Only part of professional is they are paid to ride. Their gear - with the exception of European ones - often sucks and they could refuse to ride with the crap they give them but they don't. OSHA could intervene on their behalf for better gear, but they just go with the flow albeit it being "unsafe" to the point of being laughable at a track day. Also, ask a shop how much damage comes in on their patrol bikes and be prepared to get a shock. Even some Iron Butt riders who do far more miles than law enforcement types do considerably less damage to their own bikes over a year - but they don't have the free health care afforded by taxpayers for their own rides either.

 

I've heard the "We ride side-by-side all the time and we trust each other's riding ability" hypothesis. Even watched my side-by-side buddy of ten years blow through I light that I braked for with him leaving a nice skid mark all the way through the intersection. Also, too bad the guy in the vehicle who serves into your lane and causes you to take out your bike and your buddy by your lack to "stay put" didn't know about it. Stagger is better in any language than side-by-side. A wayward wandering cager or blown tire will make you think again about side-by-side.

 

Jazzy.

Huh?

[farmerp]

FYI Brother Speed is an outlaw type biker bunch. My guess if they do a toxicology test all kind of things could show up.

[Dick_at_Lake_Tahoe_NV]

He previously said that he was behind the motorcycle group for a long time, 40 or 50 miles.

 

And that's a telling statement--I've been stuck behind bikes riding at 10mph below the speed limit, and been unable to pass the group for several miles. This kind of behaviour by bikes can lead to driver frustration and maybe road rage--although stopping quickly in front of the group is certainly uncalled for.

[FLTRI]

"Traffic was moving at 70 mph and suddenly the SUV stops or slows down?" Probably a woman who got a cell phone or text message. The following bikes should have all been within braking distance, but that's for the court now to decide. Tailgating seems to be the norm now.

 

Granted, Harleys have some of the worst brakes out there and most owners panic brake by using the rear pedal which will bring the thing around in short order and often in a high-side situation. ABS might have helped, but we'll never know.

 

Also, the police are not to be looked on as "Professional riders." Only part of professional is they are paid to ride. Their gear - with the exception of European ones - often sucks and they could refuse to ride with the crap they give them but they don't. OSHA could intervene on their behalf for better gear, but they just go with the flow albeit it being "unsafe" to the point of being laughable at a track day. Also, ask a shop how much damage comes in on their patrol bikes and be prepared to get a shock. Even some Iron Butt riders who do far more miles than law enforcement types do considerably less damage to their own bikes over a year - but they don't have the free health care afforded by taxpayers for their own rides either.

 

I've heard the "We ride side-by-side all the time and we trust each other's riding ability" hypothesis. Even watched my side-by-side buddy of ten years blow through I light that I braked for with him leaving a nice skid mark all the way through the intersection. Also, too bad the guy in the vehicle who serves into your lane and causes you to take out your bike and your buddy by your lack to "stay put" didn't know about it. Stagger is better in any language than side-by-side. A wayward wandering cager or blown tire will make you think again about side-by-side.

 

Jazzy.

 

Really?

 

Frankly, Mr. Illiterate, you don't know WTF you are talking about...

[Fugu]

I've seen a lot of bro speed. When I was in Boise I saw enough. I live a hop skip and a jump from this wreck. I saw bro speed before the wreck, doing what they do in traffic. I said to my passenger, those A holes are gonna get somebody hurt, I hope it's themselves and not somebody innocent.

 

There's not a damn thing important that any motorcyclists I know and like and respect have in common with bro speed, except a preference for two wheeled conveyance.

 

Beyond this wreck messing up my commute, I don't care.

 

Bro speed wouldn't spit on you if you were on fire. They are not motorcyclists. They are criminal bums and thugs. Sic semper tyrannis.

 

 

This is just my opinion but I haven't arrived at it flippantly.

[Twisties]

"Traffic was moving at 70 mph and suddenly the SUV stops or slows down?" Probably a woman who got a cell phone or text message. The following bikes should have all been within braking distance, but that's for the court now to decide. Tailgating seems to be the norm now.

 

Granted, Harleys have some of the worst brakes out there and most owners panic brake by using the rear pedal which will bring the thing around in short order and often in a high-side situation. ABS might have helped, but we'll never know.

 

Also, the police are not to be looked on as "Professional riders." Only part of professional is they are paid to ride. Their gear - with the exception of European ones - often sucks and they could refuse to ride with the crap they give them but they don't. OSHA could intervene on their behalf for better gear, but they just go with the flow albeit it being "unsafe" to the point of being laughable at a track day. Also, ask a shop how much damage comes in on their patrol bikes and be prepared to get a shock. Even some Iron Butt riders who do far more miles than law enforcement types do considerably less damage to their own bikes over a year - but they don't have the free health care afforded by taxpayers for their own rides either.

 

I've heard the "We ride side-by-side all the time and we trust each other's riding ability" hypothesis. Even watched my side-by-side buddy of ten years blow through I light that I braked for with him leaving a nice skid mark all the way through the intersection. Also, too bad the guy in the vehicle who serves into your lane and causes you to take out your bike and your buddy by your lack to "stay put" didn't know about it. Stagger is better in any language than side-by-side. A wayward wandering cager or blown tire will make you think again about side-by-side.

 

Jazzy.

 

Really?

 

Frankly, Mr. Illiterate, you don't know WTF you are talking about...

 

Kindly avoid the personal attacks and just dispute any points you disagree with on a factual basis.

[Marty Hill]

Why debate, the poster was wrong. I think the answer was fine!

[upflying]

"Traffic was moving at 70 mph and suddenly the SUV stops or slows down?" Probably a woman who got a cell phone or text message. The following bikes should have all been within braking distance, but that's for the court now to decide. Tailgating seems to be the norm now.

 

Granted, Harleys have some of the worst brakes out there and most owners panic brake by using the rear pedal which will bring the thing around in short order and often in a high-side situation. ABS might have helped, but we'll never know.

 

Also, the police are not to be looked on as "Professional riders." Only part of professional is they are paid to ride. Their gear - with the exception of European ones - often sucks and they could refuse to ride with the crap they give them but they don't. OSHA could intervene on their behalf for better gear, but they just go with the flow albeit it being "unsafe" to the point of being laughable at a track day. Also, ask a shop how much damage comes in on their patrol bikes and be prepared to get a shock. Even some Iron Butt riders who do far more miles than law enforcement types do considerably less damage to their own bikes over a year - but they don't have the free health care afforded by taxpayers for their own rides either.

 

I've heard the "We ride side-by-side all the time and we trust each other's riding ability" hypothesis. Even watched my side-by-side buddy of ten years blow through I light that I braked for with him leaving a nice skid mark all the way through the intersection. Also, too bad the guy in the vehicle who serves into your lane and causes you to take out your bike and your buddy by your lack to "stay put" didn't know about it. Stagger is better in any language than side-by-side. A wayward wandering cager or blown tire will make you think again about side-by-side.

 

Jazzy.

Lot's of stereotypical cop bashing going on here. Unless you are a motor cop, you don't need to share your ignorance of an occupation you know nothing about.

[bmwsit]

"Traffic was moving at 70 mph and suddenly the SUV stops or slows down?" Probably a woman who got a cell phone or text message. The following bikes should have all been within braking distance, but that's for the court now to decide. Tailgating seems to be the norm now.

 

Granted, Harleys have some of the worst brakes out there and most owners panic brake by using the rear pedal which will bring the thing around in short order and often in a high-side situation. ABS might have helped, but we'll never know.

 

Also, the police are not to be looked on as "Professional riders." Only part of professional is they are paid to ride. Their gear - with the exception of European ones - often sucks and they could refuse to ride with the crap they give them but they don't. OSHA could intervene on their behalf for better gear, but they just go with the flow albeit it being "unsafe" to the point of being laughable at a track day. Also, ask a shop how much damage comes in on their patrol bikes and be prepared to get a shock. Even some Iron Butt riders who do far more miles than law enforcement types do considerably less damage to their own bikes over a year - but they don't have the free health care afforded by taxpayers for their own rides either.

 

I've heard the "We ride side-by-side all the time and we trust each other's riding ability" hypothesis. Even watched my side-by-side buddy of ten years blow through I light that I braked for with him leaving a nice skid mark all the way through the intersection. Also, too bad the guy in the vehicle who serves into your lane and causes you to take out your bike and your buddy by your lack to "stay put" didn't know about it. Stagger is better in any language than side-by-side. A wayward wandering cager or blown tire will make you think again about side-by-side.

 

Jazzy.

Lot's of stereotypical cop bashing going on here. Unless you are a motor cop, you don't need to share your ignorance of an occupation you know nothing about.

 

+1

[Kathy R]

"Traffic was moving at 70 mph and suddenly the SUV stops or slows down?" Probably a woman who got a cell phone or text message. The following bikes should have all been within braking distance, but that's for the court now to decide. Tailgating seems to be the norm now.

 

Granted, Harleys have some of the worst brakes out there and most owners panic brake by using the rear pedal which will bring the thing around in short order and often in a high-side situation. ABS might have helped, but we'll never know.

 

Also, the police are not to be looked on as "Professional riders." Only part of professional is they are paid to ride. Their gear - with the exception of European ones - often sucks and they could refuse to ride with the crap they give them but they don't. OSHA could intervene on their behalf for better gear, but they just go with the flow albeit it being "unsafe" to the point of being laughable at a track day. Also, ask a shop how much damage comes in on their patrol bikes and be prepared to get a shock. Even some Iron Butt riders who do far more miles than law enforcement types do considerably less damage to their own bikes over a year - but they don't have the free health care afforded by taxpayers for their own rides either.

 

I've heard the "We ride side-by-side all the time and we trust each other's riding ability" hypothesis. Even watched my side-by-side buddy of ten years blow through I light that I braked for with him leaving a nice skid mark all the way through the intersection. Also, too bad the guy in the vehicle who serves into your lane and causes you to take out your bike and your buddy by your lack to "stay put" didn't know about it. Stagger is better in any language than side-by-side. A wayward wandering cager or blown tire will make you think again about side-by-side.

 

Jazzy.

 

 

Jazzy; Sometimes, before I post, I reread what I've written before I hit send. And then there are the times I hit send and then wince. Know what I mean?

 

 

Regarding OP: Anytime anyone goes down on 2 wheels it reflects on us all. It's terrible to die or get hurt when it could have been prevented or avoided.

 

Reflecting on the side by side and tight staggered formation riding patterns, today while riding, I remmebered that riders getting out of military service were some of the first to pump up the popularity of motorcycles after WWII.

 

I believe these riding habits were a reserection of flying wing to wing, etc. I don't know enough about the military to make a blanket statment, but some of these folks might be ex military and/or close to the military life and could be using this riding style as a bonding experience or as a way to relive their military service.

 

By no means am I suggesting that all folks who serve would be interested in riding this way, but in my limited experience I've known veterens who were avid "parade" style cruising riders. I believe it's a deadly way to ride, but then many people who don't ride think the whole riding thing is deadly.

[Boone60]

Bob,

 

Would you please explain why motor police would ride in a tight formation out on the highway, and how often this is actually done.

 

 

[bmwsit]

I am not a motor officer, my brother is and I have attempted the training. That being said, our motors do ride side by side on the city streets on occasion. They train for this and have rules for who does what when. Most of the time they are single so it does not matter. I have only seen double on the highway when doing escorts. General purpose riding on the highway, I have not seen side by side, does not mean they don't, I just have not seen it.

 

I have seen numerous "outlaw" groups riding side by side quite often though. We have two club houses in Portland and this ride was going to one of them.

[mbelectric]

Bob,

 

Would you please explain why motor police would ride in a tight formation out on the highway, and how often this is actually done.

 

 

Yea, along with Boonie, I'd like to know why this style of riding is necessary. I've never asked a motor officer, but since a few frequent these haunts, maybe they can offer an explanation...

 

Thanks in advance.

 

MB>

 

[upflying]

The "why" probably has it's roots in the military. Do groups soldiers just walk around aimlessly or do they walk (or march) in formation? Besides efficient and orderly movement of personnel, which lends an impression of professionalism, obedience and precision?

Formation riding is taught in basic motor academies and is conducted whenever two or more motors are riding together. I ride in formation during and/or to and from funerals, quarterly or semi-annual training rides and other special or public events.

It get so anal that we also mount and dismount on cue and park and pull out in unison.

We also have special ways of changing lanes, again in unison while a "blocker' bike in the rear keeps the lane open.

At intersections controlled by a stop sign, the first bike in formation stops while the others following do not. A lead bike breaks off and remains at the intersction to hold cross traffic.

That bike then takes a position at the rear.

I have a formation riding photo I will post once I find and scan it.

[tallman]

Kathy,

You let him slide on the "probably a woman" slander?

You're a bigger person than I am.

 

If you weren't there, anything else is supposition.

 

 

 

[LPR1100RT]

I have to admit when I see cops ride in formation or columns I think it looks good. When I see civilians do it worries me. I guess I had figured the police had more training on this and do it quite often while civilian riders don't train for column riding and don't ride like that daily. A few years back near my home I was following a group of 4 sport bike riders in my suv when the suv in front of them came to a quick stop for a Deer. The guys were riding in 2 by 2 column and the back 2 guys were having an active conversation between themselves face shields up 1 one rider w/only one hand on the bar. It's a slow road 25mph limit. The front guys stopped the back guys were looking at each other & never saw the stop. I watched the whole thing unfold. The 2 back drivers ran right into the front 2. The front suv never knew it happened & drove off. Luckily ,because of the slow speed, even though they all were hurt (broken bones and cuts) no life threatening injuries. The Bikes were a mess. When the police came & asked questions the guys told them they had to stop suddenly for a truck that had stopped hard in front of them. I just concurred w/their story. The thing is that even though when I do ride w/ others I ride staggered formation I have from time to time zipped up to yell something that I believe the rider ahead of me should know.

[TandemGeek]

The "why" probably has it's roots in the military.

 

... or just simply regimental practices adopted by all para-military organizations. I think it's fair to say that 'riding two abreast' and in other formations goes all the way back to 1000 B.C. when soldiers on horses formed the first calvaries of Asian, Greek and Roman armies.

 

Before adopting motorcycles, police rode horses and like all para-military organizations riding horses wore cavalry-like uniforms that were conducive to spending and entire day on horseback, e.g., full-height riding boots with bloused riding pants. The same types of boots and pants were commonplace on early police motor officers who simply adopted the same riding practices and discipline used by horse-mounted officers.

 

So, at least at this point, and IMHO... it's pretty much tradition and espirt de corps moreso that anything else. If it happens to make the officers take up less space in a traffic lane or more visible to motorists vis-a-vis 'dual headlights that mimic a full size car in a lane' then that's an effect, not the cause or reason.

 

Therefore, from a practical standpoint, IMHO riding side-by-side does in fact remain a practice that bears some review in light of the world in which we now live, vs the world that existed when it was adopted. The same is true of what officers wear and I believe there are more and more departments that are looking at both, e.g., North Carolina, Virginia, Oregon and others. Mind you, like all great tradition I don't believe they should be shelved. However, there is a time and place for everything and even the Marines only carry their swords on special occasions.

 

Not a motor officer... just someone who has spent some time studying a little history here and there.

[Jazzy]

I don't know if flying side-by-side is adopted by the military anymore. Most formations are in a "V" now. Hell, even geese know better than fly side-by-side when they migrate. Anyone who thinks their 180 degree peripheral side vision is great ought to see an eye doctor for a test as when a flight surgeon does your eye exam.

 

Ever watch a major crash on a super-wide freeway when a semi-truck merges and jumps over one lane? Cars brake and swerve and often the car nearest the freeway center wall (near the Diamond Lane) strikes it and rebounds back into the traffic lanes and gets hit again. The natural tendency is to brake or swerve and the consequences are great if the traffic is flowing at 70 mph. It can bring the entire 6 lane to a halt in an instant. Two cops side-by-side would both be taken out in an instant.

 

No one can tell what the other person is thinking, or will do, in an emergency. Even a side-by-side exit where the left cycle rider decides he needs to get off the freeway can lead to a discussion later on as to why "You cut me off!" We don't share the same brain genes.

 

Still, it's a good thing that some local jurisdictions are putting their officers in better motorcycle gear, even if they have to buy their own. Europeans are on board with a lot better gear like modular helmets and brighter jackets (which I too first hated with a passion but now I realize that it does get me noticed). We've had more than our share of dead CHP motorcycle cops around here with some going off the roadway into a dark field and night never to reach home again. Personally, cops on bikes are a very costly department expense in terms of both manpower: they can't haul a drunk or felon and need a car backup, medical costs ("It fell over and I tried to catch it and went down too and got scratched"), nor are the bikes cost effective in maintenance over a patrol car (i.e. tires, brakes, crash bars, bent handlebars, busted levers, case covers, radio gear, etc. The only advantage is accessibility in tight traffic, and even then, when I call 911 I ask for an ambulance first. The arriving cop may call EMT backup and tend to traffic control (and some do a poor job too and seems to have been dropped from some POST classes), but 10-20 minutes is too long for a first responder (EMT, Fire Paramedic, or a Medi-Vac) which is needed once a traffic cop arrives (who is not a doc needed to treat traffic victims) and then makes a call that drags out the EMT another 10-20 minutes from the first call. We've had our share of people with strokes where the cops make a very delayed called and the people are now crippled for life as the first cop on the scene thought they were "under the influence" rather than having a seizure.

 

And don't take the word "professional riders" so seriously. Legally, it means "One who is paid for a service." You can have professional race car drivers (some good, and some not so good), professional doctors, professional plumbers, professional beauticians, etc. None of that is to mean that they may be any good and do the right thing, and some are better than others. Personal arrogance seems to flow around when that term comes about.

 

And I don't have to work in the field to know something is junk or wrong. Ever own a 1981-1991 Yugo GV? I didn't work in the factory to know it was a pile of stuff. When I hear a cop utter "You don't know what you're talking about," maybe it's time for you to explain it, learn something about it, it or just shut up and get out of that line of work." Flippant remarks have no prudence.

 

Jazzy. (Who's also spent 8 years working in a POST academy but bailed for better pastures and got tired of looking at those photos the training sarge seemed to take glee in showing.).

[motoguy128]

This is why I and other riders I've ridden with in groups, always ride staggered. It doubles you following distance to the bike infront of you. Its' also wise to allow a reasonable following distance by the riders in front and well as spacing between vehicles.

 

To complicate the matter, large groups of motorcycle often ride slowly in these large groups, prompting vehciles to cut them off or drive more aggressively.

 

Bottom line, riding in a large single group, side by side, rpesents hazards when in heavy traffic, or any significant amount of traffic.

 

Just my opinion.

[upflying]

I don't know if flying side-by-side is adopted by the military anymore. Most formations are in a "V" now. Hell, even geese know better than fly side-by-side when they migrate. Anyone who thinks their 180 degree peripheral side vision is great ought to see an eye doctor for a test as when a flight surgeon does your eye exam.

 

Ever watch a major crash on a super-wide freeway when a semi-truck merges and jumps over one lane? Cars brake and swerve and often the car nearest the freeway center wall (near the Diamond Lane) strikes it and rebounds back into the traffic lanes and gets hit again. The natural tendency is to brake or swerve and the consequences are great if the traffic is flowing at 70 mph. It can bring the entire 6 lane to a halt in an instant. Two cops side-by-side would both be taken out in an instant.

 

No one can tell what the other person is thinking, or will do, in an emergency. Even a side-by-side exit where the left cycle rider decides he needs to get off the freeway can lead to a discussion later on as to why "You cut me off!" We don't share the same brain genes.

 

Still, it's a good thing that some local jurisdictions are putting their officers in better motorcycle gear, even if they have to buy their own. Europeans are on board with a lot better gear like modular helmets and brighter jackets (which I too first hated with a passion but now I realize that it does get me noticed). We've had more than our share of dead CHP motorcycle cops around here with some going off the roadway into a dark field and night never to reach home again. Personally, cops on bikes are a very costly department expense in terms of both manpower: they can't haul a drunk or felon and need a car backup, medical costs ("It fell over and I tried to catch it and went down too and got scratched"), nor are the bikes cost effective in maintenance over a patrol car (i.e. tires, brakes, crash bars, bent handlebars, busted levers, case covers, radio gear, etc. The only advantage is accessibility in tight traffic, and even then, when I call 911 I ask for an ambulance first. The arriving cop may call EMT backup and tend to traffic control (and some do a poor job too and seems to have been dropped from some POST classes), but 10-20 minutes is too long for a first responder (EMT, Fire Paramedic, or a Medi-Vac) which is needed once a traffic cop arrives (who is not a doc needed to treat traffic victims) and then makes a call that drags out the EMT another 10-20 minutes from the first call. We've had our share of people with strokes where the cops make a very delayed called and the people are now crippled for life as the first cop on the scene thought they were "under the influence" rather than having a seizure.

 

And don't take the word "professional riders" so seriously. Legally, it means "One who is paid for a service." You can have professional race car drivers (some good, and some not so good), professional doctors, professional plumbers, professional beauticians, etc. None of that is to mean that they may be any good and do the right thing, and some are better than others. Personal arrogance seems to flow around when that term comes about.

 

And I don't have to work in the field to know something is junk or wrong. Ever own a 1981-1991 Yugo GV? I didn't work in the factory to know it was a pile of stuff. When I hear a cop utter "You don't know what you're talking about," maybe it's time for you to explain it, learn something about it, it or just shut up and get out of that line of work." Flippant remarks have no prudence.

 

Jazzy. (Who's also spent 8 years working in a POST academy but bailed for better pastures and got tired of looking at those photos the training sarge seemed to take glee in showing.).

Still more cop bashing. I notice your profile is blank. Please update it so we can see from what you draw your opinions.

[tallman]

This is not a personal attack.

It is not a humorous personal attack either.

 

Fill out your profile.

As for your post...

???

Guess I didn't get the memo.

[TandemGeek]

(Who's also spent 8 years working in a POST academy but bailed for better pastures and got tired of looking at those photos the training sarge seemed to take glee in showing.).

 

OK, now you've piqued my interesting. What did you do there during your 8 year tenure?

[Kathy R]

Kathy,

You let him slide on the "probably a woman" slander?

You're a bigger person than I am.

 

If you weren't there, anything else is supposition.

 

 

 

I know Tim , it's so unlike me to sit on my hands

I must be riding too much

 

[AviP]

With long bike caravans, it's just too easy to be fixated on the bike in front. I prefer a paper map and study the route so that I can make it on my own if I need to.

 

The most common rides I do are usually me and a wingman. In rare cases, I have gone with 3 riders but they usually depend on me for directions so I end up watching my side mirrors way too often.

[Paul In Australia]

Hi

In the end, group rides must be likely to be more dangerous than single rides. The bigger the group the more the risk. The major problem is the "varying" experience and concentration levels at the time" of the group riders.

Group rides always make me nervous, but I like them for the commaradierie.

BUT i am aware I am at greater risk. IMHO group rides should be split up to max size of maybe 4 to 6 bikes ( if they know each well ) and spaced out by a few minutes.

Please remember most of these rides include a vast majority of riders who ride maybe only twice a month and maybe less. There is going to be accidents no matter what you do. Military and police riders are trained to ride in groups for work. recreational riders have a great deal more limiting factors.

"Follow the Leader" style rides are fun but they are more dangerous and they will cause accidents occassionally. Once again a matter of choice.

I think the greatest safety training for group rides , is to forcefully advise participants of the danger and, like riding in the first place, let them decide.

best regards

PCH

[BailyD]

QUOTE

 

"when I call 911 I ask for an ambulance first. The arriving cop may call EMT backup and tend to traffic control (and some do a poor job too and seems to have been dropped from some POST classes), but 10-20 minutes is too long for a first responder (EMT, Fire Paramedic, or a Medi-Vac) which is needed once a traffic cop arrives (who is not a doc needed to treat traffic victims) and then makes a call that drags out the EMT another 10-20 minutes from the first call. We've had our share of people with strokes where the cops make a very delayed called and the people are now crippled for life as the first cop on the scene thought they were "under the influence" rather than having a seizure..........................................."

 

I don't understand this? When you call for an ambulance you are saying that the police respond FIRST to evaluate, THEN decide whether or not EMS should be sent? Not in our neck of the woods! The police usually just arrive first as EVERYONE is responding. Sometimes those early critical updates help. Not just for the victim, but for the responding EMS by allowing them to "speed up or slow down" according to what is said. "he cut his finger with a butter knife" or "he got his hand caught in a running lawn mower" You'd be surprised at the lack of information passed on to ALL responding personnel by the original 911 caller.

 

BTW, lucky I got to a call early one day because before any EMS could arrive the victim stopped breathing/heart beating. I did CPR until they arrived with MORE ADVANCED life saving equipment and experience. He lived.