Woman, 40, cheats death in bicycle incident

Discussion in 'Australia and New Zealand' started by HughMann, May 9, 2006.

  1. HughMann

    HughMann New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Messages:
    285
    Likes Received:
    0
    Another one of those h*lm*t saves a life story that some people seem to have such a problem with.

    -----------------------------------------------------------
    By JOSH ALSTON
    09may06
    A 40-YEAR-OLD woman is lucky to be alive after coming off her bicycle on Ross River Rd in Aitkenvale yesterday.

    The driver of a green Mitsubishi Magna attempted to swerve and avoid the woman as she attempted to cross the busy road about 10.30am. The car still struck the woman, who was sent flying off her pushbike.

    The woman's helmet was scattered across the road after the impact and she was lucky not to be struck by the oncoming traffic.

    One onlooker, who was working at a dentist across the road, said he heard a scream before seeing the woman hit the bitumen.

    "I saw her helmet go everywhere, it was like her head exploded," the onlooker said.

    Ambulance workers were at the scene attending to the woman, while firefighters were called to close two lanes of traffic while the woman lay prone on the road.

    Despite suffering from head injuries, abrasions and bruises the woman was conscious and able to communicate.

    She was taken to hospital shortly after the accident wearing a neck brace.

    "It's a reasonably standard procedure, basically a precautionary thing," an ambulance spokesman said.

    The driver of the Magna was clearly shaken by the accident, but was unhurt.

    Her car had swerved down the road while trying to avoid the cyclist but was undamaged.

    "There were no injuries to any party (in the car) and investigations are continuing," police spokesman Sergeant Tony Jacobs said.

    The accident follows a worrying trend of cyclists being struck by cars in the twin cities.

    Northern Region Traffic Co-ordinator Inspector Brian Richardson said 70 cyclists were hit by cars in Townsville last year.

    Of those, 21 were taken to hospital, 23 required medical treatment and 26 received minor injuries.

    Eighteen of the victims were aged between 30 and 39 (most likely age group to be hit) followed by 13 aged between 12 and 16.

    Six children under 11 were stuck and three over the age of 50.

    Insp Richardson stressed the importance of wearing helmets on pushbikes, saying this incident could have been much worse if the woman had not been wearing one.

    "This is a typical example of how important it is to wear a helmet," Insp Richardson said.

    "It's a bit like wearing a seatbelt when you are driving a car.

    "(Cyclists) are the odd ones out on the road and it is important to observe the road rules all the more."

    ----------------------------------------------

    Population 150,000 and 70 cyclists hit by cars last year.
    Townsville has the worst drivers in Aust and some of the "bike riders" here seem to have no idea either. Wonder if the crap bike riders grow up to become crap drivers.
    I have a theory that kids who dont wear a bike helmet dont use a seat belt in a car when they get a licence.

    Townsville Bulletin Link

    Cheers
    Hugh
     
    Tags:


  2. flyingdutch

    flyingdutch New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2004
    Messages:
    5,700
    Likes Received:
    0
    Presumably the scream came from the bugger in the chair, cos the onlooker was distracted by woman hitting bitumen, hence pulling out teeth by accident :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
     
  3. Travis

    Travis Guest

    HughMann wrote:

    > I have a theory that kids who dont wear a bike helmet dont use a seat
    > belt in a car when they get a licence.


    Maybe they're the kids that choose to drive WITHOUT a license?

    Travis
     
  4. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-05-09, HughMann (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > Her car had swerved down the road while trying to avoid the cyclist but
    > was undamaged.


    Bullshit! I bet she simply wasn't conscious enough to refute the
    story that the magna driver came up with. I'm betting no witnesses to
    the actual incident (as opposed to those who heard the scream and
    turned around to see her on the ground) stayed back, right?

    > "There were no injuries to any party (in the car)...


    Oh, that's a relief then.

    > The accident follows a worrying trend of cyclists being struck by cars
    > in the twin cities.
    >
    > Northern Region Traffic Co-ordinator Inspector Brian Richardson said 70
    > cyclists were hit by cars in Townsville last year.


    Wow. Bogan town, eh?

    --
    TimC
    Jun 26 14:08:17 kernel: troll-o-meter (pid 15134) killed: memory exhausted
     
  5. HughMann <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Another one of those h*lm*t saves a life story that some people seem to
    > have such a problem with.


    Seems to be.

    >
    > Insp Richardson stressed the importance of wearing helmets on
    > pushbikes, saying this incident could have been much worse if the woman
    > had not been wearing one.
    >
    > "This is a typical example of how important it is to wear a helmet,"
    > Insp Richardson said.
    >
    > "It's a bit like wearing a seatbelt when you are driving a car.
    >
    > "(Cyclists) are the odd ones out on the road and it is important to
    > observe the road rules all the more."


    Yep. Woman hit by car while crossing road. No evidence to suggest she'd
    done anything wrong. Did have a helmet on. Still injured badly enough to
    be lying on the pavement. What do the cops suggest? Cyclists should obey
    the law, oh and by the way, don't forget your helmet.

    I've seen cops pull kids up with no helmet on, make them put the helmet
    on the handlebars on their head and then let them ride off on bikes with
    no brakes. Maybe we need to broaden the focus just a little.

    P

    --
    Peter McCallum
    Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA
     
  6. cfsmtb

    cfsmtb New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2003
    Messages:
    4,963
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sounds like a case of 'driver said' or 'she did' over what could of occurred. What actually transpired may never really be known.
     
  7. TimC

    TimC Guest

    On 2006-05-09, cfsmtb (aka Bruce)
    was almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea:
    > HughMann Wrote:
    >>
    >> The driver of a green Mitsubishi Magna attempted to swerve and avoid
    >> the woman as she attempted to cross the busy road about 10.30am. The
    >> car still struck the woman, who was sent flying off her pushbike.
    >>
    >> The woman's helmet was scattered across the road after the impact and
    >> she was lucky not to be struck by the oncoming traffic.

    >
    > Sounds like a case of 'driver said' or 'she did' over what could of
    > occurred. What actually transpired may never really be known.


    Unfortunately the cyclist will possibly never remember (due to
    concussion, possible unconciousness) what happened to refute the
    driver's story. The best she may be able to do is say "Well, I was
    going to work here <points at map> from home here <points at map>,
    which means I was travelling along that road. Why on earth would I
    want to be crossing there?

    Let's hope she is in a state quickly in which she can say tell her
    side of the story, and furthermore, than police believe it (one
    wonders whether they will care -- they've already shown us just how
    careful their investigative skills are).

    Fortunately, in my case, even though I was not in a state where I
    could say to police what happened, and those BASTARD witnesses decided
    it would be best if they just mind their own business and go on their
    merry oblivious ways, the driver at least said something not
    completely disassociated from the truth, even if it didn't end up
    incriminating them.

    --
    TimC
    To define recursion, we must first define recursion.
     
  8. Kingsley

    Kingsley Guest

    On Tue, 09 May 2006 18:15:56 +1000, HughMann wrote:

    > Insp Richardson stressed the importance of wearing helmets on
    > pushbikes, saying this incident could have been much worse if the woman
    > had not been wearing one.


    Funny, I would have thought he would have stressed not to
    try to overtake cyclists if there's not adequate room.

    -kt


    --
    Kingsley Turner,
    (mailto: [email protected])
    http://MadDogsBreakfast.com/ABFAQ - news:aus.bicycle Frequenly Asked Questions
     
  9. "Kingsley" wrote:
    > HughMann wrote:
    >
    >> Insp Richardson stressed the importance of wearing helmets on
    >> pushbikes, saying this incident could have been much worse if the woman
    >> had not been wearing one.

    >
    > Funny, I would have thought he would have stressed not to
    > try to overtake cyclists if there's not adequate room.


    I know the real circumstances could have been different, but as I read the
    article the accident did not seem to be an overtaking error.

    "The driver of a green Mitsubishi Magna attempted to swerve and avoid
    the woman as she attempted to cross the busy road about 10.30am. The
    car still struck the woman, who was sent flying off her pushbike."

    --
    Cheers
    Peter

    ~~~ ~ [email protected]
    ~~ ~ _- \,
    ~~ (*)/ (*)

    >
    > -kt
    >
    >
    > --
    > Kingsley Turner,
    > (mailto: [email protected])
    > http://MadDogsBreakfast.com/ABFAQ - news:aus.bicycle Frequenly Asked
    > Questions
    >
     
  10. Theo Bekkers

    Theo Bekkers Guest

    "HughMann" wrote
    >
    > "I saw her helmet go everywhere, it was like her head exploded," the
    > onlooker said.


    > "This is a typical example of how important it is to wear a helmet,"
    > Insp Richardson said.


    It should be apparent even to the casual observer that the helmet
    failed to protect the rider on at least two points.
    1. It was no longer attached to the riders head (did it leave the
    rider's head before or after it "exploded")
    2. The helmet broke up.

    Insp Richardson is clueless. Hang on, he's in Townsville, so you
    already knew that.

    Theo
     
  11. Donga

    Donga Guest

    cfsmtb wrote:
    > Sounds like a case of 'driver said' or 'she did' over what could of
    > occurred. What actually transpired may never really be known.


    You can make some reasonable assumptions about anyone who drives a
    green Magna and also lives in Townsville.

    Donga
     
  12. Trevor_S

    Trevor_S Guest

    HughMann <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    <snip>

    > Townsville has the worst drivers in Aust


    Pity you had to follow it up with generalised crap like this.

    --
    Trevor S


    "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."
    -Albert Einstein
     
  13. Trevor_S

    Trevor_S Guest

    "Theo Bekkers" <[email protected]> wrote in news:eek:[email protected]
    server.bigpond.net.au:

    <snip>

    > It should be apparent even to the casual observer that the helmet
    > failed to protect the rider on at least two points.
    > 1. It was no longer attached to the riders head (did it leave the
    > rider's head before or after it "exploded")
    > 2. The helmet broke up.


    How I read it the helmet saved a life ? Perhaps you think fuses should
    never blow either ? or perhaps it might be a better read "helmet survives
    intact, head explodes"

    Being in Townsville (but reasonably well travelled, just got back from 10
    days in your fair state) and a cyclist. From personal observation, I would
    suggest 80% or so of riders wear a helmet on their head (though the
    prevalence of not wearing a helmet seems to have gone up this year). Of
    that 80%, I would suggest 30 - 50% do not have the strap done up and/or
    have a poorly fitted strap.... this compares to my observations say in
    Caloundra, where 80% seem to not wear a helmet at all...

    I have seen police in Townsville drive past cyclists not wearing helmets
    (perhaps on their way to the latest road safety imitative (COUGH) to man a
    speed camera) as well as talking to cyclists not wearing helmets.

    --
    Trevor S


    "Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth."
    -Albert Einstein
     
  14. PiledHigher

    PiledHigher Guest

    Theo Bekkers wrote:

    > It should be apparent even to the casual observer that the helmet
    > failed to protect the rider on at least two points.
    > 1. It was no longer attached to the riders head (did it leave the
    > rider's head before or after it "exploded")
    > 2. The helmet broke up.
    >
    > Insp Richardson is clueless. Hang on, he's in Townsville, so you
    > already knew that.
    >
    > Theo


    I had to wade in on H*lm*ts

    1. The 'casual' observer ie: strawman is an idiot...

    Even though the helemet broke on impact it is designed to do that in
    mitigating impact, all standard for design just specify the amount of
    shock absorption. Not how they acheive that including fracture.

    I've seen a helemt explode with very had impact on concrete, not to say
    that the rider wasn't hurt (including knocked out) but the helemt had
    an effect mitigating significant forces of the impact.

    The strawman continues to point two:

    2. The helmet broke up.. ie air bags don't work because one you've used
    them once they cost hundreds of dollars to reset.
     
  15. Resound

    Resound Guest

    "Theo Bekkers" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:eek:[email protected]
    > "HughMann" wrote
    >>
    >> "I saw her helmet go everywhere, it was like her head exploded," the
    >> onlooker said.

    >
    >> "This is a typical example of how important it is to wear a helmet,"
    >> Insp Richardson said.

    >
    > It should be apparent even to the casual observer that the helmet
    > failed to protect the rider on at least two points.
    > 1. It was no longer attached to the riders head (did it leave the
    > rider's head before or after it "exploded")
    > 2. The helmet broke up.
    >
    > Insp Richardson is clueless. Hang on, he's in Townsville, so you
    > already knew that.
    >
    > Theo
    >
    >


    My understanding of polystyrene based helmets is that they absorb energy
    *by* breaking up. If it "exploded" then it sounds like it did its job
    spectacularly well. You could make a helmet entirely out of mild steel and
    it would survive crashes beautifully. The wearer would not.
     
  16. Resound wrote:
    > My understanding of polystyrene based helmets is that they absorb energy
    > *by* breaking up. If it "exploded" then it sounds like it did its job
    > spectacularly well.


    That's what I used to think, but it turns out that the real protection
    is given by the deformation of the polystyrene as that is when it
    absorbs the most energy. Cracking or breaking the polystyrene requires
    very little energy and an "exploded" helmet has done very little to
    protect the wearer.

    The older, less well ventilated style of cycle helmets used to be less
    prone to cracking than the more modern ones which are full of
    ventilation hole. Apparently more holes means more stress points which
    can act as a starting point for a crack.

    Graeme
     
  17. dtmeister

    dtmeister Guest

    Resound <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > My understanding of polystyrene based helmets is that they absorb energy
    > *by* breaking up. If it "exploded" then it sounds like it did its job
    > spectacularly well. You could make a helmet entirely out of mild steel and
    > it would survive crashes beautifully. The wearer would not.


    I like this as a summary of the He*m*t debate.

    http://tinyurl.com/ejrvb


    --
    ..dt
     
  18. dave

    dave Guest

    [email protected] wrote:
    > Resound wrote:
    >
    >>My understanding of polystyrene based helmets is that they absorb energy
    >>*by* breaking up. If it "exploded" then it sounds like it did its job
    >>spectacularly well.

    >
    >
    > That's what I used to think, but it turns out that the real protection
    > is given by the deformation of the polystyrene as that is when it
    > absorbs the most energy. Cracking or breaking the polystyrene requires
    > very little energy and an "exploded" helmet has done very little to
    > protect the wearer.
    >
    > The older, less well ventilated style of cycle helmets used to be less
    > prone to cracking than the more modern ones which are full of
    > ventilation hole. Apparently more holes means more stress points which
    > can act as a starting point for a crack.
    >
    > Graeme
    >


    Actually that makes sense. I was packing a lappy on wed with only very
    large blocks of polystyrene to pack it with. I just tore handfulls out
    of the blocks litteraly. punching it didnt work, it just didnt
    disintegrate and I can hit pretty hard.

    Ok so helmet styrene is denser. It would damm well want to be :)

    Dave
     
  19. dave wrote:

    > Actually that makes sense.


    Oh hell, I've started making sense again. Nurse! More medication!

    :)

    Graeme
     
  20. Theo Bekkers

    Theo Bekkers Guest

    "Resound" wrote
    >
    > My understanding of polystyrene based helmets is that they absorb

    energy
    > *by* breaking up. If it "exploded" then it sounds like it did its

    job
    > spectacularly well. You could make a helmet entirely out of mild

    steel and
    > it would survive crashes beautifully. The wearer would not.


    I think you have an incorrect understanding of how polystyrene absorbs
    energy.

    If your steel helmet had a polystyrene shell the steel shell will
    prevent the polystyrene breaking up and yes, then it will do a much
    better job. A hairnet over polystyrene doesn't deserve the title of
    helmet as it will break up. Break-up of the polystyrene is a total
    failure as at that point it no longer offers any protection.

    Theo
     
Loading...
Loading...