The Tt Safety Debate

[When Skies Are Grey]

If you are genuinely concerned with the number of deaths from riding it makes sense to start by putting a ban on the biggest sources of death - day to day cycling on two wheels.

 

You what the single biggest cause of death is.....life. People who have been alive, die every day...you heard it here first!

[manshimajin]

After all every day of the year the leather and the lycra brigades are going out on UK roads knowing that they may be killed

 

Well I certainly don't think that when I go out on my bike, and I do believe I speak for most riders here !!

...and this includes TT riders...statistically the odds are higher on getting killed on bikes on normal roads. I merely say this because the originator of the post wishes to focus on facts.

 

as a policeman I know says, the term in the force for those on two wheels is 'organ donors'...

 

And this particular phrase is bang out of order, and one that didn't go down well when my son was stopped on his bike and the same term used when they spoke to him - Who by the way was doing nothing wrong at the time

I agree that it is 'bang out of order' but I guess the Police use 'black humour' to deal with the trauma of having to deal with biking accidents. As noted elsewhere in this thread even though motorbikes account for 1% of road useage they account for 20% of fatalities. If you project that figure (ie about 600 deaths in the UK pa) to match it to 4 wheel transport mileage it would 60,000 deaths p.a.. That is the size of the problem.

 

So if JohnnyRotten is interested in facts and uses these as a basis for arguing bans on dangerous activities, motorbikes would be completely banned as being far too dangerous for everyday use. Same would apply to pedal bicycles.

 

I am not a biker, I used to watch the TT as a kid in the early 50s, I do not watch it these days - but I do not see an argument for banning it if the people participating enjoy it knowing the risks involved. Individuals seem to get a lot of enjoyment out of high risk activities - do you ban them all and wrap the world in cotton wool?

[Slim]

Well think it out. Given the racing conditions and safety features of the 50s and 60s - what do you think the figure for the 50s and 60s would have been, if someone had suddenly come up with technology to double the lap speed to over 130mph?

 

I've not read the rest of this thread yet, so sorry if this has been covered, but:

 

Other technology has advanced too, braking, safety equipment, traction, power to weight, reliability etc.

 

As for the banning thing, I'm not in favour of banning the TT. I'd far rather a solution that makes it safer, either radical modifications of the most dangerous parts of the course, eg purchase of land to create for more run-offs (for example what they've done already to the much improved brandish corner), the removal of obsticles on the course or a limit on the power of the bikes to suit the course better. The improved safety tech combined with lower speeds might make the fatalities drop considerably.

 

The point about 'telling people how to live their lives' being a manx/british thing doesn't wash with me at all. The OP went to some lengths to demonstrate that other racing venues have massively improved the safety record.

[When Skies Are Grey]

The other alternative is to take the funds they need to make the course safer and build an all purpose world class racing circuit.......

[bluemonday]

The other alternative is to take the funds they need to make the course safer and build an all purpose world class racing circuit.......

 

And at the same time set up an OFFICIAL fund to provide financial assistance when things go tits up as opposed to relying on people dresing up in fancy dress and running around with buckets.

 

But hey that won't happen, all the leeches might have to part with some of the money they make.

[Bobbie Bobster]

As for the banning thing, I'm not in favour of banning the TT. I'd far rather a solution that makes it safer, either radical modifications of the most dangerous parts of the course, eg purchase of land to create for more run-offs (for example what they've done already to the much improved brandish corner), the removal of obsticles on the course or a limit on the power of the bikes to suit the course better. The improved safety tech combined with lower speeds might make the fatalities drop considerably.

 

The point about 'telling people how to live their lives' being a manx/british thing doesn't wash with me at all. The OP went to some lengths to demonstrate that other racing venues have massively improved the safety record.

 

Kudos Slim for bringing the thread back on course.

 

The OP presented a fairly good start at an objective statistical analysis, without obvious bias, of the TT's historic safety record compared to other motor racing events. The statistical basis of the analysis has been unsuccessfully challenged in the thread, so we could accept the premise that the TT has fallen behind other comparable motorsport events in its safety record. Given this, shouldn't the organisers be trying a lot harder to cut down the number of fatalities and life-changing injuries as other motorsport organisers have done?

 

Why should they be doing this? I would argue that very few competitors see the event as a competition to cheat death. They see it as a competition to ride better, smoother and faster than they have before and to get the highest place finish they can. The consequence is that it's the duty of the organisers to provide the safest possible environment for competitors to achieve these goals.

 

How could this be achieved? I agree with Slim that altering the course to reprofile the highest-risk sections is one approach, but fundamentally with a 37 mile circuit through towns it's not going to be possible to do this in any major way. Limiting bike power and speed (as has been done in F1) must be only way of fundamentally improving the safety record.

 

Would making the bikes slower affect the attractiveness for competitors and spectators alike? Similar moves on other motorsoprt events (WRC, F1) have shown that it doesn't have to.

 

Despite attempts to portray it as such, I don't believe this is a "stop the TT" thread, I think it's one part of a "how might the TT need to change to keep going" debate.

[jonnyrotten]

As for the banning thing, I'm not in favour of banning the TT. I'd far rather a solution that makes it safer, either radical modifications of the most dangerous parts of the course, eg purchase of land to create for more run-offs (for example what they've done already to the much improved brandish corner), the removal of obsticles on the course or a limit on the power of the bikes to suit the course better. The improved safety tech combined with lower speeds might make the fatalities drop considerably.

 

The point about 'telling people how to live their lives' being a manx/british thing doesn't wash with me at all. The OP went to some lengths to demonstrate that other racing venues have massively improved the safety record.

 

Kudos Slim for bringing the thread back on course.

 

The OP presented a fairly good start at an objective statistical analysis, without obvious bias, of the TT's historic safety record compared to other motor racing events. The statistical basis of the analysis has been unsuccessfully challenged in the thread, so we could accept the premise that the TT has fallen behind other comparable motorsport events in its safety record. Given this, shouldn't the organisers be trying a lot harder to cut down the number of fatalities and life-changing injuries as other motorsport organisers have done?

 

Why should they be doing this? I would argue that very few competitors see the event as a competition to cheat death. They see it as a competition to ride better, smoother and faster than they have before and to get the highest place finish they can. The consequence is that it's the duty of the organisers to provide the safest possible environment for competitors to achieve these goals.

 

How could this be achieved? I agree with Slim that altering the course to reprofile the highest-risk sections is one approach, but fundamentally with a 37 mile circuit through towns it's not going to be possible to do this in any major way. Limiting bike power and speed (as has been done in F1) must be only way of fundamentally improving the safety record.

 

Would making the bikes slower affect the attractiveness for competitors and spectators alike? Similar moves on other motorsoprt events (WRC, F1) have shown that it doesn't have to.

 

Despite attempts to portray it as such, I don't believe this is a "stop the TT" thread, I think it's one part of a "how might the TT need to change to keep going" debate.

 

 

Thanks for all of that.

 

So far you and I seem to be about the ONLY posters on on this thread who haven't claimed that I would like the TT banned.

 

But it's quite clear that mentioning the undeniably awful safety record makes the most vociferous pro-TT fans lash out at whoever mentions it, mostly because they know it's indefensible as it is.

 

I think they also realise that there is no significant political and public will to make it safer. And until, or unless there is, government and voters are shirking thehir responsibilities in a most shameful way.

[The Chief]

It has become evident in recent weeks that all motorsport whatever level is dangerous both for participants and spectators, we've had problems at TT and Southern 100, Surtees being killed, Massa's injury, spectator being killed in wales at a rally and just this weekend a powerboat racer being killed after a crash.

 

Competitors in these sports are aware of the dangers at all levels and still they strive to compete, that is human nature.

 

Is the TT dangerous, i think we can all agree that it is, should it be banned for the danger level i am not so sure, if human beings are willing to compete of their own free will then i say let them.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Would making the bikes slower affect the attractiveness for competitors and spectators alike? Similar moves on other motorsoprt events (WRC, F1) have shown that it doesn't have to.

 

Despite attempts to portray it as such, I don't believe this is a "stop the TT" thread, I think it's one part of a "how might the TT need to change to keep going" debate.

 

If I might ask without any sort of prejudice or assumptions on my part, why are the dangers of the TT a problem?

 

And other than the aspect of speed, can the TT be made safer? If the speed was reduced, would it not affect the popularity and purpose of the TT?

[KMC]

This is a quote from Guy Martin on his return from racing at the weekend at the new Armoy Road Race in Ireland !!

 

This has answered one or two questions on here as to how the riders see the challenges themselves, and that they do understand the danger in what they do.

 

Got back from Armoy the other day. Now that’s what I call I man’s track. Proper. I’m back to work for a couple of days then off to the Ulster GP.

 

You know I’m into my mountain biking big time and some people like to describe sports like that, BMX, snowboarding, surfing, motocross, and the like as extreme. Well to me I reckon that’s a load of ***. Extreme to me is something that’s as hardcore as it gets, something where if it all goes a bit pear-shaped, nine times out of ten you end up pushing up daisies. So to me Armoy was as extreme as it gets, a proper extreme sport. It’s just confirmed to me that it is what floats my boat.

 

Oh, and jonnyrotten, I haven't accused you of wanting the TT banned either. I fully accept your views and those of others, but I will also air mine at the same time. That's what debates are all about

 

Kev

[Slim]

If I might ask without any sort of prejudice or assumptions on my part, why are the dangers of the TT a problem?

 

Because of the endorsement, because of the association, because of the cost, because of the reputation, because you have a duty of care, but mostly because you should always do all that you can to prevent someone from dying.

 

And other than the aspect of speed, can the TT be made safer? If the speed was reduced, would it not affect the popularity and purpose of the TT?

 

Like I said, the new brandish is a lot safer. It'd be difficult and expensive, but it is possible to do that at other corners. As has been pointed out, pretty much all other motor racing has been made safer, and hasn't reduced it's popularity.

[La_Dolce_Vita]

Because of the endorsement, because of the association, because of the cost, because of the reputation, because you have a duty of care, but mostly because you should always do all that you can to prevent someone from dying.

 

Ok, I see. I find the endorsement and association is one I find particularly bizarre, as it does make the TT seem singularly terrible in comparison with other government funded pursuits. The cost issue would seem to be balanced or mitigated by the increased tourism, would it not?

And your last point, I think you are right. Steps should be taken to prevent the likelihood of death, but it will always be a certain danger when racing fast on the TT. If steps can be taken to improve safety then it would be about time they were brought in. But I don't see a speed limit working somehow.

[Bobbie Bobster]

Would making the bikes slower affect the attractiveness for competitors and spectators alike? Similar moves on other motorsoprt events (WRC, F1) have shown that it doesn't have to.

 

Despite attempts to portray it as such, I don't believe this is a "stop the TT" thread, I think it's one part of a "how might the TT need to change to keep going" debate.

If I might ask without any sort of prejudice or assumptions on my part, why are the dangers of the TT a problem?

 

And other than the aspect of speed, can the TT be made safer? If the speed was reduced, would it not affect the popularity and purpose of the TT?

The organisers owe a duty of care to the participants to minimise,within the context of the event, the risk of death or serious injury. The statistics seem to indicate that they have failed to keep pace with developments in other comparable motorsport events.

 

They also owe a responsibility to the people of the Isle of Man to maintain social order, ref. Hobbes, Locke etc. Not ensuring that the safety record of the TT races is kept in line with similar events, and the evolving social context in which "high-risk" organised events are viewed, is arguably a violation of their social contract.

 

Regarding the speed issue, to use an analogy, I would maintain that no-one really cares that much if/when lap records are broken in F1 races - the key is in the race itself, not the speed of the cars. There have been numerous "reset" events when F1 vehicle specification has been changed in order to bring about various changes, including reducing cornering speed to reduce the accident risk. This has affected lap times and top speeds but with little detrimental effect on the popularity of the sport.

[Bobbie Bobster]

This has answered one or two questions on here as to how the riders see the challenges themselves, and that they do understand the danger in what they do.

 

Extreme to me is something that’s as hardcore as it gets, something where if it all goes a bit pear-shaped, nine times out of ten you end up pushing up daisies.

It has not.

 

Compare it with the OP of a statistical analysis of the historic trend of deaths in the TT compared with other motorsport events. This answers questions regarding the relative safety of the TT.

 

Quoting one rider from what looks like a blog-type entry, but could be a puff-piece for a sponsor or a piece of journalism with who knows what type of either intentional or unintentional spin or bias, does not provide a reliable determination of how the competitors as a group see the challenges of the TT.

[KMC]

comparable motorsport events

 

Again, you cannot compare the TT with other than Real Road Racing on the roads.

 

You cannot compare these events with BSB, WSB or Moto GP as they are totally different animals.

 

Accept the TT for what it is, and that is a one off event that is nothing like anywhere else in the world, and as such has its own characteristics and model.

 

Safety is something that is addressed by the organisers, and reviewed and improved every year, but again, and because of the nature of the beast, you cannot protect the participants the same way that short circuit riders are protected.

 

Every year the safety aspect is taken into account, and if it was possible to wrap it up like say Donington, then I’m sure it would have been done long ago.