To go back to the OP - I don't know how to stop the carnage. Its clear analysis of why the crash rates are so high is important and people riding beyond their skills make up the vast majority of those killed according to the analysis I have seen.

Because infact many of the fatal accidents are not at speeds significantly higher than the speed limits speed cameras won't do much. Education must be the key - and perhaps have some mechanism for bike license to lapse after a certain time they are not used?

I would like to see mandatory retesting for all classes of driver every few years and make testing much much harder.

Did you realise you can get a unlimited bike licence even now at over 21 and have never learnt to corner at speed or brake from speed? its not a part of the training or testing to learn to brake hard from 70 mph or to countersteer in fast corners.

I would like to see mandatory retesting for all classes of driver every few years and make testing much much harder.

Now I do agree with that

TJ those things are all part of good driving. But you can still go too fast.. and reduced speed makes everything safer.

Quite obviously.

This is a non-argument now, it's pointless. We are actually all agreed except that TJ thinks we aren't.

I understand the point TJ makes. Skill obviously plays a part, it's just that in the grand scheme of things, not enough of a difference overall. Make driving on public roads as utilitarian as you can, and make driving/riding on closed roads, tracks as attractive as you can. You'd soon reduce the deaths on roads.

stilltortoise - Member

...............but how anyone can argue that reducing speed limits won't reduce {EDIT} the severity of {EDIT} accidents is beyond me.

Because reducing speed limits has been tried and make little difference to the type of crashes that are so overpresented on roads like the A537.

Two reasons - one is that the guys who ride stupidly fast will still do so despite the speed limits and the other is that a great many of the fatal accidents are at speeds under 50 mph.

nickc - Member

I understand the point TJ makes. Skill obviously plays a part, it's just that in the grand scheme of things, not enough of a difference overall. Make driving on public roads as utilitarian as you can, and make driving/riding on closed roads, tracks as attractive as you can. You'd soon reduce the deaths on roads.

I tend to agree - a part of the reason I got rid of my bike.

Skill makes far more difference to crashing rate on motorcycles than people seem to give credit to however. Its a huge part of the issue. it is not insignificant.

track days are increasingly popular as is advanced training. This can only be good

I don't care either way really as:
1) I won't be going to that area
2) My council tax doesn't pay to wipe the road clear of the blood and bones like the local people's does although unfortunately some of my taxes do.
3) I don't care 'cos its in the north
4) the local businesses won't be getting my money because all of the ignorant motoristas who drive too fast mean that I won't go there to start with
Sorted.

According to MCN, the cameras aren't working properly yet. There is also a detour on the route that has no cameras so will screw up the average speed calcs. Possibly.

the guys who ride stupidly fast will still do so despite the speed limits

...and if they keep getting caught by cameras and fined maybe they would slow down. Isn't that the point? I got caught by an unmarked car some years ago on the M74. I was doing an [i]average [/i]of 92mph on a clear road in good conditions. Even the copper acknowledged the good conditions, but "had to" fine me.

Regardless of my skill level and assessment of road conditions, I have not driven like that since for fear of more points and more fines. Maybe one day I would have been in a nasty accident had I continued

Speed Kills.

No it doesn't. Inappropriate speed can but doesn't always kill. Stll that makes a sightly less Daily Mail-esque soundbite so has no place on STW

BigButSlimmerBloke - Member

Speed Kills.

No it doesn't.

There is also a detour on the route that has no cameras so will screw up the average speed calcs. Possibly.

The old road leaves and rejoins the new road, but that's less safe again.

I knew someone who was killed when out cycling on Long Hill (that's the A5004 between Whaley Bridge and Buxton, for those in the South). He was hit head on by a motorcyclist. The motorcyclist also died.

For someone so vehemently anti-car / pro fuel-price hikes, I find TJ's approval of ragging the arse off high powered sports bikes on public highways strangely contradictory.

Inappropriate speed can

🙄

Pretty weak little caveat there to make a point.

Speed Kills.

To be fair to TJ, that's not actually what he says. What he's trying to say is that people with the appropriate skill 'can' ride at a faster pace and more safely than those without those skills. It's actually pretty self evident, it just doesn't matter that much statistically in terms of overall road safety

Thank you nickc! I thought I had lost the ability to explain myself at all!

A biker screaming along may well be comfortably within his own skill level but it doesn't stop him putting the shits up other road users and potentially causing fatal distractions.

But that's alright cause he is an experienced, safe biker.

If the average person (or the whole nation) goes faster then there is likely to be more accidents and fatalities, is that not accepted?

I think there are a couple of red herrings here, what John McGuiness does is very different to the general motorcycling public. He rides on closed roads and short track, granted the TT / NW200 / etc are hazardous in terms of the surface but marshals are there to minimise risk, i.e. Oil spill, animal on the track - look at hutchey this year, he said he lost 2 seconds on one lap this year due to marshal flags. He;s also using the whole road with nothing coming the other way. If i took the desmosedici out this afternoon and road like john mcguiness on a public road, i wouldn;t fancy my chance of coming home.

You just can;t ride like that. All riders new or old should be made to do compulsary further training, either rospa, iam or bikesafe and wise up a bit, that would reduce the accidents through anticipation, thinking ahead and making calulated decisions. yes my bike is far too powerful for road use, like 95% of bikes on the road, but its only as fast as the rider that winds it on.

It's actually pretty self evident, it just doesn't matter that much statistically in terms of overall road safety

Exactly, it's self evident, which is why it's too obvious for him to need explaining... He is likewise missing our points.

To me, the phrase 'speed kills' means that if you are going too fast you might crash and die. Which is true. I don't think anyone's stupid enough to think it means that if you go at any speed you are certainly going to die. So there's not much point arguing against it.

Pretty weak little caveat there to make a point.

Speed Kills.

How does that work? You reach a certain speed and drop dead? I have never heeard of speed being recorded as the cause of death. Perhaps you can enighten me what speed is the fatal one, the one that will certainly, under any circumstances kill?

Yep Coyote, it's a good point, the public roads are no place for this kind of stuff, last time we had this discussion I think it was decided that consideration was an important part of riding/driving, and it has to be said, that a 'good' driver/rider won't by coming past you like that...

Sorry BigButSlimmerBloke...I "bow" to your superior skills regarding pedantry and semantics.

You know what the **** it means, don't be silly, but feel free to sit there and make useless points because a two-word slogan sounds a bit Daily-Mailesque to [i]you[/i].

🙄

BBSB - you're really coming across as a tool here.

FFS - molgrips - do you get tired of the whooshing noise as things fly over your head. You clearly have failed to grasp the points again.

However your prejudices and leaping to conclusions in your ignorance is obviously more valid than my decades of experience and avid reading of the research.

TJ I have not. Please explain why you think this!

I'm agreeing with you, did you not see that part?

deadly - you're welcome, I just prefer not live my life to other people's slogans.
still, maybe you can tell me what the fatal speed is, out of interest?

avid reading of the research.

I so want your life 🙂

BBSB - you're really coming across as a tool here.

I know, imagine disagreeing with someone who's talking rubbish. Shocker, eh?

One final attempt

The majority of these accidents with bikers on roads such as the a537 are born again bikers who vastly overestimate their skills.

Teh classic accident is not at high speed - its running wide on medium speed bends. This is because they don't have the skills to ride the bike properly

Because it is not high speed accidents then a focus on speeds is not going to reduce th4e accident stats significantly.

skill is far more important on a motorcycle than people give credit for, speed is far less important. Because of this skilled riders are often both faster and safer.

The answer must lie in stopping people riding beyond their capabilities. Clamping down on speed will not stop these crashes.

BigButSlimmerBloke - Member

BBSB - you're really coming across as a tool here.

I know, imagine disagreeing with someone who's talking rubbish. Shocker, eh?

You appear to be looking at it from a "pedant with nothing better to do" angle, which is completely inappropriate, it's clearly a simple headline that summarises a valid point. Is that simple enough for you?

deadly - you're welcome, I just prefer not live my life to other people's slogans.

You're the man, living life according to your own rules. A proper Easy Rider type. Impressive. Maybe you can think of something snappy that fools like me can understand and have a think about then. I could have sworn for years that the "Speed Kills" slogan [b][i]actually[/i][/b] meant that speed really does kill somewhere along the scale. Silly old me eh?

still, maybe you can tell me what the fatal speed is, out of interest?

I don't know. You still can't see you're just being silly do you? If you think the constant over analysis sounds clever, it doesn't. As cynic-al said, you're just sounding a bit toolish.

No arguments there TJ - as I said before.

However, speed is a factor.

The classic accident is not at high speed - its running wide on medium speed bends

Yes, and they run wide because they are going too fast for their skill level. So they could stay safe by skilling up, or slowing down.

Like I say, it's ultimately too much speed for a person to handle that causes a crash. Slowing down to a point at which they can ride the bike properly would be a very easy way to help.

Or, to put it another way - overconfidence kills.

Please don't slag me off for being stupid here.. this is meant to be a discussion so we can figure out our repsective points.

One final attempt

Famous last words...oh that they were true 🙂

[i]The answer must lie in stopping people riding beyond their capabilities. Clamping down on speed will not stop these crashes.[/i]

Speed humps every 20 feet will though 🙂

not always molgrips - target fixation more than anything, you don't even need to be over the speed limit for it to have desperate consequenses on a roads like the A537

I didnt realise how long it was since I last drove that road... must be about a year ago, so the cameras must have come in since.

The first time I drove it you could see straight away that it was a fab road, with lots of excellent low speed corners that you can see right round and far enough ahead so that you know if a car is coming the other direction way before you get to the corner. Also there are some cracking straights too where you can see for miles.

I could see that the problems come when some out brake themselves in to the bends, when damp some of the bends are more greasy than you would expect probably due to the amount of rubber laid down, and some of the straights are uneven and bumpy, and if your idiotic enough to drive/ride it quickly the first time your out then I could certainly see why it could easily go wrong.

Last year I went up a few times and drove back and forth over the route a few times getting progressively quicker and quicker, the straights you have to treat with respect, but can be driven very quickly in sections, then bends are an absolute joy with 2nd gear controlled slides and drifts possible. Its a shame that such a good road is now gone.

TJ is largely right here I reckon, at least in what he's specifically talking about (though he's either being very specific or ignoring what I discuss below) - skilled riders can ride faster than a less skilled rider and be safer. BUT only with the caveat that that only applies for accidents where only the motorbike is involved.

Add in accidents or potential ones where oil, ice, mechanical failure, other cars/motorbike/sheep, etc are a factor and less speed does make it safer (though again, to a much smaller degree, skill may have some benefit - eg some riders can rescue a tankslapper better than others). How much those accidents apply to the specific road(s) mentioned isn't something I know but I'll bet that even if it's not a majority, a significant proportion of motorbike accidents do involve other factors and as such, higher skill levels will not allow you to ride significantly faster than a less skilled rider without significantly increasing risk of those accidents.

Just don't buy a motorbike - simple.

IMO going 5mph over a speed limit is MUCH safer than going 5mph under it but riding about a foot from someone's rear bumper - which many riders do.

A superbike can be had for £8k brand new. A bit more for something utterly mental - a simple and very basic test is all that is needed to ride one. Some get to 100 in 5 seconds - that's insanely fast. I think that for over a certain power, extra training and a very rigorous test should be mandatory. Or just ban stupidly fast bikes altogether; unfortunately that's most bikes over 600cc!

Surely the classic accident is a motorist pulling out and not seeing the biker. That must happen far more often than the A537 type accidents.

[i]its running wide on medium speed bends.[/i]

hmmm, then it's still a 'speed' issue, this is caused 'mostly' by too high a speed on entry...Or missing the apex (a skill thing) but my money's on speed.

not always molgrips - target fixation more than anything, you don't even need to be over the speed limit for it to have desperate consequenses on a roads like the A537

Absolutely, but this is not about the legal speed limit. This cannot take into account sharp bends.

nickc - Member

its running wide on medium speed bends.

hmmm, then it's still a 'speed' issue, this is caused 'mostly' by too high a speed on entry...Or missing the apex (a skill thing) but my money's on speed.

Neither.

its caused by panicking, sitting up and backing off the throttle - this cause the bike to run wide. This is at speeds far below those which a skilled rider could get round the corner with huge safety margins. its purely a lack of ability. The entry speed is fine.

Edit - of course the reasons for crashes are very varied but this particular scenario is suprising common and accounts for a lot of the deaths on great biking roads.

Out of interest as a non-motorbiker, why does coming off the throttle make you understeer? Logically I'd have thought that if you back off, you'll get some engine braking to the backwheel which will tend to reduce grip and oversteer if anything?

Just a suggestion but perhaps add a suggested speed to road signs warning of a bend in the road, speed subject to severity of bend etc, that would at least give a better warning to motorists of whats coming up.
I remember riding in France some years ago & the grading of bends like this meant that once you got the feels of the system you could get your entry speed into the corners right for your level of skills & thrills 😉

DB - they have that in NZ too - made spirited driving far easier and much safer.

Good idea.

Clubber - makes the bike sit up straight - especiially if shaft driven, if you come off the throttle mid corner on my Moto Guzzi you might as well say bye bye

[i]its caused by panicking, sitting up and backing off the throttle [/i]

ummmm, right, and why would you be panicking then? and why would you be backing off the throttle?

Like I said only a couple of things make a bike run wide on a corner, missing the apex, and too much speed, panicking says to me it's a speed thing, no?

From only driving cars, I can not comment of bikes but, I know that certainly having done a track day makes you a smoother more progressive driver, and therefore less likely to crash.

As to limiting engine size etc etc, that really doesnt work, its all about momentum, and even a 65bhp car can be driven very quickly.

One thing that has changed in the last few years is that sports cars have gone for more and more grip, so therefore the speed at which things go wrong is so much higher, I assume the same applies to bikes? If more cars came out with less grip you could still have all the fun but at much much lower speeds.

Nick - not really - You go into a corner, realise it's tightening and instead of (by the sounds of it) trusting the bike and keeping on the throttle, you back off (it's natural instinct to slow down when in trouble) and cause the accident.

It is a speed thing yes - too much speed for your ability.

+1 for funkydunc also.

Dickyboy "makes the bike sit up straight"

Because you slow down (so you lean less)? So the wheels naturally turn less, right? (because a rounded profile wheel will naturally turn when leaned)

Without trying to link it to speed, my point was target fixation usualy equates to running wide / stright on. TJ is correct though, if you read the research, the majority of accidents involving motorcyclists is a single vehicle accident in derbyshire.

Backing off the throtle is usualy combined with natural reaction of grabbing a big handful of front brake Clubber, this stands the bike up mid corner and carries you over into the oncomng traffic, countersteering requires momentum, and a skilled rider would countersteer harder and accerlerate through the bend istead of backing out of it.

countersteer and accelerate - so like a speedway rider (to a much lesser extent!)?

[b]dunc[/b] to some extent but with the bikes its more than acceleration is so huge that a quick twist of the throttle gets you very fast very quickly.

the crash I describe they still have plenty of grip - but not the skills to use it.

[b]clubber[/b] - its really complex - its to do with position of the centre of gravity, geometric effects from the rear lifting, the width of the tyres and a load of other factors - but basically if you have 30 degrees of lean with a neutral throttle and all the forces balance when you roll off the throttle the forces change and rebalnce with 25 degrees of lean - meaning you run wide. Its not oversteer from a loss of front wheel grip like a car. The front tyre still has plenty of grip

Edit - sort of clubber but both wheels are still gripping.
[b]Nickc[/b] - its too fast only for their skill. Not for the radius of the bend or the abilities of the bike.

Clubber, yes, I see your point, sorry I had a different type of corner in mind.

[i]Nickc - its too fast only for their skill.[/i]

I wasn't aware the road death statistics took into account how good or bad a driver/rider was...*

*Being sarcastic, sorry...

From the report ( http://www.roadsafetyfoundation.com/downloads/RSFreportweb.pdf)

Motorcyclists accounted for just 4% of the traffic on the
motorway and A road network surveyed, but were overrepresented
in high severity crashes, accounting for 26% of all
fatal and serious collisions reported. Of these, 50% occurred
at junctions, 10% were head-ons, 6% rear end shunts and 5%
single vehicles running off the road.

So nationwide (and I know that this has been about a specific road), just running off the road is pretty uncommon (1 in 20)

Nickc - its too fast only for their skill. Not for the radius of the bend or the abilities of the bike.

Too fast for skill = too fast. Therefore, speed is a factor. We agree.

More accurately the specific speed that rider is doing in that specific type of situation (tightening bend, rider goes straight on) is a factor. For a different rider it may be perfectly safe.

Many of the other accidents include the running wide on bends - they run wide and hit another vehicle.

Most of the accidents on junctions are smidseys ( Sorry mate I didn't see you)

But as you say this was in the context off the A537 and similar roads. No junctions and thus no smidseys. I have also seen stats that show a far larger % of single vehicle accidents.

Nickc - they manage to still do this at relativly low speeds

Further, looking at that report, page 15, I think that the table at the bottom of the page refers to the 10 black/red spots at the bottom of page 14. As such for the Cat % Fiddle, the accident breakdown is:

36% at Junctions
5% run offs
18% head ons
41% 'other'

I'm not really certain what run offs are (though suspect they're the type of accident TJ is talking about) and head ons could well be caused by run offs as could some of the 'other' but it certainly suggests that there are a significant number of accidents at junctions which skill will only partly mitigate.

EDIT - TJ, you say "No junctions and thus no smidseys" but I just checked on google maps and there seem to be a good few junctions.

Its a good few years since I rode but but I don't remember many junctions. However you are right there are more than I remember.

I can't open that PDF - its keeps crashing my steam drive puter with too much stuff running on it 🙂

at a guess - run offs are the classic accident I talk about. A fair amount of the head ons will be the same cause - running wide on bends and some of the others as well.

I am sure I read an interpretation of the stats were they had looked at the blame - and in accidents where the rider was to blame the type I talk about was a majority. Junctions being normally the rider not to blame.

Still 36+% (and I'd expect that means we're talking of numbers of at least 50% just on the basis that I don't believe that the remaining 64% are all due to a rider's lack of skill) of accidents are accidents where higher speed will increase the chance of them happening pretty much regardless of skill...

seems to me riding a motorbike on the ragged edge on a public road is just selfish antisocial behavior

it may be fun and look really cool but its just the same as tearing down a footpath on a dh bike

thats why bridelways and trailcentres and dh tracks are so great coz we can indulge in our childish pastimes without causing other people grief

likewise bikers and drivers should book a track day or do the TT

I would dearly love to drive really fast, it's definitely a part of my psyche.. but I'll save it for when I end up on track. Or when I'm on my mtb 🙂

The argument that driving fast is ok if you have the skills reminds me of the fate of Mike Hailwood and also of Mike Hawthorne. They are as dead as that proposition.

The argument is ok for a one way system with restricted access, but simply does not hold water on public roads with traffic coming the other way or with slow moving bags of blood and bone on bicycles in front of you round the blind corner.

One of the consequences of a minority driving their cars/bikes/whatever fast is that it means that everyone else speed up and becomes more aggressive. Where I live is fairly urban, the speed limit is 30mph but people regularly drive along the road at 40-50mph. This means that when turning out of a side road you have to floor it because you have no idea whether someone driving 20mph over the limit is going to come round the corner, same as pulling out from parked, or attempting to pull in to stop. Everyone drives foot to the floor because a small minority of people did so. This means that it becomes difficult to cross the road on foot -because you don't know if someone is going to hoon round the corner, its difficult to turn right on a bike because the motoristas are driving too fast and a lot of them don't think that cyclists should be on the road. Speeding affects everyone be it through death/injury, property damage beacuse they pile into a narrow section with parked cars and can't stop, its dangerous crossing the road, its dangerous cycling, actually it can be dangerous walking on the pavement because sometimes they run out of road and end up on it.
But then again because they're London drivers they don't know how to drive in anything other than straight lines so have to slow down really hard to get round corners.

kimbers - Member

seems to me riding a motorbike on the ragged edge on a public road is just selfish antisocial behaviour

#agreed. I never have done nor have I suggested it was reasonable.

epicyclo - Member

The argument that driving fast is ok if you have the skills

Again - not what I have said.

No, not what you've said but you still say that driving fast is fine so long as you're a skilled rider (EDIT - and within your limits). You may not be on the ragged edge but you may well still be significantly increasing the risk of having a serious accident or worse causing one that affects other peopler.

Your original premise was that most accidents on the cat&fiddle were the fault of unskilled riders. The numbers seem to suggest that while they do probably cause quite a lot of them, there are plenty of accidents where skill of the rider will be very little mitigation and as such, riding slower will give a greater chance of avoiding them or making them less severe.

I think TJs points ring true that, if you are a more experienced/skilled biker you can go round a corner quicker and safer than a weekend born again warrior and that a fair proportion of accidents that are caused in that very manner.

The exception i take is the assumption that skilled bikers can ride round corners faster and be safe. Its just not true when you have so many other hazards to consider.

18 years of road and race-track taught me that and I have a sizeable part of my calf and a rebuilt knee to show for it.

clubber - Member

No, not what you've said but you still say that driving fast is fine so long as you're a skilled rider

Not what I have said at all. Point out where I said that?

Your original premise was that most accidents on the cat&fiddle were the fault of unskilled riders. The numbers seem to suggest that while they do probably cause quite a lot of them, there are plenty of accidents where skill of the rider will be very little mitigation and as such, riding slower will give a greater chance of avoiding them or making them less severe.

You are making assumptions there. Recessive speed does play a small role in the accidents yes. However that stats suggest it is in a minority of cases. How many % from the date you read was excessive speed a major part?

However lack of skill - the ego writing cheques the body can't cash on behalf of the bikers - is far greater as is car drivers not seeing the bikes. These are the two largest categories of fatal bike accidents. Absolute or excessive speed has a very small role in these two categories

focussing on speed is the wrong place. focussing on addressing the skills gap is a far more effective way of reducing fatalities.

A skilled experienced rider t the speed limit will be safer than the newb at 45 mph.

Stop riding bikes altoghether there will be no bike accidents.

LHS - Member

I think TJs points ring true that, if you are a more experienced/skilled biker you can go round a corner quicker and safer than a weekend born again warrior and that a fair proportion of accidents that are caused in that very manner.

The exception i take is the assumption that skilled bikers can ride round corners faster and be safe. Its just not true when you have so many other hazards to consider.

focussing on speed is the wrong place

Not necessarily, because however good or bad you are, slowing down will make you safer. It's an easy win.

Training may be more effective ultimately, but really - slow the F down first to within your limits, THEN gain some skills.

Surely the first part of riding skill is knowing your limits in the first place?

Not necessarily, because however good or bad you are, slowing down will make you safer. It's an easy win.

No it doesn't thats the bit you fail to understand.

I don't agree. Surely, if you are an inept rider, then going nice and slowly through a bend will be safer than if you pin it?

I live just off another motorcyclist honey-pot / death trap road (the A6 into Matlock Bath). A few things about the type of person who rides a motorbike there, which may possibly be different from the average motorcyclist (although maybe not given their general statistical tendency to get themselves killed).

All of them drive fast, it may be sometimes within the limits, but typically a lot faster than the prevailing traffic, and with complete disregard for pedal cyclists when overtaking them, and not much for cars, oncoming traffic, no overtaking lines etc.

There may be some sorry mate I didn't see you incidents, but to be honest I bet most of these are 'sorry mate I didn't see you because you were doing some crazy 50mph overtake in 20mph prevailing traffic speeds without looking out for anyone coming from the side roads. Which while the driver is 'to blame', are still a situation where the motorcyclist could have driven sensibly and defensively and avoided it. Same goes for bikes overtaking traffic jams - it might not be your fault if someone comes in from the side, but fault makes bugger all difference if you're knocked off, better to keep an eye out for it and slow down sometimes.

They have trouble going round corners without going onto the other side of the road, that is certainly true. There is one bridge on a sharp s bend that is famous for people crashing motorbikes into it. Oops.

The majority of them seem to have stupid loud exhausts. Are these actually legal? They sound so stupid, and you can hear them from right up the top of the valley sides. ****ers.

It is however quite funny going to Matlock Bath, always makes me think of the Village People, I always imagine they're all about to break out into the YMCA dance.

Joe

"speed kills" is an over simplification of the problem to which the over simplified answer is to restrict ALL motor vehicles to 20mph.
Better training & driver testing is part of the solution as are stiffer penalties for those that continue to drive like pricks on public roads.

OK, TJ, I'm not going to argue over what fast means because clearly we won't agree. In the past you've talked about overtaking and going over the speed limit which can be safe in the right circumstances including the skill of the rider.

I never said excessive speed since I'm talking about the unexpected type of accidents where it's impossible to say what excessive is.

My point is that in the 'junction' type accidents for example, if you're going slower then you will typically/often/sometimes be more likely to be able to avoid it by swerving/stopping/whatever - that's just common sense. I'm not suggesting that it will always work.

A skilled experienced rider t the speed limit will be safer than the newb at 45 mph.

I'm suprised that you're making such an absolute statement there but it does demonstrate nicely the blindspot you have for motorbikes. It may well be true that a skilled rider is safer at the speed limit than a newb at 45mph in some accidents but it's just as likely be true that the skilled rider is less safe at the higher speed in accidents where the unexpected happens (a car pulls out) where the difference in speed may well be the difference between having the accident or not.

Better driver training is definitely a good thing. Would you not agree though that there's a significant number of accidents where it'll make no/very littel difference though and where speed will be an important factor?

mostly "sorry mate I didn't see you" is a preferential statement to make than - "sorry mate I didn't actually look" or "sorry mate I saw you but still pulled out because I knew I was only risking damage to you & not me"