Keep eyes on the road, not the screen

 The headline on the article in Wired reads "Rejoice! Carmakers Are Embracing Physical Buttons Again." 

It's the best news I've read in a long time, if slightly premature. Not all carmakers are going back to safer eyes-off controls, and none are doing very much to bring them back. 

There are strong economic incentives for vehicle manufacturers to install do-it-all touchscreens, with elaborate menus that require looking at the screen while the car is in motion. 

They'll continue to do so, despite obvious safety hazards. Motorcycle makers have the same incentives. But it's not motorcycle instrument panels that mostly menace motorcyclists. 

"Distracted" automobile drivers are the huge threat to motorcyclists. Riders already fear they're nearly invisible, even to attentive drivers. Screens promote additional distraction. 

Experienced drivers and riders know that the best kind of controls are those you can operate without having to look at them. Knobs, switches, levers and buttons placed where muscles can remember their location and function are life savers. 

Quoted in the Wired article is VW design chief Andreas Mindt:

"It's not a phone, it's a car."

That simple philosophy, put into effect across the industry, could save many lives.

Wired printed a chart from IAM Roadsmart showing the change in reaction time caused by various distractions. An undistracted driver has a reaction time of one second. A drunk driver has a reaction time 12 percent greater.

That's bad.

What's worse? A driver using Apple CarPlay on the touch screen has a reaction time 57 percent greater.

If automakers seriously do address the problem of distracting screens, I suspect the first thing they will do is go to voice commands. That's better, but not much.

The Wired chart shows that using CarPlay voice commands only reduces added reaction time to 36 percent greater than that of an undistracted driver.

My wife patiently endures my resistance to using, or even looking at, the touch screen on the dashboard of our family car.

As co-pilot, she attends to the various functions, and even announces what the navigation map shows.

"Not this light, but at the next one, turn left," she'll say.

What am I looking at instead? The road ahead, as seen through the windshield.

I'm not a hero; just an old guy who grew up driving old cars and, for almost a decade, commuting on an old Royal Enfield motorcycle.

On a motorcycle, you had better not be looking at the instrument panel (such as there is, on a motorcycle) when moving.

The only downside to ignoring a motorcycle dash is that the turn signals on a motorcycle are not self-cancelling, so, yes, an inattentive motorcyclist can merrily ride for miles indicating a turn he never takes.

That's important. I try to compensate by using hand signals, which do, in effect, self cancel.

In the car, I let my wife wrestle with CarPlay.

How I almost hit two motorcyclists

 As a motorcyclist myself I try to watch out for motorcyclists when I am driving my car. 

Nevertheless I almost hit two. Maybe three. Here's how it happened. 

The transition from one expressway to another brought my wife and I onto the left (fast) lane of the new expressway. 

But now I had to get off almost immediately, on the right, on an exit across five lanes of traffic. 

The best opening in the lane immediately to my right appeared to be ahead of a motorcyclist. Two, in fact. I could see that a rider on a trike was well behind the first guy. 

I sped up to increase the clearance in front of the lead rider, turned on my blinker and starting to edge right. Checking my mirror I could see that he was waving an arm. His whole arm. 

Was he encouraging me to get in front of him? Or signaling to the rider behind him to stay left for the upcoming interchange? The answer was not long in coming. 

"He's coming up!" my wife cried. I swerved back into my own lane and the first rider shot by. I am sure he was not happy with me.

But my blinker was still on, I still needed to get over, and the opening between the first rider and trike looked large and empty.

I was wrong.

Immediately to my right, in the blind spot formed by my car's C-pillar, was a second two-wheeler. 

Just as I started moving right he came by and revved his motor. I am certain he did it intentionally.

Bless him. It was an actual example of loud pipes saving lives.

I jerked back into my lane and turned off my turn signal, slowing slightly to make sure the final guy, on the trike, made it past without further hassle from me.

Of course I missed my exit. My wife and I were so shaken we gave up on our planned outing and got off the expressway altogether.

I hope the three bikers later had a laugh at my expense and forgave me.

There are lessons here for me as an automobile driver and I hope I learn them. There are also lessons here for me as a motorcyclist. How invisible we are.

Mayhem on the street! Blame bikers!

 My old Royal Enfield Bullet and I won't be popping any wheelies on the street anytime soon. We're both too old and fragile for that kind of stuff.

I'm thus unlikely to fall afoul of a new Florida law.

According to the local newspaper, Florida has a new ordinance on the books that "expands a law barring drag racing by including stunt-driving that blocks traffic on roads and in parking lots.

"In part, the law also includes definitions of such things as a 'doughnut,' 'drifting,' a 'burnout,' and a 'wheelie.'"

It's aimed at the packs of motorcycles and ATVs doing stunts in what the law terms "street takeovers," often blocking or at least terrifying other traffic.

Laws banning drag racing on public roads are old stuff. Drag racers used to gather on long, straight, isolated stretches of back roads, making at least the possibility of enforcement (by blocking escape routes) possible.

In cities, nimble vehicles presented with many escape routes can run away at will. So practical direct enforcement of this new law is probably nearly impossible.

Police pursuit adds dangers of its own. Boynton Beach, Florida, fired an officer who chased at high speed a 13-year-old boy on an off-road motorcycle. The fleeing rider crashed his bike, and died. A 2022 investigation found that, while the rider committed multiple violations, these did not meet existing department standards for continued high-speed pursuit.

That boy was riding alone. A pack of riders misbehaving would have added chaos, and thus even more danger, to the equation. 

My real fascination with the law is its definitions of misbehavior. These won't surprise anyone familiar with a motorcycle. You know them when you see them, but here they are, officially:

"Burnout means a maneuver performed while operating a motor vehicle whereby the motor vehicle is kept stationary, or is in motion, while the wheels are spun, resulting in friction which causes the motor vehicle's tires to heat up and emit smoke."

"Doughnut means a maneuver performed while operating a motor vehicle whereby the front or rear of the motor vehicle is rotated around the opposite set of wheels in a continuous motion which may cause a circular skid-mark pattern of rubber on the driving surface or the tires to heat up and emit smoke from friction, or both."

"Drifting means a maneuver performed while operating a motor vehicle whereby the motor vehicle is steered so that it makes a controlled skid sideways through a turn with the front wheels pointed in a direction opposite to that of the turn."

"Wheelie means a maneuver performed while operating a motor vehicle whereby a motor vehicle is ridden for a distance with the front wheel or wheels raised off the ground."

The real effect of the new law may be to allow judges and juries to consider misbehavior in traffic in setting penalties when deaths or injuries result.

And there are related aspects where authorities probably can crack down.

The law bans not only performing such activities, but being a passenger, arranging such an event on social media, driving alongside to photograph it (except by recognized media outlets), or even being a spectator. According to the law:

"Spectator means any person who is knowingly present at and views a drag race or street takeover, when such presence is the result of an affirmative choice to attend or participate in the event. For purposes of determining whether or not an individual is a spectator, finders of fact shall consider the relationship between the motor vehicle operator and the individual, evidence of gambling or betting on the outcome of the event, filming or recording the event, or posting the event on social media, and any other factor that would tend to show knowing attendance or participation."

I am opposed to street take-overs and stunting on the street in general. It's just not nice. But is it really worth enforcing a ban? I think it is, as long as dangerous pursuit is effectively minimal.

Even one death or injury is too much. It's a bad look for motorcyclists who, let's admit it, depend for survival at least partially on caution and courtesy being shown by every other driver on the road.

Running risks at a railroad crossing

 I came very near dying, and being responsible for the death of my wife, at a railroad crossing in Fort Lauderdale. 

Luck, and my wife, saved us, in the seemingly most casual way. How banal life and death encounters can seem, when they occur! 

Lately our local high-speed rail operator, Brightline, has upgraded railroad crossings to increase safety as a disturbing number of motorists and pedestrians fall victim to collisions with its fast moving passenger trains. Despite the death toll, the railroad plans an increase in speed, to 110 miles per hour in some areas. 

In preparation they've added additional arms across each railroad crossing, to discourage drivers from swerving around the guard arms trying to "beat the train." 

I've tended to side with the railroad on the issue of crossing safety. What more can it possibly do, if motorists are determined to chance death in front of a fast train? 

Ride with me, here, as we approach the crossing of the railroad tracks on Northeast 13th Street in Fort Lauderdale.

The crossing lights begin flashing and making their "dinging" sound. I hit the brakes but, conscious that there may be traffic close behind me, I brake too gently and don't come to a complete stop until I am adjacent to the crossing gate.

Realizing that the arm will come down on my car, I look behind. Mercifully, the following vehicle, an SUV, has left me room to back. up. I put my car into Reverse but have only just begun to move when the crossing arm karate chops my trunk with a clunk.

I consider ramming through the arm to get farther away from the tracks, but I see that there is room between the front of my car and the tracks. Is it enough? But I've already waited too long, and the southbound Brightline train snaps in front of me at, maybe, 60 mph.

Whew.

Well, that was close.

But now it appears that I can proceed out of my unfamiliar position on the wrong side of the crossing arms. I  put the car in gear and might have proceeded forward except that my wife said:

"You know it's always possible there will be another train in the other direction..."

And sure enough: SWOOSH! A northbound Brightline train snaps past my windshield! If I had not waited that instant to hear what she had to say, and instead let off the brakes and gone forward, we would certainly have been killed.

Sobering.

Men: listen to your wives.

In general, I conclude that the high-speed railroads have not in fact succeeded in making crossings fully safe for drivers. I now realize it is not always just the "idiots" trying to beat the train who end up in harm's way.

Watch again how it happened to me:

I hit the brakes when the lights flashed, but it was too late and I came to a stop beside the crossing gate.

I put the car into Reverse, but it was too late and the crossing arm came down across my trunk.

I considered pushing back on the crossing arm, but it was too late and the southbound train came through.

I considered proceeding across the tracks, but a casual warning from my wife caused me to pause for an instant and a previously unseen northbound train came through.

Drivers approaching rail crossings need to view them as representing all the lethality they do, in fact, possess. 

Assurances that railroad crossings are perfectly safe unless abused are baloney. Crossings remain dangerous and they deserve the respect they in fact demand.

Be on guard.

Look out! The risks of talking and driving

 The world is a hectic, busy, distracting place: unless you're on an old Royal Enfield motorcycle. 

That thought came to me on the ride home from yet another dental appointment today. 

Here I am. I know where I am. I know where I am going. I know the route. 

I know the stop lights on this route, the patterns they impose on traffic and where the cars always back up onto the road waiting to get into that one drive-through restaurant. 

Balance and steering are automatic, my throttle and gear shifting are nearly automatic. Vibration tells me my speed without even having to look at the speedometer. 

My old Bullet doesn't even have a gas gauge to look at. (I calculated that I had enough gas for this trip before I even got on the motorcycle.) 

The Royal Enfield motor is the only soundtrack playing inside my helmet. My phone is inside my hip pocket, inaccessible to me and frankly not wanted. 

All I have to do is pay attention, to the road and the vehicles around me. So I do.

The other drivers on the road may be driving distracted.

I wonder: if they are fiddling with their phones or in-car screens, are they more likely to keep going straight ahead? Why would they swerve? Either way, I'm watching.

On a motorcycle I know I can not afford to be wrong.

An SUV hesitates in a driveway. I see the hesitation. The driver is unsure. Distracted. Maybe he is listening to his passenger talking. Maybe what the passenger is saying is more important than the approaching motorcycle. Anything can happen. We make eye contact.

And, then, sure enough, he pulls across the road directly in my path. I am ready for it. I come to a complete stop as he moves slowly through his turn.

He saw me! Yet he put my life -- maybe his too -- in danger anyway.

When I got home I happened to pick up a newspaper article, originally from the Los Angeles Times, by Russ Mitchell. He spoke to cognitive psychologist David Strayer, who heads the Center for the Prevention of Distracted Driving at the University of Utah.

Strayer has spent years telling us that people can not multi-task. Every added task subtracts from the mind share devoted to the main job at hand.

Driving, surprisingly, imposes relatively little load on the mind, probably the reason we believe that we can do other things at the same time. Trouble is, the added tasks are not so easy.

Brain scans show that conversation "uses a lot more of the parts of the brain than driving does," Strayer told the reporter.

The driver of the SUV that blocked me was doing too much. He suffered from cognitive overload. It didn't even take a smart phone or dashboard entertainment center to do it to him. "Just" an ordinary conversation with a passenger.

I drive a car, too. I listen to the radio, I let my mind wander; I talk to my passenger. And like any husband, I get annoyed when my wife pipes up with:

"Red light!" (I saw it.)

"You're too close!" (I am covering the brake.)

"Ignore the directions; go left!" (She's right. Ever notice how often Google is wrong?)

"Do Not Enter!" (Oops. I missed that one.)

You know what? I should be grateful. She's behaving like a good co-pilot and navigator, an extra set of eyes. That is the kind of passenger to have.

Florida asked for my opinions on motorcycle safety

Who knows more about motorcycle safety than motorcyclists?

  What's my opinion on motorcycling safety? Glad you asked.  

  You say no one asked me my opinion? You're wrong!  

  The University of South Florida "randomly selected" me to participate in the 2021 Motorcyclist Survey, funded by the Florida Department of Transportation and administered by the university's Center for Urban Transportation Research.  

  Deadline for responding was Aug. 31, 2021. Since I had been "selected" I thought I'd better ask if it was OK to write about the survey in this blog. The survey's "principal investigator" asked that I hold off until after the survey.  

  At last all can be told.

 The survey explains itself this way:

"During the past decade, Florida observed an unusual increase in serious motorcycle injuries and fatalities and a continued increase in motorcycle registrations.

"Florida has more than 1.2 million drivers with motorcycle endorsements and more than 600,000 registered motorcycles annually. Motorcycles represented three percent of registered motor vehicles, and less than one percent of traffic on Florida’s roadways, yet represented 17 percent of Florida’s traffic fatalities and 12 percent of serious injuries during the last five years.

"Taking the survey helps us better understand motorcyclists' behaviors and measure the progress of motorcycle safety programs in Florida."

Of course the survey asked the basic questions: age, sex, Zip Code, how many miles I ride a week, do I commute by motorcycle, do I ride alone or in groups, do I wear a helmet, do I go to Bike Week in Daytona.

One question that threw me asked whether or not I wear a bandana.

Is wearing a bandana considered a safety measure? I am not sure what they are looking for with that one.

The survey also asked the type of motorcycle I ride. My 1999 Royal Enfield Bullet is clearly a "Standard" motorcycle, but in an unstandardized way.

So I responded that it is "Standard, but retro-vintage, i.e. like an old-fashioned motorcycle although a 1999."

I am sure the tabulators will find that fascinating. For me it is no small safety consideration. My vintage-style Royal Enfield relies on cable operated drum brakes (ABS? Ha!). Its low-r.p.m., low-compression 500cc's don't have the reserve power to squirt me ahead to a safe opening in faster moving traffic.

Working through the rest of the survey I get the feeling that researchers want to know what kind of safety courses I've taken, whether I am aware of the courses that are available, and where I get my motorcycle information. Social media? YouTube?

My guess is that they're going to wind up recommending a push to get motorcyclists trained up to a higher standard.

I was pleased that the end of the survey asked what in my opinion is the greatest danger to motorcyclists in Florida.

One choice was "Potholes." I don't think that is going to be the champion danger named by Florida riders. Florida's roads are generally new enough to be relatively smooth.

The greatest danger to Florida motorcyclists, aside from their own sometimes nutty behavior, is inattentive, careless, distracted, incompetent or impaired drivers of automobiles. Fixing this element is apparently beyond the scope of consideration (a lost cause?). The survey did not suggest it as an answer. 

I chose "Grated Bridges," which refers to the metal grid of drawbridge surfaces. We're taught to ride straight and steady across them, which works. Really not a big deal.

The survey's final question asked if I have any safety tips to pass along to fellow riders.

As if I am the expert!

Thinking about it now, I think I should have recommended against wearing flip flops while riding. You know, something Florida specific.

What I in fact recommended was that the rider should plan an escape path before entering any intersection. Kind of think about "where you gonna go when the volcano blows?"

I try to do this. But would it even work? How much does it help? These things I do not know. And I hope never to have to find out.

I do hope to learn how the survey turns out. I was told to check back after November.

New riders train on Royal Enfield motorcycles

A Royal Enfield Classic 500 in service at a rider training program in the Pacific Northwest.

It may surprise you that Royal Enfield motorcycles will train some brand new motorcycle riders across the United States this year.

Up to 50 Royal Enfield motorcycles are in use by seven rider training programs from Delaware to Los Angeles, from Florida to the Pacific Northwest.

Sarah Lahalih is Rider Training manager for Royal Enfield North America.

"As we continue grow brand awareness in North America, this key initiative allows new riders to be exposed to the Royal Enfield brand from the start," she told me, in an email.

"We are committed to rider training and safety and are working closely with accredited programs across the U.S.

"Currently we are adding Royal Enfields into the mix of schools' training fleets. However, in two-three years years we could explore the idea of having Royal Training academies."

Rider training is a brilliant idea, in my opinion. Not content with the number of young people (and has-beens like me) getting into motorcycling, Royal Enfield will raise its own crop of riders.

Obviously there is a big benefit to the brand in doing so.

Royal Enfield needs name recognition in the United States and what better group of people to get astride your products than people who are probably considering buying a motorcycle!

I personally was strongly influenced by the motorcycle I got to ride during my Motorcycle Safety Foundation class, way back in 2001.

It wasn't a Royal Enfield, of course, but I liked it so well I did eventually buy one.

While I was in the dealership a fellow customer, a MSF instructor, learned what I was looking for and reinforced my decision.

"THIS is the motorcycle!" he said, enthusiastically pounding the seat of the motorcycle I had in mind.

Obviously, familiarity had bred respect. Royal Enfield has precisely the stylish yet comfortable and nonthreatening motorcycles new riders are likely to seek.

Sarah said that the new Royal Enfield Himalayan adventure bike will join the Classic 500 in training programs.

"We made a separate lower seat that we will be adding to the training bikes in order to meet national training standards. We also did this for the Classic," she said.

Sarah listed these rider training programs as offering Royal Enfields so far:

Motorcycle Riding'sCool,Chicago

Virginia Motorcycle Safety Program

Delaware Motorcycle Safety Program

Pacific Northwest Motorcycle Safety Program

Ride Smart, Florida

Bay Area Motorcycle Training, California

Westside Motorcycle Academy, Los Angeles, Calif.

Royal Enfield's loud valves might indeed save lives

Loud Valves Save Lives t-shirt.

"Loud Valves Save Lives" is the old joke about Royal Enfields. The clatter of out-of-adjustment valves is amusing if considered as a safety device akin to the supposed "loud pipes save lives" slogan common in Harley-Davidson circles.

I recently had reason to think it might be so.

My wife and I were walking in our neighborhood when I noticed a bit of litter in the bicycle lane adjacent to the sidewalk. I leaned over to pick it up and nearly had my head taken off by a rider on an electric bicycle.

The rider came "out of nowhere" over the hump of a bridge, and moving the "wrong way" against traffic. I was watching the other direction.

Even so, if it had been moving no faster than a bicycle I would have seen it before I entered the bike lane; but it was much faster and, of course, it was almost completely silent.

I've always dismissed the "loud pipes save lives" argument as wishful thinking. Drivers behind the motorcycle (and thus no threat)  will hear it but those ahead likely won't hear my exhaust note before they run into me.

What I had never considered was that pedestrians too depend in part on their hearing to sense danger.

As silent electric cars, electric bicycles and now even electric motorcycles become more common, those of us who occasionally walk may miss the noise provided by internal combustion.

Angered when non-riders tell you to play it safe?

Sooner or later every motorcycle blogger goes into an angry rant about how much he hates it when non-riders urge him to "be careful" on his motorcycle. Carter Edman wrote the definitive example on the Ride Apart blog last year.

Recently I found myself on the opposite end of this human interaction, and it left me with a fresh viewpoint.

My wife and I went on vacation to the high cliffs of Nova Scotia's Cape Breton. At each "look-off" (Canadian for "overlook") she edged as close as possible to the long drop to get a dramatic photograph. At first, I simply caught my heart in my throat, looked away and hummed the national anthem.

After her fourth or fifth excursion to the edge of a 200-foot fall I finally blurted out a suggestion that she step back. It made her angry.

Why? I was only thinking of her — and, selfishly, how much I would miss her.

Here's what I think was going on. Cautioned to "be safe" she instinctively reacted with "I know what I'm doing. I understand the risk and am behaving accordingly. Don't question my judgement because my mind is made up. We aren't coming back to Nova Scotia anytime soon and I want this picture."

My cliff walking wife turns to have her photo taken, on the edge of a waterfall.

Same thing with motorcyclists. We understand that riding on two wheels is inherently risky. We have the little argument about giving it up forever with ourselves every time we throw a leg over a motorcycle. Once we decide to proceed, we don't want to replay this anxiety causing exercise.

We know the risks. We think we have them under control. Second thoughts now will only rob us of the determination and concentration it will take to overcome our natural fears and actually keep us safe.

Does that sound right?

I hope so. But here's a twist: my own reaction when someone urges me to ride safely is to appreciate the comment. After all, they're only thinking of me. When I promise to ride as safely as possible I am sincere — after all, it's in my self interest to do so.

Does this make me somehow better than those other motorcycle bloggers? Does this make me gentler, more patient and less quick to anger than my darling wife?

Well... yeah.

Royal Enfield stolen; video shows thieves at work

Thieves can easily break the motorcycle handlebar lock.

There's a remarkable surveillance camera video of a Royal Enfield C5 being stolen by two thieves from a parking space in South Delhi, India.

The video shows just how easy it is to break the handlebar lock — the only device I typically use to protect my Bullet when it is outside of my garage.

Snap! And it's gone.

Remarkably, one of the thieves then takes several minutes to leisurely hotwire the motorcycle. He seems to know what he's doing but doesn't want to make a production of it, pausing frequently to look innocent.

The same two, apparently, escaping with the Royal Enfield.

The video closes with a second scene from another camera of the same two (apparently) riding off, one of them on the Royal Enfield, the other on another motorcycle.

Hollywood could not have better staged managed this "Gone in Seven Minutes" move.

If you're in India, watch for a maroon Royal Enfield Classic 500CC with engine and chassis numbers 003316. Contact Vinod Solanki vinodsolankivps@yahoo.in

Regardless of where you are: beware. Here's the complete video:

Could you have avoided this crash? Helmet cam video

Spinning helmet cam captures the horror of a motorcycle crash.

"Made friends with the front of a lorry today," a young motorcyclist in England notified his friends on Twitter  Aug. 28.

"Needles to say, I won't be calling it back for afternoon tea."

The helmet cam video of his collision with a giant truck has made the 20-year-old who signs himself Lazy Days Rider "a bit of a celebrity," he admits.

The clarity of the video, the fact that we hear the sound of his voice (and even the sound of the crash) and the horrifying effect of the camera spinning through space after the impact makes a deep impression on anyone who has ever been on two wheels.

Hundreds have commented on the video, some to express concern for his health and some to criticize the rider for not doing more to avoid the accident.

I am not sure what more he could have done (some suggested precautionary swerving from side to side approaching the intersection, to attract attention).

My comment would be that this is one of those traffic situations that allows very little chance for escape. The rider has a solid stand of trees to one side, a wall of truck in front of him, and a second truck moving to cut off escape to the other side.

In an effort to better set the stage for those of us who drive on the right, I have flopped the screen grabs you see in this blog item. Only a heartbeat separates these three frames. The wide-angle camera lens actually makes the danger look more distant than it is.

Whoa! Rider realizes here that black truck is entering his lane.

Black truck coming fast. Red truck blocks escape.

Escape impossible.

I encourage you to watch the video. It pauses momentarily at several points as captions appear to explain what the rider is seeing.



I console myself with the thought that I would have been moving slower on my Royal Enfield (Lazy Days Rider was on a Triumph Speed Triple). Also, on Florida's typical multi-lane roads it is often possible to use a car ahead and off to one side as a football style blocker, clearing the intersections just ahead of me and my motorcycle.

Maybe that would have helped. Big maybe.

Royal Enfield sidecar lights help put width to work to add safety

Bike's right turn signal was removed and wired to the car's signal, which also contains a small white running light.

Sidecars are often fitted to Royal Enfield motorcycles. I speculated recently that lights added to a sidecar might increase safety by helping other motorists better judge how far away the motorcycle is and how fast it is approaching.

Drivers, I suggested, are used to judging the speed and distance of another vehicle by the distance between its lights, something a solo motorcycle can't offer.

Ted Wetzler of North Ridgeville, Ohio helpfully sent me the pictures you see here of his Royal Enfield and Cozy sidecar, equipped with a clever set of running lights. He wrote:

Perimeter signals on the bike and car. The car's rear turn signal is also a brake light.

"I thought I would send along some snaps of the bike with car I received last fall. Both front and rear right turn signals were removed by the dealer (Ural Northwest in Bellingham, Wash.) and the signal wires attached to what appear to me to be original equipment signals fitted to the sidecar's sheet metal over the wheel.

Rear combo turn signal/brake light.

"This was no special order and made sense to me as placement was logical, showing the dimensions of the bike to approaching vehicles. The car is a Cozy and the bike is a 2008 Bullet with an engine that has been upgraded slightly to accommodate the extra burden the car puts on the motor's strength.

"I've passed 2,500 miles driving this arrangement during the eight months of drivable conditions in Northern Ohio — back roads and city streets only. Driving this rig gives you a workout. They don't drive themselves.

"I didn't consider this car's signal arrangement was anything special when I got it."

Front combo turn signal/running light.

Perhaps not, but it is interesting.

Wetzler says he chose the color of his Royal Enfield and sidecar in part for safety.

"You see a ton of black bikes roaming in my part of the woods with riders and their passengers dressed top to toe in black as well. Since black absorbs light and doesn't reflect any, they go mostly unseen while driving.

"My choice of color — white — was made in part so the hardware could be seen on the road. (And, yes, i was influenced a little by Hubert driving his white Ural all over the place.) After experiencing a close call where a utility truck did a wide turn into my lane, I started wearing a white shirt as well. So far, so good."

Reckless rider brought to justice! FAIL

Don't let your Royal Enfield motorcycle end up on the FAIL blog, I joked, back in May.

I never dreamed that authorities would actually track down the motorcyclist who got FAIL's attention by riding with a barbecue grill wrapped around his body.

Police in Melbourne, Australia, got their man. He's Michael Wiles, 29. The price of becoming famous around the world: $800 (Australian) and loss of his license for one month.

You can read the entire story, by reporter Mega Levy, in The Age.

Wiles turns out to be a true knight of the road, accepting responsibility for his actions and vowing to turn down offers to endorse barbecue grills.

In fact, his gallantry rather casts into a dim light the sleuths who spent time bringing him to bay.

Do they rate a FAIL of their own?

Royal Enfield sidecar lights up for safety

A 2006 Royal Enfield Bullet with sidecar, for sale on CraigsList in Michigan, shows an interesting modification that never occurred to me.

The owner has added a tail light to the sidecar wheel fender, and mounted an extra turn signal to the outside front edge of the sidecar.

The effect, especially at night, would be to visually "widen" the motorcycle to almost automobile width.

It's clever, and I'll bet it really does increase safety, at least marginally.

We know that automobile drivers don't seem to have the same subconscious respect for motorcycles they show for approaching cars. A driver who would not dare pull out in front of an oncoming car will do so in the path of a motorcycle.

I don't think it's a mean streak. I really think it's the experience, repeated hundreds of times daily, of judging how close a car may be by how far apart its lights are. If a motorcycle somehow had widespread lights, it might be more intimidating and thus safer.

Maybe the solution would be to put a headlight in the nose of that sidecar!

Drunks on four wheels vs. drunks on two

Motorcycle riders were more than twice as likely as passenger vehicle drivers to be drunk , according to the latest national survey by U.S. safety officials. The study found that 5.6 percent of riders are drunk, while "only" 2.3 percent of passenger car drivers are drunk.

Martin Zimmerman of Tribune Newspapers reports that the survey was conducted in 2007 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration at 300 locations around the U.S. Drivers and riders were randomly directed into the survey site by police officers. Alcohol and drug tests were administered by non-law-enforcement personnel.

Participation was voluntary and anonymous. Those who refused to participate were evaluated by NHTSA interviewers trained to detect impairment. Those found to be under the influence weren’t arrested. Instead, they were offered a number of options to keep them off the road until they sobered up, including a hotel.

Of course, percentages are one thing, raw numbers are another. There are far more drunk drivers than riders on the road and they are a bigger menace by about a ton and a half. But is that any excuse? Nevermind the danger to others, you have your own life to consider as a rider, and no crash structure to fall back on.

No point my giving a lecture on this; no one would listen and I am no one to talk, although I won't take a drink if I'm on the bike.

I'm just interested: you guys really do this? How?

Oh, I know, an old time rider once recounted how he'd cruise alongside the bike that was carrying the beer and without stopping help himself to a bottle from the saddlebags. He'd tuck the bottle into his belt when he wasn't sipping. It was an inspiring story, except he now walked like the Tin Man from Wizard of Oz. Life catches up to you.

Driving a car is one thing, and we all know we shouldn't risk that after drinking, either. But at least cars have four wheels.

However you look at it, the survey does not enhance the image of motorcyclists. This may hurt your pride: pickup truck drivers were the next most likely to have illegal blood-alcohol levels.

Motorcycle safety's easiest little tip

The Motorcycle Rider Course I took to get my license taught me a lot of things, but one tip sticks out. I may never master counter steering or some of the other big concepts, but this little piece of advice was easy to put into effect. I find that I never forget to do it and it saves me potential trouble at every intersection.

What is this fantastic little tip? You might laugh.

The technique is simply to ride with your throttle hand held so that the finger tips are atop the front brake lever -- but not far enough to operate the brake. Your thumb wraps firmly around the throttle (as it must, since it is the only grip you have on it). Perfectly comfortable, but very important.

Here's why: holding your hand like this insures that when the time comes to grab the brake lever, even in an emergency, you will automatically close the throttle with your thumb as you stretch your fingers to reach the lever. Simple, huh?

What happens if you don't do this is dangerous and unsettling. If you ride with your fingers wrapped around the throttle (as I typically hold a bicycle hand grip), your hand can be in any position at all, depending on how much throttle you're using.

In an emergency, you won't think. You'll open your hand (thumb included) and grab forward for the lever. When you get it, you'll clamp down hard, pulling back and down to get maximum pressure. That back-and-down movement will actually roll on more throttle as you apply the brake.

Since you instinctively grabbed for the clutch with your other hand, the engine will begin roaring as you're trying to stop. It's terrifying: I know, because I didn't count this little tip for much in class and had to experience an emergency stop without it for myself.

Got a tip you'd like to share? Comment here.