Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Ouch, off at Winton ASC

Discussion in 'Racing, Motorsports, and Track Days' started by pvda, Nov 14, 2006.

  1. Great pics.

    Right time
    Right Place
    Right exposure
    Right Focal length

    Those pics are pretty right :p
  2. That's the series JohnnyO races in isn't it?

    Where was this clown when the TNT highsided? :grin:
  3. Ouch

    ......this is a bit of a strange thought but I wonder what a decent high side at say 100km/hr an hour is equivalent to once the 100km/hr factor is removed.

    Eg is a 2m highside at 100km/hr equivalent to falling say 5m at 0km/hr? or does ground speed make little difference? I guess there is probably no REAL equivalent as the forces of the body are different but there must be a rough one.
  4. I think that the main difference is the sliding distance. At speed you may also tumble, but in general, falling awkwardly from 2-3 meters high does a lot of damage if you land wrong.

    Think of it as much like falling off a horse. People can and do die from it, and people's necks can be broken, even though they're not travelling more than 10-20kph most of the time (unless they're in a gallop).

    Given adequate abrasion protection, very few people receive serious injuries from a low-side, unless they either slide into something, or go sliding for some distance with parts of their body trapped underneath the bike.
  5. Yeah, good point..... but I'd rather not test it out :p
  6. Loving those shots, Awesome!
  7. See, that's what a real[/b[ photographer can do :p
  8. See, that's what a real[/b[ photographer can do :p
  9. Good to see even a SuperMod suffers from the dreaded Double Post Syndrome :wink:
  10. Tiga/Cathar, on the topic of a highside at speed... my personal experience is that the momentum part of an "at speed" high side, certainly adds a "few" metres to an equivalent "fall".

    I started playing around with some basic kinetic equations to work out what kind of height the first glancing impact with the road would have been equivalent to... but it all depends on the assumptions made... I think my assumptions were a tad idealistic and conservative coz I ended up with something like an equivalent 10m fall... problem is... a 10m fall would see you hitting the deck at about 50km/h... which is more than enough to cause death...

    Anywayz... since I'm demonstrably alive... my calcs are wrong!... unless I only think I'm alive?!

    :-k ... there's been a decided philosophical flavour to NR today... :-k
  11. Getting thrown and sliding (or tumbling) usually wont kill you if you've got the right protective gear on but finding a solid object which suddenly stops you is the big problem, hence the use of air fences on walls which are a little too close from comfort at race tracks.
  12. :shock: :shock:
    Very impressive!!! Even if you did come up with a 10m fall as your output. In my world "basic" and "kinetic equations" do not belong in the same sentence.
  13. Repeat after me....

    Rob is a nerd, Rob is a nerd, Rob is a nerd. OK, so he's not a geeky type computer nerd, more of an engineering, chemical sort of nerd. But a nerd is a nerd, regardless!

    All I know, is that after me little off in July (which I'm sure resulted in a slap like a highside), it berluddy hurts.

    And Tiga, I'm sure there's a financial model that probably looks like one of them kinetic equations!

    Now, give me some tekky type stuff involving computers and Stop errors and I'm happy.
  14. Taa Tiga :) *bows grasciously*

    Hey CJ, I think you deserve one of these for that!!