Serious Thoughts about the Central Route

LIL MAC--LONG TIME NO SEE. THANX FOR THE REMINDER--I WAS THERE BACK THEN WITH YOU.

As I said in another post along similar lines, the issue isn't riding two up vs. staggered, or how close an interval anyone thinks we should ride.  When I made my first run in 2004, I considered myself to be an "average" Vietnam vet... I was just shy of 54 years old.  Guess what?  I'm still that "average" Vietnam vet, only now I'm pushing 63.  In many ways, I'm a better rider today than I was back then, and eight RFTW's have had a lot to do with that.  But I also have to acknowledge that my reaction times aren't what they were nine years ago and some of my riding skills have deminished over that time.  It's a function of aging, and anyone who doesn't acknowledge that is just kidding himself.  This is the challenge facing the BOD... how do we accommodate an aging rider population and still maximize safety for all concerned?  Everything is going to have to be on the table... riding formations, intervals, and yes, individual rider qualifications and abilities.  I don't envy them this task, but it's something that has to be addressed.

Edited by PapaSmurf - May-29-2012 at 5:47pm

After all these years, I still cannot agree on the side by side, "two second" distance.  There simply is no escape route available at 65 mph and you cannot see anything more than the taillight of the bike in front of you.  It just ain't safe (especially when coupled with fatigue, weather, road hazards, etc.)

Sorry, but it is what it is.........

Just a quick clarification. Side by side riding is only banned in two states Virginia and Vermont. All others have no reference to this in their codes or statutes.

If this post is to continue = please keep in mind - back on page one - Too Tall stated these riders WERE riding STAGGERED when the accident happened..

I don't want to flame anyone, but I would like to correct the false information that was posted about a "fatal accident" in Colorado which supposedly took place "on RFTW" in 2005.  This is not true.

The accident that is being referred to did NOT occur on the Run.  The riders involved were NOT registered with RFTW, and they were NOT riding in the pack.  They were NOT under the control of RFTW in any way, had never ridden with RFTW before, had never signed in or attended the RFTW morning safety briefing/meeting that is mandatory for all riders.

The rider and his passenger showed up in Colorado Springs at the RFTW lunch stop.  After RFTW left Colorado Springs, they followed BEHIND the RFTW pack, BEHIND the Last Man vehicle and behind most of the RFTW 4-wheelers.

It was reported that the rider involved was not riding in any formation, and was not riding tight.  As a point in fact, the failure to ride tight was considered a factor in causing the accident.

The rider who was struck left a good-sized gap between himself and the vehicles in front of him.  An elderly driver in a cage had been sitting at a stop sign for a long time, and was growing impatient.  The driver later told police that he saw the gap and thought that he had room to floor it and scoot through in front of the bike.  He didn't.  The cage and motorcycle collided, and the rider and passenger were injured - the passenger had extensive head injuries.  The last I heard, the passenger was still alive, but in a long-term coma, with no improvement expected.  I suspect that she has probably passed away by now, but I have no solid information regarding her condition.

I'm not trying to criticize anyone for speaking up - I think that voicing opinions respectfully is a good thing, and I support a discussion about safety.  But I also think that accuracy is important.  It's not helpful to start or continue false rumors about RFTW having a "fatal collision" in 2005, much less to present that misinformation as evidence that riding in the RFTW formation is dangerous.

In fact, the major lesson from that Colorado accident is that leaving gaps between bikes is dangerous, because it invites cages to hog in.  The other lesson I take from that accident is that the Run's policies requiring that riders sign in, show proof of license and insurance, attend a safety briefing before being allowed to ride with RFTW, and wear a helmet are very wise.  I've heard some people complain about "all the rules," on the Run, but I believe that those rules are necessary, and are in the best interest of the safety of every participant.

Please note that I'm NOT taking sides in the discussion about what formation to ride in - I see caring and thoughtfulness and wisdom in all the views I've seen posted, and I have great respect for everyone who's spoken up.  I recognize a lot of the names of people posting, and know that you all care deeply about RFTW, and have a great deal of riding experience.  I also know that the current RFTW Directors are listening to all constructive criticism and suggestions, and I trust that they will do everything they can to ensure that the Run is as safe as possible. 

I truly believe that the RFTW Board of Directors and Officers of both Routes are outstanding leaders.  They have done an amazing job of getting this Mission down the road for 24  years.  And despite the accidents that have occurred over the years, RFTW really does have a great safety record, especially compared to other large-scale motorcycling events.  That's a tribute to the RFTW Leaders, Road Guards, and also to every rider who's ever joined the RFTW Mission.

Everyone in leadership of RFTW is in my prayers, all year long, especially the Directors.  They have a very demanding job, and they all need the support and prayers of everyone who participates in, or cares in any way about RFTW and its Mission.  May G*D richly bless all of these devoted servants, and give them wisdom and discernment to make sound decisions on behalf of us all.

Hugs to you all,

-  SizzMo'

Thank you SizzMo. 

Snowdawg wrote:   Please refresh my memory here if I'm wrong but at that time new riders and day riders were not required to join RFTW in any way, or attend any morning meeting. Matter of fact, anyone could shoot down an entrance ramp and fall in formation at any time. The RFTW site invited ANYONE to join the run for a day or an hour.  Is that correct? I also recall it being announced at the meetings that if you're not comfortable riding in the pack that you should ride toward the back, isn't that correct? Didn't RFTW pay out $10,000 because of  that accident? If RFTW had nothing to do with the accident, was not responsible, why did they pay?  I do not want to post false info, but we were told at the time there was a fatality in that accident. As Ice Scout states above, this incident began all the the new procedures of signing in and the ten dollar signup fee to pay for insurance from AMA, the medical info...all that. This was not a requirement at the time and attendance at morning meetings was just a suggestion even for those of us who were going all the way.

Edited by PapaSmurf - May-31-2012 at 11:41am

Ok guys and Ladies we as a BOD are looking at all the safty for the riders on Run For The Wall that is our first priority  and will always be. In this comming year we will be working on different idea to make it as safe as possiable for all the riders and we as a board do liston to the riders we welcome your input on any subject. I know there has been talk about sensoring what goes on in here  and that is the futherest from the truth we wont to know how each of you feal and if it goes against what is in place  that is some of the things that we may need to look at so please continue to post your thought on here but I would also ask that if you see a problem  try and come up with a answer for that problem or at least your ideas. This is a great mission we all do every year it isnt perfect but we all do our best and will continue to do just that do our best as to what is best for all our riders we may not always come up with the best idea but we try  Thanks Ray  Too Tall McDowell BOD 2012-2013