Safer Journeys, interesting...

[koba]

From the "Safer Journeys" website:

"In general, submitters placed more emphasis on initiatives aimed at road users than on roading, vehicle, or speed initiatives. This may indicate that submitters do not understand the safe system approach and are much more focussed on the driver, rather than the other three elements of the safe system."


Comments?

[Blackbird]

A bit bloody patronising, but nothing to get too worked up about. The State can worry about the other factors as there's relatively little that the "ordinary person"can influence there. We're right to focus on the driver because that's where we can have the greatest influence. If the driver/rider has better situational awareness skills, then he or she should be able to largely compensate for the other factors by driving to the conditions. Oh, and it's a relatively low cost solution too.

Or am I wrong?

[p.dath]

I'd say there was probably a good degree of interest in roading, but roading is expensive to fix, and we are in a recessionary period. I'd support the introduction of barriers for roads carrying a volume of 10,000 vehicles per hour. Many other countries have the same standard. I believe the NZTA would like this to.

Hasn't happened yet. Probably wont happen for a long time. Because it costs a lot of cash to retrofit NZ's roads.


I support a common roading standard for highways. I believe NZTA does as well. Hasn't happened yet. Probably wont happen for a long time. Costs a lot of money to correct the engineering of the roading network.

And lots of people support increased driver education. However that hasn't progressed - because agreement hasn't been reached on what and how that education should be done.

[MSTRS]

Comments?

Changing driver behaviours will have a bigger influence on road safety then all other measures put together.
Spend all the millions you like on making roads easier etc...won't help if drivers are still 'asleep'.

[jim.cox]

I note on-going training for motor-cyclists

But nothing for cage drivers

I think the Govt is still too scared to actually do anything effective

[bogan]

I'd say there was probably a good degree of interest in roading, but roading is expensive to fix, and we are in a recessionary period. I'd support the introduction of barriers for roads carrying a volume of 10,000 vehicles per hour. Many other countries have the same standard. I believe the NZTA would like this to.


Would the barriers end up being cheese cutters though? :shit:

In a country like NZ there is always going to be issues with the roading, the population is too spread out, so while it would be a lot safer to have better roads, its not feasible. So we should work on driver training instead, at the very least I think that traffic offenders who get more than half way to losing thier license in demerits should have to resit the test (and pay for it themselves), maybe exclude speeding in that one though?



And lots of people support increased driver education. However that hasn't progressed - because agreement hasn't been reached on what and how that education should be done.

Retesting every 10 years would be logical as thats when driver licenses have to be renewed anyway I think?

[p.dath]

Would the barriers end up being cheese cutters though? :shit:

Currently I would say yes, because I see more cheese cutters being deployed than non-cheese cutters.

Its probably a question of "we have $x" to spend, which will allow us to day "y" km's of concrete barriers, or "z" km's of cheese cutters.

Which will save more motorcyclists? Don't forget, even though cheese cutters are "bad" if a motorcyclists hits them - it does help prevent oncoming vehicles crossing the centre lane and hitting us.

[bogan]

Currently I would say yes, because I see more cheese cutters being deployed than non-cheese cutters.

Its probably a question of "we have $x" to spend, which will allow us to day "y" km's of concrete barriers, or "z" km's of cheese cutters.

Which will save more motorcyclists? Don't forget, even though cheese cutters are "bad" if a motorcyclists hits them - it does help prevent oncoming vehicles crossing the centre lane and hitting us.

well a road with no barriers is better off for motorcyclists than a road with cheesecutters (think thats what the whole cheesecutter campaign is about), so the Y kms of concrete is better!

[p.dath]

well a road with no barriers is better off for motorcyclists than a road with cheesecutters (think thats what the whole cheesecutter campaign is about), so the Y kms of concrete is better!

I don't think I can agree. There are a lot (and I mean a lot) more accidents caused by vehicles crossing the centre lane than there are motorcyclists being injured on cheese cutters.

So it seems that it is better to have the odd motorcyclist cut up by a cheese cutter, than having a lot more killed because of a complete lack of barriers.

[bogan]

I don't think I can agree. There are a lot (and I mean a lot) more accidents caused by vehicles crossing the centre lane than there are motorcyclists being injured on cheese cutters.

So it seems that it is better to have the odd motorcyclist cut up by a cheese cutter, than having a lot more killed because of a complete lack of barriers.

um, cos there's a lot more roads without barriers than there are ones with cheese cutters. And even if you are correct, the ends don't justify the means, killing 10 bikers to save 20 cagers isn't an option.

[p.dath]

um, cos there's a lot more roads without barriers than there are ones with cheese cutters. And even if you are correct, the ends don't justify the means, killing 10 bikers to save 20 cagers isn't an option.

I was only talking about saving motorcyclists. I bet that more motorcyclists get killed by cars crossing the centre line, than motorclists get killed on cheese cutters (cheese cutter accidents have very few recorded incidents).

So the choice becomes more busy roads with cheese cutters, or only a few with concrete barriers.

[bogan]

I was only talking about saving motorcyclists. I bet that more motorcyclists get killed by cars crossing the centre line, than motorclists get killed on cheese cutters (cheese cutter accidents have very few recorded incidents).

So the choice becomes more busy roads with cheese cutters, or only a few with concrete barriers.

If thats the case then why are there motorcycle groups against cheesecutters all over the world, surely someone would have prevented statistics to back up your claim as it would remove a lot of opposition to the barriers. They also don't stop all traffic from crossing the center, heavy vehicles force their way through, to end up on the other side with no control whatsoever found this (http://www.network.mag-uk.org/barriers/WRB-reportV9.pdf) in the cheesecutter section which may be an interesting read for you.

[Ender EnZed]

I was only talking about saving motorcyclists. I bet that more motorcyclists get killed by cars crossing the centre line, than motorclists get killed on cheese cutters (cheese cutter accidents have very few recorded incidents).

So the choice becomes more busy roads with cheese cutters, or only a few with concrete barriers.

This is precisely the Cheescutter Debate isn't it? There is a specific section of KB for it.

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/forumdisplay.php/85-Cheesecutter-campaign

[p.dath]

If thats the case then why are there motorcycle groups against cheesecutters all over the world, surely someone would have prevented statistics to back up your claim as it would remove a lot of opposition to the barriers. They also don't stop all traffic from crossing the center, heavy vehicles force their way through, to end up on the other side with no control whatsoever found this (http://www.network.mag-uk.org/barriers/WRB-reportV9.pdf) in the cheesecutter section which may be an interesting read for you.

Motorcyclists don't like them because they usually sever limbs or heads with a heavy impact. Pretty nasty.

If you read the Monash University report they cite, they compare the relative accident rates of the barriers. The short story is that very few motorcyclists have a collision with the wire barrier at such an angle that they do loose a limb (how many have we had in the last 5 years in NZ, one?).
I don't know the number of motorcyclists killed because someone crossed the centre line, but I would be pretty confident the the number would be much higher.

Personally I don't like the idea of cheese cutters because of limb dismemberment. But I like the idea even less of the higher probability of being killed by a drunk crossing the centre lane and killing me head on.

So I guess I begrudgingly accept we need to get barriers on as many roads as possible with a flow of 10,000 cars per hour as possible, and then look at upgrading them to safer concrete barriers.

So I'm saying do what we can to save as many lives as we can now, and then work on making it better. If we aim for the best option first probably hundreds of riders will be killed before we can complete the project of upgrading the busiest roads.

[BMWST?]

prolly the other way around,more motorcyclists injured because THEY crossed the centre line...THEY = motorcyclists

[bogan]

Motorcyclists don't like them because they usually sever limbs or heads with a heavy impact. Pretty nasty.

If you read the Monash University report they cite, they compare the relative accident rates of the barriers. The short story is that very few motorcyclists have a collision with the wire barrier at such an angle that they do loose a limb (how many have we had in the last 5 years in NZ, one?).
I don't know the number of motorcyclists killed because someone crossed the centre line, but I would be pretty confident the the number would be much higher.

Personally I don't like the idea of cheese cutters because of limb dismemberment. But I like the idea even less of the higher probability of being killed by a drunk crossing the centre lane and killing me head on.

So I guess I begrudgingly accept we need to get barriers on as many roads as possible with a flow of 10,000 cars per hour as possible, and then look at upgrading them to safer concrete barriers.

So I'm saying do what we can to save as many lives as we can now, and then work on making it better. If we aim for the best option first probably hundreds of riders will be killed before we can complete the project of upgrading the busiest roads.

But the onus is on those putting in the barriers to provide statistical evidence that bikers are better off with them, they haven't, why not? I assume because it doesn't exist. Sure head on collision deaths will be higher simply because there are more roads without cheescutters on them than with. For example if 0.1% of roads have cheesecutters then statistically every biker killed by a cheesecutter is approximately equal (haven't taken traffic density into account) to 1000 bikers killed by other motorist crossing the centerline.

[Swoop]

"In general, submitters placed more emphasis on initiatives aimed at road users than on roading, vehicle, or speed initiatives."
Comments?
Yup. It appears that the gubbinments STILL haven't twigged to the simple fact that the populace know that the kiwi driver is crap.
Licencing standards are low and the driving skills/roadcraft which started out pretty low, are decreasing to new depths.

Luckily the police ignore areas which could affect this, and simply go for the easy answer of "speed kills".

[koba]

Changing driver behaviours will have a bigger influence on road safety then all other measures put together.
Spend all the millions you like on making roads easier etc...won't help if drivers are still 'asleep'.

Abosolutley, and very well put. It sounds a wee bit like thats not the answer 'they' were looking for tho!

[koba]

Yup. It appears that the gubbinments STILL haven't twigged to the simple fact that the populace know that the kiwi driver is crap.
Licencing standards are low and the driving skills/roadcraft which started out pretty low, are decreasing to new depths.

Luckily the police ignore areas which could affect this, and simply go for the easy answer of "speed kills".

Yeah, pretty much aye. That answer I posted just blew me away because its seems so telling of a stinky attitude.

[MSTRS]

So I guess I begrudgingly accept we need to get barriers on as many roads as possible with a flow of 10,000 cars per hour as possible, and then look at upgrading them to safer concrete barriers.


Bugger off! That's just playing straight into 'their' hands. Accept second-rate up-front and that's all you'll ever get. There will be no upgrade later. This country refuses to even put a second rail on existing armco that has killed bikers. Besides, solid concrete does not cost hugely more than the guillotine/garrotte shit, PLUS no ongoing cost for maintenance.