This road is highly dangerous. Can someone tell me why?

[Ixion]

MoT have just finished classifying all the roads in the country , in an exercise called Kiwirap (Kiwi Road Assessment Program - don't blame me I didn't invent the stupid name).

What they've done is go through all the raods and grade them from 2 star (dangerous) to 4 stars (very safe).

Two problems though.

First, is that they ignored motorcycles. Intentionally.

Second is the ratings often don't seem to make sense.

Like this one, http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/2-Star%20Rating%20example%202.jpg.

Can someone tell me why that stretch of road should be considered as one of the most dangerous in the country. Because I can't any major issues. Just looks like a normal back road to me.

[p.dath]

Like this one, http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/2-Star%20Rating%20example%202.jpg.

Can someone tell me why that stretch of road should be considered as one of the most dangerous in the country. Because I can't any major issues. Just looks like a normal back road to me.

Just guessing, but is there a hidden intersection on the left hand side there between the power poles?

[MSTRS]

Multiple driveways? Lots of orchard traffic...

[Stirts]

Because the two cars at the end of the road force you have to slalom through?

[breakaway]

Is it because its such a nice straight piece of road, I might be tempted to do a wheelstand which the gubmint considers unsafe?

[bogan]

hmmm, so now its the roads that are the danger, is there some taboo on blaming the drivers for being morons? It baffles me how there is so little emphasis placed on operator attention, when in the workplace there are many standards and protocol for dealing with simple things such as lathes, saws, even the proper way to lift a library book.

looking at that pic I can't see anything remotely dangerous, maybe it has bad reflections during night driving or something?

[EJK]

I'll be honest.



I have no fuckn clue.

[Ixion]

To clarify, I don't know the answer. They've classified it as two star (as low as they went). It has a few issues, I wouldn't want to blat down there at 200kph, but overall it looks a pretty reasonable back road.

What I'm really trying to work out is whether there star ratings are the result of some meaningless formula (like the way they calculate corner speeds), or whether there is some reason why that stretch of road would be considered especially dangerous.

[cowboyz]

i think youll find it will be based on the accidents in the area in the past. maybe all living int he area cant drive?

[Ronin]

If that's where I think it is (around Hastings) then it has a high accident rate.

[Banditbandit]

If that's where I think it is, it's because there've been a lot of fatal crashes there ... and that's because of the idiots on the road ..not the road itself ... there's just enough curve on it that idiot car drivers going too fast in the direct the pix is taken can't hold it on their own side of the road and cause head-ons.

Mind you, I'm one of the idiots ... :yes: the first time I did the Mamaku Road (Tirau to Rotorua) I couldn't resist opening the throttle - what a spectacular Road ... just great ... wonderful surface, cool bends ... 185 klicks plus ...

That's a very dangerous Road on their reckoning ... dangerous because it is too tempting ...

[Dare]

To clarify, I don't know the answer. They've classified it as two star (as low as they went). It has a few issues, I wouldn't want to blat down there at 200kph, but overall it looks a pretty reasonable back road.

What I'm really trying to work out is whether there star ratings are the result of some meaningless formula (like the way they calculate corner speeds), or whether there is some reason why that stretch of road would be considered especially dangerous.
I suspect the answer you are looking for has to do with the large number of posts and poles on both sides of the road, (any one of which can kill a cager over about 120) combined with intersections, a relatively narrow space considering trucks probably use that road, and grass ditches.
This road is moderately dangerous for bikes but lethal for any car that loses control at speed. I should know, a friend of mine stuck a fence post through his civics passenger seat one night. Lucky stupid bugger.
Also because to most people straight road = safe, therefore speed. Defensive driving should have taught these people better hazard spotting habits but there we are.

Does that answer your question?

[robertydog]

SH2 between Clive and Hastings. Lots of orchards, nice straights to speed on. Pedestrians like to walk down there at all hrs and get run over.

[Jonathan]

Nah dudes, it's 'cos there's a Taniwha under it!

[onearmedbandit]

I suspect the answer you are looking for has to do with the large number of posts and poles on both sides of the road, (any one of which can kill a cager over about 120)



Wouldn't even take that speed to kill someone by hitting a power pole.

[neels]

Depends on their method of rating them, whether it's actual accidents, chance of accident or result if there is an accident.

I can see how it could be a bit iffy with lots of high fences, hedges etc obscuring vehicles pulling out of intersections/driveways, hence increased chance of accident.

All those large poles close to the edge of the road would make for a much worse result of an accident if someone runs off the road or has to take evasive action.

[Ixion]

I think that accidents history is considered. But it's not the only criterion. They say




Based on inspection of various design elements, the Star Rating provides an evaluation of the impact and severity those elements would have in a crash scenario.



And they give examples of the "various design elements"




The safest roads are likely to be straight, divided, have good line-markings, wide lanes and sealed shoulders. Roadsides with no trees or ditches, and roads with few, if any, intersections are also deemed safer.

Comparatively, single or narrow lanes, undivided roads and unsealed shoulders are deemed the least safe. Tight curves in mountainous terrain, poor line markings and unforgiving roadside features such as trees, power poles and ditches also affect the safety rating.



Which is all simplistically logical. But, in reality , the vast majority of NZ roads are going to include tight curves :love: , and features such as trees power poles ditches etc. The only ones that don't are motorways and such like . (boooorrrring)

Why this worries me, is that I suspect that they are setting up a formulaic system that will automatically classify almost all "normal" country roads as "highly dangerous". Which then gves a perfect excuse to cut the speed limit on them. That MAY be fair enough if the roads considered "highly dangerous" really are. But based on their example, I'm not seeing it.

[Ronin]

SH2 between Clive and Hastings. Lots of orchards, nice straights to speed on. Pedestrians like to walk down there at all hrs and get run over.

That's backed up by the info on the web site. everyone did read it right? Relatively short stretch of road with a high accident rate is always going to be a 2 star road regardless of the road construction.

[yungatart]

I think it is because that is where all the spaceships come to play...never know what might happen with those pesky little aliens around...can't trust 'em.

[cowboyz]

actually... thinking about it... speed kills so its probably based on speeding tickets..

So all dead striaght roads where drivers creep up to 105km/hr will be class 2 roads

[bogan]

That's backed up by the info on the web site. everyone did read it right? Relatively short stretch of road with a high accident rate is always going to be a 2 star road regardless of the road construction.

they do factor in traffic volume as well though surely?

edit: just looked and collective risk doesn't but personal risk does

[Ixion]

Yes. As well as purportedly, road engineering factors. They compute two risk ratings, personal risk , which is the risk relative to traffic volume, and general risk, which is the overall risk of a crash occuring on that stretch of road (which obviously will be higher for a busy road).

[Mom]

To clarify, I don't know the answer. They've classified it as two star (as low as they went). It has a few issues, I wouldn't want to blat down there at 200kph, but overall it looks a pretty reasonable back road.

What I'm really trying to work out is whether there star ratings are the result of some meaningless formula (like the way they calculate corner speeds), or whether there is some reason why that stretch of road would be considered especially dangerous.

Here is my spin on it, this used to be a typical main rural type road. Large parts of SH1 between Albany and Orewa (now SH 17) were layed out the same. Back then many, many people were killed and maimed, on long straight stretches of road in head on accidents. How the hell it could happen was beyond me, visibility huge, no bends nothing.

However, travelling on it, it was really obvious how it happened. Ma & Pa Kettle out for a Sunday pootle on a Wednesday morning, pulled over onto the very wide shoulder and travelled at 70 kph. Now they thought they were doing the right thing, but really they were still holding folk up, they took up enough of the lane that cars could not zip past even though Ma & Pa were using the shoulder. SO frustration sets in, and the following car takes a risk and overtakes the old farts. BANG!

Now, transpose Ma & Pa with a slow truck, or a tractor, or a tractor towing a hay baler and you begin to get the picture. Slow traffic holding up others who get frustrated and take a risk to overtake. Interestingly enough, when they redesigned the road and got rid of the wide shoulders the accident/fatality rate dropped too. Look about yourself when you travel rural roads and observe the white crosses, you may be surprised to see them on wide laned, large shouldred strainght or gently curving bits of tarmac.

My theory, I am sticking with it.

[Stirts]

And if I am not mistaken, is that a business operation of some description (signage) enabling fucktards to decide to pull in/out at a moments notice causing mayhem and carnage?

[robertydog]

And if I am not mistaken, is that a business operation of some decription (signage) enabling fucktards who decide to pull in/out at a moments notice causing mayhem, carnage, death and destruction?

Cafe and another business

[Scuba_Steve]

Why this worries me, is that I suspect that they are setting up a formulaic system that will automatically classify almost all "normal" country roads as "highly dangerous". Which then gves a perfect excuse to cut the speed limit on them. That MAY be fair enough if the roads considered "highly dangerous" really are. But based on their example, I'm not seeing it.

Lets hope then instead it just makes all those who can't drive think these roads are too dangerous for them & they stay off 'em, leaving them free for the rest of us to have some fun on

[bogan]

interstingly, the road at the top of the collective risk table doesn't feature in the personal risk. So to us it isn't a risky road, but to the gubbermint, it is a road that the cost of re-engineering will be most effective. Thats my take on it anyway.

[Ixion]

Well, on that road, if I were riding it, I'd be wary of

High hedges either side, causing shadows and damp/icey roads.
Likely sustrike for oncoming traffic (see the shadows)
road surface isn't perfect , some minor tar bleed and loos stuff by the sides.
Not a lot of run off, and cluttered with heavy duty poles. But there is some run off,and the road is pretty straight
Some sort of business on the left ahead
And a couple of semi concealed driveways, which are blind (both ways, I can't see down them, farmer coming out of them can't see me until the last minute) because of those high hedges
Long vegetation by the right hand side, harbouring birds and animals
High trees in the area, which could attract hawks
Some sort of intersection in the far distance

That's a bit of a list, but no more than I'd see on almost any back road, and a lot less than some. Still not seeing why this is a bad road (admittedly, I could never see why SH 2 was considered such a deadly road , either).

And, I am looking at it as a motorcyclist. They admit that they totally ignored motorcyclists in the study. So a cager might spot somethign that doesn't worry a biker.

[Ixion]

Lets hope then instead it just makes all those who can't drive think these roads are too dangerous for them & they stay off 'em, leaving them free for the rest of us to have some fun on

There is that. One can always hope.

Alas, though, the collectivly dangerous ones seem to be so just because they have very large traffic volumes (and are therefore mostly exceeding boring). Whilst of the personally dangerous (read, interesting) roads bugger all are around Auckland. 'S not fair. Why do you buggers in Nelson get all the interesting roads (anyone see a link with the other thread about Nelson biker blitz?). I must check out SH 12 from dargaville to Ohaewai

[p.dath]

To clarify, I don't know the answer. They've classified it as two star (as low as they went). It has a few issues, I wouldn't want to blat down there at 200kph, but overall it looks a pretty reasonable back road.

What I'm really trying to work out is whether there star ratings are the result of some meaningless formula (like the way they calculate corner speeds), or whether there is some reason why that stretch of road would be considered especially dangerous.

Perhaps it is related to the number of accdients there have been on the road. Who knows.

[p.dath]

Is there a pub on the road? Or is there a school on the road?

[Ixion]

Can't see either

Really, my point is , that this is clearly not a high speed road. But, given a sensible hand on the throttle, there doesn't seem to be anything about it that a half way competent driver should have any problem with

So, if there is a high accident rate, is it because of drivers, not the road itself. The KiwiRap thing is based around engineering. But if it's including roads as dangerous that are so not because of engineering deficiences, but because of incompetent drivers, then it will be a waste of time

And what we are likely to end up with is totally boring roads with horribly low speed limits, in an attempt to engineer compensation for driver incompetence

[Ixion]

They gave another example of a two star road
http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/2-Star%20Rating%20example.jpg

I can see some issues with t hat road. It's not bad, but I could understand it getting a low rating

They did find an example fo a one star bit of road, after all
http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/1-Star%20Rating%20example.jpg

Now, THAT one clearly is dangerous. Spidey went into overdrive just at the sight of the picture.

So, those ones, I can see the rationale. The first example, I can't see it. Which makes me suspect their methodology.

[spookytooth]

its the broken white lines on the otherside of the road,tards think its 3 lanes

[Bender]

SH2 between Clive and Hastings. Lots of orchards, nice straights to speed on. Pedestrians like to walk down there at all hrs and get run over.

I thought it was SH1 just South of Katikati, (near Tauranga) which looks identical and is also an accident black spot. The reason at Katikati is because there is very litle passing opportuniy for a long way either way and cars get stuck behind trucks. The first opportunity they get they're overtaking from impatience and kaboom. The heavy poles holding wind netting are not particularly forgiving either.

[Berries]

Can someone tell me why that stretch of road should be considered as one of the most dangerous in the country. Because I can't any major issues. Just looks like a normal back road to me.
Because if you come off the road where that photo is taken you are either going to hit a thick wooden pole on the left or a thick wooden pole on the right. And thick wooden poles hurt, whether you are sliding along on your arse or sitting in a cage. The ones on the left look fairly regularly spaced, if a bit close to the road. The ones on the right are even closer to the road and more closely spaced. NZTA have an 'ideal' of 9m wide clearzones either side of the road where there are no non frangible objects. Impossible to achieve on the NZ road network granted, but I can't see how that fence on the right was approved and if the road is SH would expect it to be taken down.

The original KiwiRAP was based on crashes per km and crashes per 100milion VKT (vehicle kilometres travelled). It was crude. The new star ratings go further in that they have actually looked at all the roadside hazards and measured how far they are from the carriageway. Still not great, but it's a start. Have a look at page 15 of the Safer Journeys Strategy for an explanantion of why NZ is going this way.

[p.dath]

There is a good explanation of the ratings here:
http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/scoring_bands.html

[p.dath]

Second is the ratings often don't seem to make sense.

Like this one, http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/2-Star%20Rating%20example%202.jpg.

Can someone tell me why that stretch of road should be considered as one of the most dangerous in the country. Because I can't any major issues. Just looks like a normal back road to me.

So it has a two star rating because of the power poles (aka, road side furniture) being so close to the roading edge. Someone coming off the road is highly likely to hit one of those poles. Also the right hand edge has no sealed edge. And the horiculture fence with large posts is in close proximity to the road edge.

So basically the road is ok unless you get into a skid or loose control because if you slide off the road you're probably going to be fucked.

[kave]

MoT have just finished classifying all the roads in the country , in an exercise called Kiwirap (Kiwi Road Assessment Program - don't blame me I didn't invent the stupid name).

What they've done is go through all the raods and grade them from 2 star (dangerous) to 4 stars (very safe).

Two problems though.

First, is that they ignored motorcycles. Intentionally.

Second is the ratings often don't seem to make sense.

Like this one, http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/2-Star%20Rating%20example%202.jpg.

Can someone tell me why that stretch of road should be considered as one of the most dangerous in the country. Because I can't any major issues. Just looks like a normal back road to me.

It pays to note that they didn't rate all the roads in the country, it was purely an exercise in rating the State Highway network. Of course you would expect higher standards of a main arterial route than you would expect from a rural back road, unfortunately (or fortunately for those who enjoy a more technicaly challenging ride) these standards aren't often met in New Zealand.

[p.dath]

First, is that they ignored motorcycles. Intentionally.

That might be a tad harsh Ixion. They appear to have ignored all road users equally, not just motorcycles. This is how they say they form the results:


1.Risk Mapping - uses historical traffic and crash data to produce colour-coded maps which illustrate the relative level of risk on sections of the road network.


2.Performance tracking - involves a comparison of crash rates over time to establish whether fewer - or more - people are being killed or injured, and to determine if measures to improve safety have been effective.


3.Star Rating - road inspections look at the engineering features of a road . Between one and five stars are awarded to road links depending on the level of safety 'built-in' to the road.

[Ixion]

That might be a tad harsh Ixion. They appear to have ignored all road users equally, not just motorcycles. This is how they say they form the results:

No. They say, in their Q&A document




22. Why aren’t cyclists or motorcyclists included in assessing the Star Ratings?

The KiwiRAP model is presently aimed at providing Star Ratings for motorized vehicle occupants as these account for the greatest proportion of road users and crashes on the rural state highway network, where KiwiRAP is initially targeted



Though I didn't intend the stement to be condemnatory. Just that motorcycles weren't taken intot he formula . So, for instance , SH1 north of Auckland gets 4 stars with a "no roadside hazards" , even though theres a steep bank on one side, and cheescutters on the other.

[PirateJafa]

Though I didn't intend the stement to be condemnatory. Just that motorcycles weren't taken intot he formula . So, for instance , SH1 north of Auckland gets 4 stars with a "no roadside hazards" , even though theres a steep bank on one side, and cheescutters on the other.

Don't worry Les, last time I was down there, they appear to have fixed that by putting a cheesecutter on the bank side as well.

[Madness]

I think they may have ignored motorcyclists when they decided cheesecutters are a minor/negligible roadside hazard risk. I'd also be more concerned about all the sections of tar that turn to quicksilver during summer up here than say a ditch or an intersection, just personally.

[duckonin]

Class 2 may get a low KPH sign on it 2=50kph=hazards???

[rastuscat]

Can someone tell me why that stretch of road should be considered as one of the most dangerous in the country. Because I can't any major issues. Just looks like a normal back road to me.

The KiwiRap programs doesn't identify roads, they identify themselves.

It don't specifically blame the road, it identifies the road as a place that a significant number of crashes have happened.

To that end, blame the crashes on that road for bringing the road to the Gremlins attention. For whatever reason they happened (road, driver, rider, Doris the Sheep etc), they happened, and caused the road to be labelled as dodgy.

It's not as if the Gremlins just randomly chose the road.

So there.

[bogan]

The KiwiRap programs doesn't identify roads, they identify themselves.

It don't specifically blame the road, it identifies the road as a place that a significant number of crashes have happened.

To that end, blame the crashes on that road for bringing the road to the Gremlins attention. For whatever reason they happened (road, driver, rider, Doris the Sheep etc), they happened, and caused the road to be labelled as dodgy.

It's not as if the Gremlins just randomly chose the road.

So there.

clearly its not the road that is dangerous but the people that drive on it, the 'danger' could be as simple as the road being too boring and people not paying atention, so it aint the road that needs fixing, its the people.

So there. sorry, couldn't resist!

[red mermaid]

I think the idea is that the piece of road identifies itself as dangerous due to the number and type of crashes, then the roadway is examined to see if there are any engineering solutions that may make crashes harder to happen, and if they do happen, lessen the consequences of the crash.

[DarkLord]

Where is that, exactly? It looks like one of the roads to Te Puke when coming from the Waikato region.

[flyingcrocodile46]

Restricted side vision of approaching traffic on side roads or private entrances seems likely?

[Ixion]

The KiwiRap programs doesn't identify roads, they identify themselves.

It don't specifically blame the road, it identifies the road as a place that a significant number of crashes have happened.

To that end, blame the crashes on that road for bringing the road to the Gremlins attention. For whatever reason they happened (road, driver, rider, Doris the Sheep etc), they happened, and caused the road to be labelled as dodgy.

It's not as if the Gremlins just randomly chose the road.

So there.

It appears not. From the KiwiRAP Q&A


The Star Ratings are based on a visual inspection of the actual road features which are known to influence crash risk and crash severity. The Star Ratings do not take crash data into account. <o>:p</o>

The risk maps do include crash data .

So there (sorry. Couldn't resist)



Class 2 may get a low KPH sign on it 2=50kph=hazards???
Thats what worrys me

Again, from the KiwiRap Q&A (my emphasis )



<!--[if !supportLists]--><!--[endif]-->1.Why not just reduce the speed limit to improve safety?<o>:p</o>

Travel speed influences the severity of a crash and the risk of a crash occurring. However, speed limits are just one part of the road safety equation – the Safe System. There are many improvements that can be made to roads to make them safe, such as installing safety fences around roadside hazards.<o>:p</o>
<o>:p</o>
Speed and safety need not be mutually exclusive. Some of <st1>Europe</st1>’s fastest roads are their safest. However, there may be some instances where lowering the speed limit on a high risk, low star rated road may be an appropriate method of managing road safety outcomes, at least until the improvements are made<o>:p</o>

Now, I understand about poles and such. And if those poles were on the sides of a tricky downhill twisty bit, I'd be concerned about them. But, poles are only a problem if you hit them. That is a straight (nearly) bit of road , excellent visibility (except the driveways, and that's just a matter of gauntlet). To be honest, anyone who can't drive/road along that bit of road without incident shouldn't be on the road at all.

If that road is considered dangerous (and likely to have a lower speed limit dumped on it) then almost ANY back road will be in the same boat. Because most are a lot more technical than that. Heaven knows what they'd make of SH22 .

(EDIT. Please ignore the smilies. They appear to be embedded in the quoted text and I can't be arsed hacking them out)

[bogan]

I think the idea is that the piece of road identifies itself as dangerous due to the number and type of crashes, then the roadway is examined to see if there are any engineering solutions that may make crashes harder to happen, and if they do happen, lessen the consequences of the crash.

good point, be interesting to see what the correlation between different engineering solutions and the accident rates (ie how well the solution works). Obviously they have the data available, why not use it to show how well making all the roads <s>boring</s> safe works?

[cheshirecat]

One of the issues they don't mention is that a major highway can descend into a gravel path then jump to a dual carriageway - there is no consistancy and quality round every corner can't be relied upon, unlike European or US roads. IE an A road in the UK is consistant regarding quality and speed. I'm over here on a visit at the moment and really really miss my bike, gorgeous summer long daylight hours, windy country lanes, motorways everyone does 130ish on !! Am impressed by the courtesy of the drivers and general traffic sense. I want my bike I want my Bike.

[BMWST?]

the first example has almost no "shoulder " on the rhs,if you run off the road at all you are into that fence,there is not much room on the left either,if someone isnt paying attanetion and some sort of avoidance has to be taken,someone will be in serious trouble.....The second is similar,thats my take anyway

[Thani-B]

.... Still not seeing why this is a bad road (admittedly, I could never see why SH 2 was considered such a deadly road , either) ....

It's not a deadly road, you are right with that. I've driven or ridden that road almost every day for the past 4 or so years, I have never crashed nor had a near crash, although I have passed several in my time. There is nothing wrong with it.
They had it right when they put the JAFA signs up.

[Staticam]

Where is that, exactly? It looks like one of the roads to Te Puke when coming from the Waikato region.

779-795 Fairdown Rd

Take the numbers from the bottom of the pic to this site:
http://www.linz.govt.nz/geodetic/conversion-coordinates/online-conversion-service/converter/index.aspx?Advanced=0
Input coordinate system = New Zealand Map Grid
Output coordinate system = World Geodetic System 1984
and feed those results into google maps :mellow:

[specter]

lol went to aussie recently, and my uncle showed me some b roads, and all through them are signs saying stuff like "WARNING: motorcyclists die here" which in motorcyclists terms meant "great fucking road ahead!"

[rustic101]

Surveyed in 2008, wonder if improvements have been made

[Berries]

And what we are likely to end up with is totally boring roads with horribly low speed limits, in an attempt to engineer compensation for driver incompetence
Welcome to the future. Although I would add driver/rider error, as well as incompetence.

[Sentox]

779-795 Fairdown Rd

Take the numbers from the bottom of the pic to this site:
http://www.linz.govt.nz/geodetic/conversion-coordinates/online-conversion-service/converter/index.aspx?Advanced=0
Input coordinate system = New Zealand Map Grid
Output coordinate system = World Geodetic System 1984
and feed those results into google maps :mellow:

Method is sound, but you might have your coordinates reversed.. It's actually 135-163 SH 2. Doubly sure based on streetview and the fact I've been on said road many times before.

[Howsie]

Another attempt to keep us in the bubble. I have been down that road many times and it is as safe as pie. It shows why it is classed as a 2 Star section of road on the website..........

[Donzzz]

I dont know maybe coz of the big fuck off pillars on either side of the road to greet you if you come off!

[Max Preload]

I'd say it's because of the sort of mindless gorms that work in the adjacent orchards that pull out in front of other vehicles because their brain is idle.

[Grubber]

i think youll find it will be based on the accidents in the area in the past. maybe all living int he area cant drive?

Hmmmm...a rational thinker...is this allowed?

[Swoop]

It is nothing more than a tool (Kiwirap).

This sort of arbitrary crap will enable TPTB to have "conclusive evidence" that a lower speed limit needs to be set for XYZ road/s.

[Banditbandit]

I dont know maybe coz of the big fuck off pillars on either side of the road to greet you if you come off!

I'm very familiar with the road shown as the first example - and for many reasons it has a high fatal crash rate, which gives it the rating

If anything happens, then there is no run off area, and the chance of hitting something hard is high, including something coming the other way
Many people drive between Napier and Hastings anywhere between 60 and 70 klicks max - annoying the hell out of other drivers
Drivers doing that speed sit on the left - hard left - tempting other drivers to pass
There's lots of driveways, including farm gates and lots of agricultural machinery on the road.
Some fo the driveways - maybe not in the photograph - are fruit and vege stalls, with lots of in-out trafic
There's a pub not far away
There's lots of dickhead drivers on that stretch
The road surface is a little bumpy, so dickheads can easily lose control

I've moved out of Hawke's Bay - glad I did - the drivers there are pretty appalling - not all but enough to scare the hell out of me at times ...

[rastuscat]

Interesting thought follows. (Well, I think so)

The gubbermint internal discussion agencies are looking at what is called a safer system. Basically, they are looking at trying to get our road transport system co-ordinated to mean that when a person makes a cock up, the outcome is mitigated by safer roads cars etc.

This safer system would reduce the road toll, so I personally think that the think tank is heading in the right direction. KiwiRap is part of that concept.

My problem is, if we just support that concept as the be-all and end-all of road safety we miss out on what is the grestest chance to save ourselves, that being the recognition that we are the factor that most influences our own personal safety.

Who can influence my decision to go too fast into a corner, probably on the wrong line? Me.

Who can ride at a distance that means I can stop when the dick head in front of me stops for reasons known only to him? Me.

Who can avoid most head on crashes by staying on my own side of the centreline? Me.

Now, those are things I can influence right now, this second, at no cost at all to anyone.

So there.

P.S. anyone else ending posts with "so there" is in breach of my ineffectual property rights.

So there.

[Ixion]

Exactly so. Give that man an orang-utan

I understand all about crash mitigation and not having nasty hard bits to hit (even better not having nasty hard shapr bits that cut you in half, but they're all good according to NZTA). Jolly good, just do it stuff.

But, y'know, here's an idea right out of left field. Strange concept I know, but, how about not crashing in the first place ?

And, come on now, for anyone to crash on that stretch of road they'd need to be either

Drunk or stoned
Absolute imbeciles
or the victim of some freak catastrophe (heart attack, all the wheels fell off stuff).

A good deal of the current official angst about motorcycle crash rates is in fact attributable to this official policy. Which says, in effect "Let's not bother trying to have competent drivers who actually do a decent job of driving. Let's just assume that they *will* crash, and try to make it so that when they do, they don't get hurt too badly".

Now, that sort of works for reducing car crash fatalities. At the expense of increased severe injury rates (which is exactly what we are seeing at the moment).

But it doesn't work at all for bikes . If you ride a bike the ONLY way to not get hurt is to not crash in the first place. Stop falling of y' fuckin' bikes, m'kay? And then maybe we can suggestthe same bizarre logic for cagers.

So there (sue me)

[Banditbandit]

But, y'know, here's an idea right out of left field. Strange concept I know, but, how about not crashing in the first place ?

And, come on now, for anyone to crash on that stretch of road they'd need to be either

Drunk or stoned
Absolute imbeciles



Go with the last one - it's important to rememebr that, by definition, half the population is below average intellegence ... and they probably all drive cars !

And before you go arguing statistics and IQs with me, the IQ system was set up so that the mid point of 100 IQ points was set so half the population fell below 100 IQ points and half were above 100IQ points - ergo - half the population fall into the "below average intelligence" category ...

[Ixion]

Yes, I know. But, an imbecile is defined as having an IQ of less than 49. You have to be more retarded than just somewhat stupid to crash on that road.

[duckonin]

Stuf has the nations worst roads on line now (new's) with a description as to why, I cannot figure out how to link this maybe another can..

[MSTRS]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/motoring/3852105/Nations-worst-roads-revealed

[Ixion]

And they're all down in the blurdy lower NI. How come those bugegrs , and Nelson get all the fun roads, and here in Dorkland we're stuck with the boring motorways ? 'Taint fair!

[Ixion]

Actually , one thing I think they ought to do right away (and I think I'll write and suggest it), is to put signs along the roads (especially the 1 2 and 3 star ones) showing their rating. Then bikers can tell if a road is worth exploring or not, and not waste time on a road which turns out to be boring. Bonus being that the good roads (1 or 2 star) will be Enid-free.

[bogan]

And they're all down in the blurdy lower NI. How come those bugegrs , and Nelson get all the fun roads, and here in Dorkland we're stuck with the boring motorways ? 'Taint fair!

well the ones they listed round palmy are shit, unless you get a clear run through the gorge; that can be fun even under the speed limit :yes:

[duckonin]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/motoring/3852105/Nations-worst-roads-revealed

Thanks for that, must try harder.....

[Staticam]

Method is sound, but you might have your coordinates reversed.. It's actually 135-163 SH 2. Doubly sure based on streetview and the fact I've been on said road many times before.

Ah I see, I wasn't refering to the first post, rather #33 Ixion's post - one star bit of road, http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/1-Star%...%20example.jpg is 779-795 Fairdown Rd

[Banditbandit]

And they're all down in the blurdy lower NI. How come those bugegrs , and Nelson get all the fun roads, and here in Dorkland we're stuck with the boring motorways ? 'Taint fair!

The motorways are more than boring ... they're painful ... Coming south out of Auckland at 10.30am a couple of months ago on a weekday morning traffic was moving at a 15 k crawl ... and it was drizziley .. surrounded by trucks ... when I got the last straight before the Bombay Hill there was no traffic - and no rain ... the bike was so excited and pleased :clap: it went past 200 klicks before I could rein it back in :innocent:

You could always move south ...

[Ixion]

I got a better idea. Everybody else move souf. And leave the north to darkness and to me.

[Banditbandit]

I got a better idea. Everybody else move souf. And leave the north to darkness and to me.

Bugga that for a laugh ... all the JAFAs can stay where they bloody well are ...

[Ixion]

I got a better idea. Everybody else move souf. And leave the north to darkness and to me.

[Bald Eagle]

I got a better idea. Everybody else move souf. And leave the north to darkness and to me.

Then you can enjoy this lovely bit of SH 1 which is my daily commute. Can you tell me if this is a dangerous road :rofl:

[mashman]

Then you can enjoy this lovely bit of SH 1 which is my daily commute. Can you tell me if this is a dangerous road :rofl:

you coulda snapped the crosses at the side of the road lol

[Banditbandit]

Then you can enjoy this lovely bit of SH 1 which is my daily commute. Can you tell me if this is a dangerous road :rofl:

YES - for sure .. you have to watch out for flying fish coming over that wall on the right ... :doobey:

It's also the one a lot of politicians use going to work ... watch out for those mad bastards .. their drivers have been seen travelling in excess of 170 klicks ... :Police:

Oh .. and isn't there a 70 klick or 80 klick speed limit along there ? Too many white/blue/yellow cars? :shake:

Come on .. someone spot the cheesecutters on the median strip ... they worry me every time I ride it ...

[Ixion]

I rode back over that bit on the way home from BIKEOI!. I was rather glad of those cheesecutters, they reduced the options of the cop going the other way to light flashing impotence.

[Sentox]

Ah I see, I wasn't refering to the first post, rather #33 Ixion's post - one star bit of road, http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/1-Star%...%20example.jpg is 779-795 Fairdown Rd

Ah, I follow. My mistake.

[Banditbandit]

I rode back over that bit on the way home from BIKEOI!. I was rather glad of those cheesecutters, they reduced the options of the cop going the other way to light flashing impotence.

So ... cheesecutters DO have their uses.

[MSTRS]

There's always radio, though.
That bit of road, especially, gives me the shits. There is NOWHERE to go, if it's all coming at you.

[Ixion]

True. But there were a LOT of bikes around Wellington that day!. And von Klunken had a lot of luggage strapped on the back (hey, if you have a bike designed to move an Army depot, you take advantage of it). An unintended effect of the luggage was the number plate was very hard to read from anything other than dead behind. It was unintended. You do believe me, don't you ?

[Banditbandit]

True. But there were a LOT of bikes around Wellington that day!. And von Klunken had a lot of luggage strapped on the back (hey, if you have a bike designed to move an Army depot, you take advantage of it). An unintended effect of the luggage was the number plate was very hard to read from anything other than dead behind. It was unintended. You do believe me, don't you ?

Of course we believe you (snigger )

[Berries]

Actually , one thing I think they ought to do right away (and I think I'll write and suggest it), is to put signs along the roads (especially the 1 2 and 3 star ones) showing their rating. Then bikers can tell if a road is worth exploring or not, and not waste time on a road which turns out to be boring. Bonus being that the good roads (1 or 2 star) will be Enid-free.
That was always the intention, putting signs up, but not for those reasons obviously. More to scare the shit out of Enid so that on a one star road she had a death grip on the wheel and stuck to 40km/h, or on a five star road start to push it a bit and maybe top 70 while having a sherry.

[Brian d marge]

MoT have just finished classifying all the roads in the country , in an exercise called Kiwirap (Kiwi Road Assessment Program - don't blame me I didn't invent the stupid name).

What they've done is go through all the raods and grade them from 2 star (dangerous) to 4 stars (very safe).

Two problems though.

First, is that they ignored motorcycles. Intentionally.

Second is the ratings often don't seem to make sense.

Like this one, http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/2-Star%20Rating%20example%202.jpg.

Can someone tell me why that stretch of road should be considered as one of the most dangerous in the country. Because I can't any major issues. Just looks like a normal back road to me.+++

Easy three reasons

is it Hard , there is a kiwi motorist on it

and no gravel traps

Next Question

Stephen

[Brian d marge]

heres the road looking towards My house

now one has been hurt there in all of ten years

Safe as! this one is .

Stephen

[MSTRS]

This morning's paper....
The section covered in Ixion's photo is being considered for a drop to 80kph 'because it is NZ's most dangerous piece of road'
What gets me is that despite it currently being 100kph, it is a rare day when one can exceed about 80kph anyway. Well, not for long, esp when in a car.

[Berries]

That’s where it all turns to custard. NZ’s most dangerous road pops up all over the country depending on how you look at the data. Using the first iteration of KiwiRAP the worst performing section of road was actually one in Dunedin that I ride every day.

Dropping the speed limit is the cheap and easy non-fix. If it is rare that you can get above 80km/h then nothing will be achieved, other than more tickets for the government coffers from otherwise law abiding people. Who will still fall asleep and crash in to those poles, and will still pull out of fruit shops and hit traffic that they should have seen. Remove the poles, remove the hazard. Oh dear, too expensive. Let’s just slap some signs up and get the police to enforce it.

[MSTRS]

That’s where it all turns to custard. NZ’s most dangerous road pops up all over the country depending on how you look at the data. Using the first iteration of KiwiRAP the worst performing section of road was actually one in Dunedin that I ride every day.

Dropping the speed limit is the cheap and easy non-fix. If it is rare that you can get above 80km/h then nothing will be achieved, other than more tickets for the government coffers from otherwise law abiding people. Who will still fall asleep and crash in to those poles, and will still pull out of fruit shops and hit traffic that they should have seen. Remove the poles, remove the hazard. Oh dear, too expensive. Let’s just slap some signs up and get the police to enforce it.

It's not the road that dictates the speed, but rather Ethel, Albert and all their friends...

[p.dath]

I understand all about crash mitigation and not having nasty hard bits to hit (even better not having nasty hard shapr bits that cut you in half, but they're all good according to NZTA). Jolly good, just do it stuff.

But, y'know, here's an idea right out of left field. Strange concept I know, but, how about not crashing in the first place ?

And, come on now, for anyone to crash on that stretch of road they'd need to be either

Drunk or stoned
Absolute imbeciles
or the victim of some freak catastrophe (heart attack, all the wheels fell off stuff).


I can't but help think of James Duece who got hit by a sheep. I never had the opportunity to meet JD - but he won my respect. How about the two recent motorcycle deaths caused by a Polcie officer U-turning in front of them. I had a friend recently come off after running onto diesel on the road - and he is the best rider I know.

Freak catastrophe's happen all the time. I doubt any reasonable person plans to have an accident. Sometimes you don't get a choice where you are going to come off the road. And the difference between being badly hurt or worse could be as simple as having a road free of furniture for you to hit.

[Maha]

i think youll find it will be based on the accidents in the area in the past. maybe all living int he area cant drive?

Partly correct, I will say visual deception may have a part to play. Notice how the road narrows?

[Ixion]

Certainly, there are some accidents that have to be classified as just plain "shit happens".See the "freak catastrophe " clause. You can never eliminate the risk completely. And, for that reason ,as I said, getting rid of roadside nasty hard bits is a GoodThing. Like I said, just do it.

My beef is that blaming the road, then reducing the speed limit accordingly, on the assumption that people are inevitably going to crash, is the ONLY thing TPTB seem interested in.

I'm pretty sure that if crashes were reduced to the "shit happens " ones, and the incompetent/imbecile/don't give a shit/doing stupid shit/haven't a clue crashes were eliminated, the road toll would be a fraction of what it is now. And a small fraction at that. (Your police u turn example isn't a good one - that classes as "doing stupid shit").

And your diesel example illustrates another problem - you can only eliminate the permanent road hazards. You'll still be left with the ones that come and go. Diesel, oil, ice, birds, clay, gravel, mechanical failure, heart attack at wheel, sun strike, you name it.

I reckon 90% of the effort is going to what should be only 10% of the problem. Mainly because "Lower the speed limit" is such an easy "fix". (In reality it will fix nothing).

[pete376403]

I reckon 90% of the effort is going to what should be only 10% of the problem. Mainly because "Lower the speed limit" is such an easy "fix". (In reality it will fix nothing).

Easy (ie cheap signage) fix AND the revenue potential from speeding tickets. Win/win situation for them - how can they not do it?

[p.dath]

Easy (ie cheap signage) fix AND the revenue potential from speeding tickets. Win/win situation for them - how can they not do it?

I would be interested in them trying a signage approach as well. I keep reflecting back recently on a trip I did to Great Barrier Island. Pretty much most of the roading network is "legalally" 100km/h. There is no way you could go that fast. You just couldn't. The roads are too twisty, have single lane stretches, etc.

So they just have signs with an advisory speed and a warning. It seems to work for them. Lets try it on the mainland.

[roenut]

im sure that road is the main road to napier or pakowhai rd, i used to live around the corner. 100km zone with multiple orchard driveways and a few small intersections. not much lighting at all too

[george formby]

The article about dangerous roads in the Herald today lists SH 1 from warkworth to north as dangerous & SH 10 north of the Bay of Islands as dangerous. The west coast route & twin bridges roads are low to medium. SH1 & SH10 are open, wide well sign posted & reasonably well surfaced roads. The west coast & twin bridges roads are narrow, very twisty & in places appalingly surfaced. It's not the roads is it? More thoughtless, biased propoganda. Get slow people out of fast cars I say.

[cowboyz]

one would HAVE to argue what we have been spending all the roading budget on if Sh1 (you know... the number ONE STATE highway) is concidered a dangerous road!!

[Ocean1]

There is no way you could go that fast. You just couldn't. The roads are too twisty, have single lane stretches, etc.

Are you a betting man, dude?

[rustic101]

The system components of a Crash are:


Road and Environment Condition
Human Condition
Vehicle Condition

Get one of these wrong and its not good. Mix two together and, well the results are out there for all to see. Its all about Cause and Effect.

[p.dath]

The article about dangerous roads in the Herald today lists SH 1 from warkworth to north as dangerous & SH 10 north of the Bay of Islands as dangerous. The west coast route & twin bridges roads are low to medium. SH1 & SH10 are open, wide well sign posted & reasonably well surfaced roads. The west coast & twin bridges roads are narrow, very twisty & in places appalingly surfaced. It's not the roads is it? More thoughtless, biased propoganda. Get slow people out of fast cars I say.

I think roading does have some effect. If the west coast route and twin bridges are consistently narrow, very twisty and in places badly surfaced then road users will adjust their use of the road to match.

It would be interesting to know the nature of the SH1 and SH10 accidents. You may find they are head ons or collissions with road side furniture - both of which can be addressed via roading design.

This does not negate the need for driver training - but road design can make a road users bad decision result in a more serious accident.

[Berries]

I would be interested in them trying a signage approach as well. I keep reflecting back recently on a trip I did to Great Barrier Island. Pretty much most of the roading network is "legalally" 100km/h. There is no way you could go that fast. You just couldn't. The roads are too twisty, have single lane stretches, etc.

So they just have signs with an advisory speed and a warning. It seems to work for them. Lets try it on the mainland.
We do don't we ? Curves that need signs have them. It's just that there are longer straight bits between the curves here. If you had a bit of road here that was exactly the same as on GBI then I imagine it would be signed the same anyway.

[Ocean1]

If you had a bit of road here that was exactly the same as on GBI then I imagine it would be signed the same anyway.

That's the best idea I've heard in yonks, make all mainland roads the same standard as GBI.

HeeeeHaarrrrr

[sAsLEX]

DREDGE......


But I have to laugh when I head north on SH1, goes 80 somewhere north of this damned city, but there is a spot where a little side road comes off this 80 stretch.

At this point SH1 is three lanes wide, easy flowing corners, good surface, and all in all what should be a perfectly safe piece of road.

However the skinny little single lane goat track that turns to gravel within 60 meters of SH1 has a 100 sign 20m back from the intersection....... nothing to do about the apparent safety of the road speed limits

[p.dath]

However the skinny little single lane goat track that turns to gravel within 60 meters of SH1 has a 100 sign 20m back from the intersection....... nothing to do about the apparent safety of the road speed limits

I'm actually happy about the speed limit on the gravel road part - because the nature of the road is suggesting how fast you should travel on it. We shouldn't need a legally posted sign to make us slow down.

[BoristheBiter]

MoT have just finished classifying all the roads in the country , in an exercise called Kiwirap (Kiwi Road Assessment Program - don't blame me I didn't invent the stupid name).

What they've done is go through all the raods and grade them from 2 star (dangerous) to 4 stars (very safe).

Two problems though.

First, is that they ignored motorcycles. Intentionally.

Second is the ratings often don't seem to make sense.

Like this one, http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/2-Star%20Rating%20example%202.jpg.

Can someone tell me why that stretch of road should be considered as one of the most dangerous in the country. Because I can't any major issues. Just looks like a normal back road to me.

I can't be arsed to read this whole thread which is what you have done with this photo.
If you read the whole thing, you will answer the question as it takes crashes in that area as a factor.
So stop being a one sided conspiracy theorist that you claim everyone else is.

[sAsLEX]

I'm actually happy about the speed limit on the gravel road part - because the nature of the road is suggesting how fast you should travel on it. We shouldn't need a legally posted sign to make us slow down.

No. I agree.

But yet there is an 80 km sign on one of the better segments of NZ roading slowing us down as idiots crash.

Darwin was right, let the weak clean the gene pool.

[schrodingers cat]

[QUOTE=Ixion;1129792362]

They did find an example fo a one star bit of road, after all
http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/1-Star%20Rating%20example.jpg
[QUOTE]

Could we lobby to get more of these dangerous 1 star roads built please

[scumdog]

[QUOTE=Ixion;1129792362]

They did find an example fo a one star bit of road, after all
http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/1-Star%20Rating%20example.jpg
[QUOTE]

Could we lobby to get more of these dangerous 1 star roads built please

That bit was dodgy-as in December while they were building it but shoot, it looks good now eh!

[crash99]

hmmm, so now its the roads that are the danger, is there some taboo on blaming the drivers for being morons? It baffles me how there is so little emphasis placed on operator attention, when in the workplace there are many standards and protocol for dealing with simple things such as lathes, saws, even the proper way to lift a library book.

looking at that pic I can't see anything remotely dangerous, maybe it has bad reflections during night driving or something?

Yep, absolutely agree bogan. In fact - how about this - we start a campaign that everytime a cage drives off the road, the driver looses their licence for 6 months. (Instead of what they do now is classify the road as dangerous and strighten the corners out . . . )

[bogan]

Yep, absolutely agree bogan. In fact - how about this - we start a campaign that everytime a cage drives off the road, the driver looses their licence for 6 months. (Instead of what they do now is classify the road as dangerous and strighten the corners out . . . )

exactly, and as somebody mentioned before, there is a relationship between attention needed for a road, and attention applied. If they are all straight people will pay less attention and drive off em anyway, or be paying so little attention they will forget what to do when a corner comes up, so of course the corner would be classified as dangerous and straightened. Saw some lady driving with a goddam newspaper on the steering wheel today (within 100m of a school actually), she wouldn't be doing that if there were more corners.

[DR650gary]

There may be a Taniwha or two lurking around there:blink:

[crash99]

[QUOTE=Ixion;1129792362]

They did find an example fo a one star bit of road, after all
http://www.kiwirap.co.nz/pdf/1-Star%20Rating%20example.jpg
[QUOTE]

Could we lobby to get more of these dangerous 1 star roads built please

Ha! Couldnt agree more Cat - and do you really ride a TF(TS?)185?! Here's a really interesting link if you do . . . http://www.horizonsunlimited.com/hubb/suzuki-tech/ts185er-ultimate-long-distance-weapon-8377 Or is this actually you? :shifty: :shit: