Albany ACC check point (27 February) [Archive]

NighthawkNZ

27th February 2011, 16:29

A score? Does highest score win something?

lf you want to wear a t-shirt and jandals and as long as you have your helmet legally they can not make you wear anything else as it is not law that you have too...

Personally if I would be asking am I getting a ticket for anything if yes please write it out now... and stop yabber mouthing to me... if no... good bye... and I doin't give a rat arse about your silly little score...

Again having a rego on your bike has nothing to do with safety what so ever it is a money gathering thing only... if the are wanting safety then your W.O.F is more important.

Rego is Road Fees, ACC and GST... pure money making nothing else what so ever...

MadDuck

27th February 2011, 16:34

A friend of mine went through it yesterday. He also got 18 out of 21.

One question he was asked by the ACC dude was why he wasnt wearing a hi viz. Lucky my friend was in a good mood......

My friend did mention that people should be able to HEAR him coming on his Harley :msn-wink:

lone_slayer

27th February 2011, 16:45

I got 18/21 not bad

Did they tell whay you missed points for?

ICE180

27th February 2011, 17:05

those high viz things

The higest score might win but who knows you might get a lolly or something ?

the cops were ok about it busted more cars than bikes while i was on the phone for wof and rego

Mully

27th February 2011, 17:57

Yeah, they did one on West Coast Rd on Friday morning.

I think I got 17, from memory. No high viz (minus 3) and jeans instead of "proper" trousers (minus 1).

He didn't answer when I asked him what Rego had to do with safety, other than to say it was on his checksheet.....

And we agreed to disagree about the value of high viz gear. Seemed like a nice enough chap, and the cop was pleasant enough. Don't shoot the messengers and all that.

NighthawkNZ

27th February 2011, 18:01

Mully

27th February 2011, 18:03

did you tell him the were draggin jeans... ? he probably wouldn't know the difference...

I considered it - but I didn't want to take the risk that he might actually know.

I did explain to him that I overheat in cordora trousers and asked if it was safer for me to be more comfortable in jeans than not paying attention because I was less comfortable wearing the full getup.

No answer - I guess minimum wage form filling doesn't get you a whole heap of smarts.

nosebleed

27th February 2011, 18:11

those high viz things

The higest score might win but who knows you might get a lolly or something ?

the cops were ok about it busted more cars than bikes while i was on the phone for wof and rego

Wait, what? They were checking cars as well?

Saw them mustering in the Albany pub carpark last weekend, wondered what they were up to.

Gman71

27th February 2011, 18:23

yes, they pulled me over.

assumed the guy on the bike in front would keep them busy when they pulled him over, so surprised they waved me in too.

cop was nice and friendly, explained the ACC guy was there and there were running a safety campaign.

he finally asked me to turn my bike off so he cold hear me, no issues with that, I wasn't being hugely friendly or co-operative at that stage.

asked for my license, commented on all my proper gear etc etc , checked rego + wof, and was pleased I HAD a license- the last guy didnt.

bike was all legal so no issues, handed me over to ACC guy who marked off off what i was wearing (ATGATT) + bike cc, name, address and destination, (there would have been no fines or drama regardless of answers or attire, it was a survey). asked why I didnt wear fluro gear, told him why- dont believe it makes that much difference, have me headlight on etc. he gave me a spiel about how much more easy it makes it for drivers to see us.

got and entry form for $250 of safety gear.

if the extra ACC levy is also funding this roadside initiative, then good job, I'm all for it. might get through to the next squid at the checkpoint in running shoes and jeans.

cheshirecat

27th February 2011, 18:24

not sure how they tate Hi Vis as 3 and jeans as 1. I've ridden 10's and 10's of thousands of miles on dark bikes with no lights and on bikes with twin headlights and I've noticed minimal difference. When occasionally using a hi vis the only consistant difference seems more wombats tailgating so I leave it off. I mean if they can't see a bright red bike with twin Hella plus 90's at their eye level then a Hi Viz is not going to be seen anyway. Personally I don't assume anyone's seen me apart from the long arm of the law plus God knows how many lessons from DRing in London.
It's easier to assume everyone will pull out or shoot a red, which makes it fairly accurate.
The only way a Hi Viz might work is when stopping for a red (a strange concept for some cagers) and you might be seen by the aforementioned before they wallop you up the rear. But then we have wing mirrors for those events. Wonder how many points they score?

If they are going to preach anything that would be it. Just my 2c. Oh and how to brake a modern sports bike. How to . . . .

MadDuck

27th February 2011, 18:56

he gave me a spiel about how much more easy it makes it for drivers to see us.

I wonder if there is any stats or survey figures to back this up. If not then a 3/21 for not having Hi Viz is pretty unfair and wont actually do the ACC any favours from bikers IMHO.

If so is orange better than yellow in the hi viz range for "see-a-bility".

Hawk

27th February 2011, 19:11

the cops and the ACC were running a check point in albany today
taking to us two wheeled freaks

then giving you a score for what you where wearing and if ya bike was rego etc

I got 18/21 not bad
anyone else get pulled over

so this is where the extra acc levy goes to

I have on very good authority March is bike mouth as far the traffic policing is concerned, yes we are still a target and your favorite weekend twistie road is being paid attention to also. This is nation wide.

zeocen

27th February 2011, 19:13

racefactory

27th February 2011, 19:21

Shit! That was lucky I didn't get trapped in it. How did I miss it I wonder, I was all around Albany today.

Just wondering, providing you were looking ahead, was there sufficient space to turn around or did they trap people around a sharp corner or something?

warewolf

27th February 2011, 19:22

YNo high viz (minus 3) and jeans instead of "proper" trousers (minus 1).Clowns. :weird:

They gonna put hi-vis vests on trains? Plenty cagers hit them, and they're running on fixed rails with plenty of warning signs on the road approaches.

Ocean1

27th February 2011, 19:23

I wonder if there is any stats or survey figures to back this up. If not then a 3/21 for not having Hi Viz is pretty unfair and wont actually do the ACC any favours from bikers IMHO.

Remember the stat's used to justify raising the registration costs for bikes? It's carefully designed surveys like this that produce 'em.

The very best thing the bike safety quango thingo dudes could spend our money on is developing a set of surveys aimed at collecting data demonstrating that the whole grubby business is a jack-up.

Mully

27th February 2011, 19:24

So you get waved over by the police, they check your bike - that's all good.
But then you're ushered towards an ACC man and rated on your dress code? Are you fucking kidding me?

At that point can you decline and ride off? That is some seriously weak shit.

AFAIK, the Police man didn't check my bike at all (well, he checked it out after the fact) unless he did it while I was parking up.

Mr ACC "rated" my bike (WOF, Reg, headlight etc) and then rated my gear. The total (bike & gear) was out of 21.

I don't know what the law would be about riding off - I am but a poor bush lawyer.

Mom

27th February 2011, 19:30

So you get waved over by the police, they check your bike - that's all good.
But then you're ushered towards an ACC man and rated on your dress code? Are you fucking kidding me?

At that point can you decline and ride off? That is some seriously weak shit.

You do have to stop for plod, why you have to stop to be "rated" on what you are wearing is beyond me and frankly I would not be sticking around for that. If I had wanted to enter NZ's next "top safety gear wearing model" then fair enough. To stop me to "assess" what I am wearing earns a great big :motu: from me.

Plod can stop me and ticket me for not wearing a helemt (unlikely), no one else can detain me to check my clothing out.

Live to Ride folks...

"Ride to Live" is more appropriate!

Attitude is what it is all about.

Ocean1

27th February 2011, 19:35

Remember the stat's used to justify raising the registration costs for bikes? It's carefully designed surveys like this that produce 'em.

The very best thing the bike safety quango thingo dudes could spend our money on is developing a set of surveys aimed at collecting data demonstrating that the whole grubby business is a jack-up.

>rant... In fact I reckon some cleaver dickie dude in here should publish a 21 point questionnaire designed to evaluate the safety merits of fuckwit ACC lackeys found lurking on the roadside.

Any takers?

Mully

27th February 2011, 19:36

Plod can stop me and ticket me for not wearing a helemt (unlikely), no one else can detain me to check my clothing out.

Attitude is what it is all about.

Plod are doing the stopping, presumably because some clipboard jockey trying to wave people over would be less effective than an adequate similie....

They are doing licence checks too - and the 30 seconds to talk to an ACC monkey didn't really hurt in the scheme of things.

Perhaps 50,000 motorcyclists telling said ACC monkeys that high-vis wont do shit, and that if they want to do something, they should teach cagers to drive might perhaps sink in.

Swoop

27th February 2011, 20:07

Mully

27th February 2011, 20:14

Worth riding around the block and coming back stark bollock naked, apart from a helmet, to get a new "point score" record with the morons.

No, it isn't.

It really, really isn't.

CookMySock

27th February 2011, 20:25

[....] then you're ushered towards an ACC man and rated on your dress code? Are you fucking kidding me? At that point can you decline and ride off? That is some seriously weak shit.You can decline and ride off at the first bit too, but yeah I would have passed all the gear questions and then rapidly lost all my carefully-earned points at the attitude test.

Why don't people feel angry at ACC ?

MadDuck

27th February 2011, 20:39

No, it isn't.

I dont know.....imagine that one posted on UTube :msn-wink:

Mom

27th February 2011, 20:40

The police are allowed to pull a motorist over for a chat, but ACC can get fucked. Absolutely no mandate there.

Worth riding around the block and coming back stark bollock naked, apart from a helmet, to get a new "point score" record with the morons.

Agree! Though I draw the line at nudey rudey riding myself :msn-wink:

No, it isn't.

It really, really isn't.

Speak for yourself, he might be rather tasty to perve at :pinch:

mashman

27th February 2011, 20:53

Remember the stat's used to justify raising the registration costs for bikes? It's carefully designed surveys like this that produce 'em.

The very best thing the bike safety quango thingo dudes could spend our money on is developing a set of surveys aimed at collecting data demonstrating that the whole grubby business is a jack-up.

I wonder if the information gathered is to be used as a baseline for the new risk assessment for the ACC's levy calculations coming in on April 1st.

3 points off for hi-viz v's 1 point for jeans... i'd be worried if that's what the info is being used for :)

bogan

27th February 2011, 21:00

I've had a read of three reports on the high vis, one being done in NZ (auckland region) and one done by MAIDS.

The NZ one attributed a 37% lower risk to riders wearing high vis, however their study did not (as far as I can tell) take into account multiple factors, like those who wear high vis might also be more likely to have headlights on, brightly colored bikes, and ride more defensively.

The MAIDS one, is 179 goddamn pages long :shit: doesn't get into the risk decrease of various clothing types as far as I can tell (I'll have a better look at some point though, as it's an interesting read anyway). The breakdown they give is of whether the clothing worn by rider in an accident made them more or less visible, but that doesn't give any indication as to how likely high vis wearers are to be in an accident. They did go into bike color in the same way as the NZ report though (found color of bike is up to fuck all for risk), so I would expect them to cover clothing in the same way somewhere....

Mully

27th February 2011, 21:01

You can decline and ride off at the first bit too,

Go on then. Decline to pull over when directed to by a Police officer.

Why don't people feel angry at ACC ?

Angry at ACC is one thing.

Angry at the bloke trying to earn a living by doing his master's bidding of a morning is completely another. It's like yelling at the service station people because of the pricing.....

Mom

27th February 2011, 21:10

It's like yelling at the service station people because of the pricing.....

At risk of being abused by service station people on here, all of whom I am sure are on to it intellegent people. Some of these friggen upstarts need a good kick up the thingy :yes:

I rarely hit a bad one mind, even travelling around. Sometimes the local Mobil employs dicks, the last one they employed has put me off ever going there agin for fuel.

Mind you, pay peanuts get starved monkeys.

Mully

27th February 2011, 21:18

At risk of being abused by service station people on here, all of whom I am sure are on to it intellegent people. Some of these friggen upstarts need a good kick up the thingy :yes:

I agree many need a kick up the arse

But do you abuse them because of the pricing structure. Or because head office denies them staff so they have to run the pumps on prepay? Tempting though it is to lash out at the symbol of "the Man (tm)" when they charge you knocking on $60 to fill up your steed, it's pointless.

DB seems to be implying that anyone pulled over (if they do pull over) and chatted to by these clipboard jockeys should abuse them for being part of ACC. But then KB always has produced big-talking keyboard warriors.

To my mind, 50,000 (or thereabouts) motorcyclists making the 1st person explanation that high-viz is not the solution has more chance of being listened to that some plonker mouthing off.

bogan

27th February 2011, 21:20

To my mind, 50,000 (or thereabouts) motorcyclists making the 1st person explanation that high-viz is not the solution has more chance of being listened to that some plonker mouthing off.

Well if I can make sense of the data, a factsheet may be in the works to help out...

Gman71

27th February 2011, 21:28

The cop said I didnt have to talk to the ACC guy, totally up to me.

But.....Nice fine sunny day, hours of riding ahead of me, a friendly cop, and a smiling guy from ACC being made to work on a Sunday, in an effort (useful, useless,whatever your opinion) to make the world a safer place for ME, so why wouldn't I talk to him.

Be all staunch and say 'fuck that' and ride off, but don't then come here a bitch about what ACC are doing, or that their plans are shit, if you cant spare 60 seconds from your busy day to have a quick chat on the roadside, hear what they have to say, and offer some ideas.

nosebleed

27th February 2011, 21:29

...DB...

Really? And you still bite after all these years?

BTW the rest of your post was valid but it was overshadowed by the mini facepalm halfway through. :)

Mom

27th February 2011, 21:31

DB seems to be implying that anyone pulled over (if they do pull over) and chatted to by these clipboard jockeys should abuse them for being part of ACC. But then KB always has produced big-talking keyboard warriors.
.

I did not realise that I was responding to a post by the illustrious DB. I dont actually abuse anyone, even the annoying people employed by an employer that pays minimum with little support to their staff, who are sometimes empowered by a little bit of training.

Never, ever thought of abusing one for the price I had to pay. The people at these check points are I am sure genuine in their desire to see the biker deaTH RATE DECLINE. Opps! Just they have no right to detain me as I go about my lawful business.

Ocean1

27th February 2011, 21:35

Well if I can make sense of the data, a factsheet may be in the works to help out...

Cool.

Question: how do you diferentiate your facts from those on all the other fact sheets? The ones with all the other, different facts.

Just curious.

bogan

27th February 2011, 21:47

Cool.

Question: how do you diferentiate your facts from those on all the other fact sheets? The ones with all the other, different facts.

Just curious.

Find the ones without any 'spin' on em of course! Or if there are none adequate, just explain why those other facts, are actually, just assumptions. Like the NZ study, if it's findings were correct, the accident rate should have gone down by around 7% once the headlight law was introduced (assuming it was followed, the same assumption they would need to make with high vis), did it?

The Pastor

27th February 2011, 21:52

i so hope those fagball cops and those cocksucking acc dickheads don't pull me over.

The Pastor

27th February 2011, 21:54

You can decline and ride off at the first bit too, but yeah I would have passed all the gear questions and then rapidly lost all my carefully-earned points at the attitude test.

Why don't people feel angry at ACC ?

wtf are you still doing here?

\m/

28th February 2011, 04:50

If I get stopped I'll ride off as soon as the policeman has done his checks. I can't be fucked listening to some acc fuckmuppet talking out his arse.

YellowDog

28th February 2011, 05:22

So I am wearing racing leathers, which are heavily armoured and made of substantial materials designed to protect bones and flesh in the event of an impact with the road or anything else. My leathers have prominent white sections and also reflective strips designed to provide a high degree of visibility, both at night as well as in day light.

Why pick on me and let Mr T-shirt, Shorts & Jandals boy pass unhindered?

Of course I say nothing to upset anyone and I am quite grateful for not getting a speeding ticket for any alledged infringements :bleh:

Usarka

28th February 2011, 07:30

If you're being told off for not wearing hi-vis, ask them how the fuck did they see you in time to pull you over?

Paul in NZ

28th February 2011, 07:58

If you're being told off for not wearing hi-vis, ask them how the fuck did they see you in time to pull you over?

Bwahahah... that should be our standard respose...

let the bastards score this...

Swoop

28th February 2011, 08:00

3 points off for hi-viz v's 1 point for jeans...
I'd like to see the full "scale".
-1: Not driving in a tank.
-1: Not driving a car.
-1: Not wearing full hi-viz to make up for another persons myopia.
-1: Not riding with a tray of donuts attached to the pillion seat.

Damn, I can only get a 17/20 at best.:rolleyes:

Big Dave

28th February 2011, 09:51

Having a prepared (suitable) response to the ACC survey would be a great way to make a point.

The political organisations should draft one.

nosebleed

28th February 2011, 10:15

Having a prepared (suitable) response to the ACC survey would be a great way to make a point.

The political organisations should draft one.

Here 'tis...

If you're being told off for not wearing hi-vis, ask them how the fuck did they see you in time to pull you over?

Then explain it's because they were looking for you, and thus able to see you.
Therefore it's better to train drivers to be observant from the start of their learning to drive process, than to make bikers shell out more money on "protective" (a term used loosely here) clothing.

James Deuce

28th February 2011, 10:18

T
Be all staunch and say 'fuck that' and ride off, but don't then come here a bitch about what ACC are doing, or that their plans are shit, if you cant spare 60 seconds from your busy day to have a quick chat on the roadside, hear what they have to say, and offer some ideas.

Are you mental? They're just going to do what they want to. They really, really, really don't give a shit about the answers you're giving unless they support the argument they're going to present to make hi-viz compulsory.

The best outcome from the questionnaire will be that Hi-Viz vests become compulsory.

The most likely outcome will be that the regs will be changed and you'll be fined and have points added to your license if you don't wear it and the ACC levy will go up to fund an "education" campaign and to pay for the "free" hi-viz vests they'll give out.

How you people can see what happened post-Bikoi and then sit back and believe that "they" are here to help you is beyond me.

They're not here to help you. You're a revenue stream. That's it. They want their cake and they want to eat it too. Jam levies up and stop you from having "accidents" and it's win/win for the government.

They're not here to help you.

Timmeh:P

28th February 2011, 10:22

18/21 here...

I was out riding with my partner who is learning to ride. We had just been in a car park practising low speed turns and manoeuvring and decided to go out towards Albany for a quick blat where we got stopped at this checkpoint.

I told the cop and ACC lacky that I disagree with their views on High Vis vests. As I see it, (and it has been mentioned a number of times) if a driver can't see my two very bright headlights, then a high vis vest ain't going to do shit.

What pissed me off more, is the fact all the car drivers are waved through and the bikers are made to feel like they are on display.... "Look at those bad bikers... they must have been doing something wrong!". We had passengers in cars yelling out at us if we had done something wrong! There is already a negative attitude towards anyone who rides on two wheels, this just makes it worse.

Why can't the checkpoint ALSO warn drivers to be vigilant and look out for bikes. Also make it a breath testing spot while they are at it.

The police officer even said to me that 99% of motorcycle accidents he attends it is the DRIVERS fault, they did not see the biker. So shouldn't they be educating the car drivers to be more vigilant?!!?

:brick:

avgas

28th February 2011, 10:27

Having a prepared (suitable) response to the ACC survey would be a great way to make a point.
The political organisations should draft one.
I have mine sorted
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/-AEP5y2hEwE?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Speed kills everyone. Don't go anywhere fast.

Big Dave

28th February 2011, 10:33

Which is why I said the Political Organisations should draft one.

Genestho

28th February 2011, 13:10

Keep in mind, there are always specifically targeted campaigns - fatigue, childs car seat checks to name a quick couple, Motorcyclists are not unique, just seems it at this point.

Which is why I said the Political Organisations should draft one.

My 2 cents...I'd agree with this stance BD, I'd see nothing wrong with a well thought out - professionally designed, with relevant sourced info, perhaps a "what we would like to see from these educational stops as Motorcyclists" and handed to the ACC representative/officer.

Stamp of approval from all relevant groups and logos to signify united approach and numbers, addressed to ACC/NZ Police/MOT, with a request for feedback from forms to appropriate organisation emails, or a blank space as optional extra for the stopee's comment/s and/or email addy?

This then surely gives all Motorcyclists view points consideration, the more knowledgable the viewpoint, rather than opinion - the better?

Would Magazines publish a 'cut out' copy?

Then Motorcyclists could keep for future use...

I could be wrong but it seems (and I have been advised) a lot of Govt agencies don't appear to have an understanding about Motorcycling related issues, apart from gathered statistics, but it's my personal opinion that they are trying, and there is further obligation to do so.

Usarka

28th February 2011, 13:29

I wonder if this safety vest will make them happy.....

camo_army_safety_vest.html (http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/348210768/camo_army_safety_vest.html)

Blinkwing

28th February 2011, 13:48

17/21 out at Westgate the other day. Was like "wtf do the police want" :<

Usarka

28th February 2011, 13:53

Are the cops stopping you wearing safety vests?

If not, just ride passed and if they chase you say "Sorry mate I didn't see you".

Big Dave

28th February 2011, 14:17

Keep in mind, there are always specifically targeted campaigns - fatigue, childs car seat checks to name a quick couple, Motorcyclists are not unique, just seems it at this point.

My 2 cents...I'd agree with this stance BD, I'd see nothing wrong with a well thought out - professionally designed, with relevant sourced info, perhaps a "what we would like to see from these educational stops as Motorcyclists" and handed to the ACC representative/officer.

Stamp of approval from all relevant groups and logos to signify united approach and numbers, addressed to ACC/NZ Police/MOT, with a request for feedback from forms to appropriate organisation emails, or a blank space as optional extra for the stopee's comment/s and/or email addy?

This then surely gives all Motorcyclists view points consideration, the more knowledgable the viewpoint, rather than opinion - the better?

Would Magazines publish a 'cut out' copy?

Then Motorcyclists could keep for future use...

I could be wrong but it seems (and I have been advised) a lot of Govt agencies don't appear to have an understanding about Motorcycling related issues, apart from gathered statistics, but it's my personal opinion that they are trying, and there is further obligation to do so.

Kiwi Rider has donated a page to BRONZ every month for the last 10 years - to do with what they will. :-)

swbarnett

28th February 2011, 17:25

then giving you a score for what you where wearing and if ya bike was rego etc
How many points for knowing how to stay upright?

Probably none as ACC prefer morons in cotton wool than educated riders living life to the full.

trailblazer

28th February 2011, 17:34

i know that not all accidents are the bikers fault and that people in cars and trucks and even other motorcycles are the vechile at fault but if the minority of bikers stopped being fuckwits out on the road (speeding,passing on double yellow lines, passing in dangerous places and not allowing the car in front to see you etc just to name a few) then maybe we wouldn't have the issues we are having. The road is not a race track yet i would say that at least 50% of bikers treat it like one. I have been driving in my car in a line of traffic doing 110 ks while a group of bikers past the whole line of traffic at a heck of a lot quicker than we were travelling while cars were coming in the opposite direction. In my opinion that is who the police and acc are targeting but to get them they have to go through all of us. So if you don't want to have a we chat with acc and the police and you want our acc levies to drop then all we have to do is ride sensibly. My 2c

sunhuntin

28th February 2011, 17:57

At risk of being abused by service station people on here, all of whom I am sure are on to it intellegent people. Some of these friggen upstarts need a good kick up the thingy :yes:

I rarely hit a bad one mind, even travelling around. Sometimes the local Mobil employs dicks, the last one they employed has put me off ever going there agin for fuel.

Mind you, pay peanuts get starved monkeys.

now now, i did nearly 3 years at bp and am certainly not an upstart, lol. the only time my customers didnt come first was when a certain Grub called in to say hi. :) :niceone:

Blackshear

28th February 2011, 18:05

superman

28th February 2011, 18:13

14/21
-4 for no license on hand
-4 for no fluro
Can't remember what the 1 came from.

On second thought. How the fuck is not holding a license on your persons going to stop a car/van/truck/bike/magpie from tearing you asunder?

You want to see my license sir? Well I'd need to take off all my gear sir it's hiddin in a pocket around my thighs sir... hard to access sir.

Well in that case never mind. :msn-wink:

Blackshear

28th February 2011, 18:17

You want to see my license sir? Well I'd need to take off all my gear sir it's hiddin in a pocket around my thighs sir... hard to access sir.

Well in that case never mind. :msn-wink:

I gave him the 'got totally fucking smashed and lost all my clothes on friday' line but guess he heard that already.
Seriously though, read the card and figure out how your license is important.
"The main risk factors are decreased stability, lower level of occupant protection and less visibility to other road users."

/rantrant

Bassmatt

28th February 2011, 18:22

Taz

28th February 2011, 18:50

No rego and no license = certain death.

Christ they're getting tough now - It used to be just a fine!! :eek:

Deviant

28th February 2011, 19:18

Didn't read the whole thread but I heard they were on Dominion Road tonight too.

As a former bike rider, I was right there with you guys in blaming car drivers. Since the bike got destroyed by a careless ute driver (who tried to blame it on me- Frank Allen Tyres Dom Road), I've stuck with my car- it was my 3rd crash, two being 100% car driver's faults and requiring over half the original cost in repairs or full payout (their insurance). The one that was my fault cost me $40 in parts, and a half day off to sulk.

To be fair to the cops and car drivers in general, you don't get anywhere near as much vision in a car, and less awareness and focus of anything smaller than a car.

Bikes move fast. It takes a split second for one to get so close you can hit it. It's your life at stake, so you need to take some of the responsibility for it.

Hi vis vests don't make me see you sooner, but when you enter my vision, I notice you far better than if you're wearing black.

Blame it on shitty drivers all you like. The fact is that motorbikes are dangerous and it's in your hands to reduce that risk or not.

Personally, I wont commute on Dominion Road on a motorbike any more but I will ride one for fun or inter-city travel. And I wouldn't wear a hi-vis for that.

EDIT: This was in response to people saying Hi Vis doesn't help much.

James Deuce

28th February 2011, 19:47

EDIT: This was in response to people saying Hi Vis doesn't help much.

It doesn't. The main reason they don't see bikes is this: Motion Camouflage (http://www.motorcycleinfo.co.uk/index.cfm?fa=contentGeneric.twhhyjzpxapzkouq&pageId=146841)

http://board.mcnews.com/Topic16871-4-1.aspx

http://www.qbi.uq.edu.au/professor-mandyam-srinivasan-faa-frs

Because of a motorcycle's small size relative to the background and other vehicles it appears to be motionless until it appears to grow rapidly in size just prior to hitting the vehicle that pulled out in front of it. This is why a major proportion of SMIDSYs follow that sentence with, "He was speeding!"

The hi-viz doesn't help at a distance because of the prevalence of bright colours in the background - vehicles, advertising hordings and so on. Couple that with the findings of a UK study into why Motorcycle Paramedics were getting mowed down at intersections and dispatch riders weren't and the findings were that most road users expect people wearing hi-viz vests to be on foot - road workers, cops, ambos and paramedics, council workers, rubbish men, etc etc, all move at a walking pace, again encouraging road users to pull out in front of a hi-viz vest because there's no way the hi-viz vest will accelerate up to 30mph rapidly. The average driver only checks in any given direction for a 10th of a second before making a decision about whether to go or not.

You can see where this goes. If you don't teach drivers about motion camouflage they don't know how to separate relatively close single track vehicles from the background. That's what's meant by "Look for bikes" but no one really explains why you have to look harder.

Big Dave

28th February 2011, 20:00

It doesn't---- snip ----

Brilliant. Now put that in 3 sentences.

James Deuce

28th February 2011, 20:01

Nothing like a challenge.

kiwi cowboy

28th February 2011, 20:06

lf you want to wear a t-shirt and jandals and as long as you have your helmet legally they can not make you wear anything else as it is not law that you have too...

Personally if I would be asking am I getting a ticket for anything if yes please write it out now... and stop yabber mouthing to me... if no... good bye... and I doin't give a rat arse about your silly little score...

Again having a rego on your bike has nothing to do with safety what so ever it is a money gathering thing only... if the are wanting safety then your W.O.F is more important.

Rego is Road Fees, ACC and GST... pure money making nothing else what so ever...

Well said that man:niceone:

MaxB

28th February 2011, 20:43

ACC haven't done much recently to make us trust them. Don't know why this should be any different.

Telling an ACC grunt at the roadside won't achieve anything. Another ride to Wellington in election year might.

If we don't jump up and down we'll be wearing hi-viz vests before we know it.

oneofsix

28th February 2011, 21:04

It doesn't. The main reason they don't see bikes is this: Motion Camouflage (http://www.motorcycleinfo.co.uk/index.cfm?fa=contentGeneric.twhhyjzpxapzkouq&pageId=146841)

http://board.mcnews.com/Topic16871-4-1.aspx

http://www.qbi.uq.edu.au/professor-mandyam-srinivasan-faa-frs

Because of a motorcycle's small size relative to the background and other vehicles it appears to be motionless until it appears to grow rapidly in size just prior to hitting the vehicle that pulled out in front of it. This is why a major proportion of SMIDSYs follow that sentence with, "He was speeding!"

The hi-viz doesn't help at a distance because of the prevalence of bright colours in the background - vehicles, advertising hordings and so on. Couple that with the findings of a UK study into why Motorcycle Paramedics were getting mowed down at intersections and dispatch riders weren't and the findings were that most road users expect people wearing hi-viz vests to be on foot - road workers, cops, ambos and paramedics, council workers, rubbish men, etc etc, all move at a walking pace, again encouraging road users to pull out in front of a hi-viz vest because there's no way the hi-viz vest will accelerate up to 30mph rapidly. The average driver only checks in any given direction for a 10th of a second before making a decision about whether to go or not.

You can see where this goes. If you don't teach drivers about motion camouflage they don't know how to separate relatively close single track vehicles from the background. That's what's meant by "Look for bikes" but no one really explains why you have to look harder.

Good post the only bit I will comment on is the last couple of words. The "Look for bikes" works best if they look twice rather than harder. They are more likely to notice the bike on the second look because it has moved from where they first saw, but didn't notice, it. It also therefore gives them an indication of speed.

bogan

28th February 2011, 21:14

Good post the only bit I will comment on is the last couple of words. The "Look for bikes" works best if they look twice rather than harder. They are more likely to notice the bike on the second look because it has moved from where they first saw, but didn't notice, it. It also therefore gives them an indication of speed.

and to identify blind spots and verify they are empty before going. Good writeup James Deuce, interesting point about seeing other thing they expect from the high vis colors, rather than what is actually there.

avgas

28th February 2011, 21:19

Christ they're getting tough now - It used to be just a fine!! :eek:
Ever been tazered at 200kmh.

And thats when they are nice to you. Otherwise they kill the people whom do runners.

Ocean1

28th February 2011, 21:29

interesting point about seeing other thing they expect from the high vis colors, rather than what is actually there.

Pattern recognition. You're brain uses shorthand wherever possible. If you know the area you're looking at you're much more likely to fail to see transient artifacts. Your brain sees a very rough outline of the scene it expects to see and pulls the rest from memory. Only... there wasn't a bike there when the memory was recorded.

The mechanisms of visual perception and recognition are nowhere near the straight acquisition of real data that many believe.

bogan

28th February 2011, 21:33

Pattern recognition. You're brain uses shorthand wherever possible. If you know the area you're looking at you're much more likely to fail to see transient artifacts. Your brain sees a very rough outline of the scene it expects to see and pulls the rest from memory. Only... there wasn't a bike there when the memory was recorded.

The mechanisms of visual perception and recognition are nowhere near the straight acquisition of real data that many believe.

yup, done a few pages on that for my thesis, it just never occurred to me that a blob of such color would be recognized that way, especially when there is a big headlight under it!

scumdog

28th February 2011, 22:40

DB seems to be implying that anyone pulled over (if they do pull over) and chatted to by these clipboard jockeys should abuse them for being part of ACC. But then KB always has produced big-talking keyboard warriors.

To my mind, 50,000 (or thereabouts) motorcyclists making the 1st person explanation that high-viz is not the solution has more chance of being listened to that some plonker mouthing off.

That last paragraph makes sense.

Better all the clip-board people report that "ALL bikers think hi-vis vest are a waste of time, they all have similar thoughts on what will work regarding safety on the road"

Instead of "What a bunch of bolshy, arrogant disorganised shambolic knobs that biker lot are"

"Not a single common thought in their little heads, not cohesion at all..each one doesn't have a clue what the next one wants...the only common factor we recorded was how rude they all were."

swbarnett

1st March 2011, 00:01

Hi vis vests don't make me see you sooner, but when you enter my vision, I notice you far better than if you're wearing black.
Only because, as a former rider, you're looking for bikes. Most people don't.

A collegue of mine wears a hi-vis vest all the time. He was taken out last week by a U-turning driver that just didn't see him (he's OK. Just bruising and minor concussion). The vest did nothing because the driver just wasn't looking. And if she had been the vest would've been redundant.

I never expect anyone to see me. I see them, that's all that matters.

The fact is that motorbikes are dangerous
Bollox! Motorcycling is not inherently dangerous. It is, however, EXTREMELY unforgiving of inattention, ignorance, incompetence and stupidity!

Personally, I wont commute on Dominion Road on a motorbike
I've been up there in rush hour a number of times. I honestly can't see what the problem is if you just keep your wits about you and ride in an defensive but assertive manner.

swbarnett

1st March 2011, 00:04

If we don't jump up and down we'll be wearing hi-viz vests before we know it.
I won't and neither will my wife.

boostin

1st March 2011, 05:47

BoristheBiter

1st March 2011, 07:12

Only because, as a former rider, you're looking for bikes. Most people don't.

A collegue of mine wears a hi-vis vest all the time. He was taken out last week by a U-turning driver that just didn't see him (he's OK. Just bruising and minor concussion). The vest did nothing because the driver just wasn't looking. And if she had been the vest would've been redundant.

I have a theory and it is the gap theory.

Drivers see a gap and think i can put my car/truck/bike into that and give no thought of the speeds that are being done.

The best example is the one when someone pulls out, normally in a 100k area, and doesn't speed up so you have to brake. they see the gap and not the other vehicles around them and the busier the intersection the worse it gets.

But then there are the ones that just don't look.

trailblazer

1st March 2011, 08:41

I would like to see the response if when you are stopped at a checkpoint you call the friendly copper over to the ACC person and ask the cop how many times a day people don't see or notice them when they have full disco lights and sirens going.

If people can't see a police cars lights going at full noise then how is a hi viz going to help?

that is a very valid point and a very valid argument while we are fighting this hi vis bollocks. I personally don't want to wear one but if they make it law then im not going to be wanting to get a ticket for not wearing one and im not going to let it stop me riding my bike. All we can do as bikers is answer there questions and have our say. If you don't stop and don't take part when or if they pass this law regaurding hi vis we can't moan and complain.

pritch

1st March 2011, 09:02

trailblazer

1st March 2011, 09:10

To a certain extent all of the forgoing misses one point. Some drivers look at the bike and think, "That can't hurt me." Then do whatever they like.

It would make no difference what you're wearing, they can see you but just don't give a shit.

I'd love a holster that clipped to the parcel tray on my moped. Then I could change their perspective. Sadly the phrase "collateral damage" comes to mind... :whistle:
some people think that they own the road and don't give a rats arse about anyone else. Bit like they wankers that like to cut cyclists off or throw bottles and rubbish at them.

trailblazer

1st March 2011, 09:14

I wonder on the acc's statistics how many fellow bikers that happen to be driving a car has pulled out in front of a motorcyclist and caused an accidant. I bet that it wouldn't be many.

Little Miss Trouble

1st March 2011, 09:21

To a certain extent all of the forgoing misses one point. Some drivers look at the bike and think, "That can't hurt me." Then do whatever they like.

It would make no difference what you're wearing, they can see you but just don't give a shit.

I'd love a holster that clipped to the parcel tray on my moped. Then I could change their perspective. Sadly the phrase "collateral damage" comes to mind... :whistle:

Absolutely correct on that point. It's the old 'might has right' theory which is proven to me over and over, not just when I'm on my bike but in my little shopping trolley of a car too. Arrogant 4x4 and people mover drivers try and muscle into my space on a far too frequent basis simply because they're larger... Too bad for them I'm not easily intimidated and have a fairly good memory so that I can *555 them later.

Little Miss Trouble

1st March 2011, 09:29

oneofsix

1st March 2011, 09:32

I firmly believe 'seeing' bikes is a matter of training the driver's mind to the consequences of their actions and nothing to do with what we are wearing.

Heh although in saying that I bet I'd be 'seen' a lot more if I were to forgo my leathers in favour of a bikini.

Not sure it would improve your safety, some clown would likely hit the accelerator rather than the break. They would see more of you though :bleh:

Whynot

1st March 2011, 09:47

Heh although in saying that I bet I'd be 'seen' a lot more if I were to forgo my leathers in favour of a bikini.

I think in the interests of safety you should post some pics up so we can make an educated judgement .... :innocent:

Little Miss Trouble

1st March 2011, 10:05

I think in the interests of safety you should post some pics up so we can make an educated judgement .... :innocent:

Meh, I can't be bothered trawling back through the Kai Iwi Lakes threads but there are probably some in there

Little Miss Trouble

1st March 2011, 10:17

In the same amount of time it takes a 'regular' car driver to not see us, I can generally* take note of a bikes make, model, colour and colour of a riders gear, why? Because I've been marshaling at HD for the past year and have trained my brain to notice these things.

*Late-ish model sportsbikes, nakeds in particular, happy to admit my knowledge of cruisers is more limited.

Old Steve

1st March 2011, 19:13

I wear a fluoro yellow hi-viz every time I get on my bike. Headlights on high beam too. There is starting to be a suspicion that orange hi-viz are not as noticable as fluoro - something to do with road cones and road works signs, people can see an orange hi-viz but don't actually register that they've seen them.

I'd love to be pulled over by Plod and to have my bike checked. "Officer, what about the removed exhaust baffles, let me fire it up for you?" Now I think being heard is an extra safety feature, but my bike does exceed the makers listed decibel level so is illegal on the road. Did pass it's last WOF without the baffles being put back in though, though I think the WOF tester was a rider, he said, "Sounds nice doesn't it."

Max Preload

6th March 2011, 01:03

Nice fine sunny day, hours of riding ahead of me, a friendly cop, and a smiling guy from ACC being made to work on a Sunday, in an effort (useful, useless,whatever your opinion) to make the world a safer place for ME, so why wouldn't I talk to him.How about because they're going to twist anything you say to use in the push to introduce the compulsory wearing of hi-vis vests for motorcyclists which is, simply put, complete and utter fucking bullshit?

scumdog

6th March 2011, 08:13

How about because they're going to twist anything you say to use in the push to introduce the compulsory wearing of hi-vis vests for motorcyclists which is, simply put, complete and utter fucking bullshit?

Maybe 'somebody' should speak to this 'they're' that you feel is going to twist anything you say....?

Instead of letting rip with paranoid screaming on KB.

Or is that half the fun?

gsx83esd

6th March 2011, 08:44

wish i had known there was a check point , i would have got the bike out and made a special trip to the check point to have a look at the silly buggers !( acc that is)

tigertim20

6th March 2011, 18:33

'am I getting a ticket?'
'no'
'Later!'

Im not going to sit and listen to some muppet with a tick sheet whose probably never ridden a motorcycle in his life, tell me what he thinks of my motorcycle dress sense. I have places to be and things to do, So it is my intention to treat them (should i find myself pulled over by them) as I would a jehovas witnees knocking on my door, an unwanted annoying distraction from the list of things I have to do that day.

Max Preload

8th March 2011, 09:45

Maybe 'somebody' should speak to this 'they're' that you feel is going to twist anything you say....?You shouldn't speak to these ACC arsehats any more than you should speak to Police and for the same reasons.

Instead of letting rip with paranoid screaming on KB.

Or is that half the fun?It's nothing to do with paranoia and everything to do with reality. Do you trust politicians implicitly? :lol:

scumdog

8th March 2011, 10:00

You shouldn't speak to these ACC arsehats any more than you should speak to Police and for the same reasons.

So how are the Power That Be expected to get you message??:blink:

ClutchITUP

8th March 2011, 10:31

How bout we write a song about our freedom being taken away

Heres a start <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/ipzHglsRSOs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>just replace Keith Wilson with Nick Smith(is he still the minister?)
and Bill Clinton with John Key

Its pretty catchy we could all sing it at the next bikoi

I would go thru all legal and in jandals best thing to do for sure

swbarnett

8th March 2011, 10:52

So how are the Power That Be expected to get you message??:blink:
The trouble is that there is a perception that all people in authority hear only what they want to here and not what's being said to them. In this situation it's better to say nothing. Then there's nothing to twist.

Max Preload

8th March 2011, 13:54

So how are the Power That Be expected to get you message??:blink:I personally don't expect them to ever get any message they don't wish to hear. However, I will continue to WRITE to them. But I certainly won't be assisting with filling out any of their loaded questionnaires. Ever.

BoristheBiter

8th March 2011, 13:59

The trouble is that there is a perception that all people in authority hear only what they want to here and not what's being said to them. In this situation it's better to say nothing. Then there's nothing to twist.

Yes but there is still a right way and a wrong way to do that.

The acc people on these stops are not the ones that will put together the report never mind make the decisions.

Max Preload

8th March 2011, 16:59

Yes but there is still a right way and a wrong way to do that.

The acc people on these stops are not the ones that will put together the report never mind make the decisions.Indeed. So speaking to them isn't going to convey anything other than that which the survey has been designed to do. So simply don't waste your time doing it.

BoristheBiter

8th March 2011, 19:29

Indeed. So speaking to them isn't going to convey anything other than that which the survey has been designed to do. So simply don't waste your time doing it.

Yep, just say thanks but no thanks and move on, no need to get angry at someone for just doing their job.

Good god did we just agree on something what is this world coming to:facepalm:

matdaymon

8th March 2011, 20:14

I wondered WTF they were doing. I rode through heading in to Albany from SH17 and had a couple of guys flick there lights at me to warn me there was "something" up ahead.
Don't know how they managed to stop anyone southbound as they were hiding around a blind corner. Lucky for me they already had their hands full with 3 or 4 bikes on my side of the road and they didn't bat an eyelid my way (maybe because my Hyo has its scooter spec exhaust still?).
I only wear my hi vis vest in wet weather, when there is ACTUALLY less visibility and the nob jockey in the cage needs something extra than my bright fucking orange bike, reflectors, and lights to see me on the road. Definitely heading to welly for the next bikoi.

PS to the person who suggested it. This year (2011) is Election year. Nov 26 to be exact :soon: