MOTO-NZ finally come up with something for all our money

[swbarnett]

But rail maintenance costs alot more than road maintenance & must be performed more often. Laying tracks far exceeds cost of roading by a large margin. I don't see the saving in road maintenance being enough to justify trains.
I agree that savings in road maintenance may not be enough to offset the running costs of trains. However, it pays for itself, by getting most of the vehicles off the road and creating a much more relaxed society. Compared to the population there are very few private cars in Switzerland (1 car per 1350 people in Zurich when we were there). The few times I was returning a rental car to Basel I was amazed by the "rush hour" traffic on a Monday morning. A lot lighter than here at the time and a lot better behaved.


There is apparently only 1 passenger network in the world that pays for itself & it's in India where they're allowed to overcrowd, sit on the roof & hang off the sides.
It's not really about a single aspect of Government services breaking even. It's about the overall picture. The real question is - does the overall infrastructure break even? And if it doesn't, is it worth the cost for social reasons? There are a lot of social costs that are reduced by good public transport. The geography of NZ, however, does make nation-wide public transport very difficult. We have to ask ourselves if it would work when both the financial and social ledgers are tallied.


As for outages, power cuts happen
I commuted daily by train for two years in Switzerland and there was not one disruption due to a lack of power (only once for a heavy snowfall).


alot of our more recent ones were due to morons running the show.
That is one difference. You can hardly call the average Swiss a moron when it comes to organisation and systems management.


But regardless of all this private passenger vehicles still trump public transport IMO at-least until/if the UN get their "Agenda 21" we don't all work close to trains, as soon as you bring busses into the mix your've just killed off any arguable advantage of trains & over half of NZ doesn't even have train access, infact alot don't have any viable public transport (NZ as a country not NZ as population)
True. The reason it works in Switzerland is that the population (9million at the time) is concentrated into an area the size of the central north island. That and the fact that train and buss stations are plentiful and servercies are frequent.

[Scuba_Steve]

Dont know where you get your information from...

It was a South African study on a new track. It took into account the complete picture, while the operation of electrics were cheaper the added maintenance they required voided any savings to be had & with more more expensive lines & engines electrics were the more expensive choice

[MrKiwi]

[QUOTE=Flip;1130454651]You lot are entering into a discussion with a member of the ACC owned loby group MotoNZ, remember he is only representing the interests of ACC...[QUOTE]

Wrong, yet again. While MSAC is set up by ACC and members are appointed by Cabinet it is not a lobby group, it is an advisory group to government. It is not our role to advocate government policy and we don't. The members of the Council are ordinary bikers like you, trying to find 'useful' ways to spend the $30 per annum bikers are now required to pay.

Unless the levy is repealed would you like officials to be the sole source of determining how that money is spent, it so please tell me and I will stop wasting my energy and time.

Cheers...

[GrayWolf]

[QUOTE=Flip;1130454651]You lot are entering into a discussion with a member of the ACC owned loby group MotoNZ, remember he is only representing the interests of ACC...[QUOTE]

Wrong, yet again. While MSAC is set up by ACC and members are appointed by Cabinet it is not a lobby group, it is an advisory group to government. It is not our role to advocate government policy and we don't. The members of the Council are ordinary bikers like you, trying to find 'useful' ways to spend the $30 per annum bikers are now required to pay.

Unless the levy is repealed would you like officials to be the sole source of determining how that money is spent, it so please tell me and I will stop wasting my energy and time.

Cheers...

Sorry MrKiwi,
yes I've had my say in this thread, but after XXX? pages and posts? it seriously reminds me of a childhood nursery rhyme.... here we go round the mulberry bush....... till we all fall down!

[bogan]

Unless the levy is repealed would you like officials to be the sole source of determining how that money is spent, it so please tell me and I will stop wasting my energy and time.

I'm kinda struggling to see where the difference would be? I want to see this thing work for us, and now GM has gone (who clearly was pushing government policy, or at the least was chosen because his policies are aligned with the governments) it has a better chance, but how about moving on from the talking stage. You've already spent far too long dwelling on that.

[davereid]

While MSAC is set up by ACC and members are appointed by Cabinet it is not a lobby group, it is an advisory group to government. It is not our role to advocate government policy and we don't. The members of the Council are ordinary bikers like you, trying to find 'useful' ways to spend the $30 per annum bikers are now required to pay. Unless the levy is repealed would you like officials to be the sole source of determining how that money is spent, it so please tell me and I will stop wasting my energy and time. Cheers...

The best usage of the funds would be to lobby other groups unfairly penalised by ACC victim charges.

ALL the money should be used to lobby for our charge to be the same as or less than a car.

The facts are:

Motorcyclists are cheaper to treat than cyclists, pedestrians, or Car Occupants
Cyclists
- 567 active claims
- $12,573,000
- $22,174 per claim
Pedestrians:
- 1115 active claims
- $24,494,000
- $21,967 per claim
Car Occupants:
- 8525 active claims
- $208,305,000
- $24,434 per claim
Motorcyclists:
- 3173 active claims
- $62,523,000
- $19,704 per claim
Average Current situation for all accounts
- 14762 active claims
- $341,007,000 total cost
- $ 23,100 per claim
Source http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/statistics/acc-injury-statistics-2008/8-motorvehicle-
account/IS0800157

Motorcyclists are victims of crashes not the cause. Blame should not be apportioned in a no fault system but if it is, it shouldn't be placed on the victim. (Would we charge women an extra ACC fee to cover the costs of rape ?)

71% of crashes were collisions
Motorcyclist primarily responsible for 35% or 1/3 of collisions
ie 2/3rds of collisions are caused by the motorist not the motorcyclist
Of all crashes including single vehicle ones, the motorcyclist was primarily
responsible for 51%. That's way better than car drivers.
Source http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/Motorcycle-Crash-
Factsheet.pdf


ACC are using the motorist as a cash cow.
Current situation for all accounts
- 14762 active claims
- $341,007,000 total cost
- $ 23,100 average per claim
Source : http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/statistics/acc-injury-statistics-2008/8-motorvehicle-
account/IS0800157
$341,007,000 total cost
4,125,932 licensed vehicles
= $ 82.64 per vehicle
OR $ 0.115 per litre on Petrol,
OR 0.08c per litre if diesel included

The levy should be going down, as motorcycling is getting safer

Are motorcyclists crashing more or placing more claims ?
NO WE ARE CRASHING LESS
per 10,000 motorcyclists
Year Crashes Injuries Fatalities
1951 454 451 19
1961 394 391 10.3
1971 473 516 9.2
1981 247 254 8.7
1991 270 283 10.7
2001 114 116 6.1
2004 121 123 5.8
2008 142 144 5.2


MotoNZ is a motorcyclist funded, ACC controlled group, charged with making motorcyclists swallow ACC propaganda.

In fact the MotoNZ site from time to time publishes ACC propaganda without even doing the simplest cross reference.

It shouldnt be up to me to dig up the real data. MotoNZ should be doing it, using our money usefully.

If it can't spend the money actively opposing ACC then its a puppet, and should be treated with contempt.

[Conquiztador]

The best usage of the funds would be to lobby other groups unfairly penalised by ACC victim charges.

ALL the money should be used to lobby for our charge to be the same as or less than a car.

The facts are: .....


MotoNZ is a motorcyclist funded, ACC controlled group, charged with making motorcyclists swallow ACC propaganda.

In fact the MotoNZ site from time to time publishes ACC propaganda without even doing the simplest cross reference.

It shouldnt be up to me to dig up the real data. MotoNZ should be doing it, using our money usefully.

If it can't spend the money actively opposing ACC then its a puppet, and should be treated with contempt.

"You must share bling around..." I was told. (Or something to that effect)

[Scuba_Steve]

The best usage of the funds would be to lobby other groups unfairly penalised by ACC victim charges.

ALL the money should be used to lobby for our charge to be the same as or less than a car.

The facts are:
...

Yep


"You must share bling around..." I was told. (Or something to that effect)

^ what he said.

[MSTRS]

Well - MrKiwi and his cronies at McSack have had a month to ponder over and respond to davereid's figures, the source of which is ACC themselves before their spin doctors got involved.

The response is deafening, don't ya think...

[Magnum Noel]

Well -The response is deafening, don't ya think...

The response is deafening, don't ya think...
The response is deafening, don't ya think...
The response is deafening, don't ya think...
echo
echo
echo

[MrKiwi]

Anyone interested... - https://careers.acc.co.nz/jobdetails?ajid=oswca

[oneofsix]

Anyone interested... - https://careers.acc.co.nz/jobdetails?ajid=oswca

Can we have a joint chair, Stoney and Katman :shutup:




Talk about ensuring nothing is ever achieved but by hell the meeting would be fun to watch. :bash: :killingme

[Katman]

The facts are:


Motorcyclists are victims of crashes not the cause. Blame should not be apportioned in a no fault system but if it is, it shouldn't be placed on the victim. (Would we charge women an extra ACC fee to cover the costs of rape ?)

71% of crashes were collisions
Motorcyclist primarily responsible for 35% or 1/3 of collisions
ie 2/3rds of collisions are caused by the motorist not the motorcyclist
Of all crashes including single vehicle ones, the motorcyclist was primarily
responsible for 51%. That's way better than car drivers.
Source http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/Motorcycle-Crash-
Factsheet.pdf


You seem to struggle with figures in the same way that Ixion did.

The pie chart on this page http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/Motorcycle-crash-facts-2012.pdf indicates that of all motorcycle accidents, about a third are single vehicle accidents i.e. the motorcyclist cannot point the blame at any other road user. Of the other two thirds, which are multi vehicle accidents (i.e. collisions), the motorcyclist has the responsibility (full or at least partial) in about half the number.

That would therefore indicate that motorcyclists bear the responsibility for about 66% of the crashes they have.

[davereid]

You seem to struggle with figures in the same way that Ixion did.

The pie chart on this page http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/Motorcycle-crash-facts-2012.pdf indicates that of all motorcycle accidents, about a third are single vehicle accidents i.e. the motorcyclist cannot point the blame at any other road user. Of the other two thirds, which are multi vehicle accidents (i.e. collisions), the motorcyclist has the responsibility (full or at least partial) in about half the number.

That would therefore indicate that motorcyclists bear the responsibility for about 66% of the crashes they have.

And car drivers are responsible for what percentage of the accidents car drivers have ? 99%?

[mashman]

about a third are single vehicle accidents i.e. the motorcyclist cannot point the blame at any other road user

What percentage of that third can point the blame to road conditions... just to clarify, effluent, loose chip, fluids on the road etc...?

[Ocean1]

What percentage of that third can point the blame to road conditions... just to clarify, effluent, loose chip, fluids on the road etc...?

He doesn't know.

He doesn't actually know jack shit. Gwarn, ask him.

[mashman]

He doesn't know.

He doesn't actually know jack shit. Gwarn, ask him.

I thought I did ask him... he might know.

[davereid]

What percentage of that third can point the blame to road conditions... just to clarify, effluent, loose chip, fluids on the road etc...?

The entire "partial responsibility - full responsibility" thing is an old statistical trick to make a group seem to be more at fault than they really are. When I did math we called it "shifting the denominator". Its a cunning trick to give you the result you want.

Look at a simple case.

Say there are two types of cars, blue and red. There are equal amount of blue cars and red cars, and they travel identical distances and have identical crash rates.

Say I then divide accidents up.

Blue car hits blue car. Red car hits red car. Red car hits blue car.

We already know that the accident rate is identical, as we invented the entire scenario.

But my headline will scream "Red cars are only 50% of the vehicles on the road, but we see them in 66% of two car collisions".

Katman will then tell me I need a blue car.

[Scuba_Steve]

Katman will then tell me I need a blue car.

And it was the bikes fault :innocent:

[Katman]

What percentage of that third can point the blame to road conditions... just to clarify, effluent, loose chip, fluids on the road etc...?

See, the thing is, I actually don't give a fuck what percentage it might be.

The reality is, if it were only 5% of single vehicles crashes that could be blamed on road conditions then we're clearly not very good on two wheels.

If 95% of single vehicle crashes could be blamed on road conditions then we'd clearly be piss poor at reading road conditions.

Either way, we'd have vast room for improvement.

[mashman]

See, the thing is, I actually don't give a fuck what percentage it might be.

The reality is that if it were only 5% of single vehicles crashes that could be blamed on road conditions then we're clearly not very good on two wheels.

If 95% of single vehicle crashes could be blamed on road conditions then we'd clearly be piss poor at reading road conditions.

Either way, we'd have vast room for improvement.

You don't give a fuck about accidents that can't be avoided like mechanical failure or acts of god? Seems a little short sighted to me, surely even the most ardent osh inspector accepts that there is the probability for accident?

[Katman]

You don't give a fuck about accidents that can't be avoided like mechanical failure or acts of god?

Crashes that truly "can't be avoided" are so rare that they should be considered of no statistical value.

[mashman]

Crashes that truly "can't be avoided" are so rare that they should be considered of no statistical value.

In which case they should not exist in the numbers and should be recorded as no fault found for that purpose.

[MrKiwi]

Can we have a joint chair, Stoney and Katman :shutup:




Talk about ensuring nothing is ever achieved but by hell the meeting would be fun to watch. :bash: :killingme

... well now that would be interesting!

[avgas]

Now they are advertising for the role of chair person - who wants to work 60 days (20 days of meetings + prep) of the year and get paid $60,000.
Sounds pretty good to me - I wouldn't mind taking the small pay cut to get most of the year off work.

[swbarnett]

Now they are advertising for the role of chair person - who wants to work 60 days (20 days of meetings + prep) of the year and get paid $60,000.
Sounds pretty good to me - I wouldn't mind taking the small pay cut to get most of the year off work.
You don't need to take a pay cut. Just take 60days leave a year leave pay.

[Berries]

Now they are advertising for the role of chair person - who wants to work 60 days (20 days of meetings + prep) of the year and get paid $60,000.
That is quite a few bundles of $30. Glad it isn't being wasted.


[Hit head against wall fucking hard smilie]

[Conquiztador]

Now they are advertising for the role of chair person - who wants to work 60 days (20 days of meetings + prep) of the year and get paid $60,000.
Sounds pretty good to me - I wouldn't mind taking the small pay cut to get most of the year off work.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but the pay is $850/day estimated at max 24 days of work/year. That makes max $20,400/year. There is added repayment of travel costs etc. So you will need a second income from somewhere.

[StoneY]

Can we have a joint chair, Stoney and Katman :shutup:


Talk about ensuring nothing is ever achieved but by hell the meeting would be fun to watch. :bash: :killingme

I disagree.... plenty would be achieved.... katman would bleed and we would get new road furniture and less fucking number crunching bullshit like GM kept focusing on


... well now that would be interesting!

Yes... indeed it would, bring your popcorn and first aid kit.



:jerry::doctor:

[Flip]

A big fucking fat ZERO is what moto-nz have done for biker safety in NZ.

What a waste of thirty bucks.

At least ACC can say they have listened to the biker community?

[MrKiwi]

The entire "partial responsibility - full responsibility" thing is an old statistical trick to make a group seem to be more at fault than they really are. When I did math we called it "shifting the denominator". Its a cunning trick to give you the result you want...

In my opinion, your view above is rubbish if by it you mean to imply that is always the case. It's a fob off when the results are not as you want them.

I've analysed the numbers, time and time again as have lots of other people. Even allowing for errors and rounding and poor data collection, the stats are not good. We bikers can, and should do better. Attempting to shift the blame onto car drivers all or most of the time is denial of the obvious.

But I suspect we will have to agree to disagree.

[MrKiwi]

I disagree.... plenty would be achieved.... katman would bleed and we would get new road furniture and less fucking number crunching bullshit like GM kept focusing on



Yes... indeed it would, bring your popcorn and first aid kit.



:jerry::doctor:

Popcorn ready and waiting...

[bogan]

I've analysed the numbers, time and time again as have lots of other people.

That's nice, can you do something about them now? How many years worth of MSL is now in a slush fund somewhere?

[oneofsix]

That's nice, can you do something about them now? How many years worth of MSL is now in a slush fund somewhere?

Don't be silly. They are still in the blame the biker mode. The airline industry was here about half a centuary ago and then they realised that instead of blaming the pilots that if they fixed the thigns around the pilot the pilots made less mistakes or at least their mistakes were survivable. The difference of course is that if the airline industry didn't fix their shit there would be no passengers and therefore no industry whereas with bikers the more they blame them the more ACC they can charge them. :yes:

[MrKiwi]

Don't be silly. They are still in the blame the biker mode. The airline industry was here about half a centuary ago and then they realised that instead of blaming the pilots that if they fixed the thigns around the pilot the pilots made less mistakes or at least their mistakes were survivable. The difference of course is that if the airline industry didn't fix their shit there would be no passengers and therefore no industry whereas with bikers the more they blame them the more ACC they can charge them. :yes:


Who is in blame the biker mode. Not me. I said as bikers we can do more and I said as bikers if we try and shift the blame totally onto other road users we are in denial about the obvious. I did not say other road users are blameless. Far from it.

If you look at the accident stats for serious injuries and fatalities across the urban and rural environment, about 30% of accidents do not involve other vehicles. Of the accidents that involve multiple vehicles at least half of them (probably more truth be told) the principle fault is the biker, the rest lie with cars. Katman was right in that respect (at least with my understanding of the accidents stats).

However, that picture changes quite a lot if you look at all accidents (minor in addition to serious and fatal). There are a lot more minor accidents reported and about 80% of those do not relate to speed, alcohol, drugs or rider fault. So at least at the minor end of the scale we riders are doing well, other road users are not.

So when people start quoting stats, it pays to ask what accidents the stats relate too.

[MSTRS]

So when people start quoting stats, it pays to ask what accidents the stats relate too.

ACC (and their subsidiaries) are only interested in those accidents that 'cost them money'. Therefore your words above were never truer...

[Blackbird]

Mr Kiwi is right on the money :yes:

No official body seems willing to grasp the real issue of raising riding standards - it's the only thing which is going to make a measurable difference to the accident statistics. If this forum is a genuine reflection of the motorcycling population, the average rider is probably lukewarm too. The old saying about the definition of insanity.... doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results was never more true.

[davereid]

Of the accidents that involve multiple vehicles at least half of them (probably more truth be told) the principle fault is the biker, the rest lie with cars.


I'd be interested in seeing that data. The data I have does not breakdown into subsets of serious or not serious accidents. Although it would be a good bet that non-serious accidents don't get recorded anywhere.

However, the MOT figures are "motorcyclist primarily responsible for multiple vehicle crash = 23%".

And I stand by my statement that MOT and ACC shift the denominator, and cherry pick data sets to get the outcome they want.

I read Gareth Morgans rant about "I'm an economist and I know everything and I checked the figures and bikers are naughty naughty people".

I will give Gareth the benefit of the doubt, and assume he was given cherry picked data, and was simply to lazy to cross check it.

As a simple cross check would show bikers are sometimes very bad, often average and overall better than car drivers, but are always vulnerable.

Motorcyclists are primarily responsible for only 33% of single vehicle crashes and 23% of multiple vehicle crashes.

Whats the bet that Car drivers are responsible for virtually 100% of their single vehicle and multiple vehicle crashes. And thats shifting the denominator right back at ya.

[bogan]

The old saying about the definition of insanity.... doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results was never more true.

Yeh, but doing nothing over and over again like these muppets is even worse, shirley?

iirc 150 bucks of mine is what they have before I stopped paying rego, you can get a nice pair of gloves for that. Keep my fingers warm and dry, enhanced feel, leading to overall control benefits in some situations. The same cannot be said for the metric fuckton of nothing delivered so far.

[oneofsix]

Mr Kiwi is right on the money :yes:

No official body seems willing to grasp the real issue of raising riding standards - it's the only thing which is going to make a measurable difference to the accident statistics. If this forum is a genuine reflection of the motorcycling population, the average rider is probably lukewarm too. The old saying about the definition of insanity.... doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results was never more true.

Yes Mr Kiwi and co (which I suspect includes you) is right on OUR money.

As for doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results - from the beginning of motorcycling it has been blame the biker but even if every biker was Peter Perfect there would still be the stats to say they were their own worst enemies because that is the way humans like it, blame the minority. Perfect airline pilots still crash, still technically 'at fault' but by dealing with contributing factors the industry has been made safer. A couple of off the top of my head examples; Instead of rumble strips on fog lines and next to central WRBs, these things even flick the wheels of 4x4s, now about setting them back off the road so correction of the awake driver can happen before them rather than affecting a driver that is still 'on the road', ensure the crap from roadworks is swepted up before the crew leaves.

[Zedder]

Who is in blame the biker mode. Not me. I said as bikers we can do more and I said as bikers if we try and shift the blame totally onto other road users we are in denial about the obvious. I did not say other road users are blameless. Far from it.

If you look at the accident stats for serious injuries and fatalities across the urban and rural environment, about 30% of accidents do not involve other vehicles. Of the accidents that involve multiple vehicles at least half of them (probably more truth be told) the principle fault is the biker, the rest lie with cars. Katman was right in that respect (at least with my understanding of the accidents stats).

However, that picture changes quite a lot if you look at all accidents (minor in addition to serious and fatal). There are a lot more minor accidents reported and about 80% of those do not relate to speed, alcohol, drugs or rider fault. So at least at the minor end of the scale we riders are doing well, other road users are not.

So when people start quoting stats, it pays to ask what accidents the stats relate too.


It looks like the issues have been listed and, from what I know, they are being addressed.

We already have ACC backed motorcycle training courses, the car and motorcycle licence system has been changed to "assess the higher skills expected of todays more experienced applicants" and "improve safety of motorcyclists" respectively plus the Police have implemented the "Safer journeys" strategy with "top priorities" being:young drivers, alcohol and drug impaired drivers, motorcycling, road and roadsides and safer speeds."

Why then are motorcyclists still paying $30 each to MOTO-NZ? It certainly appears the "as bikers we can do" concept is a bottomless pit for our money.

[Paul in NZ]

Well I don’t know much about riding ‘standards’, what ever they are? I mean I’m not sure you can measure them or enforce them effectively and even if you can, the biggest maniac on the road can ride safely while under a short examination.

I think lumping it all in together as 'riding standards' is not right. I know people who have zero natural ability and look simply awkward on a motorcycle and yet they have completed many many thousands of trouble free kilo’s simply because they are aware of their deficiencies and ride accordingly. Similarly how many people do you know that can make a bike do almost anything and still smear themselves all over the scenery?

Standards and ability are nothing compared to a healthy self-preservation instinct.

[Blackbird]

Well I don’t know much about riding ‘standards’, what ever they are? I mean I’m not sure you can measure them or enforce them effectively and even if you can, the biggest maniac on the road can ride safely while under a short examination.

I think lumping it all in together as 'riding standards' is not right. I know people who have zero natural ability and look simply awkward on a motorcycle and yet they have completed many many thousands of trouble free kilo’s simply because they are aware of their deficiencies and ride accordingly. Similarly how many people do you know that can make a bike do almost anything and still smear themselves all over the scenery?

Standards and ability are nothing compared to a healthy self-preservation instinct.

I largely agree Paul, although there are riding techniques which help enormously which aren't taught at what you might call learner level. Also depends on what you call "short examination". I'm not specifically pushing the IAM approach, but my 2 hour assessment ride a couple of years ago caused major ego damage in terms of riding professionally. Best thing I've ever done. In any event, you're right about self-preservation. The trouble is, how many motorcyclists and car drivers do we see on a daily basis who lack that self-preservation instinct or have an excess of confidence in their own abilities?

[davereid]

In any event, you're right about self-preservation.?

Absolutely true. 23% of multiple vehicle accidents are primarily the responsibility of the motorcyclist.

Its within our reach to make that zero percent - that's my personal target.

And while I can't do anything to improve the skills of the fella responsible for the other 77% of accidents, I can improve my skills so that he can make his mistakes, and I still have room to move.

That doesnt alter the basic fact here, that ACC are cherry picking data to get the outcomes they want.

[Big Dave]

When I first heard about this $30 levy at the BRONZ meeting after the Wellington rally - I imagined/dreamed/hoped it would fund awareness campaigns. (amongst other things)

Maybe some of the 'look out for bikes' stuff on TV or popular press I thought. Get some messages out there.

Even those Mick Doohan - 'Road is not a race track' ideas aimed at rider behaviour - in any sort of media.

How many years on is it? And still it's statistics?

[bogan]

When I first heard about this $30 levy at the BRONZ meeting after the Wellington rally - I imagined/dreamed/hoped it would fund awareness campaigns. (amongst other things)

Maybe some of the 'look out for bikes' stuff on TV or popular press I thought. Get some messages out there.

Even those Mick Doohan - 'Road is not a race track' ideas aimed at rider behaviour - in any sort of media.

How many years on is it? And still it's statistics?

Latest council update shows the main focus of 2013 is three more statistical research proposals :pinch:

But also consideration for:
A riding/driving conditions website
A riding mentoring initiative
Safety awareness initiatives aimed at scooter and moped riders
Public awareness campaign for all road users about safely sharing the road

Which probably means they are considering how to go about forming a committee to decide on the best research methods to decide on how to research the implementation strategies for the aforementioned considerations.

[MSTRS]

Welcome to the Magic Roundabout. (Someone's) money funds it's operation, whilst it never goes anywhere but in circles.
Just like the problem of sand-scouring at Westshore beach. 'Everyone' knows the cause, 'everyone' knows what will fix it. But nothing is ever actually done.

[willytheekid]

MOTONZ! <_<


Hmmm...I can't remember asking you lot to "represent" me?...and yet you have ensured I have to pay for the so called priviledge??:confused:

No thanks:no:...Please have your Bullshit! $30 fee removed from my already rediculas rego fees. (Thats If you REALLY want to help kiwi bikers!...instead of just playing "holier than thou", judging the rest of us and pissing around with bullshit ACC Stats!)

http://www.xda-developers.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/stats.jpg

...its ALL you do! :motu:

[Big Dave]

Even private enterprise over here gets in on the act.

These are effective - if only by repetition.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/z8mOX8PdtOU?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[oneofsix]

good ad.
We have Super Cheap here and nothing stopping them running it here.
We are forced to pay the govt. for the service, about time they provided it

[Usarka]

We have Super Cheap here and nothing stopping them running it here.



They "launched" the carma campaign here a year ago. Supposedly.

http://carma.supercheapauto.co.nz/article/News.aspx?id=2

[Big Dave]

Supposedly.


They use the word 'Australasian' in the content once.

Right, yer in.

[Usarka]

Australasian?

http://media.onsugar.com/files/ons4/2009/12/51/485/4852708/701014894da787bc_Poh_ABC.jpg

[Big Dave]

I went looking for the Benny Hill skit where the nurse has 'Pat' written on her boob - like Poh. No find.

I did find that chick from Frazier in her knickers though.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/6bxoAsvhcOI?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>

[Pampera]

I went looking for the Benny Hill skit where the nurse has 'Pat' written on her boob - like Poh. No find.

I did find that chick from Frazier in her knickers though.



Brilliant!
Posting this clip alone well exceeds the sum total of value MotoNZ has delivered for motorcyclists over the last three years, by a substantial margin. At last I have got something worthwhile and tangible for the levy!:not: Benny Hill - the Guvnor!

Michael

[Berries]

Motorcyclists are primarily responsible for only 33% of single vehicle crashes.
You are taking the piss right? What are you blaming the other two thirds on then?


EDIT - For info, using CAS, which is the best thing we have, it shows that in all single vehicle crashes over the last five years involving mopeds and motorbikes 2073 had the rider at fault, 102 had no fault. Thats 95% by my reckoning and I would suggest much closer to the real figure than 33%. According to the new Safer Journeys action plan released yesterday everything has been fixed anyway –


The first actions were followed by the 2011–12 Action Plan, which had a broad scope and contributed to improvements across many areas of the system, such as significant reductions in fatal and serious road crashes amongst motorcyclists and high-risk drivers.

We must all be due a refund.

[davereid]

You are taking the piss right? What are you blaming the other two thirds on then?
EDIT - For info, using CAS, which is the best thing we have, it shows that in all single vehicle crashes over the last five years involving mopeds and motorbikes 2073 had the rider at fault, 102 had no fault. Thats 95% by my reckoning and I would suggest much closer to the real figure than 33%. According to the new Safer Journeys action plan released yesterday everything has been fixed anyway –We must all be due a refund.

Yep I was taking the piss.

As I said in my post, I shifted the denominator right back at them by quoting their own figures, but using a denominator of single vehicles crashes when the stats had been compiled for all crashes....

The difference is, when I do it, I says so LOL even if it is in fine print.

But don't forget, the entire debate around who is at fault is misleading.

As I have said before, car drivers are responsible for virtually 100% of car accidents. And no one is surprised by that.

But if you say motorcyclists are responsible for more than half motorcycle accidents, that is apparently supposed to make us say "gee we can't drive"

[Flip]

WTF has MotoNZ actually done in the last two years?

Two fifths of fuck all.

I want my $60 back MotoNZ you useless pricks, I will book myself on a advanced skills course without your help.

[gunnyrob]

Hmm, so they're working on this then:

"Latest council update shows the main focus of 2013 is three more statistical research proposals

But also consideration for:
A riding/driving conditions website Why not ramp up the safer journeys website or something similar?
A riding mentoring initiative Raise awareness of rides like NASS/SASS and IAM and grant subsidies for the organisers so they can obtain resources
Safety awareness initiatives aimed at scooter and moped riders expand Auckland Transports "one layer is safer than none campaign
Public awareness campaign for all road users about safely sharing the road That supercheap auto video was excellent, so fund more like it

Which probably means they are considering how to go about forming a committee to decide on the best research methods to decide on how to research the implementation strategies for the aforementioned considerations" job done

[Katman]

Yep I was taking the piss.

As I said in my post, I shifted the denominator right back at them by quoting their own figures, but using a denominator of single vehicles crashes when the stats had been compiled for all crashes....

The difference is, when I do it, I says so LOL even if it is in fine print.

But don't forget, the entire debate around who is at fault is misleading.

As I have said before, car drivers are responsible for virtually 100% of car accidents. And no one is surprised by that.

But if you say motorcyclists are responsible for more than half motorcycle accidents, that is apparently supposed to make us say "gee we can't drive"

If you're going to 'shift the denominator' at least try to do it in a feasible manner.

Otherwise you just look stupid.

[Ocean1]

I see that the new armco barriers over the Rumutakas are all mounted high on flanged C section steel posts. Pretty much precicely the sort of shit I'd have thought any organisation looking to improve biker safety would have been all over in the standards compliance phase of introdctuon of new product.

Letting it get so far as actual installation is a fucking joke.

[davereid]

If you're going to 'shift the denominator' at least try to do it in a feasible manner.

Otherwise you just look stupid.

Thats the problem around here. Unless you are really really obviously tongue-in-cheek everyone thinks you are serious...

[gunnyrob]

research is valuable - it's a fact!

[MSTRS]

I see that the new armco barriers over the Rumutakas are all mounted high on flanged C section steel posts. Pretty much precicely the sort of shit I'd have thought any organisation looking to improve biker safety would have been all over in the standards compliance phase of introdctuon of new product.

Letting it get so far as actual installation is a fucking joke.


Dear Stephen

I can not believe what I am seeing with the 'new, improved and approved' post design. The wooden posts were bad enough and have killed numerous people, several being people I personally knew.
With reference to photo #1 on this website page http://www.csppacific.co.nz/Gallery.php?productid=nuguard31 I have to ask...Is there a deliberate plot to create more killing and dismembering road furniture and fittings? As if the cheesecutter posts and wires aren't enough, motorcyclists are now faced with what I have drawn and attached.
As a rider of long standing, I am well aware of the need for safety equipment, but I am horrified with what is being employed these days in the name of 'safety'. To hit any type of post is bad news to a crashing rider, but to have an exposed edge like these new posts defies any rational explanation.
As ever, the fix is simple. Will the calls for a bottom rail of some description, such as 'Mototub' used in Europe and Britain to cover the posts, continue to fall on deaf ears? And yes, I understand things like 'cost/benefit ratios' - however, I can only guess at how many kilometers of safety fence/rail posts could be made safer by the amount that one human life is valued at.

I look forward to your response


I sent that to Steven Joyce on April 12, 2010. His reponse was not 'encouraging'. And this fabulous new, friable post continues to be put in on every new or replacement Armco barrier.
What is worse (in some ways) is the posts actually stick up above the W beam - so try sliding along the top or go under. Nasty.
Fucking pricks.

[Katman]

I sent that to Steven Joyce on April 12, 2010. His reponse was not 'encouraging'. And this fabulous new, friable post continues to be put in on every new or replacement Armco barrier.
What is worse (in some ways) is the posts actually stick up above the W beam - so try sliding along the top or go under. Nasty.
Fucking pricks.

Yeah, 'sticking it to the man' hasn't done us jack shit yet.

Perhaps it's time to start looking a bit closer to home.

[Ocean1]

I sent that to Steven Joyce on April 12, 2010. His reponse was not 'encouraging'. And this fabulous new, friable post continues to be put in on every new or replacement Armco barrier.
What is worse (in some ways) is the posts actually stick up above the W beam - so try sliding along the top or go under. Nasty.
Fucking pricks.

I'd be surprised if there wasn't some mechanism in NZ law requiring any govt funded safety initiative to be structured so as to benefit different groups similarly. Fuck knows how you get a specific safety installation actually likely to kill a significant group of taxpayers.

[Ocean1]

Yeah, 'sticking it to the man' hasn't done us jack shit yet.

Perhaps it's time to start looking a bit closer to home.

Yeah, 'cause if you really really pay attention those sharp edged steel posts on the outside of curves routinely doused with diesel won't ever get ya.


Sanctimonious fuckwit.

[Katman]

Yeah, 'cause if you really really pay attention those sharp edged steel posts on the outside of curves routinely doused with diesel won't ever get ya.


Sanctimonious fuckwit.

Do you have trouble staying upright when you're riding next to a WRB?

You should stick to a car.

Shitforbrains.

[Ocean1]

Do you have trouble staying upright when you're riding next to a WRB?

You should stick to a car.

Shitforbrains.

Only on the corners. Why don't you come show me how it's done, arsehole?

[Katman]

Only on the corners. Why don't you come show me how it's done, arsehole?

Do you really need someone to show you how to do it?

[Scuba_Steve]

Do you really need someone to show you how to do it?

I'd like to see you do it too; Keep your bike upright on a corner. I usually have to lean mine.
So I'll bring the popcorn, you bring the bike :corn:

[Katman]

I'd like to see you do it too; Keep your bike upright on a corner. I usually have to lean mine.
So I'll bring the popcorn, you bring the bike :corn:

Does leaning a bike mean sliding it down the road to you?

[Scuba_Steve]

Does leaning a bike mean sliding it down the road to you?

nope, but leaning isn't "upright" either & you claim you can get round corners "upright" I just said I'd like to see that, assuming you're travelling at any decent speed; after all the Rumutakas is 100km/h zone so 10km/h round the corners doesn't cut it.

[davereid]

Does leaning a bike mean sliding it down the road to you?

Lucky that you are such a good rider you will never fall off.

Me, I have managed over 50 years without hurting myself.

But one day I might fall off. Inconsequential on its own.

Id be much happier if my taxes hadn't been used to put shit on the roads that's almost guaranteed to transform my minor mistake into a body shredding experience.

Especially when the same people that are putting the body shredding shit on the road are wringing their hands (as they pull them out of my pocket) and saying "how can you make you safer ?"

[MSTRS]

I'd be surprised if there wasn't some mechanism in NZ law requiring any govt funded safety initiative to be structured so as to benefit different groups similarly. Fuck knows how you get a specific safety installation actually likely to kill a significant group of taxpayers.

NZTA and/or their predecessor LTSA have a policy re roadsides...no-one who makes a mistake deserves to die because of that mistake. Which is why trees etc are removed near the roadside and why barriers are installed on the outside of corners. Which immediately provides the (likely) cause of death for a rider who 'makes a mistake' or whatever. Nice to know we are so important in their scheme of things.

Just as an aside, for those that don't know, the age-old standard Armco wooden posts have killed a lot of riders over the years. It's just that the new metal ones will do it much more efficiently.

[Ocean1]

And yes, I understand things like 'cost/benefit ratios' - however, I can only guess at how many kilometers of safety fence/rail posts could be made safer by the amount that one human life is valued at.


I sent that to Steven Joyce on April 12, 2010. His reponse was not 'encouraging'. And this fabulous new, friable post continues to be put in on every new or replacement Armco barrier.
What is worse (in some ways) is the posts actually stick up above the W beam - so try sliding along the top or go under. Nasty.
Fucking pricks.

Can't help with the cost of armco, other than some bleating in the UK about a cost of 1000 pounds. Oh, and the cost of the steel itself should be under NZ$150/M.

I did come across this t'other day, though, which makes for interesting reading... http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/UTCC%20_Value_of_statistical_life.pdf

So, adding a healthy fudge to the cost of armco itself and an installation cost then a rough guess at an answer to your question might be 6 to 10 kilometers.

[Ocean1]

NZTA and/or their predecessor LTSA have a policy re roadsides...no-one who makes a mistake deserves to die because of that mistake. Which is why trees etc are removed near the roadside and why barriers are installed on the outside of corners. Which immediately provides the (likely) cause of death for a rider who 'makes a mistake' or whatever. Nice to know we are so important in their scheme of things.

They need to cut all those trees down to make the post they plant around the outside of all those corners.

[MSTRS]

Can't help with the cost of armco, other than some bleating in the UK about a cost of 1000 pounds. Oh, and the cost of the steel itself should be under NZ$150/M.

I did come across this t'other day, though, which makes for interesting reading... http://www.transport.govt.nz/research/Documents/UTCC%20_Value_of_statistical_life.pdf

So, adding a healthy fudge to the cost of armco itself and an installation cost then a rough guess at an answer to your question might be 6 to 10 kilometers.
Interesting. Thanks for that.
Not counting cheesecutter down the middle for lefthand bends, roadside barriers on righthanders are the ones that present the greatest risk overall to a rider. Seldom is the barrier length more than several hundred metres in those situations, so that's potentially a lot of corners made safer for the price that one human life is 'valued' at.



They need to cut all those trees down to make the post they plant around the outside of all those corners.

No no, cookie boy. The trees are cut down to stop the unfortunate (and others) from directly impacting them in the event of their leaving the road. And for the sake of clearer views of the surrounds. The timber from said trees is used as fuel at the metal smelter to make the ALL METAL Armco which is then installed to stop people inspecting the surrounds any closer than the immediate roadside. Cos nature is dangerous. Sheesh, I thought everyone knew that.

[Ocean1]

Not counting cheesecutter down the middle for lefthand bends, roadside barriers on righthanders are the ones that present the greatest risk overall to a rider. Seldom is the barrier length more than several hundred metres in those situations, so that's potentially a lot of corners made safer for the price that one human life is 'valued' at.

I'd be substantially less grumpy if they deleted all roadside right hand bend barriers where the only danger on that side is the barrier. There's a few of 'em, and the savings made by not installing them in the first place would have damn near paid for 2nd rails on the rest.

[avgas]

Does leaning a bike mean sliding it down the road to you?
Only if your a cool kid like me.

[Zedder]

NZTA and/or their predecessor LTSA have a policy re roadsides...no-one who makes a mistake deserves to die because of that mistake. Which is why trees etc are removed near the roadside and why barriers are installed on the outside of corners. Which immediately provides the (likely) cause of death for a rider who 'makes a mistake' or whatever. Nice to know we are so important in their scheme of things.

Just as an aside, for those that don't know, the age-old standard Armco wooden posts have killed a lot of riders over the years. It's just that the new metal ones will do it much more efficiently.

What's really poor is there's been extensive research done on the types of road barriers causing motorcyclists to come to grief.

It's not like the info is unavailable and in fact, EuroRap (European Road Assessment programme) put out a position paper in 2008 which has not only been very well received in the UK and Europe but retro fitting of roadside barriers had been started in order to it safer for motorcyclists.

Nothing similar has been initiated here to my knowledge though.

[MSTRS]

I'd be substantially less grumpy if they deleted all roadside right hand bend barriers where the only danger on that side is the barrier. There's a few of 'em, and the savings made by not installing them in the first place would have damn near paid for 2nd rails on the rest.
How true that is.


What's really poor is there's been extensive research done on the types of road barriers causing motorcyclists to come to grief.

It's not like the info is unavailable and in fact, EuroRap (European Road Assessment programme) put out a position paper in 2008 which has not only been very well received in the UK and Europe but retro fitting of roadside barriers had been started in order to it safer for motorcyclists.

Nothing similar has been initiated here to my knowledge though.
To hear a Minister of Transport (Joyce, and Labour's Duynhoven) speak of research, one could be forgiven for believing they live on another planet.
I am convinced that when one of them can not argue with a premise, then 'lack of research' is cited as the reason for not doing what is self-evident.
Joyce even went so far as to tell me that his advice is "a bottom rail would cause cars to ride up and over the Armco, thereby negating the safety aspect of the structure".

[Conquiztador]

Anyone know who got the advertised position as the chair of MOTO-NZ?

[Kickaha]

Joyce even went so far as to tell me that his advice is "a bottom rail would cause cars to ride up and over the Armco, thereby negating the safety aspect of the structure".

Ok I didn't bother translating this but a guy I know had it up on his facebook page
http://www.motociclismo.it/guardrail-assassini-basta-poco-a-renderli-piu-sicuri-moto-54562

I fail to see how something like this could cause a car to " ride up and over the Armco" I cant really see how anything short of a ramp would

[Ocean1]

I fail to see how something like this could cause a car to " ride up and over the Armco" I cant really see how anything short of a ramp would

Could probably make an arguement for it, based on dual armco rails. Be so little in it the numbers probably wouldn't prove anything one way or the other.

Anyway, that's not a second armco rail, it's one of several similar add-ons, mostly made of recycled plastic being fitted to barriers all over Europe to prevent the posts killing bikers. It's much less stiff than a metal rail, so even less likely to cause a car to ride over the barrier.

Besides, if he's worried about traffic escaping over and under barriers he'd be far better looking at the history of such incidents where WRB is installed. Sports cars routinely go under them and anything of any tonnage more or less just ignores it. I passed one WRB breach a few months ago where tyre marks extended a good 3 metres into the opposing lane.

[swbarnett]

tyre marks extended a good 3 metres into the opposing lane.
Was this 3m past the original positioin of the WRB or was there a good meter or two of median first?

WRB are designed to deform up to 3m in either direction. The theory being that this will save the occupents from a sudden stop. In my observations this is totally ignored in most installations; the opposing lane is well within the deformation range.

[Ocean1]

Was this 3m past the original positioin of the WRB or was there a good meter or two of median first?

WRB are designed to deform up to 3m in either direction. The theory being that this will save the occupents from a sudden stop. In my observations this is totally ignored in most installations; the opposing lane is well within the deformation range.

Was a very small medium, and I didn't get out and measure it but the tyre marks reached about half way across the opposing lane. I've read one manufacturer's recommendation of a 7 metre medium for WRB. And while it's energy absorbant properties is what gives the sales idiots something to impress the natives with the obvious issues around the corespondingly wide mediums required just isn't mentioned. Our roads just aren't wide enough to comply with that particular spec', and the cost of widening them completely obliterates the already very slight short term cost advantage WRB haas over the alternatives, so everyone just ignores it.

The fact is the deflection of WRB varies exponentially with any increase of both mass and aproach angle, if WRB is designed for optimum performance for a family sedan at 15 degrees then a 20 ton flatdeck at 90k and 30 degrees is going to ping the posts like toothpicks and stretch the wire so far as to be completely useless. It's depressing when authorities get shit wrong and simply won't be moved from an entrenched position, out comes the usual political defensive methods and any chance of sense goes out the window.

[swbarnett]

It's depressing when authorities get shit wrong and simply won't be moved from an entrenched position, out comes the usual political defensive methods and any chance of sense goes out the window.
Exactly. I've even heard them say that WRBs were put in because there wasn't room for a concrete barrier :facepalm:

[oneofsix]

Exactly. I've even heard them say that WRBs were put in because there wasn't room for a concrete barrier :facepalm:

That was the exact excuse used on SH1 between Pukerua Bay and Paekakariki. Also that they could be easily taken down for emergency access - like that ever happens (the taking down that is).

WTF these thing are meant to deform by 3m! and that is meant to prevent head ons on the stretch of road above?! Boy were the people of Wellington LIED to, no wonder it wasn't save to reinstate the 100k limit after the "safety improvements". Not only were we told the limit was being temporarily lowered until the "safety improvements" to prevent head ons but now you tell me they wont prevent head ons, perhaps the WRB reduces them :oi-grr:

[swbarnett]

perhaps the WRB reduces them :oi-grr:
As far as I can see all that is required in most places to reduce the number of hean-on collisions is those flimsy poles that can be driven over quite safely. The intention is one of psychological deterrant. They'd probably be enough to stop all but the most brain-dead drivers from attempting an overtake on a blind corner.

[oneofsix]

As far as I can see all that is required in most places to reduce the number of hean-on collisions is those flimsy poles that can be driven over quite safely. The intention is one of psychological deterrant. They'd probably be enough to stop all but the most brain-dead drivers from attempting an overtake on a blind corner.

My only problem with that is I have seen them is on Grays Rd in Porirua and not on the double yellow section but on the WHITE line. Also placed on centre line of left hand bends (one way is going to be left hand :laugh:) a target for noobs to fixate on.

Funnily enough the crash that was the major excuse for the WRB on SH1 was a driver dozing off. The lowered limit and removal of the stopping areas has made this more likely.

[Ocean1]

My only problem with that is I have seen them is on Grays Rd

Traffic calming device. Hate them. Make a point of remaining highly aggravated any time I see 'em on principle.

Have to say they're quite robust, takes a good nudge to dislodge 'em.

Apparently.

[rustic101]

That was the exact excuse used on SH1 between Pukerua Bay and Paekakariki. Also that they could be easily taken down for emergency access - like that ever happens (the taking down that is).

WTF these thing are meant to deform by 3m! and that is meant to prevent head ons on the stretch of road above?! Boy were the people of Wellington LIED to, no wonder it wasn't save to reinstate the 100k limit after the "safety improvements". Not only were we told the limit was being temporarily lowered until the "safety improvements" to prevent head ons but now you tell me they wont prevent head ons, perhaps the WRB reduces them :oi-grr:

Since the WRB's have been installed along the Coast Road they have prevented up to 80 potential Head On's, some of which had they not been there would have taken out a number of motorcyclists approaching in the opposite direction. I have yet to see the WRB's flex three metres. I don't know their technical specs so not able to comment but have watched a refrigerated truck and trailer strike and take out 150m section of posts and the encroachment was only around 300mm.

[swbarnett]

Have to say they're quite robust, takes a good nudge to dislodge 'em.

Apparently.
Ran over them after being pushed out of my lane by a large truck and trailer unit on my CB125T in the '80s. Heard the impact but didn't feel it.

[Ocean1]

Since the WRB's have been installed along the Coast Road they have prevented up to 80 potential Head On's, some of which had they not been there would have taken out a number of motorcyclists approaching in the opposite direction.

Up to? Potential?

You mean something's hit the barrier 'prox 80 since they were installed 5 - 6 years ago.

And they've prevented up to exactly the same potential number of head-ons any other barrier design would have done in that time.


I have yet to see the WRB's flex three metres. I don't know their technical specs so not able to comment but have watched a refrigerated truck and trailer strike and take out 150m section of posts and the encroachment was only around 300mm.

I have yet to see a truck take out 150 metres of posts, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. What 150 metres of missing posts does mean is that the wire is then capable of restraining very little, so if that truck encroached just 300mm it certainly wasn't the WRB preventing it going further.

I don't have a problem with barriers in general. Just ones that kill motorcyclists.

[Zedder]

Since the WRB's have been installed along the Coast Road they have prevented up to 80 potential Head On's, some of which had they not been there would have taken out a number of motorcyclists approaching in the opposite direction. I have yet to see the WRB's flex three metres. I don't know their technical specs so not able to comment but have watched a refrigerated truck and trailer strike and take out 150m section of posts and the encroachment was only around 300mm.

The Brefin 4 wire system, which is used in NZ, was tested with a 8000kg truck at 15 degrees approach angle and 80 kmph speed. Results using posts spaced at 3.2 metres, produced a 2.21 metre deflection.

A 2000kg pickup truck at 25 degrees and 100kmph with the same post spacing produced a deflection of 2.4 metres.

[Smifffy]

The question remains: Which individual, or collective group of, riders has benefited from the levy since it was first collected, and how?

Have the stats improved?

For the sake of argument, let's assume the vast majority of riders are fuckwits. Tax the fuckwits. Are there now any less fuckwits? Only the by the number that have been 'taxed off the road' except they're probably still riding anyway.

[Conquiztador]

So here a suggestion...

Most of us tend to agree that MOTO-NZ has not done much for the NZ bike riders. And many would argue that they have done nothing.

Can we do better? How bout if we, the bike riders and users of the roads, put together a "Think-Tank" that came up with say 10 suggestions on how to address the issues in an effective and less time consuming/costly way. Once those 10 suggestions had been aired here on KB and other forums, at meetings, gatherings etc. and we had some feedback, the 10 suggestions would be adjusted if need be. Then packaged nicely and forwarde as a alternative that all/most active riders can agree on. This proposal would be forwarde to all that have something to do with mc riding in NZ. And if we had done our job properly we would hopefully get the buy-in and all/most suggestions would be implemented. MOTO-NZ would be scarpped, the money they have in their coffers given back to riders in one form or another and the $30 fee would be gone.

Yes, I paint a very simple picture here. But is it really that hard? When I read through posts that have been posted on KB re this subject you could forgive me for thinking that here between us KB's we have the solution.

Let's take charge and not be dictated to by ones we do not respect.

Any takers???

[Berries]

Any takers???
Don't crash.




Next.

[Conquiztador]

Don't crash.




Next.


A start. Somehow I think we need more meat on the bones here... But I suppose we need to to start somewhere. So, what is the best suggestion to achieve that? (The "Don't crash").

We could propose that all bikes are removed from the roads. That would solve it and achieve the "don't crash". But somehow I think that might not be the solution... So we need to come up with a bunch of suggestions on how to reduce/eliminate crashes by bikers.

Well, I actually think we already have the solutions. But perhaps the idea here would be to list them??

[rustic101]

Up to? Potential?

You mean something's hit the barrier 'prox 80 since they were installed 5 - 6 years ago.

And they've prevented up to exactly the same potential number of head-ons any other barrier design would have done in that time.

In a nut shell yes. In fact its 80 strikes, not sure of the number of persons in each vehicle who could have been injured or killed.

I've had mates fall from the bottom rung of ladders and kill themselves - Should we ban ladders?

Yes WRB are a little more unforgiving than possibly other barrier types. However if your bike is mechanically sound, you ride to the conditions, ride with the right behaviours and wear adequate gear then I see no problem. I'm very comfortable riding next to them every day.

I'm seeking an argument BTW, just stating fact around what I see and also my opinion in the last para.

[Berries]

A start. Somehow I think we need more meat on the bones here... But I suppose we need to to start somewhere. So, what is the best suggestion to achieve that? (The "Don't crash").
It is fairly simple IMO. Don't ride beyond the capabilities of your bike or your brain. That would solve at least 75% of all crashes involving bikes.


We could propose that all bikes are removed from the roads. That would solve it and achieve the "don't crash". But somehow I think that might not be the solution..
Oh, it probably is. Two wheels, inherently unstable, stupid power to weight ratios. When you sit back and look at it logically there is no real point to motorbikes other than as urban commuters in very large cities.

[MSTRS]

Wash your filthy mouth, you wowser you.

[Ocean1]

In a nut shell yes. In fact its 80 strikes, not sure of the number of persons in each vehicle who could have been injured or killed.

I've had mates fall from the bottom rung of ladders and kill themselves - Should we ban ladders?

Yes WRB are a little more unforgiving than possibly other barrier types. However if your bike is mechanically sound, you ride to the conditions, ride with the right behaviours and wear adequate gear then I see no problem. I'm very comfortable riding next to them every day.

I'm seeking an argument BTW, just stating fact around what I see and also my opinion in the last para.

In fact ladders have already been banned from many work-sites, but how dangerous ladders are is irrelevant, nobody's being required to use them in spite of any danger in doing so.

WRB is an option no less expensive than other designs, and apparently no more effective. And yet, in spite of the fact that they're supposedly a safety device they represent a serious danger to a significant group of road users.

And you don't have a problem with that? It doesn't that strike you as massively inappropriate of public funds, at the very least?

NZTA have for some time had a policy of ensuring road safety projects produce an outcome that minimises the risk to accident victims regardless of cause. The preamble to that initiative goes: "Nobody should die because they made a simple mistake". So even if you don't see the problem represented by unsafe road furnature the authority in charge of road safety do.

Motorcyclists, apparently fall outside that policy, even very comfortable ones. That's just wrong.

[swbarnett]

a significant group of road users.
I think this is the problem. NZTA (and some bikers it seems) don't consider us "significant".

[Scuba_Steve]

I think this is the problem. NZTA (and some bikers it seems) don't consider us "significant".

NZTA in my experience don't consider motorists significant, bar the last year where it seems they've finally got someone there who actually uses a vehicle

[Bald Eagle]

NZTA in my experience don't consider motorists significant, bar the last year where it seems they've finally got someone there who actually uses a vehicle

I met a local govt transport consultant recently who was an import from mother england and did not have any form license and was a career pedestrian - are we surprised there pokicies dont consider road users rofl

[Big Dave]

To dream..the impossible dream...to etc etc.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-01/motorcycle-roads-get-safety-upgrades/4603208

[oneofsix]

To dream..the impossible dream...to etc etc.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-01/motorcycle-roads-get-safety-upgrades/4603208

Yet another reason to jump the ditch.

[Big Dave]

Yet another reason to jump the ditch.


Quality of recreational motorcycling isn't a valid reason though.

It's mainly a wide, flat land and as we know, the best riding is all about mountains and valleys.

[oneofsix]

Quality of recreational motorcycling isn't a valid reason though.

It's mainly a wide, flat land and as we know, the best riding is all about mountains and valleys.

That someone in authority cares is and it is still one the the greatest motorcycling countries according to Henry Cole. But don't panic, I ain't coming across any time soon. It is just another straw on the pile, almost as if the Aussies have seen a tourist potential in Henry Cole's review and our lot are talking about learning mandarin instead
"Prime Minister John Key wants more students to consider learning Mandarin" http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10876524

[Big Dave]

Yeah. Depends where on the continent you live.

I was meaning the Hunter Valley roads in the article. This is not far off the Putty Road.

281162

Diamond Geezer is Henry. I interviewed him in Akl.

[Scuba_Steve]

I met a local govt transport consultant recently who was an import from mother england and did not have any form license and was a career pedestrian - are we surprised there pokicies dont consider road users rofl

Well if he's a pedestrian, the least he could do is stop the idiots from placing zebra crossings on corners. That'd go a decent way towards the safety of everyone

[Flip]

I am just about to pay Motonz another $30, wtf have I got for it?

[James Deuce]

I am just about to pay Motonz another $30, wtf have I got for it?
Anal warts?

[Smifffy]

I am just about to pay Motonz another $30, wtf have I got for it?

That feeling that now the govt is looking out for your safety? Bawahahahaahaahaaaaahaa

[jimbo_on_travels]

This is a re-post I did from Wellington Riders FB page a couple of days ago based on a BRONZ meeting last Wednesday night (19/06) that included representation from Moto NZ, as well the local district police commander for Wellington region.

Anyway feel free to comment; this was the first time Moto NZ reached out to the local community and thanks to Byron and Kim for hosting through BRONZ. They work hard behind the scenes to protect your rights as a motorcyclist. (Their site is http://www.bronzwellington.org.nz/)


MOTO NZ

Speaker - Dave of e-Riders came along and represented Moto NZ for the evening.

Great discussion amongst all who attended.

Why should you care? Because $30 of your rego goes to them. They are interested in YOUR ideas on how to spend it to benefit us out on the road. They are in the process of updating a form to be available on their website to make it easier to use.

The money is spent in conjunction with ACC in a complex relationship between several govt departments. They have so far collected $millions and have only allocated $50k in actual project spend.

1) LED Light Kit - Dave is of the opinion that hi-vis vests is not going to bring accidents down. However developing a simple enough and easy to use LED light kit that you can retrofit to any bike is one idea on how to make us more visible to other road users. Still in planning stage, but looking promising.

2) Stats analysis on crashes - primarily looking at road safety e.g. camber, road design and how this affects us (but not other road users). Dave was pretty instrumental in getting motorcyclists recognised as being road users as well as everyone else. He also stated that we're not 17x(?) times more at risk, but its our vulnerability that is the issue and how we manage this from a Govt perspective.

3) Gravel and Sheep were brought up in the discussion (surprise!). Moto NZ / NZTA(?) working on an app for smart phones called 'Thunder Maps' that allows anyone to raise a ticket re: road hazards. This is hopefully going to be tuned so that Motorcyclists can have more say on what is affecting them. I hate gravel. I hate sheep even more - hope to use this when either of the two get in my way :)

4) For reporting road issues Look up your local 'Road Controlling Authority'; for Wellington region, use this link (http://www.gw.govt.nz/reporting-road-issues/)

5) Subsidised rider courses are set to continue and are discounted by the ACC.


Hopefully this isn't the last Moto NZ "reachout" - I sincerely hope that they continue to consult with us all in the future.

THE POLICE

The local district commander came along and told us that Upper Hutt Council have been given a bunch of money from the ACC re: the amount of crashes happening on the Rimutakas last year.

Because of this I'd expect much more of a police presence around the hill in the run-up to the 'silly season' months in Spring /Summer time.

He focussed primarily on talking about the importance of pre - rider briefings & mentoring on group rides. They have no website / suggestion box as yet, but I'd hope that they would be working on it.

They also have a plan to target riders to fill out questionnaires to gather data on how to prevent so many accidents from happening on the hill. Riders would receive a free coffee voucher for completing the survey. A suggestion was made that they should target different demographics, different types of bikes, and on different days to get a more complete picture of how we all collectively go about riding on the hill. Hopefully they take this on board.

[Bassmatt]

This is a re-post I did from Wellington Riders FB page a couple of days ago based on a BRONZ meeting last Wednesday night (19/06) that included representation from Moto NZ, as well the local district police commander for Wellington region.

Anyway feel free to comment; this was the first time Moto NZ reached out to the local community and thanks to Byron and Kim for hosting through BRONZ. They work hard behind the scenes to protect your rights as a motorcyclist. (Their site is http://www.bronzwellington.org.nz/)


MOTO NZ

Speaker - Dave of e-Riders came along and represented Moto NZ for the evening.

Great discussion amongst all who attended.

Why should you care? Because $30 of your rego goes to them. They are interested in YOUR ideas on how to spend it to benefit us out on the road. They are in the process of updating a form to be available on their website to make it easier to use.

The money is spent in conjunction with ACC in a complex relationship between several govt departments. They have so far collected $millions and have only allocated $50k in actual project spend.

1) LED Light Kit - Dave is of the opinion that hi-vis vests is not going to bring accidents down. However developing a simple enough and easy to use LED light kit that you can retrofit to any bike is one idea on how to make us more visible to other road users. Still in planning stage, but looking promising.

2) Stats analysis on crashes - primarily looking at road safety e.g. camber, road design and how this affects us (but not other road users). Dave was pretty instrumental in getting motorcyclists recognised as being road users as well as everyone else. He also stated that we're not 17x(?) times more at risk, but its our vulnerability that is the issue and how we manage this from a Govt perspective.

3) Gravel and Sheep were brought up in the discussion (surprise!). Moto NZ / NZTA(?) working on an app for smart phones called 'Thunder Maps' that allows anyone to raise a ticket re: road hazards. This is hopefully going to be tuned so that Motorcyclists can have more say on what is affecting them. I hate gravel. I hate sheep even more - hope to use this when either of the two get in my way :)

4) For reporting road issues Look up your local 'Road Controlling Authority'; for Wellington region, use this link (http://www.gw.govt.nz/reporting-road-issues/)

5) Subsidised rider courses are set to continue and are discounted by the ACC.


Hopefully this isn't the last Moto NZ "reachout" - I sincerely hope that they continue to consult with us all in the future.

.

Gee it must have taken all of 5 mins for them to come up with those ideas. Why does a LED kit need to be "developed" there are heaps of options on the market already.

[Flip]

Thats management talk for anal warts.

I want my $90 tax back you thieving w@nkers.

[Big Dave]

Thats management talk for anal warts.

I want my $90 tax back you thieving w@nkers.

If it's any help, it's tax money you would have had to pay anyway. It isn't an additional fee - it was part of the tax that was earmarked. And it seemed like a win at the time.

What they should do is add the interest accrued, but then I might flap my wings and fly to the moon too.

[oneofsix]

Gee it must have taken all of 5 mins for them to come up with those ideas. Why does a LED kit need to be "developed" there are heaps of options on the market already.

Having been at the meeting I would think Dave would agree with you. One of the problems they have is that your money can't be invested by them and ACC can't spend it with out their recommendation. They have to spend it on stuff no on else is doing for motorcyclists and it also has to be on road registered motorcyclists. Spending the money has to be guided by ACC criteria, Govt rule, but of course ACC don't have a criteria for our money, they have shit around interfacing with Govt dept etc but not us.

ACC being a govt dept you can't just say we will use off the shelf stuff unless you first specify which ones and why those ones. This is your "kit development", they wont be building their own kit. :facepalm: The interesting bit was why he choose LEDs or riding lights over hi-vis. The riding lights giving a better indication of distance and speed than the centralized main light(s), the distance between the side lights would, I suspect, have to be a condition of the kits.

[Berries]

Go on then, which member of KB is this?

motonz-welcomes-mark-gilbert-as-new-chair/ (http://motonz.org.nz/gareth-morgan-resigns-as-chair-of-council/motonz-welcomes-mark-gilbert-as-new-chair/)

[jimbo_on_travels]

He doesn't ride a bike apparently :/

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

[avgas]

Thats management talk for anal warts.
I want my $90 tax back you thieving w@nkers.
I think the smartest move would be that if the cops turned a blind-eye to rego.
For once I would like one govt department to go against another OUTSIDE the beehive. Like the good ol' days.

[avgas]

They have to spend it on stuff no on else is doing for motorcyclists.
I'm sorry but this is BS.
They are an advisory committee. The job of an advisory committee or consultant is to place the suggestions forward for funding, and advise at proposed outcomes. Suggestions CAN tie in to collaborated ideas, or can utilised/fund/back existing initiatives - if it aligns with the ideals of the committee. I should know I'm on a few.

They are not to run this as an R&D department. There is no requirement for them to develop SHIT. As I am also involved in these. There is a very clear distinction between the 2. One advise on existing solutions, one develops new ones.
McSAC may have changed their name - but their primary function is to advise, not develop new initiatives.

[Howie]

MOTO NZ

Speaker - Dave of e-Riders came along and represented Moto NZ for the evening.



1) LED Light Kit - Dave is of the opinion that hi-vis vests is not going to bring accidents down. However developing a simple enough and easy to use LED light kit that you can retrofit to any bike is one idea on how to make us more visible to other road users. Still in planning stage, but looking promising.

Interesting, I know in my case that sounds expensive. 1, I am already near the maximum wattage for my bikes output by adding heated grips, GPS Hardwired etc. I would also need to guard the lenses the same as my headlight is due to riding a lot of Gravel roads.





3) Gravel and Sheep were brought up in the discussion (surprise!). I hate gravel. I hate sheep even more - hope to use this when either of the two get in my way :)

I love gravel, some of best places to go in NZ are down a mix of sealed and Gravel roads. The sheep/ cattle / Deer one is interesting. The best answer would be to get Farmers to maintain the fences properly. It is interesting that you hardly ever see wandering stock on the main highways, yet some rural areas, and secondary roads you can almost guarantee running into some wandering stock somewhere.




5) Subsidised rider courses are set to continue and are discounted by the ACC.


Hopefully this isn't the last Moto NZ "reachout" - I sincerely hope that they continue to consult with us all in the future.

[/QUOTE]

Good to hear, although I am yet to see any subsidised courses that would relate to the sort of riding I do.





The riding lights giving a better indication of distance and speed than the centralized main light(s), the distance between the side lights would, I suspect, have to be a condition of the kits.

The distance between, and how diffused the light are both needed. Unfortunately if the distance between is large it well make them very vulnerable to breakage from minor drops which could make it expensive for learners and adventure bike riders. So hopefully some common sense well prevail

[jellywrestler]

I've had mates fall from the bottom rung of ladders and kill themselves - Should we ban ladders?

how many????

[p.dath]

I suspect we'll get 10 years down the road and the fund will be mostly un-touched. Then the tricky bit will be what do do with the build up of all of those funds.

I wonder if it would be enough to fund 12 months of rego for every rider.

[Smifffy]

I suspect we'll get 10 years down the road and the fund will be mostly un-touched. Then the tricky bit will be what do do with the build up of all of those funds.

I wonder if it would be enough to fund 12 months of rego for every rider.

Nothing tricky about it. Either straight into the slush fund, or a war fund against bikers or simply spend it on junkets for the committee.

[Conquiztador]

Nothing tricky about it. Either straight into the slush fund, or a war fund against bikers or simply spend it on junkets for the committee.
I must have missed the questioner re what bikers want to be done with the money...

[MSTRS]

I must have missed the questioner re what bikers want to be done with the money...

Oh - you mean 'consultation' ??

BWHAHAHAHA

I no longer care about that, as I have seceded from the union.

[oneofsix]

I must have missed the questioner re what bikers want to be done with the money...

That would be the MOTONZ website which will be true to the typical government consultation process in that it will have a place for suggestions -


Oh - you mean 'consultation' ??

BWHAHAHAHA

I no longer care about that, as I have seceded from the union.

but as per typical government consultation processes no way to process the feed back. :laugh:
You could join the rebels but ...