Stuff.co.nz Blackspots database

[paturoa]

Stuff have gone live with an interactive online tool for blackspots. http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/blackspots

Interestingly you can download a csv file and do interesting pivot tables in excel. I'm not sure what the Most Vunerable field actually means (suspect I'll have to read the detail)

Anyway have a look at this data which was quite easy to generate:


<tbody>
most-vunerable
motor cyclist










Row Labels
Sum of deaths
Sum of serious
Sum of minor


a single vehicle

45
479
23


bend-lost control/head on
38
312
17


miscellaneous
0
6
0


overtaking
0
12
0


rear end/obstruction
2
55
1


straight-lost control/head on
5
94
5


multi vehicle

77
622
86


bend-lost control/head on
27
81
18


crossing/turning
30
319
28


miscellaneous
1
2
0


overtaking
7
66
13


rear end/obstruction
9
131
19


straight-lost control/head on
3
23
8


Grand Total

122
1101
109


</tbody>


Looks like overtaking is the way! Seriously add together the bends and crossing / turning and the 80 / 20 rule is starting to show out. What was the cause of the crash is'nt really there.

[Hitcher]

Gotta love meaningless data. Was the moon in the seventh house and did Jupiter align with Mars?

[FJRider]

Black spots are where idiots crash.

[Brian d marge]

Well it does give a clue to how you will meet said idiots

Stephen

[ellipsis]

...a pirate is somewhat freaked by 'the black spot' too, I think...I don't really know any real pirates so I can't verify this either...yet again...

[paturoa]

Gotta love meaningless data. Was the moon in the seventh house and did Jupiter align with Mars?

No data is meaningless (assuming accuracy), it is the value / relevance of it and how we get get information from it that you can love!

F'instance (like that one?), if you'd asked me to guess the spread of single vehicle bins, I would have guessed 90% or more, were going to be corners rather than 67%.

[paturoa]

Black spots are where idiots crash.

Yes for single vehicle, and I suspect that we'd debate the idiot ratio for multi vehicle bins.

[paturoa]

...a pirate is somewhat freaked by 'the black spot' too, I think...I don't really know any real pirates so I can't verify this either...yet again...

Rrrrrrghhhh.

[paturoa]

Gotta love meaningless data. Was the moon in the seventh house and did Jupiter align with Mars?

There is a nice stretch of wide, straight down hill road locally where the speed camera vans regularly collect some serious revenue! Looking at the map I can see two nearby serious injury prangs, one at an intersection and the other car vs pedestrian. However when I look at other parts of the map in the general there are areas with more prangs that I've never seen a speed camera vans.

[rastuscat]

Causes of crashes can be analyzed to establish factors.

Gross factors can be categorized as behavioral or locational.

E.g. A long straight road with a hill crest leading to a cliff can easily be identified as a crash waiting to happen. It's clearly locational. On the other hand, a driver turns right across the path of an oncoming vehicle on a clear day with clear sight lines, this is a behavioral issue.

The two main categories of bike crashes are
Crossing and turning
Loss of control on a bend


Of course there are others, but these make up the vast majority.

The trouble with the crossing and turning stat is that it doesn't show whether it was the biker or the car driver was the one not giving way. It's just a gross stat. We can assume its the car drivers, coz we are bikers, but it's not certain.

Loss of control on a bend, well, call it too fast, poor braking, poor entry line, weight movement, call it what you like, it happens.

The one factor FOR FREE RIGHT NOW that I can control is my own riding. It's one thing that influences either locational crashes or behavioral crashes. Riding defensively reduces my chances of being involved in either category. Doesn't eliminate it, reduces my chances.

Of course, if I'm going to have a crash I'm better off wearing decent gear. Given that I can't predict when a crash is going to happen, I try to wear good gear all the time. Folk in Christchurch learned that it's better to have insurance BEFORE the earthquake.

Just a thought.

[paturoa]

Folk in Christchurch learned that it's better to have insurance BEFORE the earthquake.

Just a thought.

A good way of putting it for ATGATT. For the crash stats, it extends to how we ride too.

[Hitcher]

A good way of putting it for ATGATT.

Really? ATGATT can only be proveable if accident trials are set up where exactly the same circumstances unfold for riders wearing varying types and qualities of "protective" equipment.

Fact: Motorcyclists will have accidents that put their health at risk.
Fact: Protective equipment can help mitigate the severity or effects of motorcycle accidents.
Fact: Useful protective equipment should remain connected to a rider in a way that does not make it harmful (e.g. securely fitted helmet; securely fitted boots; skin covered by material that isn't frivolously abradable)

It is at that point that I depart from the ATGATTers, many of whom believe:

Protective equipment can reduce motorcycle accidents (e.g. fluoro vests). Clearly it cannot, and any overconfidence generated is in itself dangerous.
The more protective equipment that's worn the safer a rider will be (e.g. armour; back protectors; only leather; neck braces; airbag jackets). These views are a bit like those Facebook stories about friends of friends who had their MS cured by stopping drinking products containing aspartame; or how chemtrails released by governments from high-flying aircraft subjugate the masses beneath. Unscientific, unprovable nonsense.


Riders should decide what's appropriate for them, bearing in mind the facts.

I am a supporter of religious freedom. ATGATTERs can believe whatever they want but should not claim to be the holders of The Truth.

[Paul in NZ]

I just thought I'd avoid black spots - they are obviously as slippery as a vasolined manhole cover after a diesel spill. Fotunately all my spot are red and throbbing...

[paturoa]

Really? ATGATT can only be proveable if accident trials are set up where exactly the same circumstances unfold for riders wearing varying types and qualities of "protective" equipment.

Fact: Motorcyclists will have accidents that put their health at risk.
Fact: Protective equipment can help mitigate the severity or effects of motorcycle accidents.
Fact: Useful protective equipment should remain connected to a rider in a way that does not make it harmful (e.g. securely fitted helmet; securely fitted boots; skin covered by material that isn't frivolously abradable)

It is at that point that I depart from the ATGATTers, many of whom believe:

Protective equipment can reduce motorcycle accidents (e.g. fluoro vests). Clearly it cannot, and any overconfidence generated is in itself dangerous.
The more protective equipment that's worn the safer a rider will be (e.g. armour; back protectors; only leather; neck braces; airbag jackets). These views are a bit like those Facebook stories about friends of friends who had their MS cured by stopping drinking products containing aspartame; or how chemtrails released by governments from high-flying aircraft subjugate the masses beneath. Unscientific, unprovable nonsense.


Riders should decide what's appropriate for them, bearing in mind the facts.

I am a supporter of religious freedom. ATGATTERs can believe whatever they want but should not claim to be the holders of The Truth.

Yes really.

Not sure how or why you've included hi-vis as ATGATT. I don't consider it protective gear, any more than say riding with your headlight on. These are preventative measures.

Oh a new acronym ATPMATT! The last time I looked, having insurance doesn't prevent earthquakes. However playing the numbers game there will be a number of bins that are avoided or reduced in severity because of hi-vis. Probably bugger all though.


And trolling right back at you. I agree ATTGATTers can't claim to be the holders of The Truth, any more than you can :facepalm:

[FJRider]

Yes for single vehicle, and I suspect that we'd debate the idiot ratio for multi vehicle bins.

I would guess at least ONE idiot is involved in each of those too ... :facepalm:

[FJRider]

A good way of putting it for ATGATT. For the crash stats, it extends to how we ride too.

It depends a lot on circumstance ... as there are times when insurance and ATGATT aren't worth a pinch of shit.

In most cases ... you should be better off with both .... But that is not always the case.

[rastuscat]

The last time I looked, having insurance doesn't prevent earthquakes.

Entirely correct. Equally, wearing ATGATT won't prevent crashes.

However, having insurance when an earthquake rogers your house prevents financial ruin (found THAT out), and wearing ATGATT when a crash happens prevents as many injuries as it can.

Better insurance policies give better protection. Better gear does too.

Nothing can totally prevent injury in the event of a nasty bin, but it's good idea to wear good gear, all the time when riding.

Dismounting soapbox.

[ellipsis]

Dismounting soapbox.


...were you wearing hi-vis, steel caps, a helmet and use a restraining line while up there...I bloody well hope so...you are part of the show tomorrow and we dont want any accidents barring your presence..