Riders dropping, says poll

[thepom]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11283273

Stroombergen's report — thought to be the first to analyse the combined role of vehicles, roads and drivers on the road toll — concluded that more than 80 per cent of the fall could be explained by long-term trends. Of this, 45 per cent was due to safer cars and fewer motorcycles, 19 per cent was due to better roads and only 36 per cent was due to the driver behaviour factors, such as road safety advertising, breath testing and lower speed, which had received so much political attention for decades.

Matthew-Wilson says the same problem applies to the speeding campaign, as 80 per cent of the road toll occurs below the speed limit. The killers, he says, are the extreme speedsters who ignore road safety messages, not your law-abiding middle-class drivers who tend to get caught on holiday weekends.

[James Deuce]

your law-abiding middle-class drivers

Where the fuck does one find those? The only law they pay attention to is speed. Everything else gets ignored. They're a much bigger threat than the "extreme speedsters".

Also, I doubt rider numbers are dropping. Rego numbers have dropped. There will be a significant gap betwixt rego figures and rider figures. This is just the usual massaging numbers to fit the expected outcome.

[Maha]

Polls are not worth shit to the masses, only to those who want believe what they are reading/told, and to those who unlawfully think they are contributing to society by taking part in said polls.

[Katman]

Polls are not worth shit to the masses, only to those who want believe what they are reading/told, and to those who unlawfully think they are contributing to society by taking part in said polls.

'Unlawfully'?

[FJRider]

'Unlawfully'?

Stupidly he means .... same thing though ... ;)

[Maha]

'Unlawfully'?

Yes, it's an adverb like bullshitfully.

[R650R]

The bulk of that article is clive Mathew Wilson quotes, WTF these lazy journalists keep on using him as an 'expert' when all he's done is write a book about finicky car faults... Never take anything seriously in n article where he is quoted.
Yep you can twist the stats every which way, one thing not mentioned when they comparing to nearly 20 years ago is the massive traffic congestion. No matter how much you want to out of frustration you just cant kill yourself when stuck in traffic.
And as for better cars, seems to be an odd claim when at same time they moan how old the vehicle fleet is.
What of the 50000 people a year leaving to work in aussie, surely there's a lot of go getter I cant wait risk takers in that demographic who might have crashed if still here???
Really the main drop is surely congestion and also reduced journeys due to the massive economic recession over last few years...
No mention of safer trucks either, there's a lot of units out there now running disc brakes and EBS and also front under-run protection (moulded into bumpers) that stops most cars from going completely under the front in head on...

[Ocean1]

This is just the usual massaging numbers to fit the expected outcome.

Perhaps not. Most such data presented for general consumption is pretty obviously spun to suit the source, and that's usually pretty obvious due to fucking huge holes in the data set. But this:


Stroombergen's report — thought to be the first to analyse the combined role of vehicles, roads and drivers on the road toll

Suggests the data may just possibly have come from a wide enough range of sources to actually come close to be worth believing.

Which, let's face it is a fucking huge problem. Why is it that this is the first such analysis? Why should the usual suspects get to present corrupt, insultingly obviously tweeked data as impartial, scientifically valid reports without the detailed, equally reported rebuttal they deserve?

Rhetorical question is rhetorical.

[Big Dog]

Those combined stats, drop in rider numbers and no meaningful drop in road toll means more cagers are killing themselves in their safer cars at their lower speeds.


Darwin?


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[Voltaire]

Expert.....

I 'd go out on a limb and say he's not a motorcycle fan....but may be a fan of 70's Glam Rock.:facepalm:

http://laudafinem.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/screen-shot-2013-07-22-at-4-55-02-pm.png?w=1204&h=1068

http://www.dogandlemon.com/media/General%20Comments%20PDF/The%20Emperors%20New%20Car.pdf?page=15

[Berries]

I 'd go out on a limb and say he's not a motorcycle fan....but may be a fan of 70's Glam Rock.:facepalm:
Get out of here. His head is on upside down.

[caspernz]

Clive Mathew Wilson may well be a plonker, but he's making money out of something while we're giggling about his outdated appearance...

Maybe I've spent too much time out trucking and biking, but that survey/poll article is just a yawn :nya:

[Voltaire]

Clive Mathew Wilson may well be a plonker, but he's making money out of something while we're giggling about his outdated appearance...

Maybe I've spent too much time out trucking and biking, but that survey/poll article is just a yawn :nya:

For sure, Health and Safety is going to be a money spinner as you can't really say no.

It would be pretty easy I think for the Govt to just put a huge tax on motorcycles and watch them slowly fade away...who would stop them....oh hang on they already have.

He's got some Hipster basics going on....

[James Deuce]

He's got some Hipster basics going on....
Like the car he owned when he started the Dog & Lemon Guide. A Hindustan Ambassador.

[James Deuce]

Perhaps not. Most such data presented for general consumption is pretty obviously spun to suit the source, and that's usually pretty obvious due to fucking huge holes in the data set. But this:

Suggests the data may just possibly have come from a wide enough range of sources to actually come close to be worth believing.



The basic issue I have with the data set is that it isnt comparable to anything used previously. Only sections of it used in isolation against previous methods.The conclusions drawn from it are just made up.

[Daffyd]

The bulk of that article is clive Mathew Wilson quotes, WTF these lazy journalists keep on using him as an 'expert' when all he's done is write a book about finicky car faults... Never take anything seriously in n article where he is quoted.


Yes, the man's a pillock!

[Ocean1]

The basic issue I have with the data set is that it isnt comparable to anything used previously. Only sections of it used in isolation against previous methods.The conclusions drawn from it are just made up.

I haven't read the report. Just the article. Which did quote Stroombergen saying that he can't explain half of the dramatic fall in deaths.

And frankly I don't have a problem with a change in measurement methodology from one that only ever produces results that NZTA/ACC/ et al want to one that for the first time actually uses the one data string you'd think was absolutely most relevant: that fatalities in NZ have been plummeting over the last couple of decades, in spite of huge increases in road miles. Nor do I think it's incorrect in tentatively suggesting that fuck all of that improvement has been associated with behavioural or cultural changes.

My point was why is it only now that someone's actually attempted to analyse cause, using most of the relevant information rather than simply babble on about how the road toll is simply awful and is all caused by excess speed? So when a professional statistician comes up with data roughly describing the road accident landscape and identifies indications of causal links that sure as fuck sound like something most of us might recognise from what we see every day then you have to ask why those official entities tasked with improving road safety haven't done exactly that long before now.

Maybe the fed's do know it all. Maybe this: "In 2011 the road toll dropped by almost a quarter (from 375 to 284 deaths), prompting a series of Ministry of Transport investigations into what was going right." taught them everything there was to know. Maybe they just didn't tell us because it'd demonstrate their policies were inadequate. Or pointless.

But I don't think so. The simplistic speed kills policies haven't changed, so I don't believe they suddenly commissioned an actually viable analysis which might contradict their traditional mantra. Nor has the ridiculous growth of road signage sprouting up on the outside of every fucking corner in the country slowed, having begun with those most likely to see a bike needing exactly that escape. No sudden evidence of any such common sense at all. Nothing that hints that improvements are needed in anything other than velocity.

[Voltaire]

The road toll is deaths, would less deaths be attributed partly to the improvements in car safety, emergency services and medical advances ?

[Ocean1]

The road toll is deaths, would less deaths be attributed partly to the improvements in car safety, emergency services and medical advances ?

In the current climate of politicisation it's not possible to know.

In my opinion they're likely to be improvements #1, #2 and #3, in roughly that order.

[TheDemonLord]

I thought one part of the article was particularly interesting - the section where it talked (for about 2 lines) about how improvements in roads have helped the road toll....

Could it be that all our Major single lane Arterial routes with F-All passing lanes to the rest of the country need to be updated to dual lane carriageways with barriers in the middle?


Nah - its Speed

Speed Kills

Amidoingitrite?