A safety framework for discussing motorcycle safety

[MrKiwi]

As some of you will know, I’ve done my stint on the Motorcycle Safety Advisory Council. Three and half years. Did I achieve anything during that time? I suspect that will be a moot point, but I persevered for two appointment terms with my reasons stated in other threads on this website. Two areas of work that stood out for me, were making our roads motorcycle friendly (a long term project that needed to start) and the research around conspicuity, something I personally took a lot of interest in.

About two years ago, I began working fulltime in the motor industry representing the views of the new vehicle sector (cars, truck and motorbikes). In this role I have been giving some thought to how we advocate a better outcome for motorcyclists on our roads. At the risk of teaching you how to suck eggs (not my intention) we all know our roads are not always a safe place, the policy bias of officials is skewed towards cars and trucks and certain government agencies would rather see less of us on our roads.

Government agencies have their own framework for thinking about motorcyclists. I want to change that and develop a strategic framework so I stick to my knitting when lobbying. After reviewing a number of documents from around the world (particularly informed by a recent publication of the International Motorcycling Manufactures Association), I’m leaning towards the following:
· Public Policy Considerations – instead of officials thinking motorcycling is a risky mode to have less of, officials and policy makers should recognise that motorcycles (mopeds, scooters, motorbikes) are a key mode of transport which fulfils a number of important and diverse roles. As such they should be integrated into policies and initiatives aimed at creating a safer environment for riders and addressing vulnerabilities that we face.
· Training for riders and awareness raising among other road users – in road safety this is known as human factors, and it has been shown to be the most critical in accidents. Pre and post licence training for motorcycle riders is important. But it should not stop there, it is crucial that other road users have an appreciation of the dangers of misjudging the speed or behaviour of a rider, including the failure to see an oncoming rider. This should be incorporated into training for all road users and it should be a part of obtaining a drivers licence.
· Infrastructure suited to Safer Motorcycling – New Zealand roads are designed and built primarily for trucks and cars. Motorcyclists, until recently, have not had a look in! All road controlling authorities (NZTA and local government) should in particular pay attention to the needs of motorcyclists in road design, construction, repairs, and maintenance.
· Technology Advances – Manufacturers are committed to on-going research into and development of safer motorcycle technologies and safety devices.

It is also my view that government agencies should take a more integrated approach to stakeholder engagement, move towards an accurate and harmonised data collection process and recognise NZ’s unique characteristics (ie not all international strategies can, or should, be imported into NZ without modification).

OK, now for your views – good, bad and the ugly. What am I missing?

[Akzle]

ban cars .

-edit-
oh yes, and ban "safety regulatory framework" bullshit, because that shit doesn't achieve any shit except getting some old white cunts paid, and if there's any people that don't need to be paid, it's old white cunts.
in fact, ban old white cunts.

[Bald Eagle]

Unless the political masters of the policy makers change their bias nothing will change. They determine the policy objectives.

Sent from my LG-P768 using Tapatalk

[R650R]

Your missing the DGAF factor of most motorists. From early years as a Fish and chip delivery rider, M/C commuter and 15 years of trucking about 90% of the people that pull out in front of you or drift across the centre aren't paying any attention or didn't even look to start with.
So I'm big on the training aspect but instead of fancy lane positioning nonsense keep it pure and simple. Having a gameplan when vehicle x fails to give way is the important thing. Teach people to think like this then it becomes pure instinct when things go south.
And infrastructure, remove redesign things to be rounded and frangible rather than square edges. Tempted to write to transit about the latest young death down here. Was car running off roading striking culvert and rolling/flying across road. now its only a matter of money that those precast culverts aren't designed and installed in a different way. When a vehicle goes off road for whatever reason its bound to bounce off that in an unpredictable fashion into the path of others. They've taken over the roll of population control that powerpoles used to have.
This nation needs more designated rest areas for all road users too, but simple things like including a tap so riders can wash visors mid journey etc and a sheltered area to get out of the weather for ten mins and wake the brain up.
As an example excluding the two pubs and café which aren't always open, there is only one rest area on SH5 with a covered structure.

[Akzle]

Your missing the DGAF factor of most motorists. From early years as a Fish and chip delivery rider, M/C commuter and 15 years of trucking about 90% of the people that pull out in front of you or drift across the centre aren't paying any attention or didn't even look to start with.
So I'm big on the training aspect but instead of fancy lane positioning nonsense keep it pure and simple. Having a gameplan when vehicle x fails to give way is the important thing. Teach people to think like this then it becomes pure instinct when things go south.
And infrastructure, remove redesign things to be rounded and frangible rather than square edges. Tempted to write to transit about the latest young death down here. Was car running off roading striking culvert and rolling/flying across road. now its only a matter of money that those precast culverts aren't designed and installed in a different way. When a vehicle goes off road for whatever reason its bound to bounce off that in an unpredictable fashion into the path of others. They've taken over the roll of population control that powerpoles used to have.
This nation needs more designated rest areas for all road users too, but simple things like including a tap so riders can wash visors mid journey etc and a sheltered area to get out of the weather for ten mins and wake the brain up.
As an example excluding the two pubs and café which aren't always open, there is only one rest area on SH5 with a covered structure.

so what you're saying is, remove the "drink driving limit" so more pubs are motivated to open for longer hours and we can all get further in greater safety, with frequent doobie breaks.

fucken game on.

[TheDemonLord]

Your missing the DGAF factor of most motorists. From early years as a Fish and chip delivery rider, M/C commuter and 15 years of trucking about 90% of the people that pull out in front of you or drift across the centre aren't paying any attention or didn't even look to start with.
So I'm big on the training aspect but instead of fancy lane positioning nonsense keep it pure and simple. Having a gameplan when vehicle x fails to give way is the important thing. Teach people to think like this then it becomes pure instinct when things go south.

Allow all motorcyclists to ride with an RPG - this will soon sort out the DGAF attitude of car drivers AND magically improve lane discipline AND improve drivers awareness of Motorcyclists.

as for the OP - noble sentiments - I wish you the best, but unless there is either a major shift in motorcyclist numbers, we are unlikely to see any major improvements and since we aren't 'green' in the same sense as cyclists are, then we are aren't going to get any recognition of being a positive minority.

[Kickaha]

Allow all motorcyclists to ride with an RPG - this will soon sort out the DGAF attitude of car drivers .

You say that as though motorcyclists don't have that same DGAF attitude

[TheDemonLord]

You say that as though motorcyclists don't have that same DGAF attitude

Never said they didn't - but can you say an idiot on a bike is capable of causing the same amount of carnage as an idiot behind the wheel of a 2 tonne Remuera Tractor?

[Hitcher]

All road controlling authorities (NZTA and local government) pay particular attention to the needs of motorcyclists in road design, construction, repairs, and maintenance.

I hope you mean that this may be their intention, as it certainly isn't a reality.

As one example, NZTA doesn't know how to lay tarseal. My mother, all 80 years of her, could do a better job than many of the kilometres that NZTA signs off on, and she doesn't know the first thing about laying course chip roads. Many km of new seal fail within the first day, with chip being ripped out or the tar boiling through, either outcome causing shiny patches that are potentially lethal to motorcyclists in wet weather. As well as being suboptimal, this is taxpayers' money wasted. These shiny patches loiter threateningly for years. Forget about stupid campaigns like dobbing in stock trucks dribbling shit (something that the Highway Patrol could fix in a week), shiny tar patches are a fundamental road integrity issue that should be put right immediately. NZTA could start by holding their contractors accountable for these failures.

A second example, NZTA doesn't know how to build safe corners. If they did they would have heard about something called "camber". The left-hand off-camber sweeper at the top of the Ngauranga Gorge is a death trap that has claimed motorists since soon after it was opened 25 years ago. Preceding that is the Wainuiomata Hill Road (OK, not a state highway, but the camber lesson should have been learned there) which is a symphony of off-camber corners. More recent are the "improvements" on the Kaitoke side of the Rimutaka Hill Road summit. Brand new corners, many badly off camber with deceptive exit vision lines, on a stretch of road that is also too steep for heavy vehicles. Magic.

A third example, NZTA doesn't know how to build roundabouts. Double-laning the Otaki roundabout 10 years ago created a choke point that, on a good weekend, can result in a tailback as far as Levin. Why? Because both lanes are able to direct traffic straight through the intersection -- it's a Clayton's passing lane choke point. On holiday weekends all other passing lanes heading north out of Wellington on SH1 are coned off, but the Otaki roundabout escapes. The left-hand lanes at roundabouts like these should be left-hand turn only. That would also give traffic entering off side roads a crack at gaining access to the main highway. This disaster has recently been repeated at the new roundabout at Otaihanga, which is also badly off camber, as several capsized articulated truck-and-trailer units can attest. Tough shit for any vehicle that happened to be on their offside when they went over.

A fourth example, the pedestrian traffic lights on the main street in Otaki. I mean, for fuck's sake, why weren't these placed 15m further back so that they could control the Arthur Street intersection as well?

I'll stop now before I write War and Peace, but I'm happy to do so, preferably on a paid-per-word basis.

[Akzle]

A second example, NZTA doesn't know how to build safe corners. If they did they would have heard about something called "camber".

it's not cambered, because it's crowned,
centrally, so the water runs off or some shit :facepalm:

[Hitcher]

it's not camber, it's crowned,
centrally, so the water runs off or some shit

Apparently in such a manner that avoids the cost of having to have drainage channels on both sides of the highway.

[Reckless]

I hope you mean that this may be their intention, as it certainly isn't a reality.

As one example, NZTA doesn't know how to lay tarseal. My mother, all 80 years of her, could do a better job than many of the kilometres that NZTA signs off on, and she doesn't know the first thing about laying course chip roads. Many km of new seal fail within the first day, with chip being ripped out or the tar boiling through, either outcome causing shiny patches that are potentially lethal to motorcyclists in wet weather. As well as being suboptimal, this is taxpayers' money wasted. These shiny patches loiter threateningly for years. Forget about stupid campaigns like dobbing in stock trucks dribbling shit (something that the Highway Patrol could fix in a week), shiny tar patches are a fundamental road integrity issue that should be put right immediately. NZTA could start by holding their contractors accountable for these failures.

A second example, NZTA doesn't know how to build safe corners. If they did they would have heard about something called "camber". The left-hand off-camber sweeper at the top of the Ngauranga Gorge is a death trap that has claimed motorists since soon after it was opened 25 years ago. Preceding that is the Wainuiomata Hill Road (OK, not a state highway, but the camber lesson should have been learned there) which is a symphony of off-camber corners. More recent are the "improvements" on the Kaitoke side of the Rimutaka Hill Road summit. Brand new corners, many badly off camber with deceptive exit vision lines, on a stretch of road that is also too steep for heavy vehicles. Magic.

A third example, NZTA doesn't know how to build roundabouts. Double-laning the Otaki roundabout 10 years ago created a choke point that, on a good weekend, can result in a tailback as far as Levin. Why? Because both lanes are able to direct traffic straight through the intersection -- it's a Clayton's passing lane choke point. On holiday weekends all other passing lanes heading north out of Wellington on SH1 are coned off, but the Otaki roundabout escapes. The left-hand lanes at roundabouts like these should be left-hand turn only. That would also give traffic entering off side roads a crack at gaining access to the main highway. This disaster has recently been repeated at the new roundabout at Otaihanga, which is also badly off camber, as several capsized articulated truck-and-trailer units can attest. Tough shit for any vehicle that happened to be on their offside when they went over.

A fourth example, the pedestrian traffic lights on the main street in Otaki. I mean, for fuck's sake, why weren't these placed 15m further back so that they could control the Arthur Street intersection as well?

I'll stop now before I write War and Peace, but I'm happy to do so, preferably on a paid-per-word basis.

Agree 100% Hitcher
to add to this
Existing roads are in a shocking state.

About 10 of us have just done (Last Friday Sat Sunday) 1000K round top of the North Tour. Auck, Dargaville, Ahipara, to the Cape lighthouse, Russel, Mangawhai and back.

Seal so old tar bleed was the whole road wide, repairs unmarked and open, Repairs done but feathering at the edges spewing fine tar granules all over the road.
Not just areas pretty much constantly, it was terrible.
I don't mind the wet at all and am Confident on those roads in those conditions. But in my mind it was a big fail for LTNZ and New Zealand.


When will drive the the conditions fail and the conditions provided get so bad that at any speed there is a to high chance of failure.
I maintain Mrs Smith in her 4x4 taking her kids on a tour doesn't have a clue how slippery and dangerous the roads are she's driving on!
She's driving in blind faith and luck. Only we have an idea because we are bikers.
But when she fails its prob put down to speed or not driving to the conditions.

It was a great Bike ride, no breakdowns, no off's, no tickets so I haven't got an axe to grind!

But my lasting impression was how really really dangerous the environment created by poor NZ roads are to some off NZ's loveliest places!

[Akzle]

I maintain Mrs Smith in her 4x4 taking her kids on a tour doesn't have a clue how slippery and dangerous the roads are she's driving on!
Only we have an idea because we are bikers.

mrs smith probably not, but mr smith just might. on the whole, that "holier than thou" shit don't wash.

but thankfully its the manufacturers' responsibility to counteract poor driving with technology., like abs , tc, esp, etc which allows fuckwits to do things wrong (braking, cornering, braking while cornering, putting on lippy, getting dressed, sipping fucking latės) and get away with it.

limit the national fleet to manual rwd vehicles manufactured prior to 1995. and ban women.

[R650R]

As one example, NZTA doesn't know how to lay tarseal. My mother, all 80 years of her, could do a better job than many of the kilometres that NZTA signs off on, and she doesn't know the first thing about laying course chip roads.


Yes. Half the problem us we use traffic to compact the chip instead of a prescribed amount of roller passes. We're one of the few developed countries in the world that does this cheap nasty shortcut. Not to mention the signs left out too long after wards and loose chip not cleaned up. When I was in UK I saw them lay chip, traffic never drivers over it till its 100% finished (they do one side at a time). One time a contractor stuffed up in Norfolk, it was headline news that a total of 12 cars got chipped windscreens ove next week and they got chewed up for it bigtime.
I know an older driver that did roadworks, apparently when they 'cut' (blend) the tar with kerosene its a different amount everytime depending on weather and temperature. Translation, some fella in a hivis guesses it and the skill is prob not being passed on properly...



a stretch of road that is also too steep for heavy vehicles. Magic.

:scratch:



A third example, NZTA doesn't know how to build roundabouts. Double-laning the Otaki roundabout 10 years ago created a choke point that. This disaster has recently been repeated at the new roundabout at Otaihanga, which is also badly off camber, as several capsized articulated truck-and-trailer units can attest. Tough shit for any vehicle that happened to be on their offside when they went over.


It's only muppets that roll over at those roundabouts. Horrible as they are, a competent driver should read the road ahead and drive accordingly. But I do agree that they shouldn't use them as a traffic calming measure when it creates a bigger hazard. Truck rollovers at roundabouts (and they happen at the 'flat' ones too) are generally always excess speed. Agree 100% about the left turn idea. We have those double lane roundabouts on non double lane roads here in the bay and they just create a hazard.

Further to your left turn idea I think any T junction close to a major roundabout should be left turn only and all the right turning traffic can just go to the roundabout and do a 180.

[Kickaha]

I maintain Mrs Smith in her 4x4 taking her kids on a tour doesn't have a clue how slippery and dangerous the roads are she's driving on!
She's driving in blind faith and luck. Only we have an idea because we are bikers.

Bikers have shown themselves to be just as shit as any other group of road users at judging any of that

[R650R]

Bikers have shown themselves to be just as shit as any other group of road users at judging any of that

100% Agree.

Has anyone ever done accident stats on group riding vs solo as I feel that is always the most dangerous time of exposure. First there's the red mist defacto race vibe, then there's the lemming syndrome of trusting that the front rider has seen and responded to oncoming traffic.
Going around Lake Waikarmoana on the weekend I was cringing at the lines taken by some 'riders', lucky with the cold weather there was minimal camper vans, just few redneck locals in hiluxes going hard.

[Ocean1]

It is also my view that government agencies should...

Might I just say... Verkeersbordvrij. Signs. They're a fucking joke. If you took the time to read every one you pass on most city roads you wouldn't have any time to spend navigating your vehicle on the road.

That, and stop fucking with the rules for setting speed limits, if there's been an off on a particular corner then that's no reason to reduce the speed limit, not even if you add "temporary" to the sign. That way leads to insanity, and zero speed zones. If there's a problem with the corner then take the cash saved by not accumulating every official in the country on site for their opinion and use it to fix the fucking problem.

And yes, Hitch, surfaces are sub-optimal, and yes that's down to piss poor QA.

[caseye]

Might I just say... Verkeersbordvrij. Signs. They're a fucking joke. If you took the time to read every one you pass on most city roads you wouldn't have any time to spend navigating your vehicle on the road.

That, and stop fucking with the rules for setting speed limits, if there's been an off on a particular corner then that's no reason to reduce the speed limit, not even if you add "temporary" to the sign. That way leads to insanity, and zero speed zones. If there's a problem with the corner then take the cash saved by not accumulating every official in the country on site for their opinion and use it to fix the fucking problem.

And yes, Hitch, surfaces are sub-optimal, and yes that's down to piss poor QA.

Couldn't agree more!
Money on bad corners, road stretches, less signage and most definitely fewer slower speed signs, beginning to think we live in a country where people can NOT only read, write or do their arithma tic but can't actually drive a moto car in a responsible manner either.

[Urano]

[...]
· Public Policy Considerations – [...]
· Training for riders and awareness raising among other road users – [...]
· Infrastructure suited to Safer Motorcycling – [...]
· Technology Advances – [...]
OK, now for your views – good, bad and the ugly. What am I missing?

i've written a book, four years ago, covering exactly your points. i'd be happy to gift you a copy but unfortunately it's in italian and i've not had way to follow a translation for it yet, even despite a very nice offer from a cool guy here...

i put particular stress on the human factor part (which, driven by my former airline training, i consider the biggest component of the problem) both on the bikers side than on the others users' one. traffic psychology (motivation, self assessment, rage management, flock behavior, stress and fatigue management) should be treated for cagers and truckers too, and from my point of view all licenses should be incremental.

then there's a huge part, that should be transmitted to wide public, concerning the distance between "what will increase your safety" and "what will make industry sell more". no conspiracy or other, simply a clarification that "serving suggestions" are not exclusive on cookies packages... i suggest you to consider it.


and eventually we come to the second biggest part of the problem:




As one example, NZTA doesn't know how to lay tarseal.
[...]
A second example, NZTA doesn't know how to build safe corners.
[...]
A third example, NZTA doesn't know how to build roundabouts.
[...]
A fourth example, the pedestrian traffic lights
[...]


logistic politics and city traffic management it's a pandora's box.
safety of one category of users (and of all and every single users) is unbreakably bonded to the whole picture.
we need to consider the widest horizon of long term planning and then go down to the resulting economic production, people relocation, cost of people displacement and moving though the various activity centers, all through the single corner construction.
i'd give a kidney to meet an administration willing to plan long term logistic with citizens, but unfortunately for the most of the cases the word "planning" is a wide overesteem...
anyway, we can simplicistically sum up and say that for sure a way to increase bikers safety is to build more railway.

this is truly a war and peace topic, anyway. we'd need months to cover it...



Bikers have shown themselves to be just as shit as any other group of road users at judging any of that

prob is not the roads themselves, it's energy. people do not realize what kind of energy is stored in a 1 ton car traveling at 90kmh.
everybody simply forget that front crash tests are made to simulate two vehicles traveling at 32kmh each.

[Brian d marge]

I hope you mean that this may be their intention, as it certainly isn't a reality.

As one example, NZTA doesn't know how to lay tarseal. My mother, all 80 years of her, could do a better job than many of the kilometres that NZTA signs off on, and she doesn't know the first thing about laying course chip roads. Many km of new seal fail within the first day, with chip being ripped out or the tar boiling through, either outcome causing shiny patches that are potentially lethal to motorcyclists in wet weather. As well as being suboptimal, this is taxpayers' money wasted. These shiny patches loiter threateningly for years. Forget about stupid campaigns like dobbing in stock trucks dribbling shit (something that the Highway Patrol could fix in a week), shiny tar patches are a fundamental road integrity issue that should be put right immediately. NZTA could start by holding their contractors accountable for these failures.

A second example, NZTA doesn't know how to build safe corners. If they did they would have heard about something called "camber". The left-hand off-camber sweeper at the top of the Ngauranga Gorge is a death trap that has claimed motorists since soon after it was opened 25 years ago. Preceding that is the Wainuiomata Hill Road (OK, not a state highway, but the camber lesson should have been learned there) which is a symphony of off-camber corners. More recent are the "improvements" on the Kaitoke side of the Rimutaka Hill Road summit. Brand new corners, many badly off camber with deceptive exit vision lines, on a stretch of road that is also too steep for heavy vehicles. Magic.

A third example, NZTA doesn't know how to build roundabouts. Double-laning the Otaki roundabout 10 years ago created a choke point that, on a good weekend, can result in a tailback as far as Levin. Why? Because both lanes are able to direct traffic straight through the intersection -- it's a Clayton's passing lane choke point. On holiday weekends all other passing lanes heading north out of Wellington on SH1 are coned off, but the Otaki roundabout escapes. The left-hand lanes at roundabouts like these should be left-hand turn only. That would also give traffic entering off side roads a crack at gaining access to the main highway. This disaster has recently been repeated at the new roundabout at Otaihanga, which is also badly off camber, as several capsized articulated truck-and-trailer units can attest. Tough shit for any vehicle that happened to be on their offside when they went over.

A fourth example, the pedestrian traffic lights on the main street in Otaki. I mean, for fuck's sake, why weren't these placed 15m further back so that they could control the Arthur Street intersection as well?

I'll stop now before I write War and Peace, but I'm happy to do so, preferably on a paid-per-word basis.

Privatisation could have helped here

Stephen

[Urano]

Privatisation could have helped here

Stephen

not so sure about it.
it really depends.
in general i have to draw the conclusion that the best compromise could be to keep national property of all the infrastructural nets and sell only concession of management few decades long.

[Drew]

There's nothing wrong with the fucking roads, if you ride accordingly.

I ride like a cunt and I'd love a racetrack surface everywhere, but who is paying for it.

Teach the riders to ride and accept responsibility for their own safety, and the stats will do the rest for you.

[R650R]

There's nothing wrong with the fucking roads, if you ride accordingly.

I ride like a cunt and I'd love a racetrack surface everywhere, but who is paying for it.

Teach the riders to ride and accept responsibility for their own safety, and the stats will do the rest for you.

Kind of correct to a certain point. Here in Hawke's Bay we are home to the deadliest stretch of state highway in NZ, SH2 expressway. Its only roughly 15 years old, plenty wide and acres of runoff in most places.
But put Darwin and high traffic volume together and its crash bang your dead time. Stragely enough I don't think anyone has actually died yet at the two abortion intersections on it, just on the wide open perfect visibility stretches...
I think fatigue is under rated as a crash factor so road design could play a factor in keeping a wayward vehicle off the road if it strays and educate people not to do the big panic swerve and end up crossing into oncoming traffic.

[Drew]

Kind of correct to a certain point. Here in Hawke's Bay we are home to the deadliest stretch of state highway in NZ, SH2 expressway. Its only roughly 15 years old, plenty wide and acres of runoff in most places.
But put Darwin and high traffic volume together and its crash bang your dead time. Stragely enough I don't think anyone has actually died yet at the two abortion intersections on it, just on the wide open perfect visibility stretches...
I think fatigue is under rated as a crash factor so road design could play a factor in keeping a wayward vehicle off the road if it strays and educate people not to do the big panic swerve and end up crossing into oncoming traffic.
So drivers are being squids, and people are dying in near perfect conditions? Sort of proves my point rather than countering it. The roads are not the problem.

[MrKiwi]

Might I just say... Verkeersbordvrij. Signs. They're a fucking joke. If you took the time to read every one you pass on most city roads you wouldn't have any time to spend navigating your vehicle on the road.

That, and stop fucking with the rules for setting speed limits, if there's been an off on a particular corner then that's no reason to reduce the speed limit, not even if you add "temporary" to the sign. That way leads to insanity, and zero speed zones. If there's a problem with the corner then take the cash saved by not accumulating every official in the country on site for their opinion and use it to fix the fucking problem.

And yes, Hitch, surfaces are sub-optimal, and yes that's down to piss poor QA.

Yes, I tend to agree, good points, thanks.

[MrKiwi]

There's nothing wrong with the fucking roads, if you ride accordingly.

I ride like a cunt and I'd love a racetrack surface everywhere, but who is paying for it.

Teach the riders to ride and accept responsibility for their own safety, and the stats will do the rest for you.


True to a point, but some designs are not helpful to riders. Take for example roundabouts where the road slopes down from the centre of the roundabout so that when you lean into the corner your lean is artificially accentuated (negative camber), or changes of seal as you line up a corner. I could go on, but the point I am trying to make is when designing and building roads, factor in the needs of all road users, not just cars and trucks.

Having said that, I am a strong supporter of riding to the conditions.

[MrKiwi]

ban cars .

-edit-
oh yes, and ban "safety regulatory framework" bullshit, because that shit doesn't achieve any shit except getting some old white cunts paid, and if there's any people that don't need to be paid, it's old white cunts.
in fact, ban old white cunts.

Thanks for raising the standard of the debate, not!

[Blackbird]

True to a point, but some designs are not helpful to riders. Take for example roundabouts where the road slopes down from the centre of the roundabout so that when you lean into the corner your lean is artificially accentuated (negative camber), or changes of seal as you line up a corner. I could go on, but the point I am trying to make is when designing and building roads, factor in the needs of all road users, not just cars and trucks.

Having said that, I am a strong supporter of riding to the conditions.

Sure improving roads contribute to safety but I'm totally with Drew. Raising the standard of Roadcraft will almost certainly be more cost-effective than improving roads but both have their place. The only real stumbling block is that the average road user thinks they're crash hot already. At least making the learner tests more comprehensive is a step in the right direction.

[BlackSheepLogic]

· Training for riders and awareness raising among other road users – in road safety this is known as human factors, and it has been shown to be the most critical in accidents. Pre and post licence training for motorcycle riders is important. But it should not stop there, it is crucial that other road users have an appreciation of the dangers of misjudging the speed or behaviour of a rider, including the failure to see an oncoming rider. This should be incorporated into training for all road users and it should be a part of obtaining a drivers licence.


Drop the Post-training shit. Pre-Training, is needed as a stop-gap for experience. Save the post training for repeat offenders.

Failure to see a bike is just an excuse that used to justify I did not look, did not care, or I though that stop/give-way sign did not apply to me...

[Drew]

True to a point, but some designs are not helpful to riders. Take for example roundabouts where the road slopes down from the centre of the roundabout so that when you lean into the corner your lean is artificially accentuated (negative camber), or changes of seal as you line up a corner. I could go on, but the point I am trying to make is when designing and building roads, factor in the needs of all road users, not just cars and trucks.

Having said that, I am a strong supporter of riding to the conditions.This is something you struggle with, the off camber round-a-bouts? Don't think about it, look where you want to go, and you'll barely notice it any more.

Simple solution, that proper training would have illustrated.

[Blackbird]

Drop the Post-training shit. Pre-Training, is needed as a stop-gap for experience. Save the post training for repeat offenders.

Failure to see a bike is just an excuse that used to justify I did not look, did not care, or I though that stop/give-way sign did not apply to me...

And poor situational awareness of a rider failing to see a situation developing is also a contributor. Not helpful just blaming car drivers and excluding other road users. Hence the need for on-going refreshers.

[MrKiwi]

This is something you struggle with, the off camber round-a-bouts? Don't think about it, look where you want to go, and you'll barely notice it any more.

Simple solution, that proper training would have illustrated.

No I don't struggle with roundabouts, I've never come off going around one and I have been riding bikes since 1981. It's strange you jump to the conclusions. I have a long list of road features that suit cars and trucks but are less optional for motorbikes. It is that simple really. We are an ignored user group by and large.

It is bad road design. Why make it harder than it needs to be for riders, especially less experienced ones.

The points I'm making are:

riders should ride to the conditions, but
roads can be better designed than they are for motorcyclists.

[MrKiwi]

Drop the Post-training shit. Pre-Training, is needed as a stop-gap for experience. Save the post training for repeat offenders.

Failure to see a bike is just an excuse that used to justify I did not look, did not care, or I though that stop/give-way sign did not apply to me...

Post rider training is an interesting point. I've discussed with many of my rider friends who have undertaken at their cost post rider training. Universally they have got something out of it. My view for debate, is that post rider training should be more readily available at reasonable prices, part of a package of measures to improve our skills and keep them sharp.

Are you suggesting repeat offenders should be made (compulsorily) to undertake post licence training?

[Katman]

We are an ignored user group by and large.


And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

[swbarnett]

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.
I think it's more a numbers game. There simply aren't enough of us to matter to most non-riders.

[Big Dog]

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

Not at all helped by the tragically low registration numbers.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[GrayWolf]

Yes. Half the problem us we use traffic to compact the chip instead of a prescribed amount of roller passes. We're one of the few developed countries in the world that does this cheap nasty shortcut. Not to mention the signs left out too long after wards and loose chip not cleaned up. When I was in UK I saw them lay chip, traffic never drivers over it till its 100% finished (they do one side at a time). One time a contractor stuffed up in Norfolk, it was headline news that a total of 12 cars got chipped windscreens ove next week and they got chewed up for it bigtime.
I know an older driver that did roadworks, apparently when they 'cut' (blend) the tar with kerosene its a different amount everytime depending on weather and temperature. Translation, some fella in a hivis guesses it and the skill is prob not being passed on properly...


:scratch:



It's only muppets that roll over at those roundabouts. Horrible as they are, a competent driver should read the road ahead and drive accordingly. But I do agree that they shouldn't use them as a traffic calming measure when it creates a bigger hazard. Truck rollovers at roundabouts (and they happen at the 'flat' ones too) are generally always excess speed. Agree 100% about the left turn idea. We have those double lane roundabouts on non double lane roads here in the bay and they just create a hazard.

Further to your left turn idea I think any T junction close to a major roundabout should be left turn only and all the right turning traffic can just go to the roundabout and do a 180.

Yes and now in their friggin wisdom, the gubbermint have approved 50 tonne trucks for the roads (an extra axle), The bloody highways here are NOT designed for the current trucks allowed in many places... Rimutaka's for example... So now these new 50 tonner's are going to be on that hill, on your side of the road, to negotiate the tight corners... :crazy:

FFS we have a rail freight network that is profitable and capable of being utilised far more than it is....
So lets allow bigger, road destroying trucks instead..... :facepalm::facepalm:

and while I'm at it... the Wainui hill?? the 'roundabout' they installed at the Bell rd/Grace st Junction. Fantastic road design,,,, a huge metal drain?? whatever cover that is almost the full width of the single carriageway as you exit from Gracefield into Bell.

[BlackSheepLogic]

Post rider training is an interesting point. I've discussed with many of my rider friends who have undertaken at their cost post rider training. Universally they have got something out of it. My view for debate, is that post rider training should be more readily available at reasonable prices, part of a package of measures to improve our skills and keep them sharp.

Are you suggesting repeat offenders should be made (compulsorily) to undertake post licence training?

Yes, I think repeat offenders should have additional training to make them aware of how their offending effects other road users.

I am however completely against mandatory on-going training, experience makes better riders. non-mandentory training I'm OK with training but I see no reason it should be forced onto all within a given license class. Nor do I think it will achieve anything. People need to be personally motivated to seek training not forced.

[Ocean1]

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

Yeah, you'd really like that to be true, eh?

In fact it's far more likely to be related to the large number of "road safety" lobbyists like AA pushing successfully for improvements that benefit cars, some of which are definite threats to a biker.

[Katman]

Yeah, you'd really like that to be true, eh?

In fact it's far more likely to be related to the large number of "road safety" lobbyists like AA pushing successfully for improvements that benefit cars, some of which are definite threats to a biker.

Yeah, of course.

It's got absolutely nothing to do with decades of alienating 'fucking cagers' for having the audacity to impede our 'racing lines'.

[R650R]

Yes and now in their friggin wisdom, the gubbermint have approved 50 tonne trucks for the roads (an extra axle), The bloody highways here are NOT designed for the current trucks allowed in many places... Rimutaka's for example... So now these new 50 tonner's are going to be on that hill, on your side of the road, to negotiate the tight corners... :crazy:

FFS we have a rail freight network that is profitable and capable of being utilised far more than it is....
So lets allow bigger, road destroying trucks instead..... :facepalm::facepalm:



Lets not have facts get in the way of a good rant aye...

Firstly you only need to run nine axles for 50Max setup so that's a 6x4 tractor unit towing a 6 axle b-train of which many were already on the highway. Under 50Max the overall vehicle length is increased by several metres which reduces the tarmac loading. The whole reason 50max was approved was there were already plenty of operators exceeding 44ton on regular basis with no problems bar the fines. The whole HPMV scheme has allowed better planning of loads and utilisation of available deck space.
I recently worked for a less reputable firm, the difference between going up a hill at 44ton opposed to 50ton is negligible, even the CVIU that pulled me up once and looked at my paperwork didnt weigh me up... Most of the modern engines just dig deeper and make more power, they are designed for extreme loads. The only thing that really changes running fat is the fuel mileage goes through the floor.
All of the HPMV approved units should track no worse than previously approved max length designs. Swinging wide on most state highways is purely operator error/discretion 99% of the time. Like any industry there will be a few bad eggs out there.
Rail is good for some instances and non urgent freight but it will never be better than trucks for the majority of NZ freight under existing technology. The actually loading and unloading of freight into a standard 20ft container is also a very labour intensive and time consuming process. A shipping container still has to get to a from a rail head, which requires a swinglifter and a good operator.
A lot of big trucks actually direct deliver their freight. If somehow there was a magic transition to rail, our cities would be clogged with six wheeler metro trucks and swinglifters.... The double handling would translate to higher freight prices and less international competiveness for our exports.
Even in England and Europe where there are awesome rail networks, huge amounts of freight still travel by truck, what does that tell you?

[Akzle]

I think it's more a numbers game. There simply aren't enough of us to matter to most non-riders.
like homosexuals and women,
no where near enough of a majority for those groups to think their opinion matters....


FFS we have a rail freight network that is profitable and capable of being utilised far more than it is....
So lets allow bigger, road destroying trucks instead..... :facepalm::facepalm:

hahahahhahaha. you don't know much about dem trains, huh?
and your elected government sold the rail network.... to the fucken strayans. it's largely in disrepair.
as has been otherwise pointed out: the logistics of loading and unloading trains for shit isn't practical. economoneyically speaking.

do you buy shit? i bet you do. know how that shit got to where you bought it? bet ya dont.
but bet you can guess, it wuz trukz oi.

[MrKiwi]

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

I know from my days in the past as an official that the central reason is they think motorcycling is too dangerous. Some of the riding community's attitudes hasn't helped, but its not the primary reason ...

[rastuscat]

Thanks for raising the standard of the debate, not!

It's just Akzle being Akzle.

[rastuscat]

Lots of interesting views on here. Again.

No surprises, folk on here have the answers. But find it easier to snipe on a forum than to actually get involved and do something. Like the OP did.

Untimately, we need someone to do that high level thinking. Then we need to remember that right here, right now, the greatest influence on our safety is us.

Just sayin. Again.:drool:

[Berries]

No surprises, folk on here have the answers. But find it easier to snipe on a forum than to actually get involved and do something. Like the OP did.
Riiiiight. So the OP asks a question and nobody is allowed to answer? Odd way to run a forum.

[James Deuce]

I am however completely against mandatory on-going training, experience makes better riders. non-mandentory training I'm OK with training but I see no reason it should be forced onto all within a given license class. Nor do I think it will achieve anything. People need to be personally motivated to seek training not forced.

Experience is just practising the same old mistakes over and over. I think, especially given your attitude, Class 6 licenses should involve a license resit every 5 years, following a compulsory 2 week review programme, taken at motorcyclist's own expense and in their own time. Might make having a class 6 meaningful.

[Brian d marge]

Yes and now in their friggin wisdom, the gubbermint have approved 50 tonne trucks for the roads (an extra axle), The bloody highways here are NOT designed for the current trucks allowed in many places... Rimutaka's for example... So now these new 50 tonner's are going to be on that hill, on your side of the road, to negotiate the tight corners... :crazy:

FFS we have a rail freight network that is profitable and capable of being utilised far more than it is....
So lets allow bigger, road destroying trucks instead..... :facepalm::facepalm:

and while I'm at it... the Wainui hill?? the 'roundabout' they installed at the Bell rd/Grace st Junction. Fantastic road design,,,, a huge metal drain?? whatever cover that is almost the full width of the single carriageway as you exit from Gracefield into Bell.
Need to keep the americans happy by using the petro dollar

I completely agree with you about the trains

Stephen

[Urano]

car drivers that hit bikes because they did not see them

it is physically possible that they don't see us even despite their attention. (so figure out how they can see us when they're actually not paying attention...)

and in any case remember that the "i didn't see him" data you find in statistics is always the easiest read of the problem, not necessarily the true one...

much more probably they see but make mistake while interpreting what they've seen, its speed and direction. this is not a problem of attention, is a problem of average expectation and lack of preparation, and you can't solve it with a fee...

[Berries]

it is physically possible that they don't see us even despite their attention. (so figure out how they can see us when they're actually not paying attention...)

and in any case remember that the "i didn't see him" data you find in statistics is always the easiest read of the problem, not necessarily the true one...

much more probably they see but make mistake while interpreting what they've seen, its speed and direction. this is not a problem of attention, is a problem of average expectation and lack of preparation, and you can't solve it with a fee...
Or with training as per the OP. You can train other road users all you want but they will still fail to see a motorbike approaching with the right of way no matter how much hi-viz the rider is wearing or how bright his daytime running lights are. They don’t see trains for fucks sake. Teach riders to expect that it is going to happen and it won’t matter if it does. I’d suggest that at least 90% of crashes involving motorbikes were avoidable by the rider, including a large proportion of those where the car driver was deemed to be at fault.

[BlackSheepLogic]

I think, especially given your attitude, Class 6 licenses should involve a license resit every 5 years, following a compulsory 2 week review programme, taken at motorcyclist's own expense and in their own time.

Yep, punish 'em all for one persons mis-deeds, works for me as long as I'm excluded....

Our views on training and the benefit of mandatory training are different, thats all.

[willytheekid]

Riiiiight. So the OP asks a question and nobody is allowed to answer? Odd way to run a forum.

:laugh:...you seem to forget who he works for mate.



ps...its kinda how his boss & Co want to run the whole country:yes:...dont ya love the attitude tho:killingme

[MrKiwi]

It's just Akzle being Akzle.

Yes, so I gathered. I did ask for the good, the bad and the ugly, so I shouldn't be surprised. My bad.

[MrKiwi]

Riiiiight. So the OP asks a question and nobody is allowed to answer? Odd way to run a forum.

I invited comments, all comments. Please keep them coming, it is helpful. Some of the views expressed might not be sensible, but they give me a flavour of the variety and intensity of feelings.

[MrKiwi]

Or with training as per the OP. You can train other road users all you want but they will still fail to see a motorbike approaching with the right of way no matter how much hi-viz the rider is wearing or how bright his daytime running lights are. They don’t see trains for fucks sake. Teach riders to expect that it is going to happen and it won’t matter if it does. I’d suggest that at least 90% of crashes involving motorbikes were avoidable by the rider, including a large proportion of those where the car driver was deemed to be at fault.

90%, that an interesting view. Made me pause and think for a bit. I'm not sure it is as high as 90% but I agree with the idea that a lot of the time, no the vast majority of the time, we can be in control of what happens. It grates that we might need to give way or make room for other road users when we have the right of way etc, but I'd rather be alive grating my teeth and letting a few choice words escape than be dead or seriously injured.

Are you suggesting that training other road users is a waste of time, or is your view that yes train other road users to watch, look be aware etc, but let's not fool ourselves that this is a panacea for correcting current wrongs.

[MrKiwi]

:laugh:...you seem to forget who he works for mate.



ps...its kinda how his boss & Co want to run the whole country:yes:...dont ya love the attitude tho:killingme

Out of curiosity, who do you think I work for? :psst:

[george formby]

90%, that an interesting view. Made me pause and think for a bit. I'm not sure it is as high as 90% but I agree with the idea that a lot of the time, no the vast majority of the time, we can be in control of what happens. It grates that we might need to give way or make room for other road users when we have the right of way etc, but I'd rather be alive grating my teeth and letting a few choice words escape than be dead or seriously injured.

Are you suggesting that training other road users is a waste of time, or is your view that yes train other road users to watch, look be aware etc, but let's not fool ourselves that this is a panacea for correcting current wrongs.

I have spent a lot of time tinking about road safety the last couple of years as my G/F is now riding. We have had the benefit of good mentoring, lots of practice & training through pro rider. An absolute bargain at the mo.
Apart from skill development and knowledge/road craft, the most apparent change is in her attitude to being on the road. After decades driving, typically obliviously, she is now habitually active in assessing what is happening around her and making the appropriate decisions to be in the safest possible position. She freely admits this mind set is like night & day compared to how she used to perceive her place on the road.

There is no panacea for absolutely preventing accidents, large lumps of metal at high speed in narrow confines does not allow it.
An ongoing change of perception amongst road users seems the best way to lessen the toll. Every rider or driver who learns to look and think defensively is an asset to help minimise the consequences of those who don't. Increasing the percentage of road users through education, even if it starts at school, who act to prevent accidents will lessen the toll or at least be one less vehicle in an accident.
Well, that's kinda how I see it. "Safe" roads & heavy fines do not change attitudes or abilities.

[willytheekid]

Out of curiosity, who do you think I work for? :psst:

SANTA!:eek:

[MrKiwi]

I have spent a lot of time tinking about road safety the last couple of years as my G/F is now riding. We have had the benefit of good mentoring, lots of practice & training through pro rider. An absolute bargain at the mo.
Apart from skill development and knowledge/road craft, the most apparent change is in her attitude to being on the road. After decades driving, typically obliviously, she is now habitually active in assessing what is happening around her and making the appropriate decisions to be in the safest possible position. She freely admits this mind set is like night & day compared to how she used to perceive her place on the road.

There is no panacea for absolutely preventing accidents, large lumps of metal at high speed in narrow confines does not allow it.
An ongoing change of perception amongst road users seems the best way to lessen the toll. Every rider or driver who learns to look and think defensively is an asset to help minimise the consequences of those who don't. Increasing the percentage of road users through education, even if it starts at school, who act to prevent accidents will lessen the toll or at least be one less vehicle in an accident.
Well, that's kinda how I see it. "Safe" roads & heavy fines do not change attitudes or abilities.

Thanks, good points.

[MrKiwi]

SANTA!:eek:

lol, I asked for that one...

[Berries]

90%, that an interesting view. Made me pause and think for a bit. I'm not sure it is as high as 90% but I agree with the idea that a lot of the time, no the vast majority of the time, we can be in control of what happens. It grates that we might need to give way or make room for other road users when we have the right of way etc, but I'd rather be alive grating my teeth and letting a few choice words escape than be dead or seriously injured.
90% was a rough figure I just pulled out of my arse after 15 years of crash scene investigation and crash data analysis. I just wanted to flag that in many cases where the other party caused the crash the rider could have done something to avoid the incident. Like you say, no point being in the right as you are stretchered away with a leg missing.


Are you suggesting that training other road users is a waste of time, or is your view that yes train other road users to watch, look be aware etc, but let's not fool ourselves that this is a panacea for correcting current wrongs.
By all means train them to look for bikes etc, but 'we' have to acknowledge that sometimes they won't see us even if they think they have tried.


So to make things safer for riders when other traffic screw up it would mean riders having to travel well below the speed limit so they have plenty of time to avoid the mistake of the other vehicle.
Of course you could just ride around in your own little world and expect everyone else to do the right thing. Personally I expect them to do the wrong thing. Cover your brakes, position yourself accordingly. Basic riding skills I would have thought.

[GrayWolf]

hahahahhahaha. you don't know much about dem trains, huh?
and your elected government sold the rail network.... to the fucken strayans. it's largely in disrepair.
as has been otherwise pointed out: the logistics of loading and unloading trains for shit isn't practical. economoneyically speaking.

do you buy shit? i bet you do. know how that shit got to where you bought it? bet ya dont.
but bet you can guess, it wuz trukz oi.


Looks in wallet for company ID.. Ooo look, Locomotive Engineer. yup as normal, your absolutely right, I know nothing about them!!!......... I just drive the things! :motu:

Secondly the Aussie's dont own the network any longer, to paraphrase you, "get up to date man".... It's called KIWIRAIL for a reason. $100's of millions have been spent on replacing rolling stock and infrastructure upgrades / replacement in the last few years.

[GrayWolf]

Lets not have facts get in the way of a good rant aye...

Under 50Max the overall vehicle length is increased by several metres which reduces the tarmac loading. The whole reason 50max was approved was there were already plenty of operators exceeding 44ton on regular basis with no problems bar the fines.

All of the HPMV approved units should track no worse than previously approved max length designs. Swinging wide on most state highways is purely operator error/discretion 99% of the time. Like any industry there will be a few bad eggs out there.

Even in England and Europe where there are awesome rail networks, huge amounts of freight still travel by truck, what does that tell you?


So the trucks will be several meters longer, but you see no difference in the tracking?

Maybe you personally are a good driver. There are plenty of instances where I or my YL have driven/ridden over the 'Taka's and been confronted by a truck across the centreline to negotiate the tight bends. I believe there has been mention of this in other threads (historically) as well.

Well there's a good role model to follow... if we all break the law often enough (excess loading) we can get it changed.... Well I have to apologise to the rabble rouser's then I guess..... they have it right, lets all break the law and get it changed!! :shifty::shifty:

I agree with your assessment of road/rail shifting of freight in city environments... Sadly like here, England disposed of huge chunks of rail land where the goods yards and sidings used to be. They have hamstrung themselves by that act of yore. However, it's interesting that in Wellington BOTH Toll and Mainfreight have their depots right next to the Rail Freight yard.

[george formby]

An idea I heard from a talkback host years ago was that you had to ride a motorbike for the first 2 years before getting your car license. What your girlfriend is now aware of proves the idea as being a good one. Plus of course all the loonys would kill themselves off before being able to get in a car where they are far more likely to kill others.

Many years ago a British MP suggested exactly that become law. Didn't get much traction.

[MrKiwi]

Unless the political masters of the policy makers change their bias nothing will change. They determine the policy objectives.

Sent from my LG-P768 using Tapatalk

You're absolutely right, but I'm bloody minded so having a sensible framework/strategy to promote is helpful. I don't work in the system anymore, but I worked in it long enough to know you can chip away at this from both ends, the pollies and the officials. The pollies are usually unreliable, inconsistent and respond to where they get their votes from. We're not a big enough sector to be a threat.

That doesn't mean we should not continue to try. BRONZE has done some good work in the past and not doubt will do more. I can do my bit from another angle/user group. The more different groups chipping away at this the more likely we might make some small gains.

I may be totally wrong, but humour me anyway :beer:

[Reckless]

You're absolutely right, but I'm bloody minded so having a sensible framework/strategy to promote is helpful. I don't work in the system anymore, but I worked in it long enough to know you can chip away at this from both ends, the pollies and the officials. The pollies are usually unreliable, inconsistent and respond to where they get their votes from. We're not a big enough sector to be a threat.

That doesn't mean we should not continue to try. BRONZE has done some good work in the past and not doubt will do more. I can do my bit from another angle/user group. The more different groups chipping away at this the more likely we might make some small gains.

I may be totally wrong, but humour me anyway :beer:

Great to see someone is carrying the flag and putting his energy where his Keyboard usually is?
Unfortunately most of us are busy carving out a living to be to effective? I tried with Mag but it didn't work I'm sad to say.
Sounds like you know your stuff Good on you Mr Kiwi!


We're not a big enough sector to be a threat.
If we where really organised and together we could we be?? Is there enough Bikers In NZ?
5000 bikes did make an impression after all we at least made to big of a noise to be ignored?
I'm very sure we have been played again with these announcements being to close to the elections to have time to respond to?

I'm getting the Vib if anyone had a good basis for us to go forward with, an organisation could get a good following.
Take up the challenge the force is strong in you :)

[swbarnett]

Experience is just practising the same old mistakes over and over.
So noone can ever learn anything just by doing it?

How do you think the first motorcyclists learned to ride.

[BlackSheepLogic]

So noone can ever learn anything just by doing it?

How do you think the first motorcyclists learned to ride.

From some noob with a book.

[R650R]

So the trucks will be several meters longer, but you see no difference in the tracking?

I agree with your assessment of road/rail shifting of freight in city environments... Sadly like here, England disposed of huge chunks of rail land where the goods yards and sidings used to be. They have hamstrung themselves by that act of yore. However, it's interesting that in Wellington BOTH Toll and Mainfreight have their depots right next to the Rail Freight yard.

3m is not a lot when a combination is already 20m to start with. If you look at the newer units the last axle group is set forward slightly so more rear overhang.
Toll put some cameras on their trucks and even filmed them from various angles.

Yes the railheads. Land is at a premium these days, look how much land they occupied back when we were a small nation and freight volumes were much lower. And the Britain you speak of was prob only 20-40 million people, not the 60+ million it is now. Toll is the leftovers from the state rail companies previous incarnations, tranzlink, NZRail etc... Mainfreight has always been an astute player and bought land in right places, they use rail far more than people realise. We live in a just in time environment these days though, products need to be moved as soon as they are made and supplies must arrive as soon as they are needed. To have the extra storage space to allow for rail lead times is just not economically feasible these days.
It would be fun if someone sold a toy trainset that replicated the true amount of space needed for the shunting yards, they'd be no room left in the shed/hobby room to add the fancy model houses and rivers etc....

[swbarnett]

From some noob with a book.
Huh? There was noone to write the book befor the first motorcyclists.

[buggerit]

Looks in wallet for company ID.. Ooo look, Locomotive Engineer. yup as normal, your absolutely right, I know nothing about them!!!......... I just drive the things! :motu:

Secondly the Aussie's dont own the network any longer, to paraphrase you, "get up to date man".... It's called KIWIRAIL for a reason. $100's of millions have been spent on replacing rolling stock and infrastructure upgrades / replacement in the last few years.

Are the Chinese locos still restricted on how far they travel from the Hamilton repair shop?

[Urano]

Teach riders to expect that it is going to happen and it won’t matter if it does. I’d suggest that at least 90% of crashes involving motorbikes were avoidable by the rider, including a large proportion of those where the car driver was deemed to be at fault.

of course riders have to prepare for the worst case scenario, but you have to consider a pair of problems:
1- "we" are not better than "them", because usually "we" are also "them". considering bikers as an "elite" is a very typical psychological error, but the truth is that there's a whole bunch of idiots traveling on two wheels too, and aside from idiots there's a whole bunch of people who is possibly riding his bike on friday evening after work, tired, exhausted by the last discussion with his boss, and missing the road sign.
2- even if you're best of the best, there's something that rows against you, which i call "the road errors rules".
it says: "everybody make mistakes". i stick to the idea that if others users are better trained it would be better for me too.
3- the "who cares about drivers training" attitude could be a very bad road to go down to. the result, i'm afraid, would be something similar to "who cares about riders, avoiding me it's THEIR job"...



So you don't think bigger fines/penalties would work as an incentive towards road safety? If that is the case we can forget about things becoming safer for us then.

no.
and it's something proven by the very few analysis of police enforcement activities results.

what i really think is that using an engine driven vehicle is often considered a constitutional right, but i have no knowledge of a single country which states in its constitution that you have to.

the incentive toward road safety would be better made by serious considerations about licensing.
unfortunately this would mean politicians would loose a lot of votes, so they'll never do that...



She freely admits this mind set is like night & day compared to how she used to perceive her place on the road.

exactly.
that's why i think licenses should be incremental: to own a license you must earn the previous level one first.
moped>bikes>cars>truck>buses>trailers



If motorcyclists want to be as safe as being in a car buy a car.

and the "there's nothing to be done, if it's my turn nothing can save me" it's another psychological attitude that needs to be worked off.
it's true that "safety is not the equivalent of risk free", but this shouldn't be an excuse not to put any effort in order to increase our safety.



So noone can ever learn anything just by doing it?
How do you think the first motorcyclists learned to ride.

almost.
you can learn something from "zero point" all by your own, but this usually takes about four times the time, and your preparation is always very "shallow".
this is because from a low level ability you can't judge your errors, and tend to reproduce them constantly until something happens to make them pop out.
but it's not guaranteed that they'll pop out without hurting you.

learning from others' experience is the very basis of ours success as species on the planet.
imagine being born in a empty house and never see anyone in your life: you'll have to learn by yourself that fire burns, scissors cut, how to use the fridge...

why would you do that? because you don't want to let go some of your hybris and say "teach me"? bad choice...

[BlackSheepLogic]

Huh? There was noone to write the book befor the first motorcyclists.

A minor technicality like this would not have been an impedance.

However, back to Jame's point that experience in just practicing the same old mistakes - Our graduated licensing system seems to be at least partly based on the concept that experience is a key component in becoming a better rider/driver.

[george formby]

Some interestin points Urano, particularly the learning from experience. It all depends on the experience & the individuals ability to survive it or learn from it.
Also nobody is perfect, so true. A higher percentage of switched on road users would have an immeasurable effect of not producing statistics.


Another angle I have been thinking about, baring in mind that separate road user groups have limited visibility & political sway, is making the powers that be come clean on there intentions for traffic safety.
I feel that the emphasis on speed enforcement & shock advertising does not improve safety overall but is intended to limit the severity of accidents.
We have no limitation regardless of speed.

It's late and I'm tired but I guess the simplest way to describe what I'm thinking is do the Government, Police, NZTA etc work to a short term median strategy based on a spread sheet? If so can this be proven? If they really do believe that current measures are purely in the interest of road safety & current spending on speed cameras, advertising, road maintenance etc, is the very best option for improving safety & lessening the number of accidents overall then can that be proven?
If the first option is true it can be changed, if the second option is true it can be improved.

[Berries]

I feel that the emphasis on speed enforcement & shock advertising does not improve safety overall but is intended to limit the severity of accidents.
The official view these days is that crashes are inevitable, people will always make mistakes, but the severity of the crash can be reduced by a combination of safe speeds, safe roadsides, safe road users and safe vehicles. That last one pretty much knackers motorbikes if you ask me.

[swbarnett]

almost.
you can learn something from "zero point" all by your own, but this usually takes about four times the time, and your preparation is always very "shallow".
this is because from a low level ability you can't judge your errors, and tend to reproduce them constantly until something happens to make them pop out.
but it's not guaranteed that they'll pop out without hurting you.

learning from others' experience is the very basis of ours success as species on the planet.
imagine being born in a empty house and never see anyone in your life: you'll have to learn by yourself that fire burns, scissors cut, how to use the fridge...

why would you do that? because you don't want to let go some of your hybris and say "teach me"? bad choice...
All very good points but it seems you've totally missed the point of my comment. Forgive me if I thought it was clear that I was just saying that experience is definitely valuable and not just a case of repeating the same bad habits over and over.



I started my riding career by doing an 8-day riding course (one day a week) at Western Springs in the '80s so I'm well sold on the value of training.

[george formby]

The official view these days is that crashes are inevitable, people will always make mistakes, but the severity of the crash can be reduced by a combination of safe speeds, safe roadsides, safe road users and safe vehicles. That last one pretty much knackers motorbikes if you ask me.

Exacary my thoughts.
I feel we are left out of the decision making process or are irrelevant. But we still have to pay in excess for being ignored, irrelevant & deliberately put at risk with road side barrier design.
I know this thread is about motorcyclist safety but we are the skin on the pudding. I try to look at it as safety for all road users if anything is to change. We are effectively ignored, financially penalised and victimised.
Common sense dictates we look after ourselves individually but it's like shoving shit uphill using a chopstick with the decision makers at the top taking a piss and sharing cost comparisons to get a human change in attitude to general safety.

3 out of your 4 safes have a lot money invested in there production. One does not.

[SuperMac]

So noone can ever learn anything just by doing it?

How do you think the first motorcyclists learned to ride.

Learning from experience is fine, if . . .

1. You need to survive the experience
2. You need to realise something needs changing
3. You need to be able to work out what to change and be able to determine whether it results in an improvement

Some don't manage '1'

2 & 3 are difficult for many.

So is 'training' always the answer? Sadly, no; some elements can be useful, not so much others.

[Urano]

I feel that the emphasis on speed enforcement & shock advertising does not improve safety overall but is intended to limit the severity of accidents.
We have no limitation regardless of speed.

donno NZ situation but, at the cost of being populistic, i feel that at least here in EU the emphasis on speed enforcement is intended only to raise more money in the easiest possible way.
remember that the hugest part of collisions happens at or below 60 kmh.

even sending police to simply check tyres would have better results in regard of safety, but this would mean at least two guys stopping each vehicle instead of an automated computerized plate reader in the police HQ that mails thousands of speed fines...



Forgive me if I thought it was clear that I was just saying that experience is definitely valuable and not just a case of repeating the same bad habits over and over.
[...]
I started my riding career by doing an 8-day riding course (one day a week) at Western Springs in the '80s so I'm well sold on the value of training.

sorry, i was misled by the "first biker" thing.
i think experience is incredibly valuable.
from a "middle upper level" you can even start to analyze your errors and earn experience over experience by your own.
and every experienced guy knows also that even experience could be a cause of error (overconfidence) and has the sense to re-take a basic course once a while or to step down the difficulty of his ride (maybe renting an easy, light 125cc for a trackday...) to "clean the technique"... :niceone:

[Ocean1]

Learning from experience is fine, if . . .

1. You need to survive the experience
2. You need to realise something needs changing
3. You need to be able to work out what to change and be able to determine whether it results in an improvement

Which is why dirt based experience produces better results.

I sort of agree with Jim, without feedback you learn very little, in fact you accumulate and reinforce bad habits. And the only feedback you get on the road is likely to be fatal. It's no place to learn anything.

In the dirt poor performance is far more likely to result in more useful consequences: enough pain to cause you to try other options, but not usually enough to cripple or kill you.

Would all those in favour of reallocating Akatarawa forest as a public training ground with publicly funded XR200s free from a concession stall at either end please raise your hands.

[pritch]

Raising the standard of Roadcraft will almost certainly be more cost-effective than improving roads

Until I retired I worked with maybe forty women not a single one of whom would have even heard of "road craft". One of the males might have been familiar with the idea having been in the British Police in a former life.

Raising the standard? We'd need to start by introducing the concept.

Depressing isn't it?

[rastuscat]

Riiiiight. So the OP asks a question and nobody is allowed to answer? Odd way to run a forum.

Nope, never said we can't debate issues. But how about being constructive. Or is that too much to ask?

On the positive side, with the NZ exchange rate still going strong my imports of donut batter are going well.

300136

[Blackbird]

Until I retired I worked with maybe forty women not a single one of whom would have even heard of "road craft". One of the males might have been familiar with the idea having been in the British Police in a former life.

Raising the standard? We'd need to start by introducing the concept.

Depressing isn't it?

Ron,

I have a confession :rolleyes: Until I joined IAM just over 3 years ago, my knowledge of Roadcraft was pretty much non-existent too, yet the impact on my riding and driving has been immense - a genuine lifesaver. Not bad for a $40 annual subscription and a $50 Advanced Test fee eh?

It is a bit depressing but not depressed at the moment - off to Canada and Alaska for a month later today :niceone:

[Reckless]

Which is why dirt based experience produces better results.

I sort of agree with Jim, without feedback you learn very little, in fact you accumulate and reinforce bad habits. And the only feedback you get on the road is likely to be fatal. It's no place to learn anything.

In the dirt poor performance is far more likely to result in more useful consequences: enough pain to cause you to try other options, but not usually enough to cripple or kill you.

Would all those in favour of reallocating Akatarawa forest as a public training ground with publicly funded XR200s free from a concession stall at either end please raise your hands.

AMEN! have to agree 100% :clap:
I rode dirt and road ( Kawasaki F11 air cooled 250 and it was Brand new lol) with my first bike for about 3 years. Then I rode for 25+ years on the road only. Then started dirt again. I must say I re learned more about how control a bike in the first year back on the dirt than I could ever have imagined I'd forgotten?
When I teach someone to ride its always on the kids CRF150f on the dirt (well in a paddock).
Some road bike training would greatly benefit from a few sessions on bike skill on the dirt.

[MrKiwi]

The official view these days is that crashes are inevitable, people will always make mistakes, but the severity of the crash can be reduced by a combination of safe speeds, safe roadsides, safe road users and safe vehicles. That last one pretty much knackers motorbikes if you ask me.

That's the safe system approach to road safety in a nutshell. The problem/challenge is the safe system for road safety is a concept developed for cars, trucks, buses etc. Motorbikes are a little outside that system, but my view is it is not impossible to bring them in. That's why I, and others are suggesting, making our roads safer for motorcycling is useful, as it targets the safe roads/roadsides bit of the plan. The risk for us bikers is that when we are involved in an accident, our exposure rate is 18-20 higher than in a car. Safer users is addressed by training (good debate in this thread on that one) and I'd rather not talk about safer speeds (but should at some point I guess!)

My view is the last one can be worked on. It's not possible to make bikes as safe as cars, but technology can help to reduce both the rate and severity of accidents. ABS, traction control and motorbike stability control are useful in this respect (at least on tarmac anyway).

[MrKiwi]

AMEN! have to agree 100% :clap:
I rode dirt and road ( Kawasaki F11 air cooled 250 and it was Brand new lol) with my first bike for about 3 years. Then I rode for 25+ years on the road only. Then started dirt again. I must say I re learned more about how control a bike in the first year back on the dirt than I could ever have imagined I'd forgotten?
When I teach someone to ride its always on the kids CRF150f on the dirt (well in a paddock).
Some road bike training would greatly benefit from a few sessions on bike skill on the dirt.

Interesting points, and I suspect you're both right.

[MrKiwi]

- off to Canada and Alaska for a month later today :niceone:

Have a good one - I'm hoping to get up there next year, or maybe 4 weeks through Europe...

[Blackbird]

Have a good one - I'm hoping to get up there next year, or maybe 4 weeks through Europe...

Thanks Mr K :niceone: ! This one is down to my wife although I'm happy to tag along (despite preferring to spend it on another bike.... shhhhhhh :nono: ). Train through the Canadian Rockies, staying with relies on Vancouver Island and a cruise to Alaska with side trips. The nearest we get to 2 wheels is me riding a mountain bike on an Alaskan side trip!

[MrKiwi]

Thanks Mr K :niceone: ! This one is down to my wife although I'm happy to tag along (despite preferring to spend it on another bike.... shhhhhhh :nono: ). Train through the Canadian Rockies, staying with relies on Vancouver Island and a cruise to Alaska with side trips. The nearest we get to 2 wheels is me riding a mountain bike on an Alaskan side trip!

Nice :yeah:. I bought a bike this year (this week in fact, pick it up in a couple of weeks) hence I'm not heading anywhere overseas in a hurry :oi-grr:although I'm aiming to ride the new bike any chance I get :2thumbsup...

[swbarnett]

I sort of agree with Jim, without feedback you learn very little, in fact you accumulate and reinforce bad habits. And the only feedback you get on the road is likely to be fatal. It's no place to learn anything.
While I totally agree that getting training at any stage of a riding career is to be encouraged I honestly believe that what you gain from your own experience depends largely on how self-observant you are. I tend to over-analyse my riding so I've managed to pick up quite a bit from my own mistakes. I used to say that the best way to learn on the road was to first know you current ability and then push beyond that just a little bit at a time. If you tend to under-estimate your own ability this can work very well.

And just to be clear - I agree that experience alone is no substitute for formal training or mentoring when it's available.

[Ocean1]

That's why I, and others are suggesting, making our roads safer for motorcycling is useful, as it targets the safe roads/roadsides bit of the plan.

Have I mentioned the signs?

300139

I imagine official types would suggest that they're a safety feature, for all types of vehicle. And they're right, the hard evidence is that they cause accidents.

Not only do they cause accidents for all categories of vehicle but common sense indicates that the more there are on the roadside the higher the injury and fatality rate will be for bikers.

Get rid of the useless, dangerous fucking things.

[Ocean1]

While I totally agree that getting training at any stage of a riding career is to be encouraged I honestly believe that what you gain from your own experience depends largely on how self-observant you are. I tend to over-analyse my riding so I've managed to pick up quite a bit from my own mistakes. I used to say that the best way to learn on the road was to first know you current ability and then push beyond that just a little bit at a time. If you tend to under-estimate your own ability this can work very well.

And just to be clear - I agree that experience alone is no substitute for formal training or mentoring when it's available.

Different subject. Training is limited both by the quantity of motivation available from both sides of the deal and your ability to observe the changes your tutor recommends. If doing something "wrong" feels the same as doing it the way your tutor suggests then the lesson won't stick much where it counts: in your sub-conscious, where the riding of motorcycles actually occurs.

Experience doesn't rely on anyone's interpretation of what's "correct", it simply punished poor decisions. Your sub-conscious remembers that lesson.

Road experience punishes poor decisions by maiming or killing you. Of limited use, unless you're already expert enough to gain your experience in that very narrow band of performance variables which give you useful feedback without killing you. In which case you don't actually need much further experience, do you?

Riding on the dirt not only gives you a much wider band of performance variables to juggle in which to learn your limits but the consequences of any poorly perceived feedback or poor decisions are far more likely to be appropriate for the purposes of improving your perception of the limits of those variables and your skills in managing them.

[swbarnett]

Different subject. Training is limited both by the quantity of motivation available from both sides of the deal and your ability to observe the changes your tutor recommends. If doing something "wrong" feels the same as doing it the way your tutor suggests then the lesson won't stick much where it counts: in your sub-conscious, where the riding of motorcycles actually occurs.

Experience doesn't rely on anyone's interpretation of what's "correct", it simply punished poor decisions. Your sub-conscious remembers that lesson.

Road experience punishes poor decisions by maiming or killing you. Of limited use, unless you're already expert enough to gain your experience in that very narrow band of performance variables which give you useful feedback without killing you. In which case you don't actually need much further experience, do you?

Riding on the dirt not only gives you a much wider band of performance variables to juggle in which to learn your limits but the consequences of any poorly perceived feedback or poor decisions are far more likely to be appropriate for the purposes of improving your perception of the limits of those variables and your skills in managing them.
If I've read this right we're saying the same thing in different ways.

[Reckless]

If I've read this right

Buggered if I know like reading Romeo and Juliet. Thats a compliment BTW :)

On Dirt You learn to loose grip ( front and rear) and come back, to use your weight, to trust the bike, that its better than you in most cases, Not to shit yourself and freeze, relax even when your in the shit, never give up your options until impact and dirt/woods riding teaches you about 'Target fixation" IN a BIG way!!
If all that fails you really do learn how to fall off with the least damage.

I remember a Bermbuster in Taupo. Thought i was doin real well till the rear kicked me in the ass and tossed me up over the bars.
There's me feet in the air, Helmet down by the front guard, hips on the steering head.
But the CR250 was going along over the ruts straight as a die on its own.
I had this vision If it was human it would have been saying WTF are you doing up there cock, I'm fine :bash:
So I clambered back on without falling off and carried on my merry way.
I'm not talking big jumps just woods and trails. Its one arena when you really do learn something everytime you ride.

You never forget shit like that especially in that "OH Fuck" moment when granny has pulled out on you.

Nuff said sorry I digress, back n topic?

[Akzle]

Different subject. Training is limited both by the quantity of motivation available from both sides of the deal and your ability to observe the changes your tutor recommends. If doing something "wrong" feels the same as doing it the way your tutor suggests then the lesson won't stick much where it counts: in your sub-conscious, where the riding of motorcycles actually occurs.

Experience doesn't rely on anyone's interpretation of what's "correct", it simply punished poor decisions. Your sub-conscious remembers that lesson.

Road experience punishes poor decisions by maiming or killing you. Of limited use, unless you're already expert enough to gain your experience in that very narrow band of performance variables which give you useful feedback without killing you. In which case you don't actually need much further experience, do you?

Riding on the dirt not only gives you a much wider band of performance variables to juggle in which to learn your limits but the consequences of any poorly perceived feedback or poor decisions are far more likely to be appropriate for the purposes of improving your perception of the limits of those variables and your skills in managing them.

one should refrain from spurious verbiage when dimunitive communication will suffice.

[SuperMac]

Which is why dirt based experience produces better results.

I sort of agree with Jim, without feedback you learn very little, in fact you accumulate and reinforce bad habits. And the only feedback you get on the road is likely to be fatal. It's no place to learn anything.

In the dirt poor performance is far more likely to result in more useful consequences: enough pain to cause you to try other options, but not usually enough to cripple or kill you.

However . . . doesn't it make more sense to learn how to not get into trouble, rather than what to do when it happens?

This ssems to agree:

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/18/Suppl_1/A1.1.abstract

DOES PRE-LICENSED DRIVING EXPERIENCE AFFECT CRASH RISK AS AN UNSUPERVISED RESTRICTED LICENSED DRIVER? FINDINGS FROM THE NEW ZEALAND DRIVERS STUDY

D Begg1, J Langley1, R Brookland1, P Gulliver1, S Ameratunga2

1Injury Prevention Research Unit, University of Otago, New Zealand
2School of Population Health, University of Auckland, New Zealand

Abstract

Background
There is a popular notion that driving experience before commencing licensing may help improve driver safety as a newly licensed driver. The limited empirical evidence available suggests that the opposite may be the case.

Aim
To examine the relationship between on and off road pre-licensed driving experience and crash risk as an unsupervised restricted licensed driver.

Methods
The New Zealand Drivers Study (NZDS) - a prospective cohort study – included 1,424 15-24 year old drivers who completed study-specific interviews at each licence stage (learner, restricted and full) of the graduated licensing process. Pre-licensed driving experience, car/motorcycle use both on and off road, demographic and behavioural data were obtained at the learner licence interview. Car driving exposure data was obtained at restricted and full licence interviews. Crash data sources were police traffic crash reports and self-reports.

Results
Using multivariate logistic regression, after controlling for potential confounders (driving exposure, gender, residential location, alcohol, cannabis, herbal high use, impulsivity, sensation seeking, aggression/hostility), off road motorcycle use (OR=1.9) was the only pre-licensed driving behaviour associated with crash risk

Contribution to the Field
Overall, pre-licensed driving experience did not affect crash risk when unsupervised driving was allowed, although off road motorcycling may increase risk.

[Ocean1]

However . . . doesn't it make more sense to learn how to not get into trouble, rather than what to do when it happens?

It makes a damned sight more sense to learn both, dunnit?


This ssems to agree:

http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/18/Suppl_1/A1.1.abstract

DOES PRE-LICENSED DRIVING EXPERIENCE AFFECT CRASH RISK AS AN UNSUPERVISED RESTRICTED LICENSED DRIVER? FINDINGS FROM THE NEW ZEALAND DRIVERS STUDY

D Begg1, J Langley1, R Brookland1, P Gulliver1, S Ameratunga2

1Injury Prevention Research Unit, University of Otago, New Zealand
2School of Population Health, University of Auckland, New Zealand

Abstract

Background
There is a popular notion that driving experience before commencing licensing may help improve driver safety as a newly licensed driver. The limited empirical evidence available suggests that the opposite may be the case.

Aim
To examine the relationship between on and off road pre-licensed driving experience and crash risk as an unsupervised restricted licensed driver.

Methods
The New Zealand Drivers Study (NZDS) - a prospective cohort study – included 1,424 15-24 year old drivers who completed study-specific interviews at each licence stage (learner, restricted and full) of the graduated licensing process. Pre-licensed driving experience, car/motorcycle use both on and off road, demographic and behavioural data were obtained at the learner licence interview. Car driving exposure data was obtained at restricted and full licence interviews. Crash data sources were police traffic crash reports and self-reports.

Results
Using multivariate logistic regression, after controlling for potential confounders (driving exposure, gender, residential location, alcohol, cannabis, herbal high use, impulsivity, sensation seeking, aggression/hostility), off road motorcycle use (OR=1.9) was the only pre-licensed driving behaviour associated with crash risk

Contribution to the Field
Overall, pre-licensed driving experience did not affect crash risk when unsupervised driving was allowed, although off road motorcycling may increase risk.


So, either experience produces negative performance gains or they didn't in fact control all significant confounding factors. Yes?

Like dirt bike riders pre-selecting for higher risk tolerance, for example.

Sorry, I don't know how they got those results but I'm sticking to my empirical observation that enhanced feedback experience produces performance improvements, rather than a decline in performance.

[george formby]

It makes a damned sight more sense to learn both, dunnit?


I'm no statistician but selecting the performance of 15 - 24 year olds on the road based on who has been hooning on the dirt & who has not is an answer looking for a question. What a misleading load of tosh.

Dunnit? Your darn tootin it does.
Absolutely everybody has said that my G/F is riding the wrong bike, a trailie. To tall, to heavy whatever. But. She can ride it anywhere, can stop the bike on any surface, plans ahead & has learned how to really ride it. Body weight, throttle & clutch control etc.
Riding off road has become a big part of making her a better rider. Expecting the future of your road riding career to be bump & slip free is ludicrous.
PPPPPP. As they say in the army.

[R650R]

Kinda related, just seen a worksafe graphic in construction mag, maybe they're logo etc...

Anyway picture a square with four boxes and a centred cross with four arrows poking out side the box.
From topleft clockwise the boxes say: Enforce, Self Directed, Educate, Engage/Commit
And the arrows: Aware, Committed, Unaware, Not Committed.

Seems to be a good way to assess where things need to head :)

[MrKiwi]

My views on training is you are never too old or never too experienced not to continue to get something out of it, depends on the quality of the training provider though. There is a spectrum. One of the best techniques to learning that I and many others are aware of is the role of a mentor. It is one thing to learn some new skills in training, but another to translate that to your own riding on the road. A mentor can look at your riding and provide valuable feedback.

Pre and post licence training is useful. Pre licence training should in my view be mandatory. Post licence training is desirable and should be readily available at reasonable prices. The availability of affordable training is patchy around the country. In certain circumstances it is arguable that post licence training should also be mandatory, as discussed earlier in this thread.

I'm not sure post licence training should be mandatory for all riders, but encouraging all riders to actively keep up their skills is a good idea. Just my two cents worth...

[swbarnett]

My views on training is you are never too old or never too experienced not to continue to get something out of it
Exactly. Even if it's just the confidence that you're doing it right.


Pre and post licence training is useful.
By far the best way to learn to drive/ride is a combination of both training and experience - train, ride, train, ride etc. etc. Also, lots of miles on the road in a short time can't be underestimated. I learned more during the 2.5months I spent as an Auckland m/c courier than I had in any of the previous two years since getting my license.


I'm not sure post licence training should be mandatory for all riders, but encouraging all riders to actively keep up their skills is a good idea. Just my two cents worth...
My father taught me to drive (car). When I got my license he told me that "now you start to learn". Meaning that, once you get your license you can really get out there and work on what you've been taught. For the first 6months after I got my licesnse I wasn't alowed to drive without one of my parents in the passenger seat. I benifited greatly from their experience.

Of course, when I learned to drive there was no graduated license scheme. I suppose what I'm really tallking about when applied to today is mandatory training before graduating to the next stage of license. And perhaps a refresher 1 year after passing your full.

[george formby]

I was lucky enough to get on the road through the star rider scheme in the UK. The beginning of staged licensing. Having a very capable bike mad parent helped immensely, too. Still does.
I'm trying to repeat my experience with my G/F. I've always been in a cocoon of betterment and now try to pass that on.

The very cheap, good, subsidised courses offered by pro rider are a fantastic start IMHO. Cheap & accessible ongoing training.

More initiatives like this have got to be a good thing. A significant number of road users are genuinely interested in their vehicles & improving their abilities but actual tuition is cost prohibitive.

Subsidised training, rego discounts, insurance discounts etc would appeal to quite a few people and once established would be the smart route for younger road users to get the vehicle of their dreams. And be safe. Also a lot of fun for experienced riders/drivers. Certainly has been for me.

A proactive approach to making people safer.

Most people still won't give a shit, they are already brilliant, but over time the demographic with half a brain or more will see the personal & financial wisdom of investing time & a little cash in being a better, safer road user.
:laugh:I would like to think so anyway.

[MrKiwi]

Thanks everyone for your feedback, I found it very useful with a number of insightful comments from you. I'm now going to polish up my advocacy position and see if I can get this into several motoring trade publications...

[Pixie]

I hope you mean that this may be their intention, as it certainly isn't a reality.

As one example, NZTA doesn't know how to lay tarseal.

NZTA does know how to lay tar seal.They know all the processes available and choose the cheapest tender.

[MrKiwi]

Two publications so far:

AutoTalk a couple of weeks back (aimed at the car folk), and upcoming,
a guest editorial in Bike Rider Magazine...


Good to get some air time... :niceone:

[buggerit]

I see they have added a bit of paint to a couple of corners on the Kopu-Hikuai's, unfortuanately they have cocked it up and actually made the corners more dangerous.They have added closely spaced dash lines on the inside of the centre and side markings of the road
to give the visual effect of a narrower road to make people slow down , but they have done it through the corner instead of
before the corner, so have created a distraction to the driver/riders they are trying to protect plus adding more paint
where we dont want it, on a corner.:crazy:

[MrKiwi]

I see they have added a bit of paint to a couple of corners on the Kopu-Hikuai's, unfortuanately they have cocked it up and actually made the corners more dangerous.They have added closely spaced dash lines on the inside of the centre and side markings of the road
to give the visual effect of a narrower road to make people slow down , but they have done it through the corner instead of
before the corner, so have created a distraction to the driver/riders they are trying to protect plus adding more paint
where we dont want it, on a corner.:crazy:

I haven't got up to those parts for a while so haven't seen the outcome. Sounds very disappointing from your description. The whole purpose of looking at those markings was to make it more friendly for motorcyclists, not less friendly. :no: