Death toll on the roads is virtually identical to 2019

[Jeeper]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/123849914/its-not-the-tourists-road-death-toll-virtually-unchanged-from-2019-despite-border-closures

I have suspected this all along. Kiwi drivers are not as competent as they believe they are. In fact, my most recent road trip also supports the notion. In some respects, I don't believe speed is a significant contributor as well. It's the attitude that is the problem, particularly the unwillingness to train existing license holders for improving skills. Cars and bikes are much more powerful now than ever before, yet people got their licences some years ago with no further training required to handle extra power.

Just my thoughts for the year 2020. May the year 2021 bring much joy and happiness to everyone.

[F5 Dave]

What about the effect of wanking while driving?. Or updating Farcebook which is largely the same thing.

[caspernz]

This revelation isn't news to anyone who can read statistics.

Nor is it a surprise to anyone involved in driver/rider education.

Lack of political willpower to make meaningful change :brick:

[Jeeper]

This revelation isn't news to anyone who can read statistics.

Nor is it a surprise to anyone involved in driver/rider education.

Lack of political willpower to make meaningful change :brick:What changes would you suggest? NZTA and AT are full of idiots as far as I can see with respect to traffic management and planning.

Driving license should not be perpetual. A refresher every 10 years at renewal should include at least some sort of testing. If the driver can provide evidence of attending a training course, this could be exempted. But then do we even have such courses available for drivers? I know about the rider training courses. Why doesn't ACC sponsors such courses for drivers?

[malcy25]

What changes would you suggest? NZTA and AT are full of idiots as far as I can see with respect to traffic management and planning.



How's about actual policing, rather than speed management.

[Owl]

Why doesn't ACC sponsors such courses for drivers?
Because drivers would then have to pay for it and they're the majority, not minority like us.

[FJRider]

I don't believe speed is a significant contributor as well.

Speed in itself in not the issue. BUT ... if you believe that "Speed" is anything over the posted speed limit for the road you're on ... you've got it wrong.

The "I have right of way ... therefore I have no need to slow down as I approach this next intersection controlled by the give way/stop sign" is an attitude issue. Not a skill or ability issue.

It's the same as driving at the same speed (on dry or wet roads) and expecting the same stopping distances ... which also makes an it an attitude issue. Rather than a skill issue.


It's the attitude that is the problem.

This is the major factor in any accident. The attitude of the person that was in control of the vehicle. Speed can be a factor in retaliative to the situation/conditions at the time. And not necessarily over any posted limit for that area. Just simply too fast for the conditions ... or the ability of the driver/rider to control their vehicle IN those conditions.

Reducing damage and increasing your chance's of survival ... can be achieved by reducing speed. Which funnily enough ... is the basic reason speed limits are reduced in high crash zone area's.


But ... who wants to live forever ... eh ... :shutup:

[FJRider]

Because drivers would then have to pay for it and they're the majority, not minority like us.

There is an ACC levy attached to all motor vehicle registration. Not just for motorcycles.

[pritch]

Passing the drivers licencing test should be the beginning of a driver's education. Sadlly in this country most people never do anything else to improve their knowledge or ability. A small percentage will do a defensive deiving course but that'll be it.

Holden and BMW were running driver training courses but they are expensive and only a few will do those. Other than that the only people who will do anything about improving their skills are the enthusiasts and they are a small proportion of the total number of drivers on the road.

Apparently my next "driving test" will involve the Montreal Cognitive Assessment. The same test made famous by Donald J Trump.

[Laava]

I blame the tourists. It was much safer when they were here, clogging up the roads and therefore keeping the average speed way down.

[roogazza]

No surprises really, Humans do dumb shit !!

30 odd years as a Copper has helped mould me into negative bugger.

Just look after yourself guys and girls, try to keep all your experience to the forefront of your thinking when out driving/riding.

Good luck for 2021 xx

[Owl]

There is an ACC levy attached to all motor vehicle registration. Not just for motorcycles.
I was referring to the $25 safety levy that's only applied to motorcyclists.

[Jeeper]

Last week on my road trip, I came across a section where everyone was driving at 90 (posted speed limit 100). At the passing lane I went past a few cars and the reason became apparent, a cop car was doing a leisurely 90. I was the only one to overtake the cop (still remaining within the limit).

This is how road rage starts.

[Jeeper]

How's about actual policing, rather than speed management.What would you have them police?

[jellywrestler]

What would you have them police?

all roading offences, they do speed as it's backed my a machine, no sitting in court for hours waiting to appear in front of the judge when someone challenges your 'judgement' on the offence etc. they should put cameras in the cars, record the offence on the road, ticket people and have the video evidence to back it up, then the coppers on the road will actually want to deal with all offences rather than the easy one

[FJRider]

all roading offences, they do speed as it's backed my a machine, no sitting in court for hours waiting to appear in front of the judge when someone challenges your 'judgement' on the offence etc. they should put cameras in the cars, record the offence on the road, ticket people and have the video evidence to back it up, then the coppers on the road will actually want to deal with all offences rather than the easy one

And if the ticket (even just a speed infringement ticket) goes to court ... the Cop that issued the ticket has to be in court too.

[caspernz]

What changes would you suggest? NZTA and AT are full of idiots as far as I can see with respect to traffic management and planning.

Driving license should not be perpetual. A refresher every 10 years at renewal should include at least some sort of testing. If the driver can provide evidence of attending a training course, this could be exempted. But then do we even have such courses available for drivers? I know about the rider training courses. Why doesn't ACC sponsors such courses for drivers?

Oh I reckon there's plenty of clever folks at NZTA & AT, just a limit to what they can make happen within their constraints. Politics gets in the way. The driver licensing reform bill sitting in a politicians bottom drawer just one example of that...

ACC has plenty of good intentions, the Ride Forever courses are awesome, but getting enough riders to partake is the hurdle. Talk to any SCU member, the same basic stuff gets done wrong over and over.
So without a compelling reason to get a driver to partake in any post licence training, can't blame ACC for not offering something very few actually want to do.
There's a defensive driving course for existing licence holders that AA run as an example, but it's somewhat basic and judging by how few of them are run, not enough folks wanting to do them.

Perhaps being forced to attend traffic school instead of paying a fine might bring about a result?



How's about actual policing, rather than speed management.

The perception of enforcement being lacking, other than speed, is one of my bugbears as well. The basics aren't enforced, folks get frustrated, the standard declines and it perpetuates from there. The basics of following distance, indicating, keeping left unless overtaking, driving to the conditions, avoiding distractions...would love to see that given some focus. But hey, can't blame the boys in blue as it's a numbers game and they haven't got enough resources.

So look at it any way you want, road safety is a political and social problem. Sadly I don't see things improving anytime soon.

All I can do is look after myself as best as I can :innocent:

[Bonez]

How's about actual policing, rather than speed management.In the last 12 months I've witnessed cops aprehend quite a few thugs and helped them achieve it. As
roogazza said people are dumb...

On yesterdays ride a policeman was assisting a driver who had vehicle issues in Ekatahuna.

[Jeeper]

Casper the friendly ghost, I agree with your assessment mostly, but I do think there is over emphasis on speed enforcement. I have attended Ride Forever courses because I wanted to improve my technique. I have even attended off-road driving courses where I could, rather than just go rip up precious tracks that we can still use.

My two pet peeves are drivers sitting in the right lane for no reason and people who cut in between the space I have left in front of me and the car I'm following.

[Bonez]

I agree with your assessment mostly, but I do think there is over emphasis on speed enforcement. I have attended Ride Forever courses because I wanted to improve my technique. I have even attended off-road driving courses where I could, rather than just go rip up precious tracks that we can still use.

My two pet peeves are drivers sitting in the right lane for no reason and people who cut in between the space I have left in front of me and the car I'm following.I go for a ride:whistle:

A nice 400km run tomorrow....

[Trade_nancy]

Gotta keep being ultra-alert. I ride a Postie bike for a crust. On Xmas eve about Noon on my way to start of 2nd run I aproached green light on busy Bunnings Intersection on Tremaine (Palmy)..saw a Police car coming towards me..so thought..better not go through an orange turning red light...so changed down a gear ready to brake. No need to worry about my driving/riding...the cop did a right turn in front of me cutting me off - no indicators and he never saw me. It happens. Keep looking and waiting..as they say - every car on the road is operated by someone trying to kill you.

[Gremlin]

But then do we even have such courses available for drivers? I know about the rider training courses. Why doesn't ACC sponsors such courses for drivers?
Why does ACC sponsor the courses for riders? It's not because there are a bunch of riders in ACC that want to give riders something free. Riders are crashing and getting injured in the process. Putting them back together costs money, it costs ACC money.

ACC provides the courses as an investment. Less riders crashing equals less dollars putting them back together. That's the aim. If the statistics said the courses do bugger all, it would be canned ASAP.

Drivers mostly have metal surrounding them, and that metal has got safer and safer over the years, with crumple zones, air bags etc. It costs a lot less, on average (as there are a lot more drivers than riders) to put drivers/passengers back together, if they're even injured (compare injuries in minor fender benders, cars v bikes).

Yes, I'd like to see the average cop enforcing all road rules all the time. There are areas where the cops do focus on centre line cutting, holding up others etc, but it's not the norm. The biggest thing tho, is trying to get the riders most at risk, on a Ride Forever course... and they are the most likely not to take up a course...

[Jeeper]

One thing you forgot about ACC, being an insurance company focused on rehab, a fatality is cheaper for them from cost perspective. Injury has to be supported for life potentially (i.e. ongoing costs).

In my argument, the focus is on lack of competence of local drivers resulting in similar fatalities as any other year. How do we as a collective improve the skills of an average driver. I used ACC funded training for riders as an example which could be replicated in some ways for drivers. Perhaps, perhaps not.

[Navy Boy]

Dow here in Blenheim the new (Read lower) speed limits on SH6 between Blenheim and Nelson came into force last month. I've now travelled the route 3 times, twice in a car and once on a bike.

First time got sat behind a ute towing a caravan in damp conditions. The rig was doing between 80 and 90Km/hr so stayed where I was - Unfortunately the ute also towing who was behind me didn't think the same and overtook less than 1Km from Havelock, nicely filling any following distance I had left in front of me...

Fair enough, he's allowed to pass but the lower limits (And attitude of the driver) meant that he was going to perform a risky manoeuvre as he wanted to make progress.

The other thing I've noticed is that it's very easy to day dream when sitting at the lower speeds. Especially if behind something else as you feel safe when travelling at the lower speed. I suspect this is what happens to many car drivers during the holiday season which in turns leads to poor decision making.

But hey - You're all going slower so things are safer right???

Personally the evidence I've seen thus far on SH6 suggests that it isn't safer and that the concentration threshold has been reached.

Soporific is how I'd term it :(

[nerrrd]

It’s all about perception of risk, isn’t it? And everyone’s perception of risk, and driving behaviour as a result of that, is different. Public education has worked pretty well with drink driving, but general driving behaviour looks to be a tougher nut to crack.

I agree that the best way to improve the standard of driving is to make the licence much harder to get and keep. Unfortunately we’ve built our transport infrastructure on the guiding principle of easy access to private vehicles, and changing that now is going to be a long and expensive process.

Anyway, it’ll all be irrelevant in a couple of years like they were saying a couple of years ago when all the self-driving vehicles take over...crickets.

Actually the boffins looking into risk management for those might have some interesting insights.

[pete376403]

Dow here in Blenheim the new (Read lower) speed limits on SH6 between Blenheim and Nelson came into force last month. I've now travelled the route 3 times, twice in a car and once on a bike.

:(

WRT the 80 Km/Hr limit thats been imposed here - I was in Nelson a few weeks ago and saw all the "80" signs with tape over them. Asked a local about the reason. He said (and correct me if I am wrong) that there were three fatalities in a short space of time, and the local council had to be seen to be "doing something", even though one of the deaths was a suicide, one was a drunk driver and the third was a head-on from overtaking in the wrong place. Is this correct? Because if so, imposing lower limits isn't going to prevent at least two of these, but may well lead to more of the third due to frustration /impatience. And the only cop I saw between Nelson and Blenheim was not out looking for poor driving but parked off the side of an uphill straight, no doubt with the radar on.

[OddDuck]

+1 to above, agreed. We are hitting the limits of the lower speed campaign's actual safety returns.

I've just come back from a two-day ride and have some observations... firstly I have never seen ordinary Kiwis being so generally nice on the roads. Ever. Ride up behind large, slow campervan / SUV towing caravan / etc, sigh, sit back at polite distance and wait for safe and legal opportunity to pass... oh what's that? Indicating left, pulling over, waving me through? Awesome thanks mate!

It happened no less than five times in a row on the Rimutaka hill in the morning going north. This included a two-trailer car transporter.

The aggro that I grew up with on the roads was mostly not there. There was still a trace of it, but tailgating, risky overtakes etc... honestly there were only three people I saw doing this stuff. Two were other bikers. The third was a hotted up ute over the 'Takas on the way back home. That was it.

While away I heard a story of a double fatal car crash just before Christmas Day, from people with one degree of separation from the family. Pretty tragic... abusive relationship, drugs as part of the lifestyle, loose dog in the back, neither occupant wearing seatbelts and at least one of them went through the windshield. Horrible and also utterly preventable... buckle up. Click. Done. But they hadn't, and from what I'm hearing it's happening more and more.

So, a couple of questions: how much of this season's road toll is like this? Are the Serious Crash Unit's reports accessible to the general public? Reading the news makes it look like a random bad-luck lottery, and I'm sure some of it is, but when they're just not bothering with the basics then I think we'll have to accept that target zero is not going to happen.

[jellywrestler]

And if the ticket (even just a speed infringement ticket) goes to court ... the Cop that issued the ticket has to be in court too.

no it doesn't, hence the concentration on speed, the speed is backed up by radar, the judge beleives the cop has signed an oath, and has a machine to back it up, end of story. As said, if they recorded things then there's hard video evidence to back them up, streamlines the whole thing, be good in car chases too to gain info

[rastuscat]

A research project we did a few years back found a few things that we already knew anecdotally.

People think they are better than average drivers. That's because they see everyone else's errors, but not their own.

It's also not how averages work. If everyone was better than average, the average would be higher, which it isn't.

People generally think more driver education is needed............for other people. Of course, they don't think they need it themselves.

Optimism bias leads us to believe that we won't be the one that crashes. We accept that crashes will happen, but it won't be us. And because it won't be us, we don't need to change.

People want change, but they don't want to change.

The cost of injuries arising from motorcycle crashes are disproportionate to VKT. No matter whose fault they are, they cost more on average than other vehicle crashes. That's why ACC charges more, and invests in Ride Forever.

[HenryDorsetCase]

What would you have them police?

red light runners.
people who change lanes without indicating and treating traffic as if they were lapping backmarkers in the Indy 500
cunts who are on the inner lane of a roundabout, see the exit they want and just go - no head turn, no indication. I was nearly killed by that a couple times this year.
Anyone texting while driving including while stopped at lights should be taken to the side of the road and shot. No trial, no due process, just two in the back of the head and the car parked with the keys in the ignition for anyone to use.
tailgaters.
anyone with any distraction in the vehicle including children. My view is that anyone with children in a vehicle should have to use a specific type of vehicle where the driver sits in a separate compartment and the children are loose in the rest of the vehicle. No interaction whatever. Any breach, two in the back of the head.
Abolish all speed limits and advisory signs. This would force people to use their own judgment. Get it wrong? You guessed it - if Darwin does not sort you out then two in the back of the head.
reverse the onus of proof. If you are involved in an "accident"* then it is your fault until you prove otherwise. If you can, then you may live. This particularly applies to a car driver v cyclist or motorcyclist.

*accident - no such thing.

thatll do for starters. When I rule you all (and I will) this will be what happens. I might make people drive on the right (but in left hand drive cars) just so they will be a bit more careful. .. haven't decided.

[jellywrestler]

A research project we did a few years back found a few things that we already knew anecdotally.

People think they are better than average drivers. That's because they see everyone else's errors, but not their own.

It's also not how averages work. If everyone was better than average, the average would be higher, which it isn't.

People generally think more driver education is needed............for other people. Of course, they don't think they need it themselves.

Optimism bias leads us to believe that we won't be the one that crashes. We accept that crashes will happen, but it won't be us. And because it won't be us, we don't need to change.

People want change, but they don't want to change.

The cost of injuries arising from motorcycle crashes are disproportionate to VKT. No matter whose fault they are, they cost more on average than other vehicle crashes. That's why ACC charges more, and invests in Ride Forever. so we have this thing called TV, why isn't that used to teach people how to be better drivers? i went on a defensive driving course forty years ago, we had to through work, there was some interesting small tips that i still pass on these days to people, a short advert wouldn't take much, and get to many. One example is the blinker flashing fast, indicating there's a bulb out, how many people actually know that?

[FJRider]

*accident - no such thing.

Accidental differs from intentional. BUT ... Accidental or not ... accidents come with responsibility. It's factor in the "Accident" process that most people don't get. The premise that a person should be held responsible for their actions is widely held by most. Right up to the time THEY are the one that should be held accountable. THEN ... "It was an accident ... it's not my fault" ...

The ACC policy of "No fault payments" ... regardless of who was at fault in the accident ... payments are made to injured parties ... is seen as supporting this view.

Go figure ...

[FJRider]

so we have this thing called TV, why isn't that used to teach people how to be better drivers? i went on a defensive driving course forty years ago, we had to through work, there was some interesting small tips that i still pass on these days to people, a short advert wouldn't take much, and get to many. One example is the blinker flashing fast, indicating there's a bulb out, how many people actually know that?

I did my driving lessons (Mk 1 Escort [2 door]) and test in school time (1975) and run by the Automobile Association. It included a Defensive driving course. One tip I remember was ... when waiting to turn right off a main road/street ... keep the front wheels pointing straight ahead until you actually turn, so if you get hit from behind by another vehicle prior to you turning (and that HAS happened to me) ... you wont get pushed out into the traffic flow.

And I passed first go. The whole process cost me $25.

[FJRider]

WRT the 80 Km/Hr limit thats been imposed here - I was in Nelson a few weeks ago and saw all the "80" signs with tape over them. Asked a local about the reason. He said (and correct me if I am wrong) that there were three fatalities in a short space of time, and the local council had to be seen to be "doing something", even though one of the deaths was a suicide, one was a drunk driver and the third was a head-on from overtaking in the wrong place. Is this correct? Because if so, imposing lower limits isn't going to prevent at least two of these, but may well lead to more of the third due to frustration /impatience. And the only cop I saw between Nelson and Blenheim was not out looking for poor driving but parked off the side of an uphill straight, no doubt with the radar on.

You can't legislate against the stupid, drunk or suicidal.

ANY Police vehicle seen parked ANYWHERE will have an IMMEDIATE improvement on driver behavior of vehicles in THAT area. Regardless of the actual speeds of any of the vehicles passing it.

Most reduce speed when seeing one ... even if they aren't over the limit. YOU probably even do this ... ;)

[rastuscat]

You can't legislate against the stupid, drunk or suicidal.

ANY Police vehicle seen parked ANYWHERE will have an IMMEDIATE improvement on driver behavior of vehicles in THAT area. Regardless of the actual speeds of any of the vehicles passing it.

Most reduce speed when seeing one ... even if they aren't over the limit. YOU probably even do this ... ;)

The Halo effect.

[Tazz]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/123849914/its-not-the-tourists-road-death-toll-virtually-unchanged-from-2019-despite-border-closures

I have suspected this all along. Kiwi drivers are not as competent as they believe they are. In fact, my most recent road trip also supports the notion. In some respects, I don't believe speed is a significant contributor as well. It's the attitude that is the problem, particularly the unwillingness to train existing license holders for improving skills. Cars and bikes are much more powerful now than ever before, yet people got their licences some years ago with no further training required to handle extra power.

Just my thoughts for the year 2020. May the year 2021 bring much joy and happiness to everyone.

And there are still dickhead campers leaving rubbish everywhere etc etc. I doubt anything will change, but it would be good to see some irate articles in the media correctly targeting us entitled locals for once.

[FJRider]

The Halo effect.

There were a few countries in various parts of the world ... that trialed full size photo cut-out's images of Police vehicles standing (parked ??) beside the road ... everywhere.

Traffic calming at it's best ... :shifty:

[Jeeper]

There were a few countries in various parts of the world ... that trialed full size photo cut-out's images of Police vehicles standing (parked ??) beside the road ... everywhere.

Traffic calming at it's best ... :shifty:I believe UAE and Turkey still use those tactics even now.

[Jeeper]

And there are still dickhead campers leaving rubbish everywhere etc etc. I doubt anything will change, but it would be good to see some irate articles in the media correctly targeting us entitled locals for once.Someone needs to call it out.

[SaferRides]

It is interesting in itself that the road toll has not come down despite the almost complete absence of overseas tourists for most of the year, and almost a month at Level 4.

A proper analysis of the statistics would be interesting but I doubt we will ever see it done.

[Big Dog]

It would be interesting to see if there are any changes in the causes / types of accidents that caused fatalities.

It would also be interesting to compare this to any equivalent data on injury accidents and non injury accidents. For a change I don't know of anyone who has had a reportable accident in the last 12 months. Usually I know a few.

My possibly flawed / biased observations:
Although there is still less traffic in general on the roads, there is a lot more aggression and less patience, stress seems a convenient if not likely reason.

The is a lot more showboating.

A fair few people I work with have mentioned that they have never driven outside Auckland before (meaning their only open road experience is on motorways) but they have been making trips all over the north island while burning surplus leave.

I see a lot more people texting (or otherwise using cellphones) than I used to.

I see a lot more people openly drink / drug driving.
My anecdotal experience pre covid-19 was once every month or two I would see people leaving boozy parties in cars... That they then drive slowly, badly or both.
Since lockdown 2 at least once a fortnight.
Over Christmas more again.

I don't even go to parties or the pub so I shudder to think the real number.

[eldog]

I did my driving lessons (Mk 1 Escort [2 door]) and test in school time (1975) and run by the Automobile Association. It included a Defensive driving course. One tip I remember was ... when waiting to turn right off a main road/street ... keep the front wheels pointing straight ahead until you actually turn, so if you get hit from behind by another vehicle prior to you turning (and that HAS happened to me) ... you wont get pushed out into the traffic flow.

And I passed first go. The whole process cost me $25.

A bottle of milk was about 5 cents?

there has been lots of changes since then.

but has there been any real change in the causes of crashes?

sure more cars, better vehicle and road design.
The attitude hasn’t really changed from those who dont/won’t give a toss.

a coworker was finally picked up for alcohol etc, still thinks it isn’t his problem
blames it on the breakup with girlfriend, work etc. he can’t be the cause surely.
=tosser


i caught up with a friend who is a nurse and generally sees a lot of accident victims.
absolutely hates motorcycle accidents.
detests motorcycles and riders because of the dumb stuff and carnage
sure there is a large problem of SIDSU.

make sure you are all visible, there should be a review of the number of lights on a motorcycle and visibility of indicators when extra lights are used.
be aware of gravel on intersections-quite noticeable in rural areas, or washed out of drives into roadway.

and my old favourite corner cutting

make yourself visible.

[FJRider]

... make yourself visible.

I guess that's why Black motorcycles and Black based riding gear is so popular. Even most reflective gear doesn't work that well in daylight hours. But the real issue is that simply ... to see things you might run into ... first you actually have to look. The old story ... if it appears to be no threat or danger to yourself ... ignore it and it will go away.

But ... some still drive into trucks. And claim they didn't see it.

Go figure.


But YES ... times have changed. Rider safety gear being worn is the norm. BUT ... Only the Helmet is required by law. The rest of the safety gear is optional. So it's the riders choice how badly injured they want to be ... should they be involved in an accident. I'm not playing the blame game ... regardless of whom was at fault ... an accident will cause you pain. A few too many riders put the faith in their own abilities to stay safe, and don't always wear all (or any) of the other safety gear. To the extent that risks are taken that ignore the simple fact that some other road users aren't that skilled at keeping themselves (and other road users) safe.

Most of my working life was spent driving somewhere/something on the road ... motorcycles passing me was common (Even when I was on the posted speed limits :lol:). Even in these recent times ... RIDER behavior isn't that great in far too many cases. Following distances in most cases was the biggest issue.

Yes times HAVE changed ... but in too many cases ... SOME things (too many things) have remained exactly the same.

Go figure ...

[Berries]

My 2 cents.

In general the road network is much the same as it was twenty years ago. Ok, you might find some places now have guardrail, some sites have been realigned, some sites have much better surfacing, a shit load of tactile road markings have been installed and millions spent on signage. There might even be some new roads built to a decent standard in places. But that is a fraction of our network and fatal crashes will continue to hover around the same number in the future no matter how many billions are thrown at engineering our way out of it. Limit all vehicles to 30km/h and ban motorcycles and that might get somewhere, otherwise we are just throwing money away.

Through working in the industry I have come to the conclusion that the focus is wrong. You can’t spend a tiny proportion of the road safety budget on fancy TV adverts and hope that will reach the target audience, and you can’t possibly hope to enforce the way to vision zero if you want to keep the general public on side.

After attending a pretty confronting fatal crash a couple of months ago I have put together a presentation that was initially aimed at one particular school but now looks like it could go wider. There are a multitude of reasons why people under 20 will continue to kill themselves and their friends. I have figured it is best to get in their heads before they do that because the way we do things at present is clearly not working. Over 30'’s like myself are a lost cause if you ask me. We are already entrenched in our ways and I cannot see any realistic or practical way to change that. The saviour of self-driving cars is still years away.


It is interesting in itself that the road toll has not come down despite the almost complete absence of overseas tourists for most of the year, and almost a month at Level 4.

A proper analysis of the statistics would be interesting but I doubt we will ever see it done.
Any proper analysis has always shown overseas drivers were not the issue that people made them out to be. Like on New Years Day when SH6 past Gibbston in Queenstown was closed due to a crash and then a couple of hours later so was the Crown Range. Just doesn't make the headlines like they would if Johnny Foreigner caused it.

[FJRider]

It would be interesting to see if there are any changes in the causes / types of accidents that caused fatalities.



Recently I watched an old episode of Motorway Patrol ... it featured a replay of the roadside camera footage of a lane splitting motorcyclist ... bouncing off a car and into the side of the trailer of the truck that was driving beside it. Only the fast reactions of the driver stopped him being killed.

After all the anger and hype of Wire rope barriers ... I can't recall anybody being killed by riding into them anywhere in NZ. Or a death caused by hitting one.

Tar seal or Asphalt roads don't seem any softer ... and riding off the road and into a tree (or roadside furniture) will still give the same chance of survival. Regardless of how good your riding gear is. Unless you can suggest a new type of accident ... the "Old" style accidents will still kill and maim motorcyclists.

Cars will still be driven into the path of motorcycles ... by people with (apparently) good eyesight.

Stopping motorcyclists from dying on the roads is a big ask. Probably unlikely even. But doing what we can to keep ourselves safe is our best chance of survival. Our own skills and knowledge is what we rely on.

Good safety gear wont stop an accident or make you bullet proof. But it might help us survive an accident. And reduce the amount of injury. But for this to happen ... you have to wear it.

[James Deuce]

Good safety gear wont stop an accident or make you bullet proof. But it might help us survive an accident. And reduce the amount of injury. But for this to happen ... you have to wear it. It's overrated. Plus 10 years on from my last big one, I'm pretty sure death would have been a better option. Life is fundamentally over. I don't have the physical capability to do anything thanks to the cumulative effect of accident injuries. Working, even from home is a major effort, not helped by the fact that it's a pointless job working for newspeak cretins who can't see the irony of the hole they've fallen into. There's no point getting worked up about anything or making people conform to the "right way". We're all going to die and when you're gone, you're gone. Two generations down the track, no one has a memory of you as person anyway and most of us don't contribute anything worthwhile.

[nerrrd]

...there should be a review of the number of lights on a motorcycle and visibility of indicators when extra lights are used...make yourself visible.

I’ve often wondered if the teeny tiny rear lights on bikes are fit for purpose. Assuming that purpose is to make drivers behind you aware that you’re there, rather than just a styling exercise. They all manage to accommodate a reasonable amount of width for the indicators and the number plate, not sure why a bigger rear light couldn’t be integrated into that somehow.

Having said that I personally find in city driving that road positioning and managing the gaps between myself and other traffic is the most effective way of making myself visible, basically making sure that where I am is where the car drivers expect to find me. Which is limiting when it comes to progressing through slower traffic, but then my enormous sidecases aren’t exactly helpful in that regard either.

But nothing is completely foolproof.

[onearmedbandit]

After all the anger and hype of Wire rope barriers ... I can't recall anybody being killed by riding into them anywhere in NZ. Or a death caused by hitting one.



I'm sure there was a guy here (or a friend of his who was a member) who fucked up a high speed wheelie and was killed by going through a WRB. I can't speak of the facts surrounding his speed etc but from what I gather if he had hit anything solid at that speed it would've been a similar result.

[F5 Dave]

It's overrated. Plus 10 years on from my last big one, I'm pretty sure death would have been a better option. Life is fundamentally over. I don't have the physical capability to do anything thanks to the cumulative effect of accident injuries. Working, even from home is a major effort, not helped by the fact that it's a pointless job working for newspeak cretins who can't see the irony of the hole they've fallen into. There's no point getting worked up about anything or making people conform to the "right way". We're all going to die and when you're gone, you're gone. Two generations down the track, no one has a memory of you as person anyway and most of us don't contribute anything worthwhile.
Ahh, but I've just been riding around the backroads jville to makara up the hill to karori before the rain sets in (actually it still seems to be holding off some more) . I was marveling at the fine conditions of the roads which would be gravel or hopelessly broken without the Taxpayer.

I feel refreshed and full of a decent taste of nature.

Thank you taxpayer. Thank you.

[R650R]

Humans are arrogant in their thought that they can control everything to reach a desired outcome.

As someone stated earlier you have a bell curve of ability with many having an illusion of where they belong on that curve.
The sad fact is a significant portion of the population is on the wrong side of that curve, either due to lack of experience, influencing substances or circumstances (drugs, alcohol, fatigue, stress, health) or theyÂ’re just plain dumb.
Training will only effect a change in a small portion of that group. Largely it will just be another tax of time and money against competent people.
Humans make mistakes, none of us are perfect... eventually that mistake happens at an inconvenient time and place that results in an undesirable outcome.
You can blame this group and that group but the laws of averages are kinda good friends with the laws of physics....

Just look at death and injury in the workplace. YouÂ’ve hired a person and even paid them money to do something because they are the best person available to do that task, theyÂ’re probably well on the good side of the bell curve. If your a decent employer youÂ’ll even give them extra training and the best available gear to do the job safely.
But guess what, those people still make mistakes and have accidents.
And there’s no way society would ever accept the level of scrutiny on their driving that your workplace subjects you to of your abilities, so any extra ‘ driver training’ of the public would be a token exercise at best...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Ur71ZnNVk&feature=youtu.be

[Big Dog]

I guess that's why Black motorcycles and Black based riding gear is so popular. Even most reflective gear doesn't work that well in daylight hours. But the real issue is that simply ... to see things you might run into ... first you actually have to look. The old story ... if it appears to be no threat or danger to yourself ... ignore it and it will go away.

But ... some still drive into trucks. And claim they didn't see it.

Go figure.


But YES ... times have changed. Rider safety gear being worn is the norm. BUT ... Only the Helmet is required by law. The rest of the safety gear is optional. So it's the riders choice how badly injured they want to be ... should they be involved in an accident. I'm not playing the blame game ... regardless of whom was at fault ... an accident will cause you pain. A few too many riders put the faith in their own abilities to stay safe, and don't always wear all (or any) of the other safety gear. To the extent that risks are taken that ignore the simple fact that some other road users aren't that skilled at keeping themselves (and other road users) safe.

Most of my working life was spent driving somewhere/something on the road ... motorcycles passing me was common (Even when I was on the posted speed limits [emoji38]). Even in these recent times ... RIDER behavior isn't that great in far too many cases. Following distances in most cases was the biggest issue.

Yes times HAVE changed ... but in too many cases ... SOME things (too many things) have remained exactly the same.

Go figure ...

Re wire ropes, I know of 2.
One a member here.
Over a 30 year period that is statistically insignificant to everyone except their friends and families.

I believe we have reached a stasis of sorts.
If the road toll comes down people take bigger risks, when it goes up people show more caution.


Still, half of the suicide rate on NZ though eh?
But how much more do we spend going around in the same circles that have largely been unchanged since there 90s?

If we spent some of it on mental health would we see less risk taking from people who haven't made the decision to suicide but do indulge in risky behavior due to a lack of self worth / preservation?

I get it, let up on the campaigns and the road toll goes up and people are out of work, but we have reached a point where increased investment will not necessarily mean better results.

It's a tough one and I wouldn't want to be the one making the calls, but I still want to see the real data before making any judgements on the causes.
Sure I have opinions but they are just that until we have corroborating data.


Another relatively new phenomenon, is people working full time jobs, then recreating in a full time way, then trimming their sleep to keep up to date on media / social media.
But that's okay because that all contributes to the economy. Even though they drive like zombies.

[jellywrestler]

I'm sure there was a guy here (or a friend of his who was a member) who fucked up a high speed wheelie and was killed by going through a WRB. I can't speak of the facts surrounding his speed etc but from what I gather if he had hit anything solid at that speed it would've been a similar result.

yip, and there's a been a few killed by seatbealts but the percentage of people saved by them is a little different, same with wire rope barriers

[Berries]

I believe we have reached a stasis of sorts.
If the road toll comes down people take bigger risks, when it goes up people show more caution.
Where did you hear that? The number of people dead on the road has no bearing on how I ride or drive.

I believe there is a balance between allowing mobility in big lumps of metal at speeds too high for the human body to survive and there being a certain number of mistakes that lead to crashes that lead to loss of life. I think we are about at that balance point. "Any number is too many" is quite right, but that completely ignores a number of realities related to moving at anything faster than a good running pace.

[Big Dog]

Where did you hear that? The number of people dead on the road has no bearing on how I ride or drive.

I believe there is a balance between allowing mobility in big lumps of metal at speeds too high for the human body to survive and there being a certain number of mistakes that lead to crashes that lead to loss of life. I think we are about at that balance point. "Any number is too many" is quite right, but that completely ignores a number of realities related to moving at anything faster than a good running pace.I didn't hear it anywhere.
Just my own opinion.

People who are more aware of risks, in my experience, take steps to mitigate them.

People unaware of risks or who assume the risks don't apply to them take bigger risks.

The sort of people who would actively participate in this thread are entirely unlikely to be influenced by marketing because our awareness is already high.
However we still only make up a statistically insignificant portion of the data set.

[Bonez]

I didn't hear it anywhere.
Just my own opinion.

People who are more aware of risks, in my experience, take steps to mitigate them.

People unaware of risks or who assume the risks don't apply to them take bigger risks.

The sort of people who would actively participate in this thread are entirely unlikely to be influenced by marketing because our awareness is already high.
However we still only make up a statistically insignificant portion of the data set.
This is exactly why a I fitted a small 3 LED array below the head light on my '76 Honda CB550F. It's amaxing what a difference it has made at lot of at informing other motorist I'm on their stretch of road. I also wears a dayglow yellow vest when I ride these days.

[FJRider]

I'm sure there was a guy here (or a friend of his who was a member) who fucked up a high speed wheelie and was killed by going through a WRB. I can't speak of the facts surrounding his speed etc but from what I gather if he had hit anything solid at that speed it would've been a similar result.

I stand corrected.

I've been riding motorcycles on the road since I got my license. A few off's over the years. Nothing that required more than a few days in Hospital with a bruised ego and broken collarbone. I was lucky. I toured Malaysia in the early 80's ... my safety gear was a pair of knock-off Levi's and T-shirt ... and an open face Helmet. Army boots to complete the ensemble. A few off's there too. All I rode away from. Others on my two year tour to Singapore (with 1RNZIR) were not so lucky. One friend was killed in an overtaking gone wrong. Other riders here in NZ I knew have also died on our roads. They too became a statistic.

I have never claimed to be any sort of expert rider ... quite the opposite. I was lucky. If I pushed my own riding boundaries ... which I did ... and got it wrong ... which I did at times ... The person I held responsible was myself. I knew I was risking my life. The warning voices sounding in my own head ... sometimes ignored. The line between expert and lucky is hard to fathom ... let alone see. Except in hindsight. I was always happy riding motorcycles. Never any regrets. There were times that I'd not like to see repeated. Actions have reactions ... and I have lived through those reactions. Those reading this post did too. And long may it last for all of us.

The reasons we ride are our own. By our own choice we may live or die. We know the rules ... and the main rule we all understand is that we may die doing it. We all knew that from the beginning ... so none of can say "I didn't know".

I'm coming up to my 63rd birthday soon ... and have no plans to give up riding. It may not be on my FJ1200 ... as I'm not as fit or strong as I was. (I wasn't that strong then either) I'll be selling or trading it on something a little smaller. And suitable for the back roads and back country areas. Well ... that's the plan.

Most of the issues in this thread are about things pretty much out of our control on a nationwide basis ... but on a personal level ... We have choices.
The choices you make and options you have ... can lead you all to a long and happy life. Life however doesn't always work out that way. Motorcycling is dangerous. We ALL know that. We have to trust that the millions of people driving and riding on the same roads WE are ... will be doing their best to keep US alive.

Yeah Right.


Stay safe out there folk's ... and be lucky.

[Swoop]

We all know and appreciate the fact that kiwi drivers are shit, but luckily this will remain constant for the forseeable future so will ensure a sense of predictability.
It does appear to be declining in regards to keeping a vehicle on the appropriate side of the white line though...

I fully supprt HDC's bullet in the back of the head programme. This would also work with red light runners, who would recieve a 12g solid slug through their windscreen as a warning shot (which is actually an aimed shot at the driver). Anyone taking a car to get a replacement windshield due to a 12g hole in it would receive...


My view is that anyone with children in a vehicle should have to use a specific type of vehicle where the driver sits in a separate compartment and the children are loose in the rest of the vehicle.
Cars have a boot. Put the kids in there. DING! next problem to solve?

[HenryDorsetCase]

We all know and appreciate the fact that kiwi drivers are shit, but luckily this will remain constant for the forseeable future so will ensure a sense of predictability.
It does appear to be declining in regards to keeping a vehicle on the appropriate side of the white line though...

I fully supprt HDC's bullet in the back of the head programme. This would also work with red light runners, who would recieve a 12g solid slug through their windscreen as a warning shot (which is actually an aimed shot at the driver). Anyone taking a car to get a replacement windshield due to a 12g hole in it would receive...


Cars have a boot. Put the kids in there. DING! next problem to solve? Sadly, most new vehicles are silly utes or SUV's these days. Sedan cars are not as popular as they were.

Technology will help us here with the red light runners. We can adapt my favourite part of the Aliens movies - sentry guns. When a light goes red, a sensor is fired that arms the guns aimed at the lanes (from across the road and up high say- next to those pointless red light cameras). Once the system is armed anything crossing the line (like a drag racing start line laser or something) gets the metal rain. It could be implemented everywhere there is a red light, it would be cheap, and it would absolutely, positively mean that people took them seriously. Because they sure as shit don't now. Since the worst offenders I have seen are courier vans, and other tradie battlers, judicious placement of the sentry gun would ensure the driver paid the price but not the payload - because I want my fucking parcel, OK?

[Berries]

Sadly, most new vehicles are silly utes or SUV's these days. Sedan cars are not as popular as they were.

Technology will help us here with the red light runners. We can adapt my favourite part of the Aliens movies - sentry guns. When a light goes red, a sensor is fired that arms the guns aimed at the lanes (from across the road and up high say- next to those pointless red light cameras). Once the system is armed anything crossing the line (like a drag racing start line laser or something) gets the metal rain. It could be implemented everywhere there is a red light, it would be cheap, and it would absolutely, positively mean that people took them seriously. Because they sure as shit don't now. Since the worst offenders I have seen are courier vans, and other tradie battlers, judicious placement of the sentry gun would ensure the driver paid the price but not the payload - because I want my fucking parcel, OK?
You’ve got my vote comrade.

[pritch]

You’ve got my vote comrade.

I'll second that. Love that "metal rain".

But seriously...

The two most recent YouTube clips by Noraly, she of 'ItchyBoots' fame, depict the methods used in Holland to teach riding skills to motorcycle police. Potentially of interest to anyone interested in rider skills training?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMp-oEyKh1s

[OddDuck]

I stand corrected.

I've been riding motorcycles on the road since I got my license. A few off's over the years. Nothing that required more than a few days in Hospital with a bruised ego and broken collarbone. I was lucky. I toured Malaysia in the early 80's ... my safety gear was a pair of knock-off Levi's and T-shirt ... and an open face Helmet. Army boots to complete the ensemble. A few off's there too. All I rode away from. Others on my two year tour to Singapore (with 1RNZIR) were not so lucky. One friend was killed in an overtaking gone wrong. Other riders here in NZ I knew have also died on our roads. They too became a statistic.

I have never claimed to be any sort of expert rider ... quite the opposite. I was lucky. If I pushed my own riding boundaries ... which I did ... and got it wrong ... which I did at times ... The person I held responsible was myself. I knew I was risking my life. The warning voices sounding in my own head ... sometimes ignored. The line between expert and lucky is hard to fathom ... let alone see. Except in hindsight. I was always happy riding motorcycles. Never any regrets. There were times that I'd not like to see repeated. Actions have reactions ... and I have lived through those reactions. Those reading this post did too. And long may it last for all of us.

The reasons we ride are our own. By our own choice we may live or die. We know the rules ... and the main rule we all understand is that we may die doing it. We all knew that from the beginning ... so none of can say "I didn't know".

I'm coming up to my 63rd birthday soon ... and have no plans to give up riding. It may not be on my FJ1200 ... as I'm not as fit or strong as I was. (I wasn't that strong then either) I'll be selling or trading it on something a little smaller. And suitable for the back roads and back country areas. Well ... that's the plan.

Most of the issues in this thread are about things pretty much out of our control on a nationwide basis ... but on a personal level ... We have choices.
The choices you make and options you have ... can lead you all to a long and happy life. Life however doesn't always work out that way. Motorcycling is dangerous. We ALL know that. We have to trust that the millions of people driving and riding on the same roads WE are ... will be doing their best to keep US alive.

Yeah Right.


Stay safe out there folk's ... and be lucky.

Just to support what you're saying... we've never had wider or better choices in terms of bikes, gear, tyres and rider training. There is a fair amount of random chance involved in staying alive on the roads, but... BUT... there's a lot that an individual can do to swing the odds in their favour, both to avoid an incident and then to survive it if if does happen *.

Be seen. ATTGATT. Upskill and ride within your skills. Consideration, following distances, stopping distances. Techniques and habits on the road.

A thought I've had recently, after a trip, was that most of my traffic risks happened in unfamiliar cities while trying to navigate, particularly when tired, hot, bothered, and / or in a hurry. The most likely to have an incident areas were 50 and 70 zones. For me at least, the fix is simple - go around, not through. Accomodation on outskirts if possible, with clear routes to and from. That sort of thing. Doesn't cost anything, makes my ride both safer and more fun, probably saves time as well. That's just for me, YMMV.

* one of the selling points for me on my airbag vest was a testimonial from a rider: T-boned at an intersection and thrown across three lanes. His off-road leg armour saved his knee. The vest, with integral back protector, saved the rest of him when he went spine-first into a fire hydrant. Of all the furniture you could hit, a fire hydrant... he had a walk-away. He picked himself up, dusted himself off, and walked away. Well, after a sit-down first. The safety gear does improve and evolve steadily with time, this stuff simply didn't exist for consumers ten-ish years ago but it's around now.

[Navy Boy]

Just to support what you're saying... we've never had wider or better choices in terms of bikes, gear, tyres and rider training. There is a fair amount of random chance involved in staying alive on the roads, but... BUT... there's a lot that an individual can do to swing the odds in their favour, both to avoid an incident and then to survive it if if does happen *.

Be seen. ATTGATT. Upskill and ride within your skills. Consideration, following distances, stopping distances. Techniques and habits on the road.

A thought I've had recently, after a trip, was that most of my traffic risks happened in unfamiliar cities while trying to navigate, particularly when tired, hot, bothered, and / or in a hurry. The most likely to have an incident areas were 50 and 70 zones. For me at least, the fix is simple - go around, not through. Accomodation on outskirts if possible, with clear routes to and from. That sort of thing. Doesn't cost anything, makes my ride both safer and more fun, probably saves time as well. That's just for me, YMMV.

* one of the selling points for me on my airbag vest was a testimonial from a rider: T-boned at an intersection and thrown across three lanes. His off-road leg armour saved his knee. The vest, with integral back protector, saved the rest of him when he went spine-first into a fire hydrant. Of all the furniture you could hit, a fire hydrant... he had a walk-away. He picked himself up, dusted himself off, and walked away. Well, after a sit-down first. The safety gear does improve and evolve steadily with time, this stuff simply didn't exist for consumers ten-ish years ago but it's around now.

Yep - I'm with you on the airbag bit. I too wear one and the added inconvenience is more than offset by the potential benefits they bring. Any aids, be they airbags, ABS, TC or anything else always come to the fore when you're not concentrating, thinking about something else and life happens to you. As you say though - Choice is what it all boils down to.

[F5 Dave]

Won't help you when you're decapitated,

. . . and other silly arguments I've heard. I mean its possible you'll meet an angry Sean Connery with a Dragonhead Katana during an accident, but that's less likely by the day .

Yes I had to look up the sword he used.:cool:

Good grief, seems there's and industry selling replica from an ancient movie.

[OddDuck]

Won't help you when you're decapitated,

. . . and other silly arguments I've heard. I mean its possible you'll meet an angry Sean Connery with a Dragonhead Katana during an accident, but that's less likely by the day .

Yes I had to look up the sword he used.:cool:

Good grief, seems there's and industry selling replica from an ancient movie.

Now that you mention it, one of the more hilarious encounters I've had while touring was a truckie who came up spontaneously and started on about "ride carefully or your head'll come off"

I'm cranking it up slightly... but only slightly. To be fair to the man he had attended one such within the prior two years. Cannot be unseen, etc etc.

Yes, it does happen, I've heard another about a young fella who didn't observe following distance and went into the back of a ute carrying some sheaves of corrugated iron which overhung the rear end of the tray and... well it ended up being a giant razorblade at throat level. This was a story told to me almost twenty years ago and I don't know how old it was then, or even if it's true. Such stories last though. They're horrifying and so they endure. They're a problem because they breed fatalism: in a crash you're fucked fucked fucked anyway so either don't ride or don't worry about it... but if this story is true then disaster could have been averted by 1) follow at 2 seconds or more and 2) look for your escape, not at what you're about to crash into, and 3) practise your emergency braking every now and then, you never know when you'll need it. The corrugated iron might not have been obvious while following, particularly edge-on.

We are taking risks, that's unavoidable, but we are not helpless. There are things that we can do to swing the odds further in our favour.

[F5 Dave]

Head injuries are more prevelant with car passengers as I understand
We are likely to suffer other injuries. Wearing helmets is a good thing.

[OddDuck]

Yeah. There's not much flank room inside a car, usually... very easy to knock a head if things go (literally) sideways.

[scumdog]

Sadly, most new vehicles are silly utes or SUV's these days. Sedan cars are not as popular as they were.

Technology will help us here with the red light runners. We can adapt my favourite part of the Aliens movies - sentry guns. When a light goes red, a sensor is fired that arms the guns aimed at the lanes (from across the road and up high say- next to those pointless red light cameras). Once the system is armed anything crossing the line (like a drag racing start line laser or something) gets the metal rain. It could be implemented everywhere there is a red light, it would be cheap, and it would absolutely, positively mean that people took them seriously. Because they sure as shit don't now. Since the worst offenders I have seen are courier vans, and other tradie battlers, judicious placement of the sentry gun would ensure the driver paid the price but not the payload - because I want my fucking parcel, OK?


Well put!

Too many don't 'drive' - they just 'steer'.

And have no idea of road rules/etiquette.

[OddDuck]

Speaking of airbags...

https://www.airbagjeans.com/

Thoughts?

Obviously it's very early, pre-commercial prototype, sales hype, dubious claims, etc. Interesting to see someone having a try though.

[rastuscat]

Interesting. Knowing how to make a vehicle move, steer, change gears, brake etc is one thing.

Knowing how to negotiate that vehicle doing those things in traffic is road craft.

[rastuscat]

Speaking of airbags...

https://www.airbagjeans.com/

Thoughts?

Obviously it's very early, pre-commercial prototype, sales hype, dubious claims, etc. Interesting to see someone having a try though.

My experience of air bag vests tells me that airbags prevent ventilation. Heat build up is the enemy of concentration.

[F5 Dave]

Bullshit. People have been racing in them for years. My Alpinestars was fine up far north with leathers over the top

[OddDuck]

My experience of air bag vests tells me that airbags prevent ventilation. Heat build up is the enemy of concentration.


Bullshit. People have been racing in them for years. My Alpinestars was fine up far north with leathers over the top

Maybe both are true... stop and go or urban traffic situations, not much airflow, heat buildup. Highway riding, lots of airflow, fine. At least that's been my experience. Tank bags are also a problem if you're after airflow, so are windshields... adjustable louvres or something on the ST2's fairing would have been good.

On a recent overnighter I got downright silly after letting myself get too warm, it really can creep up on a person.

[pritch]

Maybe both are true...

Very possible. It seems one gent is riding through the air on a naked roadster, and the other is shielded from the airflow behind a wall of plastic. There would seem to be the potential for them both to experience the same weather conditions very differently.

[rastuscat]

Maybe both are true... stop and go or urban traffic situations, not much airflow, heat buildup. Highway riding, lots of airflow, fine. At least that's been my experience. Tank bags are also a problem if you're after airflow, so are windshields... adjustable louvres or something on the ST2's fairing would have been good.

On a recent overnighter I got downright silly after letting myself get too warm, it really can creep up on a person.

Yes, the ranch slider on the front of my RT limits air flow.

[rastuscat]

Bullshit. People have been racing in them for years. My Alpinestars was fine up far north with leathers over the top

Hmmm. Ill try doing 290 kmh to see if it makes a difference.

[F5 Dave]

Jezuz we live in New Zealand. You've been reading too much Australian claptrap. My vest is no worse than my previous bodyarmour.

[rastuscat]

Jezuz we live in New Zealand. You've been reading too much Australian claptrap. My vest is no worse than my previous bodyarmour.

I sweat like a pongo doing a spelling test even in my Airflow suit. The airbag vest eliminates the benefit of a vented jacket.

[OddDuck]

A while ago I went low / no sugar (various reasons), took about two months for the metabolism to re-balance but after that I don't sweat in the heat anything like how I used to. An unexpected benefit. YMMV of course...

What airbag vest, what vented jacket? I've tried the Helite Turtle with both a vented Macna textile jacket and a set of vented Triumph 2-piece sport touring leathers, it actually works pretty well with the vents on both. The Macna uses a mesh frontal area (roughly 40% lost behind the Turtle), the Triumph leathers use flank vents which work out to being just outside the Turtle's coverage. Short cuff gloves are good too although I know there'll be a wasp or bee sometime.

[Jeeper]

Very possible. It seems one gent is riding through the air on a naked roadster, and the other is shielded from the airflow behind a wall of plastic. There would seem to be the potential for them both to experience the same weather conditions very differently.Not to mention whether one rider is riding in winter or summer. That would be a different experience as well.

[F5 Dave]

Techair 5 and matching leathers.

Saw the Harley crew through Wairarapa today including beardy with open face and no gloves. You could try that rastus?

Of course no gear will save you, but I've crashed enough times racing to appreciate the difference of decent body armour.

[R650R]

Hmmm. Ill try doing 290 kmh to see if it makes a difference.

Dont forget your brolly dolly with her umbrella too and someone else gassing the bike and checking tyres 😂😂😂

[F5 Dave]

I think people would be surprised how physical racing is, either with tight tracks or powerful bikes making keeping them on the track difficult.

Riding in town is the same exertion as being in a car

[rastuscat]

Riding in town is the same exertion as being in a car

Interesting. I've worked on bikes for some years, though not at the moment. A day of riding a bike is more fatiguing than a day of driving a car, IMHO.

Back to the topic, when we stop looking at the number of deaths as being someone else's problem, we can start to do thgings to reduce the problem.

As long as we continue to blame roads, drivers, government, councils, NZTA, ACC, Police, not much will change.

[Bonez]

Interesting. I've worked on bikes for some years, though not at the moment. A day of riding a bike is more fatiguing than a day of driving a car, IMHO.

Back to the topic, when we stop looking at the number of deaths as being someone else's problem, we can start to do thgings to reduce the problem.

As long as we continue to blame roads, drivers, government, councils, NZTA, ACC, Police, not much will change.Exactly but that is not the KB knitting circles way. They just moan about everyone else.:yes:

I do find riding 6hrs more relaxing than driving a car for that long all the same. I'd nod off in a car.

[Navy Boy]

A while ago I went low / no sugar (various reasons), took about two months for the metabolism to re-balance but after that I don't sweat in the heat anything like how I used to. An unexpected benefit. YMMV of course...

What airbag vest, what vented jacket? I've tried the Helite Turtle with both a vented Macna textile jacket and a set of vented Triumph 2-piece sport touring leathers, it actually works pretty well with the vents on both. The Macna uses a mesh frontal area (roughly 40% lost behind the Turtle), the Triumph leathers use flank vents which work out to being just outside the Turtle's coverage. Short cuff gloves are good too although I know there'll be a wasp or bee sometime.

I'm with you - My Helite Airbag vest still allows my vented jacket to breathe fairly well. The big screen I've fitted to my V85 is by far the biggest obstacle in that regard. it doesn't take long for wearing the vest to become second nature and the beauty of it is that you can wear it on different bikes and with different jackets too :Punk:

[Bonez]

All the fancy riding shit and I just use stuff from the Bunnings HS shelves over my faded old leather jacket or on longer rides my second hand two piece Dainese leathers.:msn-wink:

Leather jacket and dayglow yellow vest are fine around town and far better than the shorts, T-shirts and jandels I see riders wearing on a hot on all types of m/cs on warm days.

[R650R]

Interesting. I've worked on bikes for some years, though not at the moment. A day of riding a bike is more fatiguing than a day of driving a car, IMHO.

Back to the topic, when we stop looking at the number of deaths as being someone else's problem, we can start to do thgings to reduce the problem.

As long as we continue to blame roads, drivers, government, councils, NZTA, ACC, Police, not much will change.

THis thread cropped up in my mind watching this glider vid last night...

The aviation industry seems to freely admit their faults and share knowledge so others don’t repeat.
In contrast in trucking it’s usually all hush hush top secret as to why a unit rolled over...
Bikers... oh that crap front tyre or that crappy corner etc...
The big problem with road crash data though is privacy act and insurance legalities...
It’s disturbing though that police perpetuate the road myth though. SH5 is in our news a lot and the cops say take care it’s a “ difficult” road when really it’s not, the tens of thousands of safe journeys completed per week are evidence of that.


That serious crash show was good, never did it show the road as a factor...


Glider vid titled two turns that nearly killed me https://youtu.be/Alk-q4golx0

[rastuscat]

THis thread cropped up in my mind watching this glider vid last night...

The aviation industry seems to freely admit their faults and share knowledge so others don’t repeat.
In contrast in trucking it’s usually all hush hush top secret as to why a unit rolled over...
Bikers... oh that crap front tyre or that crappy corner etc...
The big problem with road crash data though is privacy act and insurance legalities...
It’s disturbing though that police perpetuate the road myth though. SH5 is in our news a lot and the cops say take care it’s a “ difficult” road when really it’s not, the tens of thousands of safe journeys completed per week are evidence of that.


That serious crash show was good, never did it show the road as a factor...


Glider vid titled two turns that nearly killed me https://youtu.be/Alk-q4golx0

The aviation industry has a no-fault investigation process for incidents. As a result, people aren't scared to admit they got something wrong.

As opposed to our road system, where systems (insurance, legal) combine to prevent people from telling the truth, or admitting fault.

It's led to road crashes being poorly understood.

[FJRider]

... or admitting fault.

In most cases ... this is the hard bit.

Admit or say nothing ... Then hope the cop's find something to get them out of the shit.

[Jeeper]

Admiting fault has consequences including insurance liability. But that's only if one has insurance (non-compulsory in NZ).

[FJRider]

Admiting fault has consequences including insurance liability. But that's only if one has insurance (non-compulsory in NZ).

That would depend ENTIRELY on the individual policy held by individual concerned. Not all insurance policies are the same. Being at fault in itself ... is not really/usually the major issue. Having the premiums paid and up to date ... IS. That's the whole principal of having insurance. BUT ... being held at fault might (ok WILL) see your premiums go up.

Those looking for a particular type of insurance ... read all the policies of the companies first. Some clauses may trip you up ... like being "Under the influence of alcoholl" ... which is not the same (with some companies) as being over the (any) legal limit to drive.

There are a few good past threads on insurance ... worth a read.

[FJRider]

Interesting. I've worked on bikes for some years, though not at the moment. A day of riding a bike is more fatiguing than a day of driving a car, IMHO.

Back to the topic, when we stop looking at the number of deaths as being someone else's problem, we can start to do thgings to reduce the problem.

As long as we continue to blame roads, drivers, government, councils, NZTA, ACC, Police, not much will change.

Riding a big bike through the city (any city) center is bloody hard work. Especially in summer.

Looking at road deaths as a problem wont fix anything. But being at fault should also mean ... that there WERE steps we could have taken to avoid the accident ... BUT DIDN'T. At the moment ... it's who broke the road rules and will end up in court. How many times have you heard ... "I had right of way so it's not my fault" .. ?? The fact that they could have slowed or stopped before it happened ... not mentioned.

For a motorcyclist ... Proactively looking out for things that might kill us (and avoiding them) ... should be our primary defense process.

[pritch]

The aviation industry seems to freely admit their faults and share knowledge so others don’t repeat.


Pilots have a saying to the effect, "You may survive the accident, but you won't survive the enquiry."

Without wishing to suggest for a minute that Hollywood should be considered historically accurate, the movie "Sully" might be relevant.

[Jeeper]

That would depend ENTIRELY on the individual policy held by individual concerned. Not all insurance policies are the same. Being at fault in itself ... is not really/usually the major issue. Having the premiums paid and up to date ... IS. That's the whole principal of having insurance. BUT ... being held at fault might (ok WILL) see your premiums go up.

Those looking for a particular type of insurance ... read all the policies of the companies first. Some clauses may trip you up ... like being "Under the influence of alcoholl" ... which is not the same (with some companies) as being over the (any) legal limit to drive.

There are a few good past threads on insurance ... worth a read.That's not the same as admiting fault for the accident. Most insurance policies clearly require the insured to not readily admit the fault (and liability). Let the assessor do their job and assign where the fault lies.

Insured can be at fault and insurance will cover it (most of the times, depending on the situation). That's how insurance works. But if you say to the other party it's all your fault before the case is even handled by the insurer, then you are taking away their ability to defend their legal liability. A bit unfair and it starts becoming messy.

Finding the root cause to remidiate future risk is a different matter. And that is what I am interested in. Whether it's my own mistake or someone else's.

[Jeeper]

https://www.stuff.co.nz/motoring/123721241/one-district-ruled-them-all-when-it-came-to-speeding-tickets-in-2020

Waikato issued nearly twice as many speeding tickets in 2020, compared to 2019 - saying science backs up the assertion that mean reduction in speed results in fewer fatalities.

Road toll stats don't support that scientific claim. So what gives? Targeting drivers doing 1-5 percent over the posted speed limit is really harsh with minimal gain (perhaps monetary gain only). Even with cruise control set at 100 kms/hr it's impossible to not occasionally go over by 1-2 kms (eg on a hilly descend before the computer has time to react).

[Berries]

In a page linked from the one you quote -


Matthew-Wilson said almost all speed-related accidents involve a tiny group of “yobbos”, impaired drivers and motorcyclists.

This group is effectively immune to road safety messages.
For once I agree with the twat.

[FJRider]

That's not the same as admiting fault for the accident. Most insurance policies clearly require the insured to not readily admit the fault (and liability). Let the assessor do their job and assign where the fault lies.

Insured can be at fault and insurance will cover it (most of the times, depending on the situation). That's how insurance works. But if you say to the other party it's all your fault before the case is even handled by the insurer, then you are taking away their ability to defend their legal liability. A bit unfair and it starts becoming messy.

Finding the root cause to remidiate future risk is a different matter. And that is what I am interested in. Whether it's my own mistake or someone else's.

I understand that angle. I was instructed by my Driving instructor when training for my very own drivers license ... if involved in a motor vehicle accident ... speak only to Police about the accident. Do not lie, just say what happened. The only thing you say to the other people involved in the accident ... is an inquiry in relation to their health.

For the very reasons you mentioned.

[Ian Staples]

I do understand that any road death or injury is bad but I do wonder what the death rate is over the last 40 years compared to the actual miles driven. I would take a stab in the dark that its probably on tenth of what it was per K. I would suspect the govt would know the exact figure based on WOF odo readings but if they told the public they couldn't scare us with there advertising . Anyway if they were serious about reducing carnage on the road and the big accidents just kill all subaru drivers .

[rastuscat]

I do understand that any road death or injury is bad but I do wonder what the death rate is over the last 40 years compared to the actual miles driven. I would take a stab in the dark that its probably on tenth of what it was per K. I would suspect the govt would know the exact figure based on WOF odo readings but if they told the public they couldn't scare us with there advertising . Anyway if they were serious about reducing carnage on the road and the big accidents just kill all subaru drivers .

You are talking about VKT, vehicles kilometres travelled. The more vehicles, the more VKT. The more mobility, the higher the VKT.

https://www.transport.govt.nz/statistics-and-insights/road-transport/sheet/vehicle-kms-travelled-vkt

[Berries]

Be part of the only real solution -

Driving Instructor Vacancy (https://www.seek.co.nz/job/51219088?type=standout#searchRequestToken=abff2efd-49ee-45b6-9f01-e4eee1187f40)

Motorcycle Instructor Vacancy. (https://www.seek.co.nz/job/51219291?type=standout#searchRequestToken=abff2efd-49ee-45b6-9f01-e4eee1187f40)

[caspernz]

Driving Instructor Vacancy (https://www.seek.co.nz/job/51219088?type=standout#searchRequestToken=abff2efd-49ee-45b6-9f01-e4eee1187f40)

Motorcycle Instructor Vacancy. (https://www.seek.co.nz/job/51219291?type=standout#searchRequestToken=abff2efd-49ee-45b6-9f01-e4eee1187f40)

That's about half the solution.

Political willpower for meaningful road user education and enforcement is largely MIA. Not just in NZ either :eek5:

[Bonez]

On my wee 433km ride yesterday the other road users were 99.99999% well behaved. Even those pesky white tourist vans folk here moan about moved over when I was approaching.


If you suffer from road rage take a deep breath and get over yourselves:innocent: and enjoy the extra time on your m/c.:yes:


Just saying...

[Navy Boy]

On my wee 433km ride yesterday the other road users were 99.99999% well behaved. Even those pesky white tourist vans folk here moan about moved over when I was approaching.


If you suffer from road rage take a deep breath and get over yourselves:innocent: and enjoy the extra time on your m/c.:yes:


Just saying...

This echoes my time on the roads over recent weeks. Of course it's only those that exhibit dork-like behaviour that you remember... :confused:

[Bonez]

This echoes my time on the roads over recent weeks. Of course it's only those that exhibit dork-like behaviour that you remember... :confused:The sheep need vehicle awareness training though I noticed. Any takers?:rolleyes:

[pritch]

On my wee 433km ride yesterday the other road users were 99.99999% well behaved. Even those pesky white tourist vans folk here moan about moved over when I was approaching.


Fuck me old boot! (Old rural expression.) It's almost as if there are people in this country who have not yet realised there is a pandemic. There are border controls. Currently the tourist vans are driven by Kiwis.

SMH

[Bonez]

Did somebody just fart in this thread as it stinks to high heaven?

Whoever it was obviously hasn't ridden in the last 6 months.

The prime candidate to run the Sheep Vehicle Awareness Program by the smell of it.

Just saying....

[FJRider]

The sheep need vehicle awareness training though I noticed. Any takers?:rolleyes:

No. Most motorcyclists need training on how to behave with stock on the road ... and how stock will will react in certain circumstances.

And ... how NOT to react themselves when seeing stock on or beside the road.

Sheep generally attempt to get back to the Paddock they got out of. If that means crossing the road to do so ... they will give it a go. Sheep react to loud noises ... and run to safety. Again ... if that means crossing the road ... they will usually wait until the loud noise is really close before running.

Farmers do not usually put two or three sheep in empty paddocks. So ... if you see a few sheep on the road edge ... look for similar sheep in the roadside paddocks. That's probably (maybe) where they will try to go.

A few things that you should remember as you approach sheep you see on the road verge ...

1. They run from loud noises ... so stop/reduce the loud noises. Clutch in and coast for a bit if you're close. If you have time ... slow down and idle through. This gives all of ewe's (excuse the pun) time to sort yourselves out to where ewe's want to be. In such cases ... Loud pipes wont save your life. They may kill you.

2. Ewe's with lambs nearby ... will run to their lambs if spooked. If you see lambs on the road ... look for where their mothers are. They are bigger and will do more damage to you.

3. You may often see signs on the side of the road ... various sizes and colours with STOCK / CATTLE (or similar) on them. Nothing else. Take the warning ... as these signs are a warning. Look for gateways left open for them to go into ... or ones that they havge come out of. Well trampled grass and sheep shit all over the place is obviously where they have been. Follow the trail along the road carefully. Be aware of the difference between sheep shit and bullshit. Many stock owners often forget to collect the signs after a stock move. Not really supposed to ... but they do. If you hit stock with the signs out (and you ignore them)... your problem.

Sometimes they just have a person (often a kid on a four-wheeler bike) waving you to slow down. Take the warning.

4. Revving the shit of your engines to speed up mobs of stock is not recommended. Most farm workers will just call the cops ... and will probably be in the same rugby team as the local cop. So if you do ... expect to be stopped down the road. Sometimes ... WAY down the road.

5. The owner of stock on the road is legally responsible for damage their stock cause to vehicles. Ignore the warnings ... and this will not be the case. And you might beheld accountable for damage to stock.

Remember ... the smell of sheep and cow shit on a hot exhaust lingers for quite some time. As does the stock internal body bits that can escape confinement if you hit one. In my various travels ... I would have seen about 30 motorcycles that were written off/ destroyed after hitting stock on the road. At least double that damaged. A few riders killed. It seems funny when you see or hear about it happening ... To somebody else.

All this is seldom covered in any motorcycle road safety / awareness courses. But SHOULD be.

[eldog]

Fuck me old boot! (Old rural expression.) It's almost as if there are people in this country who have not yet realised there is a pandemic. There are border controls. Currently the tourist vans are driven by Kiwis.

SMH

Got to wonder just who is a “kiwi”

and how do they rate versus other drivers from around the world


I ask this because I have seen a lot of very ‘recent’ kiwis on the road.
the older ones are better.
i work with one recently arrived kiwi, even they are shocked by the crap driving of their compatriots.
kiwis in general are better but the single mindedness often rules them out of thinking of others when on the road.

saw a classic kiwi driver the other day emerge from a single lane stop go roadworks, managed to accelerate along a very straight bit of road then off the road edge, luckily back on, narrowly missing a ditch. The lanes all marked with edges etc how did that happen.....straight bit of road 600m or so, going off road after the first 200m

It seems to come down to attitude, there those who know everything, those who think they know, those who don’t give a dam, those who only drive because they have to, those who thoath driving but because of circumstances use it as a means of travel.

there also those poor unfortunates who are in the wrong place at the wrong time, even though they are in legally the correct place etc.

[eldog]

No. Most motorcyclists need training on how to behave with stock on the road ... and how stock will will react in certain circumstances.

And ... how NOT to react themselves when seeing stock on or beside the road.

Sheep generally attempt to get back to the Paddock they got out of. If that means crossing the road to do so ... they will give it a go. Sheep react to loud noises ... and run to safety. Again ... if that means crossing the road ... they will usually wait until the loud noise is really close before running.

Farmers do not usually put two or three sheep in empty paddocks. So ... if you see a few sheep on the road edge ... look for similar sheep in the roadside paddocks. That's probably (maybe) where they will try to go.

A few things that you should remember as you approach sheep you see on the road verge ...

1. They run from loud noises ... so stop/reduce the loud noises. Clutch in and coast for a bit if you're close. If you have time ... slow down and idle through. This gives all of ewe's (excuse the pun) time to sort yourselves out to where ewe's want to be. In such cases ... Loud pipes wont save your life. They may kill you.

2. Ewe's with lambs nearby ... will run to their lambs if spooked. If you see lambs on the road ... look for where their mothers are. They are bigger and will do more damage to you.

3. You may often see signs on the side of the road ... various sizes and colours with STOCK / CATTLE (or similar) on them. Nothing else. Take the warning ... as these signs are a warning. Look for gateways left open for them to go into ... or ones that they havge come out of. Well trampled grass and sheep shit all over the place is obviously where they have been. Follow the trail along the road carefully. Be aware of the difference between sheep shit and bullshit. Many stock owners often forget to collect the signs after a stock move. Not really supposed to ... but they do. If you hit stock with the signs out (and you ignore them)... your problem.

Sometimes they just have a person (often a kid on a four-wheeler bike) waving you to slow down. Take the warning.

4. Revving the shit of your engines to speed up mobs of stock is not recommended. Most farm workers will just call the cops ... and will probably be in the same rugby team as the local cop. So if you do ... expect to be stopped down the road. Sometimes ... WAY down the road.

5. The owner of stock on the road is legally responsible for damage their stock cause to vehicles. Ignore the warnings ... and this will not be the case. And you might beheld accountable for damage to stock.

Remember ... the smell of sheep and cow shit on a hot exhaust lingers for quite some time. As does the stock internal body bits that can escape confinement if you hit one. In my various travels ... I would have seen about 30 motorcycles that were written off/ destroyed after hitting stock on the road. At least double that damaged. A few riders killed. It seems funny when you see or hear about it happening ... To somebody else.

All this is seldom covered in any motorcycle road safety / awareness courses. But SHOULD be.

true, the sheep can jump out of ditches and directly into your path even though you thought you had passed them, no matter how slowly and carefully.
ducks can run back into you, the old crash bars on the front work wonders
15 young bulls out picnicking on the roadside can be intimidating as they pass by you, time and patience generally are the best when there is no other option.

[eldog]

This echoes my time on the roads over recent weeks. Of course it's only those that exhibit dork-like behaviour that you remember... :confused:

That will be the usual suspects from sheepieville aka Dorkland.
So many ‘had to get out’ over the Xmas break, me I enjoyed piece and quiet working from home, with the odd ride to Taupo thrown in for something to Do as a rewardo.:devil2:

the traffic was quite good.

however the Intercity bus at 90 kph with cruise control on, was constantly braking the brake lights on, off, on, off for at least 15 minutes. There where a few frustrated people who passed this annoying hazard, rather briskly. No risk, was really painful seeing the brakes coming on every 5 seconds.

[Bonez]

Got to wonder just who is a “kiwi”

and how do they rate versus other drivers from around the world


I ask this because I have seen a lot of very ‘recent’ kiwis on the road.
the older ones are better.
i work with one recently arrived kiwi, even they are shocked by the crap driving of their compatriots.
kiwis in general are better but the single mindedness often rules them out of thinking of others when on the road.

saw a classic kiwi driver the other day emerge from a single lane stop go roadworks, managed to accelerate along a very straight bit of road then off the road edge, luckily back on, narrowly missing a ditch. The lanes all marked with edges etc how did that happen.....straight bit of road 600m or so, going off road after the first 200m

It seems to come down to attitude, there those who know everything, those who think they know, those who don’t give a dam, those who only drive because they have to, those who thoath driving but because of circumstances use it as a means of travel.

there also those poor unfortunates who are in the wrong place at the wrong time, even though they are in legally the correct place etc.Spot on falla

[Scuba_Steve]

Interesting. I've worked on bikes for some years, though not at the moment. A day of riding a bike is more fatiguing than a day of driving a car, IMHO.

Back to the topic, when we stop looking at the number of deaths as being someone else's problem, we can start to do thgings to reduce the problem.

As long as we continue to blame roads, drivers, government, councils, NZTA, ACC, Police, not much will change.

I would argue tho that while I agree the individual needs to change, it does start with the Govt.
They're the ones allowing sub par drivers on the road thus thinking they're good enough to drive
They're the ones running NZ's biggest extortion racket with the speed scam while ignoring all other driving issues making people think they're driving alright
They're the ones telling people the only bad driving is "speeding" & drink driving
If people aren't told they're doing shit wrong, they ain't gonna change what they're doing
Govt needs to shift focus to 'impeding flow of traffic', 'failing to keep left', 'failing to indicate', 'failing to give way', shit that actually matters!

[release_the_bees]

You're not wrong there. If I was a cop, and given free rein, the amount of people I'd ticket for tailgating would be off the charts.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Bonez]

You're not wrong there. If I was a cop, and given free rein, the amount of people I'd ticket for tailgating would be unreal.

Sent from my SM-G965F using TapatalkYip only one car length on the open road. It's just stuuuupid. I back wayyyyy off in those situations until there is plenty of room to pass, even if it is on double yellow lines.:whistle: As long as I can see far enough ahead. Get away from the fuckers as soon as you can.:yes:

[F5 Dave]

I would argue tho that while I agree the individual needs to change, it does start with the Govt.
They're the ones allowing sub par drivers on the road thus thinking they're good enough to drive
They're the ones running NZ's biggest extortion racket with the speed scam while ignoring all other driving issues making people think they're driving alright
They're the ones telling people the only bad driving is "speeding" & drink driving
If people aren't told they're doing shit wrong, they ain't gonna change what they're doing
Govt needs to shift focus to 'impeding flow of traffic', 'failing to keep left', 'failing to indicate', 'failing to give way', shit that actually matters!

Golly. I'm going to agree with SS here. The If people aren't told etc bit is bang on.

[Bonez]

Golly. I'm going to agree with SS here. The If people aren't told etc bit is bang on.
They ARE told-TV, Radio, notice boards, traffic signs/lights, /reflective markers, internet pages, KB knitting circle etc etc etc,

Jusy saying...

[FJRider]

They ARE told-TV, Radio, notice boards, traffic signs/lights, /reflective markers, internet pages, KB knitting circle etc etc etc,

Jusy saying...

The good news is ... speed is easy to monitor and Police. The other issues ... not so much. You (ok .. THEY) have to see it for themselves. And for the most part ... THEY'RE NOT ... !!!

[jellywrestler]

The good news is ... speed is easy to monitor and Police. The other issues ... not so much. You (ok .. THEY) have to see it for themselves. And for the most part ... THEY'RE NOT ... !!!

they're easy too, fit cameras in the cop cars, the evidence is recorded, the cop doesn't have to sit in court waiting, it's not he said she said....

[nerrrd]

And then you get the gentleman yesterday who couldn't pull into the carpark next to the one with my bike in it without almost hitting the bike. Twice. I ended up standing next to one of my panniers to make sure he knew how close he was getting, almost knocked on his window at one point (politely of course), that's how close he was.

This was in standard row of parallel supermarket car parks. And given the bike was only taking up half the normal width of a car, he had way more room than usual. Middle aged guy, no L plates.

Not adding to the road toll obviously, but displaying a very ordinary level of spatial awareness.

[Navy Boy]

I would argue tho that while I agree the individual needs to change, it does start with the Govt.
They're the ones allowing sub par drivers on the road thus thinking they're good enough to drive
They're the ones running NZ's biggest extortion racket with the speed scam while ignoring all other driving issues making people think they're driving alright
They're the ones telling people the only bad driving is "speeding" & drink driving
If people aren't told they're doing shit wrong, they ain't gonna change what they're doing
Govt needs to shift focus to 'impeding flow of traffic', 'failing to keep left', 'failing to indicate', 'failing to give way', shit that actually matters!

Well said that man - And there in lies the rub. It's standard human behaviour that if you do something whilst driving and then get away with it without anything bad happening (Or at least nothing you noticed at any rate) then cognitive function is such that you'll be more likely to do it again. We're all susceptible to this whether we realise it or not.

On a positive note that's why I always try to wave thanks to vehicle drivers when they pull over or make things easier for me. People remember that and are more likely to do it again as they see you as a person rather than just another loon on 2 wheels.:cool:

Except if I'm riding a Harley of course - Then I don't wave at anything or anyone 'cos that'd be so uncool... :lol:

;)

[FJRider]

they're easy too, fit cameras in the cop cars, the evidence is recorded, the cop doesn't have to sit in court waiting, it's not he said she said....

The trick is ... the cop has to be where the "Action" is. When it happens. Even with cameras in/on the car.


Meanwhile ... the cop parked on the side of the road "Watching traffic" ... see's mostly well behaved drivers.

Go figure ...

[release_the_bees]

The trick is ... the cop has to be where the "Action" is. When it happens. Even with cameras in/on the car.


Meanwhile ... the cop parked on the side of the road "Watching traffic" ... see's mostly well behaved drivers.

Go figure ...It wouldn't take an unmarked cop car long going up and down the Auckland motorway. I see dozens of people following too close every day, regardless of the time of day and the traffic volume.

I'd struggle to fit my bike in between some of the gaps that I see between vehicles.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[rastuscat]

I would argue tho that while I agree the individual needs to change, it does start with the Govt.


Hmmm.

And there lies the issue. Pushing responsibility onto someone else (gubbermint) protects our self image, and allows us to escape responsibility.

It's classic deflection.

My safety starts with me. Sure, gubbermint can do stuff too, but on todays ride it was my responsibility to manage my safety.

[rastuscat]

Well said that man - And there in lies the rub. It's standard human behaviour that if you do something whilst driving and then get away with it without anything bad happening (Or at least nothing you noticed at any rate) then cognitive function is such that you'll be more likely to do it again. We're all susceptible to this whether we realise it or not.

Thus with cellphone use.

Hypothetical case, I made this up.

When my wife calls, her picture appears on my phone, and she has her own ringtone. It's a settings thing, apparently.

So, I;'m driving, and my phone rings with her ring tone. I look down and there's her smiling face looking back at me.

My first thoughts are that I shouldn't answer the call because

I might get a ticket
I might kill a child, the ads on tv say so
Someone might see me on the phone and shame me


Then I realise that not answering a call from Mrs Cat is worse than all of those things, so I answer it. "Hi, yes, on the way home, see you soon."

Nobody died, no ticket, no public shaming. in short, no adverse outcome.

Next time, answering the phone is just that little bit easier. And after 400 times, I'll be Facebooking, Instagramming, blogging, answering emails etc.

It's optimism bias in action. Taking a risk with no adverse outcome leads to subconscious complacency.

So, when we take a racing line on a tight right hander because we have done exactly the same 400 times, onlyu this time theres a car coming the other way with two wheels on my side of the road...........we rant about the cars killing us. Because we have tught ourselves that racing lines on right hand corners are perfectly safe.

Prevention is better than cure, expecially for broken arms, broken legs and ruptured spleens.

[Scuba_Steve]

Hmmm.

And there lies the issue. Pushing responsibility onto someone else (gubbermint) protects our self image, and allows us to escape responsibility.

It's classic deflection.

My safety starts with me. Sure, gubbermint can do stuff too, but on todays ride it was my responsibility to manage my safety.

Yes but we know* when we're driving bad.
The general public don't know they're driving bad, & because the Govt won't tell them they'll continue to drive just as bad or even worse. That was my point, people don't always know they're doing wrong & if no-one's gonna tell them then they'll never be able to change.

Unlike bikers, most cage users have no interest in motor vehicles or roads, it is merely a tool they need to use to transport between 2 or more locations; so they have no self interest to learn to drive, know the rules, care about the roading system, thus without having the info that they're 'doing shit wrong' being handed directly to them they ain't never gonna find out or change & that's my point you can only take responsibility & choose to change if you're aware change is needed.

[rastuscat]

Yes but we know* when we're driving bad.
The general public don't know they're driving bad, & because the Govt won't tell them they'll continue to drive just as bad or even worse. That was my point, people don't always know they're doing wrong & if no-one's gonna tell them then they'll never be able to change.

Fair point, that.

People almost without exception think they are better than average. Because they see other people driving badly, but not their own bad driving.

But being told that by the gubbermint is almost a watse of time, bacause nobody thinks it applies to them. Coz they are better than average.

Statistically, it can't be true. It's not how averages work.

Good point Skoober.

[F5 Dave]

A simple retest every 10 years would be a good start.

I'm not scared of it, because, you know.

[James Deuce]

Blah blah blah. It all comes down to luck. When it's your turn, it's your turn.

[Kickaha]

Blah blah blah. It all comes down to luck. When it's your turn, it's your turn.

Your optimistic outlook has always inspired me James

[James Deuce]

Your optimistic outlook has always inspired me James
Well that cheered me up.

[FJRider]

... Then I realise that not answering a call from Mrs Cat is worse than all of those things, so I answer it. "Hi, yes, on the way home, see you soon."

Nobody died, no ticket, no public shaming. in short, no adverse outcome.

Next time, answering the phone is just that little bit easier. And after 400 times, I'll be Facebooking, Instagramming, blogging, answering emails etc.

It's optimism bias in action. Taking a risk with no adverse outcome leads to subconscious complacency.

And answering/replying with the phone while you're stopped at the traffic lights carries the same penalty. What's the safety message there ... ??

[FJRider]

It wouldn't take an unmarked cop car long going up and down the Auckland motorway. I see dozens of people following too close every day, regardless of the time of day and the traffic volume.

I'd struggle to fit my bike in between some of the gaps that I see between vehicles.

No need for an unmarked cop ... how far apart are the cameras on ALL the motorways .. ??

Their choice is stop every other vehicle for any of the obvious traffic infringements ... or keep ALL the traffic flowing.

They choose the latter one ... and ping those that actually get it so badly wrong .. THEY stop traffic.

Or if they are featuring on Motorway patrol ... and they want to be famous.

[FJRider]

A simple retest every 10 years would be a good start.

It would be political suicide to introduce that.

Most people know the rules ... but if they get away with breaking the rules for long enough ... the perceived dual risk factor (getting caught by plod or having an accident) lessens the longer they continue to get away with it ...

And the longer they get away with it ... the better driver's they perceive themselves to be.

[FJRider]

Blah blah blah. It all comes down to luck. When it's your turn, it's your turn.

You can have MY turn if you want ... I'm not in that big a hurry to have it ... <_<

[rastuscat]

A simple retest every 10 years would be a good start.

I'm not scared of it, because, you know.

The concern is what to do with the at least 50% of people who would fail. It would shut down the economy.

[F5 Dave]

A practical retest with tiered outcomes, say for instance having to attend training and retest . This would give an interface with the general public to a trained professional assessment of thier driving. It's an extension of Scubies comments. How else will they know?

[pritch]

A practical retest with tiered outcomes, say for instance having to attend training and retest . This would give an interface with the general public to a trained professional assessment of thier driving. It's an extension of Scubies comments. How else will they know?

The problem with this is similar to requiring professional driver training for new drivers. The farmers would be instantly up in arms about having to transport their offspring to town for training. The National Party would be instantly vocal in opposing the training 'cause farmers...

Other countries do it of course, but we have a very large "too hard" basket.

[F5 Dave]

Good point. Exemptions for farmers just so they shut the fuck up.

[roogazza]

The problem with this is similar to requiring professional driver training for new drivers. The farmers would be instantly up in arms about having to transport their offspring to town for training. The National Party would be instantly vocal in opposing the training 'cause farmers...

Other countries do it of course, but we have a very large "too hard" basket.

My pet hate is the type of person doing the training/grading and just how good they are.

In the past I have seen some real doosy's doing licence testing for example at AA. :confused:

[Jeeper]

My pet hate is the type of person doing the training/grading and just how good they are.

In the past I have seen some real doosy's doing licence testing for example at AA. :confused:That has been my experience as well. Not all trainers and assessors are actually good. There are some good ones, and equally there are some assessor where it makes you wonder 'how did they get to be assessors'. I have had the privilege of witnessing my teenagers going through driving tests, coin flip really.

[pete376403]

Might be urban legend but I have heard / read VTNZ have a policy of 50% or thereabouts failure rate.

[pritch]

Might be urban legend but I have heard / read VTNZ have a policy of 50% or thereabouts failure rate.

Some people really aren't very smart, f'rinstance turning up for the test in a car with an expired warrant. Fail.

A guy of my acquaintance was telling those assembled in the local hostelry that his son was failed his driving test because he turned up for the test in bare feet. I didn't have a problem with that. If they turn up for the test in jandals that should be a fail too.

There might be a financial incentive to fail people these days if a retest costs another fee.

[Kickaha]

A guy of my acquaintance was telling those assembled in the local hostelry that his son was failed his driving test because he turned up for the test in bare feet. I didn't have a problem with that. If they turn up for the test in jandals that should be a fail too..

That's a lot safer than driving wearing motocross boots

[pritch]

That's a lot safer than driving wearing motocross boots

It's about control and none of those options are appropriate. Good contact with control surfaces is important. The Armorguard packaging used to warn against putting it on control surfaces. It turned out that the seat is a control surface too. :whistle:

[Kickaha]

It's about control and none of those options are appropriate.

I would disagree, driving barefeet you have far more feel than any footwear including auto racing boots

[F5 Dave]

When I did my bike licence I just assumed it had a wof as I'd bought it a week or so before as I hadn't fancied doing licence on my XR250 with no indicators mirrors, sidestand, 1/2 a muffler. Last 2 got fixed but I'd bought an RD350 by then and in an ingenious display of deception applied some crude 250 stickers. But got cold feet, plus it used to oil plugs regularly. So bought a GSX250 to get licence.

He asked about the wof, I kinda shrugged and he got bored of looking. Later after passing I discovered there was none. Sheesh can't trust some people. :lol:

[Jeeper]

There might be a financial incentive to fail people these days if a retest costs another fee.

Retest has never been free.

[pritch]

I would disagree, driving barefeet you have far more feel than any footwear including auto racing boots

Maybe if you drove bare foot all the time, otherwise it would feel weird. We'll just have to disagree. I'm definitely wearing shoes to my next drivig test. :whistle:

[pritch]

Retest has never been free.

In days of yore nobody used to fail. Well, very few failed.

[Bonez]

In days of yore nobody used to fail. Well, very few failed.thats because we drove on quiet back roads with our parents cars before going for our licenses. With our parents permission.:wings:

Just saying...

[F5 Dave]

People supposedly use to fall off dust themselves down, carry on back to the cop outside the copshop door and still pass. So goes the urban legend,


. . . which if I apply critical thinking 🤔 several decades later, I'm less likely to believe. Oh well good story.

[Jeeper]

In days of yore nobody used to fail. Well, very few failed.I have realized that, particularly looking at the stats for sure and the way a lot of the older drivers/riders go about their business.

[release_the_bees]

People supposedly use to fall off dust themselves down, carry on back to the cop outside the copshop door and still pass. So goes the urban legend,


. . . which if I apply critical thinking [emoji848] several decades later, I'm less likely to believe. Oh well good story.I'm convinced that I should have failed my test. However, my father had built the tester's house, and all the tester did was go on and on about how much he loved his new house. I don't think he took that much notice about what I was actually doing, which was for the best as I rode appallingly badly due to nerves and not really being ready to take the test.



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[F5 Dave]

When I did my car licence, the 6 1/2' cop kinda groaned as I led him outside Peirce house as I pointed out our 850 mini and dutifully squeezed in to the passenger seat with his bike boots on.

It was rush hour Wellington heading back onto the motorway which circa 1983 meant nose to tail but doing 80kph. I had to fuking $#Cane the poor mini to get up to speed and push my way into a gap.

As we went into the tunnel he said. Well I might as well tell you now that you've passed. I've sat there 15min with timid drivers. A fair change in attitude to today I'm sure. :niceone:

[Bonez]

I have realized that, particularly looking at the stats for sure and the way a lot of the older drivers/riders go about their business.I blame old cunts in New Plymouth riding outside city limits traveling at 170kmh over hill and dale everywhere.:innocent:

Just saying.....

[Bonez]

I have realized that, particularly looking at the stats for sure and the way a lot of the older drivers/riders go about their business.I wonder how other road users view YOUR driving/riding ability.

Just saying.....

[rastuscat]

Interesting the comments in regard to licence testing. Mine was marginal, in 1981 in Invercargill.

I think the process (CBTA, since 2014) turns out better riders now than used to be. My experience of looking at riders both as a popo and an instructor tells me that riders who start now and go through the CBTA process to get their licence are generally better riders than self taught experts.

People complain about how expensive it is, how long it takes. In France and Germany it cost around 2500 Euro to get a motorcycle licence, due to the requirement to spend a lot of time getting professional tuition.

So here we complain that the system is too easy, but that it takes too long and costs too much.

Conversely, the harder or more complex you make it to get a licence, the more likely it is that people will either not ride, or ride without a licence. Neither of which are good outcomes.

[Scuba_Steve]

Thing I hate most about the licence is the 10yr renewal of the "it's not an ID" licence, where literally the only thing you do is update your ID; not even the multi-choice test... but you know, "it's not an ID"

[roogazza]

Thing I hate most about the licence is the 10yr renewal of the "it's not an ID" licence, where literally the only thing you do is update your ID; not even the multi-choice test... but you know, "it's not an ID"

How true, photos aren't updated either are they ?

There's money in renewals, lifetime licence didn't work for them. Hard to argue it's not a NZ card ?

[R650R]

Driver licencing is not about safety, it's about you signing a contract with the state to agree to pay a schedule of fines that they choose to expose. If it wasn't a contract you wouldn't have to sign anything.
Same with hazardous goods, you are taught the bare minimum on the subject...

OSH forklift training seems to be about the only thing out there that properly trains people in nearly all the modes of failure that will result in small or large scale disaster....

Our population has nearly doubled in 30 years the road toll has pplummeted in comparison, its barely newsworthy these days now the media has a new genre of fear porn to peddle.
The road toll now is just a political tool that will be leveraged to end free travel completely eventually under the guise of climate and covid controls.
Tragic as it is our fear is over blown due to it being so visible... but no ones grabbing the sugary drink off the fat kid in aisle 7. "Don't do it Jonny, you die of pancreatic cancer in 20 years time,"

As we all board the trains to health camps well suddenly be interested in rail safety....

[Scuba_Steve]

How true, photos aren't updated either are they ?

There's money in renewals, lifetime licence didn't work for them. Hard to argue it's not a NZ card ?

Photo's are.
Photo, signature & expiry date are the only thing updated.
No care if you know the current rules or if you should have got a licence in the 1st place, only that your pic is updated & give them money for the privilege

[Jeeper]

Photo's are.
Photo, signature & expiry date are the only thing updated.
No care if you know the current rules or if you should have got a licence in the 1st place, only that your pic is updated & give them money for the privilegeDon't forget the free eye test you get.

[release_the_bees]

I think the process (CBTA, since 2014) turns out better riders now than used to be.
When I did the silver Ride Forever course last year, I was the only rider on a full licence, with the others being on their restricted licences and going through the CBTA process. I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by the general level of skill and roadcraft within the group. They were far better riders than I was at the same stage of my riding career.



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[Jeeper]

https://youtu.be/wM8Xli2KTzI

I gave up on bicycle commute because nobody actually sees you.

[Navy Boy]

When I did the silver Ride Forever course last year, I was the only rider on a full licence, with the others being on their restricted licences and going through the CBTA process. I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised by the general level of skill and roadcraft within the group. They were far better riders than I was at the same stage of my riding career.



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

This is much the same in the UK where driving tests and standards have been on the up (Both in terms of difficulty and cost) for many years now. The same complaints surface too - That is that it's too difficult and costly which then drives poor behaviours such as driving/riding without licences and insurance. The fact is that the system produces better riders than it used to - But it needs to given the increased traffic volumes from 20/30/40 years ago.

The best we can do is use this to our own personal advantage. I try to do this by attending a Ride Forever course at least once per year and I always manage to learn/re-learn something whenever I go. Plus it's a day's riding for peanuts in terms of $. Good all round me thinks.

:niceone:

[Navy Boy]

See here for the latest feedback following the speed limit changes on SH6.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/123987663/how-are-sh6-speed-limit-changes-being-received-one-month-in

It's actually not a bad article though the 'Feedback' seems to be entirely anecdotal and is doubtless edited to suit the prevailing narrative - That is that lower limits are a GOOD thing... The bit about accidents still happening on SH60 is amusing - So we haven't actually done anything about the standard of driving but everyone is going slower so that's OK... :confused:

To be clear - I don't disagree with all the changes made. Around Pelorus Bridge the lower limit is a positive change but many of the other changes are simply soporific when you use them and don't allow you to make safe progress for fear of getting wrapped over the knuckles. A shame but there you go - The price of progress perhaps? :mellow:

[rastuscat]

See here for the latest feedback following the speed limit changes on SH6.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/123987663/how-are-sh6-speed-limit-changes-being-received-one-month-in

It's actually not a bad article though the 'Feedback' seems to be entirely anecdotal and is doubtless edited to suit the prevailing narrative - That is that lower limits are a GOOD thing... The bit about accidents still happening on SH60 is amusing - So we haven't actually done anything about the standard of driving but everyone is going slower so that's OK... :confused:

To be clear - I don't disagree with all the changes made. Around Pelorus Bridge the lower limit is a positive change but many of the other changes are simply soporific when you use them and don't allow you to make safe progress for fear of getting wrapped over the knuckles. A shame but there you go - The price of progress perhaps? :mellow:

First, congrats on the use of the word "soporific". I knew that sooner or later it would have a use.

If I had a time machine I would know when I was going to crash, and have the chance to wind the clock back and go slower. Then the crash, if it happened at all, would be less serious.

But I don't have a time machine. It's something even BMW hasn't addeed to it's top line models.

It amuses me that people climb onto the interweb and grizzle about how crap drivers (apart from themselves) are, then bitch about speed limits being reduced. The logic confounds me. Like, we should let crap drivers go faster. Really?

Each 10 kmh reduction in speed limit normally returns around a 4 kmh reduction in the over all speed people travel at.

When I started as a traffic cop in Auckland we had a 20 kmh tolerance. But we killed around 750 per year in NZ that year. We have a learned a lot about kinetic energy management since then.

Nobody ever thinks they will crash, which is why individuals, effected by optimism bias, object to reduction in speed allowance. It's as if they are having something taken from them for no reason.

But collectively, the risk reduces as the speed of traffic reduces. It's the conflict between individual perception of risk, and the objective reality of collective risk.

[Navy Boy]

First, congrats on the use of the word "soporific". I knew that sooner or later it would have a use.

If I had a time machine I would know when I was going to crash, and have the chance to wind the clock back and go slower. Then the crash, if it happened at all, would be less serious.

But I don't have a time machine. It's something even BMW hasn't addeed to it's top line models.

It amuses me that people climb onto the interweb and grizzle about how crap drivers (apart from themselves) are, then bitch about speed limits being reduced. The logic confounds me. Like, we should let crap drivers go faster. Really?

Each 10 kmh reduction in speed limit normally returns around a 4 kmh reduction in the over all speed people travel at.

When I started as a traffic cop in Auckland we had a 20 kmh tolerance. But we killed around 750 per year in NZ that year. We have a learned a lot about kinetic energy management since then.

Nobody ever thinks they will crash, which is why individuals, effected by optimism bias, object to reduction in speed allowance. It's as if they are having something taken from them for no reason.

But collectively, the risk reduces as the speed of traffic reduces. It's the conflict between individual perception of risk, and the objective reality of collective risk.

Ah good - Some informed debate ;)

There are two main points to my argument on this:

1. The media's narrative on the topic - That is that if you simply slow down everything will be better.

You may think that I'm being simplistic/facetious here but when it comes to getting a certain message across then this is surprisingly accurate. Being in the Navy for some years has shown me time and again that factual accuracy comes a distant second to headline production. This, being an emotive topic, is no different from the media's standpoint.

2. Reduction of the 'Collective risk' as you've succinctly put it.

Collective risk is precisely that - Collective. That meaning that contributory factors are wide reaching and multi-faceted. Whilst it's entirely accurate to say that crap drivers are more dangerous if they can go faster those drivers/road users who aren't crap are punished too. The issue with SH6 is that we've now reached the point where the speed limit, IMHO, actually makes you drive/ride in a less safe manner owing to the sheer boredom brought about by the changes. The behaviours this creates are counter productive.

Then again if the casualty figures are lower (Something the article has steadfastly avoided mentioning - Which supports my desired narrative theory) then the facts provide a stronger argument one way or the other.

As was mentioned in an earlier post people need to know what it is they are doing wrong. Going slower is often a very effective way of masking this and not actually educating people. All of which takes time, money and resource of course.

It's a fascinating topic - Thanks for the debate :drool:

[rastuscat]

Ah good - Some informed debate ;)

There are two main points to my argument on this:

1. The media's narrative on the topic - That is that if you simply slow down everything will be better.

You may think that I'm being simplistic/facetious here but when it comes to getting a certain message across then this is surprisingly accurate. Being in the Navy for some years has shown me time and again that factual accuracy comes a distant second to headline production. This, being an emotive topic, is no different from the media's standpoint.

2. Reduction of the 'Collective risk' as you've succinctly put it.

Collective risk is precisely that - Collective. That meaning that contributory factors are wide reaching and multi-faceted. Whilst it's entirely accurate to say that crap drivers are more dangerous if they can go faster those drivers/road users who aren't crap are punished too. The issue with SH6 is that we've now reached the point where the speed limit, IMHO, actually makes you drive/ride in a less safe manner owing to the sheer boredom brought about by the changes. The behaviours this creates are counter productive.

Then again if the casualty figures are lower (Something the article has steadfastly avoided mentioning - Which supports my desired narrative theory) then the facts provide a stronger argument one way or the other.

As was mentioned in an earlier post people need to know what it is they are doing wrong. Going slower is often a very effective way of masking this and not actually educating people. All of which takes time, money and resource of course.

It's a fascinating topic - Thanks for the debate :drool:

I for one would be keen for speed limts to increase. I would probaly enjoy my riding more etc.

However, until the standard of driving/riding improves, I just can't support that. Perhaps if we were all as awqesome as we think, sure.

But evidence appears to suggest that we collectively do make mistakes too often for the leash to be lengthened.

Good debate though.

:killingme:killingme:killingme:killingme

[Navy Boy]

I for one would be keen for speed limts to increase. I would probaly enjoy my riding more etc.

However, until the standard of driving/riding improves, I just can't support that. Perhaps if we were all as awqesome as we think, sure.

But evidence appears to suggest that we collectively do make mistakes too often for the leash to be lengthened.

Good debate though.

:killingme:killingme:killingme:killingme

:niceone::niceone::niceone:

[Swoop]

If I was a cop, and given free rein, the amount of people I'd ticket for tailgating would be off the charts.
Several factors are in play here, firstly that nobody enforces the "keep left unless passing" rule, which results in;
secondly there is the dumbed down motorists who have been fed the propaganda that "speed kills"... So we now have road users who will sit on the road and not give a fuck about anyone behind them.

I'd be ticketing the cunts holding up traffic.


My pet hate is the type of person doing the training/grading and just how good they are.

In the past I have seen some real doosy's doing licence testing for example at AA.
It is quite noticable if you see a driver-training car on a multi-lane motorway. They are ALWAYS in the middle lane. So the retardedness is passed onto the new drivers.:mad::ar15:

[caspernz]

It is quite noticable if you see a driver-training car on a multi-lane motorway. They are ALWAYS in the middle lane. So the retardedness is passed onto the new drivers.:mad::ar15:

Ah yes, for a while now it's been part of the I endorsement course to get instructors to encourage new drivers to see the centre lane as the thru lane, using left lane mostly to prep for joining or departing motorway.
Retarded in my view, but hey I don't write the syllabus. I suppose it's path of least resistance, many folks don't understand merge like a zip...:oi-grr:

[R650R]

On many NZ “motorways” there is seldom much distance between on and off ramps. Unless traffic is very light it makes sense to use middle lane to avoid being cut off by bad mergers or exiters, especially in heavy b-train truck.
Whatever vehicle im usually looking for where the best average flow is and change lanes to suit although not too frequently.
It there’s space for someone slow to move into other lanevthen prob space for you to pass anyway.

Tailgating is over rated, yes it’s dangerous but the real problem is someone that’s not paying attention. I’ve been hit three times from behind and following distance wasn’t the issue.
You watch the dashcams vids and often traffic that is too close actually stops with a ciggee paper gap between bumpers but then someone who prob was a safe distance rams the lot of them oblivious that they stopped.

Getting disturbing number of drivers staring into their laps while driving, playing with their phones or something else....Should change law and make a brief hand held call legal but txting major crime...

[jellywrestler]

It's something even BMW hasn't added to it's top line models.

BMW don't have any top line models at all

[Jeeper]

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2021/01/2020-equal-deadliest-year-for-motorcyclists-in-new-zealand-in-25-years.html

[malcy25]

https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/new-zealand/2021/01/2020-equal-deadliest-year-for-motorcyclists-in-new-zealand-in-25-years.html

Half the story is missing. Are miles up, are more riders riding, is the at fault party ratio changing? Yes, 57 is terrible, but so is the reporting.

[rastuscat]

Half the story is missing. Are miles up, are more riders riding, is the at fault party ratio changing? Yes, 57 is terrible, but so is the reporting.

Thing with media stories is they choose a point of view, and focus on that. They are making a news piece, not a balanced information piece.

VKT is the important factor. Vehicle Kilometres Travelled. It's measured in millions of km. I've tried to find the VKT for motorcycles over the years, but it's eye-wateringly complex. They tend to get mixed in with other vehicle classes.

Comparing the number of deaths to a historical figue can be very misleading.

[HenryDorsetCase]

But I don't have a time machine. It's something even BMW hasn't addeed to it's top line models.



thats a bit shit. Even my hot tub has a time machine!

[Jeeper]

Half the story is missing. Are miles up, are more riders riding, is the at fault party ratio changing? Yes, 57 is terrible, but so is the reporting.Policy makers and NZTA are focused on absolute numbers. Hence reporting is on absolute numbers. Very emotive.

Target of zero deaths on roads gives a warm fuzzy feeling to the politicians, but in reality this is unachievable. There will always be accidents given the variables involved in traveling on road.

[rastuscat]

Policy makers and NZTA are focused on absolute numbers. Hence reporting is on absolute numbers. Very emotive.

Target of zero deaths on roads gives a warm fuzzy feeling to the politicians, but in reality this is unachievable. There will always be accidents given the variables involved in traveling on road.

Thing with Vision Zero is its not a target. Like, it's not realistic. It's aspirational, and allows us to focus on preventing every crash we can.

If you set a goal of, say 250 per year, you are actually saying that 250 is acceptable.

If we got to choose those 250, I could draw that list up fairly quickly. Problem is, we don't get to choose who they are.

The folk who get killed are most often just Mr and Mrs Average, who have made a fundamental error, or two.

Best video I have seen on Vision Zero is this one.

https://youtu.be/k2tOye9DKdQ

You are right, we will never eliminate road deaths. But it's good to try to.

[Jeeper]

I understand that it's aspirational, and I have no problems with the desire to preserve human life and eliminate risks that can cause harm. But the sad reality is that the aspirational goals are not backed by outside the box or original thinking in solving the problems. Where is the infrastructure improvement to support the need? Where is the education for drivers? Improved licensing regime for drivers? Reducing speed limits without any other improvement is simply a trade off between deaths and injury. In effect, what this is saying is that policy makers wish to have potentially more people injured rather than die. Harm is harm (it's just that death is more permanent harm).

I work in Risk Management field and often come across organizations and their goals of zero tolerance for fraud or something along the lines. The problem is there is often no corresponding investment in detection or prevention systems to eliminate such fraud and theft. It's a balancing act tolerance for loss and customer experience vs capital investment needed.

[Blackbird]

Half the story is missing. Are miles up, are more riders riding, is the at fault party ratio changing? Yes, 57 is terrible, but so is the reporting.

A lot more than half the story is missing, at least to interested parties so that a balanced viewpoint can be arrived at. Rastuscat may know what statistics are collected but I certainly don't. For example, in a motorcycle accident, is there any data analysis on the type of motorcycle involved, whether the rider has had recent training, actually holds a licence and a host of other relevant stuff which might be contributing factors. I suppose I'm asking whether there is a comprehensive standard methodology for data gathering rather than just leaving it to an individual investigating officer or other party. It might sound anal but having spent an awful lot of years on engineering condition monitoring, reliable data is the only way of getting to root causes.

[Moi]

Half the story is missing. Are miles up, are more riders riding, is the at fault party ratio changing? Yes, 57 is terrible, but so is the reporting.

If you think that report was half missing, then you should read the report in Sunday Herald of 24th January 2021 by Luke Kirkness. If you are subscriber it's available beyond the NZHerald's pay-wall: Motorcyclist death toll worst in 25 years. (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/motorcyclist-death-toll-worst-in-25-years-in-new-zealand/J4LTWFLVZX3RFBEHTMJX23CX4Y/).

If you're not a subscriber, let me quote some passages from the report where two experts are questioned - one is Josh Kronfeld, former All Black, and the other is John Cameron, Harley Owners Group Auckland chapter president.

Quote Josh Kronfeld:
Harley-Davidson fanatic and former All Black Josh Kronfeld says motorcyclists are always on alert for danger, with other road users often putting them at risk.
"Motorcyclists are so constantly having to be in that awareness that someone is going to do something wrong in a car. That's every time you go to ride. "Unfortunately there's a lot of hazards that come with [motorcycling]. We as riders all know that and it's just part of the game."

When Josh was confronted with this from NZTA: "The NZTA data, provided by the crash analysis system (CAS), found the rider was likely to have primary responsibility in 73 per cent of the deadly motorcycle crashes between 2015 and 2019. The comparable figure for minor injury crashes was 55 per cent and 39 per cent for multiple vehicle crashes."

Josh response: "Kronfeld wasn't sure what to make of the CAS figures and wondered if they factored in other issues such as the possibility of a pothole or shingle on the road, wandering livestock or even a dip hidden in the road's camber."

Josh went on to say: "They're factors that you assume the police put into it but how can you tell if they're 100 metres off the road off the bike?".

"It's only happened because of that initial issue and they've tried to save themselves."


Josh's explanation for the crashes: "One of the leading causes of crashes was as simple as other drivers not seeing them on the road."

He continued: "Every time I go for a ride there's an incident where someone pulls out from another lane, hasn't seen you, and you're not doing anything ridiculous." and he added "People just haven't seen you when they look in their side mirror or they haven't looked over their shoulder to check their blind spot. That's such an easy moment to wipe you out."

John Cameron's solution is simple...
John Cameron said it was often the obnoxiously loud motorcycles that kept riders safe.
"Loud bikes save lives because if you hear us at least you can be aware something is out there. People complain the bikes are too noisy but I'd much rather you hear me coming because you're not looking at me."

And Cameron's main complaint: Cameron said people using their phones behind the wheel was his biggest worry.

and we, motorcyclists are getting the blame: He [Cameron] was not surprised to see motorcyclists blamed for crashes but thought the CAS numbers were not all they were chalked up to be.

A little bit of insight from Cameron "Motorcyclists are by no means impeccable on the road, and we also have to up our game by riding smarter."

The last part:
Kronfeld said: "Most of the media accidents reported are of someone doing something dumb.

"Someone travelling the country does a three-point turn on a corner [in front of you] or something - you're not expecting that. They're the ones that get highlighted."

Cameron wants to see the New Zealand driving test have a section added to involve motorcycles, in a bid to better educate people.

Meanwhile, Kronfeld urged road users - motorcyclists and other vehicle drivers alike - to be more alert when travelling.

"I think for everyone to be safe it's important to be constantly looking for a hazard, it doesn't matter if you're on a bike, in a car, on a pushbike or skateboard," he said.

"When you're out on the road, you [should be] looking for something to go wrong."

[george formby]

A lot more than half the story is missing, at least to interested parties so that a balanced viewpoint can be arrived at. Rastuscat may know what statistics are collected but I certainly don't. For example, in a motorcycle accident, is there any data analysis on the type of motorcycle involved, whether the rider has had recent training, actually holds a licence and a host of other relevant stuff which might be contributing factors. I suppose I'm asking whether there is a comprehensive standard methodology for data gathering rather than just leaving it to an individual investigating officer or other party. It might sound anal but having spent an awful lot of years on engineering condition monitoring, reliable data is the only way of getting to root causes.

IIRC the instructor on my last Ride Forever day rattled off figures about the percentage of riders without training having accidents as opposed to those who have taken advantage of further training. Different types of riders, bike styles and age were also highlighted.

Summit else that I took away from the courses was the instructors opinion that those who would benefit the most from further training feel they need it the least.

All the instructors I've spent time with mention this.

I think the relevant info is there but how to reach the riders most at risk is proving tough to achieve with voluntary training.

[release_the_bees]

The scheme that they're trying out where they lower the rego costs for those who have attended a ride forever course is a good start. If they don't see the value in training, then maybe a few extra dollars in their back pocket might motivate a few to attend.

As much as I've enjoyed and learned from the Ride Forever courses that I've been on, I can't help but think that statistic is a bit skewed though - it could be argued that those who seek out extra training and upskilling are already more naturally inclined to taking responsibility and riding safely and defensively, compared with some of those that don't. (Which is basically what that Ride Forever instructor was saying.)

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[F5 Dave]

If you think that report was half missing, then you should read the report in Sunday Herald of 24th January 2021 by Luke Kirkness. If you are subscriber it's available beyond the NZHerald's pay-wall: Motorcyclist death toll worst in 25 years. (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/motorcyclist-death-toll-worst-in-25-years-in-new-zealand/J4LTWFLVZX3RFBEHTMJX23CX4Y/).

If you're not a subscriber, let me quote some passages from the report where two experts are questioned - one is Josh Kronfeld, former All Black, and the other is John Cameron, Harley Owners Group Auckland chapter president.

Quote Josh Kronfeld:
Harley-Davidson fanatic and former All Black Josh Kronfeld says motorcyclists are always on alert for danger, with other road users often putting them at risk.
"Motorcyclists are so constantly having to be in that awareness that someone is going to do something wrong in a car. That's every time you go to ride. "Unfortunately there's a lot of hazards that come with [motorcycling]. We as riders all know that and it's just part of the game."

When Josh was confronted with this from NZTA: "The NZTA data, provided by the crash analysis system (CAS), found the rider was likely to have primary responsibility in 73 per cent of the deadly motorcycle crashes between 2015 and 2019. The comparable figure for minor injury crashes was 55 per cent and 39 per cent for multiple vehicle crashes."

Josh response: "Kronfeld wasn't sure what to make of the CAS figures and wondered if they factored in other issues such as the possibility of a pothole or shingle on the road, wandering livestock or even a dip hidden in the road's camber."

Josh went on to say: "They're factors that you assume the police put into it but how can you tell if they're 100 metres off the road off the bike?".

"It's only happened because of that initial issue and they've tried to save themselves."


Josh's explanation for the crashes: "One of the leading causes of crashes was as simple as other drivers not seeing them on the road."

He continued: "Every time I go for a ride there's an incident where someone pulls out from another lane, hasn't seen you, and you're not doing anything ridiculous." and he added "People just haven't seen you when they look in their side mirror or they haven't looked over their shoulder to check their blind spot. That's such an easy moment to wipe you out."

John Cameron's solution is simple...
John Cameron said it was often the obnoxiously loud motorcycles that kept riders safe.
"Loud bikes save lives because if you hear us at least you can be aware something is out there. People complain the bikes are too noisy but I'd much rather you hear me coming because you're not looking at me."

And Cameron's main complaint: Cameron said people using their phones behind the wheel was his biggest worry.

and we, motorcyclists are getting the blame: He [Cameron] was not surprised to see motorcyclists blamed for crashes but thought the CAS numbers were not all they were chalked up to be.

A little bit of insight from Cameron "Motorcyclists are by no means impeccable on the road, and we also have to up our game by riding smarter."

The last part:
Kronfeld said: "Most of the media accidents reported are of someone doing something dumb.

"Someone travelling the country does a three-point turn on a corner [in front of you] or something - you're not expecting that. They're the ones that get highlighted."

Cameron wants to see the New Zealand driving test have a section added to involve motorcycles, in a bid to better educate people.

Meanwhile, Kronfeld urged road users - motorcyclists and other vehicle drivers alike - to be more alert when travelling.

"I think for everyone to be safe it's important to be constantly looking for a hazard, it doesn't matter if you're on a bike, in a car, on a pushbike or skateboard," he said.

"When you're out on the road, you [should be] looking for something to go wrong."


Jezuz, that kinda amounts to a rant from two chaps from the middle aged Harley owners fraction of nz rider, ostensibly blaming other road users for all crashes. Waste of . . . I'm going to say printers ink, but you know what I mean.

[FJRider]

Jezuz, that kinda amounts to a rant from two chaps from the middle aged Harley owners fraction of nz rider, ostensibly blaming other road users for all crashes. Waste of . . . I'm going to say printers ink, but you know what I mean.

Interesting comments from them (and you ... a rant in itself .. ??). But you are correct in saying Harley riders are a fraction of NZ motorcycle riders ... and their comments and experiences are just as valid as yours are to relate. BUT ... You are hardly in a position to say their comments were just a rant ... if you weren't there to see the and experience the same things they did at the same time.

A few months back I was traveling to my workplace (Stewart Island) ... a commute (by car sadly) done weekly (one week on and one off). I was stopped at a scenic stop, and was taking a short vid with my hand held camera. It can take a video or stills. I caught a row of three cars rounding a corner ALL over the center line. A Motorcycle coming the other way had to go right onto grass on the other side to miss the cars (He was ok as was the bike).

All the vehicles stopped and when Plod arrived (eventually) ... ALL the CAR drivers swore it was the BIKE on the wrong side THEY had to avoid by crossing the center line.

I showed the Plod the video I had taken. Then he promptly wrote the tickets for the car drivers. But until he saw the vid I took ... he was certain it was definitely the motorcyclist at fault.

In my 47 years of motorcycling ... the truth of things I've seen happening on the roads (in NZ) might be thought of as fiction ... if I (or you) weren't there to see it.

[rastuscat]

The scheme that they're trying out where they lower the rego costs for those who have attended a ride forever course is a good start. If they don't see the value in training, then maybe a few extra dollars in their back pocket might motivate a few to attend.

As much as I've enjoyed and learned from the Ride Forever courses that I've been on, I can't help but think that statistic is a bit skewed though - it could be argued that those who seek out extra training and upskilling are already more naturally inclined to taking responsibility and riding safely and defensively, compared with some of those that don't. (Which is basically what that Ride Forever instructor was saying.)

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I always thought the figures were skewed too, by that tendency to attract the safety minded rider.

Now that I work in head office and I can see the rationale behind any figures ACC uses, and contrary to my scepticism, it's clearly credible.

The first few people who did Ride Forver courses were probably the cloth-cap brigade, focussed on being safe so they could get home safe. In 2013, the target for annual course attendance was 1000.

It's now 2021, and our annual target is 7500, going up to 10000 next year. So far, over 24000 people have done courses. Some have done more than one, it's over 24000 individuals.

From this, and using injury analysis (as we get the injury records when people make a medical claim) it is apparent that people who have attended Ride Forever courses are 27% less likely to submit an injury claim than someone who hasn't. This is the figure we have been using, and it has been standardised and independantly audited.

Standardisation means that we take a selection of 1000 attendees, and look at their lifetime claims data. In this way you can see if they are risk takers, or not. If they fell off their bicycle when young, that be on their record. In this way, it's easy for us to see who the risk takers are. We can also see who the safety conscious are, as they have a significantly reduced claims history.

So we can actually claim that 27% as being legitimate, as it factors in the risk taking of the people being analysed.

So, next move is to close off that study group, and start looking at a new subset. So far, we can see that the 27% is actually quite conservative, in terms of injury reduction. Once the analysis is done and peer reviewed, we can start using that figure.

Of course, optimism bias makes the role more challenging. As a group, we accept that as motorcyclists, there's a risk of injury. Thing is, we never think it's going to be us. And for that reason, we don't see the need for coaching. After all, we have been riding for years with no problems, and what can there possibly be for me to learn, right?

Trouble is, each day somone gets hurt while riding a motorcycle. And in circumstances, regardless of whose fault the crash was, where the motorcyclists could potentially have done something to prevent it.

I know, it's always someone elses fault, right? Fault actually doesn't mean much when you are lying in the back of an ambulance with a broken arm, broken leg and ruptured spleen.

The point of the Cashback Pilot scheme was to see if a financial incentive was enough to attract riders who had not previously engaged with Ride Forever to attend courses. Riders starting out who are progressing through the licence pathway are incentivised to attend Ride Forever courses through reductions in time on graduated licence classes for doing a CBTA assessment, supported by Ride Forveer Bronze and Silver courses.

So why would a rider who has had a full for years do a Ride Forever course? That's what Cashback is trying to achieve. If it works, likely the conditions will be altered, and the scheme rolled out further. It's a piulot, ending in June this year, it can't be changed before that, or the outcomes will be less valid.

From my point of view of having been an instructor, I've never had anyone on a course who thought they had learned nothing. Even teaching people good braking techniques was an eye opener for some. And a plan for smoothe, consistent cornering. Stuff we all think we do well already, it's always possible to get better.

Let's face it, if we were all as good as we thought we are, we wouldn't have half the injury stats we have.

[Kickaha]

John Cameron said it was often the obnoxiously loud motorcycles that kept riders safe.
"Loud bikes save lives because if you hear us at least you can be aware something is out there. People complain the bikes are too noisy but I'd much rather you hear me coming because you're not looking at me."

He's an idiot, they make no difference at all, in a modern vehicle with windows up and radio on you don't hear shit until they are alongside you

[F5 Dave]

Interesting comments from them (and you ... a rant in itself .. ??). But you are correct in saying Harley riders are a fraction of NZ motorcycle riders ... and their comments and experiences are just as valid as yours are to relate. BUT ... You are hardly in a position to say their comments were just a rant ... if you weren't there to see the and experience the same things they did at the same time.

A few months back I was traveling to my workplace (Stewart Island) ... a commute (by car sadly) done weekly (one week on and one off). I was stopped at a scenic stop, and was taking a short vid with my hand held camera. It can take a video or stills. I caught a row of three cars rounding a corner ALL over the center line. A Motorcycle coming the other way had to go right onto grass on the other side to miss the cars (He was ok as was the bike).

All the vehicles stopped and when Plod arrived (eventually) ... ALL the CAR drivers swore it was the BIKE on the wrong side THEY had to avoid by crossing the center line.

I showed the Plod the video I had taken. Then he promptly wrote the tickets for the car drivers. But until he saw the vid I took ... he was certain it was definitely the motorcyclist at fault.

In my 47 years of motorcycling ... the truth of things I've seen happening on the roads (in NZ) might be thought of as fiction ... if I (or you) weren't there to see it.
Cool story. No really, good work.
But we just can't give the Mike to individuals and ask their opinions for a balanced piece of journalism unless they have some actual data that has been critically analyzed.

That's like asking the opinion, or listening to, the opinion of a Rockstar or Actor, or social influencer on the subject of politics or heaven help us, vaccination. You'll get a strong opinion but not an informed one.

We could run all our social policy past that Israel Whatshisface dude for comment and biblical adherence.

[Gremlin]

A lot more than half the story is missing, at least to interested parties so that a balanced viewpoint can be arrived at. Rastuscat may know what statistics are collected but I certainly don't. For example, in a motorcycle accident, is there any data analysis on the type of motorcycle involved, whether the rider has had recent training, actually holds a licence and a host of other relevant stuff which might be contributing factors. I suppose I'm asking whether there is a comprehensive standard methodology for data gathering rather than just leaving it to an individual investigating officer or other party. It might sound anal but having spent an awful lot of years on engineering condition monitoring, reliable data is the only way of getting to root causes.
Agreed, if you're not actually collecting the data how can you analyse?

If it's so awful, then publish those 57 (individuals removed obviously). Then you can say, 35, single vehicle loss of control, 20 intersections where the other driver messed up, etc etc, and so on. No point moaning when you don't know how it actually occurred.

[Jeeper]

Thank you everyone for such a civil and constructive discussion on KB so far.




PS: I may have just jinxed it.

[caspernz]

Without getting too hung up on stats, the fatality numbers for the past year are no surprise. Bike sales are up, more kiwis holidaying in NZ, in that sense the number of fatalities could be expected to have been higher still.

As RC already said, taking a corner correctly and knowing how to perform an emergency stop, just those two skills save lives. The attitude adjustment to lower the risk tolerance of an R4E participant can take a bit longer.

Very few participants at R4E are willing to believe the single vehicle crash stats for motorcycles, yet it's publicly available data. I suppose it's hard for riders to accept the biggest cause of motorcycle accidents is actually the (lack of) skill and (poor) attitude of the rider.

It's really that simple :brick:

[FJRider]

Cool story. No really, good work.
But we just can't give the Mike to individuals and ask their opinions for a balanced piece of journalism unless they have some actual data that has been critically analyzed.

That's like asking the opinion, or listening to, the opinion of a Rockstar or Actor, or social influencer on the subject of politics or heaven help us, vaccination. You'll get a strong opinion but not an informed one.

We could run all our social policy past that Israel Whatshisface dude for comment and biblical adherence.

What fucking world do YOU live in. No one in reality wants to listen to what YOU think. Somebody liked and famous (obviously not you) maybe.

The funny thing is ... That Israel Whatshisface has more influence in social influencing ... than you ever will. Get over yourself.

You get strong opinions here on KB ... informed ... sometimes (often BADLY informed) ... but you believe what you like. Truth and believable are often cell mates. What you choose to believe is your issue.

My story was about three persons attempting to pervert the course of justice.

YOUR story is about a person that is well known to the general public, and can influence people a lot more than you or I ... and you don't like it because he's famous and ... what else was it again .. ??


For what it's worth ... in MY opinion ... if the influence is in the right direction ... for the right reasons ... What's the down-side ... ??

[F5 Dave]

Who put garlic in your cornflakes?

My point, and to be fair, that is what I was talking about, is the journalist choosing to use two 'experts' who dont appear to be experts. That was the point. My ego doesn't come into it.

[FJRider]

He's an idiot, they make no difference at all, in a modern vehicle with windows up and radio on you don't hear shit until they are alongside you

MY opinion also.

But still ... the "Loud bikes save lives" stickers are everywhere.

Especially at Harley Davidson gatherings ... ;)

Go figure ... :lol:

[Jeeper]

I knew I had jinxed it... Oh well.

[FJRider]

Who put garlic in your cornflakes?

My point, and to be fair, that is what I was talking about, is the journalist choosing to use two 'experts' who dont appear to be experts. That was the point. My ego doesn't come into it.

Where is it written that they were being quoted as "Experts" ... they are well known (by some) personalities. Better known than you or I.

Better they quote them than us ... as it would have a better chance of making it into print.

Only the END result matters ... and would general public believe you or I ... ???

They've never heard of you ... ;)

[F5 Dave]

For FJ. 2nd sentence down.



If you think that report was half missing, then you should read the report in Sunday Herald of 24th January 2021 by Luke Kirkness. If you are subscriber it's available beyond the NZHerald's pay-wall: Motorcyclist death toll worst in 25 years. (https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/motorcyclist-death-toll-worst-in-25-years-in-new-zealand/J4LTWFLVZX3RFBEHTMJX23CX4Y/).

If you're not a subscriber, let me quote some passages from the report where two experts are questioned - one is Josh Kronfeld, former All Black, and the other is John Cameron, Harley Owners Group Auckland chapter president.

Quote Josh Kronfeld:
Harley-Davidson fanatic and former All Black Josh Kronfeld says motorcyclists are always on alert for danger, with other road users often putting them at risk.
"Motorcyclists are so constantly having to be in that awareness that someone is going to do something wrong in a car. That's every time you go to ride. "Unfortunately there's a lot of hazards that come with [motorcycling]. We as riders all know that and it's just part of the game."

When Josh was confronted with this from NZTA: "The NZTA data, provided by the crash analysis system (CAS), found the rider was likely to have primary responsibility in 73 per cent of the deadly motorcycle crashes between 2015 and 2019. The comparable figure for minor injury crashes was 55 per cent and 39 per cent for multiple vehicle crashes."

Josh response: "Kronfeld wasn't sure what to make of the CAS figures and wondered if they factored in other issues such as the possibility of a pothole or shingle on the road, wandering livestock or even a dip hidden in the road's camber."

Josh went on to say: "They're factors that you assume the police put into it but how can you tell if they're 100 metres off the road off the bike?".

"It's only happened because of that initial issue and they've tried to save themselves."


Josh's explanation for the crashes: "One of the leading causes of crashes was as simple as other drivers not seeing them on the road."

He continued: "Every time I go for a ride there's an incident where someone pulls out from another lane, hasn't seen you, and you're not doing anything ridiculous." and he added "People just haven't seen you when they look in their side mirror or they haven't looked over their shoulder to check their blind spot. That's such an easy moment to wipe you out."

John Cameron's solution is simple...
John Cameron said it was often the obnoxiously loud motorcycles that kept riders safe.
"Loud bikes save lives because if you hear us at least you can be aware something is out there. People complain the bikes are too noisy but I'd much rather you hear me coming because you're not looking at me."

And Cameron's main complaint: Cameron said people using their phones behind the wheel was his biggest worry.

and we, motorcyclists are getting the blame: He [Cameron] was not surprised to see motorcyclists blamed for crashes but thought the CAS numbers were not all they were chalked up to be.

A little bit of insight from Cameron "Motorcyclists are by no means impeccable on the road, and we also have to up our game by riding smarter."

The last part:
Kronfeld said: "Most of the media accidents reported are of someone doing something dumb.

"Someone travelling the country does a three-point turn on a corner [in front of you] or something - you're not expecting that. They're the ones that get highlighted."

Cameron wants to see the New Zealand driving test have a section added to involve motorcycles, in a bid to better educate people.

Meanwhile, Kronfeld urged road users - motorcyclists and other vehicle drivers alike - to be more alert when travelling.

"I think for everyone to be safe it's important to be constantly looking for a hazard, it doesn't matter if you're on a bike, in a car, on a pushbike or skateboard," he said.

"When you're out on the road, you [should be] looking for something to go wrong."

[F5 Dave]

I knew I had jinxed it... Oh well.
Well I wasn't trying to derail the conversation.

[FJRider]

For FJ. 2nd sentence down.

As I recall ... in our discussions ... that line was neither mentioned, discussed, or argued by either of us.



What point are you trying to make NOW ... ???

[Scuba_Steve]

He's an idiot, they make no difference at all, in a modern vehicle with windows up and radio on you don't hear shit until they are alongside you

And that's before we even get into the Doppler effect

[OddDuck]

He's an idiot, they make no difference at all, in a modern vehicle with windows up and radio on you don't hear shit until they are alongside you

Absolutely. Ride with earplugs and it's the same thing... had this direct experience with a Harley executing an overtake inside my lane. I'd had no idea that the bloke was there and then suddenly BRRRRAAAAAP and he's there on my shoulder at about two feet linear distance between us. I hadn't heard anything until he was level with me. 100 zone.

Waving other riders through is one thing, this shit going on is quite another... I'd pulled onto SH2 in Featherston about two minutes earlier and he hadn't been there then so I hadn't been holding the guy up. Can't be sure about mirror checks but I am in the habit of taking a look every now and again and then monitoring regularly once I see someone behind me.

Anyway... the loud pipes thing... it might work IF THEY PROJECTED THE SOUND FORWARD. Possibly shaping the sound in a manner similar to a headlight's beam. As far as I'm aware, there's nothing on the market currently that does this, I haven't heard of anyone protoyping it or trialling it either.

[pritch]

Where is it written that they were being quoted as "Experts" ... they are well known (by some) personalities. Better known than you or I.

Better they quote them than us ... as it would have a better chance of making it into print.

Only the END result matters ... and would general public believe you or I ... ???

They've never heard of you ... ;)

It's possible you may be overestimating the reading ability of the NZ public. (From memory the average NZ reading age is that of a 12 yo.) Most don't read beyond the headlines, only a small percentage of the Herald's diminishing readership would have bothered to read the article. Kronfeld's name might have caused a few rugby fans to read a couple of paragraphs but...

[Moi]

I was the one to use the word 'expert' when I provided some quotes from the NZHerald report.

I, also, have difficulty with the word 'report' as I felt it was tending more to an explanation piece. Considering the writer is a "Consumer Affairs Reporter", I am surprised he didn't actually ask some of those who are more likely to know about road safety, than Kronfeld or Cameron, such as RideForEver or Motorcycle Safety Advisory Council [MSAC] or, perhaps, some of the motorcycle riding instructors. And then he might have been able to write a report which outlined steps that could be taken by motorcyclists to "up their game" and lessen the chance of them having a serious crash.

I was a little surprised that the writer included Kronfeld's reaction to the CAS findings - Kronfeld wasn't sure what to make of the CAS figures... - on who is considered the 'at fault' party in motorcycle crashes - The NZTA data, provided by the crash analysis system (CAS), found the rider was likely to have primary responsibility in 73 per cent of the deadly motorcycle crashes between 2015 and 2019. Perhaps the writer was hoping it would highlight something, what I am not sure of except that Kronfeld moves further from being an 'expert' in my opinion.

As for the 'expert' comment from Cameron about loud pipes, the less said the better.

Considering that both men, Kronfeld and Cameron, offered what are considered by many as hackneyed explanations to explain how motorcyclists can reduced crashes - 'it's the other road users' fault' and 'loud pipes' - as their main advice suggested to me that neither were anywhere near being an expert or even well informed.

So, in hindsight, perhaps I should have put quotes [" "] round the word 'expert' in the introduction to what I wrote and so suggest to readers that I am being slightly sarcastic about the use of that word. The fact I didn't 'quote mark' the word is because I thought that readers of what I wrote would see that I was being slightly sarcastic - my mistake.

Mea culpa...

[Bass]

It's possible you may be overestimating the reading ability of the NZ public. (From memory the average NZ reading age is that of a 12 yo.) Most don't read beyond the headlines, only a small percentage of the Herald's diminishing readership would have bothered to read the article. Kronfeld's name might have caused a few rugby fans to read a couple of paragraphs but...

My personal experience of journalists is that there are no others amongst us who are quite so talented at distorting the truth without actually telling a lie.

On the other hand, I like applied statistics (lies, damned lies and statistics) so maybe I'm irreparably twisted as well. However, it is the most powerful investigative tool I have ever been given when properly used and so i get frustrated by the way LTNZ collect accident data, because it is not formal enough to lend itself to proper analysis.

Even so, it is possible to make some rough approximations which within their "rough" boundaries can be a bit useful.

The first one is that ABOUT 40% of fatal motorcycle accidents are single vehicle events. Even allowing for shitty road surfaces etc, I find it hard to not conclude therefore that the largest risk that motorcyclists face in NZ is motorcyclists. We kill ourselves at a faster rate than any outside factor.

The next one is also pretty vague but it looks like the 50/50 live or die speed for a motorcycle accident is about 68 kph - not very fast imho.
Let's extend that a bit.
Kinetic energy, the energy of motion, the energy that's dispersed in a prang by tearing things and people apart is proportional to the SQUARE of the speed at impact moment. This means that the probability of death rises and accelerates very quickly above the 50/50 mark. Sadly i cannot with any certainty state what the probability of dying is at any other speed but suspect it is like:-
68 kph 50/50 death
75 kph >85% death
80 kph >95% death
90 kph and up death

No proof, just opinion but that's what the numbers look like to me. Of course, these are probabilities and there is never a 100% probability for something that has not happened yet. There are those who have lost it at over 100kph on the public road and walked away from it, but not many of them.

Also, some will use this information to say that if I'm dead at 90 kph, I might as well be doing 150 kph cos i can't get any deader than dead. The biggest risk is motorcyclists remember.

[Berries]

If it's so awful, then publish those 57 (individuals removed obviously). Then you can say, 35, single vehicle loss of control, 20 intersections where the other driver messed up, etc etc, and so on. No point moaning when you don't know how it actually occurred.
Every year I do this, every time I regret it but here goes.

Not quite sure where they get the figure of 57. The official crash database has 53 crashes where someone on a motorbike died made up of 53 riders and one pillion. All the riders were male. They probably counted the two crashes where motorbikes were involved but it was another party who died.

22 crashes at intersections and driveways. Eleven were multi vehicle where the rider was at fault, five the other vehicles fault, three where fault was unclear due to the lack of information. When the other vehicle was at fault they were your standard SMIDNSY so you could argue the rider could have done something but without knowing everything about the crash that is a hard one. Where the rider was at fault you have inattention before slamming into a stationary vehicle clearly signalling a right turn and several examples where the rider was doing at least 80 in a 50 and a car or truck turned across their path. I cannot bring myself to blame the car driver when people do that. The only red light running crash and the only fail to stop at a stop sign crash actually had the rider being the guilty party, not the other vehicle as we come to expect. Three intersection crashes only involved the rider.

So 31 crashes not at intersections. In 21 of them there were no other vehicles involved, one involved a wild pig at night, the others you have to say the rider was the primary reason for the crash occurring. A couple of potential medical events but more often than not people throwing their lives away.

The kicker for me is that of the ten multi vehicle crashes not at intersections eight were clearly the fault of the rider, generally crossing the centre line on a left hand curve and having a head on or trying to ride in a group and failing miserably.

Getting picky the data includes three farm bikes doing what farm bikes do and three dirt bikes doing the same. Generally with the rider not bothering with their helmet. I don’t think they should be used to raise my ACC again but that is an argument going nowhere.

Three learners actively learning. Several suspended/disqualified riders on big Harleys. Oh yes. 17 of the 53 bikes involved were Harleys. Next was Suzuki on seven then you get five Hondas and five Kawasaki’s.

Biggest five year age bracket was 45 to 49 with nine riders then six each for 20 to 24 and 55 to 59. Only five crashes on a wet road, eight at night. 21 crashes at the weekend.

My opinion – rider fault 41, possible rider fault 2, probably rider fault 2, not rider fault 7, unclear 1.

There are a thousand ways to present this information but it is generally pointless posting it because we are all entrenched in our own views and it will just start more arguments. I ride because I like the adrenaline I get from it but I think I know when and where to ride sensibly so that I get home at night alive and with my licence intact. When I look at crashes like this I use a measure of whether it could have been me. There are a couple where it was wrong place wrong time and there is nothing anyone of us could have done, that’s the risk we all take and why motorbikes are incompatible with Vision Zero. There are also a couple where the rider made a decision which turned out to be the wrong one and then found he was in a position where there was no escape route. Have done the same, could have been me.

Other than that once again it is a whole lot of people who did not pay the full attention required when you ride a motorbike. A couple of stolen bikes so sod them, but most of the rest could have been avoided if they didn’t do stupid speeds in inappropriate places, didn’t ride while wasted, didn’t ride immediately after having a drunken bust up with the Mrs and generally just concentrating on what was happening in front of them. Oh yes, and not hitting trees. Trees hurt.

[F5 Dave]

Every year I do this, every time I regret it but here goes.

Not quite sure where they get the figure of 57. The official crash database has 53 crashes where someone on a motorbike died made up of 53 riders and one pillion. All the riders were male. They probably counted the two crashes where motorbikes were involved but it was another party who died.

22 crashes at intersections and driveways. Eleven were multi vehicle where the rider was at fault, five the other vehicles fault, three where fault was unclear due to the lack of information. When the other vehicle was at fault they were your standard SMIDNSY so you could argue the rider could have done something but without knowing everything about the crash that is a hard one. Where the rider was at fault you have inattention before slamming into a stationary vehicle clearly signalling a right turn and several examples where the rider was doing at least 80 in a 50 and a car or truck turned across their path. I cannot bring myself to blame the car driver when people do that. The only red light running crash and the only fail to stop at a stop sign crash actually had the rider being the guilty party, not the other vehicle as we come to expect. Three intersection crashes only involved the rider.

So 31 crashes not at intersections. In 21 of them there were no other vehicles involved, one involved a wild pig at night, the others you have to say the rider was the primary reason for the crash occurring. A couple of potential medical events but more often than not people throwing their lives away.

The kicker for me is that of the ten multi vehicle crashes not at intersections eight were clearly the fault of the rider, generally crossing the centre line on a left hand curve and having a head on or trying to ride in a group and failing miserably.

Getting picky the data includes three farm bikes doing what farm bikes do and three dirt bikes doing the same. Generally with the rider not bothering with their helmet. I don’t think they should be used to raise my ACC again but that is an argument going nowhere.

Three learners actively learning. Several suspended/disqualified riders on big Harleys. Oh yes. 17 of the 53 bikes involved were Harleys. Next was Suzuki on seven then you get five Hondas and five Kawasaki’s.

Biggest five year age bracket was 45 to 49 with nine riders then six each for 20 to 24 and 55 to 59. Only five crashes on a wet road, eight at night. 21 crashes at the weekend.

My opinion – rider fault 41, possible rider fault 2, probably rider fault 2, not rider fault 7, unclear 1.

There are a thousand ways to present this information but it is generally pointless posting it because we are all entrenched in our own views and it will just start more arguments. I ride because I like the adrenaline I get from it but I think I know when and where to ride sensibly so that I get home at night alive and with my licence intact. When I look at crashes like this I use a measure of whether it could have been me. There are a couple where it was wrong place wrong time and there is nothing anyone of us could have done, that’s the risk we all take and why motorbikes are incompatible with Vision Zero. There are also a couple where the rider made a decision which turned out to be the wrong one and then found he was in a position where there was no escape route. Have done the same, could have been me.

Other than that once again it is a whole lot of people who did not pay the full attention required when you ride a motorbike. A couple of stolen bikes so sod them, but most of the rest could have been avoided if they didn’t do stupid speeds in inappropriate places, didn’t ride while wasted, didn’t ride immediately after having a drunken bust up with the Mrs and generally just concentrating on what was happening in front of them. Oh yes, and not hitting trees. Trees hurt.
Well I'd want that to be peer reviewed before publishing, but I'd vote you do future write ups for the paper as that looked like a serious analysis attempt. Interesting.

[rastuscat]

Every year I do this, every time I regret it but here goes.

Not quite sure where they get the figure of 57. The official crash database has 53 crashes where someone on a motorbike died made up of 53 riders and one pillion. All the riders were male. They probably counted the two crashes where motorbikes were involved but it was another party who died.

22 crashes at intersections and driveways. Eleven were multi vehicle where the rider was at fault, five the other vehicles fault, three where fault was unclear due to the lack of information. When the other vehicle was at fault they were your standard SMIDNSY so you could argue the rider could have done something but without knowing everything about the crash that is a hard one. Where the rider was at fault you have inattention before slamming into a stationary vehicle clearly signalling a right turn and several examples where the rider was doing at least 80 in a 50 and a car or truck turned across their path. I cannot bring myself to blame the car driver when people do that. The only red light running crash and the only fail to stop at a stop sign crash actually had the rider being the guilty party, not the other vehicle as we come to expect. Three intersection crashes only involved the rider.

So 31 crashes not at intersections. In 21 of them there were no other vehicles involved, one involved a wild pig at night, the others you have to say the rider was the primary reason for the crash occurring. A couple of potential medical events but more often than not people throwing their lives away.

The kicker for me is that of the ten multi vehicle crashes not at intersections eight were clearly the fault of the rider, generally crossing the centre line on a left hand curve and having a head on or trying to ride in a group and failing miserably.

Getting picky the data includes three farm bikes doing what farm bikes do and three dirt bikes doing the same. Generally with the rider not bothering with their helmet. I don’t think they should be used to raise my ACC again but that is an argument going nowhere.

Three learners actively learning. Several suspended/disqualified riders on big Harleys. Oh yes. 17 of the 53 bikes involved were Harleys. Next was Suzuki on seven then you get five Hondas and five Kawasaki’s.

Biggest five year age bracket was 45 to 49 with nine riders then six each for 20 to 24 and 55 to 59. Only five crashes on a wet road, eight at night. 21 crashes at the weekend.

My opinion – rider fault 41, possible rider fault 2, probably rider fault 2, not rider fault 7, unclear 1.

There are a thousand ways to present this information but it is generally pointless posting it because we are all entrenched in our own views and it will just start more arguments. I ride because I like the adrenaline I get from it but I think I know when and where to ride sensibly so that I get home at night alive and with my licence intact. When I look at crashes like this I use a measure of whether it could have been me. There are a couple where it was wrong place wrong time and there is nothing anyone of us could have done, that’s the risk we all take and why motorbikes are incompatible with Vision Zero. There are also a couple where the rider made a decision which turned out to be the wrong one and then found he was in a position where there was no escape route. Have done the same, could have been me.

Other than that once again it is a whole lot of people who did not pay the full attention required when you ride a motorbike. A couple of stolen bikes so sod them, but most of the rest could have been avoided if they didn’t do stupid speeds in inappropriate places, didn’t ride while wasted, didn’t ride immediately after having a drunken bust up with the Mrs and generally just concentrating on what was happening in front of them. Oh yes, and not hitting trees. Trees hurt.

Doesn't make great reading, does it.

And yet we blame other people for the mistakes they make. When the best thing we can do, collectively, is suck it up, and try to individually improve ourselves.

Ride Forever helps. Just sayin'.

[release_the_bees]

Doesn't make great reading, does it.

And yet we blame other people for the mistakes they make. When the best thing we can do, collectively, is suck it up, and try to individually improve ourselves.

Ride Forever helps. Just sayin'.In some ways that doesn't make great reading, but in other ways it does - it shows just how much we are in control of our own destinies in terms of making it home safely after each ride.

I'd be much more concerned if those at fault figures were reversed, as there would be much less that I could do for my safety on a personal level.




Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[FJRider]

It's possible you may be overestimating the reading ability of the NZ public. (From memory the average NZ reading age is that of a 12 yo.) Most don't read beyond the headlines, only a small percentage of the Herald's diminishing readership would have bothered to read the article. Kronfeld's name might have caused a few rugby fans to read a couple of paragraphs but...

My questions are ...

Does Josh himself actually believe what he said ... ???

Did the writer of the article want an expert opinion or a celebrity opinion ... ??? Or did he think he got both ... ??

Will this article (potentially) encourage some young rugby fan((atic) to cut the pipes off his GN125 to (potentially) help save his own life .. ???

[Swoop]

Ah yes, for a while now it's been part of the I endorsement course to get instructors to encourage new drivers to see the centre lane as the thru lane, using left lane mostly to prep for joining or departing motorway.

... many folks don't understand merge like a zip...:oi-grr:

The issue is those who stay in the middle lane - well away from any sort of on / off ramps. It is a simple "failure to keep left unless overtaking" issue... seemingly encouraged and perpetuated by driving "schools".


As for "merging like a zip", Billy Connelly visited NZ and in one of his performances stated "merge like a zip? You kiwi's merge like fucking velcro!".
He is spot on.

[FJRider]

The issue is those who stay in the middle lane - well away from any sort of on / off ramps. It is a simple "failure to keep left unless overtaking" issue... seemingly encouraged and perpetuated by driving "schools".

Most Driving Schools normally teach normal open road and City driving practices. As this is the usual driving test criteria.

Motorways typically can have three lanes: The general rules for such are as follows.

Lane one – the left lane – is for routine driving.

Lane two – the middle lane – and lane three – the right-hand lane – are for overtaking.

Keep to lane one unless there's a build-up of slow-moving vehicles in that lane ... when you can move over to one of the other lanes.

Hence the "Keep left unless overtaking" (on Motorways) is generally ignored by motorists. And seldom enforced by plod.

[eldog]

As for "merging like a zip", Billy Connelly visited NZ and in one of his performances stated "merge like a zip? You kiwi's merge like fucking velcro!".
He is spot on.

Very narrowly missed becoming one of this years statistics last weekend, SUV merged digitally, like an on off switch.
no idea he nearly ran me over. No lookin, no gentle change, just twist the wheel.
just as well I was paying attention.

hate riding in the big smoke. Too many idiots.

going to suggest once you get a full motorcycle license, you also get unlimited speed limit.
we pay for ACC, you know there is more risk at higher speed.
balance risk with you knowledge of your own skill set.

i owned a loud pipe bike, sounded great cruising around.
limited number of other road users heard or paid attention.
less than 50% of other road users was able or cared what the noise was.
loud pipes only effective in small number of cases.

just got to follow other normal road rules.
penalties for other road users involved in any type of motorcycle incident quadruple normal ones.

[rastuscat]

hate riding in the big smoke. Too many idiots.


Interesting.

I hear people saying that people who make driving mistakes are idiots.

Not really. If they were out of the car and sitting in a pub I'd probably have a beer with them. They are just people who made a mistake.

We tend to demonize those we seek to blame. Its something we as humans do. Its a gross generalization and one of the steps of our psyche self defence mechanism.

The reality is we demonize those we see making mistakes, but we don't see our own mistakes. Its part of being human.

[nerrrd]

Motorcyclists' reactions to other people's driving is also coloured by our relative vulnerability, I find.

I got tapped from behind while sitting in traffic, and was expecting the driver behind me to pull over so we could check there was no damage. He pulled out into the outside lane and carried on, so I followed him and forcefully indicated I would like him to pull over, which he eventually did. I got very angry. When he finally did, and we confirmed that there was no damage, I felt obliged to apologise for my reaction. I seemed to get a real shot of adrenaline, even though it must have been a very light tap.

[rastuscat]

A couple of years ago I was part of a research project into drivers attitudes.

Conclusions included that everyone thinks they are better than average. Mostly because they see other people making mistakes and judge them harshly, but fail to judge harshly their own mistakes.

Another conclusion was that drivers generally support increased driver education............for other people. They were asked if they supported more driver education, and if they said yes, they were asked what additional driver education they had done. The vast majority had done none.

There is also the training conundrum to deal with. In terms of driver training, when people go to advanced driver training, most commonly supported by an employer as part of workplace h&S, they expect to be taught advanced skills, like skid control, hazard avoidance, emergency braking etc. In my view, it's the bascis that need to be taught, like indicating at roundabouts, how to merge or change lanes, just basic stuff.

On a wall in a training room I was in lots of times several years ago was a poster saying "Advanced skills are the basics mastered". I don't need people to be advanced drivers, I just need them to consistently be good at the basics.

Its human nature.

[Jeeper]

Interesting.

I hear people saying that people who make driving mistakes are idiots.

Not really. If they were out of the car and sitting in a pub I'd probably have a beer with them. They are just people who made a mistake.

We tend to demonize those we seek to blame. Its something we as humans do. Its a gross generalization and one of the steps of our psyche self defence mechanism.

The reality is we demonize those we see making mistakes, but we don't see our own mistakes. Its part of being human.I see my mistakes all the time, and try not to repeat them. My kids in the car with me learn from how I drive and behave on road.

[release_the_bees]

I can't speak for others, but after almost every ride, while I'm taking my gear off, I have a think about the ride I've just completed and what I could have done better.

As an example, when merging lanes this morning, I probably got a bit close to the car in front of me. If they'd stopped suddenly, I would have had to swerve around them, as I wouldn't have been able to emergency brake without hitting them.

I also video my commutes on occasion. Most of it is thrown away without me ever watching it, but if something ever takes me by surprise, I like to re-watch the incident and see if there were any warning signs or things that I could have done better.



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[rastuscat]

I can't speak for others, but after almost every ride, while I'm taking my gear off, I have a think about the ride I've just completed and what I could have done better.

As an example, when merging lanes this morning, I probably got a bit close to the car in front of me. If they'd stopped suddenly, I would have had to swerve around them, as I wouldn't have been able to emergency brake without hitting them.

I also video my commutes on occasion. Most of it is thrown away without me ever watching it, but if something ever takes me by surprise, I like to re-watch the incident and see if there were any warning signs or things that I could have done better.



Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

I do commentary rides to myself from time to time. Makes me seek things out. My bike has a dash cam front and rear, but I never bother to watch. I've seen it all live, I don't need on demand :)

[eldog]

Interesting.

I hear people saying that people who make driving mistakes are idiots.

Not really. If they were out of the car and sitting in a pub I'd probably have a beer with them. They are just people who made a mistake.

We tend to demonize those we seek to blame. Its something we as humans do. Its a gross generalization and one of the steps of our psyche self defence mechanism.

The reality is we demonize those we see making mistakes, but we don't see our own mistakes. Its part of being human.

Idiot was perhaps the wrong word.

There was no mistake.
Just no look.
No SMIDSY
No concern
No change in behaviour-did the same action twice within 60 seconds. Just glad I survived both events.
Like most people they have no thought for others.

Got myself out of there and into clear space.

[eldog]

Interesting.

I hear people saying that people who make driving mistakes are idiots.

Not really. If they were out of the car and sitting in a pub I'd probably have a beer with them. They are just people who made a mistake.

We tend to demonize those we seek to blame. Its something we as humans do. Its a gross generalization and one of the steps of our psyche self defence mechanism.

The reality is we demonize those we see making mistakes, but we don't see our own mistakes. Its part of being human.

Idiot was perhaps the wrong word.

There was no mistake.
Just no look.
No SMIDSY
No concern
1 flash of indicator as they swerved into my lane.
Twice that happened.:pinch:
No change in behaviour-did the same action twice within 60 seconds. Just glad I survived both events.
Like most people they have no thought for others.

Got myself out of there and into clear space.

[Berries]

I can't speak for others, but after almost every ride, while I'm taking my gear off, I have a think about the ride I've just completed and what I could have done better.
I'm thinking whether I generated a *555 call.

[F5 Dave]

I'm wondering what hot babes saw that monster 3rd gear stand on the seat wheelie. Oh wait. I dreamed that. :confused:

[eldog]

A couple of years ago I was part of a research project into drivers attitudes.

Conclusions included that everyone thinks they are better than average. Mostly because they see other people making mistakes and judge them harshly, but fail to judge harshly their own mistakes.

Another conclusion was that drivers generally support increased driver education............for other people. They were asked if they supported more driver education, and if they said yes, they were asked what additional driver education they had done. The vast majority had done none.

There is also the training conundrum to deal with. In terms of driver training, when people go to advanced driver training, most commonly supported by an employer as part of workplace h&S, they expect to be taught advanced skills, like skid control, hazard avoidance, emergency braking etc. In my view, it's the bascis that need to be taught, like indicating at roundabouts, how to merge or change lanes, just basic stuff.

On a wall in a training room I was in lots of times several years ago was a poster saying "Advanced skills are the basics mastered". I don't need people to be advanced drivers, I just need them to consistently be good at the basics.

Its human nature.

i am my most worst critic.
i push others to do more, push myself harder.
a procrastinator, with 2 left feet and a self defeating ability to do things in the reverse order.
i try to improve with everything I do.

Hard to soar like an eagle when you have no wings.

but that’s just me and why I am different to anyone else

[FJRider]

... Its human nature.

What (if any) figures are available that give the percentage of those that have done riding courses ... that have been involved later in a motor vehicle accident .. ???

[F5 Dave]

When I was involved in the instructing game the actual qualified instructor (ie not a pleb like me) used to tell the students that previous students were still involved in accidents. His theory was over confidence.

But not really backed up with real data. Still a good thing to instill in fledglings.

[FJRider]

When I was involved in the instructing game the actual qualified instructor (ie not a pleb like me) used to tell the students that previous students were still involved in accidents. His theory was over confidence.

But not really backed up with real data. Still a good thing to instill in fledglings.

And those that have done any (or all) of the various riding courses ... will be able to tell you how good a rider they are ... because THEY have done the various courses.

Like ... "I've done the Gold course ... so I must be better than you ... who hasn't done any" type comments.

[caspernz]

When I was involved in the instructing game the actual qualified instructor (ie not a pleb like me) used to tell the students that previous students were still involved in accidents. His theory was over confidence.

There's a simple way of expressing it. Participants in any riding course can be divided into two very broad categories.

Group one become safer riders.

Group two now simply crash at a higher speed.

Difference between these two groups is attitude. As an instructor I have to accept that I have limited influence on the attitude of a rider.

Ask an instructor how they feel when they find out that a rider they gave a licence to recently, has been injured/killed in a single vehicle motorcycle crash. Am I supposed to feel guilty for giving a licence to a rider who ticked all the boxes on test day? Then same rider goes out, attitude and ego gets them injured/killed :rolleyes: I don't own that decision they made :nono:

[F5 Dave]

. . .

Group two now simply crash at a higher speed.. . .



. . . Difference between these two groups is attitude.
I don't think its that simple. I think overconfidence, if that is the driver, will manifest in many forms of risky behavior.

But I do agree with the next bit. We had people wanting to learn, and people wanting to shorten thier provisional licence, as it was back in the day. The 2nd group knew it all and could often ride quite well, from a technical point of view. I sent a couple home for dangerous stuff that put others at risk.

Which reminds me,. . .

Then there was the occasional Hardley wannabe who needed a licence and we didn't send them away for having a 1340 for the carpark stuff. But we did insist on gloves. Which they invariably weren't wearing. Better control you see. :tugger:

They never came back. Bet we were the butt of thier rants at the pub that night.

You just cant help the willfully stupid.

[rastuscat]

What (if any) figures are available that give the percentage of those that have done riding courses ... that have been involved later in a motor vehicle accident .. ???

The figure we have had which was audited and certified is 27%. A rider who has done a Ride Forever course is 27% less likely to submit an injury claim via ACC.

And the stats are standardized in terms of risk propensity. Which means that it compares apples to apples in terms of rider lifetime risk profile.

Its being reviewed again at the moment, and looks like increasing significantly. The new figure can't be released until it has been externally audited and validated.

Riders who have done courses are still subject to the same laws of physics as riders who haven't. If they follow too close, or get too narrow on a corner too soon, despite what they were told on the course, they are subject to the same adverse outcomes.

If someone does a course but doesn't change the way they ride, nothing will change.

[FJRider]

The figure we have had which was audited and certified is 27%. A rider who has done a Ride Forever course is 27% less likely to submit an injury claim via ACC.

As opposed to a rider that hasn't done a course ... would be 100% likely to submit an injury claim ... ?? :scratch:


And the stats are standardized in terms of risk propensity. Which means that it compares apples to apples in terms of rider lifetime risk profile.

Over a riders lifetime ... experience increases ... does risk then reduce somewhat .. or not .. ??? :scratch:


Its being reviewed again at the moment, and looks like increasing significantly. The new figure can't be released until it has been externally audited and validated.

So ... the figure you just stated/quoted ... may not actually be correct .. ?? Would this be due to an an incorrect initial assessment of the cause/effect of the rider training courses ... or changing attitudes and behavior of (some .. ??) riders that have completed the courses .. ??? :scratch:


Riders who have done courses are still subject to the same laws of physics as riders who haven't. If they follow too close, or get too narrow on a corner too soon, despite what they were told on the course, they are subject to the same adverse outcomes.

So ... a rider training course will not allow the rider to defy gravity and the various laws of physics. Who knew ... ??? :eek5:


If someone does a course but doesn't change the way they ride, nothing will change.

Like the one's that do all the courses ... and still crash. But it's all good ... if it wasn't THEIR fault .. ?? Right .. ??


Or have I got it wrong ... again .. ?? :confused:

[FJRider]

There's a simple way of expressing it. Participants in any riding course can be divided into two very broad categories.

Group one become safer riders.

Group two now simply crash at a higher speed.

Difference between these two groups is attitude. As an instructor I have to accept that I have limited influence on the attitude of a rider.

Ask an instructor how they feel when they find out that a rider they gave a licence to recently, has been injured/killed in a single vehicle motorcycle crash. Am I supposed to feel guilty for giving a licence to a rider who ticked all the boxes on test day? Then same rider goes out, attitude and ego gets them injured/killed :rolleyes: I don't own that decision they made :nono:

Almost ... but no Cigar,

Group one can be (mostly) safer riders ... but being human ... they can make an error of judgement. One that might not be regarded as stupid ... just a simple misjudgment. Speed and/or conditions at the time ... being the factors in the final result.

Group two aren't necessarily going faster ... but should be more aware of the risks involved ... taking more care to see issues before they become issues ... and act accordingly. If speed is a factor for this group ... perhaps they didn't fully understand the principals of the courses.

But ... those courses will tell you of the reduced amount of time you have to react at the higher speeds. And the implications of that. Riding courses will not increase your reaction times ... just make you aware of things that might be an issue ... very soon. That rider still has to decide the amount of urgency required to react. Usually two seconds ago ... but can only do it NOW.

Any driving/riding instructor who feels guilty about the on road death of a student they taught ... should change occupations immediately. Because they CANNOT be held accountable for those deaths/injuries.

[F5 Dave]

Actually, you would hope it would Decrease their reaction times.

We used to teach a philosophy from Kenny Roberts via Twist of the wrist.

Felt board with packets of reactions. If you have those ready to hand you can put that plan in action . Brake hard. Feel for grip. Escape path.
3 packets.

[F5 Dave]

The most prevalent lesson was braking. Both learners and advanced course made significant reduction in distance to stop

The hurt report showed that many did absolutely nothing in emergency situations. Teach them to react and not be afraid of the front brake could be the difference between hitting a car at bugger all vs 50kph.

Advanced courses we did it from 100kph. Many were scared. Yet we're happy to travel at that speed on the motorway.

[FJRider]

Actually, you would hope it would Decrease their reaction times.

We used to teach a philosophy from Kenny Roberts via Twist of the wrist.

Felt board with packets of reactions. If you have those ready to hand you can put that plan in action . Brake hard. Feel for grip. Escape path.
3 packets.

Seeing and knowing what the issue is sooner helps. But Traveling faster means less time for safe response period.

It's interesting you put looking for an escape route LAST.

Braking but NOT changing direction ... KEEPS you heading INTO the danger.

A (supposedly) trained rider will ALREADY have a planned escape route from their position ... if they don't ... then they never saw the danger increasing.

Putting themselves in a position they need to LOOK for the escape route.



I was told to be always be looking for the safest route away from where you are. Even before you have an issue.

That advice has never let me down.

[FJRider]

The most prevalent lesson was braking. Both learners and advanced course made significant reduction in distance to stop

The hurt report showed that many did absolutely nothing in emergency situations. Teach them to react and not be afraid of the front brake could be the difference between hitting a car at bugger all vs 50kph.

Advanced courses we did it from 100kph. Many were scared. Yet we're happy to travel at that speed on the motorway.

STOPPING in the middle of a "Situation" or leaving the "Situation" ... which would you choose ... ??

My Grandad rode motorcycles ... advice HE gave me ... I still follow.

The best bit was "Look for the safest way out ... before you NEED the way out" ... and as long as you're moving ... don't stop looking. :lol:


It seems the safety procedure most followed is ... When the shit hits the fan ... Brake hard until you think it's safe to change direction.

Is THAT your opinion too ... ??

[F5 Dave]

Well ok I feign in your superior advice. You are clearly the superior motorcycling guru.

[rastuscat]

STOPPING in the middle of a "Situation" or leaving the "Situation" ... which would you choose ... ??

My Grandad rode motorcycles ... advice HE gave me ... I still follow.

The best bit was "Look for the safest way out ... before you NEED the way out" ... and as long as you're moving ... don't stop looking. :lol:


It seems the safety procedure most followed is ... When the shit hits the fan ... Brake hard until you think it's safe to change direction.

Is THAT your opinion too ... ??

Referring to my post above, you are correct. The 27% figure is wrong. Its far lower than reality.

Ride Forever training is relatively new, having been introduced in 2012/2013. The 27% figure came from the riders who undertook training in the first few years. The new analysis is coming from the group that has taken part more recently.

Out of interest over 24000 individuals have taken part in Ride Forever courses to date. And 86% of them strongly recommend the course they took to their mates.

Its a case of people not knowing what they don't know. I'm not referring to people on KB, of course, as we are all awesomer than everyone else.

[SaferRides]

The most prevalent lesson was braking. Both learners and advanced course made significant reduction in distance to stop

The hurt report showed that many did absolutely nothing in emergency situations. Teach them to react and not be afraid of the front brake could be the difference between hitting a car at bugger all vs 50kph.

Advanced courses we did it from 100kph. Many were scared. Yet we're happy to travel at that speed on the motorway.

I thought I was OK with hard braking until the day I had to stop completely from 100 km/h on the motorway. 100 to 50 was no problem, but the last 50 km/h was the trickiest because I'd never practiced it. What happened was the rear wheel started to lift and I backed off too much.

[FJRider]

Referring to my post above, you are correct. The 27% figure is wrong. Its far lower than reality.

So ... of those that have done riding courses ... that have been involved later in a motor vehicle accident ... is far higher than 27% ... ???


Ride Forever training is relatively new, having been introduced in 2012/2013. The 27% figure came from the riders who undertook training in the first few years. The new analysis is coming from the group that has taken part more recently.

So ... the earlier groups were less likely to be in an accident ... or ... are the figures based on recent course member statistics ... ???


Out of interest over 24000 individuals have taken part in Ride Forever courses to date. And 86% of them strongly recommend the course they took to their mates.

And what was it that 14 % didn't like .. ???


Its a case of people not knowing what they don't know. I'm not referring to people on KB, of course, as we are all awesomer than everyone else.

Like when people ride with their wheels in contact to the left of the centerline on a corner ... with themselves and their bike on the other side of the line ... they don't know it's dangerous .. ??

The one thing that has saved my butt on countless occasions is ... although I have "Right of way" ... I never assume I will GET (nor will I assert) right of way.

Most multi-vehicle accidents are caused due to "assumption of (or asserting) right of way" issues. And this is not just Motorcycle accidents I'm talking about.

[caspernz]

Almost ... but no Cigar

You're overthinking the topic and I took the liberty to simplify. I can't recall where to find the study stats from western Europe...

Advanced rider training creates, in simplistic terms, two groups.

Riders who now think more about their riding and become safer.

Riders who use these new skills to go fast but lack the discipline to apply this extra speed potential wisely. Then crash at a higher speed.

So from where I sit, it really is that simple.

Feel free to over analyze :facepalm:

[Bonez]

BMW don't have any top line models at all
:msn-wink:
Ahhh such wise words from one so young.

Wonder how BMWs super duper indestructable motorcycle final drive chain is doing?

[rastuscat]

So ... of those that have done riding courses ... that have been involved later in a motor vehicle accident ... is far higher than 27% ... ???

And what was it that 14 % didn't like .. ???


The 14% may have not liked the instructor, may have not liked the advice given because it doesn't fit with their beliefs, any number of things.

I told a guy once that use of both brakes in various circumstances is a good idea. Learning which circumstances are appropriate to which brake is the key. He told me he'll only ever use the rear brake, as he came off when he last used the front brake.

You just can't help some people.

[release_the_bees]

The 14% may have not liked the instructor, may have not liked the advice given because it doesn't fit with their beliefs, any number of things.

I told a guy once that use of both brakes in various circumstances is a good idea. Learning which circumstances are appropriate to which brake is the key. He told me he'll only ever use the rear brake, as he came off when he last used the front brake.

You just can't help some people.How'd that guy get on with the emergency braking practice? [emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[pritch]

I told a guy once that use of both brakes in various circumstances is a good idea. Learning which circumstances are appropriate to which brake is the key. He told me he'll only ever use the rear brake, as he came off when he last used the front brake.


Was this dude on a Harley? This isn't intended to be a dig at riders of Milwaukee's finest. It's just that I've seen reference in US texts to Harley riders relying on the rear brake.

[rastuscat]

Was this dude on a Harley? This isn't intended to be a dig at riders of Milwaukee's finest. It's just that I've seen reference in US texts to Harley riders relying on the rear brake.

M109, actually. And yes, the big cruiser crowd often rely on the rear, due to the weight distribution of those things.

Which exposes them to risk in an emergancy stop situation. If their habit is to only use the rear, the black mark leading to the point of impact will tell a story.

[Calix Lee]

I am extra careful whenever I drive my motorbike.

[Laava]

I am extra careful whenever I drive my motorbike.
Lol!
I am imagining you tootling the horns melodiously.

[frogfeaturesFZR]

Lol!
I am imagining you tootling the horns melodiously.

And avoiding the skid demon:facepalm: