PDA

View Full Version : Reply from MP Harry Duynhoven



0arbreaka
10th December 2007, 21:12
Not long after the accident from which Dan lost his life, I wrote an email to Prime minister Helen Clark expressing my concerns about the dangers posed to road users by the wire median barriers, this email was fowarded to MP Harry Duynhoven as it fell under his portfolio, it has taken well over a month to get a reply from the mp.

Heres the reply in which I recieved today;

Dear Mr Allison

Thank you for your email of date 2007, to the Prime Minister Helen Clark in which you express concern about the dangers posed to motorcyclists and other road users by wire rope median barriers (WRMB). Your email has been referref to me for reply as the issue falls within my portfolio. I have asked my officals to comment on the issue for me and they advise as follows:

The fatal crash involving a motorcyclist who hit a wire rope barrier on Auckland's Southern Motorway in October 2007, while tragic in itself, has reignited the debate about the hazards that motorcyclists face with these barriers. However, the safety benefits that wire rope barriers provide tpo the vast majority of road users are undeniable and continue to be demonstrated.

Transit New Zealand (Transit), as the angency responsible for the installation of WRMB's, recognises that all safety barriers, not just wire rope barriers, can be a safety hazard to motorcyclists. However, at this stage, New Zealand crash statistics and international research and experience do not show that wire rope barriers present more of a danger to motorcyclists than other types of barrier. Indeed, there is good evidence to suggest that if no barrier was in place, the likely result of a motorcyclist coming off their bike would be the same if not worse - ie: the motorcyclist may a strike roadside hazard or oncoming traffic. Transit continues to monitor the way in which our wire rope barriers perform and keep watching brief on international WRMB design developments, especially with respect to theit response to impacts from motorcyclists.

In 2006 Transit commissioned Opus International Consultants to prepare a report on this issue, and continue to closely follow international research and views on the topic. All of our work in New Zealand, and the scanning for information on international developments suggests that our approach is appropriate.

Over the ten year period from 1997 to 2007 (so far) there have been nine reports of a motorcyclist killed in New Zealand following impact with a safety barrier. Two of these involved a median barrier - one W-section ("Armco") and the recent wire rope crash. Both accidents were on an Auckland Motorway and both allegedly involved speed significantly in excess of the speed limit. None of the other seven involved a wire rope barrier.

Based on these statistics, there is no indication that wire rope barriers are more dangerous to motorcyclists than other types of barriers. Furthermore, motorcycle crashes with wire rope barriers are a very small percentage of the total motorcycle crashes.

It is clear that if we are to continue to reduce the number of fatalities and serious injuries on our roads, we need to make use of new ways of reducing the numbers and effects of crashes. Transit is following current best practice by installing wire rope median barriers to achieve these outcomes and advises that they have considered both motorcyclists and cost effectiveness before proceeding with their installation. Education of road users about excessive speed is central to our road safety strategy.

I trust that my reply goes some way to providing an understanding of the current approach taken in New Zealand on this subject. I also wish you every success with your career in the field of medicine. Thank you for taking the time to write to me with your concerns. It is appreciated

Yours sincerely


Hon Harry Duynhoven
Minister for Transport Safety

From what I have gathered from this reply, our efforts to get the cheesecutters either removed or made biker friendly have gone unrecognized by the government. They appear to have only considered the statistics. I am not happy about this at all, and I suggest that you all make your opinions known to the transport minister.

Mom
10th December 2007, 21:18
PM Crashe

She spoke to Mr Dynhoven? at the labour Party Conference the week prior to the Cheesecutter protest ride in Auckland, I am sure she has a letter that say something different to that reply you have posted here.

What a crock!

0arbreaka
10th December 2007, 21:33
What a crock!

Exactly that.:argh:

Blue Thunder
10th December 2007, 21:39
Perhaps if one of our elected representatives of the peoples voice, had one of their loved ones killed or maimed by one of these lethal safety devices , we might see a change of heart!:oi-grr:
I agree that for the vast majority of road user that these devices are working, BUT what about the so called minority of user for who they provide yet another hazard to deal with.
Yes speed may have been a factor in the deaths, but would those deaths necessarily have happened if the barrier was made of a different design?
I have witnessed the effect of several large rigs that have managed to climb over wire barriers but never one that has broken through concrete or steel!
Do armco or concrete walls have the same effect as striking a post 4" wide, I think not!
Consideration for motorcyclist and cost effectiveness, wot a load of BOLLOX, save money here and the MP's can enjoy more taxpayer funded trip overseas to visit thier partners in crime, surely they could do that by video conference or haven't they caught onto that technology yet??????

Time foe something else to be done! they won't listen to petitions voiced by the people who apparently elected them in to do the peoples bidding!
Throw the buggers out next election and hope we get some politicians that will do what they are elected to do , Not what some egotistical maniac tells them to do, to preserve their precious seat and inflated salary.!

deanohit
10th December 2007, 21:53
Sounds like it's time to send some gruesome pics of the aftermath of an accident involving these barriers with a note asking "What if this was your son or daughter?"

rainman
10th December 2007, 22:09
Over the ten year period from 1997 to 2007 (so far) there have been nine reports of a motorcyclist killed in New Zealand following impact with a safety barrier. Two of these involved a median barrier - one W-section ("Armco") and the recent wire rope crash. Both accidents were on an Auckland Motorway and both allegedly involved speed significantly in excess of the speed limit. None of the other seven involved a wire rope barrier.

Based on these statistics, there is no indication that wire rope barriers are more dangerous to motorcyclists than other types of barriers. Furthermore, motorcycle crashes with wire rope barriers are a very small percentage of the total motorcycle crashes.

It is clear that if we are to continue to reduce the number of fatalities and serious injuries on our roads, we need to make use of new ways of reducing the numbers and effects of crashes.

Some logical fallacies there. He first talks about the number of deaths, but then extends that to say the statistics show cheesecutters are "no more dangerous to motorcyclists than other types of barriers". To conclude this he would have to compare the results (from real crashes...) of motorcyclists hitting a range of barrier types at a range of operating speeds. How many "serious injuries" were there in the 10 year period? And for how many of these years have we had a significant length of cheesecutter installed? How does this correlate with motorcycle population growth over the 10 years? Is the sample size big enough to tell if the problem is getting worse?

Bah. Wish they'd teach people to think proper.

Some dickhead driver nearly pushed me into the barriers the other week. I was not going "significantly in excess of the speed limit", and I was watching closely as I was in his/her blind spot, so took evasive action. Had it gone differently (been wet, I'd been tired or otherwise less on to it) I would likely not have died, but it's likely at ~80km/h I would have had a Very Bad Experience hitting a WRB just a metre or two away. A concrete barrier would still hurt, but I'd bet my left one that injuries would be less, all else being equal.

Mind you, Duynhoven probably has a point with speed. It is the easy thing to blame... and as a group we may have a well-deserved reputation... We do provide a ready excuse by some of our own behaviour.

trumpy
10th December 2007, 22:26
Bah. Wish they'd teach people to think proper.

Did anyone really expext a reasoned and well thought out answer from this man? He has been a non event in every portfolio he has had and has a brain pre wired to toe the party line (unless aunty H says otherwise). Action Man he is not.
(p.s I don't partularly like the man........:motu:)

yungatart
11th December 2007, 07:08
Bollocks!

All the overseas research points to WRB being more hazardous to riders than other forms of barrier.

Keep getting those petition forms signed folks!
A petition must go before a parliamentary select committee, which is where we get to have our say.

MSTRS
11th December 2007, 08:20
Dyunhoven's attitude is the one we are up against at Transit. He doesn't know a thing about the issue (and doubtless couldn't care less). He asks his officials for the answer and they in turn get it from Transit. This is proof that the campaign needs to be stepped up a notch into the civil disobedience area, IMO.

ManDownUnder
11th December 2007, 08:29
1) From what (incredibly little) I understand... 9 accidents does not make a sample size from which statistically valid conclusions can be reached.

Who are the statisticians in here? Post some (plain english) comment on this - what sample size is needed etc etc etc

2) What overseas research is on hand that contradicts what was said?
3) Crashe... you got that letter?
4) What else can we put together. It needs to be/sound/present "reasonable"
5) Keep in contact with the man. Every response is important, just as every attempt to con6act him is
6) Anyone know how to book a slot on Campbell live with Harry, Helen, John Key and the National Minister for Transport safety? A time suitably damaging... just enough to paint them in an UGLY light and really make 'em squirm before the elections would be nice.

Did I mention I know Harry (a few years back now though)... and John Key happens to be my MP... office about 4km from my house?

ManDownUnder
11th December 2007, 08:32
National has an axe to grind with LTNZ... hoarding cash... http://www.national.org.nz/Article.aspx?ArticleId=11515

I can think of something they could spend it on... y'know... safety...

Finn
11th December 2007, 08:36
I think some of you actually think that this Government actually cares for the general wellbeing of NZders. Quite simply, they don't give a shit. They are only in power for self serving reasons. Just look at all the bills they've past when over 80% of the country are against them...

Vote National. It's time for a refreshing change.

Usarka
11th December 2007, 08:57
Harry wouldnt have replied, it would have been one of his lackies.

Vote national. because next year we're not allowed to say that.

vifferman
11th December 2007, 09:01
Indeed, there is good evidence to suggest that if no barrier was in place, the likely result of a motorcyclist coming off their bike would be the same if not worse - ie: the motorcyclist may a strike roadside hazard or oncoming traffic.
This is a bit of a non sequitur - a WRB is a roadside hazard!

clint640
11th December 2007, 09:02
1) From what (incredibly little) I understand... 9 accidents does not make a sample size from which statistically valid conclusions can be reached.

Who are the statisticians in here? Post some (plain english) comment on this - what sample size is needed etc etc etc


Statistics hardly come into it, as rainman points out, there's simply no logic to their assertion that WRMB are no more dangerous based on 'the above statistics'

Tryin to deny that a WRMB is more dangerous than its concrete equivalent is tryin to deny the bleedingly feckin obvious. You can tell just by looking at them. The physics of whats going to happen when hitting them would be clear to a 10 year old.

Cheers
Clint

Ocean1
11th December 2007, 09:11
1) From what (incredibly little) I understand... 9 accidents does not make a sample size from which statistically valid conclusions can be reached.


Not a statistician.
However, risk is a simple enough equation. Risk equals exposure times consequence.

In order to accurately assess the risk of WRBs to motorcyclists you first need to establish a baseline. Are you looking to compare the risk to those posed by no barrier at all? Or those posed by alternative designs of barrier?

The first part of the sum won’t change much, (unless a particular design can be said to cause accidents), it’s just the number of motorcycle accidents occurring adjacent to or in close proximity to the barrier. If we’re looking to compare the inherent risks to bikers of various forms of barrier then you need to assign categories of damage/injury caused (or prevented) by accidents relating to all of the designs in question.

On the face of it that’s exactly what’s been done. The sample, however, is pitifully small, nowhere near large enough for an acceptable level of confidence. There’s ways to fix that, we can wait for the sample to get bigger, (and, ethics aside, that’s not ideal because the environment is changing quickly), or we can go get data from essentially similar groups with larger existing samples, (off shore). We can also simulate the consequences, by scientifically chucking sheep carcases at barriers to see what happens. Either of the last two would probably be effective, (in an acceptable time frame), in filling in the consequence half of the risk sum, for us, as a group.

I’d be very surprised if the above data isn’t already available, the most likely source would seem to be one or more of the riding interest groups who’ve already been successful in forcing modifications to policy overseas. Any entity concerned with maintaining the status quo here will focus on the frequency of related events, (exposure), because the numbers there are small, easily attributed to “acceptable collateral damage” in any analysis of the barriers overall effectiveness. I’m picking they might rather we not focus on the consequences side or that sum, not only is the data highly likely to indicate “unacceptable carnage” but the data itself would be graphic, a powerful PR tool in it’s own right.

So let’s do that.

MSTRS
11th December 2007, 11:14
I had a reporter here this morning for an interview on the subject. I let her read Duynhoven's reply while I got some stuff together for her....the walls/air turned blue with the language. Good thing he is not in HB.

Squiggles
11th December 2007, 16:37
Stats>Research it seems.

Bugger, so a bunch of us have to be killed by these things before its considered

ynot slow
11th December 2007, 17:12
What do you expect from a hopeless MP,as stated all he does is toe the party line,hell how many years has he been in parliament (12?),and still not in cabinet,allways an associate minister outside cabinet.Remember he was a teacher prior to becoming an MP(mentally pathetic)for labour.Interestingly he coached NPboys high 3rd 11 soccer team when teaching,even then he couldn't get the top job,mind you he was passionate about his Porsche car,he liked the model which is his domain in life,maybe if he rode a bike instead of older cars it might be ok.At least the previous NP MP called Friedlander had an interest in road/transport and is the road transport assoc president.

Hitcher
11th December 2007, 17:57
Hon Duynhoven's reply would have been written by his officials. It clearly shows the extent of prejudice inherent in the "system". Playing Jedi mind-games with the brain-dead is neither stimulating or rewarding. The sooner we organise a face-to-face with said Minister, the better!

limbimtimwim
11th December 2007, 18:45
My letter is almost exactly the same and arrived a couple of days ago.

Kept meaning to scan it in and post it, and kept forgetting.

Matt_TG
11th December 2007, 23:39
Is that an exact copy and paste of the letter? If so the spelling and grammar are shocking.

My thoughts exactly. Written by someone with a NCEA Inglish pass perhaps?

Could we stage a sort of "Mythbusters" test by throwing a dummy at a WRB and a concrete barrier at say 80km/h and compare the results? Just a thought.

ynot slow
12th December 2007, 06:35
My thoughts exactly. Written by someone with a NCEA Inglish pass perhaps?

Could we stage a sort of "Mythbusters" test by throwing a dummy at a WRB and a concrete barrier at say 80km/h and compare the results? Just a thought.

Hell no that would be tantamount to the MPs admitting they were wrong,great idea though a couple of dummies flung at the barriers would cost stuff all,hell use a real dummy couple of labour cabinet ministers.

Hitcher
12th December 2007, 07:53
Could we stage a sort of "Mythbusters" test by throwing a dummy at a WRB and a concrete barrier at say 80km/h and compare the results? Just a thought.

Mythbusters? We could drive a car at it, particularly on the Centennial Highway, to demonstrate that a 1.5km stretch of wire rope on a windy stretch of road, held up only by aluminium pegs, will not stop a car from crossing into the path of oncoming traffic.

The "myth" that needs to be challenged here isn't the implied fact that the lives of motorcyclists are worth less than car occupants. It's that cheesecutter makes roads safer by preventing accidents. Based on the "supporting" statements they make to defend their position, officials have bugger all real evidence to defend their prejudice.

sunhuntin
12th December 2007, 08:21
im with hitch. use a combo of vehicles, cars, vans, campers, trucks, and, if it can be safely pulled off, a motorbike.

Ocean1
12th December 2007, 08:23
Mythbusters? We could drive a car at it, particularly on the Centennial Highway, to demonstrate that a 1.5km stretch of wire rope on a windy stretch of road, held up only by aluminium pegs, will not stop a car from crossing into the path of oncoming traffic.

Aluminium? Or steel?

Whether they prevent head-ons, at least, should be capable of statistical proof. Has there not been a reduction of accidents, fatalities and head-ons on that stretch of road since installation? There bloody well better have been, that's exactly the basis on which they were stuck there, notwithstanding the lack of required seperation.


The "myth" that needs to be challenged here isn't the implied fact that the lives of motorcyclists are worth less than car occupants. It's that cheesecutter makes roads safer by preventing accidents. Based on the "supporting" statements they make to defend their position, officials have bugger all real evidence to defend their prejudice.

The threat to various lives is an issue I'd like to see addressed however. The consequences of an accident are already high enough for us without introducing even more narrow impact obstacles inches from the traffic line. Introducing them to the left, effectively denying the natural escape line, is an abomination.

Do you doubt that they do, in fact, prevent head-on incidents?

I'm aware that they have trouble with anything larger than a typical Queens St taxi, but do they not actually work for a typical family car, in a typical encounter?

MSTRS
12th December 2007, 08:39
Aluminium? Or steel?

Whether they prevent head-ons, at least, should be capable of statistical proof. Has there not been a reduction of accidents, fatalities and head-ons on that stretch of road since installation? There bloody well better have been, that's exactly the basis on which they were stuck there, notwithstanding the lack of required seperation.

The threat to various lives is an issue I'd like to see addressed however. The consequences of an accident are already high enough for us without introducing even more narrow impact obstacles inches from the traffic line. Introducing them to the left, effectively denying the natural escape line, is an abomination.

Do you doubt that they do, in fact, prevent head-on incidents?

I'm aware that they have trouble with anything larger than a typical Queens St taxi, but do they not actually work for a typical family car, in a typical encounter?
Steel AFAIK. Sunhuntin stopped to look at some prior to wire being fitted and reckoned they weighed maybe 5kg. Doubt they do, but certainly too heavy to be alu??
What I'd like to know is - on a stretch where many cross-overs occurred but there is now cheesecutter...are there the same number of cross-over 'attempts' that are now thwarted? Or much less because people take more care for fear of hitting that shit?
Perhaps it is a moot point, since deaths are avoided, but if the barriers are not being hit regularly can we be convinced of their effectiveness over a range of vehicles striking them?

clint640
12th December 2007, 09:51
Could we stage a sort of "Mythbusters" test by throwing a dummy at a WRB and a concrete barrier at say 80km/h and compare the results? Just a thought.

I don't think it's really necessary to test the bleedingly obvious, & overseas research is quite clear that WRB = bad news. What I reckon we need is when the next politician/bureaucrat comes out with that "WRB are no more dangerous to motorcyclists than other barriers" bollocks, show them a pic of a concrete barrier, and a wire rope barrier, ask them to imagine they're on a motorcycle doing 30 km/h, wearing full protective gear & they're going to hit one of these barriers at a 30 degree angle. Which one would they rather have?

It's a bit of a no-brainer really, so even politicians & bureaucrats should get it.

Cheers
Clint

MSTRS
12th December 2007, 09:59
It's a bit of a no-brainer really, so even politicians & bureaucrats should get it.


Sorry, O Delusional One. They would deny the noses on their faces if their staff told them to....

Ocean1
12th December 2007, 10:09
Steel AFAIK. Sunhuntin stopped to look at some prior to wire being fitted and reckoned they weighed maybe 5kg. Doubt they do, but certainly too heavy to be alu??

I did say I'd check, and haven't. Will look tonight and report, but the ones I've seen where the paint has failed certainly look like galvanised steel...


What I'd like to know is - on a stretch where many cross-overs occurred but there is now cheesecutter...are there the same number of cross-over 'attempts' that are now thwarted? Or much less because people take more care for fear of hitting that shit?
Perhaps it is a moot point, since deaths are avoided, but if the barriers are not being hit regularly can we be convinced of their effectiveness over a range of vehicles striking them?

Any visible constraint to driving lines has the effect of slowing traffic, it's a well known phenomena, one used to justify much road safety furniture. A heightened perception of risk seems to me the mechanism, and there’s no doubt it works, at least in the short term. It’s the only possible justification I can think of for WRBs on the left side of the road. It can’t believe that effect can offset the danger they represent though. No doubt a closely spaced row of vertically mounted chainsaws would have an even more dramatic effect, the rationale is identical.

The barriers up the coast have been hit regularly, and the numbers are available, (although the source may be questionable). You don't have to stop many head-ons to comfortably justify a median barrier, and that fact represents a substantial hurdle to any statistical attempt to change current policy.

The overall effect of most of the modifications to the coast road, (in particular) is to constrain available space. They closed the footpath some time ago and have added several areas of potential run-off over the years, but now they've prevented access to what may otherwise be a road of decent width. If you take the overall surface width of the terain available you'd have room for four lanes and a median barrier through most of it, so I don't understand the move to so restrict the road to sheep track dimensions.

avgas
12th December 2007, 10:13
Never trust someone who gets paid to lie.

Ocean1
12th December 2007, 10:16
I don't think it's really necessary to test the bleedingly obvious, & overseas research is quite clear that WRB = bad news. What I reckon we need is when the next politician/bureaucrat comes out with that "WRB are no more dangerous to motorcyclists than other barriers" bollocks, show them a pic of a concrete barrier, and a wire rope barrier, ask them to imagine they're on a motorcycle doing 30 km/h, wearing full protective gear & they're going to hit one of these barriers at a 30 degree angle. Which one would they rather have?

It's a bit of a no-brainer really, so even politicians & bureaucrats should get it.

Cheers
Clint

I believe test data concentrates mainly on impact angles of some 15 deg. No less dangerous from a rider’s perspective, but apparently an angle representative of most impacts.

But I like the idea of a wee local experiment, lots of potential for publicity, pic’s of bits of machinery and sheep carcases all over the six o’clock news? Brilliant!

ManDownUnder
12th December 2007, 10:21
Never trust someone gets paid to lie.

I felt my ears burning... what're you hint... ooooo you mean Harry.

... ok...

clint640
12th December 2007, 10:32
Sorry, O Delusional One. They would deny the noses on their faces if their staff told them to....

Well, they might not 'get' it, but it would be fun watching them try to explain why they would rather hit a WRB instead of the concrete equivalent:

"well actually, I'd rather be dismembered on a cheesecutter because otherwise the massive budget surplus might be decimated by the approx 50c per capita needed to install something safer"

Clint

Ocean1
12th December 2007, 10:37
approx 50c per capita needed to install something safer"

Clint

You have budget numbers?

clint640
12th December 2007, 12:23
You have budget numbers?

No, that was just a rough guess based on the around $20/m extra that concrete costs x say 100km of barrier built per year (way high probably) divided by 4M people.

Clint

Ocean1
12th December 2007, 12:32
No, that was just a rough guess based on the around $20/m extra that concrete costs x say 100km of barrier built per year (way high probably) divided by 4M people.

Clint

I think materials costs are likely to be only a small component of the installed costs. Unsubstantiated romour has WRB costs at $700,000/K, far in excess of the price of the posts and wire. Be real nice to lay our hands on actual numbers. I've also heard LTNZ indicate that installation time is a factor, with concrete closing roads for too long, I'd be keen to consider finding solutions to that issue.

Nasty
12th December 2007, 13:46
I think materials costs are likely to be only a small component of the installed costs. Unsubstantiated romour has WRB costs at $700,000/K, far in excess of the price of the posts and wire. Be real nice to lay our hands on actual numbers. I've also heard LTNZ indicate that installation time is a factor, with concrete closing roads for too long, I'd be keen to consider finding solutions to that issue.

Which is interesting ... as they close roads for huge lengths of time installing the WRBs ... concrete they can develop off site and install at speed onsite.

Swoop
12th December 2007, 14:26
Never trust someone who gets paid to lie.
You can always tell when a politician is lying... their lips move.


Why is it that Die'nhoven has to get fuggin' consultants in? Is his department that incompetent, or is it for the normal reasons of gubbinment putting up a secondary layer of protection (like DHB's) to avoid public scorn??

Ocean1
12th December 2007, 15:19
Which is interesting ... as they close roads for huge lengths of time installing the WRBs ... concrete they can develop off site and install at speed onsite.

Do you think I'd be interested in offering hideously overpriced project or design solutions for really really difficult problems? :shifty:

avgas
15th December 2007, 15:32
After working with them on a few jobs......i wouldnt let their design engineers lay a gravel driveway.
Sorry if you do have this job, but i doubt any motorcyclist would cut corners off a road.

Pixie
19th December 2007, 14:09
I sent this email to Harriet Dynhoven:

Dear Minister

I read your letter to Mr Allison regarding Motorcyclists' concern over dangerous road barriers.This seems to be ,in a phrase Labour Party members love so much,a flipflop on the assurances our representative at the Labour party conference was given.
I will be advising all my Biker associates of your party's attitudes to this issue.

Yours
Paul Girardin

The text as posted follows:

Dear Mr Allison

Thank you for your email of date 2007, to the Prime Minister Helen Clark in which you express concern about the dangers posed to motorcyclists and other road users by wire rope median barriers (WRMB).....etc

Pixie
19th December 2007, 14:20
Could we stage a sort of "Mythbusters" test by throwing a dummy at a WRB and a concrete barrier at say 80km/h and compare the results? Just a thought.

That is a great idea.But don't use dummies,pig carcases would be better as they behave like a human body.Make sure they have not been gutted prior to the test.

Beeza
19th December 2007, 14:28
Harry Duynhoven, even though he's apparently a motorcyclist, has about as much courage to press ahead ANY motorcycling cause past his Labour cabinet colleagues as what a solitary pilchard has in a tank full of great white sharks.

Duynhoven is NOT the man you want on your side if you're going into battle. He's a milksop.

yungatart
19th December 2007, 14:30
I believe test data concentrates mainly on impact angles of some 15 deg. No less dangerous from a rider’s perspective, but apparently an angle representative of most impacts.

But I like the idea of a wee local experiment, lots of potential for publicity, pic’s of bits of machinery and sheep carcases all over the six o’clock news? Brilliant!

Can I suggest, that for maximum impact, this be done on the Friday at about 4.30/5 ish of Wellington anniversary w/e. It could be followed with the same stunt the next w/e, in Auckland.......at the very least you should have a captive audience of cagers as they leave the city in droves for their long weekends.

Ocean1
19th December 2007, 14:52
Can I suggest, that for maximum impact, this be done on the Friday at about 4.30/5 ish of Wellington anniversary w/e. It could be followed with the same stunt the next w/e, in Auckland.......at the very least you should have a captive audience of cagers as they leave the city in droves for their long weekends.

Apocrypha to be sure, but apparently there was developed a "chicken gun" for the purpose of simulating bird-strikes on aircraft canopies. The story has it that an Merkin institution placed a call to the British suppliers, complaining that the velocity of chickens was such that the canopies must always break. Indeed they had the remains several of the hideously expensive things to demonstrate exactly that. The Pom’s reply was slow in coming, but it did arrive: “Thaw the chickens”.

I digress, (well actually I wasn’t on-topic in the first place), however, I’d volunteer to manufacture a sheep cannon, if someone could demonstrate an effective and semi-legal way to use it in pursuit of this here campaign.

yungatart
19th December 2007, 14:56
I digress, (well actually I wasn’t on-topic in the first place), however, I’d volunteer to manufacture a sheep cannon, if someone could demonstrate an effective and semi-legal way to use it in pursuit of this here campaign.

Hmmm....dons thinking cap
I will let you know...does it have to be semi-legal?

Ocean1
19th December 2007, 15:15
does it have to be semi-legal?

It, (or the use of it) has not to see me in court.

Said "canon" needs only be a means of chucking carcases at a WRB, (or anything we want to compare them with) with reasonable accuracy and consistency. A suitably modified Ute might be a better start.

The process itself requires far more organisation than the ordnance and target however, and I'm unable to supply some of those elements.

sunhuntin
19th December 2007, 19:25
That is a great idea.But don't use dummies,pig carcases would be better as they behave like a human body.Make sure they have not been gutted prior to the test.

pigs have thicker skin than humans, and a dead body reacts differently than a live one... generally a dead pig is quite stiff. a live human has flailing limbs and "loose" muscles. a test dummy with realistic internal organs and veins [that actually "pump"] would be a better option... how to go about that, i dont know...

skidMark
19th December 2007, 19:34
What the hell.

they are just sidestepping the issue

one life lost is too many, if it was a concrete barrier you would just slide...

the regardless fact is even at the speed limit wire barriers are alot more lethal.

and he seems to mention the issue that bikers are very few of the percentage of road users, what the hell? we are still road users we have just as much right to not be put in unfair danger.

we arnt saying on barriers for gods sakes, just that we want them safer.

i think it's not much to ask

it's just government cost cutting.

it's going to take a car changing lanes into a biker at 80 kph or something and then throwing them into the barrier

before this issue is even remotely delt with....

at the end of the day they see it as bikes are dangerous...and it's our own problem as we accept the cheesecutters as just another risk.

well we shouldnt have to....we have enough risks as it is, and we will not stand for it, it's unacceptable that just because we are a minority we have to have a big risk put on our lives.

this is bullshit.

Ocean1
19th December 2007, 19:37
a test dummy with realistic internal organs and veins [that actually "pump"] would be a better option... how to go about that, i dont know...

So... how close a match to human is your archetypical politician?


I ask merely for information...

YellowDog
19th December 2007, 19:39
It is not too difficult to understand the reply. Some of the referred to fatalities are potentially avoidable, however the government does not consider such loss of life to be a problem woth noting.

Perhaps the NZ government believe motorcycle riders deserve to suffer injuries or die in such a way?

ynot slow
19th December 2007, 19:40
Live animal strapped to a bike and aimed at barrier,might need a set of trainer wheels to balance,piss take sure but you get the idea for carnage.

sunhuntin
19th December 2007, 19:41
So... how close a match to human is your archetypical politician?


I ask merely for information...

"archetypical" translation please?

and its just an idea... try and get something at the very least shaped like a human, with the emphasis on the limbs, but getting a realistc gut and vein system to show that its not only limbs that get damaged.

Swoop
19th December 2007, 19:48
So... how close a match to human is your archetypical politician?
Very close match apart from the lack of a brain in the politician...
... and a spine.


Test apparatus?
Could this be done with a small trolley that would run down a small railway track affair?
The carcase/dummy/test specimin could reside on the trolley.
Calibrated speed of trolley at object can be deduced easily.
Trolley stops before hitting object and "body" is propelled forwards.

No need for "propellants" that go bang!



"archetypical" translation please?
ar·che·type
–noun 1. the original pattern or model from which all things of the same kind are copied or on which they are based; a model or first form; prototype.
2. (in Jungian psychology) a collectively inherited unconscious idea, pattern of thought, image, etc., universally present in individual psyches.

Matt_TG
19th December 2007, 19:54
Just push it off the side of a flatdeck ute passing at 70km'h I reckon. Do a few along a suitable stretch of road, leave them there and bugger off - quick. The mess would be pretty, ummmm... messy!

Usarka
19th December 2007, 19:55
I got the same letter from this sister fucking cheese dick.

Ocean1
19th December 2007, 21:37
Test apparatus?
Could this be done with a small trolley that would run down a small railway track affair?
The carcase/dummy/test specimin could reside on the trolley.
Calibrated speed of trolley at object can be deduced easily.
Trolley stops before hitting object and "body" is propelled forwards.

Yup, simple is good. Question is should it be attempted as a scientifically validated, legally approved piece of research? Or as a piece of unsanctioned education, delivered by the press.



No need for "propellants" that go bang!

:Pokey: :oi-grr:

Pixie
19th December 2007, 21:39
I digress, (well actually I wasn’t on-topic in the first place), however, I’d volunteer to manufacture a sheep cannon, if someone could demonstrate an effective and semi-legal way to use it in pursuit of this here campaign.

The Frozen Chicken Myth goes the other way round.
The yanks made the "Rooster Booster" (a simple compressed air gun).
If the poms did copy it ,it was they that did not thaw the chooks.

I would have thought a certain select group of KBers would be more interested in means of keeping sheep still,than propelling them away at high velocity.

yungatart
20th December 2007, 08:34
Very close match apart from the lack of a brain in the politician...
... and a spine.


Test apparatus?
Could this be done with a small trolley that would run down a small railway track affair?
The carcase/dummy/test specimin could reside on the trolley.
Calibrated speed of trolley at object can be deduced easily.
Trolley stops before hitting object and "body" is propelled forwards.

No need for "propellants" that go bang!



What about store mannequins that are past their use by date, and a bottle or two of tomato sauce....not scientific in the least but pretty graphic, I would think.

MSTRS
20th December 2007, 09:46
The only really valid test would be with real, live humans. Animal limbs do not act like ours. I suggest that even bodies donated to science do not fit the criteria, therefore people such as William Bell et al would be the go....