Attacking Transit on another front:

[Pixie]

Emailed to Maurice Williamson:

Dear Mr Williamson,

Around two years ago Transit NZ began installing multiple yellow chevron corner indicator signs on State Highway 16.These were being installed in other areas as well,but as I live on SH 16, this is where I really began to notice the problems they create at night.
These signs are made with a very highly reflective yellow film and at night if a motorist approaches a corner with his headlights on high beam he is blinded by the light reflected back at him and is in danger of running off the road.
Dipping the headlights is not effective because on a country road at 100 km/h entering a corner on dipped beams leaves the driver equally in the dark.Excuse the pun.

I two years ago queried Transit NZ via their website and received the reply that their signage contractor used the wrong specification of material for the signs.
They asured me that as the signs were brought to their attention they would have them replaced with less blinding ones.

Two years later nothing has changed.

As an aside the signs result in other potential problems:

> As there are typically five or less of these signs on each bend they don't delineate the curve as precisely as the traditional plastic reflective marker posts.

>Transit appear to no longer maintain or replace the traditional refective marker posts,so they are often no longer there to show the shape of the curve.

>The support posts for the chevron signs are a hazard in themselves.With up to five aluminium posts on each corner.
Transit says the posts are frangible.Sure they are,if you are in a steel cage.But as with the wire rope barriers, they conveniently forget that we motorcyclists use the roads too.

Two years ago a biker was killed,when what would have been a relatively harmless slide onto the shoulder after a poorly maintained road surface caused him to fall from his machine,resulted in his body colliding with one of those "frangible" posts and suffering fatal injuries.
This incident occured near the Omeru Reserve on Highway 16.

Transit state one of their aims is to reduce dangerous roadside furniture.It seems to me they are installing more of it.

I would appreciate it greatly if you or your associates could raise these issues with the Ministers of Transport and Road Safety on behalf of the motoring public.

[Hitcher]

Good letter! Try riding through the Waioeka Gorge at night in the rain, if you really want to see how spectacularly dangerous the reflected light from these things can be.

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

[vifferman]

Huh. :blink:

I didn't realise this. Does this mean that throughout the land, our 'roadside furniture' (including the useful roadside marker posts) is being replaced by less safe (but presumably) more 'cost effective' 1970s-surplus disco furniture?

[Pixie]

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.


Moe's fine with them - he ain't so PC








Can wimmin drive?:gob:

[Pixie]

Huh. :blink:

I didn't realise this. Does this mean that throughout the land, our 'roadside furniture' (including the useful roadside marker posts) is being replaced by less safe (but presumably) more 'cost effective' 1970s-surplus disco furniture?

No! ........ beanbags

[sAsLEX]

Good letter! Try riding through the Waioeka Gorge at night in the rain, if you really want to see how spectacularly dangerous the reflected light from these things can be.

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

Why is it wrong to use gender specific terms when referring to a male?

I am sure he, sorry they, would not be too offended, or is this more PC gone mad bullshit?

[Hitcher]

Why is it wrong to use gender specific terms when referring to a male?

I am sure he, sorry they, would not be too offended, or is this more PC gone mad bullshit?

It's not about giving offense. Rather it's about stating that only male drivers/riders are the problem, which clearly isn't true.

[sAsLEX]

It's not about giving offense. Rather it's about stating that only male drivers/riders are the problem, which clearly isn't true.

He was speaking of a specific incident....

[swbarnett]

He was speaking of a specific incident....

"if a motorist approaches a corner with his headlights on high beam he is blinded by the light"

This is most definately generic and would be better thus:

"if a motorist approaches a corner with their headlights on high beam they are blinded by the light"

[Grub]

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

Aha! 'Tis a rare and wonderful thing when the august Hitcher falls into infraction territory. One is ashamed to admit to an element of glee but is not in the least bit deterred by that shame.

Infraction = Taking Thread Off Topic :nono:

Mmmm, what a lovely way to start a weekend.

[mowgli]

Dipping the headlights is not effective because on a country road at 100 km/h entering a corner on dipped beams leaves the driver equally in the dark.Excuse the pun.

Great letter. I would drop the reference to 100kph and replace it with at night. The argument doesn't rely on entry speed and some might even argue that 100kph on a country road at night is asking for trouble.

Nice work :)

[Pixie]

I would argue that ,prior to the advent of the yellow signs,100 km/h at night with even average headlights was perfectly safe on SH 16

[Mully]

I would argue that ,prior to the advent of the yellow signs,100 km/h at night with even average headlights was perfectly safe on SH 16

Isn't SH16 an 80km/h zone now? I seem to recall it being changed a few years back.

Anyway, good letter. Let us know when/if you get a response. Probably a good time to start asking the question of various political parties anyway. I think we should make them all aware that riders (and fans, such as myself, & family of riders) make up a large chuck of the constituency.

[rwh]

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

Is that considered the correct thing these days? I thought 'them' and 'their' were plural varieties, not singular gender-neutral.

[edit: merriam-webster says it's ok, and not just these days. Not necessarily 'correct' mind, but 'acceptable'.]

Richard

[White trash]

Good letter! Try riding through the Waioeka Gorge at night in the rain, if you really want to see how spectacularly dangerous the reflected light from these things can be.

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.
People don't ride in the rain. Wally.

[swbarnett]

Is that considered the correct thing these days? I thought 'them' and 'their' were plural varieties, not singular gender-neutral.
I used to object to them and their for the same reason until I found out that they were used in a singular gender neutral context during the 1800s (or earlier, can't quite remember). Language is a living thing and, as such, meanings change over time.

[Nikolai_V]

I`m new to this forum but I am a roading engineer (currently with Transit) but most of my time with consultants and contractors and I find it difficult to believe that the installation of Chevron signs at a corner to provide deliniation is actually making the road more dangerous? And that your response to this is to ask the minister of transport to look into the matter - bit of an over reaction don`t you think?

Couple of things could be causing the issue 1. Diamond grade retroreflective material used instead of Engineering Grade, 2. signs not installed with the correct tilt (signs are not meant to be perpendicular to teh approaching vehicle, but instead aligned so as to reflect a good proportion of light to the side of the road, avoiding glare) or 3. your headlights are incorrectly adjusted and not aiming far enough left.

all of those things are easily checked and rectified, rather than calling for their removal which WOULD actually be unsafe. Believe it or not but peoples ability to percieve carriageway features at night degrades with age, and these signs are generally put up either in response to accidents, or at out of context curves.

Call your local Transit office, and let them know where the signs are located, and what the problem was - some one will head out at night and check their installation. We have safety engineers for this reason and despite the overall tone of this forum we don`t hate motorcyclists and want to kill them all, quite a few of us ride or race and do what we can to make the roads safer.

[MSTRS]

I`m new to this forum but I am a roading engineer (currently with Transit)......{SNIP}..... and despite the overall tone of this forum we don`t hate motorcyclists and want to kill them all, quite a few of us ride or race and do what we can to make the roads safer.

Oh goody. Can you get rid of those effn post/wire killing units.
Thanks.

[swbarnett]

3. your headlights are incorrectly adjusted and not aiming far enough left.
High beam aims straight ahead. They're not a problem when using low beam. I suspect that these signs are actually required because a lot of people don't know how to use their high beam. As a result those of us that do get blinded.

I'd have to say though, on my last night trip in the cage they didn't seem to be that big a problem (maybe they were dirty?).

[Ixion]

High beam aims straight ahead. They're not a problem when using low beam. I suspect that these signs are actually required because a lot of people don't know how to use their high beam. As a result those of us that do get blinded.

I'd have to say though, on my last night trip in the cage they didn't seem to be that big a problem (maybe they were dirty?).

They're bad in a cage, but nowhere near as blinding as on a bike.

Maybe cos of different positioning on road? If they're supposed to deflect the light to the left, then a bike, holding left road edge ready for a right hander, is going to cop the lot. Whereas a cage with the driver over by the centreline misses it ?

Another example I suspect of the Transit mandarins having no fucking clue about the fact that bikes are different, and treating them as two wheeled cars.

I've found the best approach is to turn my headlights off when approaching. So long as nothing's coming ambient light is better than blinded. Always used to ride without headlights on the open road at night, back in the day, everyone did.

[Nikolai_V]

They're bad in a cage, but nowhere near as blinding as on a bike.

Maybe cos of different positioning on road? If they're supposed to deflect the light to the left, then a bike, holding left road edge ready for a right hander, is going to cop the lot. Whereas a cage with the driver over by the centreline misses it ?

Bikes have a different eye height, between cars at about 1.05 to 1.15m, and trucks at 1.8 to 2.05m, and signs are designed so as to reflect (i think 5 degress off parallel) to the light entering them for this scenario. The signs are almost invisible to trucks due to their higher eye height (closer to bikes) so i suspect they`re incorrectly installed. Otherwise i`ve ridden for a few years now and never had an issue - unless high beaming diamond grade signs - then you see them - first I`ve heard of it in correctly installed signs.

A
nother example I suspect of the Transit mandarins having no fucking clue about the fact that bikes are different, and treating them as two wheeled cars.

I've found the best approach is to turn my headlights off when approaching. So long as nothing's coming ambient light is better than blinded. Always used to ride without headlights on the open road at night, back in the day, everyone did.


Nice to be singled out at Transit but i think you`ll find all the RCA`s (road controlling authorities) install chevron boards where justified, (as do almost all other highway agencies worldwide)... Spent a bit of time in engineering and i have to say i`ve never heard of it being a problem - i might look into it with 3M see if it crops up anywhere else, or if it is incorrect material choice...

Headlights off - hmm sounds like a great idea, esp when someone coming towards you with high beam causes your pupils to contract (which happens much faster than they dilate) and you lose your night vision for 10 minutes or so... would work if eveyone didnt use headlights (maybe)

[Nikolai_V]

High beam aims straight ahead. They're not a problem when using low beam. I suspect that these signs are actually required because a lot of people don't know how to use their high beam. As a result those of us that do get blinded.

I'd have to say though, on my last night trip in the cage they didn't seem to be that big a problem (maybe they were dirty?).

The real problem is that with ever increasing traffic volumes, there is less oppurtunity to use high beams, without inconveniencing other road users - you may have noticed this esp. in teh north island v. frustrating.

Hence the need for more deliniation on our roads (and it reduces loss of control crashes cheaply, while improving network efficiency).

[Pixie]

I`m new to this forum but I am a roading engineer (currently with Transit) but most of my time with consultants and contractors and I find it difficult to believe that the installation of Chevron signs at a corner to provide deliniation is actually making the road more dangerous? And that your response to this is to ask the minister of transport to look into the matter - bit of an over reaction don`t you think?

Couple of things could be causing the issue 1. Diamond grade retroreflective material used instead of Engineering Grade, 2. signs not installed with the correct tilt (signs are not meant to be perpendicular to teh approaching vehicle, but instead aligned so as to reflect a good proportion of light to the side of the road, avoiding glare) or 3. your headlights are incorrectly adjusted and not aiming far enough left.

all of those things are easily checked and rectified, rather than calling for their removal which WOULD actually be unsafe. Believe it or not but peoples ability to percieve carriageway features at night degrades with age, and these signs are generally put up either in response to accidents, or at out of context curves.

Call your local Transit office, and let them know where the signs are located, and what the problem was - some one will head out at night and check their installation. We have safety engineers for this reason and despite the overall tone of this forum we don`t hate motorcyclists and want to kill them all, quite a few of us ride or race and do what we can to make the roads safer.
If you read my post again,you will see that I have already contacted inTransitgent NZ,they admited it was a mistake they made with the material and that they would fix it as they became aware of the bad areas.Two f'in years later nothing has been done.The chevrons are fuckin useless to describe the shape of corners compared to traditional posts.
None of your stated reasons why these signs are installed explain why they are on every corner north of Kaukapakapa on SH16.
I never said they hate bikers.I actually think the are just plain inept.


They're bad in a cage, but nowhere near as blinding as on a bike.

Maybe cos of different positioning on road? If they're supposed to deflect the light to the left, then a bike, holding left road edge ready for a right hander, is going to cop the lot. Whereas a cage with the driver over by the centreline misses it ?

Another example I suspect of the Transit mandarins having no fucking clue about the fact that bikes are different, and treating them as two wheeled cars.

I've found the best approach is to turn my headlights off when approaching. So long as nothing's coming ambient light is better than blinded. Always used to ride without headlights on the open road at night, back in the day, everyone did.
I find the chevrons are worse in the car than on the bike.
You must have better eyes than me because it is the transition from highly reflected light/oncoming highbeams to dipped that my eyes fail to react quickly to.Most people over 30 agree with me when I have canvassed their opinion on this subject.

[Ixion]

Headlights off - hmm sounds like a great idea, esp when someone coming towards you with high beam causes your pupils to contract (which happens much faster than they dilate) and you lose your night vision for 10 minutes or so... would work if eveyone didnt use headlights (maybe)

You see the distant glow of oncoming headlights from quite away off, and over hills and round bends. Especially if there are clouds. And of course a full moon is as good as day. I can read a newspaper by starlight when free of light pollution. Cloudless moonless nights are tricky.

[WelshWizard]

we don`t hate motorcyclists and want to kill them all

I hope this is just a mistake as it read as though you don't hate motorcyclist,
But then go on to and want to kill them all,
Is
We don't want to kill them all what is really meant

[Patch]

People don't ride in the rain. Wally.

well the fast ones don't . . . apparently, prob don't wanna get their expensive factory sponsored pussy suits dirty or just chicken shite.



Bikes have a different eye height, between cars at about 1.05 to 1.15m, and trucks at 1.8 to 2.05m, and signs are designed so as to reflect (i think 5 degress off parallel) to the light entering them for this scenario. The signs are almost invisible to trucks due to their higher eye height (closer to bikes) so i suspect they`re incorrectly installed. Otherwise i`ve ridden for a few years now and never had an issue - unless high beaming diamond grade signs - then you see them - first I`ve heard of it in correctly installed signs.

eh? invisible to trucks - bullshit

you think those mirrors (signs) are bad in cars, try approaching them (it) in a truck - we use more light, so it compounds the issue - thought you engineers knew how to add.


They probably aren't a problem in the whop whops, so why not step outside your office, cross the strait an into the Mainland where the problems actually are.


If people knew how to drive properly, we wouldn't need these stupid mirrors (signs).

[swbarnett]

The real problem is that with ever increasing traffic volumes, there is less oppurtunity to use high beams, without inconveniencing other road users - you may have noticed this esp. in teh north island v. frustrating.

Hence the need for more deliniation on our roads (and it reduces loss of control crashes cheaply, while improving network efficiency).
So what you're saying is that you're catering to people that can't drive and penalising those that can?

This is just typical of the NZ attitude - throw on a band-aid instead of actually trying to fix the problem. If a driver can't be bothered to use their high beam they deserve to be surprised by a corner. Don't waste our money, give it to the educators.

Your argument about not being able to use the high beam doesn't wash either. When there's oncoming traffic the corner signs aren't necessary as the oncoming lights combined with your own are more than enough to guide you round the corner.

[Nikolai_V]

You know, i envy my friends who decided to go into medicine rather than engineering. Trying to save peoples lives as a doctor doenst normally earn them resentment, and most people don`t tell them how to do their jobs. Maybe we should just give up as a profession, and then see how many people get wiped out on the roads. (but thats right we dont care as most of them are 'cage' drivers so unworthy of sharing our roads).

Not that that will affect the super riders on here ( how many of you have had a crash in your riding career??) who are above the laws of physics and more mundane ones such as traffic regs. Isnt it amazing how motorcyclists and boy-racers/performance car enthuiasts use the same arguments to justify their over representation in crashes? Given that motorcyclists kill more motorcyclists (by inattention, inappropriate speed, plain stupidity) than car drivers or the environment maybe our attitudes need looking at.

Even spent any time with amulance officers? Ask them about sunny sunday afternoons, and how many riders end up being killed out on rides in the country (in single vehicle situations) This happens all over the world... Bloody depressing.

I`ve ridden most days in the past 12 years since getting my license at 15, (and was riding dirt bikes long before then), rain, hail and snow (which we get down here). i`ve lived in auckland, lane split with the best of them, raced, toured, the works.

I`m not some fascist safety nazi, just someone in the industry, sick of having to explain to co-workers and auditors why we (as bikers) seem to engage in near suicidal behaviour on such a regular basis, and why we shouldnt be legislated out of existence to protect ourselves...

Personal freedom is fine, (at least in that regard, when the red mist comes down we typically only kill ourselves unlike the child racers who wipe our a car load of their mates), but we arent helping ourselves.

Cage drivers, bikers, who gives a toss what label you stick on them - they all have families, friends, loved ones. Still a tragedy when they die needlessly. I reject the argument that 400 odd deaths a year is acceptable, and statistically insignificant. Those of you who like me have lost relatives / friends for no reason other than they were using the road network for personal mobility will possibly agree. If however you`re so much better in terms of skills, morals, intelligence than the rest of us that you can dismiss this carnage as natrual selection, as dumb people killing themselves, as hopeless cage drivers getting what they deserve, then you probably couldn`t care less until something threatens your safety, ability to enjoy yourself.

I (and others in the industry) think that motorcycling needs to be encouraged as a sustainable alternative to car use (notwithstanding the recreational reasons), as bikers you know the reasons why...

Slag me off all you want, whatever makes you feel better. Personally I enjoy my job, find it rewarding getting a realignment built at a blackspot, preventing crashes. Means I can have a hand in creating some great riding roads in my part of the world.

Back to the topic, signs are installed so as to reflect some of the light back towards the driver (thats how we see things) most truck drivers complain of being unable to see them clearly as the light is being reflected back to a height of about 1.2m (which is where most car drivers eyes are).

Despite the hard time (and abuse) i`m actually doing a literature review at the moment and working with some colleagues to see if this is a systematic problem (in which case we need to look at our policy) or if its isolated poor treatment selection (which can be dealt with at a local level). Personally driving a unfamiliar road at night in the rain - i`ll take the chevrons over road marker posts (but then again i`m not perfect). seems to be a crime to cater for all road users (like those with less than optimal night vision) but wait the cheesecutters
why bother.....

[Ixion]

Firstly, noone is trying to tell you how to do your job. We are commenting on results (not necessarily yours personally) that are unacceptable to us. Taking your doctor analogy, if I go to a doctor, and he gives me medicine that makes me sicker instead of better, I will be asking him for explanations. Even more (this is really in reference to cheesecutters), if I went into hospital for an ingrowing toenail operation, and the doctors called my family in and said "Oh, once we had him knocked out, we realised he had two good kidneys and a good heart. So we ripped them out and put them into three dying people who needed them . Pity he's dead, but as a result three other people won't die. So society is better off, I don't see what you are complaining about". Which is *exactly* your justification argument for cheesecutters (memo to self : remember this analogy) .

Secondly, a question. When these glare thingies are installed, is there any acceptance testing? That is does anyone actually do a drive through to see if they work? If not why not, and if they do why don't they do one on a motorcycle (and truck, too) .

Slagging off the poeple opposed to dangerous road furniture as "boy racers" and "super riders" doesn't help your case. The majoriuty of riders involved here have a lot more than 12 years experience and don't crash (seldom, if ever). Play the ball, not the man.

[ManDownUnder]

People don't ride in the rain. Wally.

I spend a lot of time gliding through "Taranaki Sunshine" though...

[sunhuntin]

Even spent any time with amulance officers? Ask them about sunny sunday afternoons, and how many riders end up being killed out on rides in the country (in single vehicle situations) This happens all over the world... Bloody depressing.

Cage drivers, bikers, who gives a toss what label you stick on them - they all have families, friends, loved ones. Still a tragedy when they die needlessly. I reject the argument that 400 odd deaths a year is acceptable, and statistically insignificant. Those of you who like me have lost relatives / friends for no reason other than they were using the road network for personal mobility will possibly agree. If however you`re so much better in terms of skills, morals, intelligence than the rest of us that you can dismiss this carnage as natrual selection, as dumb people killing themselves, as hopeless cage drivers getting what they deserve, then you probably couldn`t care less until something threatens your safety, ability to enjoy yourself.

why bother.....

i disagree with you, again, on the points ive bolded and underlined. the cheesecutter protest was a result of a NEEDLESS death of a 21 year old who did not deserve to die. danial died because the cheesecutter was there. in the other thread, you attempted to brush his death under the rug like he didnt exist or matter.
i know his family are still hurting, and they will hurt the rest of their days. the same goes for his friends, both in real life and online.

and yes, ive spent time with ambo drivers... most recently 2005 after being hit by a car that ran a stop sign. they tried to give me that gas stuff. i told em to rack off. they had a fight just getting me in the damn thing, never mind giving me drugs and shit once there.
and dont even get me started on the quack who xrayed my leg, cast over an open undressed wound and then decided a week later the xray lens had a dusty lens. fucker. ever tried to pull a bit of bandage from a wound that has started to grow over it?? in the mean time, that leg is nothing but scar tissue, and the slightest brush brings tears to my eyes, and both knees are stuffed to the point long periods kneeling leave me shaky on my feet afterwards. [after struggling to get up in the first place...] and forget riding a sports bike.

im liking your analogy of transit vs doctors... i dont trust either of em for any damn thing.

btw you cant cry foul for being shat on... you knew what you were getting into.

[yungatart]

... Given that motorcyclists kill more motorcyclists (by inattention, inappropriate speed, plain stupidity) than car drivers or the environment maybe our attitudes need looking at.


why bother.....

You (the impersonal you) can not legislate against human nature.

However, when something is installed as a 'safety' feature to protect road users, then surely all those road users can have a realistic expectation that said safety feature will in fact add to their safety, rather than kill them in the event of an accident.

I note that transit states that one of their aims is to make the road side environment safer. How then do they justify the increasing use of cheesecutters on our roads? Surely the two things are mutually exclusive?

[sunhuntin]

especially their use on the left hand side.

[ManDownUnder]

I`m new to this forum but I am a roading engineer (currently with Transit) but most of my time with consultants and contractors and I find it difficult to believe that the installation of Chevron signs at a corner to provide deliniation is actually making the road more dangerous? And that your response to this is to ask the minister of transport to look into the matter - bit of an over reaction don`t you think?

I think the isue is a genuine one and have expereinced it myself (a few corners on 16 come to mind). Happy to show them to you if we're in the same part of the country.



Couple of things could be causing the issue 1. Diamond grade retroreflective material used instead of Engineering Grade, 2. signs not installed with the correct tilt (signs are not meant to be perpendicular to teh approaching vehicle, but instead aligned so as to reflect a good proportion of light to the side of the road, avoiding glare) or 3. your headlights are incorrectly adjusted and not aiming far enough left.

all of those things are easily checked and rectified, rather than calling for their removal which WOULD actually be unsafe. Believe it or not but peoples ability to percieve carriageway features at night degrades with age, and these signs are generally put up either in response to accidents, or at out of context curves.

I believe the request was for the problem to be fixed - as opposed to removal of the signs. I agree entirely removing them would not a sensible solution.

Again - I would urge you to take a look at the situation first hand as it sounds like you'll be able to diagnose what the issue is. From the original posting it sounds like the wrong grade reflective material was used...


Call your local Transit office, and let them know where the signs are located, and what the problem was - some one will head out at night and check their installation. We have safety engineers for this reason and despite the overall tone of this forum we don`t hate motorcyclists and want to kill them all, quite a few of us ride or race and do what we can to make the roads safer.

Cheers

[swbarnett]

You know, i envy my friends who decided to go into medicine rather than engineering. Trying to save peoples lives as a doctor doenst normally earn them resentment,
I can understand the way you feel, I wouldn't want the job. However, doctors aren't in the habit of trying to enforce a dose of over protection on us. If they did they'd get the same flack.


and most people don`t tell them how to do their jobs.
We're not trying to tell you how to do your job. We're just telling you how we feel about the job that has been done and, from our point of view, that it seems that there is a problem that's not being taken seriously.


Maybe we should just give up as a profession, and then see how many people get wiped out on the roads.
Your profession is just like the Police. I'd rather it weren't necessary but I think we all have to admit that a complete lack of it would not be good either. The happy medium would be somewhere in the middle - by all means try to fix the roads but at the same time be careful to consider all angles and proceed with caution. To ignore one sector of society is prejudice. As motorcyclists we are a minority that has the same rights and obligations as everyone else. We don't want the road made worse for us just because our voice is not loud enough.


(but thats right we dont care as most of them are 'cage' drivers so unworthy of sharing our roads).
Noone has said that cagers don't matter. I have said that a healthy measure of cause and effect is required along with education. This applies equally to everybody no matter what they drive.


Not that that will affect the super riders on here ( how many of you have had a crash in your riding career??) who are above the laws of physics and more mundane ones such as traffic regs. Isnt it amazing how motorcyclists and boy-racers/performance car enthuiasts use the same arguments to justify their over representation in crashes? Given that motorcyclists kill more motorcyclists (by inattention, inappropriate speed, plain stupidity) than car drivers or the environment maybe our attitudes need looking at.
Nobody's ever said that they're above the laws of physics. We just complain when the logic used to justify any given statute is so obviously flawed.


Even spent any time with amulance officers?
No, I haven't and I never will even if I get the chance. They only see one side of the story. The only fact that is not in dispute is that humans are fallible. No amount of wishful thinking is going to reduce our road toll below it's natural minimum.


I`m not some fascist safety nazi, just someone in the industry, sick of having to explain to co-workers and auditors why we (as bikers) seem to engage in near suicidal behaviour on such a regular basis, and why we shouldnt be legislated out of existence to protect ourselves...
The answer is simple really. We're human. As a group we have the same extremes as any other sector of society; both safety zealots and adrenalin junkies.


Personal freedom is fine, (at least in that regard, when the red mist comes down we typically only kill ourselves unlike the child racers who wipe our a car load of their mates), but we arent helping ourselves.
No argument there. Some among us do seem to think that personal responsibility does not go hand in hand with personal freedom. The problem is that the more we harp on about society's extremes the more freedom we lose until, eventually, we don't have any at all.


Cage drivers, bikers, who gives a toss what label you stick on them - they all have families, friends, loved ones. Still a tragedy when they die needlessly. I reject the argument that 400 odd deaths a year is acceptable, and statistically insignificant.
This is where we trip over ourselves. If we get too emotional about the death of a stranger we lose our objectivity and fall into the myth of "no deaths from anything other than old age". Death is a part of life.


If however you`re so much better in terms of skills, morals, intelligence than the rest of us that you can dismiss this carnage as natrual selection, as dumb people killing themselves, as hopeless cage drivers getting what they deserve, then you probably couldn`t care less until something threatens your safety, ability to enjoy yourself.
All I ask is that we (the entire population) are given the opportunity to suffer the consequences of our decisions. If we wrap up in too much cotton wool we diminish the human condition.


I (and others in the industry) think that motorcycling needs to be encouraged as a sustainable alternative to car use (notwithstanding the recreational reasons), as bikers you know the reasons why...
And the more bikers we have in the industry the better.


Slag me off all you want,
I'm sorry if it feels like we're slagging you off. Don't take it too personally. To some degree you're like the bank teller that gets yelled at because the bank stuffed up.

[MSTRS]

I'm sorry if it feels like we're slagging you off. Don't take it too personally. To some degree you're like the bank teller that gets yelled at because the bank stuffed up.

Anyone from Transit (or anyone fullstop) who comes on here defending the use of those road-mounted guillotines, telling us that the lives saved are worth the price of motorcyclists' deaths, must be incredibly thick, not to mention, sensitive, to feel aggrieved if they cop some flak.
If Nikolai_v is so upset, perhaps he can convince his paymasters that it might be a good idea to get rid of/replace cheesecutters so that motorcyclists will leave poor Transit alone??? Until the next bit of anti-motorcyclist bullshit becomes an issue.

[swbarnett]

Anyone from Transit (or anyone fullstop) who comes on here defending the use of those road-mounted guillotines, telling us that the lives saved are worth the price of motorcyclists' deaths, must be incredibly thick, not to mention, sensitive, to feel aggrieved if they cop some flak.
If Nikolai_v is so upset, perhaps he can convince his paymasters that it might be a good idea to get rid of/replace cheesecutters so that motorcyclists will leave poor Transit alone??? Until the next bit of anti-motorcyclist bullshit becomes an issue.
Agreed. On further reflection he is more than just a customer representative.

[Nikolai_V]

Heres a quote for you, from the industry standard manual of Traffic Engineering. I realise i`m wasting my breath here but I dislike being insulted.

"Ideally barriers should have all surfaces (sides,tops and under barrier areas) as smooth as possible. Concerns that wire rope barriers will act like a cheese cutter on a motorcyclist have failed to materialise: there is no evidence at all, worldwide of this occuiring, despite approved wire rope barrier systems being used for at least two decades. As with other barriers, the posts present the greater potential for injury"

Now i`m not making this up. i think as intelligent responsible adults we are all capable of distinguishing between a real and a percieved risk. The horrible death of one young motorcyclist has coloured the issue to the point where the facts are simply ignored. What is a real fact is this, despite the potential for harm, it`s not occurring... from the way this debate is being conducted, you would imagine that hundreds of us are being sliced to bits, hobbling around like vietnam war veterans. Can`t say I`ve seen it, and the statistics on CAS (the LTNZ accident reporting database) definitley arent showing it. (oh, and by the way anticipating dismissal of the effeciveness of acident reporting - the services generally attend decapitation/amputation accidents...)

Given the responses already on this forum, i`m inclined to think that there will be a heap of responses along the lines of "government does`nt care , second class citizens, distorted statistics, government conspiracy etc". However, that doesnt actually change what has been observed to date, both in New Zealand, and around the world. People are not being sliced to bits as a result of WRB`s. They are being saved however, the fact that the people being saved are not motorcyclists relegates that fact to a non-event for people around here.

Interestingly enough, research quoted by FEMA, teh federation of european motorcyclist, recomended that the H or I section posts be replaced with C or Z (channel or sigma) shaped posts, as an effictive means of reducing injuries.

A strong thread running through this debate is apparent dimay that despite the advantages of concrete it is not used everywhere due to the cost. To these people I say wake up and smell the roses. Its simple really. Limited amount of funding, unlimited (effectively) safety shortcomings on our network. If we didnt spend the money in an efficent way the same people would be calling for our heads...

I`m not going to comment on road funding - thats a political issue.

Again, i ride on roads where wrb has been installed, i`m willing to take my chances with them, should I lowside into one. Especially as the posts have been redesigned in response to concerns re their shortcomings.

Easiest way to deal with problem (in my own opinion) is to leave things as they are... despite the huge negative publicity they arent killing / shredding people at the moment, no reason to believe that they will in the future = a non event. I`ll just get on with my job, realigning state highways and getting passing lanes built, ride my bike and wait and see.

MSTRS - abuse me all you want, I simply have a different perspective (which i think is still allowed, the government havent made it illegal yet). I`ve seen the numbers, spoken to the engineers from overseas (even ridden their roads wrb and all), and i`m happy with things. lowsiding into the posts of a barrier system isnt high on my list of things to do, thats true, but neither is getting cleaned up in a head on, or sliding into trees/ powerpoles etc.

[Hitcher]

I sense emotions are getting a little strained here. Could people please endeavour to debate/discuss the issues, rather than to attack the people presenting these.

Many thanks

[Ixion]

i`m willing to take my chances with them, should I lowside into one. Especially as the posts have been redesigned in response to concerns re their shortcomings.


Elaborate, please. When, in what way.

[Delphinus]

Heres a quote for you, from the industry standard manual of Traffic Engineering. I realise i`m wasting my breath here but I dislike being insulted.

"Ideally barriers should have all surfaces (sides,tops and under barrier areas) as smooth as possible. Concerns that wire rope barriers will act like a cheese cutter on a motorcyclist have failed to materialise: there is no evidence at all, worldwide of this occuiring, despite approved wire rope barrier systems being used for at least two decades. As with other barriers, the posts present the greater potential for injury"
What is your thoughts on the statements outlined on the cheescutter website (http://cheesecutter.co.nz/barrierinfo.asp) please?



I`ll just get on with my job, realigning state highways
I hope you mean adding more corners! :niceone:

[MSTRS]

i think as intelligent responsible adults we are all capable of distinguishing between a real and a percieved risk. The horrible death of one young motorcyclist has coloured the issue to the point where the facts are simply ignored. What is a real fact is this, despite the potential for harm, it`s not occurring... from the way this debate is being conducted, you would imagine that hundreds of us are being sliced to bits, hobbling around like vietnam war veterans.... People are not being sliced to bits as a result of WRB`s. They are being saved however, the fact that the people being saved are not motorcyclists relegates that fact to a non-event for people around here.

Interestingly enough, research quoted by FEMA, teh federation of european motorcyclist, recomended that the H or I section posts be replaced with C or Z (channel or sigma) shaped posts, as an effictive means of reducing injuries.

The risk is real. It takes a vulnerable sector of the motoring public to perceive that risk, and an example of one of us hitting a cheesecutter to demonstrate the reality of that perception. Daniel was apparently not the first to die (in NZ), and he won't be the last. If hundreds of us are not being mutilated, it is because hundreds of us are not hitting the damned things. Give it some more time.
Since you have obviously taken the time to find out FEMA's apparent recommendation, perhaps you can find the time to find out why substantial lengths of this shit are installed using H or I posts right here in NZ.




A strong thread running through this debate is apparent dismay that despite the advantages of concrete it is not used everywhere due to the cost. To these people I say wake up and smell the roses. Its simple really. Limited amount of funding, unlimited (effectively) safety shortcomings on our network. If we didnt spend the money in an efficent way the same people would be calling for our heads...
It is simple...don't waste limited resources installing this stuff where it is totally un-necessary, then there will be more $ available to use for biker-friendly barriers in areas of greatest need.


MSTRS - abuse me all you want,
If you feel that I 'abused' you, apologies. Tis hard to counter cold logic without responding with some emotion over the alternative realities that this issue presents.

[twotyred]

despite the overall tone of this forum we don`t hate motorcyclists and want to kill them all

Oh,just some of them then, not all...?

[swbarnett]

A strong thread running through this debate is apparent dimay that despite the advantages of concrete it is not used everywhere due to the cost.
It has become even clearer to me now that Transit understands full well that concrete is preferable but is installing WRBs because of the initial cost and cares nothing for the long term maintenance costs or the potential hazards. This, although unacceptable, is understandable and symptomatic of a wider problem. I know of no funding regime that rewards long term planning.

Yes, the risk of hitting WRBs is low. The consequences are extremely high.

Rate of occurrence multiplied by the impact of the event equals risk

Therefore low risk of occurrence combined with sufficiently high impact of the event results in unacceptable risk.

What really gets our backs up is that we are being singled out and told we don't matter in the wider scheme of things. If race were involved instead of mode of transport I believe this would actually be illegal.

[Usarka]

Yes, the risk of hitting WRBs is low.


Not when they're placed on the outside of corners.

[Reckless]

I must say it is quite interesting to get an opinion from the other side of the fence. From within the road engineering Dept. Given that Nikolia's argument/points are actually quite logical and informative from the Depts point of view!
I still can't see how this (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=78840&d=1196626560) makes the roads safer for us bikers. If it does, its by fear and fear alone. And the pics are taken from up in a 4WD not down at bike level. Actually from the transit depts point of view there may now be less crashes in this region. But its because we are to shit scared of making a mistake and ride strung out and weary. I'm actually more scared of a cager making that mistake and having to try and avoid him and get in-tangled in someone else's mess and killed/maimed in the cheescutter as a result.
We are not allowed to use fear as a weapon anywhere in society and I believe this is the main reason why cheesecutters are working. There are so bloody menacing even the cagers don't like them. Then when the untoward happens, its the biker that will die first every time. There is no way you can convince me the cheesecutters installed on the road in the pictures make this piece of road safer for any accident other than crossing the center line. And if that did happen where would you go if there was any chance of swerving to avoid if you had the chance. There is simply no margin for error by anyone in any type of vehicle. They are for to close to the road. Someone else makes a mistake and and your into the wire!! On either side!! This piece of road is safer because of fear alone.

Is this the way of the future for our roads it sounds like it is from the comments in this thread!!
Is this the way we want to tour our country through wire and bars.
Call the above unfactual and emotional but we are hammered with environmental this and that, all the time why not in this argument as well.

Safer my arse!!! My opinion only! unsupported by any facts!

PS The "this" was supposed to point to the thread where the cheese cutter pics where here http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=62260.
Someone could pm me on how to do those damn link words!LOL

[swbarnett]

Not when they're placed on the outside of corners.
Given that you come to grief beside one yes, the risk of hitting it is high.

Probability of coming to grief (low side, high side etc.) < 1
Probability of there being a WRB where you come off < 1

Therefore Probability of coming to grief AND hitting a WRB << 1

i.e. when considered over a year's riding the chances of actually hitting a WRB is quite small (in particular, no higher than any other type of barrier).

[MSTRS]

What really gets our backs up is that we are being singled out and told we don't matter in the wider scheme of things. If race were involved instead of mode of transport I believe this would actually be illegal.
Or gender, or age, or religion etc....perhaps we could declare motorcycling to be a living religion (it is to some) then we'd have a case for the Human Rights Commission.

when considered over a year's riding the chances of actually hitting a WRB is quite small (in particular, no higher than any other type of barrier).

True, but the consequences are what is important in this equation.
And since at least 25km/year is being installed, the chances of being in it's proximity are increasing.

[WelshWizard]

Heres a quote for you, from the industry standard manual of Traffic Engineering. I realise i`m wasting my breath here but I dislike being insulted.

"Ideally barriers should have all surfaces (sides,tops and under barrier areas) as smooth as possible. Concerns that wire rope barriers will act like a cheese cutter on a motorcyclist have failed to materialise: there is no evidence at all, worldwide of this occuiring, despite approved wire rope barrier systems being used for at least two decades. As with other barriers, the posts present the greater potential for injury"



Sorry the manual is flawed.
20th Oct 2007 3.30 Am Daniel. L.J. Evans received fatal injuries from the WRB on the Southern Motorway.
After talking to the path lab, I can say,
If Daniel had not come into contact with the Wires of The WRB he would most likely be alive now, only injuries that were of a major nature were those cause by the wires of the WRB.( they cut him into two, and nearly three severing his spine, lung, liver Stomach Etc.)

Finish and clar,
The wire cut him in half the same as it would with any other rider who hits them, only altering factor could be the angle they hit, slower angle , then the post will also damage what's not cut apart by the wires as you slide into them, if you are lucky you won't feel the post as you are already DEAD ( game of two halves), not the first either look on the WWW and you will find a lot more , so LTNZ only needs to look instead of using out of date data.

Your point about the post doing most of the damage also applies to the corrugated barriers, so should they not be constructed so that they do not leave the post exposed , if you check out Australian manufactures website http://www.ingalcivil.com.au/products.php?id=10&leaf=y how they should be


Considering the way that roads are built in the NZ, there doesn’t seem to be any practical alternative to crash barriers. Motorways and carriageways are usually placed alongside each other, meaning there is no space in between for anything other than a crash barrier.
Quote Professor Knapton concludes: “There is simply no room for any alternatives. We put our carriageways very close together. In the USA they keep carriageways about 40ft apart and have a gentle ditch between them. This is a very good idea but we don’t have the space to do it in New Zealand. I can’t think of anything for New Zealand roads that could replace barriers, especially as a lot of our motorways are urban motorways. Bearing the space issue in mind, it does seem to me that using concrete barriers is a much better alternative to steel barriers or WRBs.”

And now we have
http://www.corporateaccountability.org/Deaths/cambridgeshire.html
Maybe we will get some thing like this in New Zealand soon.

Just a few extra goodies, that LTNZ should have looked at, if they have not then they need to.
http://www.nmcu.org/av/rider_no_protection_right_view.mpg
http://www.nmcu.org/av/rider_with_protection_right_view.mpg

http://www.concretecentre.com/main.asp?page=1460
http://www.sustainableconcrete.org.nz/default.asp?pid=751&sec=750

[swbarnett]

True, but the consequences are what is important in this equation.
This was my original point. It doesn't matter how unlikely an event is if the impact of that event is sufficiently high. We are most definitely in agreement on that point I think.


And since at least 25km/year is being installed, the chances of being in it's proximity are increasing.
This, of course, is the main reason to oppose them. Well said.

[Reckless]

Sorry the manual is flawed.

Well done Mr Wizard. But will they Listen!!! Bureaucracies are never wrong.
It takes 10000 (or more) independent opinions to change, one thing, One man with the power of the establishment behind him thinks is right!
It seems to be the NZ way of late!

PS That Comment was not aimed at Nikolai far from it, but at the establishment and the attitude they seem to display.

[Jiminy]

Ideally barriers should have all surfaces (sides,tops and under barrier areas) as smooth as possible. (...) As with other barriers, the posts present the greater potential for injury

Glad to see that we all agree. Ahem, pardon me if I'm wrong, but I thought that the whole point of the campaign was to replace or modify existing barriers so that the posts are covered. Any type of barrier with exposed posts is bad, not just the WRBs. Let's dress up those posts!

However, I'm glad to get some views from the 'other side', especially from a fellow biker.

[Usarka]

Personal freedom is fine, (at least in that regard, when the red mist comes down we typically only kill ourselves unlike the child racers who wipe our a car load of their mates), but we arent helping ourselves.


The whole countries attitude is to not help yourself and let the nanny state do it for you.

If you over engineer the roads then driving skill will dissappear.

and crashes will occur on the pieces of road that require a small degree of skill, thought and responsibility.

[MSTRS]

The whole countries attitude is to not help yourself and let the nanny state do it for you.

If you over engineer the roads then driving skill will dissappear.

and crashes will occur on the pieces of road that require a small degree of skill, thought and responsibility.

How right you are. No matter how much things are dumbed down, the human condition will adjust accordingly, so little changes.
Side note - it has been posted here before that 100kph on straight, boring roads is dangerous because the driver/rider needs no input other than throttle and so attention wanders. Whereas crank it up a bit and no such 'switching off' occurs.

[sAsLEX]

Not when they're placed on the outside of corners.

I love how every new stretch of road they seem to just throw them up!


New passing lane heading from Blenheim to Picton, the road remains the same in terms of roadside threats and remains straight, but as soon as the passing lane comes up they have installed barriers on the sides of the road?!

Explain this Nikolai_V. What advantage to the public do these provide considering the tens of kms of similar road either side of the passing lane are un-barriered and what would of been a nice straight section of road now has a potentially fatal barrier on the side of the road. Considering that WRBs have been shown to be fatal to motorcyclists over the speed of 70kmhr.

[RatBags]

Sorry the manual is flawed.
20th Oct 2007 3.30 Am Daniel. L.J. Evans received fatal injuries from the WRB on the Southern Motorway.
After talking to the path lab, I can say,
If Daniel had not come into contact with the Wires of The WRB he would most likely be alive now, only injuries that were of a major nature were those cause by the wires of the WRB.( they cut him into two, and nearly three severing his spine, lung, liver Stomach Etc.)


[/url]

Here is a second case for you with CheeseCutters
Sorry very graphic so don't look on link if you are squeamish.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k303/back_fire/graphicimage1.jpg

[RatBags]

From KB you have this snippit, it may noy be WRB, but the post did just as good a job as a WRB


*warning graphic*

Guy hits a road barrier and it rips his leg off.

http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1193107951/Motorcycle_Crash_Rips_a_Guys_Foot_Straight_Off_his _Leg

I watched it, if you are sqeamish its a definate no no

[Pixie]

Despite the hard time (and abuse) i`m actually doing a literature review at the moment and working with some colleagues to see if this is a systematic problem (in which case we need to look at our policy) or if its isolated poor treatment selection (which can be dealt with at a local level). Personally driving a unfamiliar road at night in the rain - i`ll take the chevrons over road marker posts (but then again i`m not perfect). seems to be a crime to cater for all road users (like those with less than optimal night vision) but wait the cheesecutters
why bother.....
If you and your colleagues don't know that there is a problem with these signs then you are all bullshitters or never drive at night in the countryside

[Pixie]

I must say it is quite interesting to get an opinion from the other side of the fence. From within the road engineering Dept. Given that Nikolia's argument/points are actually quite logical and informative from the Depts point of view!
I still can't see how this (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=78840&d=1196626560) makes the roads safer for us bikers. If it does, its by fear and fear alone. And the pics are taken from up in a 4WD not down at bike level. Actually from the transit depts point of view there may now be less crashes in this region. But its because we are to shit scared of making a mistake and ride strung out and weary. I'm actually more scared of a cager making that mistake and having to try and avoid him and get in-tangled in someone else's mess and killed/maimed in the cheescutter as a result.
We are not allowed to use fear as a weapon anywhere in society and I believe this is the main reason why cheesecutters are working. There are so bloody menacing even the cagers don't like them. Then when the untoward happens, its the biker that will die first every time. There is no way you can convince me the cheesecutters installed on the road in the pictures make this piece of road safer for any accident other than crossing the center line. And if that did happen where would you go if there was any chance of swerving to avoid if you had the chance. There is simply no margin for error by anyone in any type of vehicle. They are for to close to the road. Someone else makes a mistake and and your into the wire!! On either side!! This piece of road is safer because of fear alone.

Is this the way of the future for our roads it sounds like it is from the comments in this thread!!
Is this the way we want to tour our country through wire and bars.
Call the above unfactual and emotional but we are hammered with environmental this and that, all the time why not in this argument as well.

Safer my arse!!! My opinion only! unsupported by any facts!

PS The "this" was supposed to point to the thread where the cheese cutter pics where here http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=62260.
Someone could pm me on how to do those damn link words!LOL

And the section in the pic has not had the centre barrier installed to the manufacturer's specs - not that I'm trying to tell Transit how to do their job

[WelshWizard]

From KB you have this snippit, it may noy be WRB, but the post did just as good a job as a WRB



I watched it, if you are sqeamish its a definate no no



Here is a second case for you with CheeseCutters
Sorry very graphic so don't look on link if you are squeamish.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k303/back_fire/graphicimage1.jpg

After seeing the video and the pictures, makes you wonder what sort of people decide to put these types of barriers up , when then know what they do the still insist on defnding these barriers.

BTW Welcome to KB Simon, how long before you leave Holland and return to the USA,

[MSTRS]

After seeing the video and the pictures, makes you wonder what sort of people decide to put these types of barriers up , when then know what they do the still insist on defnding these barriers.

BTW Welcome to KB Simon, how long before you leave Holland and return to the USA,

They don't think about realities, it's all about numbers on a piece of paper. Put that picture in front of them and their paymasters and watch them squirm.
Thanks Ratbag, and welcome to the agitator arm of KB.

[RatBags]

BE VERY AWARE THESE LINKS MAY DISTURB, MOST WOULD BE TRIPLE X RATED
they show what cops have to face when dealing with the type of accident that WRBs will cause, a must for all LTNZ planner to watch

Affect of being cut in half
http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1201146170/Disgusting_Aftermath_of_a_Fatal_Accident_in_South_ America

A bit more blood and guts from roadside furnisherings
http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1199767355/Poor_Woman_Torn_to_Pieces_After_a_Nasty_Accident

If you watch carefully you will see the posts sticking out the top of a concrete road barrier, just an example of faulty engineering design
http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1199068423/The_Most_Gruesome_Video_of_2007

[yungatart]

No person should ever have to die like that.
No person should ever have to witness that.

Are our lives so valueless, that this is what they give us as "safety barriers"?

In one of my speeches, I talked about how WRB's create a killing zone for motoryclists.
The aftermath looks less like a killing zone and more like injuries sustained in a war zone.
They have to go!

[sunhuntin]

No person should ever have to die like that.
No person should ever have to witness that.

Are our lives so valueless, that this is what they give us as "safety barriers"?

In one of my speeches, I talked about how WRB's create a killing zone for motoryclists.
The aftermath looks less like a killing zone and more like injuries sustained in a war zone.
They have to go!

no way, no fucking way should ANYONE have to die like that. you are right... it is like a warzone. the most disgusting thing ive seen in a long while...

id like to see nikoli defend his precious barriers against that

[MSTRS]

Although there is nothing in those clips to suggest that barriers were involved, it is exactly the sort of damage they will do.
Transit should hang their heads in shame.

[RatBags]

No person should ever have to die like that.
No person should ever have to witness that.

Are our lives so valueless, that this is what they give us as "safety barriers"?

In one of my speeches, I talked about how WRB's create a killing zone for motoryclists.
The aftermath looks less like a killing zone and more like injuries sustained in a war zone.
They have to go!


It's for that very reason we banned these things in Nederland, these WRB's just were to dangerous to keep as they ignored the safety of one group of road user, and still put at risk Car Drivers :(

( in Germany a sports car front end got under the WRB wires and was then guided up the hood of the car, it then decapitated both Driver and passenger, this occurred a few years ago, if I can find a link to the report I will post it):weep:

As for Horse and Trailer units, if its a Mac or a Ken, unless they hit at the correct angle, they will just role over the top of them like the barrier was not there,:mad:

if it hit at the correct angle of effectiveness then the WRBs will normally deflect about 3 1/2 to 4 yards before swinging the Horse and Trailer unit back into the traffic of the lane he was traveling or worse into more than one lane with the trailer unit jack knifed.:argue:

opps
sorry showing my USA heritage, even though I have been in the Nederland's for over 5 years now, still think in feet , inches and yards.
a yard for those who don't know is about 3" short of a meter.:beer:

[sunhuntin]

a truck being forced into a jack knife is not something i had thought of... damn.

[MSTRS]

( in Germany a sports car front end got under the WRB wires and was then guided up the hood of the car, it then decapitated both Driver and passenger, this occurred a few years ago, if I can find a link to the report I will post it):weep:



Please do. It sounds the same as the Falcon (pic can be found at www.cheesecutter.co.nz )

[RatBags]

Please do. It sounds the same as the Falcon (pic can be found at www.cheesecutter.co.nz )

No quite, the hood hardly hard more than a few scratches, front screen was gone and the tops of the seats, (it was an open top)

[MSTRS]

Same effect on the occupants tho

[RatBags]

Same effect on the occupants tho

From what I can remember you could not have done a cleaner job with a Katana:oi-grr:

[RatBags]

BTW I think the doco speed was about 90kph

[WelshWizard]

Just came across this site
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/080126/3/3qpy.html
list most dangerous roads in New Zealand anybody know the locations listed and what the roads are like

[WelshWizard]

I have been looking through this site for any cheesecutter related deaths, but it so full of death reports it will take ages , so if any one else wants to try also here it is.
.
.
.


http://www.infopig.com/keywords/Crash.html
.
.
.
.
.
,.

[MSTRS]

From what I can remember you could not have done a cleaner job with a Katana:oi-grr:

For the sake of clarity, that is a sword, not the m/c model....

[yungatart]

Just came across this site
http://nz.news.yahoo.com/080126/3/3qpy.html
list most dangerous roads in New Zealand anybody know the locations listed and what the roads are like

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php?t=65832

[sunhuntin]

For the sake of clarity, that is a sword, not the m/c model....

had me scratchin me head, thats for sure!

[Nikolai_V]

Sorry to digress back to teh original point of this thread (retroreflectve chevron signs) I`ve done a bit of checking and it seems the problems are occurring with the VIP grade material, being installed at the 5 degree offset we use for the engineering grade material.

Nightime tests we performed over the weekend show that 10 degrees is more appropriate, and reduces the amount of reflected light to the driver (test vehicles were my bikes, car and the contractors ute.) We didnt find the glare excessive in the car or the RGV before we made changes, however in the hilux and on the 900SS there was noticably more light being reflected back at the driver/rider. After the change in offset angle, the problem disappeared. I`ve sent a notice around our network contractor and mentioned this to the other RCA`s in my region, so this should n`t be a problem in the future, (locally at least). I`ll bring it up with counterparts in Transit when i get the time.

[Ixion]

That sounds very hopeful. Thank you.

[yungatart]

Thanks for doing that. I'm sure it is appreciated by those who are affected by it.
My question is this. Why on earth is the testing not done beforehand?
Surely it is cheaper, safer and more effective to do the testing before these things are installed than to retrospectively alter each and every one to comply?

Do you see why some of us think that Transit are a bunch of incompetent fools playing at road safety and using our money unwisely?

[Nikolai_V]

Yungtart - while it makes us feel special that you single out Transit for your attentions, there are over 50 road controlling authorities in New Zealand, who build and maintain far more of the roading network than Transit does. We don`t have any control over their actions, nor have much (if any say) in how they maintain their networks. You could even think of us as a minority RCA if it helps...

With regard to the signs, as I said on the weekend, out in the field I personally wouldn`t have called it dangerous, or even annoying the amount of reflected light from the signs. But I can see the point of view of those on teh forum with issues with them, hence the field tests and the recomendation to our contractors/consultants.

New Zealand, being small and not particularly well funded (in international terms) relies on overseas guidelines for a lot of our standards. We require our contractors to put the signs up in accordance with applicable standards - if these need to be revised / reviewed we do so. Cheaper to do this in response to a ne3ed, rather than start from scratch on everything (which we cant afford to do).

This is why the testing was not done beforehand - as we followed a) manufacturers guidelines and b) int. best practise.

and as for your throwaway comment at the end - no offense taken - having fronted many a public meeting i`m pretty thick skinned. Given that the attitudes prevailing to road safety on here seem to fall into either the (400 dead a year is an acceptable number - leave us to speed, drive however we want) or (transit wants to kill us all etc...) camps, I`ll just keep doing what i`m doing, because what we`re doing (which is driven by policy which YOUR elected officials set) seems to be working better than a whole raft of alternatives I could name.

Would be a nice world if I could forsee every problem before implementation / construction and eliminate them - i`d be paid a hell of a lot more thats for certain...

[MSTRS]

Yungtart - while it makes us feel special that you single out Transit for your attentions, there are over 50 road controlling authorities in New Zealand, who build and maintain far more of the roading network than Transit does. We don`t have any control over their actions, nor have much (if any say) in how they maintain their networks. You could even think of us as a minority RCA if it helps...

With regard to the signs, as I said on the weekend, out in the field I personally wouldn`t have called it dangerous, or even annoying the amount of reflected light from the signs. But I can see the point of view of those on teh forum with issues with them, hence the field tests and the recomendation to our contractors/consultants.

New Zealand, being small and not particularly well funded (in international terms) relies on overseas guidelines for a lot of our standards. We require our contractors to put the signs up in accordance with applicable standards - if these need to be revised / reviewed we do so. Cheaper to do this in response to a ne3ed, rather than start from scratch on everything (which we cant afford to do).

This is why the testing was not done beforehand - as we followed a) manufacturers guidelines and b) int. best practise.

and as for your throwaway comment at the end - no offense taken - having fronted many a public meeting i`m pretty thick skinned. Given that the attitudes prevailing to road safety on here seem to fall into either the (400 dead a year is an acceptable number - leave us to speed, drive however we want) or (transit wants to kill us all etc...) camps, I`ll just keep doing what i`m doing, because what we`re doing (which is driven by policy which YOUR elected officials set) seems to be working better than a whole raft of alternatives I could name.

Would be a nice world if I could forsee every problem before implementation / construction and eliminate them - i`d be paid a hell of a lot more thats for certain...

Funny how ALL our bitching refers to our perception of problems on NUMBERED highways...correct me if I'm wrong, but those fall under Transit's control.
International best practice? Perhaps in some things. Interestingly enough, internationally things are changing with regards to barriers at least. But 'you' are not.
Elected officials? Yes, but I didn't vote for them and neither did she...
And no matter how much or little you are paid, you are paid to ensure the best result for everybody.

[Nikolai_V]

"Whilst a number of these metal barriers have been installed or existing metal barriers retrofitted at a number of locations in Europe, including France and the UK, a number of countries have adopted a different approach specifically to WRSBs. In particular, Norway, Denmark and Holland have either removed or decided to no longer install WRSBs in response to lobbying by motorcycle groups despite there being no conclusive evidence that WRSBs are a greater or lesser risk than other types of barriers."

My emphasis added.

"... the Advisory Group on Motorcycling: Final Report to Government in the UK which includes evaluations from the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) stating that “ the current conclusion from this work is that all types of barrier pose some form of risk for motorcyclists but wire rope is no more of a risk than other types of post and beam barrier…There is, however, general agreement that the harmful items are the exposed posts of safety barriers, irrespective of their other components.”
Heres the international consensus amongst roading engineers you`ll be talking about then.

A recent study concluded quite nicely that upright crashes into barriers (concrete and armco) can be survivable on a motorcycle, but that in sliding crashes all types of barrier (including concrete) are generally fatal to motorcyclists in terms of AIS score and head injury.

I can email this to anyone who wants a copy...

There are retrofittable systems available for WRB, which are being studied at the moment - Mototub is one (french) system which we are watching the trials of with interest. Worth noting is that a large amount of the european barrier stock has the old I shape posts, which have never been allowed in NZ, and that NZ brifen barrier systems have the weakened sigma posts to minimise damage from collision between motorcyclists and the posts (see the above quote)

Due to their un-yielding nature concrete barriers which can effectivley stop heavy trucks inflict serious damage to small / midsize cars, which are generally not caused in collision with armco / wrb.

The problem is not wrb in isolation, it is sliding a motorcycle and rider(&pillion?) into any unyielding object. To design roadside furniture to be frangible for motorcyclists generally makes them too weak to function correctly for other motorists. (as obviously the kinetic energy implicit in a truck at 90km/h is rather different to a GSXR at 100 km/h).

I`d love to know the answer to this... (aside from banning bikes - some elected member will propose this one day soon), maybe we could all just not fall off / crash as much - works for me...

[MSTRS]

"... the Advisory Group on Motorcycling: Final Report to Government in the UK which includes evaluations from the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) stating that “ the current conclusion from this work is that all types of barrier pose some form of risk for motorcyclists but wire rope is no more of a risk than other types of post and beam barrier…There is, however, general agreement that the harmful items are the exposed posts of safety barriers, irrespective of their other components.”
....
There are retrofittable systems available for WRB, which are being studied at the moment - Mototub is one (french) system which we are watching the trials of with interest. Worth noting is that a large amount of the european barrier stock has the old I shape posts, which have never been allowed in NZ, and that NZ brifen barrier systems have the weakened sigma posts to minimise damage from collision between motorcyclists and the posts (see the above quote)

....

I`d love to know the answer to this... (aside from banning bikes - some elected member will propose this one day soon), maybe we could all just not fall off / crash as much - works for me...

Bullshit. We know it. Why can't 'you lot' understand? The wires are dangerous by themselves, and have the added 'advantage' of directing us into the posts.
...
Bullshit. Again. Tens of k's of I beam post WRB on Auckland's MW system. Old and new.
...
Not fall off? Ideally, yes. But in practice, we know it has happened. And will again. For as many reasons as one can come up with. Including rider being culpable. Or not.

[sunhuntin]

Due to their un-yielding nature concrete barriers which can effectivley stop heavy trucks inflict serious damage to small / midsize cars, which are generally not caused in collision with armco / wrb.

The problem is not wrb in isolation, it is sliding a motorcycle and rider(&pillion?) into any unyielding object. To design roadside furniture to be frangible for motorcyclists generally makes them too weak to function correctly for other motorists. (as obviously the kinetic energy implicit in a truck at 90km/h is rather different to a GSXR at 100 km/h).

I`d love to know the answer to this... (aside from banning bikes - some elected member will propose this one day soon), maybe we could all just not fall off / crash as much - works for me...

and again you plug the "fact" that my life is worth less than the cage driver who rear ended me causing that collision with wire rope that left me minus a limb. sorry... ya gonna have to try a LOT harder to change my mind.

and as for suggesting we just decide not to fall off as often... the only time ive come off, it wasnt my decision that saw me doing a superman over the car that the driver ran the stop sign. id have much rather stayed upright and kept my knees fully functional.

[Nikolai_V]

good to see we all have a sense of humour - maybe i need to specifcally state when i`m being tongue in cheek. I think a mass inferiority / persecution complex is at play here.

Lets get one thing straight. I like you ride motorcycles. The roads I ride also have WRB , as well as countless other hazards. I work in the industry, and am aware of the (actual) risks posed by WRB, as well as countless other hazards (seeing a pattern here?), and I still ride around the place.

You call BS on my statements/ quotes - your perogative. I have refrained from doing so on your emotive statements - also my perogative. I understand the risk when I head out the door to go for a ride - as far as i`m concerned its part of the deal.

I`ll stop wasting my time trying to preach to the converted, because sure as hell you cant see past the tragic death of one person (which half the forum sees as acceptable wastage - as long as theyre car drivers) Your ideas - putting concrete barriers everywhere are inpracticable, and would kill as many people as brifen / wrb. you persist in seeing a conspiracy where none exists - if you want to feel marginalised / treated as second class road users - good on you. You can feel like outlaw bikers, despised by society if you like... what ever floats your boat.

I value my life pretty highly - no belief in an afterlife here, so I act accordingly. Statistics (which you demean) paint a pretty bleak picture of motorcyclists ability to interact with the road environemnt and other road users.

As for me, when i`m on the road, as a pedestrian, cyclist, car / truck driver or motorcyclist, i understand the risks, internalise them and get on with things.

[MSTRS]

(that man on the cross) wept.
Tongue in cheek is one thing, but you post what you say are incontrovertible facts and I call Bullshit! as I've seen precisely what you say doesn't exist.

I, too, am well aware of all the hazards out there, for motorcyclists in particular, and ride with them in mind. I've been doing that for nigh-on 37 years.

Problem here is that Transit are all about making things safer, and preventing 'un-necessary' road deaths. That's great. But in the case of the cheesecutters, our safety is further compromised in every instance that could mean we come in contact with them.

If Transit are going to cover the posts and wires, great. Our campaign will have made things a bit safer for motorcyclists. Shame about the low-slung sports cars. But, oh well, there's not many of them comparatively speaking, so why get too out of joint about them, hmmm?

[Nikolai_V]

Exactly. kill em all and let (insert deity here) sort em out. Thats our motto. You`ve finally got where i`m coming from - all that talk about road safety is a front so we can kill more motorcyclists... and you`ve just given me a great idea, how about we get those buggers in their "low slung sports cars" as well...

HA. Why would anyone need to help motorcyclists kill themselves - we pretty good at it ourselves. (oh and that was tongue in cheek before, just so theirs no confusion).

Strangely i`m not seeing much carnage on our roads since WRSB were introduced. I`ll keep a eye on CAS (our crash analysis system) for changes in injury rates / types attributable to WRSB.... If I dont find a statistically valid correlation i`ll let you know, you`ll dismiss is as I work for transit so am not to be trusted, and the world will keep on spinning....

You just keep on feeling threatened by them, i`ll keep on doing my thing - we`ll see what happens.

[Ocean1]

…There is, [I]however, general agreement that the harmful items are the exposed posts of safety barriers, irrespective of their other components.” [I]

A recent study concluded quite nicely that upright crashes into barriers (concrete and armco) can be survivable on a motorcycle, but that in sliding crashes all types of barrier (including concrete) are generally fatal to motorcyclists in terms of AIS score and head injury.


The problem is not wrb in isolation, it is sliding a motorcycle and rider(&pillion?) into any unyielding object. To design roadside furniture to be frangible for motorcyclists generally makes them too weak to function correctly for other motorists. (as obviously the kinetic energy implicit in a truck at 90km/h is rather different to a GSXR at 100 km/h).

The trouble with such statistics is that they cost lives to gain, and the smaller the sample the less clear are the results. Statistically the number of motorcycle impacts with WRBs here is insignificant, of no value whatsoever in evaluating short range roading infrastructure policy. It doesn’t come as any surprise then, to see a study based on such data use the term “generally fatal” with regards to any evaluation of barrier design safety.

I actually agree that the dangerous bit for bikers is not the wires. The reason I agree is that, as you say the wires themselves represent a somewhat yielding target, even for a rider. I also agree that the posts are the problem, all vertical immovable objects represent the same problem, and yet they proliferate along the sides of our roads in the name of safety. And even the supposedly weaker "S" shaped WRB posts are going to be a serious problem for a biker on the ground, at speed.

What I don’t agree with is the statement that the frangible element of any barrier needs have a design limit relevant to only a narrow mass/speed range. It’s entirely possible to build a barrier with different energy absorption systems for different vehicle masses. It’s also possible to design such a barrier that has a continuous surface at the heights applicable to the relevant classes of impact, which would spread the point of impact for a rider over as much area as possible.

So why don’t we see such designs considered?

[swbarnett]

I`ll keep a eye on CAS (our crash analysis system) for changes in injury rates / types attributable to WRSB....
Just make sure that you take traffic patterns in to account. Does anyone keep data on how many of a given type of vehicle pass a given point in the NZ road system in a given time period? Without this the statistics can be very misleading.

[sunhuntin]

why do you need to see local stats when overseas statistics are screaming loudly? why not follow what most countries are doing NOW instead of what they tried, and subsequently scrapped, 5 years ago?

every single biker is aware of the thousands of hazards that await us, and many ride with the reaper on the pillion seat, but we dont need another hazard put in the name of safety. most hazards will allow us to walk away, or, at worst, be carried away in an ambo for months of rehab. wrb do not allow many that luxury.

[RatBags]

For the sake of clarity, that is a sword, not the m/c model....


Thanks MSTRS I thought most would know a Katana was a Japnese sword.

Any way
have a look here

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=711459

The mazda went under the WRB's and killed 3 teens.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=690243
read this one as it refers to another WRB failure a few months earlier.
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/11766821.html

[Reckless]

Yungtart - while it makes us feel special that you single out Transit for your attentions, there are over 50 road controlling authorities in New Zealand, who build and maintain far more of the roading network than Transit does. We don`t have any control over their actions, nor have much (if any say) in how they maintain their networks. You could even think of us as a minority RCA if it helps......

And I for one actually sympathise with you and congratulate you on fronting up, having this discussion, having the balls to do the tests etc.
Thank-you! For listening and doing!!!
Operating under a system where 50 authorities are possibly doing things slightly differently must be as frustrating to you as reading that here, we have managed to get through to one engineer through his biking allegiances with us. Realise things where not correct and change the angles of those signs. Only to be told that the other 49 road controlling authorities will probably still do it the old way because there is no one with over all control. And they wonder why we are showing a bit of anger and frustration at transit and the bureaucracy over our roading issues!




This is why the testing was not done beforehand - as we followed a) manufacturers guidelines and b) int. best practise.......

But with regards to cheesegraters from what I have read here they are not (as here) (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=78843&d=1196626676) even being installed to "a) manufacturers guidelines and b) int. best practise."



Would be a nice world if I could foresee every problem before implementation / construction and eliminate them - i`d be paid a hell of a lot more thats for certain...

We are telling you straight out "THEY WILL KILL MOTORCYCLISTS EVERYTIME"
Its a conundrum how you guys need stats, but to provide them over time we have to die or get injured.
I wonder if there is going to be a stat in 10 years that says "WRB's have saved 98% of head on injury accidents but 98% if motorcyclists who have hit them have died or been mangled.

We would find this unacceptable! But we are part of the dieing 98%! Funny that!!

[MSTRS]

Thinking about this 'no statistical evidence' bullshit....
When a car manufacturer releases a new model, and someone has a 'problem', perhaps a minor steering shimmy at 102.5kph on a chipseal road, the entire new fleet is recalled and fixed. Could this be not because of a dangerous problem, but rather that there has been a problem for one person in certain situations, and the car manufacturer is open to being sued, otherwise?
Hmmm??

[Ocean1]

Thinking about this 'no statistical evidence' bullshit....
When a car manufacturer releases a new model, and someone has a 'problem', perhaps a minor steering shimmy at 102.5kph on a chipseal road, the entire new fleet is recalled and fixed. Could this be not because of a dangerous problem, but rather that there has been a problem for one person in certain situations, and the car manufacturer is open to being sued, otherwise?
Hmmm??

Yeah, good luck suing a NZ gov't authority. Having said that I wouldn't want the ridiculously litigious Merkin culture here, just adds massive extra costs to the CPI.

There was a time, though, when authorities here set standards as workable targets, that was their main purpose. Now most of them decline all such responsibility, they just wait for a fuckup, and then hammer all concerned.

Sorry, pet gripe…

[WelshWizard]

Any way
have a look here



The mazda went under the WRB's and killed 3 teens.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=690243





read this one as it refers to another WRB failure a few months earlier.
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/11766821.html


This is to good to miss, as it show that the WRBs are flawed.


from the above link

Barrier failure may be 1st in state
Cars rarely go under cables, engineer says
By LAWRENCE SUSSMAN
lsussman@journalsentinel.com
Posted: Nov. 26, 2007
The failure of a freeway median barrier in a crash that killed two teenagers in Ozaukee County is rare and might be the first of its kind in Wisconsin, a state highway engineer said Monday.
---------------
The median barrier was installed to prevent such crossover crashes, which have occurred with shocking frequency on a small stretch of Ozaukee County freeway. Eight people have now died in five crossover crashes on the seven-mile section of I-43 since November 2005.
---------------------------
Of the 9,228 fatal accidents in Wisconsin from 1994 through 2006, 240 of them involved a median traffic barrier, U.S. Department of Transportation data shows. That's 2.6% of all fatal accidents in the state. The state DOT does not keep data on accidents involving cable barriers.

Such crashes in which vehicles go under cable barriers have occurred in other states



So it not a one off at all, SO HOW FAULTY are these things if they let cars through, let lorries run over top off them and Cut Motorcyclist into sections:mad:

[MSTRS]

Yeah, good luck suing a NZ gov't authority.

That's exactly my point.
A shareholder, for-profit business cannot afford to have a product that is not safe as designed, for purpose intended, and will generally fix it at the first sign of trouble 'just in case'....
But a company (shall we say?) like Transit, which cannot be sued and uses statistics to hide behind, is impossible to hold to account over their decisions. So we are left with only two options...Wait until the stats prove our point (sorry to all those devastated families). OR Mobilise the motoring public by any and all means to make enough noise that Transit is directed by Govt to make the changes reqd.

[sAsLEX]

Thinking about this 'no statistical evidence' bullshit....
When a car manufacturer releases a new model, and someone has a 'problem', perhaps a minor steering shimmy at 102.5kph on a chipseal road, the entire new fleet is recalled and fixed. Could this be not because of a dangerous problem, but rather that there has been a problem for one person in certain situations, and the car manufacturer is open to being sued, otherwise?
Hmmm??

Four words for you to google.

Lee Iacocca Ford Pinto

[MSTRS]

Four words for you to google.

Lee Iacocca Ford Pinto

Sombre reading. And this response seems to be applicable to our issue...
I dont think Mark is dissing on the Pinto per se... its about corporate responsibility and the fact that their cost benefit analysis produced such unethical behaviour... I didnt think that because you love ur car would override recognition of the fact that the company's management itself would act so unethically... but obviously ethics dont matter to some people and this is how companies like this can continue to exist.. we allow them to. The social contract between businesses and society is purely profit maximisation... And its people like this who show businesses society in general doesnt give a crap about corporate social responsibility or environmental responsibility as long as they get their relative bang for the buck. Try saying how great ur Pinto is to one of the people who died in them due to negligent manufacturing... oh wait u cant...
Posted by:ChristelleOctober 16, 2007 3:44:42 PMRespond ^

[Ocean1]

Four words for you to google.

Lee Iacocca Ford Pinto

More: Ralph Nader Chevrolet Corvair.


That's exactly my point.
A shareholder, for-profit business cannot afford to have a product that is not safe as designed, for purpose intended, and will generally fix it at the first sign of trouble 'just in case'....
But a company (shall we say?) like Transit, which cannot be sued and uses statistics to hide behind, is impossible to hold to account over their decisions. So we are left with only two options...Wait until the stats prove our point (sorry to all those devastated families). OR Mobilise the motoring public by any and all means to make enough noise that Transit is directed by Govt to make the changes reqd.

Your point wasn't lost, but this particular battle is difficult enough without the diversion of tilting at bigger windmills.

[WelshWizard]

Another motorcyclist killed by WRB's on January 08, 2008
http://www.news.com.au/mercury/story/0,22884,23017367-5007221,00.html

forget about the claimed speed, once again they are wrong, when the formula is used the bike was not going that fast, but with out seeing the crash scene first hand it can not be completly acurate.

[MSTRS]

Another motorcyclist killed by WRB's on January 08, 2008


forget about the claimed speed, once again they are wrong, when the formula is used the bike was not going that fast, but with out seeing the crash scene first hand it can not be completly acurate.

This is one of those cases...'high speed' not actually specified. However, if the bike slid 214m after the impact, I would tend to agree that the speed was up there. Looking at the wreck, it wasn't a low speed impact. I suspect that any barrier-type would have had a similar outcome, at least to the rider. Still, on a straight piece of mw, what happened to send him into the barrier?

[Ocean1]

This is one of those cases...'high speed' not actually specified. However, if the bike slid 214m after the impact, I would tend to agree that the speed was up there. Looking at the wreck, it wasn't a low speed impact. I suspect that any barrier-type would have had a similar outcome, at least to the rider. Still, on a straight piece of mw, what happened to send him into the barrier?

Seems I read recently that a surprisijngly high number of fatal bike accidents occur on straights. And while I agree about the likely outcome with any other type of barrier, and without wanting to get too morbid I wonder what caused the fatal injuries. Posts do you suppose?

[MSTRS]

Seems I read recently that a surprisijngly high number of fatal bike accidents occur on straights. And while I agree about the likely outcome with any other type of barrier, and without wanting to get too morbid I wonder what caused the fatal injuries. Posts do you suppose?

Probably. With horrendous injuries. Think 'mince'....Hence the counselling offered to all who witnessed it.

[WelshWizard]

This is one of those cases...'high speed' not actually specified. However, if the bike slid 214m after the impact, I would tend to agree that the speed was up there. Looking at the wreck, it wasn't a low speed impact. I suspect that any barrier-type would have had a similar outcome, at least to the rider. Still, on a straight piece of mw, what happened to send him into the barrier?

Well I would say that he was doing less than 100kph,
when you work out stopping speed on rubber over that distance you have to divide that distance speed by a factor related to the surface friction of what was on the road, commonly this works out at about a divisor of three, with out seeing the crash scene to know if the wheel was smashed of by the WRBs or the Armco at the end of the slide, and any markings on the road you can't always use the common formula, but have to use different input.

So as I said first reaction regardless of damage to the bike is it was traveling at less than a 100kph when it went down. if the driver was thrown from the bike and he hit the barrier and the bike failed to go down completely and the bikes damage was caused when it hit the Armco then the speed would be increased by the weight to damage level all part of the engineering crash program that calculates the speed, ( program has one failing it only calculates in MPH so every thing has to be converted to imperial before getting the speed in mph and then convert it back to metric:( a real pain.)