So, wodda we going to do about? It's down to us

[yungatart]

Heavily subsidised track days run fortnightly through-out the country.

If you get weekend warriors like me off the roads and onto "safe" tracks where we got our adrenilin rush cheaply then presumably we'd chill out on the road.

I know personally I'd all but abandon the roads if track days were more affordable ie $50 for the day rather than $120.

I'm not comfortable with the idea of track training for road riders...the two scenarios are so far apart...I personally don't see the use...no oncoming vehicles, no shitty road surface, just how does riding around a track make me a better rider?
I personally prefer RRRS courses and the like...teaching real road skills in a real situation.

[Pixie]

I'm not convinced it does beyond a certain point. Or, rather, I think that a rider needs training. Then a period of experience. Then some more training. More experience. etc.

'training' isn't a magic wand that solves all problems.

But to some extent we don't have to 'sell' it.

What I want to do is to have a solid body of proposals that we can put before the minister and the public to say "We are not just whinging about paying more. We have worked on this, and , in the opinion of experienced motorcyclists with hundred of millions of kilometres of experience between them, if the government implement these proposals there will be a marked drop in the motorcycle casualty rate".

If the Minister then says "Piss off, I don't care about reducing the casualty rate and the police say it won't work", well, that's sort of OK. That then becomes a different argument. We've stepped up to the plate , TPTB haven't.

"Driver Training just makes drivers over-confident" -Dave Cliff,former head of Road Policing,at the "Safe As" meeting in Whangerei.
He must be right-he's a policeman
and a cockhead

[mashman]

Difficult to find accurate stats regarding crash rates in Europe... (a problem the world over?) Bugger.

that's not strictly true. I have had this data for the UK before. The data comes from the insurance companies (ABI, all the claims from all insurers) and the police data (crash and accident categories, fault etc...) along with DVLA data (vehicle statuses i.e. dinged, crashed, written off etc...) but it costs approximately 12 thousand pounds a month!!! You need a combination of data sources to get the complete picture... This may not exist over here... although there was an article on stuff a few weeks ago about some research that had been done at Otago university (i think it was) using Police Accident Reports to derive their figures and highlighted that 250's are the bad boys of the road over here... pretty much the same as i found back in the UK for 125's... oddly enough the learning bikes!!!

[Howie]

The on that's on this weekend, its organised by the hamilton motorcycle club and I heard that it was part-funded by ACC but under closer observation there's no mention of ACC on this page.

The mention of ACC is on the Application form, along with a lot of the city councils up that way. It looks like the Hamilton Motorcycle club has put a bit of work into organising the days. Well done, hope the days go well.

[davereid]

Its true that ATGATT will help reduce the cost to ACC, but actually not by much.

Go for a ride, you will find an amazingly high number of biker already well kitted up.

So ATGATT rules wont improve anything except the small number of bikers who dont wear protective gear.

As well meaning as the idea is, the BRONZ idea of education before legislation has already worked well in this regard.

It will just be another rule, that has little or no effect on actual outcomes.

71% of our accidents are collisions, and the other driver is responsible for 65% of those.

The motorist needs to be hammered with the education here.
No amount of making it hard to get a licence will stop an idiot failing to give right of way.

So far. I also see that as bikers we are really trying hard ourselves to make biking safer.

Just here on KB we have training systems and mentors, its my opinion that we are actually managing ourselves bloody well !

The key things we can do are to :

Educate drivers not to run us over, and get good at dodging them even when they try
Educate ourselves not to just fall off - and I think we are trying hard
and turn the 33% of collisions we are responsible for into 3%

Remember, motorcycling is already getting safer every year, we don't need to self flaggelate to much..

[Ixion]

That's a good point. it's like laws to make us have headlamps on. Sure, there is a significant difference between crash rates for bikes with headlamps on and not on. But a law requiring bikes to have them on won't make any measuraeable difference to our casualty rates. because almost everyone has them on, law or no law.

So, likewise, I suspect the ATTGATT thing is overplayed. The odd rider who is way under protected gets a lot of mention here simply because he IS the exception.

We need to try to make some quantification , even if only gut feel , on what effect a proposal will ahve.

[DidJit]

Difficult to find accurate stats regarding crash rates in Europe... (a problem the world over?) Bugger.

I have found this, though, for the statisticians. Summarised here.

[Ixion]

What about a schme whereby if you have x crashes sin y years you go abck to an R class 9and a 250) ?

Is the recidivist crasher part of our problem? or not. I don't know.

Do we have a lot of people crashing once (and sometimes a crash is just a shit happens thing we can't control everythign). or do we have a few (fewer anyway) people having lots of crashes (I think over a 10 year period or so here).

What's the biggest fundamental crash cause?

Inexperience?

Doing stupid shit ?

Booze?

Roads ? (be real here. I know that everybody that crashes on a corner , it's cause of diesel, so lets ignore that one, eh)

Mechanical failure (don't reckon it myself, but, for completeness)

Simple speeding. To fst for conditions.

fatigue (I suspect that one is underrated)

what else

What's the most common cause?

What doesn't need to be included ?

[Ixion]

I have found this, though, for the statisticians. Summarised here.

That's a very full report. It willt ake a while to read but may be worth it

[NinjaNanna]

I'm not comfortable with the idea of track training for road riders...the two scenarios are so far apart...I personally don't see the use...no oncoming vehicles, no shitty road surface, just how does riding around a track make me a better rider?
I personally prefer RRRS courses and the like...teaching real road skills in a real situation.

My suggestion has nothing to do with rider training - it has everything to do with taking the sports out of sports rider whilst they are on public roads.

If I get my jolly's on the track, I'm more than happy to cruise on the road.

If you question the logic, then consider any 2-3 day ride you may have been on, for me days 1 and 2 are very much about the buzz come day 3 I'm buzzed out and happy to cruise home.

Likewise for those that have riden to track days, I hazzard to bet that the ride to the track is more spirited than the ride home.

Make these opportunities more accessible and you will notice a real difference on the road.

Of course this won't fix those guys crashing cruisers, but I doubt they're highly represented in the stats anyway.

For the born agains - the only solution is resitting licenses that they haven't used in 20yrs. No other solution really.

[The Stranger:Me]

Roads ? (be real here. I know that everybody that crashes on a corner , it's cause of diesel, so lets ignore that one, eh)

Why ignore diesel?
Diesel and similar contaminants are the single biggest cause of accidents that I have had actual experience with (not referring to reported accidents I have read or heard of). This also includes one in a straight line which caused the motorcyclist to slide for about 50m on the wrong side of the road. He was gasing up to overtake at the time and hit a patch about 6" in diameter.

[MSTRS:Me]

My suggestion has nothing to do with rider training - it has everything to do with taking the sports out of sports rider whilst they are on public roads.
.

And you would wish for that to be subsidised? By whom? Me?
Why should I pay for you to go have a fang on the track?

Training day....different story!

[Ixion]

Why ignore diesel?
Diesel and similar contaminants are the single biggest cause of accidents that I have had actual experience with (not referring to reported accidents I have read or heard of). This also includes one in a straight line which caused the motorcyclist to slide for about 50m on the wrong side of the road. He was gasing up to overtake at the time and hit a patch about 6" in diameter.

Yes , but so often "diesel" is the universal catch cry. Too vague. "we want the government to stop diesel getting on the raod" . How ?

Gravel, in contrast (still never been convinced that an experienced rider outght not to be able to cope with gravel on the road, mself, but that's just me), does sort of fall within something we could reasonably expect the government to do something about.

There was a sensible suggestion about diesel vehicles being required to ahve a one way vale to stop sloshing.

[Mom]

I am an ATGATT sort of person, but I have a fundemental issue with being legislated into wearing it.

Certainly a helmet as a base line, but the real rebels in us will revolt if we are legislated into being made to wear leather or what have you all the time. This is an expensive thing to get into, the last thing we need to do is also price ourselves out of the market to new riders. When I first started riding I had NO money (a bit like now really) and I certianly could not afford an expensive bike, let alone expensive gear to boot. So I bought what I could afford on both fronts. We want to encourage our kids into riding for the pleasure it gives, the money it saves, the congestion it helps to eliminate. I think we should really go out on a limb and lead the way here about driver education.

I am not smart enough to spout on about Horse Power to weight ratios, but I would have to say the current system for motorcyclists is a joke. We should be looking at a system where the output of your bike is the measure of what kind of bike you are able to legally start on. This equally applies to cars as well. All new riders/drivers should have to complete a number of hours of professional, approved training. The test to step up a level should be really strengthened so it is actually difficult to obtain that next step. None of this being followed in a car with someone that says look where I am indicating and do that, or a crappy ear piece that you only hear half of what comes out of it, or worse, the ride to the next intersection and turn right and stop I will tell you where to go from there sort of testing we currently have. The 20 min test of skills that allow you to go and buy any bike you fancy is frankly a joke IMO.

But apart from all that stuff, I fundamentally think targeting motorists by way of rego is wrong The no-fault system has already been eroded to the point that these bastads think it is ok to hammer us like they are proposing.

The ACC structure and system is where we should be looking, it is that that is actually being manipulated far away from its original intent.

[FastBikeGear]

This may make me even less popular

Amongst other things my suggestions to ACC were:
change the licensing:

• Extend the learner and restricted licence periods
• Defensive driving and advanced driving should be a required part of the licensing scheme.
• Require more training for all licence holders
• Require that people sit a practical test every couple of years to keep their licence - some people really shouldn't be on the road
• Require that motorcyclists wear more than an approved helmet
• - Helmet - perhaps closed face
• - Jacket - with armour
• - Gloves - with armour
• - Boots - with armour

How many people buy a road code every year and re-hash their knowledge?

+1

Oh and start ticketing for more than just speed, not indicating, etc