Hard crash stats

**newbould** · 24th December 2009, 21:32

1st off apologies if this has been covered elsewhere - I searched and could not find.
It seems to me that we have got the attention of the decision makers at ACC and can put this to some use. David Haugh has a few stats from the USA on risk factors for motorcycle accidents but how applicable are they to NZ? ACC reckon that bikes above 600 cc rating are more at risk, but what is the truth?
Perhaps we can get ACC to spend some of our extortionate levies on setting up a well designed prospective study. Someone independant from a uiniversity should design and perhaps bikers could volunteer to do the donkey work to investigate serious accidents. I would suggest serious be defined as any where the biker were hospitalised for more than 1 day. Areas to cover would include mechanical repair of the bike, involvement of other vehicle, road conditions, speed, drugs, on road or off road (may harden up the stats re registered v non registered bike accidents), cc rating, power to weight ratio, km experience of rider, group / single riding.
My guess is a two year study would give us all food for thought and ammunition to remove the off road stats from our licence levy, remove the cc rating crap, provide some areas to target to improve our riding skills and improve road repair and other driver risks.
I envisage data being gathered from police accident investigation reports and interview with rider and any other volunteering witnesses. Huge project but the data has to be worth getting.

What do you reckon?

**Genestho** · 24th December 2009, 21:54

Originally Posted by newbould

1st off apologies if this has been covered elsewhere - I searched and could not find.
It seems to me that we have got the attention of the decision makers at ACC and can put this to some use. David Haugh has a few stats from the USA on risk factors for motorcycle accidents but how applicable are they to NZ? ACC reckon that bikes above 600 cc rating are more at risk, but what is the truth?
Perhaps we can get ACC to spend some of our extortionate levies on setting up a well designed prospective study. Someone independant from a uiniversity should design and perhaps bikers could volunteer to do the donkey work to investigate serious accidents. I would suggest serious be defined as any where the biker were hospitalised for more than 1 day. Areas to cover would include mechanical repair of the bike, involvement of other vehicle, road conditions, speed, drugs, on road or off road (may harden up the stats re registered v non registered bike accidents), cc rating, power to weight ratio, km experience of rider, group / single riding.
My guess is a two year study would give us all food for thought and ammunition to remove the off road stats from our licence levy, remove the cc rating crap, provide some areas to target to improve our riding skills and improve road repair and other driver risks.
I envisage data being gathered from police accident investigation reports and interview with rider and any other volunteering witnesses. Huge project but the data has to be worth getting.

What do you reckon?

Agree with this, collect the Data, alongside, and have an independant database. Go Hard

**Berries** · 24th December 2009, 22:35

I'd forget ACC as I don't think they really care. I am not sure what data they actually collect from motorbike related claimants. I'd be targeting the MOT and NZTA, they are proposing that motorcycle safety is one of the top five priorities for the next ten years. However, as your post intimates, there is a stack of information that is missing because it is either not collected or where it is collected is entered incorrectly in to the crash database making any kind of accurate analysis very difficult. There is a definite need for the MOT/NZTA to employ motorbike specific safety staff if they want to see any improvements on the road side of the equation. Not sure whether they realise that yet, but there is quite a big gap that needs filling.

**YellowDog** · 24th December 2009, 23:05

Great suggestion. It might be a tough one to follow through however with the cooperation of the Police, it may take minimal effort and produce what we need. Maybe one of our Police biker members might be able to point us in the right direction.

**yachtie10** · 24th December 2009, 23:22

Merry xmas

If everyone on KB gave me a hundred bucks i would do a 2 year study for you

I would find it interesting just need the funds

Happy New Year

**Miscreant** · 24th December 2009, 23:50

What on earth does good solid data have to do with political agendas?
It's been done and ignored in the past. Look at the maids study.

**newbould** · 26th December 2009, 10:20

Originally Posted by yachtie10

Merry xmas

If everyone on KB gave me a hundred bucks i would do a 2 year study for you

I would find it interesting just need the funds

Happy New Year

That's 1.8 Million - ACC are ringfencing 3 mil for rider training. But if we are all trained to swerve when we should brake

But anyway I think this work needs doing but I'm not sure how to push it along. Just seems there are meetings scheduled / promised between "the biker community" and ACC to improve rider safety and this is something I think we should be pushing for

**scumdog** · 26th December 2009, 10:35

Originally Posted by Miscreant

What on earth does good solid data have to do with political agendas?
It's been done and ignored in the past. Look at the maids study.

This man says it all.

**FJRider** · 26th December 2009, 10:43

Originally Posted by Miscreant

What on earth does good solid data have to do with political agendas?
It's been done and ignored in the past. Look at the maids study.

Voter numbers data, is the one thing that affects "Political Agenda's" ...

**shrub** · 26th December 2009, 12:42

for a start, the only organisations that have the resources required to conduct a study like this are the universities, and that's their job, so let's use them. Charley Lamb at Lincoln has been involved in this area for some time and is a long way down the track.

Second, if you're interested I suggest you read the MAIDS report (available at http://www.maids-study.eu/). It's an incredibly in depth study and carries a lot of the info you're talking about, albeit in a European setting. Regardless of where it was done, the conclusions the researchers came to are pretty much spot on from my anecdotal observations as a long time rider.

It would be great to replicate MAIDS in NZ, but unfortunately the number of accidents here are just not high enough and the cost is too high. I agree that we need to engage in some serious research, and I am looking hard at devoting next year to doing a Masters thesis with Charley on a key aspect of motorcycle safety.

**newbould** · 27th December 2009, 17:34

Originally Posted by FJRider

Voter numbers data, is the one thing that affects "Political Agenda's" ...

Yip and only once every 3 years. So we need to influence the voting public - like enrolling the 7 yo to destroy the $75.00 car to bike subsidy bullshit. By getting accurate info on motorcycle accidents we undermine the bullshit further and highlight the inequity of increasing m/c ACC levies. By using "our" ACC levies to fund the research we again demonstrate our willingness to take responsibility for our own risks. Like the RRRS initiative.

Originally Posted by shrub

for a start, the only organisations that have the resources required to conduct a study like this are the universities, and that's their job, so let's use them. Charley Lamb at Lincoln has been involved in this area for some time and is a long way down the track.

Second, if you're interested I suggest you read the MAIDS report (available at http://www.maids-study.eu/). It's an incredibly in depth study and carries a lot of the info you're talking about, albeit in a European setting. Regardless of where it was done, the conclusions the researchers came to are pretty much spot on from my anecdotal observations as a long time rider.

It would be great to replicate MAIDS in NZ, but unfortunately the number of accidents here are just not high enough and the cost is too high. I agree that we need to engage in some serious research, and I am looking hard at devoting next year to doing a Masters thesis with Charley on a key aspect of motorcycle safety.

Thanks for this link - really interesting stuff which I have bookmarked for further reading. I will also steal this link (with acknowledgment) and put it on the links page of the survival section. And yes that is exactly the sort of stuff we need but with local data. The differences are many and obvious - gravel roads, lighter traffic density, minimal use of rail for freight, large proportion of stock trucks, etc. My guess is there would be enough accidents to investigate and I would far rather see my $30 to ACC going to this than TV or Back of Bus ads telling me to make my own decisions. So please, Shrub, put the proposal together and apply to ACC for funding

Having said all that, if ACC put together more practical training courses then I will be enrolling and hope that any they do put out are hugely oversubscribed.

**FJRider** · 27th December 2009, 17:45

Originally Posted by newbould

Having said all that, if ACC put together more practical training courses then I will be enrolling and hope that any they do put out are hugely oversubscribed.

Two or three courses per annum ... 25-30 places on each .... and ACC will say they are doing their bit for road safety training ...

**shrub** · 28th December 2009, 19:02

Originally Posted by newbould

So please, Shrub, put the proposal together and apply to ACC for funding

I'm onto it.

**p.dath** · 29th December 2009, 09:14

Ixion has already analysed the data he got from ACC, and found no correlation between engine size and accident rates.

If you search his posts you'll find the data that he posted to support this.