Cheeecutter saves motorcyclist's life - 2 April 2011

[Berries]

Just pointing out a fact for the OP.

[Pixie]

In the space of a heading and four sentences they mentioned 'motorcycle' 3 times and 'rider' twice.

I think the public can add simple sums.

So there were 5 bikers?

[aff-man]

Trees, wheelie bins, cars, dogs, cats, diesel, road cones, gravel, bits of car, bits of rubbish, people........

Shit happens. Its not like the WRB jumped out to get him. Last time I checked they don't move.

True.... But taking the alcamahol out of the equation, when said shit happens I like the odds of backing myself on the entire road rather than have the choice of hitting said shit or a WRB.

[avgas]

Not quite, there have been more than two bike vs wire rope barrier crashes in NZ.

Doesn't surprise me. Seen a few morons on bikes these days.
We need some kind trick question on learners scratchy test

When riding near Wire Rope Barriers:
a) Ride safely and avoid hitting them
b) Ride dangerously
c) Ride into them
d) Ride near them
e) Do a wheelie

[avgas]

True.... But taking the alcamahol out of the equation, when said shit happens I like the odds of backing myself on the entire road rather than have the choice of hitting said shit or a WRB.

I used to - but then the other side of the road brought all its traffic over to visit me on my side.
Looking at current statistics - I don't think this was a "once in a lifetime" event.

[Kickaha]

Not quite, there have been more than two bike vs wire rope barrier crashes in NZ.

Only really two that have been made public on here though

How many more have there been and what injuries did the riders get?

[StoneY]

I myself cooled off a bit in regards the WRB's after one saved mine and Kelly's lives one cold night on River Road when it caught that commodore and kept it in the other lane...........

These attachments show what CAN be done to WRB's and ARMCO to make it a little safer tho

[MSTRS:Me]

These attachments show what CAN be done to WRB's and ARMCO to make it a little safer tho

It's not much to ask, is it? If the pricks want to save money (and that's debateable) by using such barriers, at least they could ensure that they are fitted with devices to improve our chances in an up close and personal meeting.
But no, they will use any excuse not to do so...

[Str8 Jacket]

Motorcycling is optional.
It is a hobby, an indulgence.
We are all (99.9%) car/vehicle drivers.
We are a pimple, a minority, a thorn in roading society.
Special conditions for a motley few, are a self-centred fantasy.
Motorcycling is NOT the real world.
Let's get real.

I do not have a car licence but have had a full bike licence for years. I ride my bike to and from work every day, in any type of weather and use it to get everywhere and to do my shopping etc etc. Tell me where any of those tasks are not "in the real world"?

Just saying....

[Tony W]

I do not have a car licence but have had a full bike licence for years. I ride my bike to and from work every day, in any type of weather and use it to get everywhere and to do my shopping etc etc. Tell me where any of those tasks are not "in the real world"?

Just saying....

Those comments only applied to 99.9% of us !

.....not you.

[Berries]

Only really two that have been made public on here though

KB doesn't count for much when it come to real world stuff though does it. Entertainment value only.

How many more have there been and what injuries did the riders get?

Thinking the question might come up, this morning I started going through every bike vs guardrail crash over the last five years to check but halfway through 2006 something else cropped up so I left it. I personally know of two crashes in Otago where a bike/rider hit wire rope barriers. No other vehicle involved - wind in one, fatigue in the other, and the survivable injuries were caused by hitting the ground hard rather than the barrier. It is a nasty barrier if you slide in to it but in my view a standard armco barrier will do just as much damage. As Ocean1 said, concrete median barriers would be a significant improvement but even though the ongoing maintenance costs are practically zero I can't see it happening. In fact, over the next couple of years I can see a massive increase in the amount of wire rope barriers being used in NZ. You won't be able to stop it, so the best thing to do is try and make them rider friendly. As posted elsewhere, it is possible.

But no, they will use any excuse not to do so...

Fabian has left now, so it may be worth another prod at them.

[Berries]

Doesn't surprise me. Seen a few morons on bikes these days.
We need some kind trick question on learners scratchy test

When riding near Wire Rope Barriers:
a) Ride safely and avoid hitting them
b) Ride dangerously
c) Ride into them
d) Ride near them
e) Do a wheelie

Substitute the words Wire Rope Barriers for any other kind of barrier, or cars, or pedestrians, or footpaths, trees, power poles, bridges, houses etc etc .

Obviously e) is a trick answer. Wheelies are cool.

[Kickaha]

KB doesn't count for much when it come to real world stuff though does it. Entertainment value only.

Quite true if there were other WRB accidents where no injuries were sustained they probably wouldn't tend to get posted up as that fucks up the argument about how dangerous they are

I personally know of two crashes in Otago where a bike/rider hit wire rope barriers. No other vehicle involved - wind in one, fatigue in the other, and the survivable injuries were caused by hitting the ground hard

Surely not, you mean people have hit these barriers and haven't been injured by them? I didn't think that was possible

[Ocean1]

In fact, over the next couple of years I can see a massive increase in the amount of wire rope barriers being used in NZ. You won't be able to stop it, so the best thing to do is try and make them rider friendly. As posted elsewhere, it is possible.

Can't find the reference now but it showed budget figures for WRB vs concrete. WRB was a few percent cheaper to install, more costly than concrete if you included maintenance costs. Any added installation costs at all would probably make WRB more expensive than concrete and should make it lose it's preferred option status.

However, I suspect there's a perception amongst civil engineers that it's energy absorption and dissipation characteristics make it a winner. I disagree, I believe that’s true of a reasonably narrow range of masses and angles. However that's likely to be the reason for it's continued proposal for ongoing projects, even in situations where it fails to comply with best practice in terms of placement and offset from the traffic line. The fact that the posts dice motorcyclists nicely simply won't register in that decision process, statistically and politically we're simply not visible.

Cost is likely to be the main consideration in it's acceptance as proposed by civil designers by local bodies and national roading agencies. Maintenance, of course will be a separate budget, almost certainly a separate service supplier, of no concern to either the designer or the primary contractor.

There are examples of recent barrier projects where WRB hasn't been used. The armco around the Pauatahanui inlet is an example. I wonder if the environmental lobby groups might have had some input, there, they're certainly more influential than any of the bikers lobby groups. Armco isn't much better for us, (if at all) but it's evidence it can be done.

There may well be other, non-financial factors in the overwhelming preference for WRB in the face of good engineering and well researched safety, but I don't know what they are. Certainly some of the reasons I've heard for it's use amount to poorly considered excusses for a decision already made. It is not, for example readily moved out of the way to allow traffic flow to resume or to allow safety vehicles better access to an accident site.

It’s disappointing, (not to mention hugely inequitable) that a reasonably large slice of road users can be so effectively disenfranchised from such decisions but nonetheless charged more for their use of the roads on the stated basis that they’re injured more often.

[MSTRS:Me]

It’s disappointing, (not to mention hugely inequitable) that a reasonably large slice of road users can be so effectively disenfranchised from such decisions but nonetheless charged more for their use of the roads on the stated basis that they’re injured more often.

Quoted to draw attention to this glaring fact.