A safety framework for discussing motorcycle safety

[Blackbird]

Drop the Post-training shit. Pre-Training, is needed as a stop-gap for experience. Save the post training for repeat offenders.

Failure to see a bike is just an excuse that used to justify I did not look, did not care, or I though that stop/give-way sign did not apply to me...

And poor situational awareness of a rider failing to see a situation developing is also a contributor. Not helpful just blaming car drivers and excluding other road users. Hence the need for on-going refreshers.

[MrKiwi]

This is something you struggle with, the off camber round-a-bouts? Don't think about it, look where you want to go, and you'll barely notice it any more.

Simple solution, that proper training would have illustrated.

No I don't struggle with roundabouts, I've never come off going around one and I have been riding bikes since 1981. It's strange you jump to the conclusions. I have a long list of road features that suit cars and trucks but are less optional for motorbikes. It is that simple really. We are an ignored user group by and large.

It is bad road design. Why make it harder than it needs to be for riders, especially less experienced ones.

The points I'm making are:

• riders should ride to the conditions, but
• roads can be better designed than they are for motorcyclists.

[MrKiwi]

Drop the Post-training shit. Pre-Training, is needed as a stop-gap for experience. Save the post training for repeat offenders.

Failure to see a bike is just an excuse that used to justify I did not look, did not care, or I though that stop/give-way sign did not apply to me...

Post rider training is an interesting point. I've discussed with many of my rider friends who have undertaken at their cost post rider training. Universally they have got something out of it. My view for debate, is that post rider training should be more readily available at reasonable prices, part of a package of measures to improve our skills and keep them sharp.

Are you suggesting repeat offenders should be made (compulsorily) to undertake post licence training?

[Katman]

We are an ignored user group by and large.

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

[swbarnett]

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

I think it's more a numbers game. There simply aren't enough of us to matter to most non-riders.

[Big Dog]

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

Not at all helped by the tragically low registration numbers.


Stupid phone / Tapatalk, apologies in advance.

[GrayWolf]

Yes. Half the problem us we use traffic to compact the chip instead of a prescribed amount of roller passes. We're one of the few developed countries in the world that does this cheap nasty shortcut. Not to mention the signs left out too long after wards and loose chip not cleaned up. When I was in UK I saw them lay chip, traffic never drivers over it till its 100% finished (they do one side at a time). One time a contractor stuffed up in Norfolk, it was headline news that a total of 12 cars got chipped windscreens ove next week and they got chewed up for it bigtime.
I know an older driver that did roadworks, apparently when they 'cut' (blend) the tar with kerosene its a different amount everytime depending on weather and temperature. Translation, some fella in a hivis guesses it and the skill is prob not being passed on properly...






It's only muppets that roll over at those roundabouts. Horrible as they are, a competent driver should read the road ahead and drive accordingly. But I do agree that they shouldn't use them as a traffic calming measure when it creates a bigger hazard. Truck rollovers at roundabouts (and they happen at the 'flat' ones too) are generally always excess speed. Agree 100% about the left turn idea. We have those double lane roundabouts on non double lane roads here in the bay and they just create a hazard.

Further to your left turn idea I think any T junction close to a major roundabout should be left turn only and all the right turning traffic can just go to the roundabout and do a 180.

Yes and now in their friggin wisdom, the gubbermint have approved 50 tonne trucks for the roads (an extra axle), The bloody highways here are NOT designed for the current trucks allowed in many places... Rimutaka's for example... So now these new 50 tonner's are going to be on that hill, on your side of the road, to negotiate the tight corners...

FFS we have a rail freight network that is profitable and capable of being utilised far more than it is....
So lets allow bigger, road destroying trucks instead.....

and while I'm at it... the Wainui hill?? the 'roundabout' they installed at the Bell rd/Grace st Junction. Fantastic road design,,,, a huge metal drain?? whatever cover that is almost the full width of the single carriageway as you exit from Gracefield into Bell.

[BlackSheepLogic]

Post rider training is an interesting point. I've discussed with many of my rider friends who have undertaken at their cost post rider training. Universally they have got something out of it. My view for debate, is that post rider training should be more readily available at reasonable prices, part of a package of measures to improve our skills and keep them sharp.

Are you suggesting repeat offenders should be made (compulsorily) to undertake post licence training?

Yes, I think repeat offenders should have additional training to make them aware of how their offending effects other road users.

I am however completely against mandatory on-going training, experience makes better riders. non-mandentory training I'm OK with training but I see no reason it should be forced onto all within a given license class. Nor do I think it will achieve anything. People need to be personally motivated to seek training not forced.

[Ocean1]

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

Yeah, you'd really like that to be true, eh?

In fact it's far more likely to be related to the large number of "road safety" lobbyists like AA pushing successfully for improvements that benefit cars, some of which are definite threats to a biker.

[Katman]

Yeah, you'd really like that to be true, eh?

In fact it's far more likely to be related to the large number of "road safety" lobbyists like AA pushing successfully for improvements that benefit cars, some of which are definite threats to a biker.

Yeah, of course.

It's got absolutely nothing to do with decades of alienating 'fucking cagers' for having the audacity to impede our 'racing lines'.

[R650R]

Yes and now in their friggin wisdom, the gubbermint have approved 50 tonne trucks for the roads (an extra axle), The bloody highways here are NOT designed for the current trucks allowed in many places... Rimutaka's for example... So now these new 50 tonner's are going to be on that hill, on your side of the road, to negotiate the tight corners...

FFS we have a rail freight network that is profitable and capable of being utilised far more than it is....
So lets allow bigger, road destroying trucks instead.....

Lets not have facts get in the way of a good rant aye...

Firstly you only need to run nine axles for 50Max setup so that's a 6x4 tractor unit towing a 6 axle b-train of which many were already on the highway. Under 50Max the overall vehicle length is increased by several metres which reduces the tarmac loading. The whole reason 50max was approved was there were already plenty of operators exceeding 44ton on regular basis with no problems bar the fines. The whole HPMV scheme has allowed better planning of loads and utilisation of available deck space.
I recently worked for a less reputable firm, the difference between going up a hill at 44ton opposed to 50ton is negligible, even the CVIU that pulled me up once and looked at my paperwork didnt weigh me up... Most of the modern engines just dig deeper and make more power, they are designed for extreme loads. The only thing that really changes running fat is the fuel mileage goes through the floor.
All of the HPMV approved units should track no worse than previously approved max length designs. Swinging wide on most state highways is purely operator error/discretion 99% of the time. Like any industry there will be a few bad eggs out there.
Rail is good for some instances and non urgent freight but it will never be better than trucks for the majority of NZ freight under existing technology. The actually loading and unloading of freight into a standard 20ft container is also a very labour intensive and time consuming process. A shipping container still has to get to a from a rail head, which requires a swinglifter and a good operator.
A lot of big trucks actually direct deliver their freight. If somehow there was a magic transition to rail, our cities would be clogged with six wheeler metro trucks and swinglifters.... The double handling would translate to higher freight prices and less international competiveness for our exports.
Even in England and Europe where there are awesome rail networks, huge amounts of freight still travel by truck, what does that tell you?

[Akzle]

I think it's more a numbers game. There simply aren't enough of us to matter to most non-riders.

like homosexuals and women,
no where near enough of a majority for those groups to think their opinion matters....

FFS we have a rail freight network that is profitable and capable of being utilised far more than it is....
So lets allow bigger, road destroying trucks instead.....

hahahahhahaha. you don't know much about dem trains, huh?
and your elected government sold the rail network.... to the fucken strayans. it's largely in disrepair.
as has been otherwise pointed out: the logistics of loading and unloading trains for shit isn't practical. economoneyically speaking.

do you buy shit? i bet you do. know how that shit got to where you bought it? bet ya dont.
but bet you can guess, it wuz trukz oi.

[MrKiwi]

And I wonder what brought that about.

Maybe it's something to do with a 'fuck the establishment' attitude.

I know from my days in the past as an official that the central reason is they think motorcycling is too dangerous. Some of the riding community's attitudes hasn't helped, but its not the primary reason ...

[rastuscat]

Thanks for raising the standard of the debate, not!

It's just Akzle being Akzle.

[rastuscat]

Lots of interesting views on here. Again.

No surprises, folk on here have the answers. But find it easier to snipe on a forum than to actually get involved and do something. Like the OP did.

Untimately, we need someone to do that high level thinking. Then we need to remember that right here, right now, the greatest influence on our safety is us.

Just sayin. Again.