Road toll - Police stupid obsession blaming speed

[neil.]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.

nah, I reckon it will get worse, as people rely on technology more, their own skills get worse, so when something does happen, they have no idea how to deal with it. I'm not even a fan of cruise control except for motorways, some folks seem to leave it on ALL the time, so i'm sure some crashes are due to going around corners at 100km/hr or more, with cruise control still on.

[caspernz]

It smells funny in here...again! That's what happens when you shovel clown shit I suppose

[george formby]

BTW: My current 4 wheeled vehicle has web browsing and email, on a 8" screen, as well as all of the other crap. The pron can be off putting at 110kph

The Troll called you sport, again. In this instance spurt would have been betterer.

[Akzle]

Some on here say that many drivers and riders dont have any skills in the first place so they have no ability to get worse anyway.

some most on here say that you're a fuckwit so...

you're a fuckwit anyway.

[YellowDog]

Some on here say that many drivers and riders dont have any skills in the first place so they have no ability to get worse anyway.

The unaided by technology crap rider, may suffer a 50kph off, however at that speed, are less likely to kill themselves. Assuming ATGATT applies to said accident.

My point is that technology insulates them (and us) from their crap riding and means that they won't have that basic lack of skills accident until >80kph, or more, where they will be less likely to survive.

Hence: Vehicular enhancing technology is a killer, so it should therefore be restricted to already proven to be competent riders only.

Why able bodied car drivers are allowed to pass a driving test in an automatic transmission vehicle with ABS, beggars belief

[onearmedbandit]

To be honest in my opinion this cop out of blaming 'technology' can be applied to the introduction of seatbelts, or disc brakes, collapsing steering columns or blah blah.

[pritch]

Like it or not sport you will be an oldie one day and that plus future advancing technology could mean the difference between taking the bus and still being able to drive.

There are problems with the technology. As has already been discussed on KB the designers of the system may be knowledgable about that technology, but some are demonstrably piss poor drivers. There is concern that they are building their pathetic driving into the system. How could it be otherwise?

When the guy was killed when his Tesla drove under a truck and trailer unit that it thought was the sky, Tesla spokespersons said you should not rely on the technology, you should stay in control at all times. Which sorta begs the point?

Then there's the people of colour in the US of A who are worried that the technology will not recognise them in the dark. That might sound funny but I haven't seen a statement from the company about that concern yet. There may have been one but...

[YellowDog]

To be honest in my opinion this cop out of blaming 'technology' can be applied to the introduction of seatbelts, or disc brakes, collapsing steering columns or blah blah.

Disc braking yes and also ABS too (both of which I might now struggle without), but far more so, Electronic Stability Control and Active Cruise Control.

There was a guy caught by a motorcyclist in the UK, reading a Kindle eBook whilst driving his car, with the aid of such technology. Though thoroughly deserved, Darwin's theories didn't even get a look in

[granstar]

Some on here say that many drivers and riders dont have any skills in the first place so they have no ability to get worse anyway.

.................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .....................................

[Akzle]

At the end of the day it will be the insurance companies that will make the final call as to whether the technology is safe or not as if they decide no anyone that uses it will not be covered. The NZTA needs to take some responsibility for allowing any non proven technoliges on the road in the first place.

you're a fuckwit

[crack]

Lives will be saved as technology will compensate for all human error situations on the road and if there were no human error crashes there would be no need for the technology.

Yes you are correct, but you are also wrong:



There are many cases where technology does not perform in times of crisis, something being unforeseen and outside of its design, or an event happens outside the scope for which it is designed, and the humans have to intervene.

There are cases of humans not understanding the modern technology, and perfectly good equipment kills people through a lack of human training and understanding.

Manufacturers of technology put equipment into use, and at some point and time, something inevitably will happen/goes awry, and humans are left to sort it out, sometimes they get lucky, sometimes they perish.

This is perhaps the biggest issue with technology, is the testing of it in all known circumstances, its the unknown that killls you and then everyone all of a sudden becomes smart and designs a fix.

[crack]

I'm pretty sure I can remember figures north of 600. Maybe even approaching 650?

That's a pretty big + or - from 300.

Thinking back to then we had the big booze barns with parking for 300 cars plus, and at 10.30PM everybody would pile into their cars and hit the road pissed. In retrospect it's a wonder the road toll wasn't even higher.

I made my statement very loosely based upon memory and not research, and when I quoted the figures as I did, I new I was on safe ground with the plus or minus.

Sorry for a very loose quote, or the way in which I attempted to pass on information:

Please view the below.


Historical deaths since 1921


Year Number of road deaths Year Number of road deaths Year Number of road deaths
1921 69 1953 313 1985 747
1922 61 1954 360 1986 766
1923 59 1955 333 1987 795
1924 94 1956 329 1988 727
1925 103 1957 384 1989 755
1926 149 1958 379 1990 729
1927 138 1959 349 1991 650
1928 176 1960 374 1992 646
1929 178 1961 393 1993 600
1930 246 1962 398 1994 580
1931 170 1963 394 1995 582
1932 168 1964 428 1996 514
1933 132 1965 559 1997 539
1934 169 1966 549 1998 501
1935 190 1967 570 1999 509
1936 203 1968 522 2000 462
1937 213 1969 570 2001 455
1938 243 1970 655 2002 405
1939 246 1971 677 2003 461
1940 205 1972 713 2004 435
1941 174 1973 843 2005 405
1942 164 1974 676 2006 393
1943 152 1975 628 2007 421
1944 142 1976 609 2008 366
1945 128 1977 702 2009 384
1946 191 1978 654 2010 375
1947 206 1979 554 2011 284
1948 196 1980 599 2012 308
1949 218 1981 669 2013 253
1950 232 1982 673 2014 293
1951 292 1983 644 2015 319
1952 272 1984 669 2016 327
Road deaths and reported injury casualties 1980 to 2016
Year Population (000) Vehicles (000) Road deaths Injuries
No. of fatalities Per 100,000 population Per 10,000 vehicles No. of injuries Per 100,000 population Per 10,000 vehicles
1980 3176.4 1789.4 599 18.9 3.3 15872 500 88.7
1981 3194.5 1848.6 669 20.9 3.6 15479 485 83.7
1982 3226.8 1882.5 673 20.9 3.6 16194 502 86.0
1983 3264.8 1917.4 644 19.7 3.4 16491 505 86.0
1984 3293.0 1968.9 669 20.3 3.4 17524 532 89.0
1985 3303.1 1996.1 747 22.6 3.7 18912 573 94.7
1986 3313.5 2010.1 766 23.1 3.8 18874 570 93.9
1987 3342.1 2030.6 795 23.8 3.9 18728 560 92.2
1988 3345.2 2045.4 727 21.7 3.6 17346 519 84.8
1989 3369.8 2108.4 755 22.4 3.6 16594 492 78.7
1990 3410.4 2197.7 729 21.4 3.3 17719 520 80.6
1991 3449.7 2220.1 650 18.8 2.9 16767 486 75.5
1992 3485.4 2227.1 646 18.5 2.9 16121 463 72.4
1993 3524.8 2243.8 600 17.0 2.7 15108 429 67.3
1994 3577.2 2289.3 580 16.2 2.5 16600 464 72.5
1995 3643.2 2354.6 582 16.0 2.5 16870 463 71.6
1996 3717.4 2379.8 514 13.8 2.2 14796 398 62.2
1997 3761.1 2392.7 539 14.3 2.3 13375 356 55.9
1998 3790.9 2440.4 501 13.2 2.1 12412 327 50.9
1999 3810.7 2512.3 509 13.4 2.0 11999 315 47.8
2000 3830.8 2601.7 462 12.1 1.8 10962 286 42.1
2001 3850.1 2633.2 455 11.8 1.7 12368 321 47.0
2002 3939.1 2709.5 405 10.3 1.5 13918 353 51.4
2003 4009.2 2801.0 461 11.5 1.6 14372 359 51.3
2004 4060.9 2920.7 435 10.7 1.5 13890 342 47.6
2005 4098.3 3030.4 405 9.9 1.3 14451 353 47.7
2006 4139.5 3124.3 393 9.5 1.3 15174 367 48.6
2007 4228.3 3189.1 421 10.0 1.3 16013 379 50.2
2008 4268.6 3247.8 366 8.6 1.1 15174 356 46.7
2009 4315.8 3220.3 384 8.9 1.2 14541 337 45.2
2010 4367.8 3230.6 375 8.6 1.2 14031 321 43.4
2011 4405.3 3233.6 284 6.4 0.9 12574 285 38.9
2012 4433.0 3250.1 308 6.9 0.9 12122 273 37.3
2013 4471.1 3304.7 253 5.7 0.8 11781 264 35.6
2014 4509.9 3398.1 293 6.5 0.9 11219 249 33.0
2015 4596.7 3514.8 319 6.9 0.9 12270 267 34.9
2016 4693.0 3656.3 327 7.0 0.9 12456 265 34.1

[Moi]

Just my opinion... technology in a vehicle, either a bike or a car, is like icing on a Christmas cake - it's really great to have that almond foundation and then the thick white icing on top of a moist and tasty fruit cake. But, if the cake underneath is dry and burnt the icing really doesn't save the day when Aunty May takes a bite and spits the cake on the Axminster carpet and looks as if she's been poisoned!

The technology in a car - airbags, ABS, ESC, ETC, EBA, etc - is the icing... the underlying fruit-cake is the driving skill of the driver. If their driving skill is such that the technology is along for the ride because it never gets used, then great. But if the technology is working overtime because the driver's skill is poor, then one day the driver will "spit the dummy onto the Axminster" when the technology can no longer overcome the forces of physics.

Those of us old enough to have learnt to drive in the days of cross-ply tyres, drum brakes, no power-assistance for anything, vacuum wipers and no heaters/demisters possibly have an advantage when driving over those who learnt to drive with "all the mod-cons" - we are less likely to rely on the technology to save the day as we probably don't get into the situation of "having to save the day".

Despite all the technology in my car, I tend to drive as if I am still driving Dad's Mk1 Cortina... very aware of the limitations it had with cross-ply tyres and absolutely no weight on the rear axle [solved with a small sack of scoria].

So what's this got to do with the death toll on NZ's roads? Again just my opinion, but I believe we as a nation need to have a serious look at what we are doing when we teach drivers and riders and what we are doing as on-going "PD" for drivers and riders who have held a licence for some time. Get the underlying skills right and maintain those skills, focus on the skills rather than just one action - speed.

[neels]

I watched an air crash investigation the other day, about the Air NZ airbus that crashed on test flight in france.

The root cause was dumb human shit causing sensors not to work, however the reason the aircraft crashed was that the pilots didn't recognise the point at which the technology on the aircraft couldn't figure out what to do, and it was time to take manual control and actually fly the thing themselves.

When doing something yourself ceases to be normal behaviour, and you rely on technology to do it for you, when the time comes that the technology fails the response is going to be much less effective....

Having fun at the moment teaching my son to drive vintage cars, he's learning the joy having none of the modern aids, what's most interesting is that there's a noticeable change in his driving after going back to basic principles of operating a motor vehicle.

[YellowDog]

I watched an air crash investigation the other day, about the Air NZ airbus that crashed on test flight in france.

The root cause was dumb human shit causing sensors not to work, however the reason the aircraft crashed was that the pilots didn't recognise the point at which the technology on the aircraft couldn't figure out what to do, and it was time to take manual control and actually fly the thing themselves.

When doing something yourself ceases to be normal behaviour, and you rely on technology to do it for you, when the time comes that the technology fails the response is going to be much less effective....

Having fun at the moment teaching my son to drive vintage cars, he's learning the joy having none of the modern aids, what's most interesting is that there's a noticeable change in his driving after going back to basic principles of operating a motor vehicle.

A few years back, an Air France A320 fell out of the sky, from 38,000ft, into the Atlantic. It was the then most advanced (safest) passenger plane in the world, being an Airbus A320. The cause must have been terrorism? Turns out that only one of the 8 pilots on the plane had any practical flying ability and he was sleeping off a night out with a new girlfriend. By the time he was showered and at the helm, it was too late.

I love technology, but I don't want to ever have to rely upon it totally (but of course I realise that we do so, in a lot of respects). My view is that drivers shouldn't be able to apply for a car licence until they have completed one year on a motorcycle. Of course some of them would not ever make to a car, but that might save a lot more of us too