Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

**riffer** · 12th December 2017, 06:28

I wouldn't Cassina as it goes against the Woodhouse principles, and further turns ACC into an insurance company. Those who create accidents should be charged by Police. If found guilty, they lose licenses and their vehicle insurance is affected. Anything else with ACC opens up the possibility of victims being charged more.

**Frodo** · 12th December 2017, 07:02

Originally Posted by riffer

You guys have it all arse about face.

ACC never used the MLC riders kill themselves argument. They were more concerned that MLC riders cost more because they didn't die. They got injured, and they cost more to rehabilitate - a) because, well, older folk take longer to come right and b) us 50+ riders earn more than some young squid does, generally.

...

Something is wrong here. I said it on the steps of Parliament to hundreds of bikers a few years ago and it's still the same. The government would not ever think of charging women more for ACC because they are more likely to be victims of sexual assault. But still bikers are penalised for being victims.

Sorry for the rant. It's been coming for a while.

Hi Riffer

I think we agree about the statistics.

In terms of the message:

"National road policing manager Superintendent Steve Greally said it was "certainly commonplace" to come across victims who had taken up motorcycling in their later years after coming into some extra cash and had a bit more time on their hands, forgetting that they're a bit slower and the machines they're riding are a lot more powerful." http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=11767690

"ACC’s Carey Griffiths, Senior Injury Prevention Programme Manager (Motorcycles) [said] “The disturbing feature of these deaths is that the majority involve male riders all over the age of 40. ...This highlights a real issue that we are dealing with. It concerns older male riders who are overly confident and often riding bikes that are beyond their experience and capabilities.” Nearly three quarters (73%) of fatal crashes occur on the open road where a loss of control can be deadly." http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO160...40-at-risk.htm

I think these statements are wrong as they equate risk with the absolute number of fatalities / injuries, whereas it should be based on fatalities / injuries per km ridden.

I did my first Ride Forever course the weekend before last. Great course and I learned a lot. Recommended. But I tired of the pro-ACC drivel about how car drivers were subsidising the motorcycle ACC levy.

That said, most days I ride I see bikers riding like idiots.

In short:
- There are a lot of motorcyclists being killed / injured. Too many.
- Compared to other age groups, there are more older bikers dying/injured because there are more older bikers riding more miles. I believe that, on average, older riders are safer than younger riders per mile ridden.
- The ACC levy is based on "no-fault" so includes motorcycle accidents that we ultimately the fault of the other driver. I think this is unfair. The levy should be based on an assessment of who caused the accident.
- Training can help avoid or reduce injury in accidents caused by others
- A lot of motorcycle accidents are single vehicle accidents or are otherwise the fault of the rider. This is, IMHO, caused by reckless behaviour and/or poor skills. The latter can be addressed by training. The former is more difficult ...

**riffer** · 12th December 2017, 08:38

Hey Frodo,

it's a no-brainer that the majority of fatalities occur at higher speeds - kinetic energy being half the mass times the speed squared (Ke = 1/2m * v²⁾so as speed increases there is an exponential effect on kinetic energy - the energy that is available to be expended in the event of the moving mass impacting with another mass. Whether the other mass is moving or not has a bearing on it's kinetic energy. Suffice to say - hit something at 50km/hr you might survive, hit something at 100km/hr you definitely won't.

Carey is a mate, and I've taken him to task on these comments. As usual with reporters, he had a whole lot to say, and they've taken the most salacious bit and only printed that. All the other stuff is lost in the meantime. One of the reasons Carey left the role, I guess. His job has been taken over by Dave Keilty, who's also a mate. It's actually good to know that as motorcyclists we have some of our own in key positions now. Try and ignore what the media say. They really don't understand the topic well. If they reported on finance or weather like they report on motorcycling there would be a roar of prtest country-wide.

We can't also argue that the majority of motorcyclists are older than 40. It stands to reason that if 75% of motorcyclists are over 40, then you'd expect a corresponding injury/death rate among those 75%. Except you don't - we tend to ride safer so our injury and death rates are less than our proportion of the riding population. However, a death is a death.

The motorcycle population has increased a lot in the last five years, and our injury/death rate has gone down. However, as a result of the increasing population of riders, the death rate has remained more or less static - in fact it's climbed slightly. TPTB work in total numbers when it comes to deaths. Personally, I don't put too much stock in deaths. It's the injury rate I really want to look at.

Unfortunately, a number of deaths are single vehicle accidents. However, this does not necessarily mean that the rider was completely at fault. Generally, there is something unexpected that has happened, and the road design/road furniture meant that the accident was not survivable as the road is not safe to any motorcyclist coming off his bike. So, yes, training is a great idea. But it's not the only one.

We need to look at the road design - and I don't just mean the road surface. Some roads encourage people to ride quicker for a while, then present them with a tricky change to conditions - all very well to say ride to the conditions but a 100km/hr road should be maintained to a 100km/hr standard, with, say, a tolerance of 5-10%, meaning that you should be reasonably expected to be able to travel at a speed between 90-100km/hr on it. If there are any sections that are below that speed, then at least 500 metres before the section the speed limit should be reduced to 80km/hr, or even less. That way, you signal beforehand that there is an issue - don't just present the road user with a problem when they were used to a certain speed.

Also, prevent the ability of the road user to fall into the other lane should they come off. Unfortunately, that would mean barriers - and modified cheesecutters could do this, through the introduction of a type of "chicken wire" mechanism to ensure that flying riders don't get sliced. Then we get to the sides of the road with culverts, posts, etc. We need to ensure that these are either covered, like you would in a racetrack, or moved completely so you couldn't hit them.

And then - and this one is the kicker - we need to introduce a kind of RideForever for cars. And make it compulsory at least every ten years - say as part of licence renewal. I don't care if people don't like that - generally those who don't are shit drivers anyway. If there was a RideForever for car drivers I'd do it tomorrow (actually there is, kind of. A group of people I know are trying to convince ACC to take this idea on - they are motorcycle and car instructors who want to make a difference - it would be a practical driving course with an emphasis on hazard avoidance and better driving).

Responding to the fatalities per km ridden. It's very difficult as, as a number of posters have already stated, there are a significant number of riders who don't register their motorcycles. The trick is to get those who - like my father in law does, keep their bikes off the road in winter - undertake some training on re-registration. This could be done by offering them a hand out card at the licence renewal place.

The biggest problem with the training though remains the stubbornness of humans. And I was one too - suspicious about the need for training. After all, I had years of practice on bikes. Actually I may have had years on bikes but I wasn't really learning anything - other than being put on to Keith Code's Twist of the Wrist by a fellow KBer a number of years ago. But I did a RideForever and got hooked. But there are a significant number of 40+ year olds who just don't believe they need training. I hate to generalise, but a number of them ride a particular American manufactured motorcycle. Not all, but a significant amount. Getting into the 1%ers is hard.

The myth about high viz needs to be busted. The driver who pulled out in front of me was colour blind. My bright red Aprilia looked a muddy brown to him, and my high viz vest was like a pale brown. I've had the opportunity to sit in a room and talk to the guy about what happened. It was a genuine mistake - it's really affected my life though. At the very least it will be two years before I can ride again. And there's a big IF there because I have a brachial plexus injury which means half my arm is paralyzed. Still, as I say far too much, because I did the emergency braking training I was able to slow down enough to minimise my hurt. And there's no reason why others can't learn how to do this.

The solutions are there. They are not particularly cheap. And we are up against the inevitable fact that driverless electric vehicles are our future. And the insurance companies and the likes of ACC will ensure that motorcycling on the roads becomes so expensive that the majority of riders won't bother. And collectively we are getting older. My dad can't ride any more due to Parkinsons. He's in his late 70s and would love to ride. There's aren't enough people taking up riding. My son, Pediigru on here, is a notable exception. But he's a 4th generation motorcyclist on my side and 3rd generation on his mum's side. So eventually, there won't be motorcyclists. And it will probably only take a generation or two. So TPTB don't see much need to invest too much money.

We need to convince them that this is a mistake. And we have to start by getting the next generation to ride. And train them as much as possible and teach them how to survive. Because it's worth it.

**riffer** · 12th December 2017, 08:40