Cheesecutter campaign

[MSTRS:Me]

Yeah, option B... Take woodcoks rd to SH16 and up to Wellsford.
Its 80ks through the Dome now and the Five O seem to pop up when you least expect it....the beggers!

16 eh? Eyes peeled for ginga. Or is that only on Thursdays?

[Nikolai_V]

Tell that to the widows of the drivers killed when a lorry went through the WRB ( Brifen Barriers).
Sorry you come over like an employee of a Brifen manufacturer, these things are being proven all over the world to be more dangerous than ever considered, you will find more dead among car drivers who have had the misfortune to be on the receiving end of these Brifen failures, check out some of the links posted on the CC threads on KB, even one Road Engineer from Holland has made it clear that these things are not safe.

As others have noted i`m certainly not employed by any barrier manufacturers...

Regarding your points - The first principle when designing barriers is to ask whether the hazard posed by the barrier is less than the hazard we`re protecting against. Barriers aside from concrete F type are designed to deflect and absorb impact, variables like post spacing and rail type are changed to suit particular applications.

You`ll notice the evolution in barrier end terminals over the years, wire rope barriers have evolved as well.

The common arguments on here - that Motorcyclists are going to be sliced into pieces simply arent being seen in practice. Pulling these out will simply allow vehicles to hit the hazards we`re tring to protect them against.

As it stands (as of today) WRSB and Armco are similar in terms of casualty rates for riders - do you want these gone as well?

I`ll lump them together because the posts which cause the damage to motorcyclists are common to both barrier types.

I don`t really need to look on this forum to get information regarding barriers - i`ve studied these things at uni and in practice for a while now.

I`m not denying that people are killed in collisions with barriers - I stated earlier some recent NZ stats to that effect. Cars, trucks, motorcyclists all suffer in sudden decelerations.

As an engineer, decisions affecting public safety have to be made, with limited resources, with varied and un-predictable users of the road network. Just like you choose to disregard my opinions - i`m free to disagree with the unnamed dutch engineer.

Would you like to talk to the widow(er)s caused by the non-installation of barriers (which arent concrete)? I can tell you there`ll quite a few more of them than widow(er)s of motorcyclists (and other motorists) killed / harmed by wire rope and armco barriers.

[swbarnett]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The issue for me is not how many lives WRBs save, it's the fact that they make roads more dangerous for motorcyclists.

This fact leads me to the conclusion that transit are treating us as third class citizens. It's this prejudice that I object too more than the barriers themselves.

Which is not to say that I like the WRBs, far from it.

And as for the comparison with armco. They are nothing like armco. Yes, they both have posts but armco can be fixed by the addition of another W rail at the bottom. WRBs cannot be fixed and, therefore, must go.

[Nikolai_V]

In a word...NO. Quite the opposite, in fact.
And it's strange that one will find them using stats to install this shit...*Someone died here in a freak accident so let's make sure it can't happen again* BUT in the case of existing wires "Someone died here. It was his fault. So all barriers including this one stay*

How about the barriers which get whacked all the time (Centennial Highway (SH1)) - every time we repair one is one less head on collision...

Again you`re talking about one accident, as justification for binning an effective safety system that has a proven track record, and has saved hundreds of lives across the country... and the quotes without evidence of 70km/h slicing limbs off. Strangely enough we do know plenty about the effects of motorcyclists hitting things at speed.

The human body just isn`t designed to collide with anything at speeds above around 20 km/h.

Try something. Take emotion out of the equation, and look at this like someone who has seen and attended plenty of fatal crashes, cars and motorcyclists alike. Think about the oppurtunity cost of all the dead motorists as a result of not installing wire rope barriers. Any barrier is capable of killing motorcyclists, having seen footage of motorcyclists hitting concrete and the decelleration that theyre subjected to - you`re just getting killed in a different way in most cases.

In my opinion motorcycling cannot be made safe with existing infrastructure as anything designed to safely protect cars will of necessity impart near lethal loads onto errant motorcyclists. No way around this, and I dont personally care what the Concrete Manufacturers association have to say.

If your body contacts any immovable object at 100km/h (27 m/s) you will deform at 3 times the force of gravity, its going to hurt and do unpleasant things to you. This is true of car drivers who without airbags only have around a 50:50 chance of surviving running off the road at 100km/h. You have no airbags, only 6mm of foam and plastic armour and hopefully a decent helmet. If you lowside into a barrier, the exposed posts will catch you and slow you rapidly, it doenst matter if the posts are metal or wood, attached to wrsb or armco. This will hurt, and depending on speed it may kill you.

Studies quoted by FEMA (the federation of european motorcyclists) stated that retrofitting anymore than 10% of the network with say Moto-tub, or similar protection to the posts would be economically unviable.

The way I see it, as a motorcyclist myself, is to accept that one of two may die every 5-6 years, in much the same way that you accept that 35 will die each year as a result of hitting banks and trees and parked cars. Call me callous, but its the current state of affairs and until someone either changes the laws of physics or the attitudes of riders its likely to continue.

[Nikolai_V]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The issue for me is not how many lives WRBs save, it's the fact that they make roads more dangerous for motorcyclists.

This fact leads me to the conclusion that transit are treating us as third class citizens. It's this prejudice that I object too more than the barriers themselves.

Which is not to say that I like the WRBs, far from it.

And as for the comparison with armco. They are nothing like armco. Yes, they both have posts but armco can be fixed by the addition of another W rail at the bottom. WRBs cannot be fixed and, therefore, must go.

WRSB can have plastic affixxed to the posts to reduce the hazard from getting caught in them also....

Third class citizens - I think the persecution complex is alive and well.

As a motorcyclist i`m more angry at the other riders who kill themselves in great numbers by their own stupidity, thinking the road is some sort of playground. These clowns cause a great deal of stress to my wife and family who then worry about me when i`m out on a ride. This also has a negative effect on potential motorcyclists who are put off by the risk.

I`m going to rant now, and this statement is my own personal opinion, not that of any organistaion I currently or have worked for.

Your first statement doesnt make sense. All people are equal right? Some people choose to do riskier things (risk homeostasis - look it up) than others. I`ll be dammed if i`m going to endanger the vast majority of people to cater to a near as dammit non-existient problem, as percieved by a distinct minority. You may be familiar with a concept called utilitarianism - the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This is what western society is founded upon. It would be bloody negligent of any engineer to adopt your line of thinking. Emotion and wooly-headed thought have no business in engineering or public health, which is what most of the road safety measures are.

[Ixion]

WRSB can have plastic affixxed to the posts to reduce the hazard from getting caught in them also....

...

So why haven't they ?

[Ixion]

You may be familiar with a concept called utilitarianism - the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This is what western society is founded upon. It would be bloody negligent of any engineer to adopt your line of thinking. Emotion and wooly-headed thought have no business in engineering or public health, which is what most of the road safety measures are.

So, on that basis, you being an engineer and logical and all, you will volunteer to be euthanised so that your organs can be harvested. Right?

Cos, thats what would provide the greatest good for the greatest number. One (Nikolai_V) dead. But probably six or seven alive who would other wise be dead, thanks to Nikolai's kidneys, heart , lungs, liver etc. Not to mention the further net benefit from corneas and such like. A net benefit of five or six lives.

Someone who REALLY believed in utilitarianism wouldn't hesitate would he. Nor would he hesitate to put his wife forward for the same purpose. Greatest good remember. Care to explain to her why you think having her euthanised is a really good idea?

Bet you any sum you wouldn't do it though. It's one thing to spout waffle about greatest good for greatest number etc etc when it's all nice and academic. Another thing when the life on the deficit side is yours .

And where cheesecutters are concerned, the lives on the deficit side are ours. And just exactly as you are not willing to sacrifice your life , and your wife's life, with a smile because "it's for the greater good", nor are we.

To trade in human lives in such a fashion is immoral and unethical. I think you should have studied less engineering at university and more ethics.

[Zapf]

As others have noted i`m certainly not employed by any barrier manufacturers...

Regarding your points - The first principle when designing barriers is to ask whether the hazard posed by the barrier is less than the hazard we`re protecting against. Barriers aside from concrete F type are designed to deflect and absorb impact, variables like post spacing and rail type are changed to suit particular applications.

Sliding off into the bush is a lesser hazard than contacting a WRB.

Please explain to me how a when riding a bike on a single lane road with WRB on both side is a lesser hazard than riding on a road with WRB on one side?

The common arguments on here - that Motorcyclists are going to be sliced into pieces simply arent being seen in practice. Pulling these out will simply allow vehicles to hit the hazards we`re tring to protect them against.

I seen once with my own eyes. People being sliced.

The WRB's are the Hazard. Sure traffic on the otherside is a Hazard too, but there is a much lesser chance of hitting them than the WRB's. Cause the traffic is not always there. So by encasing the road with them, our risk of hitting a hazard has just increased. Do you maths

[swbarnett]

How about the barriers which get whacked all the time (Centennial Highway (SH1)) - every time we repair one is one less head on collision...

This may or may not be true. You or I cannot say because it assumes there would've been a collision without the barrier. Something that cannot be determined with any degree of accuracy.

Again you`re talking about one accident, as justification for binning an effective safety system that has a proven track record, and has saved hundreds of lives across the country...

Then why has our road toll not dropped dramatically?

and the quotes without evidence of 70km/h slicing limbs off.

This came out of some European studies. I don't have the reference to hand.

In my opinion motorcycling cannot be made safe with existing infrastructure

We're not asking for motorcycling to be made safe. Hell, some of us are in it BECAUSE it's not as safe as a car. We're just asking that it not be made any more dangerous than it already is.

If your body contacts any immovable object at 100km/h (27 m/s) you will deform at 3 times the force of gravity,

No dispute here. However, how many impacts with barriers are at 90degrees?

At a shallow angle you'll slide along concrete whereas WRBs will slice you to bits.

The way I see it, as a motorcyclist myself, is to accept that one of two may die every 5-6 years, in much the same way that you accept that 35 will die each year as a result of hitting banks and trees and parked cars. Call me callous, but its the current state of affairs and until someone either changes the laws of physics or the attitudes of riders its likely to continue.

So you accept that a car driver's life is worth more than that of a motorcyclist?

[swbarnett]

WRSB can have plastic affixxed to the posts to reduce the hazard from getting caught in them also....

Third class citizens - I think the persecution complex is alive and well.

Well, we obviously didn't figure in the discussions about barrier use (at least not in a positive way).

As a motorcyclist i`m more angry at the other riders who kill themselves in great numbers by their own stupidity, thinking the road is some sort of playground.

Why is this your problem? you're obviously still alive.

These clowns cause a great deal of stress to my wife and family who then worry about me when i`m out on a ride.

"These clowns" have nothing to do with it. Your wife obviously doesn't know what type of rider you are (assuming you're a sensible one, and this seems likely from your comments). You need to educate her as to the risks that YOU face.

Your first statement doesnt make sense. All people are equal right? Some people choose to do riskier things (risk homeostasis - look it up) than others.

I know risk homeostatis - it came up on a cycling forum talking about airbags in cars.

I`ll be dammed if i`m going to endanger the vast majority of people to cater to a near as dammit non-existient problem, as percieved by a distinct minority.

We're not asking you to endanger anyone. Just don't make the situation worse than it already is for anyone.

Perhaps a dose of the doctor's credo is what is required here - "First do no harm".

You may be familiar with a concept called utilitarianism - the greatest good for the greatest number of people. This is what western society is founded upon.

Modern western society also seems to be hung up on the concept of non-discrimination. Why should we as motorcyclists be any different to any other minority?

It would be bloody negligent of any engineer to adopt your line of thinking. Emotion and wooly-headed thought have no business in engineering or public health, which is what most of the road safety measures are.

And a doctor with transit's attitude should be struck off for violating the hippocratic oath.

If emotion has no place then why do anything at all? We're just vague bundles of sensory perception afterall.

[swbarnett]

The WRB's are the Hazard. Sure traffic on the otherside is a Hazard too, but there is a much lesser chance of hitting them than the WRB's. Cause the traffic is not always there. So by encasing the road with them, our risk of hitting a hazard has just increased. Do you maths

Exactly.

And this applies to all road users, not just motorcycles.

[MSTRS:Me]

... and the quotes without evidence of 70km/h slicing limbs off.

Euro studies...you 'quote' them when it suits.

Strangely enough we do know plenty about the effects of motorcyclists hitting things at speed.

As do we. Some of us first hand.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the effects of a collision, and the sliding scale of damage inflicted depending on the angle of strike. For us, the angle of strike with the posts of a WRB is always 90 degrees, with predictable results according to speed.

[Nikolai_V]

So, on that basis, you being an engineer and logical and all, you will volunteer to be euthanised so that your organs can be harvested. Right?

Cos, thats what would provide the greatest good for the greatest number. One (Nikolai_V) dead. But probably six or seven alive who would other wise be dead, thanks to Nikolai's kidneys, heart , lungs, liver etc. Not to mention the further net benefit from corneas and such like. A net benefit of five or six lives.

Someone who REALLY believed in utilitarianism wouldn't hesitate would he. Nor would he hesitate to put his wife forward for the same purpose. Greatest good remember. Care to explain to her why you think having her euthanised is a really good idea?

Bet you any sum you wouldn't do it though. It's one thing to spout waffle about greatest good for greatest number etc etc when it's all nice and academic. Another thing when the life on the deficit side is yours .

And where cheesecutters are concerned, the lives on the deficit side are ours. And just exactly as you are not willing to sacrifice your life , and your wife's life, with a smile because "it's for the greater good", nor are we.

To trade in human lives in such a fashion is immoral and unethical. I think you should have studied less engineering at university and more ethics.

Where do I start... your statement assumes that i`m more good to society dead than alive - which I kind of disagree with, but hey groupthink rules on here....


I`m sorry but your viewpoint is irrelevant - all governments have to make decisions which favour some over others on a daily basis (herceptin anyone).

As an organ donor I do actually find your position offensive, because should anything happen to me, I will actually be doing some good for people even after I die. Unlike your campaign which I feel will result in a net increase in road deaths.

The current value of a human life is about $2M, so I figure that if I can save sy 2-3 people per year through work, and then 4-6 when I die, i`m in credit, and should get a refund on my taxes...

[Nikolai_V]

Exactly.

And this applies to all road users, not just motorcycles.

And WRSB and armco are installed to protect cuttings, cliffs, estuaries etc (which are also always there)

[Nikolai_V]

This may or may not be true. You or I cannot say because it assumes there would've been a collision without the barrier. Something that cannot be determined with any degree of accuracy.

Funnily enough we don`t just guess these things, we undertake modelling to determine the likelihood of collisions, and there is always years of historical data to back-analyse.

Then why has our road toll not dropped dramatically?

Considering traffic and population growth it has in real terms.

This came out of some European studies. I don't have the reference to hand.

We're not asking for motorcycling to be made safe. Hell, some of us are in it BECAUSE it's not as safe as a car. We're just asking that it not be made any more dangerous than it already is.

No dispute here. However, how many impacts with barriers are at 90degrees?

At a shallow angle you'll slide along concrete whereas WRBs will slice you to bits.


So you accept that a car driver's life is worth more than that of a motorcyclist?[/

All human life is valued equally, hence my issue with removing wrsb to prevent one or two fatalities every 5 years when they`be prevented (say) 20 deaths in that time.