I see the same problem that occurs in bicyle lanes (the few there are) - the motorbike lane will become so full of crap and debris no one will use it unless they feel like puncture fixing practice
Hell Yeah
Maybe
No way
I see the same problem that occurs in bicyle lanes (the few there are) - the motorbike lane will become so full of crap and debris no one will use it unless they feel like puncture fixing practice
The outside lanes on their freeways are high occupancy (which include motorcyclists) lanes and traffic moves along in those lanes quite well. LA has the same pre-occupation with cars Aucklanders do, just with a few million more ppl. My brother rides the 50 miles to and from work each day and thinks its great. They have cameras stationed along the freeway and anyone breaking the rules gets fined. The outside lanes also have yellow lines so you can't just move in and out of them, once your in there you have to wait until a break in the lines. These are usually a mile or so before the next off-ramp so you have time to move over. Ref to previous thread, they also have lights leading on to their freeways. Have done for years and everyone just gets on with it.
If you can't be a good example, be a horrible warning![]()
Hey I would support this, do you have this chaps details so we may be able to contact him to encourage and support his forward thinking.
As motorcyclists I think we should jump on anyone that takes us into consideration like this, if he believes he is able to table this idea without being ridiculed he may have more up his sleeve, this may be only a test bed for his other ideas… my 2 cents.
You’re dammed if you do and you’re dammed if you don’t… Bartholomew J. Simpson
65 makes sense. You don't want people doing 100kph next to three lanes of traffic travelling at 20kph.
But as Dover said, it aint going to happen. Some one will put a zero tolerance bill before parliament about not being allowed to smack your monkey while having a drink - and all those without kids will say yay! and all those who don't drink will say yay we're better than you, and then the bit about the bikes will come up, and then how can't we start up a buildozer for four hours think of the trees and the children.
and its his birthday today so he thinks he can get away with it!!!!!!!!
YES its fast and NO you can't have a ride!
"People are stupid ... almost anyone will believe almost anything. Because people are stupid, they will believe a lie because they want to believe it's true, or because they are afraid it might be true. People's heads are full of knowledge, facts, and beliefs, and most of it is false, yet they think it all true ... they can only rarely tell the difference between a lie and the truth, and yet they are confident they can, and so all are easier to fool." -- Wizard's First Rule
I think its a good idea with a lot of merit. Sod off all you nay-sayers, go spoil someone elses party.
I would prefer to have the lane on the right, not the left, but I do agree with the concept of a "High Occupancy" lane (which bikes can use) with a speed limit of 65kph. Or even 50kph if they like - that's still faster than I'll lane split anyways so I still win.
It doesnt really matter if the HO lane has to be on the left (on the existing hard shoulder) as bikes have an easy enough time nipping through the traffic anyway. However, I do think there should be some sort of logic applied to it all:
- For all HO vehicles, bikes, HO cars, buses, etc, and emergency vehicles
- Sensible speed limit applied so that the only times it comes useful is in heavy traffic
- Once the traffic on the motorway starts going faster than whatever the HO speed limit is, then just merge back into the main flow of traffic
- The lanes are swept on a regular basis
- The rules are enforced to ensure only permitted vehicles use it
I personally see this as being safer than lane splitting. Especially for learners. Just this morning on my way into work, I was filtering between the middle and right lanes. I saw a gap in the middle lane in front of me, and a van in the right hand lane put his indicator on to move into it. I could see him watching me, so I slowed down and waved him over. Just as I did this, a guy following me on a GN250 overtook me on the left (through the gap in the middle lane) and cut the van off. I'm assuming that because I was in front of him, he never saw the van's indicator. If the van driver hadn't been paying attention (he was more aware of the situation than I was, I'm a little ashamed to say), the GN rider would have been squashed.
I firmly believe that a full width lane dedicated to bikes and HO vehicles has much better visibility and far fewer hazards than the "little white highway".
Bring it on I say.
Hi Kflasher. neil.morrison@manukau.govt.nz
YES its fast and NO you can't have a ride!
You’re dammed if you do and you’re dammed if you don’t… Bartholomew J. Simpson
Here is the text of the article referred to
Originally Posted by Howick and Pakaranga Times
Originally Posted by skidmark
Originally Posted by Phil Vincent
I'm one of the maybes - and took that position because I'm always wary of anything designed by a committee - or council. I can see it now (left hand lane, stops and starts every time there's an on or off ramp, 65kph max etc). They would consider their duties discharged, the idea a good one and a shoddy solution in place (which then needs to be undone at some expense, then corrected at even MORE expense).
That being said - yes... right hand lane and everything that's been said in support of a high occupancy lane per the LA example. Good idea.
Last edited by ManDownUnder; 2nd May 2007 at 10:24.
$2,000 cash if you find a buyer for my house, kumeuhouseforsale@straightshooters.co.nz for details
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks