MOTO-NZ finally come up with something for all our money

[swbarnett]

Trains cost ALOT more than roads, while roads are almost completely "user pays" trains are heavily subsidised, a ticket is less than half the true cost of operation. If they were a "user pays" system almost no-one would ever use them due to the extreme cost. As it stands now the trains would actually lose LESS money if they didn't charge to use them, but tickets are used for crowd control.
Trains are very restrictive, you don't get to choose times, places, or routes.
Off peak they are a complete waste in every sense they burn money & emissions. As you can't just shutdown off peak travel like you can with private this makes them overall less economical by a large percentage.

I suppose it takes someone like the Swiss to make it work. Yes, the trains there were heavily subsidised. They were also heavily utilised. You can't underestimate the savings to road maintenance that this brings. The other thing was that there were no (I mean none) heavy haulage trucks on Swiss roads. All freight went by train and was distributed by small trucks locally. Even cross European trucks had to get on a train at the Swiss border.

The thing is that there was an understanding by Government of the bigger picture. Money lost on the trains was offset by the reduced road maintenance due to having considerably reduced load. Not to mention the social and environmental gains.

Electrifying the track is a HUGE waste of money. Electric tracks are a false economy, they actually cost no less & sometimes more than their Diesel-Electric counterparts to run but the track setup cost is way in excess of the diesel-electrics. The diesel-electrics also don't have the crippling failings like the electrics, they aren't stopped by power cuts or transformer problems, they are overall more reliable & thus the better option.

The Swiss trains don't suffer from power outages. They understand the value of preventative maintenance and have a very reliable electricity supply.

[swbarnett]

I'll point out, though that it's well recognised that the limit to the size of the local commute is the size of the pipeline. Make the pipe larger and the number of people moving into and out of a city will grow until the pipeline efficiency drops to the old level. You can't fix it, you're better off getting all of the head offices moved out to satelite towns.

This is why I'd like to see Whenuapai turned into another CBD rather than a new airport when it finally gets decommissioned.

[Scuba_Steve]

I suppose it takes someone like the Swiss to make it work. Yes, the trains there were heavily subsidised. They were also heavily utilised. You can't underestimate the savings to road maintenance that this brings.

But rail maintenance costs alot more than road maintenance & must be performed more often. Laying tracks far exceeds cost of roading by a large margin. I don't see the saving in road maintenance being enough to justify trains.
There is apparently only 1 passenger network in the world that pays for itself & it's in India where they're allowed to overcrowd, sit on the roof & hang off the sides.

The other thing was that there were no (I mean none) heavy haulage trucks on Swiss roads. All freight went by train and was distributed by small trucks locally. Even cross European trucks had to get on a train at the Swiss border.

Freight is a different issue, freight is justifiable on trains & does pay for itself. Aside from that the trains are well capable of carrying heavy loads far in excess of it's road going counterparts.

The thing is that there was an understanding by Government of the bigger picture. Money lost on the trains was offset by the reduced road maintenance due to having considerably reduced load. Not to mention the social and environmental gains.

The Swiss trains don't suffer from power outages. They understand the value of preventative maintenance and have a very reliable electricity supply.

As above I still question that "offset". As for outages, power cuts happen alot of our more recent ones were due to morons running the show. But not all power cuts are preventable, like the ones where some dipshit drives their car into the substation & cuts power to sections of the track etc
Diesel-electrics are the better, more reliable & cheaper train option.

But regardless of all this private passenger vehicles still trump public transport IMO at-least until/if the UN get their "Agenda 21" we don't all work close to trains, as soon as you bring busses into the mix your've just killed off any arguable advantage of trains & over half of NZ doesn't even have train access, infact alot don't have any viable public transport (NZ as a country not NZ as population)

[GrayWolf]

Trains cost ALOT more than roads, while roads are almost completely "user pays" trains are heavily subsidised, a ticket is less than half the true cost of operation. If they were a "user pays" system almost no-one would ever use them due to the extreme cost. As it stands now the trains would actually lose LESS money if they didn't charge to use them, but tickets are used for crowd control.
Trains are very restrictive, you don't get to choose times, places, or routes.
Off peak they are a complete waste in every sense they burn money & emissions. As you can't just shutdown off peak travel like you can with private this makes them overall less economical by a large percentage.
Electrifying the track is a HUGE waste of money. Electric tracks are a false economy, they actually cost no less & sometimes more than their Diesel-Electric counterparts to run but the track setup cost is way in excess of the diesel-electrics. The diesel-electrics also don't have the crippling failings like the electrics, they aren't stopped by power cuts or transformer problems, they are overall more reliable & thus the better option.

Dont know where you get your information from... Yes the setting up of an electrified overhead sysyem IS massive, but once set up it is cheaper to run than a diesel passenger train,,, FYI The new Auckland Metro services are going to be ELECTRIC, rather than replacing the ageing diesel ones (DMU's)

EXTRACT:
Electric traction offers a lower cost per mile of train operation but at a higher initial cost, which can only be justified on high traffic lines. Since the cost per mile of construction is much higher, electric traction is less viable for long-distance lines with the exception of long-distance high speed lines. Electric trains receive their current via overhead lines or through a third rail electric system.

[Ocean1]

The new Auckland Metro services are going to be ELECTRIC, rather than replacing the ageing diesel ones (DMU's)

At a total cost, apparently of 'prox NZ$11 billion.

[swbarnett]

But rail maintenance costs alot more than road maintenance & must be performed more often. Laying tracks far exceeds cost of roading by a large margin. I don't see the saving in road maintenance being enough to justify trains.

I agree that savings in road maintenance may not be enough to offset the running costs of trains. However, it pays for itself, by getting most of the vehicles off the road and creating a much more relaxed society. Compared to the population there are very few private cars in Switzerland (1 car per 1350 people in Zurich when we were there). The few times I was returning a rental car to Basel I was amazed by the "rush hour" traffic on a Monday morning. A lot lighter than here at the time and a lot better behaved.

There is apparently only 1 passenger network in the world that pays for itself & it's in India where they're allowed to overcrowd, sit on the roof & hang off the sides.

It's not really about a single aspect of Government services breaking even. It's about the overall picture. The real question is - does the overall infrastructure break even? And if it doesn't, is it worth the cost for social reasons? There are a lot of social costs that are reduced by good public transport. The geography of NZ, however, does make nation-wide public transport very difficult. We have to ask ourselves if it would work when both the financial and social ledgers are tallied.

As for outages, power cuts happen

I commuted daily by train for two years in Switzerland and there was not one disruption due to a lack of power (only once for a heavy snowfall).

alot of our more recent ones were due to morons running the show.

That is one difference. You can hardly call the average Swiss a moron when it comes to organisation and systems management.

But regardless of all this private passenger vehicles still trump public transport IMO at-least until/if the UN get their "Agenda 21" we don't all work close to trains, as soon as you bring busses into the mix your've just killed off any arguable advantage of trains & over half of NZ doesn't even have train access, infact alot don't have any viable public transport (NZ as a country not NZ as population)

True. The reason it works in Switzerland is that the population (9million at the time) is concentrated into an area the size of the central north island. That and the fact that train and buss stations are plentiful and servercies are frequent.

[Scuba_Steve]

Dont know where you get your information from...

It was a South African study on a new track. It took into account the complete picture, while the operation of electrics were cheaper the added maintenance they required voided any savings to be had & with more more expensive lines & engines electrics were the more expensive choice

[MrKiwi]

[QUOTE=Flip;1130454651]You lot are entering into a discussion with a member of the ACC owned loby group MotoNZ, remember he is only representing the interests of ACC...[QUOTE]

Wrong, yet again. While MSAC is set up by ACC and members are appointed by Cabinet it is not a lobby group, it is an advisory group to government. It is not our role to advocate government policy and we don't. The members of the Council are ordinary bikers like you, trying to find 'useful' ways to spend the $30 per annum bikers are now required to pay.

Unless the levy is repealed would you like officials to be the sole source of determining how that money is spent, it so please tell me and I will stop wasting my energy and time.

Cheers...

[GrayWolf]

[QUOTE=MrKiwi;1130460616][QUOTE=Flip;1130454651]You lot are entering into a discussion with a member of the ACC owned loby group MotoNZ, remember he is only representing the interests of ACC...

Wrong, yet again. While MSAC is set up by ACC and members are appointed by Cabinet it is not a lobby group, it is an advisory group to government. It is not our role to advocate government policy and we don't. The members of the Council are ordinary bikers like you, trying to find 'useful' ways to spend the $30 per annum bikers are now required to pay.

Unless the levy is repealed would you like officials to be the sole source of determining how that money is spent, it so please tell me and I will stop wasting my energy and time.

Cheers...

Sorry MrKiwi,
yes I've had my say in this thread, but after XXX? pages and posts? it seriously reminds me of a childhood nursery rhyme.... here we go round the mulberry bush....... till we all fall down!

[bogan]

Unless the levy is repealed would you like officials to be the sole source of determining how that money is spent, it so please tell me and I will stop wasting my energy and time.

I'm kinda struggling to see where the difference would be? I want to see this thing work for us, and now GM has gone (who clearly was pushing government policy, or at the least was chosen because his policies are aligned with the governments) it has a better chance, but how about moving on from the talking stage. You've already spent far too long dwelling on that.

[davereid]

While MSAC is set up by ACC and members are appointed by Cabinet it is not a lobby group, it is an advisory group to government. It is not our role to advocate government policy and we don't. The members of the Council are ordinary bikers like you, trying to find 'useful' ways to spend the $30 per annum bikers are now required to pay. Unless the levy is repealed would you like officials to be the sole source of determining how that money is spent, it so please tell me and I will stop wasting my energy and time. Cheers...

The best usage of the funds would be to lobby other groups unfairly penalised by ACC victim charges.

ALL the money should be used to lobby for our charge to be the same as or less than a car.

The facts are:

Motorcyclists are cheaper to treat than cyclists, pedestrians, or Car Occupants
Cyclists
- 567 active claims
- $12,573,000
- $22,174 per claim
Pedestrians:
- 1115 active claims
- $24,494,000
- $21,967 per claim
Car Occupants:
- 8525 active claims
- $208,305,000
- $24,434 per claim
Motorcyclists:
- 3173 active claims
- $62,523,000
- $19,704 per claim
Average Current situation for all accounts
- 14762 active claims
- $341,007,000 total cost
- $ 23,100 per claim
Source http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/stati...-motorvehicle-
account/IS0800157

Motorcyclists are victims of crashes not the cause. Blame should not be apportioned in a no fault system but if it is, it shouldn't be placed on the victim. (Would we charge women an extra ACC fee to cover the costs of rape ?)

71% of crashes were collisions
Motorcyclist primarily responsible for 35% or 1/3 of collisions
ie 2/3rds of collisions are caused by the motorist not the motorcyclist
Of all crashes including single vehicle ones, the motorcyclist was primarily
responsible for 51%. That's way better than car drivers.
Source http://www.transport.govt.nz/researc...orcycle-Crash-
Factsheet.pdf


ACC are using the motorist as a cash cow.
Current situation for all accounts
- 14762 active claims
- $341,007,000 total cost
- $ 23,100 average per claim
Source : http://www.acc.co.nz/about-acc/stati...-motorvehicle-
account/IS0800157
$341,007,000 total cost
4,125,932 licensed vehicles
= $ 82.64 per vehicle
OR $ 0.115 per litre on Petrol,
OR 0.08c per litre if diesel included

The levy should be going down, as motorcycling is getting safer

Are motorcyclists crashing more or placing more claims ?
NO WE ARE CRASHING LESS
per 10,000 motorcyclists
Year Crashes Injuries Fatalities
1951 454 451 19
1961 394 391 10.3
1971 473 516 9.2
1981 247 254 8.7
1991 270 283 10.7
2001 114 116 6.1
2004 121 123 5.8
2008 142 144 5.2


MotoNZ is a motorcyclist funded, ACC controlled group, charged with making motorcyclists swallow ACC propaganda.

In fact the MotoNZ site from time to time publishes ACC propaganda without even doing the simplest cross reference.

It shouldnt be up to me to dig up the real data. MotoNZ should be doing it, using our money usefully.

If it can't spend the money actively opposing ACC then its a puppet, and should be treated with contempt.

[Conquiztador]

The best usage of the funds would be to lobby other groups unfairly penalised by ACC victim charges.

ALL the money should be used to lobby for our charge to be the same as or less than a car.

The facts are: .....


MotoNZ is a motorcyclist funded, ACC controlled group, charged with making motorcyclists swallow ACC propaganda.

In fact the MotoNZ site from time to time publishes ACC propaganda without even doing the simplest cross reference.

It shouldnt be up to me to dig up the real data. MotoNZ should be doing it, using our money usefully.

If it can't spend the money actively opposing ACC then its a puppet, and should be treated with contempt.

"You must share bling around..." I was told. (Or something to that effect)

[Scuba_Steve]

The best usage of the funds would be to lobby other groups unfairly penalised by ACC victim charges.

ALL the money should be used to lobby for our charge to be the same as or less than a car.

The facts are:
...

Yep

"You must share bling around..." I was told. (Or something to that effect)

^ what he said.

[MSTRS:Me]

Well - MrKiwi and his cronies at McSack have had a month to ponder over and respond to davereid's figures, the source of which is ACC themselves before their spin doctors got involved.

The response is deafening, don't ya think...

[Magnum Noel]

Well -The response is deafening, don't ya think...

The response is deafening, don't ya think...
The response is deafening, don't ya think...
The response is deafening, don't ya think...
echo
echo
echo