NOT GOOD, Worst deaths in 19 years

[FJRider]

The dog ran across the road into me if you want to know the technical detail. Some on here appear to think I am the only person to have ever hit an amimal on the road which is far from the case if you look up info on it. Some people hit far bigger animals than I have like cows and horses. I suppose many on here would say they should not be driving if they can not see a cow or a horse on the road.

So ... you got hit by a suicidal dog ... But to hit the bigger animals ... you need to get out of the city. So that's probably unlikely to happen.

But you go where you look. Keep looking at the dog and you will hit it. Look instead where you want to go ... changing line to avoid it will usually do more harm than good. Especially if it is a rapid line change mid corner. Dogs will usually avoid actual contact at the last minute ... sheep on the other hand are entirely different story. They attempt to return to the paddock they came out of ... which is not always the side of the road you see them on.

[Ocean1]

Mr Mark Gilbert had this to say....

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post...orcycle-riding

There are some interesting numbers in there...

They're the same bullshit numbers any other govt cost center uses to apply political pressure to a leakage of funds. As Jim rightly pointed out the real numbers are dramatically lower than they used to be, and far less useful in blaming motorcyclists for their injuries. I've heard it said that ACC in particular are far more concerned at the income insurance aspect of the issue than the actual health side of the problem. Fuckem, I pay enough tax.

And while I've also read a bunch on the care and feeding of an average motorcyclist I found at least some advice from training sources both lacking in root cause data and difficult to reconcile with my own experience. I'm not unaware of the widespread tendency to consider ones' self the font of all wisdom on any topic of particular interest, but I struggled to get anything but the most simplistic rational behind any specific behavioral recommendation from training material. In actively attempting to employ some of the core advice I also found numerous instances where that advice was a very poor match to my own threat assessment. On several occasions I literally stopped, turned around and re-rode the event in question, several times, just to get a handle on whether the rule or it's application had failed. In short: there's just far too many possible potentially contributing causes to any accident to apply a concise set of rules and expect them to work more than half the time. At best.

The single most valuable contribution to the health of a motorcyclist also represents the most risk: hours on a bike. You can accumulate experience while minimising exposure to other traffic by spending time on a dirt bike, which also dramatically amplifies the number of events requiring corrective control input. But even that only helps reduce the odds of a single vehicle incident on the road. Nothing but hours on the road and eternal vigilance will prepare you for further hrs on the road.

[FJRider]

The single most valuable contribution to the health on a motorcyclist also represents the most risk: hours on a bike. You can accumulate experience while minimising exposure to other traffic by spending time on a dirt bike, which also dramatically amplifies the number of events requiring control input. But even that only helps reduce the odds of a single vehicle incident on the road. Nothing but hours on the road and eternal vigilance will prepare you for further hrs on the road.

It is the riders attitude to the risks ie: "I'm in the right so there is little risk" ... and the "they will get out of my way" .... and the thousand other similar scenarios that occur ... that needs more thought at the time. Some simply refuse to rethink decisions they already made on their intended course of action.

[Ocean1]

It is the riders attitude to the risks ie: "I'm in the right so there is little risk" ... and the "they will get out of my way" .... and the thousand other similar scenarios that occur ... that needs more thought at the time. Some simply refuse to rethink decisions they already made on their intended course of action.

Which illuminates the futility of attempting to meddle in the affairs of Evolution.

Besides, the only training that alters attitudinal issues is illegal outside of the military.

[FJRider]

Your theory would only work if the dog or other animal was stopped in the middle of the road in which case a swerve around may be possible.

Well ... in at least a half dozen times I had a dog on the road ahead of me ... no contact was made with the dog. The dogs did a U turn ...

[FJRider]

The govt needs to make riding and driving school courses compulsory before getting a licence maybe but I have read they do not support this as it could create a feeling of "Overconfidence".

Getting a FULL license does as well. Perhaps the motorcycle license needs more stages ... and many more years to complete ...

[FJRider]

Which illuminates the futility of attempting to meddle in the affairs of Evolution.

Besides, the only training that alters attitudinal issues is illegal outside of the military.

True in both counts .... and many still live only because it's illegal to shoot them ..

[FJRider]

You had time to beep your horn then? In my case there was no time.

Anything approaching me when I'm on the road ... within 50 meters ... gets my attention.

Dogs don't like loud horns ... it pisses them off ...

[FJRider]

Motorcycles in my opinion are actually easier to learn to ride than drive a car so you would have to not be very bright if it took you years to learn to ride one.

At least one of us values your opinion ....

[Big Dog]

So ... you got hit by a suicidal dog ... But to hit the bigger animals ... you need to get out of the city. So that's probably unlikely to happen.

But you go where you look. Keep looking at the dog and you will hit it. Look instead where you want to go ... changing line to avoid it will usually do more harm than good. Especially if it is a rapid line change mid corner. Dogs will usually avoid actual contact at the last minute ... sheep on the other hand are entirely different story. They attempt to return to the paddock they came out of ... which is not always the side of the road you see them on.

I read a useful bit of info 15 or so years ago that had proved quite helpful for the number of dogs that suddenly appear from driveways etc. Never hit one with this simple tip.

Aim for the tail and stay on the gas or accelerate if you were not already on the gas.
Psychologically a dog is programmed to protect his hind quarters and should turn away if they are aware of your presence at all.
Aim for the front half of the dog and they are pre programmed to stand their ground and may even lunge closer.
Staying on the gas or accelerating is about improving your chances of staying on if you hit the dog.


Given most dogs are less than a metre long (not counting tail) this is a much less significant change than trying to go around and or braking.

If you have a dog try it out around the home. Walk towards your dog from different angles. Any time you are walking toward the front half they should exhibit interest or curiosity... because they are your dog they shouldn't be aggressive. Walk toward the back and they should amble out of the way with a worried or submissive look on their face.

Haven't had to use this advice for a few years, down here there are relatively few roaming dogs... unlike Henderson.

Works pretty well with most small predators such as cats, possums etc.

Sent from Tapatalk. DYAC

[Moi]

I don't put the bike in "storage", I ride all year round ... to improve both the enjoyment and survivability of motoring in general.

They're the same bullshit numbers any other govt cost center uses ... Nothing but hours on the road and eternal vigilance will prepare you for further hrs on the road.

Thank you James and Ocean for thoughtful and reasoned responses.

Thank you Mark Gilbert for an interesting propaganda piece! I'm sure you're reading this Mark and I mean propaganda in its truest sense... "information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view". I doubt if the information you have used is 'misleading' but it is biased. Biased to what the government believes to be the answer to the crashes which involve motorcycles.

Yes, you support the Safer Journeys Action Plan which is great. And you advise ACC on how they can/could spend the Motorcycle Safety Levy fund. Both laudable actions. But meanwhile, there are more deaths and injuries involving motorcyclists. So why?

I'm going to suggest the reason why is that we are not learning from past mistakes, especially as a nation, as drivers or as riders. And why are we not learning? Because we are not being told what happened, why it possibly happened and what we could possibly do to prevent it in future.

As an aside, the placing of lower barriers - the underrun protection barriers - is an example of learning from past mistakes, but that has been known for a number of years from the European experience. There are a number of papers written about the ways to improve the safety of motorcyclists when they come off on an ordinary road and have contact with street furniture.

Back to learning from our mistakes... In the last fortnight the number of people killed or seriously injured on NZ roads has caused major headlines in many of the main stream media, and justifiably so! But that is too often the end of it. There is no reporting of the analysis of these crashes - the blame for that can be laid, in my opinion, at the feet of the media and at the feet of the authorities.

So where does the MSAC come in? MSAC is in a position to promote the reporting of the analysis and findings of these crashes and to promote recommendations from which riders and drivers can learn so they are safer on the road. It is not only a case for motorcyclists to 'learn from these crashes' but also drivers as drivers were also involved with a number of the motorcyclist deaths over this holiday period. In saying that I am not attributing blame on either party, just noting that both a motorcycle and another road vehicle were involved in many of the crashes and consequent deaths of the motorcyclist.

MSAC needs to be proactive; report the findings of crashes - both fatal and serious injury - involving motorcyclists, report the recommendations and, perhaps, critique the recommendations, support whatever is needed to make our roads safer for all road uses - even if that means pointing the finger at drivers who need to lift their game as well as at riders. Such actions may not make you 'flavour of the month' with some, too bad! If it saves lives and reduces the injuries then you have done what should be the main focus of the MSAC.

[pritch]

I would agree that experience beats reading a book or going to a riding school unless you are a beginner maybe. Riding schools from what I have read on here teach you to take every corner their way and while you may be able to get around some their way each corner should be treated as though their way may not be the safest way.

When my neice decided to get a bike I told her she was in a race, a race to acquire knowledge before she needed it. As has been mentioned already, experience tends to come after you needed it. Your suggested method of riding around in a state of blissful ignorance hopefully long enough to accumulate experience is frankly absurd. So too is your take on riding schools.

You had to beep your horn then? In my case there was no time.

This morning I opened David L Hough's "Proficient Motorcycling" at a random page and he was discussing "sudden crashes". Basically the victims of sudden crashes tend not to be paying attention sufficiently far ahead. When riding you should be aware of what is happening a minimum of twelve seconds ahead. Obviously at open road speeds, the distance you should be looking is further up the road than in town.

He recommends not following trucks or busses unnecessarily because these block your vision. If you are properly aware of your surroundings there should be few sudden surprises. The sudden crashes tend to happen to the people who are not paying proper attention.

Motorcycles in my opinion are actually easier to learn to ride than drive a car so you would have to not be very bright if it took you years to learn to ride one.

Ignoring the gratuitous insult to FJ Rider who usually comes across as reasonably intelligent, your opinion that motorcycles are easier to learn to ride than a car places you at variance with virtually everybody on the planet who actually does know anything about the subject. The reason it seems simple to you is that, as you continually demonstrate, you know fuck all about it.

If I had my way you would be banned from posting anything on KB that had any connection to riding technique or safety. You could contribute to the racing threads and inform us all what Marquez, Rossi, Lorenzo etc are doing wrong. That suggestion could come back and haunt me, but it won't be too bad because my tolerance for idiocy has been exceeded, you are going back on ignore.

[onearmedbandit]

As for not liking my posts why the hell do you waste your time responding to them muppet?

Because a lot of what you say needs to be shown for what it is.

[Berries]

MSAC needs to be proactive; report the findings of crashes - both fatal and serious injury - involving motorcyclists, report the recommendations and, perhaps, critique the recommendations, support whatever is needed to make our roads safer for all road uses - even if that means pointing the finger at drivers who need to lift their game as well as at riders. Such actions may not make you 'flavour of the month' with some, too bad! If it saves lives and reduces the injuries then you have done what should be the main focus of the MSAC.

Apart from taking money from me every time I rego the bike MSAC are an irrelevance to me. If they are going to talk about motorbike statistics then they firstly need to take out the off road bikes. Crashes like this one in Cromwell over the holidays - http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8800...-near-cromwell should be taken out of the equation as it has no bearing on on-road motorcycle safety. They/we should only count and refer to on road bikes involved in crashes.

Then, like you said, they or some other body needs to report on what actually happened. Two crashes where TBTB say that speed was a factor are likely to have significant differences in what actually happened - someone with less experience overcooking a corner while within the advisory limit has something we can learn about. Someone losing it at 140km/h trying to get around a 55km/h curve is a bit different. Head on with a car - why? We are quick to blame the car driver but that is often not the case. Were they summer only or returning riders, were they young and full of adrenaline, how much riding experience did they actually have? Did they just fuck up? We should all be able to learn something from these incidents but apart from headlines for a day or two it all goes quiet.

Fatal on the Crown Range yesterday - https://www.odt.co.nz/regions/queenstown/lifesaving-efforts-no-avail. This will be forgotten about in a couple of days by everyone bar family and witnesses. But what happened? The story and photo don't make for good reading.

If MSAC are reading this then perhaps they should consider a page on their website where the latest fatal or serious injury crash is dissected. The Civil Aviation Authority do it - https://www.caa.govt.nz/safety-info/...ident-reports/ so I can't see why they can't put my money to use helping me learn from other people's mistakes rather than targeting the limited number of riders on the Coro Loop or Rimutaka Hill. If all it manages to do is highlight that our safety is in our own hands and not some random car driver that would be a good start.

[Moi]

Apart from taking money from me every time I rego the bike MSAC are an irrelevance to me ...

If MSAC are reading this then perhaps they should consider a page on their website where the latest fatal or serious injury crash is dissected. The Civil Aviation Authority do it - https://www.caa.govt.nz/safety-info/...ident-reports/ so I can't see why they can't put my money to use helping me learn from other people's mistakes rather than targeting the limited number of riders on the Coro Loop or Rimutaka Hill. If all it manages to do is highlight that our safety is in our own hands and not some random car driver that would be a good start.

I guess we're standing at the same music stand and singing from the same score, and I'd, also, suggest that there are a few others on KB that would join us in the choir. The CAA site shows it can be done and sets a bench-mark for MSAC and ACC and the Police to follow, but I'm not holding my breath.

I agree about removing off-road crashes and those on farms involving either bikes or quads, but I somehow doubt ACC will do that. However, I do wonder if the crash in Cromwell you reference was a true off-road crash? Was he just being a fool on an off-road bike after a few too many drinks? Perhaps harsh but true if what was reported is to be believed: speed, alcohol and no helmet contributed to his death.

If we, as a country, are serious about reducing the road toll then we have to be serious about driving and riding, serious about talking about what caused the death/injury and serious about doing something about it. Until that happens the "she'll be right, mate" attitude will prevail.

Ride aware and ride safe.