Attacking Transit on another front:

**Pixie** · 18th January 2008, 11:57

Emailed to Maurice Williamson:

Dear Mr Williamson,

Around two years ago Transit NZ began installing multiple yellow chevron corner indicator signs on State Highway 16.These were being installed in other areas as well,but as I live on SH 16, this is where I really began to notice the problems they create at night.
These signs are made with a very highly reflective yellow film and at night if a motorist approaches a corner with his headlights on high beam he is blinded by the light reflected back at him and is in danger of running off the road.
Dipping the headlights is not effective because on a country road at 100 km/h entering a corner on dipped beams leaves the driver equally in the dark.Excuse the pun.

I two years ago queried Transit NZ via their website and received the reply that their signage contractor used the wrong specification of material for the signs.
They asured me that as the signs were brought to their attention they would have them replaced with less blinding ones.

Two years later nothing has changed.

As an aside the signs result in other potential problems:

> As there are typically five or less of these signs on each bend they don't delineate the curve as precisely as the traditional plastic reflective marker posts.

>Transit appear to no longer maintain or replace the traditional refective marker posts,so they are often no longer there to show the shape of the curve.

>The support posts for the chevron signs are a hazard in themselves.With up to five aluminium posts on each corner.
Transit says the posts are frangible.Sure they are,if you are in a steel cage.But as with the wire rope barriers, they conveniently forget that we motorcyclists use the roads too.

Two years ago a biker was killed,when what would have been a relatively harmless slide onto the shoulder after a poorly maintained road surface caused him to fall from his machine,resulted in his body colliding with one of those "frangible" posts and suffering fatal injuries.
This incident occured near the Omeru Reserve on Highway 16.

Transit state one of their aims is to reduce dangerous roadside furniture.It seems to me they are installing more of it.

I would appreciate it greatly if you or your associates could raise these issues with the Ministers of Transport and Road Safety on behalf of the motoring public.

**Hitcher** · 18th January 2008, 12:40

Good letter! Try riding through the Waioeka Gorge at night in the rain, if you really want to see how spectacularly dangerous the reflected light from these things can be.

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

**vifferman** · 18th January 2008, 12:52

Huh.

I didn't realise this. Does this mean that throughout the land, our 'roadside furniture' (including the useful roadside marker posts) is being replaced by less safe (but presumably) more 'cost effective' 1970s-surplus disco furniture?

**Pixie** · 18th January 2008, 13:30

Originally Posted by Hitcher

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

Moe's fine with them - he ain't so PC

Can wimmin drive?

**Pixie** · 18th January 2008, 13:32

Originally Posted by vifferman

Huh.

I didn't realise this. Does this mean that throughout the land, our 'roadside furniture' (including the useful roadside marker posts) is being replaced by less safe (but presumably) more 'cost effective' 1970s-surplus disco furniture?

No! ........ beanbags

**sAsLEX** · 18th January 2008, 15:56

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Good letter! Try riding through the Waioeka Gorge at night in the rain, if you really want to see how spectacularly dangerous the reflected light from these things can be.

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

Why is it wrong to use gender specific terms when referring to a male?

I am sure he, sorry they, would not be too offended, or is this more PC gone mad bullshit?

**Hitcher** · 18th January 2008, 16:38

Originally Posted by sAsLEX

Why is it wrong to use gender specific terms when referring to a male?

I am sure he, sorry they, would not be too offended, or is this more PC gone mad bullshit?

It's not about giving offense. Rather it's about stating that only male drivers/riders are the problem, which clearly isn't true.

**sAsLEX** · 18th January 2008, 16:42

Originally Posted by Hitcher

It's not about giving offense. Rather it's about stating that only male drivers/riders are the problem, which clearly isn't true.

He was speaking of a specific incident....

**swbarnett** · 19th January 2008, 06:49

Originally Posted by sAsLEX

He was speaking of a specific incident....

"if a motorist approaches a corner with his headlights on high beam he is blinded by the light"

This is most definately generic and would be better thus:

"if a motorist approaches a corner with their headlights on high beam they are blinded by the light"

**Grub** · 19th January 2008, 06:58

Originally Posted by Hitcher

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

Aha! 'Tis a rare and wonderful thing when the august Hitcher falls into infraction territory. One is ashamed to admit to an element of glee but is not in the least bit deterred by that shame.

Infraction = Taking Thread Off Topic

Mmmm, what a lovely way to start a weekend.

**mowgli** · 19th January 2008, 07:07

Originally Posted by Pixie

Dipping the headlights is not effective because on a country road at 100 km/h entering a corner on dipped beams leaves the driver equally in the dark.Excuse the pun.

Great letter. I would drop the reference to 100kph and replace it with at night. The argument doesn't rely on entry speed and some might even argue that 100kph on a country road at night is asking for trouble.

Nice work

**Pixie** · 20th January 2008, 12:10

I would argue that ,prior to the advent of the yellow signs,100 km/h at night with even average headlights was perfectly safe on SH 16

**Mully** · 20th January 2008, 16:43

Originally Posted by Pixie

I would argue that ,prior to the advent of the yellow signs,100 km/h at night with even average headlights was perfectly safe on SH 16

Isn't SH16 an 80km/h zone now? I seem to recall it being changed a few years back.

Anyway, good letter. Let us know when/if you get a response. Probably a good time to start asking the question of various political parties anyway. I think we should make them all aware that riders (and fans, such as myself, & family of riders) make up a large chuck of the constituency.

**rwh** · 20th January 2008, 17:05

Originally Posted by Hitcher

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

Is that considered the correct thing these days? I thought 'them' and 'their' were plural varieties, not singular gender-neutral.

[edit: merriam-webster says it's ok, and not just these days. Not necessarily 'correct' mind, but 'acceptable'.]

Richard

**White trash** · 20th January 2008, 17:09

Originally Posted by Hitcher

Good letter! Try riding through the Waioeka Gorge at night in the rain, if you really want to see how spectacularly dangerous the reflected light from these things can be.

One suggestion to your letter is to replace all the he and his references with the gender-neutral them and their.

People don't ride in the rain. Wally.