Beware Victorians
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Zebee Johnstone on 11 Apr 2010 15:55 In aus.motorcycles on Sun, 11 Apr 2010 13:12:28 GMT Deevo <deevo37(a)NOSPAMbigpond.com> wrote: > "Zebee Johnstone" <zebeej(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:slrnhs1pm0.2qp.zebeej(a)gmail.com... > > Nothing official, no. Just my own observations on the proportional > representatioon of various bike types I have seen in wrecking yards. Add to > that when I was working in the trade riding various bikes I found that the > type of bike I was riding seemed to affect the perception of the drivers > around me. Was your riding exactly the same no matter the bike? I know mine isn't.... >> THe only info I have on who gets hit more is by age. Younger riders >> have more multivehicle crashes, older riders have more solo crashes. >> >> Whether this is about experience or exposure is not known. > > Sounds like a topic worth pursuing on a more official level. Of course I > very much doubt that the Petabees would be motivated to study such figures > if there were a correlation. Data is the problem. THe MCC of NSW was finally able to get access to crash reports to try and get some idea of what kind of bike and rider was having what kind of crash, but the data itself is spotty. You have people who know nothing about bikes having to put make and model, and that isn't very reliable. If the make and model isn't clear on the bike, they'll guess or ignore. Sometimes you might get "dirt bike" but if it's a road bike they might just say "large bike" and that could be a Wing, an Electraglide, or a CB900RR. There's a lot of noise in the data. (And that's not even touching the whole "cause of crash" problem...) Then it's a matter of working out what the data might mean. You don't get young riders on cruisers, but do you get older riders using their bikes in the city as much? Is the reason most cruiser crashes seem to be single vehicle because older riders have more traffic smarts, or because most cruiser riders are using them as recreational vehicles and aren't riding in the city? Time of crash is an obvious help, but from what I recall of the quick (and early in the data collection) recap of the finds so far, most crashes were on the weekend so that doesn't help. Exposure is always the problem with things like this. You can match crash numbers against licences and registration data but you can't tell how many of those licenced riders actually ride and when and where, you can't tell how many of those bikes are ridden by the registered owner or where. Doing any kind of counting is an expensive business, and in a city the size of Sydney a very expensive one. We see stats all the time in the papers. What we dont' see is what they are based on, and how they've been derived. Start delving into data sets that aren't based on personal (and therefore inevitably flawed, read the literature on eye witnessses) observation, you realise how dodgy it all is. Zebee
From: OzOne on 11 Apr 2010 19:22 On 11 Apr 2010 15:57:01 GMT, dodger <dodger(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:13:54 +1000, Scotty wrote: > ><snip> > >> My point exactly, how many riders ride where they can be safely seen. >> They say to ride along the drivers line of a car, Id rather see a rider >> smack bang behind me where I can see him/her. Unless the car in front is >> a truck or Sealed van (in which case the rider can move behind someone >> else). > >I'm sorry but if you can't see a motorcycle being ridden behind you (in >the ride hand wheel track) then you'd best go and hand your licence in >now. > ><snip> Trouble is, so many riders just don't stay in the one palce long enough. One minute they'e in your mirror, next they're sitting in the blind spot on your LH guard...then get pissed off when you indicate and turn left! OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace.
From: George W Frost on 11 Apr 2010 21:42 "atec7 7" <""atec77 \"@ hotmail.com"> wrote in message news:hpsjii$tr1$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > theo wrote: >> On Apr 11, 2:29 pm, atec7 7 <""atec77 \"@ hotmail.com"> wrote: >> >>> Nothing like a Velocette 500 cc at full roar out the fishtale at 1oomph >> >> A fish story? >> >> Theo > that would be "A fish tail" And on a scale of 5?
From: Mr.T on 11 Apr 2010 23:10 " Scotty" <scoter1(a)warmmail.com> wrote in message news:4bbdba75$0$32441$afc38c87(a)news.optusnet.com.au... > Safe riding would fix 90% and safe car drivers the other 10%. And an actual motorbike rider knows those figures are reversed. Even the governments own statistics place 70% of car/bike accidents on car drivers. Of course we could all just follow the Victorian police concept "don't drive (ride) and you won't get caught (injured)". Trucks seem to be exempt however. Of course no truckie has ever been killed from hitting a motorcyclist! MrT.
From: OzOne on 11 Apr 2010 23:47
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:10:01 +1000, "Mr.T" <MrT(a)home> wrote: > >" Scotty" <scoter1(a)warmmail.com> wrote in message >news:4bbdba75$0$32441$afc38c87(a)news.optusnet.com.au... >> Safe riding would fix 90% and safe car drivers the other 10%. > >And an actual motorbike rider knows those figures are reversed. Even the >governments own statistics place 70% of car/bike accidents on car drivers. Yeah...and if riders woke up to the fact that they are smaller and more difficult to see particularly when they accelerate or change position quickly, then those numbers would change dramatically. Dead right is not a pleasant place! OzOne of the three twins I welcome you to Crackerbox Palace. |