Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

N/A | National [Global] WHO Decade of action on road safety (Motorcycling's political future outlined)

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' at netrider.net.au started by robsalvv, May 6, 2011.

  1. http://www.who.int/roadsafety/decade_of_action/en/


    The WHO are setting on global activism path to bring down road fatalities.

    Any politically aware rider who is familiar with Australia's National Road Safety Strategy, will see some very similar themes in the WHO documents and words linked above.

    There are two specific motorcycle mentions in this report. The first is:

    • Encourage universal deployment of crash avoidance technologies with proven effectiveness such as Electronic Stability Control and Anti-Lock Braking Systems in motorcycles.
    Key words, universal, technologies and such as ...motorcycle riders can expect a slew of technical assistance to help them ride without crashing. For a heads up on what you will be riding in the future, google saferider and righttoride.

    And the second is:

    • Set and seek compliance with laws and evidence-based standards and rules for motorcycle helmets to reduce head-injuries.
    This isn't going to mean much to Australians - helmets are already compulsory.

    The document is wall to wall of the most safetycrat "we know best" load of motherhood statements to save us from ourselves. It is targeted at all countries not just 3rd world countries that have atrocious fatality rates. It essentially encourages any and all methods to get people to stop dying from crashes... EXCEPT training and skill improvement. :?

    :!:The answer to the road trauma situation is NOT safer road users. :!:

    The answer is safer vehicles, with better technologies, on better roads, with tighter laws and better enforcement and much more stringent compliance to those laws.

    This is the future.
  2. Re: [Global] WHO Decade of action on road safety

    Now then, hands up who's deaf?
  3. Re: [Global] WHO Decade of action on road safety

    No but maybe we will get world standards rather than Australian Standards for helmets allowing for importing and reduced costs.
  4. Re: [Global] WHO Decade of action on road safety

    That was the suggestion I put forward in the NRSS submission I helped prepare.

    The NRSS had a suggestion to market helmets with something similar to an ANCAP rating. I argued in favour of the proposal so long as we SCRAPPED the Aus helmet standard thereby allowing internationally certified helmets to land more cheaply. That way riders were more likely to buy the top end helmets which presumably would have the highest helmet ANCAP rating.

    I'm surprised by the lack of traffic this thread has had. Better change the title - too many riders are living under a rock about what's coming.
  5. Its only a matter of time before MCs are either banned outright (representing an 'unacceptable risk' to ourselves), or we are so restricted that its no fun to ride on the road anyway. I think the latter is the most likely outcome.

    Enjoy it while you can.
  6. Re: [Global] WHO Decade of action on road safety

    I think that there is a lack of traffic because its probably not the two biggest issues, the second one is either neutral or possibly beneficial.

    The first one mandating ABS and TCS is probably ok (though it might impact the low end scooters). I would pay more to buy a bike with ABS and TCS already if they were available (currently considering retrofiting TCS on the R1).

    Can you explain why you see this as bad?
  7. Hang on a second, the clause is openly suggesting all manner of technical assistance, not just ABS and TCS. What's currently on the table in addition is: merge assist, intersection assist, frontal collision avoidance assist, GPS based throttle control speeding avoidance assist and cornering (braking and throttle controlled) assist... there'll probably be others in future, given that the safety crats want to make bikes uncrashable, rather than improve rider skills.

    TCS and ABS represent the thin edge of the wedge. I don't have an objection to TCS in principal, other than it does seem to be technology for technology's sake for the non competition rider. Mandatory ABS is another matter. It's not the panacea people make it out to be.

    With ABS, unthinking uncritical riders and safety crats are overlaying a one dimensional car/truck vehicle based understanding of ABS onto motorcycles. Motorbikes are NOT cars. The oversimplified understanding ignores all manner of motorcycle dynamics. The impression of inherent improvement in safety mostly comes the oversimplified understanding and from a suite of highly flawed statistical studies. That's my objection.
  8. Ill say it again: a well educated public is a difficult to manipulate public. Government depends on the public being uneducated.

    I believe road authorities should be circumvented when it comes to training.
  9. I tend to agree with the sentiment, but motorists see their safety as someone elses problem... so they love the technology that makes them "safer". Paradoxically, this tends to make them more of a danger to other road users as they deskill and hand over driving to their devices.

    ? I'm not sure what you mean.
  10. You are reading into it a lot, there is no mention of any other devices other than ABS and TCS.

    Of course ABS cannot save everyone in every situation, but it can in a lot of situations. Bikes are not cars but that doesn't mean that bikes cannot benefit from the technology. In a straight line heavy braking then ABS can be the difference. For braking in a corner lent over its not going to help (though braking at maximum grip in a corner in a car will have you spinning out as well with ABS even).

    Its not about saving every crash its about removing some.

    Throwing the baby out with the bathwater here.
  11. You're not reading into it all.
    "Encourage universal deployment of crash avoidance technologies with proven effectiveness such as Electronic Stability Control and Anti-Lock Braking Systems in motorcycles."

    That paragraph is NOT exclusive of all other technologies - it's open ended. It suggests two techniques as a subset of all possibilities. Google saferider if you're not convinced of the other techniques under trial RIGHT NOW.

    I didn't say there couldn't be a benefit. I clearly said riders and safetycrats impose their car view and the supposed benefits onto bikes and don't think beyond it.

    I get bored with these inane limited thinking ABS discussions. ABS has a place, but highly skilled riders can outbrake them. In certain circumstance ABS is totally unsuitable, e.g., low traction surfaces. In certain circumstances and certain types of ABS, braking distance will increase e.g., rear wheel going light under poor terrain or heavy braking.

    The EU MAIDS indepth crash study reconstructed 921 crashes. 87% of the crashes did not have any braking, hence ABS would not have helped in any way in 87% of these fatal crashes. Commentary from the group who helped fund the study stated that mandating ABS is likely to lead to more upright collisions which is likely to reduce the hoped for benefit of ABS. So sure, give ABS as an option. Don't mandate it.

    ABS will stop a tyre from slipping - that's it. Promocycle in Canada worked out that an ABS bike could pull -0.87g's which is pretty darn good. They had non ABS bikes however pull up to -1g. How is this possible if ABS braking is the best possible braking?

    How many do you think will be removed from improving the base skill of all riders? ABS deals with one technique issue, poor braking. It doesn't help anticipation, planning, reaction time, scanning skills, bike handling skills, road craft etc etc etc.

    Hardly. Just because you're not aware of the saferider technologies about to be rammed down your throat, it doesn't mean they aren't here. Go educate yourself. You like to consider yourself an aware thinking motorcyclist. Google "right to ride" and Saferider.
  12. What is saferider, it is not mentioned in this article?

    Its not an option on most bikes. There are plenty of cars at lower price points with it (standard) than bikes. Why do we miss out as motorcyclists? The market is not providing it. I agree that regulation is not preferred but when the market cannot provide it then what choice do we have.

    Its not the best option, those riders with those skills to be able to pull more G than an ABS bike aren't the ones crashing. There are plenty of people that do need it and cannot even buy it because the manufacturers don't provide it as an option.

    Of course it doesn't but we already agree that it will help in some situations. Agree that other things (including other techniques) are also important.
  13. I mean road authorities dont have to have a monopoly on road safety. Training can be promoted to road users outside of typical road safety advertisement/propaganda channels, and hopefully keep the training itself as far away from the usual tedious propaganda.

    Im sure the government wont even recognise this kind of training, or recognise those who have undertaken training, but the goal isnt to seek approval, but to foster a better educated public and a wider support base to push back against the restrictions we will face in future. More to the point is has to include as many car-only road users as possible.

    An extremely vocal minority is not going to be as frigtening to political entities as a moderately annoyed majority.
  14. Some disadvantages of ABS (taken from lazymotorbike.eu)
    Sometimes disadvantages

    - Some tests show that ABS performs better, but some tests have other results, and the experience of some people is also different: some ABSses engage before the point of maximum braking.

    - When the surface is bumpy, ABS will sometimes engage too soon: it gets disturbed. That means scary moments on roads with bad surfaces (in the mountains for instance), because you suddenly have no brakes.

    - In loose gravel, sand, grass, or any of such surfaces, ABS prevents you from braking at all. You can switch off the ABS of a BMW GS, but you have to stop, switch off the contact, and switch it on again. On other motorcycles, you can't switch off ABS at all.

    - Some ABSses have stoppie-intelligence. When they notice that the rear wheel gets too light, the ABS looses the front brake. That means that your front wheel suddenly seems to slide forward while it wasn't near locking at all. Especially going down in the mountains, braking before a corner, it happens regularly, and I can tell, from personal experience, that it feels terrible.

    - Most people have a tendency to increase their speed (especially in rainy conditions) when they have ABS (the "I do have ABS, don't I?"-syndrome).

    = = = = = =
    There are some of the disadvantages. How do you ride? Will those disadvantages conflict with your riding style?
  15. Have you googled it yet? It's an EU project to make bikes "safer" using all the technologies mentioned earlier.

    Sigh. You're not thinking about it as a motorcyclist are you?

    Upgrading your skills by practicing your braking is FREE.

    Sure, but why mandate it across all bikes? That is exactly what the WHO and Vision Zero principles are forcing on all riders, without any due consideration for the disadvantages.
  16. Good points. How do we alert drivers when they aren't enthusiasts and have no desire to improve their driving, particularly if technology will improve there driving for them?

    Motorists don't fear the technology.
  17. Googled it, couldn't see a connection to the article in your OP.

    I think that there would be a lot of people that would never have the skills no matter how much they practice because they were not born with it.

    Ok mandate it as an option.
  18. That's the shame of it really, i love motorcycling because of the higher demands and skills compared to cars. Any half wit can drive a car, in fact if you're a half wit it's recommended you do go and drive a car, they're purpose built for half wits.

    So I think it's something to be concerned about when the safetycrats want to build motorcycles for idiots. For sure there may be a need there, but there's a greater need to weed out the idiots in the first place.

    All of the initials (ABS...blah blah) stuck to your bike wont make you a more competent rider, if anything it will probably have the reverse effect. Maybe not for this generation of riders who rely on their skill, but for the next generation (our children) who will be sharing the road with incompetents who are more reliant on their technology than their ability.

    It's a safe crash system verses a safe driver system. I'm surprised to find riders are championing 'safe' crashes. Safe cars can have safe crashes, but safe bikes having safe crashes? How do you have a safe crash on a bike?

    For my money, having a clue will see you avoid more accidents than technology ever will. Just as avoiding accidents will see you experience less pain than wearing ATGATT will.

    These systems and ideologies aren't being sold as a back up to mistakes, these 'safe systems' are being touted as the solution to mistakes. Meaning they've since given up on trying to remove the mistakes drivers make in the first place.

    I know who I'd rather share the roads with, competent and aware drivers. By trying to idiot proof driving/riding, I think the safetycrats are just building themselves a better idiot.

    The best way to keep yourself employed is to identify or make up a problem, sell the bean counters you've got the solution, and then never solve the problem.
  19. You got to www.saferider-eu.org and didn't see the connection? :? :? :?

    Taken from the site:


    European statistics show that Powered-Two-Wheelers (PTW) road accidents are extremely high. Motorcycle and moped fatalities account for 17,8% of the total number of road accident fatalities in 2003, in EU-14 member countries. It is therefore evident that the reduction of PTW accidents is of major concern for the European community. The adaptation and implementation of appropriate ADVANCED DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS (ADAS) and IN-VEHICLE INFORMATION SYSTEMS (IVIS) technologies in PTW's might contribute to the significant enhancement of riders' safety.

    :roll: I'm greatly disappointed to be spoon feeding the likes of you Vertical C. These are the technologies that the WHO are promoting the development of.

    Sensational. Put them in a car then. They don't belong on a bike.
  20. Might? That's a hellova gamble. Expensive one too.