Accidents involving motorcycles are responsible for over 50% of open fractures of the tibia and can be associated with other lesions and the victims, in the vast majority, are youth and young adult (Brazil epidemiological data). What preventive measures could be taken to reduce this type of accident?
Dear Maxim
I agree. I think the most important is the education of young people
Thank you very much
Dear Maxim
I fully agree and in my opinion when the parents give a scooter to his/her young son/daughter he is contributing to the possibility accidents happen
Here in the United States, many of the states are repealing motorcycle helmet laws based on civil liberties arguments. Given that, the approach now has become one of education of drivers, both motorcycle and non-motorcycle. Because this trend has been so recent, it is still too early to draw any definitive conclusions, as there is a reverse Peltzman effect occurring (i.e. cyclists without helmets are aware they are at a higher risk of severe injury and death and are driving more cautiously). As some researchers out of Texas A&M discovered, the Peltzman effect dampens over time, so it will be interesting to see if non-helmeted motorcyclists are still as cautious a decade from now.
1. A helmetless rider is taking a greater risk. Risk-takers are associated with greater crash risk. There is no reason to believe that someone who chooses the risk of no helmet will evolve into a safety-conscious rider who chooses lesser risks. - there is a small percent of riders that are difficult to improve or protect.
2. Helmets DO NOT restrict the riders' views. In fact, helmeted riders have a larger search area than do drivers. Unfortunately, many of there far left and right glances are at objects that are not related to the driving task (distractions).
3. Rider training: Riders are over-represented in crashes on curves per mile traveled. Novice riders are overrepresented in those crashes. - Teach handling.
4. Riders are involved in intersection crashes - many have displayed poor search techniques - Improve rider training regarding safe glances. Also, improve conspicuity of the rider and motorcycle for those moving into the riders' paths.
(See the research by UMass-Amherst regarding driver and rider training... Muttart, Fisher et al.)
Dear Jeffrey
Your informations are valuable and I appreciate the suggestion about the research
Thank you very much
Regards
Dear nelson
i agree with you
education of young patients (riders) is most important method in this way and i think governments should have planning for this problem.
Kind regards
Dear Seyed
Thank you very much for your opinion and participation
Best regards
Dear nelson,
i think that a very important role is always played from infrastructures. Yes, it's true that the only 30% of the road accidents are explained by road characteristics, but: is it normal that several kind of vehicles have a very high level of passive measures compared with the ordinary way to realize (or maintain) many type of roads (as infrastructure, surface and crash barriers, e.g.) both in urban and rural areas? Does not take precedence saving money? In my opinion three e are always important in road aspects for safety: engineering, enforcement and environment.
Best regards
Dear Maria Luisa
The infrastructures of roads and awareness of the people are very important to reduce the number of accidents.
Thank you very much
Best regards
Public awareness through bill boards on roads and via television. We have good example of Rescue-1122 in Pakistan, where they have put pictures of accidents of people and I personally think that this is much effective way to communicate with a fear appeal to drive carefully on roads.
I have recently done a report on heavy bikes and accidents. The solution given to us by the riders was that provide them with proper racing tracks and arenas, then they will never speed in traffic.
Secondly, strict fines should be imposed on law breakers.
Indeed Henna, a recent initiative has been implemented in France. Some municipalities have created fast tracks for bikers. These bikers can use them to adrenalise, and as a result they would refrain from dangerous fast driving in public roads. Thus, this initiative has contributed in sqignificantly reducing road traffic accidents caused to/by bikers. According to French public authorities, this pragmatic solution will see its implementation spread to other areas where it is expected to yield simular results.
Dear Mohamed
We have in Brazil, some fast tracks for bikers but a big problem is that many drivers do not respect it causing sometimes accidents . An educational campaign is needed for all. Thank you very much
Regards
Hi Nelson?
Are these fast tracks in enclosed areas? are we talking about the sale concept?
Dear Nelson,
I believe Public and Govt. both should be active to reduce this problem.
1. Public- Awareness ( Stop Drink and Drive, Wear your helmets, Slow your Speed).
2. Government- Good roads. Severe penalties for driving without licence.
Thank You.
Dear Mohamed
We don't have these fast tracks in enclosed area but in open areas and bordering the streets
Dear Nelson,
In countries like France or the UK, these areas are fenced and less exposed, and there is a code of conduct, perhaps other countries should get inspired. The results are very encouraging and we should not downplay their importance.
Dear Mohamed
Surely that is more secure and this depends on the socio cultural education of a population of a country. Thank you very much.
Regards
I happened to produce documentary on Why accidents happens on roads,the main reason i explored was due to motorcyclists.
Mechanical faults,no road safety,unawareness of traffic laws,weak monitoring,absent of separate lane,and reckless driving are main causes of road accidents due to motorbikes.
The driving license procurement for motorcycle should be tougher than a four wheeler
There should be a cap on the maximum speed on the motorcycle, which should be incorporated into the design of the vehicle.
The check on the safety measures like helmet should be stricter.
The cheap quality helmets should not be allowed.
With each accident of the motorcycle, there should be huge penalty.
I agree with Anam and want to add that Proper licensing and training is also important.
I think road safety seminars should be conducted at school level Anam, so that children may have the sense of commuting and driving at an early age rather than when they are 18+.
One of the best program which has a lot of information about road safety (including problems of accidents with motorcycles) is irap or eurorap (www.irap.org or www.eurorap.org)
http://www.irap.org/about-irap-3/methodology,
iRAP Road Attribute Risk Factors: Facilities for Motorcycles
Recently, in my city, there were some serious two motor bike accidents due to poor visibility resulting from heavy fog of winters. I feel the maximum permissible speed of the vehicles should be less if the visibility is poor due to fog.
An interesting suggestion in my opinion concerning the urban segment of motorcycle mobility would be to have a system of reserved lanes if possible or, alternatively linked to the use of public transport. the reduction of promiscuity could represent a strong incentive to a better use on one side and lower the probability of accidents on the other.
regards
Edoardo
Link the insurance and health facilities to rash driving where the cost of the health does not get covered if there is rash driving and if rash driving is proven then the insurance claims stand nullified. With the street cameras it should not be difficult to do this but will require public opinion and support with a willing government. With the increasing technology it should be possible to fit the 2 wheelers with a speed guard within the city limits reducing the speed to acceptable limits so that high velocity injuries can be reduced.
educating the young is an excellent option but since when did the young take in such things seriously??
at least increased safely measures and their implementations should be made mandatory by the respective authorities
regards
dr joshi
Dear Rajeev
Thank you very much.
This is a big problem in Brazil (cultural and political) . We need to adopt these measures to avoid more deaths, specially of young people
Best regards
Driver behavior is a very important factor in road safety, and even more when it comes to motorcycles. Ideas like "i'm a good driver, nothing will happen to me" are were common in some countries (i observe the same here in turkey) and make it very difficult to establish logical safety measures.
Even if he wears a helmet and safety clothes, and even if he drives according the speed limits, he only needs to change the lane recklessly to feel the adrenaline.
Therefore the culture has to change. We have to make people realize (and not only the young ones) that the road is a mean to get from A to B, and not a place to have fun and get your daily kick of adventure.
In that matter it might be helpful to give people an easy accessible alternative for those "needs. For example cheap access to racing facilities where on one hand the safety measures are according to the high speeds and on the other hand no other road participants are endangered.
A more radical approach would be to forbid bikes over a specified CC, but that most likely would cause other problems. (i didn't think this through, just a crazy thought that came while writing :) )
From the non-human point of view, an important reason for car-bike accidents is the bad visibility of bikes and bikers.
So any measure that makes them more visible and more percebtible, should lower the number of accidents. Espacially for those accidents, where the biker was innocent.
All this is based on secondary information i read while doing research on driver behaviour, so unfortunately i have no specific papers about this topic at hand.
Dear Ahmet
Thank you very much for your valuable informations
Best regards
It's not the motorcycle that's problem, it's distracted drivers who aren't paying attention to the road.
Whether it's with their mobile phone, CD player, changing or choosing CD, radio player changing channel, lighting a cigarrette or dropping one, or being just too tired.
This could become even worse now there are screens avaible to watch in car now.
There are laws here in England but they are often flaunted, prosecution is not high enough.
www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn02198.pdf
Dear Russel and Shafig
Thank you very much for your comments
Best regards
Dear Imtiyaz
Sure but the commercial interests outweigh the common sense
Thank you very much
Regards
Road traffic accident (RTA) is killing about 1 to 2 million people per year which is a epidemic for the socity. The reason for RTA is multifactoral and it may have cultural, economical, law and order, educational level etc to vary the cause of RTA... Therefore it may be difficult to generalized the causes globally but it would have some common factors.
Some suggestions which may minimize the RTA are;
1. The drivers should be fully aware, educate and follow the road traffic rules and regulations.
2. No drink and drive.
3. Road should be repair timely
4. Drivers instruction (whereever possible) on the roads
5. Road traffic office whould provide driver licence only after examination of driver
6. Panalty for breaking the driving or traffic rules
7. Compulsion to use safety measures
8. Incoragement to driving school
9. Standarized safety measures
10. Develop skill to drive in different situation
11. Speed limits on different roads or areas
Education is the best method to induce awareness of the sense of helmets. In Germany we have a very apreciable trend to interest young children for security clothes and helmets from the beginning of their agilities. Before they can really walk they get small scooters, of course with all the equipment. Its coloured and nice to look. So the mini-children learn to accept their helmets and get used to them. They have fun and compete.
Good and successful technique!
Restrict the use of Motor Bikes on arterial or high density Roads and confine them to tertiary roads. This will reduce the frequency of collision with motor vehicles and the frequency of falls due to reduce speed. It has worked in Lagos State, Nigeria
I find it very interesting that most of the comments are aimed at changing motorcyclist behavior. I am an orthopaedic surgeon and motorbike rider (for the last 21 years) and feel that the solution to the problem lies to addressing both motorbike rider and motor-vehicle driver awareness and behavior.
Minor accidents that would only result in fender benders when two cars are involved, may result in serious injury when a car and motorbike is involved - all motorcycle riders are aware this and have adapted their on-road behavior as such. Most motor-vehicle drivers in the other hand are not so aware of the consequences of such trivial fender benders when a motor cycle is involved. Now don't get me wrong, many motorcycle riders are the cause of their own misery and need to be educated to the proper way to behave on the road, but a lot of accidents can be avoided by educating motor-vehicle drivers about awareness of motor-cycles and how to behave around them.
One very important aspect is the idea that motorcycles are 'second rate' citizens on the road, and often cars would take gaps in traffic very close to motorcycles without leaving enough space - we see the same behavior with cyclists next to the road. Other problems frequently encountered are cars turning in front of motorcycles and cars not observing save following distances behind bikes. The 'Think Bike' campaign in South Africa goes a long way to try and raise awareness of bikes and motorbikes on the road.
Most motorcycle riders have developed and increased awareness of everything around them on the road in order to prevent serious injury. It would help tremendously if motor-vehicle drivers can display this same awareness.
@Nando,
you are right, especially with the lateral distance between cars and cycles. So in Germany the youg drivers have to learn and are examined, not to drive at the edge of the road but to use their lane in the middle.
On the other hand, most of the motor cycles accidents here in Germany result from bad behaviour of the motor cyclers themselves like driving to fast, doubling in forbidden regions, disobey the right of way of others and the traffic lights.
Dear Charles, Nando and Hanno
Thank you very much for your opinions
Best regards
I agree with Nando and Hanno. While motorcyclists are probably higher risk-takers, they also generally exhibit more situational awareness relative to other automotive drivers due to the higher consequences of failure. Otherwise they would not be riding for very long. I believe there are studies that have shown that automotive drivers with additional motorcycle licenses are more conscious of fellow motorcyclists during driving simulation studies. As such, situational awareness may largely be an exercise in driver 'empathy' and imagination in how fellow road-users may potentially behave. This would suggest that intervention strategies could potentially be most effective by targeting the larger, non-motorcycle riding public by first addressing awareness and empathy (e.g., what is it like to ride a motorcycle in traffic) and then addressing specific behavior changes for dealing with motorcyclists (e.g., hazard scanning, anticipation braking, etc...).
Dear George
I agree that automotive drivers with additional motorcycle licenses are more conscious
Thank you very much for your comment
Best regards
DEAR,
we have observed same trend in India,motorcycles are more susceptible to accidents, as motorcycles are common means to travel therefore it will be predominant in developing countries, what I feel is, we should have exclusive lanes for motorcycles, as a result there will be less interaction between motorcycle and other bigger size vehicles. this might really help in reducing major accidents.
Dear George,
how did you notice it. I have an additional licence to drive motorcycles, but my bikesdrivers critics stays, they risk to much and often don´t obey the rules. ;-(
An interesting repetition of the 'safety is all' school objections. Might I suggest that treating motorcycle riders as real traffic make it a lot esker to talk sense. If you choose a unilateral measure 'safety' then the outcomes are always, restrict, control, penalise, discriminate....
IF we were to take out responsibilities seriously, THEn we would
1) develop head up displays (HUD) for motorcyclists (so that the critical 1.5s they lose looking down at instrument each time) ca be better handled without such high risk
2) take V2V sensors serious;y (currently the small radar chips in use are rarely even considered to be tested fro mot cycle presence or closing trajectories)
3) make certain that risers can use the space left between lanes to avoid the 4 wheeled (tanks) that blindly bludgeon them into injury
4) assess the full range of transport/movement/time use/shadow costs of parking/road space/pcu capacity properly to assess which stacey/other gator tradeoffs make overall sense. tc etc
5) understand the perceptual and behavioural power relationships between large and smaller vehicles, and modify training and penalties for the more powerful in this sense(e.g. 4 wheel drives trucks etch etc). Most riders are heartily sick of being assumed to be in wrong n all cases.. and it does affect their response to oppressive messages framed solely in terms of penalties for their vulnerability. A balance is essential.. it would make the 'safety is the only thing' approach get treated more constructively. Oddly enough ideas care a great deal about safety.. the Uk 'Think Bike' and 'Pefect Ride ads are excellent in being very credible to real rider and actually engaging riders and they pay attention as the message is crafted in a sensible manner.. too many 'safety horror' ads are completely non credible to riders as they are constructed so that even the basic physics (of which riders are only too well aware) on which they explicitly say they are based is violated. One appallingly fake ad of this type was put out by the Victorian TAC not long ago, and undid almost all the good work that TAC had done with riders overnight. The damage is still to be seen in the sharply reduced credibility of their claims.
So work WITH riders!
Etc
6) UnRiders (unlicenesed and uninsured are massively over represented in deaths and serious injuries.. thats a really productive route to follow
and yes i ride almost every day, since 1956 in fact, in many countires and yes larger bikes in the main..as well as scooters..
. but to describe me as paranoid about other drivers would be a massive understatement. Sadly its been proven as essential time and time and time again, on almost a daily basis.
Only very recently (id pressed for it for decades) is the behaviour of excellent riders (i.e. ones that have high exposure and very very low or even zero incident rates) has become studied.. (which actually included motorcycles! at last!) should soon also be as well..
this will enable much more convincing messages to riders, enhance training, enhance credibility and add to safety value for the riders themselves. Who, oddly enough, are often researchers themselves, just like you..
Sadly bodies like the Victorian TAC go to great lengths NOT to talk to people such a I (Ive been waiting close of two years for a meeting with their appropriate research manager..in spite of being a published researcher in the area for nearly 40 years)
This doesn't exactly raise the credibility of the punitive pushes that Tac are famous for, leaves me unable to even comment constructively on initiatives that they plan or put forward (which I get very often of course), and destroys the credibility of their many other excellent initiatives.
It still does.
In essence engage the riders..
I enjoyed my time in Brazil, but was reluctant to ride there at all..and i have no intention of taking my BMW 1200Gs to latin America either: Long Way Roud notwithstanding
If any of my comments are at all of interest to you (which may not be the case of course) you might like to check over a few of my many papers on helmets, vision, PCU levels, lane use, road surface effects, transport utilisation, choice models etc etc some but not all are on researchgate. however all are cited on at www.mwigan.com
.
Dear Marcus
Many thanks for your very important considerations
Best regards
Un-riders (unlicensed, unregistered or otherwise illegal): in ~2001 (Victoria Australia) the unrider rate was ~ 35-35%. Today it's around 10-12%.
The reason for the change was due to the 4th S in Safety 1)Safe People, 2)Safe Roads, 3) Safe Vehicles and 4) Safety information.
This 4th S (Information) is in many ways the most important one... and in just this one instance led to this massive decrease in accidents.
A similar example was found when hospital admissions data was compared with TAC, police and Vic Roads data. 2/3 of the motorcycle data in the hospital system was not recognised in any other system.
These are massive numbers... as the accident data is about 100x greater than the fatals data. Undoubtedly other countries will also find similar trends in their data.
Knowing where to look and what to look for is one of the first steps in doing something about it.
This systemic mis-reporting of motorcycle data is responsible for much of the perception that rider accidents are intractable. The perception that data analysis is not important (as demonstrated by the missing S) is responsible for this systemic mis-reporting.
The answer to this problem is usually not greater funding but greater transparency i.e. data availability and sharing.
These issues were all raised 25 years ago... but took persistence (25 years) and a ministerial directive in the first case and an audit in the second to force the data to be provided.
Given that this approach has saved large numbers of lives and has the potential to save even more injuries (by correctly directing efforts and resources) the CBR (Cost Benefit Ratio) is ridiculously high.
What we require now is the recognition that this is a desirable approach and the willingness to follow it through.
:-)
1) An intervention that will result in ~30% decrease in injuries is anti-lock braking.
2) HUD (Heads Up Displays) might improve accident rates more than we realise if the causes are not quite what we think they are.
3) Risk management interactive computer based training can also be used to train riders to avoid accidents.
The TAC is very proud of their Ride Smart program which demonstrates that it is possible to train riders to avoid risky situations and respond appropriately when the do occur:
http://www.spokes.com.au/riding-safety/ride-smart
The motorcycle minds web site has a number of quite good article on motorcycling. We should also remember that rider health comes in many forms and includes hearing:
http://motorcycleminds.org/?p=69
That's just a short selection of stuff.
However the previous response demonstrates that it's not usually high tech responses that have the greatest benefits... just a better understanding of the data... which leads to appropriate interventions.
:-)
@Michael,
your last remark shows my opinion. The best way to reduce accidental rates for motor cycles is education. The best technique just can support but not cause the correct traffic behaviour of motor cyclers and all the other participants.
Education can definitely be significantly improved:
Both riders and drivers can benefit from improved training... and any training that involves both is synergistic.
The TAC still needs to integrate the mistakes that riders learn to cope with into a similar driver product.
Unfortunately the TAC has been resistant to this... and the driver product continues without these highly desirable enhancements.
This demonstrates the need to involve experts who are driving innovation in the development of the products which will utilise these approaches.
BTW: This kind of interactive training is one of the few that demonstrates positive outcomes.
Much road based training has been criticised as not demonstrating measurable improvements. Personally I think that the mass of un-riders (riders who mostly never did any training) and missing riders (2/3 of the data) skewed the data for much on road training... as I saw a massive drop in rider accident numbers when we introduced proper rider training in Victoria. Given that none of our major organisations realised how far out their data deviated from the reported data it is not a major leap of faith to believe data collection did not reflect what was occurring accurately. Nobody who was dealing with the data ever set foot in a hospital... which is why the disconnect existed. The police had similar problems with their data on helmet usage at one stage. It took a personal conversation with their data analysis section before they realised that the data had to be wrong NB. They were claiming 30% fatals involved no helmets... when the figure was in fact close to zero. This resulted in a massive misdirection of resources into an area that could never yield any results.
Both these examples demonstrate yet again the value of good data... and why it even underpins training.
We may be misdirecting our training dollars?
:-)
Some infrastructure safety countermeasures, like motorcycle friendly guard rails can have a huge positive impact on overall motorcycle safety in terms of reducing fatalities.
Guard rails come up as a minor issue in some countries... and a major issue in others. The range is in the order of 5 (Australia)-30 % (Germany). The variation is probably due to the amount of barriers installed... although under-reporting these accidents is probably also responsible for some of the discrepancy (data again!).
However I've always thought the real benefit is in injuries where the numbers are about 100x greater... and also flow on effects eg. an emphasis on safer barriers almost always leads to an increased emphasis on safer road sides... which leads to less injuries and fatalities.
The effect of this approach is a multiplier... and made harder to estimate because it's often quite hard to show that fatalities and injuries have not occurred unless someone bothers to take a baseline measurement and do a cost benefit analysis (data again).
:-)
The WRB report offers a good insight into the options and costs of barriers.
http://motorcycleminds.org/?p=13
@Michael,
Your shown WRBs are really crazy. If you collide as a biker, you get cut and hurt. The german version (you know our guard rails) keep you from the opposite rail way and the hurting risk is smaller because of soft and smooth surfaces.
Check from engine, driver behaviour and proper enforcement point of view.. Have a balance
Motorcyclist are regarded as individuals on suicide mission in my country and are unlikely to comply with traffic rules. Best option is outright ban on commercial motorcycling and good law enforcement for other individuals who need to ride motorcycles.
Driving motorcycles will never be safe. Taking measures to reduce the number of cyclists will reduce the number of accidents. The increase of economic pressure achieved by higher insurance and tax rates might be efficient.
Dear Hagen and Joshua
Thank you very much for your comments
Best regards
Hagen Schmal is right. Motorcycling can be made safer though in countries where helmets are not compulsory, proper clothing is not common, etcetera. But a motorcycle is a high speed balance vehicle with a virtually unprotected rider. Even if all riders would always follow all traffic rules, they stand a much higher risk. The risk of wire safety barriers is real but a marginal problem ad compared to the main issue.
Road safety gains are made percentage points at a time.
Giving away percentage points because they are deemed insignificant (today) to the overall picture is usually the way we end up with large numbers of hazards (tomorrow) on the roads (a cumulative effect).
Better to get in early... design safe environments? i.e. minimise risks.
In the end all those small incremental changes have a significant benefit.
Vision Zero a Swedish initiative is in many ways the correct way to approach the problem:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vision_Zero
:-)
Agreed, Michael. The point is that we can make roads and passenger cars safe, such that car occupants, pedestrians and cyclists are very safe indeed. Motorcycling will be nowhere nearly as safe. This doesn't imply we should do nothing, it implies we shouldn't expect much effect.
@Michael,
good hint to the wiki page with rather interesting results, especially the numerical data for the decrease of fatalities.
The preceding posts suggest that one major reason we get such poor effect is poor data.
If you target the wrong problems you shouldn't expect much effect?
However that also implies that you can improve outcomes simply by targeting real problems.
Motorcycle interventions often address non-existent problems.
This is a reflection of research that is driven by non-motorcyclists... or by a lack of research.
Contrast that with motorcyclist driven research. The best example of this phenomena is the Hurt report:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurt_Report
This team was made up of 100% motorcyclists. They asked different questions to those asked b non-motorcyclists. They also saw the data differently:
What is obvious to a motorcyclist often isn't obvious to a non-motorcyclist.
While it may not always be reasonable to have 100% motorcyclists in a team doing motorcycle research even one or two riders can make a significant contribution to the design of the questions, collection and analysis of the data.
:-)
I was a motorcyclist and survived a major event when a driver didn't see me, for one distraction or another.
There are mobile phones, in car videos, you name it distractions.
Most accidents occur because the driver is not looking for something as small as a motorbike. I had my accident at 28mph so it's not always speed involved. The driver just didn't see me or so he said.
I rode my bike for the excitement and economic reasons, it was cheaper to park fuel and tax. I wore the most protective gear I could as working in the NHS I was well aware of the implications. But at the age I was, it was exciting, also I enjoyed the cammeraderie an dfeeling of belonging with other bikers because we all faced the same thing.
Why penalise the rider of the bike, which he or she has chosen of their own free will. For me it's the distracted drivers who are constantly mutiplying, some with not very much experience.
A car is now seen as a right ffor everyone to own, not a luxury.
As a motorcyclist you are not cocooned from your surroundings, so you are more aware and you are also looking for problems that can occur so you are thinking ahead. Not complacent in your metal shell.
Agree that drivers can be very distracted and insular.
So the question is how to focus the driver on what's happening on the road... especially as it pertains to riders.
It is very obvious when interacting with drivers that they often are not expecting to see a rider i.e. Lacking experience and failing to consider the consequences of their actions.
Likewise it is often obvious when talking to riders that they have failed to foresee the consequences of their actions.
Both of these are examples of a failure to manage risk appropriately.
It is possible to present the risky scenario's to riders and drivers and show them how to respond appropriately.
The TAC has both rider and driver versions of such a program:
http://ridesmartonline.com.au/
http://www.tac.vic.gov.au/road-safety/learning-to-drive/drive-smart
However the program needs to be expanded with more examples.
The car program needs to have more motorcycle specific examples. For some reason they did not incorporate what they knew from the rider program (the way cars create hazards) into the driver program. This is an opportunity going begging.
The rider program just needs a wider range of situations... so that riders can learn what to avoid without ever having been in an accident or at risk of injury.
Any country could easily build on these interactive programs to improve them. The TAC is fairly willing to collaborate with others.
It would probably spur them on to improve their own product? ...which would be a win for everybody?
:-)
Russel,
You are clearly a safe motorbike rider, which is good to hear. All you say is true. Car drivers are well protected, and if they undertake distracting activities, others have to pay the price. That's how it is. With 28 mph (45 km/h) you are driving only twice as fast as a cyclist, with perhaps a sixfold probability to die in a crash with a car as compared to cyclists.. With your helmet and safe clothes, this is a little less, so perhape you have only a four- or fivefold risk to die as compared to a bicycle (very approximately of course, all this).
I certainly do not want to penalize the rider, I just want to state that bikes are not a safe vehicle as compared to cars, because of the low protection and the balancing properties. That was the starting question of this discussion: can we make motorcycle riding safer?
There is no scientific evidence that bike riders are more careful than car drivers (although older riders may certainly be much more careful than young, inexperienced drivers!!). In everyday life my observations (not scientific!) support the contrary: I have never seen a car driver making a wheely at high speed on a 50 km/h stretch of road. Motorcyclist do, however, and all of us have experienced this once in a while. Pedestrians die much more often in a crash with a motorcycle than in a crash with a car (distance travelled taken into account; my PhD thesis). I know (from our scientific research experience) of fatal crashes where the motorcyclist decided to start an overtaking manoeuvre where this was not allowed. Perhaps he thought he had a better overview (and he probably had, but that was not sufficient to prevent his fatal crash). Car drivers do the same stupid things, and have a better chance to survive because of their metal shell..
40% of all bike crashes are single vehicle crashes. Motorcyclists tend to blame the highway authority in those cases (bad pavement, oil, loose material). As far as I'm concerned, they may be right. But it's their lives that are at stake.
Motorcycling is okay by me really, but we must not believe that it can be made much safer. There is just no way we can do that significantly (except by wearing a helmet, proper clothes and shoes, etcetera for those who do not do that yet).
Flying (single person planes) is approximately ten times more fatal (per distance travelled) than motorbiking. Flying is also not prohibited. The risks are real, and have to a large extent, to be faced.
Lets make roads safe. Hence all road users gain. But the difference between car an motorcycle will remain, I'm afraid.
Dear Henk, Michael, Russel and Hanno
Thank you very much for your very important comments
Best regards
In Victoria about 1 pedestrian is killed every 2 years by a motorcyclist... a very low rate ie. 0.5 persons a year.
This is similar to the experience in other countries.
Motorcyclists very rarely kill anyone else... so motorcyclist danger to others is almost a non-issue
:-)
"40% of all bike crashes are single vehicle crashes. Motorcyclists tend to blame the highway authority in those cases (bad pavement, oil, loose material). As far as I'm concerned, they may be right. But it's their lives that are at stake."
The implication here seems to be that there is nothing you can do about this 40%?
Just adding ABS to all bikes is good for about a 30% reduction in accidents.
Designing roadsides so that they do not contribute to the accident is good for another ~30%
Teaching riders how manage risks is probably good for 30%.
So far the intractable problem has lots of solutions?
:-)
Previous analysis of Uk data has identified the number one cause of collisions as a car driver pulling out onto a main road in front of an oncoming motorcycle. They often claim that they looked but did not see the rider. While this sounds an implausible reason (compared to just not looking, or just misjudging the approach of the motorcycle) it does fit with psychological explanations. Google 'crundall Clarke motorcycle' for a report on the possible causes of these SMIDSYs ('Sorry mate, I didn't see you' - what motorcyclists often hear from car drivers after such an accident!). Incidentally I am not a motorcyclist but I have always had at least one advanced (IAM trained) rider in my research team, and agree that the motorcyclist perspective is important for researchers to consider.
There are three measures to control accidents caused by motorcycles:
1. Limiting the maximum speed
2. Having two parallel mounted front wheels to provide a better balance.
3. Making it comprehensive to add rear air bags in all the motorcycles, as they do for cars.
@Varun,
interesting remarks. But my critics stays.
- Limiting maximum speed is no method, when motor bikers don´t obey the rules.
- double wheels in front to improve balance is the wrong method. Balance is provided by torsial moment.
- air bags only can improve the situation, if the bikers are not catapulted from their bike during an accident.
Pleae improve education and controls, that will help!
1. What if you will make bikes that cannot go beyond the speed of 50 kmph - Ban all those engines from commercial production which can produce a higher speed.
2. It is how you manage the centre of gravity. In bikes, the rider generally sits at the front side and hence CG needs to be managed accordingly.
3. Improvement is what we are focussing here.
Means for one entire century we failed to educate and control?
@Varun,
if you reduce the power of bikes, nobody would buy them. In my country you find motor bikes with far more than 100 PS, because the riders want to have fun.
And your interesting CG is no problem in modern bikes, but the momentum is proportional to the speed. And if you are stopped imediately during an acciden from high speed t, it´s without any influence where the CG is positionend, in front, at rear or in the middle.
Big sorry for arguing with a learned German authority in Nuclear Physics. Germans really are masters of engineering and all my CG goes behind.
Why at first we allowing to make airplanes to be run on road? Do we require to make automobiles for fun? When the consumerism takes over - the socialistic thought goes beyond. Sir, we do not need fun machines on public roads. They should be restrained to only racing circuit.
What is important for us - human lives or AUTOMOBILE industry? As a Scientist, we would never endorse any industry that poses a threat to mankind.
Momentum:
Only if you fixe the biker to his seat, that means remaining at the prior location.
And your scepticism with the airplanes: You should not mix up your wishes and ideas for improvement with the existing reality.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Geoscience
- Asia
- India