Z
Zebee Johnstone
Guest
In aus.bicycle on Thu, 30 Nov 2006 07:56:29 GMT
Brett Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone <[email protected]> wrote in
>> Single user can be, although there's a lot of argument about the way
>> the numbers are tallied. For example in NSW there's no way to say
>> "road surface" and if there's no other vehicle or witness they tick
>> the speed box.
>
> This would be because there would be very few police officers who are
> qualified or capable of making such a finding, at least on sealed roads.
> Gravel; different story. Sealed surfaces almost invariably provide
> adequate traction but if tyres are bald or the road structure out of
> shape or too much torque is applied or.... you may break traction.
Or if there's gravel or moss, or broken surface or banding.
was a bloke killed on the old road a few years back. Known as a good
safe slowish cruiser rider, not a hoon at all. Written down as
"speed" but few could believe it. About the only thing that seems
possible is that the excessive heat on the day made the huge amounts
of rubbery crack filler at that point slippery.
But if they don't know, it should be "dont' know". But if a single
vehicle crashes, the *default* mark is "excess speed". This is then
entered into the database as "speed-caused". And so they say "look at
all these speed-related crashes, drop the speed limit".
rather than "hmm, we seem to have a road design and/or upkeep problem,
let's look into that".
If they did more work on crash cause rather than kneejerking "speed"
then they might be able to reduce the number of crashes.
Like if they design a bike path so that there's reasonable visibility
they might reduce the number of collisions, rather than rely on
everyone to ride very slowly. Easier to say "naughty people" than say
"lets see if we can help". They've been putting guards and interlocks
on machines for 60 years or more, but they are still in to "bad
people" for road safety.
Zebee
Brett Martin <[email protected]> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone <[email protected]> wrote in
>> Single user can be, although there's a lot of argument about the way
>> the numbers are tallied. For example in NSW there's no way to say
>> "road surface" and if there's no other vehicle or witness they tick
>> the speed box.
>
> This would be because there would be very few police officers who are
> qualified or capable of making such a finding, at least on sealed roads.
> Gravel; different story. Sealed surfaces almost invariably provide
> adequate traction but if tyres are bald or the road structure out of
> shape or too much torque is applied or.... you may break traction.
Or if there's gravel or moss, or broken surface or banding.
was a bloke killed on the old road a few years back. Known as a good
safe slowish cruiser rider, not a hoon at all. Written down as
"speed" but few could believe it. About the only thing that seems
possible is that the excessive heat on the day made the huge amounts
of rubbery crack filler at that point slippery.
But if they don't know, it should be "dont' know". But if a single
vehicle crashes, the *default* mark is "excess speed". This is then
entered into the database as "speed-caused". And so they say "look at
all these speed-related crashes, drop the speed limit".
rather than "hmm, we seem to have a road design and/or upkeep problem,
let's look into that".
If they did more work on crash cause rather than kneejerking "speed"
then they might be able to reduce the number of crashes.
Like if they design a bike path so that there's reasonable visibility
they might reduce the number of collisions, rather than rely on
everyone to ride very slowly. Easier to say "naughty people" than say
"lets see if we can help". They've been putting guards and interlocks
on machines for 60 years or more, but they are still in to "bad
people" for road safety.
Zebee
