A rider representative group fears that a Victorian Road Toll Increase Inquiry (RTII) report will vilify riders with inaccurate representations of the danger of riding.
This follows recent police media reports in most states that point out the increase in rider deaths this year but have so far failed to acknowledge the dramatic rise in new and used motorcycle sales in the past year.
The Motorcycle Riders Association of Australia has issued the graph below based on Australian Bureau of Statistics and Bureau of Infrastructure and Transport Research Economics data which shows motorcycle and scooter fatalities decreasing over the past 10 years.
The RTII report and recommendations to be tabled on Thursday, March 25, 2021, are expected to present “rubbery figures … obviously put together by non-riders”.
The report will available by clicking here on Thursday.
An MRAQ press release says the Traffic Accident Commission has been reporting that riders make up 1% of road traffic but 19% of all road user deaths.
And with second-hand motorcycle sales not included in the data, the rider proportion could be much higher.
Deakin University motorcycle safety researcher Dr Liz de Rome has been claiming for years that motorcycles make up about 4% of motor vehicles.
If you count unregistered motorcycles, the percentage of motorcycles in traffic must be higher. “TAC figures are unreliable,” the MRAQ says.
“TAC figures make riding motorcycles look more dangerous than it is.
“These rubbery figures may mean the people putting them together are incompetent, or it may be the anti motorcycle culture in road authorities showing itself.
“No system develops reliable countermeasures to road trauma without reliable traffic/crash data.
“RSV/TACs use of rubbery figures to justify spending and policies that have speed limits reduced and costly wire rope barriers installed while roads are dangerously neglected.”
One of the biggest concerns among motorcycle riders about the automated vehicle future is the ability of these vehicles to identify them.
We have already reported on several instances of riders being hit by autonomous vehicles and authorities are now aware of the difficulties of these vehicles identifying small road users.
However, the Australian Centre for Field Robotics at the University of Sydney is working on the answer.
They have recently developed a perception system that will detect vulnerable road users even through buildings and around a corner.
Their “collective perception messaging” (CPM) system can even dodge running pedestrians and errant joggers.
Sydney Uni Research Fellow Dr Mao Shan says their CPM system is “more tuned for dealing with pedestrians, as they are the most common type of vulnerable road user you can find on a public road”.
“So far, we have not conducted experiments that focus on the interaction between connected automated vehicles (CAVs) and motorcyclists, but this is on the list of our future plan,” he says.
Dr Shao also points out that their roadside unit managed to detect motorcyclists in previous tests in an urban traffic environment.
Detecting motorcyclists
CPM allows an Intelligent Transport System (ITS) station – or, for example in this research, a so-called intelligent roadside unit (IRSU) – to share local perception information with others by using vehicle-to-X (V2X) communication technology. This emerging technology not only makes roads safer for motorists but also protects vulnerable road users.
The two-year study funded by the iMOVE Cooperative Research Centre involved scientists from University of Sydney’s Australian Centre for Field Robotics (ACFR), and engineers at Australian world-leading CAV technology company and V2X pioneers Cohda Wireless.
The study involved three experiments including a controlled live roll-out in Sydney’s CBD.
The Sydney test showed how a connected vehicle using CPM sensory information from an intelligent roadside unit fitted out with high-tech gadgetry including cameras and LiDAR laser sensors was able to provide a CAV with the capability to “see” through buildings and around corners onto side streets to detect pedestrians hidden from its view.
In another test using cutting-edge CARLA autonomous driving simulation software to recreate incredibly detailed virtual worlds, the research team demonstrated how a connected autonomous vehicle using CPM took measures to safely interact with pedestrians crossing the road at a non-designated crossing area.
In the third and final test in a controlled lab traffic environment with a 55m stretch of straight road, the research team showed how a vehicle stopped for a pedestrian running to make a pedestrian crossing “although he had not physically entered the crossing yet”.
The ground-breaking findings are being reviewed for publication in the academic journal Sensors.
The ACFR team has made significant progress in urban vehicle automation during the last few years. The team was also responsible for a number of successful demonstrations of driverless cars with only built-in sensors.
Despite significant advances in sensor technology, the perception capabilities of vehicles fitted with current perception technology is ultimately bounded in range and field of view (FOV) due to sensor’s physical constraints”, Professor Eduardo Nebot from the ACFR said.
“Hidden from view objects in urban traffic environments such as buildings, trees, and other road users impose challenges in perception.
“Unfortunately, failing to maintain sufficient awareness of other road users – vulnerable road users in particular – can cause catastrophic safety consequences.”
Dr Shan says the study confirmed using CPM could improve awareness of vulnerable road users and safety for CAVs in various traffic scenarios.
“We demonstrate in the experiments that a connected vehicle can ‘see’ a pedestrian around corners,” he said.
“More importantly, we demonstrate how CAVs can autonomously and safely interact with walking and running pedestrians, relying only on the CPM information from the IRSU.
“This is one of the first demonstrations of urban vehicle automation using only CPM information.”
Research co-author and Cohda Wireless Chief Technical Officer Professor Paul Alexander said the use of CPM and V2X communication technology “can be a game changer for both human operated and autonomous vehicles”.
“CPM enables the smart vehicles to break the physical and practical limitations of onboard perception sensors, and in the meantime, to embrace improved perception quality and robustness along with other expected benefits from the CPM service and V2X communication,” Professor Alexander said.
“This could lower per vehicle cost to facilitate the massive deployment of CAV technology,” Professor Alexander said.
“As for manually driven Connected Vehicles, CPM also brings an attractive advantage of enabling perception capability without retrofitting the vehicle with perception sensors and the associated processing unit.”
iMOVE Managing Director Ian Christensen said:
“These successful demonstrations will help engineers and researchers better understand the safety implications of cooperative perception and its impact on current and future transportation systems.
“The researchers from the Australian Centre for Field Robotics at The University of Sydney and the engineers from Cohda Wireless have made a significant and important breakthrough.”
Just in time for Christmas, Australia’s internationally awarded MotoCAP motorcycle gear safety ratings service has added 16 new items.
The addition of safety and comfort ratings for ten jackets and six pairs of pants brings the total number of items of clothing to 239, comprised of 115 jackets, 56 pairs of pants and 73 pairs of gloves.
Alpinestars GP Plus R V3 leather jacket
In the latest round of testing, the Alpinestars GP Plus R V3 leather jacket performed well, receiving four stars for safety.
Importantly as we start summer, the RJays Samurai 3 leather jacket also performed well for both safety and breathability, scoring three out of five stars in both categories. That comfort rating is pretty good for a leather jacket.
MotoCAP is a partnership between Transport for NSW, State Insurance Regulatory Authority (SIRA), VicRoads, Transport Accident Commission (TAC), Royal Automobile Club of Victoria (RACV), Department of Transport and Main Roads (TMR), Motor Accident Insurance Commission (MAIC), Lifetime Support Authority (LSA), Western Australian Police: Road Safety Commission, Department of State Growth, Insurance Australia Group (IAG), Australian Motorcycle Council and Accident Compensation Corporation in New Zealand.
Testing is carried out by the Deakin University Institute for Frontier Materials on behalf of the MotoCAP partners.
Two recent fatal crashes in Australia prove that wire rope barriers (WRBs) are not only a danger to motorcyclists, but also other motorists, says a long-time campaigner against the structures.
Damien Codognotto says a fatal motorcycle crash in Perth during last weekend’s Christmas Toy Run and an SUV double fatal southwest of Brisbane last month could have been affected by WRBs.
He says the female rider died after hitting a WRB that appeared to fence off a run-off area.
“In my opinion, road authorities know how deadly WRB is and they know run-off areas save lives,” Damien says.
In the 4WD crash, the car was slung across the road on a causeway and into another wire rope barrier which failed to stop the car from plunging into Wyaralong Dam, drowning two children.
“If the Wyaralong Dam causeway had had properly anchored smooth concrete barriers instead of wire rope barriers, the children may have survived,” Damien says.
The auditor’s report found there was no evidence to support the claimed safety benefits for motorcyclists and scooter riders.
Damien says that if road authorities ad relevant ministers are not aware of the safety shortcomings of WRBs, “they should not be in their taxpayer-funded jobs”.
“Again, in my opinion, the CEO of the road authority and the Minister responsible for the road authority are guilty of manslaughter when someone dies on a WRB,” he says.
De also points out that police rarely identify barrier types in crash reports “so there is no way of knowing the real wire rope barrier toll”.
A massive and potentially lethal pothole on a popular motorcycle road that has been reported to authorities is still not repaired weeks later, says Victorian rider Rodney Brown.
“It was 6.30 on a Sunday morning, dark and foggy, when I came across this road hazard killer,” he says.
“The water bottle (28cm long and 9cm wide) I placed in it gives you some perspective of this road safety hazard monster, especially for motorcycle riders.
“This death trap needs to be fixed immediately.”
Rodney reported the pothole on McGeorge Road, South Gisborne, to the local council and VicRoads but says it is still not fixed.
“The road is often used by local motorcycle riders and riders visiting the region who are looking for a scenic ride on a regional road,” he says.
“I rang VicRoads and they referred me on to my local council.
“The council knows about it and only gives these road hazards a quick repair job.
“It has been like this for weeks without any repair.”
Safety issue for riders
Dangerous road conditions are no laughing matter for riders
Potholes and other road maintenance issues are frequently cited in local and international studies.
A 2018 British Automobile Association survey found that while potholes cause damage to cars, they are a greater injury threat to riders with riders three times more likely to be involved in crashes caused by potholes and poor road surfaces than any other vehicle type.
A 244-page 2016 Austroads report, titled “Infrastructure Improvements to Reduce Motorcycle Casualties”, found that roads need to be better designed, funded and maintained to reduce the risk of motorcycle crashes.
And while riders are urged to report road defects, that only yields a result if the problem is promptly fixed.
If a council or state authority is informed of an issue and a crash occurs before it is fixed, then the authority is culpable.
That may yield a result in terms of compensation, but it does nothing to prevent the accident from happening.
Rodney says there need to be roving road crews available to attend major roads hazards, especially on weekends.
Rodney Brown
“If not there soon should be road crews established to do so,” he says.
“With all the talk from VicRoads and local council nothing has changed in my 50 years as far as fixing regional roads.
He says the concerns of motorcycle riders in parliament have been abandoned.
“This (pothole) is just another example where our government doesn’t think motorcycle.”
Australian riders have long been asking for a bigger say in road safety issues that affect one of the most vulnerable groups of road users … and now it looks like that may be on the road ahead.
Last month’s Joint Select Committee on Road Safety final report, Improving Road Safety in Australia, includes 22 recommendations, including a Select Committee on Road Safety with a National Motorcycle Consultative Committee.
If recommendation 12 to establish the motorcycle committee is approved it is expected to include public applications and invitations to individual riders and rider groups.
The Australian Government is reviewing all recommendations and will provide a response in the first half of 2021.
The Office of Infrastructure told us that since it has not yet been approved, the timeline and logistics of invitations and applications have not yet been formalised.
However, they did point out that the Australian Government “supports effective communication with motorcycle groups and other road user groups”.
“For example, the Australian Motorcycle Council has attended two separate road safety ministerial roundtables, in September 2019 and October 2020, hosted by Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack and Assistant Minister for Road Safety and Freight Transport Scott Buchholz.
“In developing the National Road Safety Strategy 2021–30, the Office of Road Safety held targeted consultation meetings with over 50 road safety organisations, industry and non-governmental groups including the Australian Motorcycle Council.”
If recommendation 12 is approved, we will update riders on how they can apply for a seat on the committee.
The shape of your motorcycle could have a big impact on rider injury in a crash, a landmark Australian study with simulated lab crash test equipment has found.
Tanks with a sharp rise from the seat can increase the risk of pelvic injury, according to the study by Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA), an independent, not-for-profit research institute based in Sydney, previously known as the Prince of Wales Medical Research Institute.
The brain and nervous system research centre conducted a three-year in-depth investigation of motorcycle crashes which has led to several other research projects, including the tank study which included simulated lab crash tests with various tank shapes.
This is the first time the interaction between the pelvis and the design of fuel tanks has been studied in this way due to a newly developed test method for physically recreating rider pelvis impacts in simulated crash tests.
“Our crash studies have confirmed previous findings related to the frequency with which the motorcycle fuel tank is a source of groin and pelvic injury demonstrating that there has been little improvement in the crashworthiness over the last few decades,” the study found.
Researchers found that fuel tanks with a lower angle or more gradual rise from the front of the seat to the handlebars were safer and less likely to cause a pelvic injury to the rider during an accident.
They identified that motorcyclists with a more upright posture, such as those riding cruiser bikes, had an increased likelihood of hitting the fuel tank with greater force than those riding bikes where they have a forward-leaning position in the seat such as sports bikes.
About 15% of injuries involving motorcyclists are pelvic injuries, says Dr Tom Whyte, an injury biomechanics engineer and researcher at NeuRA.
Pelvic injuries from motorcycle crashes can be permanent and result in difficulties with basic activities such as walking, sexual function, or urinating.
They typically occur when the motorbike makes a front-on impact with another vehicle or object and the rider hurtles over the tank and bars.
“In the simulated crash tests, we found differences in fuel tank shape influence the severity of the impact to the pelvis, with fuel tanks rising steeply and abruptly from the bike seat increasing the possibility of injury,” Dr Whyte says.
“There’s likely to be greater protection for a motorcyclist’s pelvis when they are leaning forward. This is because our tests found that there are smaller impact forces between the pelvis and the fuel tank when riders are in this position,” Dr Whyte says.
“The findings show that greater attention to the design of fuel tanks could improve the safety of motorcyclists particularly on motorcycles where riders are more likely to take an upright position while riding,” he said.
The findings are being presented to manufacturers in the hope they will consider them in their bike designs.
I have never seen so many kangaroos on and around the road as I have in the Canberra region and this is now reflected in a study of insurance claims on roadkill crashes by AAMI.
It found that the nation’s capital was the top hotspot for animal collisions.
In another study we published in 2016, a Suncorp study found kangaroos and wallabies the biggest enemy of riders accounting for 70% of all crashes with animals.
Dogs are next with 7.7% of all motorcycle-versus-animal strikes, but it would have been worse years ago before fencing laws.
AAMI’s study of more than 21,000 AAMI animal collision claims between 1 February 2019 and 31 January 2020 found that almost one third of Australia’s animal-related accidents took place on NSW roads.
Top animal collision hotspots per state
Location
#1 State hotspots
National
Canberra
New South Wales
Dubbo
Victoria
Heathcote
Queensland
Roma
Western Australia
Baldivis
South Australia
Port Augusta
Tasmania
Kingston
Australian Capital Territory
Canberra
Kangaroos in plague proportions
While Canberra’s reign as Australia’s animal collision hotspot continues for a fourth consecutive year, new entrants to this year’s list include Dubbo in New South Wales, Heathcote in Victoria, Roma in Queensland and Kingston in Tasmania.
Kristie Newton from WIRES (NSW Wildlife Information, Rescue and Education Service) said the summer bushfires have wiped out an estimated one billion native animals, and the devastating loss of so much bushland has left many displaced and vulnerable.
“As native animals come closer to the road to feed, drivers should be extra vigilant especially near water sources like creeks or gullies where thick fog can occur and reduce drivers’ visibility.”
Top five animal collision hotspots in each state
New South Wales
1. Dubbo
2. Goulburn
3. Mudgee
4. Cooma
5. Inverell
Victoria
1. Heathcote
2. Gisborne
3. Wallan
4. Sunbury
5. Woodend
Queensland
1. Roma
2. Goondiwindi
3. Moranbah
4. Middlemount
5. St George
South Australia
1. Port Augusta
2. Mount Gambier
3. Coober Pedy
4. Morgan
5. Whyalla
Tasmania
1. Kingston
2. Launceston
3. Cambridge
4. Hobart
5. George Town
Australian Capital Territory
1. Canberra
2. Kambah
3. Belconnen
4. Hume
5. Symonston
Click here for our tips on how to avoid becoming roadkill.
Norway is removing wire rope barriers from a six-kilometre stretch of road near the capital of Oslo in a win for motorcyclist safety.
Riders have long regarded the roadside barriers as a danger.
The auditor’s report found there was no evidence to support the claimed safety benefits for motorcyclists and scooter riders.
It also found Victoria’s WRB rollout was almost $100m over budget, over time and under-maintained.
Australian rider groups have long called for the rollout of wire rope barriers to be halted.
In the wake of the Norwegian move, Motorcycle Riders Association of Australia spokesman Damien Codognotto has written to Victorian MPs calling for the barriers to be removed.
He says wire rope barriers are a deadly threat to bicycle, scooter and motorcycle riders.
“They say there’s no evidence to suggest wire rope barriers are more hazardous than other roadside, or centre-of-road treatments, which is why they are used all over the world, he says.
“Victorians road users know wire rope barriers are very dangerous. Victorians who ride overseas know that no country uses as much wire rope barrier as Victoria. Some countries have banned it. Some are pulling it out. Some are not replacing it.”
He disputes claims that wire rope barrier saves lives in the majority of car crash incidents.
The MRAA has called for a search of video and photo sources including Youtube, dashcam.com and media libraries for images of crashes involving wire rope barriers to see how many perform as promoted by Road Safety Victoria, formerly VicRoads.
Ross works with the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland (CARRS-Q) at the Queensland University of Technology in the areas of both motorcycle safety and safety at roadworks.
Here is his take on roadworks speed limits:
Readers’ comments on the article offer a range of perspectives, some of which seem highly speculative. The article also makes a couple of potentially misleading points.
One of these is that roadwork speed limits in the US are only advisory. Although ‘work zone’ traffic management does vary across the many US jurisdictions, the country has produced comprehensive research and guidelines on work zone speed enforcement (see NCHRP Report 746) and has both regulatory and advisory limits. Highways in the US typically have many more lanes than Australian roads and the additional road space often allows more moderate speed limit reductions than required in Australia where roads are narrower. The US approach doesn’t achieve safe outcomes, with a current yearly average of around 600 fatal work zone traffic crashes according to NHTSA data.
In the UK, the trialling and subsequent approval of 55 – 60mph (~100km/h) highway roadwork speed limits applies, according to Highways England, to situations ‘where they could be safely implemented’. These situations include specific scenarios and conditions, including implementing the higher limits for non-workdays and when no workers are present. They are not default limits for highway roadworks. While higher speed limits can be expected to produce greater compliance, this does not necessarily lead to greater safety. As noted in the TRL report on this issue, selection of roadwork speed limits ‘should be made on a case-by-case basis’. Calls for uniformity in roadwork speed limits are understandable. However, uniform limits would logically be set low to address the highest potential risk scenarios. This conflicts with other calls for flexibility, where different speed limits may be applied as appropriate to specific conditions.\
Australia
In Australia, highway roadwork speed limits are typically progressive, with initial warning signs (e.g. Roadwork Ahead/Reduce Speed) placed at least several hundred metres upstream of (before) a work area, followed by speed limit reductions down to 60km/h, and in some situations 40km/h. A 40km/h speed limit will only normally apply on high speed roads where there are no barriers in place and when workers may be operating close to the live traffic lane. Otherwise, the typical reduced speed limit on highways will be 60km/h. There would be very few, if any, situations where an immediate 100 to 40km/h speed reduction is applied without prior warning at roadworks. However, poor compliance with reduced speed limits on approach to work areas indicates that many motorists either fail to see or do not respond adequately to warnings and speed reduction requests. As noted in a 2017 Austroads Report, this is a source of downstream traffic conflicts and a major factor in rear-end crashes which are the most common roadwork crash types. Tailgaiting doesn’t help.
The issue of roadwork speed limits at unattended and apparently inactive sites (and associated complacency among motorists) is one that has attracted considerable research attention and of which road authorities are acutely aware. From a safety perspective, there are several important issues here. One is that the task of installing and removing signage is in itself a high risk activity for traffic controllers – this is a situation where workers are known to have been killed or injured, such that in many cases it may be considered safer overall to leave signage in place. Reduced speed limits may also be left in place at inactive sites where conditions may be hazardous. The most obvious for motorcyclists may be loose or rough surfaces, but there are other potential hazards such as altered delineation, lane width and lack of line markings, for example. Speed reductions may also be left in place for some time after the completion of work to allow loose aggregate to be embedded in newly laid asphalt by passing traffic. While a roadwork site may not present any apparent hazards for some road users, numerous serious and fatal crashes do occur at inactive sites.
We all want better roads, for our safety as well as our enjoyment. Improvement and maintenance of this infrastructure unfortunately involves some disruption and inconvenience, for motorcyclists as well as other road users. I wonder if some of the people complaining about road conditions are also among those who complain about roadworks. Current arrangements and traffic control measures are far from perfect, but work is ongoing in Australia and elsewhere to improve the safety, efficiency, and management of roadwork operations. Driving or riding through roadworks sometimes causes delays, which can usually be anticipated and managed with a little preparation. Working on roads is a high-risk occupation and those involved have a right to return home safely at the end of the day, just as all road users do, including motorcyclists.
Bringing you the Best Motorcycle News from Around the Web!
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.Ok
