Well, I bet you never thought you'd be taking riding lessons from a house fly . . .
But recent research has shown that they do exactly the . . . well, perhaps not 'exactly', the things that riders need to consider.
Part of the recent set of 5 posts about the "Z Line" on the approach to junctions discussed the idea of being ready for problems to develop - being aware of the likely problem ('hazard' or 'danger', if you prefer) and getting ready to take action.
The actions for you, of course, might be covering the brakes, or getting ready to swerve.
And it's not just at junctions - be prepared for action wherever you can predict the possibility. Approaching a blind bend you might want to get ready for it to tighten, or for a change of line to avoid surface changes, or even do an emergency stop mid-corner if necessary.
So why does a fly reinforce this 'preparedness' message?
Ever tried to swat one?
Over to BBC News!
Researchers in the US say that they have solved the mystery of why flies are so hard to swat.
They think the fly's ability to dodge being hit is due to its fast acting brain and an ability to plan ahead.
High speed, high resolution video recordings revealed the insects quickly work out where a threat is coming from and prepare an escape route.
Most people will have experienced the curiously frustrating sensation of carefully attempting to swat a fly, only to swing and miss while the intrepid insect buzzes off to safety.
But scientists at the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) say it is down to quick-fire intelligence and good planning.
They filmed a series of experiments with fruit flies and a looming swatter.
The researchers discovered that long before the fly leaps it calculates the location of the threat and comes up with an escape plan.
Flies put their bodies into pre-flight mode very rapidly - Within 100 milliseconds of spotting the swatter they can position their centre of mass in the right way so that a simple extension of their legs propels them away from any threat.
The scientists found that flies were able to put themselves into this rapid reaction position no matter whether they were grooming, feeding or simply walking.
.
Friday, 29 August 2008
Thursday, 28 August 2008
Wednesday, 27 August 2008
My Bike, Visible From Space . . .
As seen on Google Earth, photo must have been taken on a Saturday morning during a 'Born Again' motorcycle training course at Cooper Reading BMW. Mine's the white RT with black panniers.
View Larger Map
Assuming their embedding works . . .
Further East along the car park, the cones are visible, laid out in the area where we practiced cornering skills.
.
View Larger Map
Assuming their embedding works . . .
Further East along the car park, the cones are visible, laid out in the area where we practiced cornering skills.
.
Tuesday, 26 August 2008
Winner,Category: "You Couldn't Make It Up"
From AutoWired:
A blind journalist was given a month's suspended jail sentence and fined 500 euros by a French court today (Friday 22nd August) for driving while drunk and without a license.
The owner of the car, who was also drunk as he sat next to the blind man when he drove the vehicle, was given the same sentence and had his license suspended for five months by the court in the northeastern town of Nancy.
The pair were arrested on a country road in the early hours of July 25 by police who spotted their car zig-zagging suspiciously and moving at a very low speed.
The police were astounded when the 29-year-old driver informed them that he was blind, and when they breathalysed him and his passenger, a 52-year-old photographer, they found they had drunk twice the permitted level of alcohol.
"I really wanted to do it (drive the car)," the blind man told the court. "I expressed this wish. He (the owner of the car) agreed."
The owner said he saw "a lot of happiness emanating from him" as he drove, adding that he had "one hand on the handbrake and one hand on the steering wheel" as the blind journalist drove.
"I was very concentrated on the road," he said.
The judge retorted that, as he was well over the legal alcohol limit, "that didn't make you a vey reliable monitor."
The blind journalist had previously driven on a closed circuit, an experience which he had recounted in a regional newspaper in an article which was accompanied by his photographer friend who was in court with him today (Friday 22nd August).
.
A blind journalist was given a month's suspended jail sentence and fined 500 euros by a French court today (Friday 22nd August) for driving while drunk and without a license.
The owner of the car, who was also drunk as he sat next to the blind man when he drove the vehicle, was given the same sentence and had his license suspended for five months by the court in the northeastern town of Nancy.
The pair were arrested on a country road in the early hours of July 25 by police who spotted their car zig-zagging suspiciously and moving at a very low speed.
The police were astounded when the 29-year-old driver informed them that he was blind, and when they breathalysed him and his passenger, a 52-year-old photographer, they found they had drunk twice the permitted level of alcohol.
"I really wanted to do it (drive the car)," the blind man told the court. "I expressed this wish. He (the owner of the car) agreed."
The owner said he saw "a lot of happiness emanating from him" as he drove, adding that he had "one hand on the handbrake and one hand on the steering wheel" as the blind journalist drove.
"I was very concentrated on the road," he said.
The judge retorted that, as he was well over the legal alcohol limit, "that didn't make you a vey reliable monitor."
The blind journalist had previously driven on a closed circuit, an experience which he had recounted in a regional newspaper in an article which was accompanied by his photographer friend who was in court with him today (Friday 22nd August).
.
Sunday, 24 August 2008
"Z Line" - 5 - How It Helps
First off: I didn't 'invent' Z Line, all I've done is give a name to something other people were already doing. Indeed, I first read about 'dramatic' positioning changes across the lane width in a UK motorcycle magazine 'Motorcycle and Workshop', in articles written by Ed Reid of Oxford Motorcycle Engineers. This would have been in the mid-late 1980s.
More recently, science has 'caught up' with research on how some animals hunt by maintaining a position relative to their prey which ensures that they do not move relative to their background. All the prey sees - if they're even that lucky - is an object 'looming' against the background.
Remember: moving objects attract attention, moving through a driver's field of view means you're more likely to be seen, and less likely to be forgotten when you have been seen.
It's worth reflecting for a moment on the previous post, and looking at how far - or how close - the main 'at risk' zones are from the junction. Usually you'll be - if you've made the effort to achieve it by not 'hiding' - in plain view of any driver who looks.
Indeed, the Hurt study (formally titled "Motorcycle Accident Cause Factors and Identification of Countermeasures") reported that the average time from the event that starts the collision sequence (such as a car beginning a turn across a motorcycle's path) to the actual impact was 1.9 seconds. A nearly identical research project just finished in Thailand reported the time at 2.0 seconds. In both studies, three-fourths of riders had less than 3.0 seconds between the start of the accident sequence and the crash
By moving across the lane away from the driver you - according to Ouellet - reduce your 'worst case' zone. By moving when the driver is most likely to see you, you attract their attention - you make yourself more conspicuous.
So . . . what is "Z Line"?
Thank you for asking :)
"Z Line combines the 'best' of Ouellet, with 'active' positioning.
Why 'active' positioning? Usually riders respond to what they can see, to achieve an increased safety margin, or gain view, or for turning at a junction, etc. In a way, this is 'passive'.
'Active positioning' takes it a stage further - the rider is positioning to 'make something happen' - in this case to move against the background - so breaking camouflage - and move across the driver's field of view - so be more likley to be seen.
A post-test rider is likely, in an urban situation, to be riding towards the centre line, so achieving a good iew in to side roads and avoiding being 'hidden' by street furniture from the view of a driver in the side road.
Take this a stage further.
Move, fairly briskly, from this dominant position towards the kerb, then back towards the centre line - you'll move substantially further through the driver's field of view than you would by maintaining a constant dominant line.
Timing:
It takes, at most, about four seconds for a driver to check a junction then pull away. If you're much more than that away, the driver will be long gone by the time you arrive there.
But within that four seconds, research has shown that drivers actually 'look' for less than half a second - so you need to be noticed within that (very) short time. Z Line moves mean that at the time the driver is most likely to be looking, you'll be making the most 'dramatic' move against the background scene - so much less likely to be hidden.
The timing for the Z Line is - roughly:
4 secs. from junction: Move left
3.5-3: move right
1.5-1: steady line, as far from the vehicle as possible
These are only approximate timings, to use as a guide.
And this isn't a 'swerve', it's a planned, steady, brisk move across the lane and longer move back, then straight past the junction.
If the vehicle is likely to be crossing from your right, reverse the positioning.
Z Line isn't a 'cure all' - you'll still need to do all the planning explained earlier, but it can make you 'visible' and may reduce your chances of being involved in a SMIDSY crash.
Image posted: This is just an approximation. As mentioned in an earlier post, US roads are different to ours, check out the width of this one in the diagram. What I've attempted to do is overlay a number of things to give an indication of timing and of what Z Line achieves:
- Vertical bars are seconds from junction @ 30mph
- Increased move through field of view shown by diagonals
- Z Line is here across two lanes, usually you'll be on single lane roads in the UK, and even if in a dual-carriageway I probably wouldn't suggest moving so dramatically across both lanes; remember, this is just an indication . . .
I do have a better 'UK' diagram, but it's not currently in 'electronic' form.
.
"Z Line" - 4 - Ouellet
James V Ouellet is an American researcher, who worked on the famous - and suitably named - Hurt Report in to motorcycle crashes in the USA. Its findings were used as the basis for much US bike training by the MSF.
He also wrote:
Lane Positioning for Collision Avoidance: An Hypothesis
ABSTRACT
Collision avoidance for motorcycles is usually synonymous with braking and swerving. Except for conspicuity, research and training in collision prevention have focused almost exclusively on the two evasive actions. However, in motorcycle/car collisions, the emphasis on braking and swerving—and on antilock braking systems—may be overrated.
Braking often can do little to delay the rider’s arrival at point of impact; swerving
requires more time than is usually available, and panicky riders often bungle what little chance they have to avoid a collision. This paper presents a mathematical reconstruction of the two most common motorcycle/car collision scenarios: a car turning left across the path of a motorcycle coming from the opposite direction, and perpendicular intersection collisions. It examines the effect of 1) initial motorcycle lane position and 2) braking effectiveness on collision avoidance. The reconstruction suggests that the motorcycle rider can do more to avoid a collision by moving laterally away from a threatening vehicle, putting at least one lane-width between them before a vehicle begins to violate his right-of-way, than he can by effective braking after the other vehicle has begun to violate his right-of-way.
This paper also included some fascinating diagrams. Allowing for US road lanes and layouts, and vehicles, being different to those we have here in the UK, he predicted 'at risk' zones for a rider on the approach to a junction, and how they vary with position across the lane width.
The motorcycle path is marked to show the possible collision outcomes, depending on
where the motorcycle is at the moment the car begins its turn.
Zone A represents a region in which the motorcycle, at constant speed, would clear the impact area before the car arrives; similarly, a motorcycle in Zone F would arrive at the impact area after the car has cleared it. A motorcycle in Zone B when the car begins its turn could avoid impact if the rider maintains constant speed, but would collide if the rider brakes sufficiently to delay his passage beyond the conflict region long enough to allow the car to impact the motorcycle. A motorcycle in Zone C when the car begins its maneuver would be unable to avoid impact by braking. A motorcycle in Zones D or E when the car begins its turn could avoid impact by delaying its arrival at the conflict area by means of front and rear braking (-.4g > a > -.7g) or rear-only braking (a > -.4g), respectively. Of course, if a motorcycle in Zones D or E fails to brake at the necessary deceleration rate, then it will strike the car.
I've posted just two of the diagrams from the report, but here's his conclusion:
DISCUSSION
The preceding analysis points to a ridiculously simple collision avoidance strategy: when faced with a potential right-of-way threat ahead, the motorcycle rider should move away laterally from the threat. That is, move to the right for a left-turning car or one crossing from the left. Or, move to the left for a car threatening from the right. And slow down and get ready when a potential threat is observed up ahead.
These general principles can be applied to situations not covered in this paper. Even
when a specific threat is not obvious, the rider can choose a lane position that balances the risks of where various potential threats might come from. For example, in riding down a residential street, where cars or pedestrians can emerge from either side, the rider may elect to ride down the center of the street. When riding down a street such as that diagrammed in this paper, the left side of the right lane (position 2L) offers a balance of risks from hazards that might come from either left or right, even when no threat is apparent.
The selection of optimum lane positioning is not a substitute for effective braking. It can reduce, but not eliminate collision risk, and is an extremely useful adjunct to skilled braking. On the other hand, effective braking is not a substitute for good lane positioning.
However, lane positioning does have the advantage that it can be performed in the
relatively low-stress situation before a car actually begins to violate the motorcycle rightof- way; therefore it is more likely to be done properly than emergency braking in a panic situation. One final caveat: lane positioning should not be pursued at the expense of conspicuity.
For example, it does a rider little good to position himself in lane 2 if doing so means that a large vehicle in lane 1 obstructs the view of the motorcycle from other traffic waiting to turn left. This is no small problem. Hurt et at [1] reported that the view of the motorcycle was blocked in nearly one-third of motorcycle-car accidents, usually by other traffic near the motorcycle.
In the final post, how "Z Line" combines the benefits of Ouellet with improvements in conspicuity.
.
"Z Line" - 3 - Prepared For Action
If you've ploughed through posts 1 & 2, you'll have an understanding of how it can be difficult for a driver to see you.
There is a 'heirachy' which goes from worst to best case:
1. The driver doesn't look
2. The driver looks, doesn't see you because you're hidden from view
3. The driver looks, sees you, incorrectly assesses your speed
4. The driver looks, sees you, asesses your speed correctly, makes an incorrect decision to pull out
5. The driver looks, sees you, assesses your speed correctly, makes the correct decision on whether there is enough room to pull out
There is, of course, a number 6:
The driver looks, sees you, assesses your speed correctly, makes the correct decision on whether there is enough room to pull out, but pulls out anyway because you're only a bike. This happens . . .
So you, as a rider, need to be prepared, you need to take responsibility for what may happen, and do sufficient to stop it happening or reduce the severity of the outcome.
You may not want to - after all, you have 'right of way' - but to ignore the fact that these crashes happen is to ignore reality.
So what action can you take?
Improve conspicuity
This might include using daytime lights & hi-viz clothing. But doing so can lead to risk compensation, where you accept more risks because you feel safer (it used to be known as the 'Volvo effect'). Certainly I've heard riders say "He must have seen me - I had my headlamp on!" Err . . . no.
Can you see the driver? If not, they probably can't see you. Can you see their eyes, or how their hands are moving on the controls? Can you see the front wheel of the car - is it turning? It's one of the best signs that a car is starting to move.
A better way to improve conspicuity is to position yourself where you can be seen - avoid those 'traps' mentioned earlier of door pillars, street furniture, etc.
Position so you can be seen between other traffic: if you're in a row of cars heading along a road, you may see over the cars to teh other car in the side road, but will the driver of that car just see a gap in the traffic?
Positioning on the lane width can help - we'll return to this in detail, as it's one of the two main elements of the Z Line.
Your Speed
What speed are you doing? Drivers will look for traffic doing the speed they expect to see, and look within the distance they expect that traffic to be. If you're travelling particularly faster than they might expect, then slow down.
Also, slowing just slightly has a great effect on your stopping distance. The Highway Code figures - however out of date, they're as a good a guide as any - tell us that at 30 mph 75 feet is needed to stop, while at 40 mph - just 10mph faster - that distance has almost doubled to 120 feet. Indeed the actual 'stopping' element rises from 45 feet to 80 feet - almost doubling!
Of course, be wary of the 'message' you're giving the driver; if they see you slow, will they take that as a 'Pull out' message?
Controls
As well as slwing slightly, cover the brakes, if the situation looks really dodgy then start to 'take up the slack'. Doing this will reduce your reaction time. Typical reaction time means that at 30mph you'll travel 30 feet before you actually begin to slow . . .
Reaction time is said to be in two parts:
- Decision Time, when you decide what to do
- Response Time, when you move to the controls
However, there's a third, over-looked, part, what a friend termed the "Oh !*!*!" distance - when you can't believe what you're seeing, let alone decide what to do or respond. Indeed, some people 'freeze' at the controls and never get past this 'reaction'.
If you're prepared for a driver to pull out, then you dramatically reduce your rection and response time, and you've already taken car of the "Oh ____" distance.
Indeed, if you're prepared to brake, then your braking is more likely to be 'apply' rather than 'grab'. Take this a stage further, are you prepared for skidding, and prepared for the action to take?
Finally: are you prepared for the worst? If you're going to impact, how will you deal with that? More here on the Jump! I've used it, it works!
.
There is a 'heirachy' which goes from worst to best case:
1. The driver doesn't look
2. The driver looks, doesn't see you because you're hidden from view
3. The driver looks, sees you, incorrectly assesses your speed
4. The driver looks, sees you, asesses your speed correctly, makes an incorrect decision to pull out
5. The driver looks, sees you, assesses your speed correctly, makes the correct decision on whether there is enough room to pull out
There is, of course, a number 6:
The driver looks, sees you, assesses your speed correctly, makes the correct decision on whether there is enough room to pull out, but pulls out anyway because you're only a bike. This happens . . .
So you, as a rider, need to be prepared, you need to take responsibility for what may happen, and do sufficient to stop it happening or reduce the severity of the outcome.
You may not want to - after all, you have 'right of way' - but to ignore the fact that these crashes happen is to ignore reality.
So what action can you take?
Improve conspicuity
This might include using daytime lights & hi-viz clothing. But doing so can lead to risk compensation, where you accept more risks because you feel safer (it used to be known as the 'Volvo effect'). Certainly I've heard riders say "He must have seen me - I had my headlamp on!" Err . . . no.
Can you see the driver? If not, they probably can't see you. Can you see their eyes, or how their hands are moving on the controls? Can you see the front wheel of the car - is it turning? It's one of the best signs that a car is starting to move.
A better way to improve conspicuity is to position yourself where you can be seen - avoid those 'traps' mentioned earlier of door pillars, street furniture, etc.
Position so you can be seen between other traffic: if you're in a row of cars heading along a road, you may see over the cars to teh other car in the side road, but will the driver of that car just see a gap in the traffic?
Positioning on the lane width can help - we'll return to this in detail, as it's one of the two main elements of the Z Line.
Your Speed
What speed are you doing? Drivers will look for traffic doing the speed they expect to see, and look within the distance they expect that traffic to be. If you're travelling particularly faster than they might expect, then slow down.
Also, slowing just slightly has a great effect on your stopping distance. The Highway Code figures - however out of date, they're as a good a guide as any - tell us that at 30 mph 75 feet is needed to stop, while at 40 mph - just 10mph faster - that distance has almost doubled to 120 feet. Indeed the actual 'stopping' element rises from 45 feet to 80 feet - almost doubling!
Of course, be wary of the 'message' you're giving the driver; if they see you slow, will they take that as a 'Pull out' message?
Controls
As well as slwing slightly, cover the brakes, if the situation looks really dodgy then start to 'take up the slack'. Doing this will reduce your reaction time. Typical reaction time means that at 30mph you'll travel 30 feet before you actually begin to slow . . .
Reaction time is said to be in two parts:
- Decision Time, when you decide what to do
- Response Time, when you move to the controls
However, there's a third, over-looked, part, what a friend termed the "Oh !*!*!" distance - when you can't believe what you're seeing, let alone decide what to do or respond. Indeed, some people 'freeze' at the controls and never get past this 'reaction'.
If you're prepared for a driver to pull out, then you dramatically reduce your rection and response time, and you've already taken car of the "Oh ____" distance.
Indeed, if you're prepared to brake, then your braking is more likely to be 'apply' rather than 'grab'. Take this a stage further, are you prepared for skidding, and prepared for the action to take?
Finally: are you prepared for the worst? If you're going to impact, how will you deal with that? More here on the Jump! I've used it, it works!
.
"Z Line" - 2 - Limits on Vision
The following is from material written by Stephen Prower, formerly Research Officer for the BMF:
In a typical intersection accident the motorcycle will be on the major road (Faulkner 1975: 91% of accidents; Olson 1989: 90% of accidents).
For most of its approach the motorcycle will also usually be perceived by the other driver in head-on view. So the other driver must base his or her estimate of the motorcycle's speed upon its rate of change of angle subtended. Only when the motorcycle commences its final traverse past the other driver's position will the other driver be able much more reliably to base his estimate upon the rate of angular motion of the motorcycle across his retina.
Correspondingly in most intersection accidents that are caused by the other driver's making an error of estimation of the motorcycle's speed, the error in question will be an error that is made in estimating the speed of the motorcycle in head-on view.
An important prediction to be investigated was that, because of the lack of visual information as to the speed of approach of a motorcycle in head-on view, subjects' estimates would be biased towards some 'expected' figure of the speed of approach of the motorcycle.
So subjects would 'dangerously' underestimate faster speeds of approach of the motorcycle above the expected figure, but 'safely' overestimate slower speeds of approach below the expected figure.
Angular motion & Rate of change of angle subtended
I use the term 'Rate of change of angle subtended', by contrast with the term 'Angular motion', to describe the difference in the perceptual information that is available to a driver with which to estimate the speed of an approaching vehicle according to whether he views the vehicle in head-on (or rear-on), or oblique, view.
The terminology is loose, but chosen to make the distinction more clear to the ordinary reader.
When an observer views a moving object that is pursuing a course of travel that projects in front of, rather than 'through', the position of the observer, namely when the observer views the object in oblique, rather than head-on', view, the observer will--in the form of the angular motion of the object across his retina--have:
* Identical visual information upon which to base his estimation of the object's speed of travel, be it, as I say:
'A fly, cannonball, or elephant -- or, more particularly, a motorcycle, or a motorcar'.
Further, as the object, in its course of travel, approaches the point where it makes a right angle to the position of the observer--ie as, in the case of an approaching vehicle that a driver observes from a junction, the object departs more and more from 'head-on' view--, the observer will have:
* Increasingly accurate, to very accurate, visual information upon which to base his estimation of the object's speed of travel.
By contrast, when an observer views a moving object that is pursuing a course of travel that projects through the position of the observer, namely when the observer views the object in head-on view, the observer will have neither of the two 'advantages' in estimating the speed of travel of the object. Instead he must rely for the purpose of estimating the speed of travel of the object upon the visual information of the rate of change of the angle that the object, as a matter of the visual size and shape of its outline, subtends, or makes, to him, ie upon the rate of change of angle subtended of the object.
The visual information will thus be less for an object with a small outline, or silhouette, such as, in the case of vehicles, a motorcycle and rider, or a pedal cycle and rider, than for an object with a large, or extensive, 'outline', such as a motorcar. And since, by comparison with 'oblique' view, the rate of change of the angle that the object subtends to him in 'head-on' view will be very small, the visual information will be correspondingly very small -- indeed, for a small object, it will tend towards the minuscule.
The simple picture of a motorcycle and rider that, by comparison with a motorcar, affords the observer less visual information of its speed in head-on view is complicated by the fact that, although the silhouette of the motorcycle and rider may be smaller and narrower than the silhouette of the motorcar, it is also taller.
Given the fact, Williams 1976 (and Williams & Hoffman 1977) assumed, without discussing the matter, that other road users attempt to estimate the speed of a motorcycle by the rate of change of the angle that the height of the motorcycle makes to them.
However, since:
* Motorcars are the predominant vehicles on the road
* Motorcars are more wide than they are tall
* It is more difficult to estimate the height, than the width,
of a motorcar, because of the confused outline of the bottom
of the motorcar
* The road scene is more 'confusingly' striated, in terms of
the contrast of the background against which a moving
vehicle is viewed, horizontally, than vertically,
I would argue that it is more plausible to suppose that other road users attempt to estimate the speed of all vehicles on the road, including motorcycles, by the rate of change of the angle that the width, rather than the height, of the vehicle makes to them.
But I do not know of any study that has investigated, or otherwise sought to resolve, the point.
Accordingly, I must formally leave the matter open.
Threshold angle
The rate of change of the angle that a moving vehicle subtends, or makes, to an observer in 'head-on' (or 'rear-on') view is so small that the figure of the change of angle between two successive fixations of the vehicle by the observer may fall below the figure of the minimum angle, or Threshold angle', that the human eye is capable of detecting.
If so, given the same:
* Viewing conditions
* Interval of time between successive fixations,
a 'small' vehicle, such as a motorcycle and rider, will 'slip' much 'sooner' below the threshold figure than a 'large' vehicle, such as a motorcar.
And the observer will find himself much 'sooner' unable to estimate the speed of approach of the motorcycle and rider.
To explain why a threshold figure for the detection of small changes of angle exists, per Hills 1980:
'At its most basic, the human visual system is a photon detector and it is inevitably limited by "quantal fluctuations" and the need for certain levels of "signal-to-noise" ratio to be achieved for signal detection. Whether or not an object is detectable to a normal observer is therefore dependent upon a number of interacting conditions. The most significant of these are the visual size of the object; its luminance and colour contrast with its background; the luminance level of the background; and the proximity and intensity of any glare sources in the field of view. These factors have been studied extensively in the laboratory but there have been relatively few field studies using dynamic driving conditions.'
Further, to give a measured value of the threshold figure, per Hills 1980:
'Two types of movement of a vehicle relative to an observer can be distinguished:
a. Tangential or angular movement which occurs when the vehicle moves across the field of view without changing distance from the observer. In this case there is no change in the visual image size of the vehicle.
b. Longitudinal movement or movement in depth in which the vehicle is either coming directly towards or going directly away from the observer [ie observed by the observer in 'head on', or 'rear on', view]. In this case there is no change in visual direction, only a change in visual-image size.
Laboratory measurements suggest that for 2 s exposures the threshold angular movement is approximately 2-3 min arc and the threshold longitudinal movement is about 1 min arc (Hills 1975b). (These values are obviously influenced by the conditions of the test.) Despite the greater sensitivity to longitudinal movement, it is generally believed that it is the longitudinal movements of vehicles that pose the greatest problems of detection and judgement. This is because the same physical displacement of a vehicle has a much greater effect tangentially than longitudinally. For example, consider a small car, a Mini, at a distance of 200 m. If it moves 10 m directly towards the observer, its visual diameter increases by 1 min arc. On the other hand, a lateral movement of 10 m by the car would result in a visual movement of 170 min arc across the background against which it is seen; it would only have to move 6 cm laterally for a movement of 1 min arc. It is the very small changes in visual-image size associated with directly oncoming vehicles that is thought to be the basic problem in judging their speeds, leading to difficulties in overtaking, right turning, and similar situations involving oncoming traffic.'
.
In a typical intersection accident the motorcycle will be on the major road (Faulkner 1975: 91% of accidents; Olson 1989: 90% of accidents).
For most of its approach the motorcycle will also usually be perceived by the other driver in head-on view. So the other driver must base his or her estimate of the motorcycle's speed upon its rate of change of angle subtended. Only when the motorcycle commences its final traverse past the other driver's position will the other driver be able much more reliably to base his estimate upon the rate of angular motion of the motorcycle across his retina.
Correspondingly in most intersection accidents that are caused by the other driver's making an error of estimation of the motorcycle's speed, the error in question will be an error that is made in estimating the speed of the motorcycle in head-on view.
An important prediction to be investigated was that, because of the lack of visual information as to the speed of approach of a motorcycle in head-on view, subjects' estimates would be biased towards some 'expected' figure of the speed of approach of the motorcycle.
So subjects would 'dangerously' underestimate faster speeds of approach of the motorcycle above the expected figure, but 'safely' overestimate slower speeds of approach below the expected figure.
Angular motion & Rate of change of angle subtended
I use the term 'Rate of change of angle subtended', by contrast with the term 'Angular motion', to describe the difference in the perceptual information that is available to a driver with which to estimate the speed of an approaching vehicle according to whether he views the vehicle in head-on (or rear-on), or oblique, view.
The terminology is loose, but chosen to make the distinction more clear to the ordinary reader.
When an observer views a moving object that is pursuing a course of travel that projects in front of, rather than 'through', the position of the observer, namely when the observer views the object in oblique, rather than head-on', view, the observer will--in the form of the angular motion of the object across his retina--have:
* Identical visual information upon which to base his estimation of the object's speed of travel, be it, as I say:
'A fly, cannonball, or elephant -- or, more particularly, a motorcycle, or a motorcar'.
Further, as the object, in its course of travel, approaches the point where it makes a right angle to the position of the observer--ie as, in the case of an approaching vehicle that a driver observes from a junction, the object departs more and more from 'head-on' view--, the observer will have:
* Increasingly accurate, to very accurate, visual information upon which to base his estimation of the object's speed of travel.
By contrast, when an observer views a moving object that is pursuing a course of travel that projects through the position of the observer, namely when the observer views the object in head-on view, the observer will have neither of the two 'advantages' in estimating the speed of travel of the object. Instead he must rely for the purpose of estimating the speed of travel of the object upon the visual information of the rate of change of the angle that the object, as a matter of the visual size and shape of its outline, subtends, or makes, to him, ie upon the rate of change of angle subtended of the object.
The visual information will thus be less for an object with a small outline, or silhouette, such as, in the case of vehicles, a motorcycle and rider, or a pedal cycle and rider, than for an object with a large, or extensive, 'outline', such as a motorcar. And since, by comparison with 'oblique' view, the rate of change of the angle that the object subtends to him in 'head-on' view will be very small, the visual information will be correspondingly very small -- indeed, for a small object, it will tend towards the minuscule.
The simple picture of a motorcycle and rider that, by comparison with a motorcar, affords the observer less visual information of its speed in head-on view is complicated by the fact that, although the silhouette of the motorcycle and rider may be smaller and narrower than the silhouette of the motorcar, it is also taller.
Given the fact, Williams 1976 (and Williams & Hoffman 1977) assumed, without discussing the matter, that other road users attempt to estimate the speed of a motorcycle by the rate of change of the angle that the height of the motorcycle makes to them.
However, since:
* Motorcars are the predominant vehicles on the road
* Motorcars are more wide than they are tall
* It is more difficult to estimate the height, than the width,
of a motorcar, because of the confused outline of the bottom
of the motorcar
* The road scene is more 'confusingly' striated, in terms of
the contrast of the background against which a moving
vehicle is viewed, horizontally, than vertically,
I would argue that it is more plausible to suppose that other road users attempt to estimate the speed of all vehicles on the road, including motorcycles, by the rate of change of the angle that the width, rather than the height, of the vehicle makes to them.
But I do not know of any study that has investigated, or otherwise sought to resolve, the point.
Accordingly, I must formally leave the matter open.
Threshold angle
The rate of change of the angle that a moving vehicle subtends, or makes, to an observer in 'head-on' (or 'rear-on') view is so small that the figure of the change of angle between two successive fixations of the vehicle by the observer may fall below the figure of the minimum angle, or Threshold angle', that the human eye is capable of detecting.
If so, given the same:
* Viewing conditions
* Interval of time between successive fixations,
a 'small' vehicle, such as a motorcycle and rider, will 'slip' much 'sooner' below the threshold figure than a 'large' vehicle, such as a motorcar.
And the observer will find himself much 'sooner' unable to estimate the speed of approach of the motorcycle and rider.
To explain why a threshold figure for the detection of small changes of angle exists, per Hills 1980:
'At its most basic, the human visual system is a photon detector and it is inevitably limited by "quantal fluctuations" and the need for certain levels of "signal-to-noise" ratio to be achieved for signal detection. Whether or not an object is detectable to a normal observer is therefore dependent upon a number of interacting conditions. The most significant of these are the visual size of the object; its luminance and colour contrast with its background; the luminance level of the background; and the proximity and intensity of any glare sources in the field of view. These factors have been studied extensively in the laboratory but there have been relatively few field studies using dynamic driving conditions.'
Further, to give a measured value of the threshold figure, per Hills 1980:
'Two types of movement of a vehicle relative to an observer can be distinguished:
a. Tangential or angular movement which occurs when the vehicle moves across the field of view without changing distance from the observer. In this case there is no change in the visual image size of the vehicle.
b. Longitudinal movement or movement in depth in which the vehicle is either coming directly towards or going directly away from the observer [ie observed by the observer in 'head on', or 'rear on', view]. In this case there is no change in visual direction, only a change in visual-image size.
Laboratory measurements suggest that for 2 s exposures the threshold angular movement is approximately 2-3 min arc and the threshold longitudinal movement is about 1 min arc (Hills 1975b). (These values are obviously influenced by the conditions of the test.) Despite the greater sensitivity to longitudinal movement, it is generally believed that it is the longitudinal movements of vehicles that pose the greatest problems of detection and judgement. This is because the same physical displacement of a vehicle has a much greater effect tangentially than longitudinally. For example, consider a small car, a Mini, at a distance of 200 m. If it moves 10 m directly towards the observer, its visual diameter increases by 1 min arc. On the other hand, a lateral movement of 10 m by the car would result in a visual movement of 170 min arc across the background against which it is seen; it would only have to move 6 cm laterally for a movement of 1 min arc. It is the very small changes in visual-image size associated with directly oncoming vehicles that is thought to be the basic problem in judging their speeds, leading to difficulties in overtaking, right turning, and similar situations involving oncoming traffic.'
.
"Z Line" - Introduction
Crashes at junctions are a constant feature of motorcycle crash statisitics. Despite all the 'advances' in conspicuity - daytime lights (initially voluntary, now almost mandatory as all new bikes are fitted with AHO - Automatic Headlamp On), and fluorescent clothing - there are probably as many of these crashes now (in terms of the %age of all bike crashes) as there have ever been.
I say 'probably' because it's difficult to get accurate figures of 'through the ages' bike crashes which give a breakdown of crash types which is easily comparable.
However, these crashes, where a vehicle either pulls out of a side road in to the path of a bike, or an oncoming vehicle turns across the bike's path, are known by two names, one technical, the other from grim experience:
RoWV - Right of Way Violation
SMIDSY - from the driver's usual apology to a prone rider: "Sorry, Mate, I didn't see you". Such a well-known phrase for riders that a BBC TV motorcycling series (and accompanying book) used the phrase for its title (and theme song!).
There are many reasons why these crashes happen, and many possible, well, not 'cures', many options the rider has to reduce the likelyhood of them happening, and reduce the severity of the outcome if they do happen.
But perhaps the first, most important, thing to establish is the difference between blame (or responsibility), and outcome. Although these crashes may be the 'fault' of the driver, and they have the responsibility to not pull out, it's usually the rider who suffers. So, rightly or wrongly, it's the rider who has to shoulder a lot of the responsibility for avoiding the crash in the first place, rather than seeking redress through insurance or courts.
So what action can the rider take?
Well, there's another term used when describing these crashes: 'Conspicuity' crashes - because the driver usually claims they haven't seen the bike and rider. This neatly side-steps the issue of actually checking and being responsible for not pulling out, by turning the blame on to the rider for not being conspicuous enough.
Quite simply, riders are often approaching these junctions in the worst possible 'way' for being seen, ny travelling almost head-on to the driver, and this means they're easily hidden - by door pillars, signs and other 'street furniture', and smudges or dirt on the cars windscreen. There are other issues too, like the driver's eyes blind spot (towards the right of the right eye) and reducing peripheral vision in older drivers.
But the 'head on' problem is worse because the rider stays 'stationary' against the background, and only slowly increases in size (known to psychologists as 'looming').
Also, a lot of bike gear and bike colour schemes do a great job of camouflaging the bike by breaking up its outline. There is no one colour scheme which will guarantee conspicuity - the rider can't control their background.
There is another human limitation, that of what the eye and brain can actually 'see'.
So "Z Line" will give more detail on this.
.
I say 'probably' because it's difficult to get accurate figures of 'through the ages' bike crashes which give a breakdown of crash types which is easily comparable.
However, these crashes, where a vehicle either pulls out of a side road in to the path of a bike, or an oncoming vehicle turns across the bike's path, are known by two names, one technical, the other from grim experience:
RoWV - Right of Way Violation
SMIDSY - from the driver's usual apology to a prone rider: "Sorry, Mate, I didn't see you". Such a well-known phrase for riders that a BBC TV motorcycling series (and accompanying book) used the phrase for its title (and theme song!).
There are many reasons why these crashes happen, and many possible, well, not 'cures', many options the rider has to reduce the likelyhood of them happening, and reduce the severity of the outcome if they do happen.
But perhaps the first, most important, thing to establish is the difference between blame (or responsibility), and outcome. Although these crashes may be the 'fault' of the driver, and they have the responsibility to not pull out, it's usually the rider who suffers. So, rightly or wrongly, it's the rider who has to shoulder a lot of the responsibility for avoiding the crash in the first place, rather than seeking redress through insurance or courts.
So what action can the rider take?
Well, there's another term used when describing these crashes: 'Conspicuity' crashes - because the driver usually claims they haven't seen the bike and rider. This neatly side-steps the issue of actually checking and being responsible for not pulling out, by turning the blame on to the rider for not being conspicuous enough.
Quite simply, riders are often approaching these junctions in the worst possible 'way' for being seen, ny travelling almost head-on to the driver, and this means they're easily hidden - by door pillars, signs and other 'street furniture', and smudges or dirt on the cars windscreen. There are other issues too, like the driver's eyes blind spot (towards the right of the right eye) and reducing peripheral vision in older drivers.
But the 'head on' problem is worse because the rider stays 'stationary' against the background, and only slowly increases in size (known to psychologists as 'looming').
Also, a lot of bike gear and bike colour schemes do a great job of camouflaging the bike by breaking up its outline. There is no one colour scheme which will guarantee conspicuity - the rider can't control their background.
There is another human limitation, that of what the eye and brain can actually 'see'.
So "Z Line" will give more detail on this.
.
Saturday, 23 August 2008
No. 10 Response To On-Line Petition
“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to postpone the date for bringing in the new motorcycle test (due sept 29 08) till all 66 sites are operational in the uk.”
Details of Petition:
“by sept 08 there will still be a large proportion of the uk without a local centre for this test. when first envisaged in early 2000 the DSA stated that the majority of candidates for test would not have to travel any more than 20 miles or 45 minutes, this is not the case. by sept 08 approx 40 sites will be operational with a further 26 operational later (up to 6 months) even when all the centres are operational many rural areas will be greatly disadvantaged.”
No. 10 Response:
The Driving Standards Agency (DSA) . . . is building a national network of multi-purpose test centres (MPTC) across the country, offering in most places car tests as well as motorcycle tests, and in some places, bus and lorry tests. DSA will meet its travelling criterion of 20 miles and 45 minutes for most customers by 29 September.
DSA has always been committed to the provision of tests to candidates living in rural and semi-rural locations and, for this reason, it is providing test centres in some of the more remote areas of the country.
In attempting to provide these MPTCs DSA has faced huge challenges. In particular, it has had to operate in an intensely competitive land market and local councils have often been reluctant to grant planning permission for these unusual developments. Despite these difficulties, significant progress has been made and there will be 38 MPTCs in use on 29 September. DSA has also been working closely with its sister Agency, the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) to allow the delivery of part-time testing from 12 of its sites from 29 September for tests at weekends.
.
Details of Petition:
“by sept 08 there will still be a large proportion of the uk without a local centre for this test. when first envisaged in early 2000 the DSA stated that the majority of candidates for test would not have to travel any more than 20 miles or 45 minutes, this is not the case. by sept 08 approx 40 sites will be operational with a further 26 operational later (up to 6 months) even when all the centres are operational many rural areas will be greatly disadvantaged.”
No. 10 Response:
The Driving Standards Agency (DSA) . . . is building a national network of multi-purpose test centres (MPTC) across the country, offering in most places car tests as well as motorcycle tests, and in some places, bus and lorry tests. DSA will meet its travelling criterion of 20 miles and 45 minutes for most customers by 29 September.
DSA has always been committed to the provision of tests to candidates living in rural and semi-rural locations and, for this reason, it is providing test centres in some of the more remote areas of the country.
In attempting to provide these MPTCs DSA has faced huge challenges. In particular, it has had to operate in an intensely competitive land market and local councils have often been reluctant to grant planning permission for these unusual developments. Despite these difficulties, significant progress has been made and there will be 38 MPTCs in use on 29 September. DSA has also been working closely with its sister Agency, the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA) to allow the delivery of part-time testing from 12 of its sites from 29 September for tests at weekends.
.
Friday, 22 August 2008
Don Palmer's Driving Handbook
Don Palmer [no relation, AFAIK], is a highly-qualified driver trainer.
His site is an interesting read on its own, with some entertaining videos to watch amongst other info.
Also linked is his Driving Handbook site - well worth a read.
.
His site is an interesting read on its own, with some entertaining videos to watch amongst other info.
Also linked is his Driving Handbook site - well worth a read.
.
Thursday, 21 August 2008
Car slopes off on road to nowhere
BBC News
A four wheel drive vehicle had its "off road" capabilities tested when it was apparently left in a Dartmoor car park with the hand brake off.
The Land Rover Freelander stayed upright despite sliding about 250ft (76m) down a slope.
The incident happened near Holne in Devon on Sunday.
Recovery crews were called to the scene to try to get the vehicle back on the road. Devon and Cornwall Police said that it was eventually retrieved.
Witness Nicholas Clegg, who took photographs of the vehicle after it had slid, said he looked on in disbelief at how the car managed to stay upright after rolling down the steep hill.
Mr Clegg, from Yeovil, Somerset, who was on a day trip with his son, said: "I can imagine how it would have stayed upright as it started to go downhill, but for it to stay upright across that terrain was remarkable."
.
Garden Art With a Twist - Hang A Banner!
Although just looking outside lately has been a better option for gardening than actually being out there - less outdoor 'rooms, more outdoor 'bathrooms and showers' - the area of garden art (known as 'yard art' in the USA) is one that's expanding now in the UK.
One new product makes 'decorating' your garden easy: you can hang garden art on your fences, walls, and trellis using the unique TeaselArt garden banners. They're ideal for both larger gardens, where the striking designs can be viewed from a distance, (garden example) and for patios' decking, or terraces where they will provide a stunning focal point. (Deck example)
Although they can be used indoors too, Teasel Art garden banners are a quick and easy way to improve your garden. The banners are supplied with four elasticated toggles, they can be hung in moments.
TeaselArt garden banners are currently available in a range of six designs, inspired by various styles of artwork. Designs include 'Mackintosh', 'Warhol', 'Celtic Cross', and Chinese characters for 'Peace'. Another design features the 'teasel' plant seed head.
TeaselArt design gallery
Besides hanging garden art to decorate a 'blank' are, the banners could also be used to 'hide' and unsightly area of your garden.
The banners - all limited editions - are machine washable, and supplied by post in a strong storage tube along with a numbered certificate signed by the designer which explains the theme behind the design.
Further info: Teasel Garden Art
.
Wednesday, 20 August 2008
Non-Slip Inspection Covers
You might expect a 'pro-safety' person like me to be mighty impressed by the introduction of non-slip insection covers.
Well . . . I am, and I'm not. Although the reduction - and it'll be very gradual because there's millions of the 'slippy' ones out there - in slides on 'manhole' covers has to be welcomed, in my humble opinion there will have been many more crashes where riders try to avoid riding over the covers, then crash when they hit them at an angle, perhaps tense and with the brakes on, than there have been due to actual slides.
In fact, the main advantage of these covers might be to reduce the 'mental' impact, and riders might just continue on and ride over them, and other covers too.
I work on the basis that unless a cover is significantly raised or dropped, I'll carry on over it. Also if it's somewher I might need to brake (eg on the approach to a junction, then I may avoid it, or instead just modulate my braking accordingly.
Even when cornering, a small slip isn't often a 'big issue' - at any reasonable speed a bike will be many feet further along the road before the rider is able to react ot any slip - and even then is only likely to panic.
Where I do see these new covers being of advantage is that they indicate that riders are being considered in road planning and engineering, following on from the IHE (Inst. Highway Eng.) guidelines recently published. What would be nice would be more care of ensuring that covers are kept to the same level as the rest of the road surface.
web site
Press Rlease:
SAINT-GOBAIN PIPELINES GETS A GRIP ON ROAD SAFETY WITH NEW ANTI-SKID ‘MANHOLE’ COVERS
03 July 2008
Although representing only 1% of road traffic, motorcyclists suffer around 20% of the annual rate of 300,000 road accident deaths and serious injuries. Government figures published in the UK and abroad confirm the dangers facing this most vulnerable group of road users and demonstrate just how disproportionate the figures for their deaths and injuries are. Creating a safer road infrastructure is seen as a priority for reducing accidents caused by skidding.
Newly launched, Saint-Gobain Pipelines’ GripTopTM access covers provide a solution for the problems caused when the raised metal studs on traditional access covers become polished by passing traffic leaving a smooth, slippery surface which is potentially lethal to motorcyclists and cyclists.
Part of a global business, Saint-Gobain Pipelines is the European market leader for access covers and gratings and has pioneered many innovations for both on and off-highway applications. In this instance, the company set about addressing a major road safety concern for motorcyclists and cyclists by developing an access cover with excellent skid resistance.
Concerns principally relate to the susceptibility of two-wheeled vehicles to the nature of the road surface and the vulnerability of riders to manhole covers with inadequate skid resistance or located in the carriageway where the motorcyclist could be leaning into a bend.
The dangers of worn access covers is also a high priority throughout Europe and is cited as one of the main hazards leading to the increased rate of accidents involving motorcyclists by the Federation of European Motorcyclists’ Associations (FEMA).
Daniel Débois of Saint-Gobain Pipelines explains: "Traditional iron and steel access covers are designed with raised metal studs to increase grip but, as FEMA highlighted in its campaign to improve riding conditions for motorcyclists, these become polished by passing traffic resulting in poor skid resistance compared to the surrounding highway. There have been urgent calls for an alternative to smooth metal and, as the market leader for these products, we saw it as our responsibility to invest in the development of a safer product."
Saint-Gobain Pipelines’ GripTopTM, available in a complete range of D400 access covers, combines the strength and durability of ductile iron with the proven stopping power of aggregate. The key to its success in providing a long-lasting anti-skid surface was aggregate and bonding agent choice. Exhaustive tests and years of research singled out an extremely hard aggregate which retains the sharp edges and facets produced during crushing. The combination of aggregate and bonding agents ensures, whatever the climatic and service conditions, that Saint-Gobain Pipelines’ targets – those of optimum balance of resistance to aggregate plucking and adhesion to the ductile cast iron substructure – are fully achieved.
In rig tests, GripTopTM has proved a skid resistance value (SRV) superior to 63 after 130,000 6.5 tonne loaded passages at 40mph, with similar results being achieved under snow conditions. In addition to these standard industry tests, Saint-Gobain Pipelines was also able to assess GripTopTM in a "live" situation. Working in partnership with Bristol City Council, the company installed around 70 anti-skid prototypes in the city’s Broadmead redevelopment programme.
Located on road surfaces subject to heavy traffic where bends and traffic lights encourage acceleration and deceleration, the covers were monitored over a two-year period. Mike Brewer, Senior Network Management Officer of Bristol City Council, and his team reported: "The feedback we received was very positive. The covers appear both practical and durable and there have been no instances of failure, despite heavy traffic. They lived up to their promise and have required no essential maintenance or further treatment."
GripTopTM covers are suitable for use in any location including bends and gradients where the potential for single-track vehicles to skid is increased. The aggregate finish can also be matched to the surrounding coloured road surfaces such as red bus lanes and cycle paths.
.
Traffic: Why We Drive The Way We Do
Hands up: I haven't read this - but it gets a fascinating review in TimesOnline.
(Incidentally, it's shown as £20 in the article - but Amazon have it for pre-order at £12)
Pedestrian KSIs (killed or seriously injured) on Kensington High Street in London fell by 60% when the council removed most of the “safety” features - road markings, railings and signs. Why? Because these devices take responsibility away from the driver or pedestrian. They make them feel they are being looked after so they take stupid risks and die.The apparently safe road is, the research tells us, the most lethal.
Like the discoveries that dieting makes you fat, that economists cannot make predictions and that Einstein was probably right about the cosmological constant, the Ken High Street experiment overturns a century of misconception. From the man with the red flag onwards, the assumption was that the car was inhuman. It had to be caged with safety precautions and its ravenous appetite for space demanded priority in towns and villages. Like a god, it was worshipped and feared.
This is understandable. It took us millions of years of evolution and 10,000 years of settlement to improve on the horse by inventing the railway. It then took us a few decades to come up with the internal combustion engine. An animal designed to stroll across the African savanna suddenly found it could streak up the M1. The power bequeathed to the individual was terrifying. There are 500 horses waiting to be unleashed in that red Ferrari nosing down Ken High Street. And it's being driven by a jerk.
But it's not just the power under citizens' right feet, it's also their exclusion from normal human intercourse. Pedestrians or, indeed, men on horses make eye contact, they are forced to acknowledge their mutual humanity. But at anything over 20mph you can't make eye contact, and contemporary car design is unhealthily obsessed with convincing drivers and passengers that they are in another, better world than everybody else. People in their cars, watched only by researchers' cameras, sing, nosepick and cry, the latter behaviour having its own special name - “grieving while driving”. In addition, of course, otherwise mild-mannered people drive like complete bastards.
They think they are alone simply because they are enclosed and moving quickly. Break through this cocoon and everything changes. There are many striking revelations in Tom Vanderbilt's Traffic, but perhaps the most poignant is the fact that people driving convertibles with the top down take more care. They are more exposed to the censure of others.
No wonder it seemed logical to plant forests of signs, to paint the streets with hieroglyphs and to treat pedestrians as bit-part players in a vast electronic game. They are too stupid to save themselves, so we have to save them with systems of lights and crossings controlled by smart people in underground bunkers.
But things that seem logical seldom are. This book is, primarily, a demonstration, with dozens of examples, of the counterintuitive truth about traffic. New cars, for example, crash more than old ones. Nobody knows why, but it may simply be that people drive them more than their old ones. The average round-trip commute time is consistent throughout the world - 1.1 hours. The stop-sign system in America is more dangerous than no system at all and, compared to British roundabouts, is lethal. Road deaths are related to poverty - as people get richer they have more time to devote to not dying. But Belgium, mysteriously, has a much worse traffic-death rate than equally rich and apparently similar Holland. It is thought that this is because Belgium is more corrupt and corruption reduces respect for the law so driving behaviour deteriorates. Older drivers are less likely to crash if they have passengers in the car, but teens are more likely - they get drunk and dance to the music like the hairy guys rocking to Queen in Wayne's World.
But the central, counter-intuitive truth is that apparently safer is more dangerous. The hero of this revolutionary insight is the Dutch traffic engineer, Hans Monderman, who died in January. He started from the position that there were two kinds of space - traffic world and social world. Traffic world is exemplified by the motorway, and social world by the village. They don't mix. Yet mixing them is precisely what traffic engineers have always done. They enforce standardised signs and markings on village streets, making the space uniform and coextensive with the motorway system. The village, as a system of ancient customs, personal intercourse and unique geography, is destroyed. It is, to the driver, a mere obstruction, to be handled with all the aggression with which he would hustle for position in a jam on the M25. The usual, wrong solution is traffic calming - speed bumps and the like. This is expensive and does not change the state of mind of the driver. Monderman went much further. In the village of Oudehaske, he removed all signs and deliberately muddled the road space so that cars, bikes and pedestrians were, in effect, equal users. They each had to negotiate their way through. Speeds plummeted. Drivers, in short, became humans again on entering the village.
Conceptually, Monderman had overcome what is generally known as “the tragedy of the commons”. Any resource held in common is vulnerable to any individual who simply decides to exploit it for his own benefit. The roads are commons and, in a village as in many other traffic situations, drivers, isolated in their cars, are the exploiters. By muddling the road, Monderman shamed the exploiters by exposing them to the spatial demands of others.
It is not clear how far this innovation can be taken. Apart from the question of its effectiveness in anything other than a village or limited city area - such as Ken High Street - there is a psychological/political issue. The variable speed limits on the M25 are examples of the new traffic thinking. But people don't understand them - why should I slow down now for a jam I haven't yet reached? The answer is that the evidence is overwhelming - slower speeds before the jam actually help it unwind and journey times are reduced. But the exploiter will reject this as he might not benefit. The problem for these subtle new theories of traffic control is that your average driver is too thick and too selfish to understand.
This is, you will gather, an important book. It is, however, hard work - flabbily written and meandering. For page after page, Vanderbilt simply summarises the work of one academic after another. Yet, if you can make it through, you can stupefy your co-drivers with questions such as what objects are most commonly dropped on the freeways of Los Angeles? Ladders. And what, in the new traffic thinking, would be the most effective safety device inside a car? A dagger pointing at the driver from the centre of the steering wheel. More dangerous is more safe.
.
Tuesday, 19 August 2008
Department for Transport Wins Diesel Spills Reduction Award
From the BMF:
The Department for Transport (DfT) is this year’s winner of the KillSpills/British Motorcyclists Federation Award 2008 for ‘Achievement in Reducing Diesel Spills’. Transport Minister Jim Fitzpatrick will be presented with the award at the DfTs Great Minster House on 16th October.
The annual award, designed to recognise those helping to reduce the menace to motorcyclists of spilt diesel on our roads, goes to the DfT in recognition of the work they have and are undertaking, in helping to remove the danger of diesel spills from our roads, namely:
- Accepted and included KillSpills suggested revisions to the Highway Code on diesel spillage
- Incorporated an action point in the National Motorcycling Strategy to deal with the issues of diesel spills.
- Funded the KillSpills ‘Anti Diesel Spill’ leaflet for distribution to the road haulage industry
- Invited KillSpills to join the four sub-groups of the National Motorcycling Council tasked with delivering the National Motorcycling Strategy
- Commissioning a study into how to clean up diesel spills with the aim of providing countrywide advice to Local Authorities.
Commenting KillSpills founder Stephen Edwards said: “The DfT deserve recognition for the positive way that they have taken this issue on board. We have never pretended that there is an overnight solution, but the support of the DfT, other agencies and major companies, has allowed us to make real in-roads into this menace.”
This is the fourth year of the award, previous winners being ASDA Distribution in 2005, Sainsbury’s Logistics in 2006 and the Highways Agency in 2007, all of them recognised for the work they had done in raising awareness of the dangers of diesel spillage and taking measures to prevent it.
Note: KillSpills (www.killspills.org.uk), sponsored by the BMF, was formed in 2004 to counter the menace of diesel spillage and particularly, the danger it presents to motorcyclists.
.
Bike Show - Display Yours?
A Freewheelers EVS ('bloodrunners' in the Bristol area) member writes:
On 23rd and 24th August, Freewheelers are holding a Bike Show on (the unburnt bit of!) Weston Pier.
We need bikes for it ! So ... any of you that are in bike clubs for anything slightly different - Hogs, off-road, vintage or veteran bikes, trikes, possibly even a well-turned-out collection of Pans or 'Wings [yes OK or GS's] - we'd like to hear from you if you'd be interested in exhibiting.
As per the title, this will benefit both the Pier - which can do with all the help it can get at the moment - and Freewheelers, who get to 'delicately offer the opportunity to donate money to' people who then come to look at aforementioned bikes.
Contact Allan Roberts: 01278 789145
.
Another Keith Code Article . . .
He must have had a few quiet moments to sit at the keyboard. :)
This one's on 'Isolating Riding Barriers'.
Link
.
This one's on 'Isolating Riding Barriers'.
Link
.
Monday, 18 August 2008
Honda ABS
With many 'safety' improvements on vehicles (see some of my earlier technology posts), there's a possible 'down' side. Even ABS has been shown in some studies to increase vehicle crash rate, possibly due to risk compensation (a simple explanation of risk compensation is to think about how differently you'd ride if you had full racing leathers against how you would ride if stark naked).
When Ford starting fitting 'affordable' ABS to the Escort several years ago, they ran a series of three TV ads. showing how ABS could be used to steer while braking, and avoid a likely collision. In two of the scenarios, it was driver error that had created the danger in the first place . . .
The first 'real' use of ABS on bikes (apart from some experimental set-ups such as the TRL's ESM) was by BMW on the K series bikes. Their first system was fairly 'abrupt' in operation, but as salesman explained to me: "Those Crunch! Crunch! Crunch! noises . . . " (from the whole bike shuddering as the ABS operates) . . . "Is far better than the Crash-Smash! noises."
BMW's ABS2 set-up was significantly smoother in operation, but it was still to be some time before other manufacturers started to build ABS systems on to their bikes - but even then usually only on the 'tourer' models.
But now Honda have introduced a system which will be fitted, initially, to the CBR600. Magazine reports suggest it's good, to. Compared to the original BMW systems it's quite incredible in complexity - I'm not even going to try and explain it!
The secret of owning a bike with ABS is to ignore that it's fitted - just brake smoothly using good braking practices. The ABS will work if it's needed. hat's the time when your braking technique needs to alter: the temptation will be to release and reapply - as taught as part of 'good braking'. Instead, you need to maintain the pressure and let the ABS do what it can.
It will be interesting to see how owners react to the new bike, and whether it is accepted by the 'sports' riders.
'Interesting' fact: ABS doesn't stand for 'Anti-lock Braking System', it's actually for 'Anti Blockier System'. I don't know what that means, though.
.
When Ford starting fitting 'affordable' ABS to the Escort several years ago, they ran a series of three TV ads. showing how ABS could be used to steer while braking, and avoid a likely collision. In two of the scenarios, it was driver error that had created the danger in the first place . . .
The first 'real' use of ABS on bikes (apart from some experimental set-ups such as the TRL's ESM) was by BMW on the K series bikes. Their first system was fairly 'abrupt' in operation, but as salesman explained to me: "Those Crunch! Crunch! Crunch! noises . . . " (from the whole bike shuddering as the ABS operates) . . . "Is far better than the Crash-Smash! noises."
BMW's ABS2 set-up was significantly smoother in operation, but it was still to be some time before other manufacturers started to build ABS systems on to their bikes - but even then usually only on the 'tourer' models.
But now Honda have introduced a system which will be fitted, initially, to the CBR600. Magazine reports suggest it's good, to. Compared to the original BMW systems it's quite incredible in complexity - I'm not even going to try and explain it!
The secret of owning a bike with ABS is to ignore that it's fitted - just brake smoothly using good braking practices. The ABS will work if it's needed. hat's the time when your braking technique needs to alter: the temptation will be to release and reapply - as taught as part of 'good braking'. Instead, you need to maintain the pressure and let the ABS do what it can.
It will be interesting to see how owners react to the new bike, and whether it is accepted by the 'sports' riders.
'Interesting' fact: ABS doesn't stand for 'Anti-lock Braking System', it's actually for 'Anti Blockier System'. I don't know what that means, though.
.
You *Do* Believe The Government - Don't You?
According to the Telegraph, road pricing - following hotly on the heels of a Government denial of any further plans - is about to be trialled!
Full story
The Daily Telegraph has learnt that eight areas - Leeds, North Yorkshire, Milton Keynes and Buckinghamshire, south west London, Suffolk and Essex – have been selected for the trials.
Initially, in January 2010, one hundred cars in each area will trial the new technology – in many cases entailing placing black boxes to allow their movements to be tracked - but members of the public will be invited to join the pilots in June 2010.
The Government is close to signing contracts with four companies who will run the national trials, testing not only the technology which will be fitted to the cars, but also the bureaucracy needed to run a system including sending out bills.
In most cases, the trials will involve a satellite tracking a vehicle's movements. Motorists will then receive a monthly or weekly bill which will vary depending on when and where they drove.
Three more companies will be paid to double check the system, ensuring that the charging machinery is legal and that the trials are properly monitored.
Last night, the Conservatives condemned the Government plans and called on Ruth Kelly, the Transport Secretary, to abandon the scheme.
The Treasury earmarked millions of pounds for the pilots in the budget and Chancellor Alistair Darling believes the scheme could be crucial in cutting congestion in the long-term.
However, the disclosure of the trials will raise fears that motorists are set to be hit with another increase in driving taxes, despite earlier assurances from the Government that
It is understood that there is greater enthusiasm in the Treasury than the Department for Transport for road pricing.
The Department for Transport insists that the pilots are designed "to inform thinking about motorway capacity".
When the scheme was first floated by the Blair administration 1.8 million people signed a petition on the Downing Street website calling on the Government to abandon the scheme.
Last night, Peter Roberts, who led the initial protests, said: "If the Government was true to its word and was kicking road pricing into the long grass, why is it running trials?
"Ministers have said that national road pricing is no longer on the agenda. So either they are wasting millions of pounds of taxpayers' money or they are not being honest with voters."
Earlier this year Ruth Kelly insisted that charging schemes would be limited to areas where congestion was greatest.
A spokeswoman for the Department for Transport said the trials had been announced last year and did not mean road pricing was going ahead.
She said: "We have been absolutely clear that any proposal for national road pricing would need to address the legitimate concerns people have.
"We're a very long way from that which is why our priority now and over the next decade is on tackling congestion where it is experienced most - in our cities and on our motorways."
.
Full story
The Daily Telegraph has learnt that eight areas - Leeds, North Yorkshire, Milton Keynes and Buckinghamshire, south west London, Suffolk and Essex – have been selected for the trials.
Initially, in January 2010, one hundred cars in each area will trial the new technology – in many cases entailing placing black boxes to allow their movements to be tracked - but members of the public will be invited to join the pilots in June 2010.
The Government is close to signing contracts with four companies who will run the national trials, testing not only the technology which will be fitted to the cars, but also the bureaucracy needed to run a system including sending out bills.
In most cases, the trials will involve a satellite tracking a vehicle's movements. Motorists will then receive a monthly or weekly bill which will vary depending on when and where they drove.
Three more companies will be paid to double check the system, ensuring that the charging machinery is legal and that the trials are properly monitored.
Last night, the Conservatives condemned the Government plans and called on Ruth Kelly, the Transport Secretary, to abandon the scheme.
The Treasury earmarked millions of pounds for the pilots in the budget and Chancellor Alistair Darling believes the scheme could be crucial in cutting congestion in the long-term.
However, the disclosure of the trials will raise fears that motorists are set to be hit with another increase in driving taxes, despite earlier assurances from the Government that
It is understood that there is greater enthusiasm in the Treasury than the Department for Transport for road pricing.
The Department for Transport insists that the pilots are designed "to inform thinking about motorway capacity".
When the scheme was first floated by the Blair administration 1.8 million people signed a petition on the Downing Street website calling on the Government to abandon the scheme.
Last night, Peter Roberts, who led the initial protests, said: "If the Government was true to its word and was kicking road pricing into the long grass, why is it running trials?
"Ministers have said that national road pricing is no longer on the agenda. So either they are wasting millions of pounds of taxpayers' money or they are not being honest with voters."
Earlier this year Ruth Kelly insisted that charging schemes would be limited to areas where congestion was greatest.
A spokeswoman for the Department for Transport said the trials had been announced last year and did not mean road pricing was going ahead.
She said: "We have been absolutely clear that any proposal for national road pricing would need to address the legitimate concerns people have.
"We're a very long way from that which is why our priority now and over the next decade is on tackling congestion where it is experienced most - in our cities and on our motorways."
.
Somerset Better Biking DVD
The Somerset Road Safety Partnership has just released its new Better Biking DVD. It's a 'promo' DVD, emphasising that the ‘rider’ is where most benefit can be gained, by spending some time and a bit if money.
Productions like this are never going to be box office hits, but this one manages to avoid being too 'preachy', while giving enough facts about the true causes of fatal crashes - the rider - to offend those who believe that all crashes are the fault of 'cagers'.
The 'preachy' bit is mainly at the start. When a character says: "You be careful" you just *know* what's going to happen . . . but with the scene in the ambulance it turned 'upwards'.
The main focus is on encouraging riders to attend the local police ‘Bikesafe’ days and 'Ride to Arrive' weekends, or take IAM ‘training’ (really?).
Amusingly, when, towards the end, they show the group of riders going around a hairpin, I thought the lead rider's (female, Triumph?) line on the exit was better than the copper's :)
The main presenter has an 'easy' manner which probably covers a lot of skill (voice reminds me of the original HitchHikers Guide radio prog. narator). He’s a local TV news anchor man.
web site
.
Productions like this are never going to be box office hits, but this one manages to avoid being too 'preachy', while giving enough facts about the true causes of fatal crashes - the rider - to offend those who believe that all crashes are the fault of 'cagers'.
The 'preachy' bit is mainly at the start. When a character says: "You be careful" you just *know* what's going to happen . . . but with the scene in the ambulance it turned 'upwards'.
The main focus is on encouraging riders to attend the local police ‘Bikesafe’ days and 'Ride to Arrive' weekends, or take IAM ‘training’ (really?).
Amusingly, when, towards the end, they show the group of riders going around a hairpin, I thought the lead rider's (female, Triumph?) line on the exit was better than the copper's :)
The main presenter has an 'easy' manner which probably covers a lot of skill (voice reminds me of the original HitchHikers Guide radio prog. narator). He’s a local TV news anchor man.
web site
.
An Alternative Training Style
Lifted from the US-based Sport-Touring Forum:
http://bmwsporttouring.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=377004&gonew=1#UNREAD
As some of you have heard me say before, I’m a re-entry rider. I came back to riding just 20 months ago after a 15 year hiatus. Since then I’ve put about 22K miles on my 04 RT, much of that riding with this group and many thousands of those miles riding two-up. Last September at the UNRally I had a close call with my pillion (here) that I knew even then was largely due to bad headwork and poor skills (despite our getting out of that bad situation unscathed and unharmed).
So, I rededicated myself to better focus and during the winter spent a lot of time reading the likes of Hough, Code, and folks here on this site. However, this spring I discovered that while that reading and practicing had improved my knowledge and skills, I was still making too wide a variety of errors I knew were interconnected. Suspecting habits from previous years riding were hampering me (let’s face it riding has evolved) I realized it was time to unlearn those habits and start learning better ones through proper instruction and coaching.
So, I started looking for courses of instruction and was surprised to find the vast ocean of skills and knowledge between MSF courses and profession track courses eerily vacant. I knew I wasn’t ready for the latter and was certain I’d progressed beyond most of the curriculum in the former. Having read about The Rider’s Workshop and its founder/instructor/guide Jim Ford in several print and on-line resources as well as here on BMWST, I thought it a good course for my skill set and to unlearn bad habits.
However, it was much more than that. Scarcely 24 hours after arriving home, I was checking my calendar and planning my follow-on tour, oops I mean class. Why the correction? The Rider’s Workshop is an on-road class cleverly disguised as a sport touring adventure – my trip twisting through the Appalachian mountains of MD, PA, WV, & VA. Being from the region I’d ridden some of the same roads before myself and with others. However, on those other occasions I didn’t have a guide leading me from one great road to another, giving me valuable insights to riding techniques and attitudes along the way.
Jim’s stated goal is to give attendees the keys to learn the Art of Riding Smooth, to identify what he calls The Invisible Roads (the roads few use), to read and understand the intricacies of those roads while riding, and to have a great time while learning and practicing these skills. Had I not learned a thing during my class it would have been a great time none-the-less. But let me assure you, Jim not only delivered on all aspects of this promise for me, he exceeded them.
Jim’s extremely smooth riding style is clearly the result of his personal experience as a pilot (he does indeed fly the road), being mentored by some great riders (Paul Mihalka, please take a bow), attending Primore’s CLASS schools, and the wisdom that comes from over 300,000 miles of riding. Couple that experience and knowledge with Jim’s calm demeanor, great voice, generous spirit, and a zest for life and riding and what results is a highly effective course that is just plain fun.
The course is generally a two-day format of five students. My class was comprised of riders from many states: MD, NY, and even ID. The experience level was widely varied as were their rides: two RTs, one Duc Supermotard, a Honda VTX (I believe), and a Burgman 600! Each rider had filled out their questionnaires informing Jim what they wanted to gain from the course and skills they wished to improve. And it became very clear later on that Jim did indeed tailor the course to each individual.
Our trip started in Thurmont MD and wound around the country roads of Western MD for several hours, mostly in a steady downpour, before we angled up towards the Mtns of Western PA and then into West Virginia. Throughout the first day, riders took turns following closely behind Jim, watching and listening to him (an radio is provided to all by TRW) espouse a one-ness between machine, man, and road – a philosophy of riding that he calls the Zen of Riding. A Pridmore student, Jim not only emphasizes mastering smoothness in all facets of riding but he positively de-emphasizes the “need for speed” on the street as an end. His view is that real, attainable, mile-crunching speed is not best attained from grabbing handfuls of throttle throughout a trip, but through heightened presence of mind, clarity of thought, and smoothness of action; all culminating in finding and achieving your “pace”.
Jim’s instruction over the radio was plentiful but in no way irritating. Rather than a “Do this … Do that” imperative approach, instead he calmly described what he was doing, always the why, and most often followed up with the how. Interspersed in the instruction were reminders of the aesthetics of riding. On appropriate occasions Jim would call our attention to a particularly beautiful vista or give us a bit of history about the area.
All this said, Jim was no stranger to humor. When a rider would show signs of forgetfulness by, say relying entirely on their self-cancelling turn signals, we would hear, “Self-canceling turn signals are for pussies … Be in control of your motorcycle at all times”. That became a class favorite. One of my personal favorites was on those rare occasions when we would have a slower moving vehicle ahead of us on a back road, he would say (as though a mantra), “Why do we ride the Invisible Roads, Gentlemen? Because local traffic doesn’t stay on local roads very long.” Then, as though commanded by his words, the vehicles would nearly always turn off!
After the inclusive dinner and night at a more than satisfactory hotel, the second day of the course revealed a change in format. Riders took turns being in the lead with Jim flying wingman. Segments of the roads selected were matched to the skill levels of each student by Jim. The “pilot under instruction” (PUI) and Jim would then proceed at an appropriate pace while the rest were directed to fall behind back and each ride his own ride. During our stints as PUI, Jim assessed our current flaws and provided corrective instruction. It was honest, direct, but never blunt. During fuel and/or water breaks, Jim might pull a student aside to give them more in-depth assessment in private. I never saw anyone rebut or even take issue with any of his critiques. I believe that is due to the respect and trust Jim inspires.
In the end, I can say that I know I learned more in that course than during most of my previous reading and riding. Of course I believe it perfect for any reentry rider, but given his experience, expertise, and coaching style, I believe all but the most learned or experienced could benefit from his course.
http://www.ridersworkshop.com/
.
http://bmwsporttouring.com/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=377004&gonew=1#UNREAD
As some of you have heard me say before, I’m a re-entry rider. I came back to riding just 20 months ago after a 15 year hiatus. Since then I’ve put about 22K miles on my 04 RT, much of that riding with this group and many thousands of those miles riding two-up. Last September at the UNRally I had a close call with my pillion (here) that I knew even then was largely due to bad headwork and poor skills (despite our getting out of that bad situation unscathed and unharmed).
So, I rededicated myself to better focus and during the winter spent a lot of time reading the likes of Hough, Code, and folks here on this site. However, this spring I discovered that while that reading and practicing had improved my knowledge and skills, I was still making too wide a variety of errors I knew were interconnected. Suspecting habits from previous years riding were hampering me (let’s face it riding has evolved) I realized it was time to unlearn those habits and start learning better ones through proper instruction and coaching.
So, I started looking for courses of instruction and was surprised to find the vast ocean of skills and knowledge between MSF courses and profession track courses eerily vacant. I knew I wasn’t ready for the latter and was certain I’d progressed beyond most of the curriculum in the former. Having read about The Rider’s Workshop and its founder/instructor/guide Jim Ford in several print and on-line resources as well as here on BMWST, I thought it a good course for my skill set and to unlearn bad habits.
However, it was much more than that. Scarcely 24 hours after arriving home, I was checking my calendar and planning my follow-on tour, oops I mean class. Why the correction? The Rider’s Workshop is an on-road class cleverly disguised as a sport touring adventure – my trip twisting through the Appalachian mountains of MD, PA, WV, & VA. Being from the region I’d ridden some of the same roads before myself and with others. However, on those other occasions I didn’t have a guide leading me from one great road to another, giving me valuable insights to riding techniques and attitudes along the way.
Jim’s stated goal is to give attendees the keys to learn the Art of Riding Smooth, to identify what he calls The Invisible Roads (the roads few use), to read and understand the intricacies of those roads while riding, and to have a great time while learning and practicing these skills. Had I not learned a thing during my class it would have been a great time none-the-less. But let me assure you, Jim not only delivered on all aspects of this promise for me, he exceeded them.
Jim’s extremely smooth riding style is clearly the result of his personal experience as a pilot (he does indeed fly the road), being mentored by some great riders (Paul Mihalka, please take a bow), attending Primore’s CLASS schools, and the wisdom that comes from over 300,000 miles of riding. Couple that experience and knowledge with Jim’s calm demeanor, great voice, generous spirit, and a zest for life and riding and what results is a highly effective course that is just plain fun.
The course is generally a two-day format of five students. My class was comprised of riders from many states: MD, NY, and even ID. The experience level was widely varied as were their rides: two RTs, one Duc Supermotard, a Honda VTX (I believe), and a Burgman 600! Each rider had filled out their questionnaires informing Jim what they wanted to gain from the course and skills they wished to improve. And it became very clear later on that Jim did indeed tailor the course to each individual.
Our trip started in Thurmont MD and wound around the country roads of Western MD for several hours, mostly in a steady downpour, before we angled up towards the Mtns of Western PA and then into West Virginia. Throughout the first day, riders took turns following closely behind Jim, watching and listening to him (an radio is provided to all by TRW) espouse a one-ness between machine, man, and road – a philosophy of riding that he calls the Zen of Riding. A Pridmore student, Jim not only emphasizes mastering smoothness in all facets of riding but he positively de-emphasizes the “need for speed” on the street as an end. His view is that real, attainable, mile-crunching speed is not best attained from grabbing handfuls of throttle throughout a trip, but through heightened presence of mind, clarity of thought, and smoothness of action; all culminating in finding and achieving your “pace”.
Jim’s instruction over the radio was plentiful but in no way irritating. Rather than a “Do this … Do that” imperative approach, instead he calmly described what he was doing, always the why, and most often followed up with the how. Interspersed in the instruction were reminders of the aesthetics of riding. On appropriate occasions Jim would call our attention to a particularly beautiful vista or give us a bit of history about the area.
All this said, Jim was no stranger to humor. When a rider would show signs of forgetfulness by, say relying entirely on their self-cancelling turn signals, we would hear, “Self-canceling turn signals are for pussies … Be in control of your motorcycle at all times”. That became a class favorite. One of my personal favorites was on those rare occasions when we would have a slower moving vehicle ahead of us on a back road, he would say (as though a mantra), “Why do we ride the Invisible Roads, Gentlemen? Because local traffic doesn’t stay on local roads very long.” Then, as though commanded by his words, the vehicles would nearly always turn off!
After the inclusive dinner and night at a more than satisfactory hotel, the second day of the course revealed a change in format. Riders took turns being in the lead with Jim flying wingman. Segments of the roads selected were matched to the skill levels of each student by Jim. The “pilot under instruction” (PUI) and Jim would then proceed at an appropriate pace while the rest were directed to fall behind back and each ride his own ride. During our stints as PUI, Jim assessed our current flaws and provided corrective instruction. It was honest, direct, but never blunt. During fuel and/or water breaks, Jim might pull a student aside to give them more in-depth assessment in private. I never saw anyone rebut or even take issue with any of his critiques. I believe that is due to the respect and trust Jim inspires.
In the end, I can say that I know I learned more in that course than during most of my previous reading and riding. Of course I believe it perfect for any reentry rider, but given his experience, expertise, and coaching style, I believe all but the most learned or experienced could benefit from his course.
http://www.ridersworkshop.com/
.
Sunday, 17 August 2008
Just When You Think . . .
. . . You're getting the hang of this 'instructing' lark, up pops Keith Code with another thought-provoking or -concentrating article.
This one's on using the throttle.
Linky
.
This one's on using the throttle.
Linky
.
Saturday, 16 August 2008
More 'Parking' . . .
A little while back I posted Parked or Abandoned - but this latest one really trumps it!
Not only is the car blocking an entrance, it's about two feet from the kerb so that usual two-way traffic was having to take turns to get past . . .
.
Tuesday, 12 August 2008
Wednesday, 6 August 2008
Potted History of UK Bike Training
Compiled quickly for a forum post, but may be of interest to you.
RAC [as in the club with a breakdown organisation], operated with the ACU [as in the UK's m/c racing 'body'] ran the RAC/ACU training scheme.
As said, voluntary both for instructors and trainees, but also for examiners who conducted test far in excess of the 'L' test then, including H Code, maintenance, slow riding, and road ride (sound familiar, kiddies?)
Can't recall exact start date, but at its close had over 350 centres across the UK.
Despite the RAC/ACU's existance, scope, and success, the Government put money into starting STEP - the Schools Traffic Education Programme.
This evolved into Star Rider, with course at Bronze (one-day [or half?]) novice, silver (6? session learner), and Gold (Theory, riding, and test) at advanced level.
In 1981 the 'Part One Test' legislation was passed.
RAC/ACU said they couldn't afford to fund the massive investment needed to continue with training & testing, so announced their intention to bale out.
Both BMF & RoSPA announced 'umbrella' plans to look after disenfranchised centres, although some went 'solo'.
Realising what they'd achieved in the name of road safety, Government announced £100,000 to subsidise the new training regime. In an uncanny parallel to the STEP funding, they gave it all to RoSPA. BMF kicked up a fuss, got £10,000 . . .
BMF grew to, at its height, C. 185 centres across the UK, including taking on several Star Rider centres, when Star Rider's parent company went bust.
RoSPA folded its scheme along the way.
When CBT was introduced it heralded financial independance for many instructors as 'compulsory' training was necessary, a business case continued when Direct Access appeared - but that also sounded the death knell for voluntary centres who couldn't afford the time and costs involved.
The biggest UK training organisation was CSM. They went bust, but many indie centres have continued from their CSM roots.
More recently, the RAC have got back in to training again. How the wheel turns . . .
RAC [as in the club with a breakdown organisation], operated with the ACU [as in the UK's m/c racing 'body'] ran the RAC/ACU training scheme.
As said, voluntary both for instructors and trainees, but also for examiners who conducted test far in excess of the 'L' test then, including H Code, maintenance, slow riding, and road ride (sound familiar, kiddies?)
Can't recall exact start date, but at its close had over 350 centres across the UK.
Despite the RAC/ACU's existance, scope, and success, the Government put money into starting STEP - the Schools Traffic Education Programme.
This evolved into Star Rider, with course at Bronze (one-day [or half?]) novice, silver (6? session learner), and Gold (Theory, riding, and test) at advanced level.
In 1981 the 'Part One Test' legislation was passed.
RAC/ACU said they couldn't afford to fund the massive investment needed to continue with training & testing, so announced their intention to bale out.
Both BMF & RoSPA announced 'umbrella' plans to look after disenfranchised centres, although some went 'solo'.
Realising what they'd achieved in the name of road safety, Government announced £100,000 to subsidise the new training regime. In an uncanny parallel to the STEP funding, they gave it all to RoSPA. BMF kicked up a fuss, got £10,000 . . .
BMF grew to, at its height, C. 185 centres across the UK, including taking on several Star Rider centres, when Star Rider's parent company went bust.
RoSPA folded its scheme along the way.
When CBT was introduced it heralded financial independance for many instructors as 'compulsory' training was necessary, a business case continued when Direct Access appeared - but that also sounded the death knell for voluntary centres who couldn't afford the time and costs involved.
The biggest UK training organisation was CSM. They went bust, but many indie centres have continued from their CSM roots.
More recently, the RAC have got back in to training again. How the wheel turns . . .
Monday, 4 August 2008
No Entry. No, really?
It's obviously important for all road users to know the full meaning of roadsigns.
Or shoudl this be 'Road, sigh . . . '?
Yup, 'No Entry', that's what the sign says. You'd never have guessed if I hadn't old you.
The light still comes on at night, even though the car park's been shut for six months . . .
.
Sunday, 3 August 2008
Newbury Parking and Congestion
Newbury is a town almost perpetually plagued by traffic congestion. Some relief was gained by the opening in 1998 of the (in)famous Newbury Bypass, after its televised battles with 'tree people', and tunnel dwellers, amongst other protestors.
However, rises in through traffic, pedestrianisation of the town centre, limitations on access at some junctions, and considerable building work, have all conspired to almost return the roads to their previous levels of congestion.
Currently plans are under way to build a massive new development of shops, flats, and parking in the 'Park Way' are of town, with some parking areas already dug for archeological research (particularly over the area behind 'Jack of Newbury's' house in Northbrook Street. Whether or not the actual development goes ahead will, it seems, depend on the way the UK's economy goes . . .
The council has also chosen this time to change some of the town's other parking areas from 'pay and display' to ticket-operated barriers. This seems to be reducing parking spaces (as additional blockades are being constructed to allow access to private parking areas) and has also led to the removal of much of Newbury's motorcycle parking bays. Another bay (as a car park has closed) has been lost to the cinema development.
The council's advice is that bikes parked that are not causing obstructions, but not in marked bays, are OK.
There is still bike parking in the centre, and by the canal edge, in the 'Wharf' car park near the Museum. Another bay is within the Kennet Centre multi-storey; here the advice from the council is avoid the barriers.
Pics above show the pedestrianised town centre one lunchtime, and the traffic 'flow' just a few yards away.
.
Saturday, 2 August 2008
Want to take part in a survey?
The requests are:
Please contribute to the Saferider survey which is part of a European project to determine the viability of future electronic warning and control systems on motorcycles. This is a project which FEMA is involved with heavily and desperately requires input to support their arguments. The survey can be found at Responses are required before the 31st of August (deadline extended).
The FIM is conducting a survey of riders for its strategic review. They are currently short of entries from UK riders, so please complete the survey here The closing date is the 5th of August.
BMF Director Cathy Phillpotts is currently trying to complete a motorcycle parking map of the UK highlighting problem areas and issues. In an effort to speed up the process, we have created a very short survey for you to complete. The address
Also, the IAM Trust is asking riders who've been involved in collisions with roadside barriers to submit details, no link so contact them directly.
Please contribute to the Saferider survey which is part of a European project to determine the viability of future electronic warning and control systems on motorcycles. This is a project which FEMA is involved with heavily and desperately requires input to support their arguments. The survey can be found at Responses are required before the 31st of August (deadline extended).
The FIM is conducting a survey of riders for its strategic review. They are currently short of entries from UK riders, so please complete the survey here The closing date is the 5th of August.
BMF Director Cathy Phillpotts is currently trying to complete a motorcycle parking map of the UK highlighting problem areas and issues. In an effort to speed up the process, we have created a very short survey for you to complete. The address
Also, the IAM Trust is asking riders who've been involved in collisions with roadside barriers to submit details, no link so contact them directly.
Friday, 1 August 2008
Zero-Emissions Race
Next year's Isle of Man TT races will, if all goes according to plan, feature a race category solely for zero-emissions vehicles.
To be called the TTxGP ('experimental', presumably?) it's being supported by the BMF.
Further details here
.
To be called the TTxGP ('experimental', presumably?) it's being supported by the BMF.
Further details here
.