'The new action plan sets out how we will work to improve the safety of motorcyclists' says Labour MP
The new Motorcycling Strategy Action Plan - agreed with the National Motorcycle Council - sets out what the Government will do to improve safety for motorcyclists and to continue to facilitate motorcycling as a choice of travel.
Jim Fitzpatrick said: "Motorcyclists are the single most vulnerable group on Britain's roads today. They account for just 1% of all road traffic, but for 20% of all those killed on the roads.
"The new action plan sets out how we will work to improve the safety of motorcyclists, and make sure that we continue to address their concerns and fully consider their needs when making decisions.
"Updated actions in the new plan include building on initial work to identify the feasibility of a motorcycle safety assessment programme, in particular, looking at the safety benefit to motorcyclists offered by new technologies and the potential for including security and environmental aspects. We will also investigate reporting options for diesel spills and other highway defects, and disseminate options for tackling diesel spills."
Since the strategy was published in 2005:
* The DfT has developed and launched a new TV and radio THINK! campaign to encourage car drivers to "take longer to look for bikes".
* THINK! has sponsored the British Superbikes Championship.
* The DfT has published new safety ratings for motorcycle helmets through the SHARP scheme that could save up to 50 lives a year.
* The Driving Standards Agency has established a voluntary register of approved Post Test Motorcycle Trainers and an Enhanced Rider Scheme offering insurance discounts to licensed riders who take further training with an approved instructor.
* The DfT has published new guidance to local authorities on Use of Bus Lanes by Motorcycles.
* Guidance to highway authorities on motorcycle-friendly infrastructure has been published by the Institute of Highway Incorporated Engineers with support from DfT.
The 42 new actions update those in the 2005 Strategy. Some of the original actions have been completed, others are ongoing, many have developed over time and been revised to reflect the latest progress, while some new issues have arisen requiring new actions.
"in particular, looking at the safety benefit to motorcyclists offered by new technologies "
I see speed limiters, and/or new speed cameras.
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 12:10
Percentage percentage percentage bollocks....... .
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 15:17
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 16:17
Are they going to take all the Numptys in cars off the road then?
Or better still actually punish them when "they didn't see the bike"
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 16:21
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 16:29
What ever it take to make money, spoil your fun and generally piss you off, Labour will be there to protect you.
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 18:10
T509Speedy wrote (see)
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 18:44
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 19:22
I do 40 miles a day commuting, the problem is cage drivers not looking or indicating. I wear Hi-Viz(long sleeve) with reflective tape on the bike(like on a Hi-Viz) and they still don't see me.
No matter how much 'high-tech' stuff you put on a bike, training you give the rider, improve the road surface, you will still get the muppets in a cage pulling out on you then giving you the thumbs up
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 21:57
Make all cage drivers do 6 months / 5000 miles on a bike before letting em near a car again.
Posted: 25/07/2008 at 22:34
as-i-said wrote (see)
just make em take a cbt, that would cut rta's with bikes a lot me thinks
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 06:35
[QUOTE] the potential for including security and environmental aspects.[/QUOTE]
So does that mean they are looking at putting CATs in the exhaust system and or trying to tax on emmissions. Barstewards they are. This is gonna be another waste of tax payers money to screw more people.
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 08:38
stuntpilot wrote (see)
Been saying this for years, except they should do a year on a bike BEFORE they ever get near a car IMO. It would teach them respect for road conditions, respect for other road users and reduce congestion.
Who knows, some of them might even get to like it . . . .
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 11:28
If they use speed limiters, surely they can only fit them to new bikes, and not recall all bikes registered to go and have the limiter fitted?
That would lead to reduced new bike sales and higher prices for bikes not fitted with it?
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 12:10
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 12:14
Huw wrote (see)
Limiters would be a death sentence, image you're overtaking and the vehicle your trying to pass speeds up.
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 12:17
R1 loon wrote (see)
Huw wrote (see)Limiters would be a death sentence, image you're overtaking and the vehicle your trying to pass speeds up.Which happens pretty well everytime I'm overtaking on the M62, whether in car or on bike
Ditto, and therefore forces you to accelerate and break the speed limit then get an NIP.......
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 12:19
I roll off the throttle as soon as I've passed their front wing - and drop back to the speed i was at before - it's amazing how the overtaken car drops back, even though you've lost speed!
Btw - if you were going to get a NIP for that I'd challenge it - there's something in the Highway Code about not speeding up when being overtaken IIRC
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 12:25
Another good one I do, when in the car, is to sit dead level with them and then box them into the next car they catch up.
If they come after me I drop my speed to about 50 and watch them get angry then plant it in a low gear
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 12:27
I roll off the throttle as soon as I've passed their front wing - and drop back to the speed i was at before - it's amazing how the overtaken car drops back, even though you've lost speed!Btw - if you were going to get a NIP for that I'd challenge it - there's something in the Highway Code about not speeding up when being overtaken IIRC
I have thought about that, I was told by someone that when he was training for his DAS, if he was overtaking and the car played silly buggers, then get out the way and the examiner would not fail him but would if he dithered, and pulled back in behind, as long as he didn't go mad.
Trouble is how do you challenge an NIP?There is nowhere on the notice you can, its fill it in or face procecution, (which I reckon is a breach of human rights).
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 12:37
R1 loon wrote (see)I roll off the throttle as soon as I've passed their front wing - and drop back to the speed i was at before - it's amazing how the overtaken car drops back, even though you've lost speed!Btw - if you were going to get a NIP for that I'd challenge it - there's something in the Highway Code about not speeding up when being overtaken IIRCI have thought about that, I was told by someone that when he was training for his DAS, if he was overtaking and the car played silly buggers, then get out the way and the examiner would not fail him but would if he dithered, and pulled back in behind, as long as he didn't go mad.Trouble is how do you challenge an NIP?There is nowhere on the notice you can, its fill it in or face procecution, (which I reckon is a breach of human rights).
You are confusing an NIP with a s172 notice requiring you to name the driver..although they may appear in the same envelope they are two different things..
The s172 MUST be completed or you will face prosecution..the only defence being that you have taken all reasonable steps to identify the driver.
An NIP is simply a note telling you that the vehicle you have registered has committed an offence..there is nothing to dispute..its in effect a courtesy that is not offered in any other country..if you like its a chance to gather your defence before you forget key facts..Its a legal requirement to send one out...nothing more..
If you return the s172 naming yourself then you would receive either a summons or a conditional fixed penalty offer..THIS is the point at which you can challenge the prosecution,,.. the notice will tell you exactly how to do this....( you tear it off and send it back ticking the box to say you wish to have the matter heard on court(if its a fixed penalty notice)..
PS if you google Idris Francis you will see that the s172 notice has already been challenged an the EU court ruled it wasn't a breach of human rights..
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 12:58
Thanks for that Gedge.
I'm not thinking of appealing, I did the crime so I'll do the time.
My only beef is that the use of cameras would be best served in the 40 and 30 zones.
Also if I do decide to go to court you can bet they'll hammer me for it.
Posted: 26/07/2008 at 13:10
kevinwigan wrote (see)
I do 40 miles a day commuting, the problem is cage drivers not looking or indicating. I wear Hi-Viz(long sleeve) with reflective tape on the bike(like on a Hi-Viz) and they still don't see me.No matter how much 'high-tech' stuff you put on a bike, training you give the rider, improve the road surface, you will still get the muppets in a cage pulling out on you then giving you the thumbs up
Posted: 28/07/2008 at 13:19
Loud exhausts just piss Joe Public off.
How about riding defensively?
Posted: 28/07/2008 at 13:27
Big Damo wrote (see)
The problem is, that to see you they first have to be looking in your direction - to do this you need to fit a really f-ing loud exhaust! It's amazing how quickly people get out of the way when you sound like like a fighter jet coming up to them
Is it?? IME its amazing how bikes with loud cans are hardly noticeable until after they have gone past you...There might be some minor benefit in waking up the odd pedestrian but somehow I doubt many car drivers with the windows up and stero going even notice you until you are in front of them and then its just to complain about your noisy exhaust system..( Emergency vehicles dont even get noticed (in good time)with flashing headlights, blue lights and massive siren blaring..)
It must be one of the worst biker myths........
Posted: 28/07/2008 at 13:35
Thats a half turth Gedge, from time to time I drive my car, what you said was correct that with loud cans when someone is going hell for leather then you dont notice them untill they have overtaken you, however being a defence rider, if I feel its too dangerous to overtake in places I found with a combination of having the lights on and a loud can it gets you noticed when you sitting near a car, they often hear you, see you then allow you to overtake or even decide to use indicators to let you know they cant let you go.
So I would say 50% that loud pipes do get you noticed.
Posted: 28/07/2008 at 13:40
A few months ago, after many many close calls and eventually getting sideswiped and knocked off by a woman in a golf changing lanes without indicating (who stopped for a second then drove off at speed) , I fitted a "road legal" race can.
I can honestly say that since the new exhaust was fitted I have not had a single close call, and as i said in my previous post,car drivers actively get out of my way. The system is fully legal (i kept the baffle in), and isnt so loud as to piss people off, but if I drop the clutch and rev a little when I see a hazard I am always noticed (so far - touch wood).
I dont care what anybody "thinks"without having experienced this, because I know that fitting the can has worked!
Posted: 28/07/2008 at 18:54
The problem comes if you do get knocked off and you have a loud can, and any witness assumes you were speeding because of the noise.
Posted: 28/07/2008 at 19:25
I too have had close calls with inattentive cagers and agree that they need more training (I like the "put them on a bike" idea, made me a better car driver).
Just playing devils advocate here for a second, is there any mention in any stats of how many of the incidents involving bikes are single bike accidents? And if so, do we really want those numbers publicised? In Ireland here, I hear of so many single bike crashes that I'd be worried that any probing into those numbers would find us to be the ones who don't pay attention, focusing any solution on bikes alone. Any thoughts?
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 10:41
Well it had to happen. I tempted fate and lost - badly.
this morning on my way home from the night shift, a guy pulled out from a slip road and did an illegal U turn in my path. I hit him hard (although only 25mph) flipped the bike and got launched high and far.
My pride and joy is a write off - note the twisted frame, and I will not be going jogging any time soon. Why did I have to stick my oar in
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 11:16
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 11:34
roebird wrote (see)
Big Damo, I'm glad you are fit enough to type on here after that collision, but sorry about the state of your poor bike. I hope the illegal u-turner had the decency to stop and check that you were OK, not just racing off like the Golf driver did.
He did stop - and so did the motorist behind me who was kind enough to phone an ambulance and the police for me. Thankfully he has admitted full liability, and with there being a witness (who made the calls) my insurance is sorting things out. Am off back to hospital this aft though to find out why my legs dont want to work anymore.
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 11:42
Just glad you're ok and things are pretty clear cut regarding your claim.
Now that you have no sex drive and cant sleep and have terrible flash backs, I hope the compo is substantial .
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 12:32
To agree with and build upon all the previous posts that have voiced the same sentiment:
Compulsory adult cycling proficiency test before you can take (motorcycling) Direct Access. Compulsory cycling proficiency and CBT before you can take (car) Driving test.
I ride a push bike, a motorbike and drive a car in and around Central London and the lack of mutual consideration and understanding between users of different vehicle types is scary. Crack this and you'd make a far greater impact on road safety. Charge for each test and you'd replace the 'Gatso Tax' income. Genius!
This wouldn't solve arrogant, homicidal, jaywalking pedestrians however. Perhaps a few high profile civil lawsuits might help here?
Oh yeah, and does having passed the CBT make us bikers any more tolerant of idiotic scooterists? Er...
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 14:24
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 14:26
Its the pedestrians on corners that start to walk off the path and cross the road whilst you are going round the corner that annoy me and are dangerous - so many times ive nearly clipped one with a mirror! Although since ive changed my cans to some lovely noisy ones on my Monster I have seen less suicidal pedestrians.
A lot of car drivers are oblivious to bikes and do not check for them as I found out first hand last October when someone went into my lane without checking it was clear and hit me in the side!
Granted some bikers are maniacs and cause their own accidents, but sometimes its other drivers who just dont look - this is where the government needs to spend its money, teaching car drivers etc. how vulnerable us bikers are and to be aware of other people around them.
Easier said then done though
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 15:12
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 18:35
It's 40 years since I took my bike test and 35 years since my car test. Apart from my HGV tests (which don't count cos we play to a different set of rules) I haven't had any further actual driving tuition so I don't know what today's driving test standards are.
My point is that I was talking to an ADI the other day about lane discipline on roundabouts and he told me that he teaches his pupils that there is no such thing as the 'wrong' lane on a roundabout.
I can confirm that there is indeed a 'wrong' lane on a roundabout; it's the one I'm in when I'm driving an artic. That lane (and any others I might need) is mine and you really don't want to be in it.
Joking aside, I can see now why people keep cutting me up on roundabouts when I'm on the bike, if that's the way they're being taught nowadays.
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 19:03
Having been a motorcyclist since the 60's I think I have seen it all through the years. The trouble is, the general standard of driving has gone completely down the tubes since those heady days, and this comment does include some bikers.
In recent years I have noticed a major down turn in the attitude of car drivers toward motorcyclists. I am of the opinion they do not care whether they hit you or not any more and it's your worst luck if you fall off when 'they' have cut you up. By far the worst offenders are women especially the 'four by four' drivers; I state this as a fact IMHO having suffered on many occasions.
I whole-heartedly advocate that no new car driver of either sex should be allowed to drive until they have spent at least a year on two wheels and in all kinds of weather, as well as all established car drivers should be put through the CBT as a mandatory requirement. Only then will these people have an appreciation for what the motorcyclist has to put up with. It is not just the bad driving of others it also includes avoiding potholes, man-hole covers, debris of all kinds, branches, leaves, stones, pebbles and litter thrown out of cars and trucks. On top of that there are the sunken drains, slippery when wet white lines, metal studs, ruts in the tarmac, road kill, grit on sprayed tar ....I could go on. We avoid all this just to get from A to B every time we go out. God help us!
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 19:25
Well it had to happen. I tempted fate and lost - badly.this morning on my way home from the night shift, a guy pulled out from a slip road and did an illegal U turn in my path. I hit him hard (although only 25mph) flipped the bike and got launched high and far.My pride and joy is a write off - note the twisted frame, and I will not be going jogging any time soon. Why did I have to stick my oar in
Look on the bright side, your still alive, the bikes going to be replaced and you may even get some cash in your pocket out of it.
Its only metal and plastic at the end of the day you can replace it.
Posted: 29/07/2008 at 20:44
Become a fan of Visordown
Follow us on twitter
Other Immediate Media Sites
Our eCommerce Platform
© Immediate Media Company Ltd 2012. This website is owned and published by Immediate Media Company Limited. www.immediatemedia.co.uk