Motorbikes 'to get safe driving aids'

[Uber Dave]

Just saw this on the BBC News site. What are your thoughts about such systems?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12266406

[crewy]

To be honest, if it takes your eyes off the road, and also distracts you concentration on riding, i dont see how it could benifit anyone.

[Ducatista]

I am not entirely convinced a vibrating seat is conducive to increased rider concentration ;)

[redken1]

I am not entirely convinced a vibrating seat is conducive to increased rider concentration ;)

Might give us an orgasm though - opps sorry could not resist it. :D

[Caz]

Sounds interesting :D but as my last off was due to lapse in concentration dont really think its a good idea ;D

[silly_simon]

Can't help but wonder How much this kind of gadgetry will push bike prices up :o

You only have to look at the retail price of the crop of new litre bikes ;) ;)

IE the new ZX10 is £1 under £12k :o :o according to the kawasaki website.

[Squashed_Fly]

Sounds interesting :D but as my last off was due to an orgasm, I dont really think its a good idea ;D


;)

[Taylor86]

I am not entirely convinced a vibrating seat is conducive to increased rider concentration ;)

Might give us an orgasm though - opps sorry could not resist it. :D

Just ordered mine! lol ;D and for those that don't know me, I'm kidding!! :P

[ro]

Hmm, hardly "the first" systems to do some of that—I've had a satnav that can warn of speed limits and traffic hazards for years. I can also glance at the map to see in advance how tight a bend is—but something that could tell me that without me having to look down would be great.

[Thorkill_The_Tall]

I've just invented a time machine and travelled back to the early 1980's.

A newly elected Conservative government was slashing public spending, selling off public property without consent and trying to introduce invasive 'safety' systems to motorcycles.

With a push of a button, my marvelous invention was supposed to bring me back to the present day, but I think it might have got stuck in the past......

[Snowy]

Hmm, hardly "the first" systems to do some of that—I've had a satnav that can warn of speed limits and traffic hazards for years. I can also glance at the map to see in advance how tight a bend is—but something that could tell me that without me having to look down would be great.

What you need Ro is an Autocue for a bike. Just like the newsreaders use but instead it projects the satnav image onto special glass tilted at an angle so the rider looks through the glass to view the road but also "through" the SatNav image. HUD in old terminology (Heads Up Display) for the fighter pilots amongst us.

It's OK I'm happy with just copyright fees - you can have the business ;D

[Nooj]

Mr Moore said making safety systems on motorbikes useful was "challenging" because of all the distractions to which riders were subjected.

Distractions? Does he mean paying attention to what's going on around us? ie. STAYING ALIVE.


The safety systems could be a boon to less experienced bike riders

No they won't, they will make them lazy and not bother to learn how to read the road and spot hazards correctly. Same as all these 'safety' features in cars have now lowered the standard of drivers' abilities to that of a trained chimp.

From this article, Mr Moore appears to be a grade A ****ing idiot. More retarded **** being forced upon us from bureau-cretins who know NOTHING about riding a bike >:( >:( >:(

[Scotty]

There are more than enough things to concentrate on whilst riding and staying alive out there, a gimmick like this won't help at all. I agree with Nooj, people should learn to use their eyes and read the road properly and ride accordingly. There are already far too many idiots in cars who can't drive to the end of their street without twat-nav telling them how to get there, they haven't a clue how to find their way around anywhere, let alone read a map >:( It will just encourage people to stop thinking for themselves. Do we really want this pox of helplessness spreading widely across the bike riding population as well? ::)

[Jon_W]

I've just invented a time machine and travelled back to the early 1980's.

A newly elected Conservative government was slashing public spending, selling off public property without consent and trying to introduce invasive 'safety' systems to motorcycles.

With a push of a button, my marvelous invention was supposed to bring me back to the present day, but I think it might have got stuck in the past......

[smiley=thumbsup.gif] [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Could not agree more!

[Taylor86]

I know from my own perspective of driving for 7 years before even sitting on a bike that my observations and general road awareness improved even after just doing my CBT!

This isn't to say that I didn't pay attention before, but I like the fact that something as simple as a day on a bike could improve my driving. Would be a shame to take this kind of experience away by introducing too much technology to bikes...

Maybe the phrase "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" is applicable.
Also, if this is an aim to improve biker safety surely it would be more useful to encourage those Bikesafe and advanced riding schemes. I'm possibly not being corporate-minded enough ;D

[Ducatista]

Also, if this is an aim to improve biker safety surely it would be more useful to encourage those Bikesafe and advanced riding schemes. I'm possibly not being corporate-minded enough

You might be right here.
What's the real motivation?
Is it to improve safety or to make money?
I notice that Yamaha & Porsche are two companies that support this research.

[Nelly]

Nope. won't be wanting one of those. Can't see anything that would help on that.

This sums it up "people should learn to use their eyes and read the road properly and ride accordingly"

[Nooj]

Reckon this needs a rant on Biker FM! ;)

[Jacde]

As Scotty and Gladelicious said!
Road users should do a complusory CBT as part of any road vehicle licence application.
Bikesafe should be a part of on going training for bike users and other vehicle users should also have refresher courses, our licences expire every 10 years so there's your time scale.

[Nooj]

Think of all the job creation involved in regular re-training and re-testing of ALL road users! That's a lot of new incomes and income TAX and much safer roads as a result! You'd think the government would be keen to get the ball rolling.

[Taylor86]

I've regularly spouted on about how I think there should be an observed drive each time you redo the photo on your license...
Similar set up to CBTs where instructors can issue a certificate valid for 10 years that says that person is safe on the roads...

[Uber Dave]

To be honest I am trying to think of any cars that have similar tech on board comparable to what they were mentioning in the article. Off the top of my head I cant think of any with the exception of a few Citroen models but then as far as I know they only have vibrating seats if you drift towards wait lines between lanes on motorways without indicating.

The Govt will never force people onto bikes because by their own admission and in their own stats they are more dangerous (taking out the car vs bike accidents the bikes still win by some stupid figures in terms of road deaths) so no amount of enforced bike training would make it much safer for us because as soon as they get in their steal box of death dealing they feel all safe and warm and dont care and would soon forget the bike part, it would just be one more hurdle to a car driving licence.

Ten years is also too soon in some respects and not enough in others, in some ways I think having a ride along/drive along after 12 months of passing your test with obvious fails meaning a re-test but ten years is too soon. They should put it at ages rather than a set period starting at 55 when peoples eyes start to go and re-action times start to dwindle.

[Morticia]

I am too busy checking what the driver in front is doing to concentrate on anything else...

[Iceman]

"Awareness" is something you need to develop.For me anyway and gadgets are just one more distraction!

[redken1]

Think of all the job creation involved in regular re-training and re-testing of ALL road users! That's a lot of new incomes and income TAX and much safer roads as a result! You'd think the government would be keen to get the ball rolling.

Please please no more taxes. I have been riding for over 30 years and if I aint got it right by now can't see how more cash generating schemes will benefit me. [smiley=thumbdown.gif]

[Squashed_Fly]

I am too busy checking what the driver in front is doing to concentrate on anything else...

I'm too busy playing with my phone or checking I still look good in my mirrors! ;D ;D ;D :D :D :D ;D ;D ;D

[Shep]

From Nich Brown, General Secretary of MAG UK.


Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 4:30 PM
Subject: [mag-uk-nc-list] Fwd: Motorbikes 'to get safe driving aids' -
BBCNews


> This popped up from our political monitoring service today.
>
> I've had a look at the news sections on the MIRA and Saferider websites
> but can't see anything new that would have prompted BBC so it may just
> be filler.
>
> I attended a presentation about the Saferider findings last November,
> there is a final report due that spells out which of the technologies
> tested are likely to be developed and over what time-frame.
>
> The conclusions of the November conference was that very few of the
> 'safety' systems could be developed quickly, many would take 10 plus
> years if at all so I believe the qoute from MIRA about some systems
> being developed in 18 months should be taken with a pinch of salt - the
> comments probably refer to the fairly predictable navigation,
> communications and entertainment systems that the project looked at.
>
> The idea of putting strain on the throttle cable to warn a rider when
> they exceed the speed limit is not mentioned in the BBC report and at
> the November presentation it was said that this 'force feedback throtle'
> system had failed to prove to be worthwhile. The 'haptic handle'
> referred to in the BBC item is a device mounted to the throttle handle
> which casues a rippling feel under the riders hand, it does not close
> the throttle either.
>
> You can see the BBC story online
> <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12266406#story_continues_1>
> here are weblinks for MIRA http://www.mira.co.uk/
> and Saferider http://www.saferider-eu.org/
>
> Nich
>

[Ducatista]

They should put it at ages rather than a set period starting at 55 when peoples eyes start to go and re-action times start to dwindle.

I don't disagree with re-testing per se (although it's a massive undertaking on a national basis) but I don't agree with targetting older drivers.

Statstically older drivers have lesss accidents that why they get cheaper premiums.
I have believed for a long time that a valid sight test should be one of the things you need to get road tax (in addition to MOT & insurance), but I don't believe older drivers should be targetted, because although eyesight and reactions do perform less well with age, all the evidence is that it's younger drivers that drive outside of their abilities.

[Nooj]

Uh-huh, what she said. Eyesight can fail at any age, not specifically 55. Also everyone's reaction time is different, some 55 year olds are better than some 35 year olds. It's not an age issue, it's an individual thing and should be tested as such.


Please please no more taxes. I have been riding for over 30 years and if I aint got it right by now can't see how more cash generating schemes will benefit me.

Not as a tax generating scheme, as a safer, more aware road user generating scheme. If you've been riding for over 30 years, you may well have over 30 years of bad habits and unsafe riding practices to undo (not knowing your riding, obviously I couldn't say, just as an example). It's much easier to correct these things on a 'little and often' training basis than to change poor driving and riding practices that have been engrained through years of unobserved mistakes. That's what things like RoSPA and the IAM are all about.

Our roads are only going to get more crowded, that means to keep accident rates down we're all either going to have to go a lot slower, or get a lot better at driving and riding.

I'd happily pay £30 every three years for a re-test if I knew that money meant inattentive, unconfident, aggressive or otherwise dangerous road users (myself included if that's the case) were regularly identified and sent off for re-training.

[redken1]

We were told that speed cameras were introduced on road safety grounds. Despite this claim, the income received from fines by the private operators was not ring-fenced and directed back into improving road safety. I am in favour of regular eye tests for all road users, I attend the opticians yearly) but I am against regular re-tests. I am fed up to the 'back teeth' of the Nanny state interfering in my place of work and in my private life. In any case, how many road users ride or drive in the same way everyday as they would during a test? Why not introduce legislation to restrict all vehicles to a top speed of 80mph. Surely that would have a huge impact on reducing casualties on our roads?

[Jon_W]

Here's my idea of a safety driving aids.....

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i36/teleSV650/Armouredtrike.jpg

Should be fitted to all machines by law!!!!
[smiley=thumbsup.gif]

[Uber Dave]

Here's my idea of a safety driving aids.....

http://i68.photobucket.com/albums/i36/teleSV650/Armouredtrike.jpg

Should be fitted to all machines by law!!!!
[smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Lol +1

[Squashed_Fly]

It might Ken, if speed were the leading factor in most accidents. But since it isn't, it's bad driving, inexperience, over confidence in ones abilities and general ignorance then restricting the speed won't solve those issues. People will just become slightly slower twats....

[wiltshire builders]

Why not introduce legislation to restrict all vehicles to a top speed of 80mph. Surely that would have a huge impact on reducing casualties on our roads?

The human brain cannot withstand a direct hit to the skull of over 20mph. Restricting vehicles will have a minimal effect if at all. The only thing that is going to reduce casualty rates is education. Unfortunately that costs money. Riders and drivers wont want to pay for it, the general public won't either and no government would have the balls to introduce a new tax to fund it.
I'm affraid we're stuck with using common sense and plain old luck.

[redken1]

I was not advocating restricting all vehicles and bikes to 80mph, merely adopting the role of 'Devil's advocate' in an attempt to make a point against re-testing.

Although I own a bike which is capable of reaching speeds over twice the legal limit, I do acknowledge that excessive speed is a factor in RTA's. In fact I agree with The Office for National Statistics's following statement, "Major contibutors to road accidents are excessive speed and alcohol." To name, but two.

Getting back to my original point with regard to my opposition to compulsory re-testing, I fail to see how such a measure would improve road safety.
To offer a case in point, no provisional licence holder or proposed re-tester in their right mind would use a mobile phone during a test. Yet, such dangerous behaviour is more common on our roads than a bin full of student's Lib-Dem membership cards.

[Nooj]

Getting back to my original point with regard to my opposition to compulsory re-testing, I fail to see how such a measure would improve road safety.

It would pick up things like poor lane discipline, incorrect use of indicators, poor attitude to other road users, right-of-way at junction confusion, poor observation and hazard awareness, not being able to pick a safe speed for the conditions (too fast AND too slow), all the things the vast majority of riders and drivers don't seem to know they get wrong every single time they go out on the road. They wouldn't be able to consciously hide it on a re-test like speeding or texting at the wheel or being drunk because they have no clue what the correct procedure for every day general road use actually is.

No one is born with an inherent ability to drive a car or ride a bike, it's a thing we all have to learn and all we learn on our lessons is the bare minimum needed to pass a very basic test. To be better and therefore SAFER drivers and riders, we need to keep learning and keep practising the correct procedure, not be left to figure it out for ourselves and make things up to fill in the bits we've forgotten.

Regular assessments and retraining if necessary is the only way to maintain a high level of skill regardless of what we're doing, ask any specialist in any field. Driving and riding especially need a high level of skills to be maintained as it's so easy to kill someone with a car or bike. So further training and retesting is the obvious way forward.

[Squashed_Fly]

Of course Nooj is missing the glaringly obvious - it would cut down on Traffic. Not everyone would pass their re-tests, some not for several attempts. Take the number of drivers on the road being approx 38,000,000. That means if they were to do re-tests every working day of the year, we would have over 150,000 re-tests taking place every day. Lets assume that at a third of these don't pass and can't drive until they do, that's over 50,000 cars a day being taken off the road, and the ones that are being taken off will be the ones who are unsafe to drive. The safe ones will pass meaning statistically, we will have safer roads.

[Jon_W]

How about one of these..... :o


;D

[Squashed_Fly]

Is that the one that Jeremy Clarkson was driving around the BBC centre?

[Jon_W]

No, that was a Peel P50 Microcar.

A 1960 car using a Lambretta scooter engine.

[Uber Dave]

How about one of these..... :o


;D

That's a hideous version of the BMW C1, and I thought the BMW was bad!

http://cdn.slashgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/bmw-c1e.jpg

[Taylor86]

How about one of these..... :o


;D

That's a hideous version of the BMW C1, and I thought the BMW was bad!

http://cdn.slashgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/bmw-c1e.jpg

That's some A-class perfectly suitable biking clothing there as well... BAH! ::)

[redken1]

Nooj, you raised some valid points in your last post and I take on board your comments relating to bad driving/riding habits. Perhaps regular assessments and retraining is the way forward. Still fail to see how re-testing would prevent such road users from resorting back to their bad habits after passing a re-test.

SF, “The safe ones will pass meaning statistically, we will have safer roads.”
Using this logic, our roads should be safer now, because the current road users (apart from the illegal drivers/riders) have already passed a test.

For the sake of the debate, I will assume that your figures are correct. I doubt that a 150,000 re-tests a day is logistically possible. Again, let’s assume that a third of re-testers fail equating to 50,000 licences being revoked.

Doubtless, a significantly high percentage of this hypothetical failure rate will be road users who cannot operate their business without a driving licence (‘white van man’ etc). In effect thousands of people will be made redundant with immediate effect on a daily basis, placing an unaffordable burden on our already hard-pressed welfare state.

I believe there is another serious issue we should ponder on before considering the introduction of re-testing, which could prove to be counterproductive. I wonder how many re-testers who fail a retest and rely on their licence for their livelihood, will take the risk and continue to drive/ride until a further re-test is booked? Off course, this will invalidate their insurance.