DOT Approved for Motorcycle Riders?

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Also note the fact that the concrete barriers on the BA near downtown are being ripped out and replaced due to all of the damage over time.

Bingo, that's over time instead of every time as would be the case with cable barriers.

[AMP]

quote:Originally posted by buckeye

There's some dubious reasoning going on in this thread.

AMP, unless you're with the NTSB, this just stretches credulity to the breaking point:
"I have witnessed dozens of crashes involving motorcycle riders in excess of 100 mph and majority of them walked away."  Got any references for that?  I'd be glad to know that it's typical and not an exaggeration.

I work along side of Race Control at ten different race courses in the United States, working for three racing sanctions.  And yes I have witnessed dozens of motorcycle road race, dirt track, motocross and drag racing incidents.  

Majority of times when a rider crashes on a motorcycle in a single vehicle incident, and does not have a sudden stop with a solid object while traveling at high speeds, they normally walk away.   Incidents involving two or more riders, typically end in some level of trauma, however most times the riders may only suffer  sprained wrists or ankles, or other minor fractures.  

Typically when the rider comes into contact with a vertical object that should not be there, such as a small tree that has grown up since our last visit to a venue, or and object that is left unprotected by soft barriers such as straw bales or air fence, do we see injuries from single rider crashes.

I have crashed (handlebar hit the ground) more than once  at speeds over 100mph while riding motorcycles, and walked away from it.  Protective leathers, boots, gloves, helmet provide adequate protection from sliding on concrete/asphalt, grass or clay surfaces.  

A famous motorcyle stunt jumper once said, "It's not the fall that hurts, it is the sudden stop at the bottom."  Or It's not the slide that hurts, it is the sudden impact with another object.

[AMP]

Here is an example of two riders involved in an incident.  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBQWjbzvthg&mode=related&search=

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by sgrizzle

Cable barriers are designed for deflection, not "snaring" vehicles. And when a vehicle hits your concrete barrier, all of the impact happens at one spot and nothing is absorbed by the target. Also note the fact that the concrete barriers on the BA near downtown are being ripped out and replaced due to all of the damage over time.

Actually, they replaced beat-up Armco railing with Jersey barriers at the 15th St. east-bound exit.

I don't know that there is any barrier which will be perfect in every crash.  Solid or cable objects, or on-coming vehicles are not friendly to bikes, period.

The one thing I don't like about Jersey barriers is the taper out-ward at the bottom.  They can and do suck a tire up on them and flip vehicles.  Ever notice those tell-tale skid marks going upward on a barrier?

At least it only winds up usually injuring or killing the inattentive driver who would have otherwise crossed the median and taken out someone else, though occasionally they wind up taking out someone else traveling behind them.

[buckeye]

I don't see comparing race crashes with street crashes as valid.  The situations are too different and there are far more variables on the street than on the course.  Perhaps if nerf-lined freeways were populated only with motorcycles and every rider came equipped with race-ready safety gear, yes.  Not only that, but there must be some skill involved in coming off the bike properly to minimize injury.  Does the general motorcycle-riding population have the same level of skill?  Doubt it...

quote:Typically when the rider comes into contact with a vertical object that should not be there, such as a small tree that has grown up since our last visit to a venue, or and object that is left unprotected by soft barriers such as straw bales or air fence, do we see injuries from single rider crashes.

In situations _closer_ to 'real life', in other words.

I suppose this thread could easily wander into general motorcycle safety questions.    I should say that I've never ridden one.  Moreover, I never plan to - driving a Miata for the last six years has helped convince me that I'm not willing to take the safety risks associated with essentially being naked in a sea of SUVs and other 3000 pound (and heavier) objects that can't or won't see my vehicle.  

Frankly, that does bias my position.  You rides your bike and you takes your chances.  Given the number of riders I see without helmets (at least half), there are many that just don't care.

[AMP]

Actually many of the riding suits you see savvy street motorcyclists wearing are made from Kevlar materials and hidden armor with space age plastics and other forms of protection sewn inside the garments.  

Helmets are another issue all together.  Seems since the major cause of injury and death is head injuries in the majority of traffic accidents, then using the best for the majority logic, why is there not a mandatory Helmet Law for every person that is in or operating a moving vehicle at all times?  

Airlines should also issue jump suits, helmets and Parachutes plus instructions to all passengers at time of boarding.

All rides at amusement parks should also issue and require the use of helmets to protect the rider's heads from any unforeseen trauma.

Trade off using helmets is compromising neck and spine injuries for immediate trauma to the skull, face and scalp areas.

Granted a helmets round form will provide glancing blows from objects one may come in contact with, and a helmet properly designed for the intent of use may provide reduced chances for superficial trauma. However, closed head injuries are not uncommon with both victims wearing and those not wearing helmets. Studies have found the de-acceleration is the major cause of closed head injuries, which occur, in automobile accidents at a far higher rate than in motorcycle accidents. Main reason is the passengers in automobiles have objects much closer to them to impact with than one riding a motorcycle.

Add to that the weight of the helmet, increasing the chances of neck and spine injuries even when there is no impact to the helmet what so ever. Just the G Forces and the added weight on the person's neck using the helmet increases their chances of neck/spine injury. Main reason for the Head and Neck Support (HANS Device) inventions and others similar to it.

Bottom line is we provide additional funding and expense to accommodate handicapped individuals and do not design buildings, ingress and egress. Plus provide access for them for public transpiration. We do not leave out the small minority of handicapped. However thinking back on this the government was forced to make laws to make sure businesses and public use facilities and transportation would provide accommodations for handicapped people.

Why discriminate by using sub-standard and dangerous, and cheaper traffic control devices on tax payer's public roads and highways? Cheaper as pointed out by the American Motorcyclists Associations Legislative representative or public use roads and highways?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevlar

[BKDotCom]

Motorcycle hit's cable barrier on BA
http://www.newson6.com/global/story.asp?s=10728711

A motorcycle driver barely missed being thrown into the Mingo Creek early Wednesday morning following an accident on a Tulsa highway.

Tulsa Police say the driver was going east on the Broken Arrow Expressway around 3 a.m. when he lost control and smacked into the cable barriers.

Police say this is the first time those barriers have stopped someone from going into the creek below.

The driver was not hurt.

Police say in fact, he got up and called his friends for help.

[Conan71]

Damn lucky he doesn't look like a loaf of sliced bread.  3am??? Hmmm.

[JCnOwasso]

I am 2 years late on this discussion, but I am always willing to give my opinion. 

AMP.  the 100mph+ crashes you have witness are in a controlled environment.  They are on a race course where the only vehicle the person has to worry about are the bikes behind him.  They generally have ample areas to slow down without abrupt stops (such as a wall).  With the number of crashes you have during a bike race, I would be extremely frightened if they had a high rate of fatality.

Now, in the real world, where you have 20-500 tons of metal rolling at 70mph within a 100ft radius of you... I think I would rather take my chance with the cable.  And there is just as good of a chance of a car crossing the median and hitting a bike head-on as it would for a bike to slice through the cable... again, I would take my chance with the cable. 

As for the cost issues.  How long did it take for these barriers to get installed?  Not very long.  They drill one day, roll cable and install poles the remaining 3 or 4.  I saw them install the 5 miles of cable on 169 N in approx 2 weeks, + or - 1 week.  So on the highend, 3 weeks to roll 5 miles of cable barriers.  It would take MONTHS of labor and materials for them to pour the jerseys like the installed on the new section of 169 (11th through 244).  A cost benefit analysis would have to have been completed prior to even thinking about going with this method.  even if you have 1 crew out every other business day fixing the cables, I would imagine you are still at a far greater cost savings. 

[rwarn17588]

It appears AMP bailed on this forum about eight months ago, so it's doubtful he's going to get your response.

Posters tend to bail when they get called out frequently on their BS, or when the inexorable force of events and time renders their opinions obsolete.