DOT Approved for Motorcycle Riders?

[cannon_fodder]

It's probably a compromise.  They are certainly cheaper than large concrete barriers and arguably look better too.  They may have more maintenance costs and apparently there is an argument that they are not as safe.  

That said:
1) They are better than nothing.  Certainly hitting this at a shear angle at 70pmh and more than likely deflecting off is better than hitting oncoming traffic at 140 mph.  Killing 2 car loads of people.

2) A motorcycle hitting a concrete barrier at 70 mph is just as dead as one hitting a wire barrier.  I really do not see how that would be an issue.  Unless he turned at a 90 angle to the rope and hopped off of his bike and skid across the ground to be decapitated.  In which case he would have ended up in oncoming traffic and them slamming into a ditch anyway...

Clearly any safety device can in rare circumstances do more harm than good.  But on the whole they will probably help...

[AMP]

I have always also asked why the Jersey DOT concrete barriers were not at the proper height to keep motorcycle riders from going over the top of them. They should be a minimum of six feet high to be a proper fit for a motorycle rider.  Afterall the Department of TRANSPORTATION should be just that.  

To accomodate all forms of Transportation, and not just Heavy Vehicles.  For many years motorcyles license tags in Oklahoma cost $8.50.  Now they are many times more than that, however DOT does ont seem to recognize in all instances those vehicles as one that also uses the highways.  The ratio of use should not be a factor.  

May be there are fewer motorcycles in this state than others, due to the lack of maintenance of the highways, and the incorporation of these unsafe and dangerous types of barriers.  

The statement of the wire rope stretched across the entrance was to illustrate that just because you are not supposed to run into barriers or objects located in the proximity of where one normally operates a motor vehicle does not mean there should be solid objects or hard to see objects placed in ones path intentionally.

I sustained damage, to one of my vehicles, while turning into the Budweiser Plant in Ardmore, Oklahoma on a business call.  The damage was caused by a wire rope strung across an entrance to the plant.

I had never been there before, and turned into the second entrance while looking back at the sign to make sure it was the correct building.  They had a wire rope stretched across that driveway that was rusted brown and very difficult to see against the similar brown color of the buliding on that overcast day in the Winter.  

The cable caught on the upper portion of the grill of my truck and stretched like a bow string, it then popped up over the hood and sprung back into my windshield cracking the glass and tearing off the radio antenna.  I was traveling around 10mph.  

I have witnessed dozens of crashes involving motorcycle riders in excess of 100 mph and majority of them walked away.  

Most of the ones that did not, had collided with a concrete barrier in turn 8a at Texas World Speedway, that has since been removed using a large crane, a Bull Dozer, and a Blade.

Took one fatality and four orthopedic injuries to convince the track owners to remove that barrier.

Since the removal of that wall, there have been crashes at that turn, but no serious injuries were sustained

The pieces of broken metal I observed in the Youtube video of the crash test appear to be razor sharp.  So if you are involved in an accident where another heavy vehicle ahead of you tears out the upright suspension portion of that barriers system, and you come along behind it and slide over those metal stands sheared off, I submit it would be razor sharp to your body parts.  I submit also that those uprights, when hit at speeds over 10 mph, will do damage to human flesh just as a razor sharp object.

O have seen the Tree Removal crews cutting down trees leaving a two or more foot high stub of a 2" to 4" diameter trees stickign up out of the ground on the roadside.  There were a large portion of these at the intersection of 36th Street North and Peoria two summers ago.  

Bottom line is why install an object or create an object near a roadway that by commom sense appears to be designed as more of a weapon than protection?  And once one is determined to be dangerous and causes injurires, why continue to use it or leave it in place until there is a fatality?   Just seems to be the common chain of events for some reason.  

Perhaps it is along the lines of the the same reason we had to create OSHA and OSHA Inspectors to keep foolish and greedy business owners from maiming and killing off the work force.

[AMP]

Two computer simulation tests performed one using the system as designed, second using round tubes around the legs of the upright flat metal supports and a plastic thick material along the lower edge.

http://www.nmcu.org/av/rider_no_protection_right_view.mpg

http://www.nmcu.org/av/rider_with_protection_right_view.mpg

[patric]

Trying to find the OHP quote... but it was effectively that when a vehicle glances a wall (like a Jersey Barrier) it's energy is deflected and the vehicle may leave the median as it slows.  When a vehicle hits cables, more energy is absorbed faster as the vehicle is "caught" in the cables.  

Since you're coming to a complete sudden stop rather than being slowed, the G-forces are greater and you are less likely to survive (since your "glancing blow" now becomes a "head on") but your vehicle is less likely to hit another vehicle (which is where the "saving lives" claim figures in).

Essentially trading one life for another.

[AMP]

The concrete barrier simulations seem to indicate that a motorcyclist impacting such a barrier in an upright position will sustain survivable injuries because of low decelerations during impact.

Simulations of the wire rope barrier collisions
showed that regardless of angle or speed it is
unlikely that the motorcyclist will clear the barrier very cleanly. In many cases the motorcyclist's extremities became caught between the wires.

This results in the rider being subjected to high decelerations.

[cannon_fodder]

So you want 6 foot high concrete barriers in place of all the barriers currently in place in the state? Find the hundreds of millions of dollars to do that and calm the people down about how ridiculously ugly that will be and then go for it!  

To accommodate all forms of transit I demand bicycle trails to Oklahoma City while we are at it.  And a go cart path.  What's the safest way of crossing the state on a camel?

Motor Cycles account for  3% of fatalities each year in Oklahoma, yet we should triple (or more) the cost to accommodate motorcycles? Six foot tall concrete walls... seriously.  If that is choice, then lets put nothing in and let the motorists and the motorcyclist continue to battle head on.  

Also, the mesh of wire on conspicuous polls in the center median is not comparable to a single line of rope across a right of way.  If the DOT proposes using a single line of wire rope to shut down roads or to stop traffic at toll roads, then we have a similar situation.  This is more akin to the wire rope in the grass at the U of Tulsa to stop people from parking on it...

[RecycleMichael]

I am in favor of divided highways that are separated by large sponge-filled center medians.

My "Twinkie Road" theory would allow vehicles leaving the roadway to hit something soft.

It would also allow for rain-water harvesting for highway gardens and help resolve stormwater runoff issues.

[patric]

It sounds like DOT is approaching this from a "something is better than nothing" angle.  
From that perspective they might be right, but if we were to spend a bit more money we could get Jersey (or F-Shape) Barriers and actually save lives.

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/2006/1/2006_1_26.shtml
http://www.answers.com/topic/f-shape-barrier
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-Shape_Barrier
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/roadwayengineering/standards/faqs.asp
http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/marapr00/concrete.htm

[dbacks fan]

Here in Phoenix when a car has hit the cable barriers and taken out the posts supporting the cables, a crew from ADOT is on scene to repair the damage between 8 and 24 hours afterwards. At times they are there within 4 hours to make repairs. They have 2 to 4 crews at any given time making repairs. And as I stated earlier most of the cable barriers are 20 to 25 feet from the actual lane of traffic. An example is the Loop 101 Freeway, going from the right shoulder to the barrier you have a 10' shoulder, three 12' lanes of travel, another 10' to 12' sholuder and the 10' to 15' of median then the barrier. The odds of a motorcyclist coming off his bike and sliding through the same spot that a car had taken out the supports are slim to say the least, and the ones that are used here do not usually snap off, they are bent over because they are made to do so at the ground.

[rwarn17588]

Yes, the cable barriers are designed to absorb more of the impact from a crash, thus lessening your chance of getting killed. Plus they prevent vehicles from veering into oncoming lanes, which is no small thing.

They have those cable barriers along I-70 and I-64 going into St. Louis.

Those barriers are very visible. If you can't seem them, as AMP intimates, you're blind and shouldn't be driving a vehicle at all.

ODOT is here to protect the *majority* of motorists, not motorcyclists who drive at insane triple-digit speeds, don't wear a helmet, or other dumb*ss stuff I frequently see them do.

[cannon_fodder]

What of the wheelie pulling crotch rockets I see on 169?  Their front wheel is probably near the 6 foot mark, so the 6 foot concrete barriers wouldn't help either as they may bounce over.  Better go to 7 foot so we can protect all transportation.

[patric]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Yes, the cable barriers are designed to absorb more of the impact from a crash, thus lessening your chance of getting killed. Plus they prevent vehicles from veering into oncoming lanes, which is no small thing.

Keeping vehicles from crossing into oncoming traffic seem to be the cable barriers only real selling point (accounting for about 6% of deaths), A Jersey barrier could do the same without sacrificing the lives of the primary vehicle's occupants.

Look at the median barrier on the Broken Arrow Expressway eastbound past Sheridan, and all the impact points there.  Most of those represent accidents the driver was able to walk away from because the forces were dispersed over time and distance along the barrier.
Now substitute a cable barrier where all of that force is concentrated at the point of impact by the vehicle becoming snared in the cables, and those points become fatality markers.

Looking at it from an economic standpoint, most impacts to Jersey barriers dont require repairs, whereas impacts to cable barriers almost always require dangerous and traffic-disrupting repairs -- and we'll end up having to do them all the time.  Cable barriers are cheaper in the short-term, but the required maintenance quickly cancels out any long-term savings.

I know this discussion was intended to illustrate that Cable Barriers are a bad idea for motorcyclists, but it's painfully apparent from the practical, economic and life-safety standpoints that it's not a well thought-out plan for motorists in general.

We should be pushing for Jersey (F-Shape) Barriers or nothing.

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by patric

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Yes, the cable barriers are designed to absorb more of the impact from a crash, thus lessening your chance of getting killed. Plus they prevent vehicles from veering into oncoming lanes, which is no small thing.

Keeping vehicles from crossing into oncoming traffic seem to be the cable barriers only real selling point (accounting for about 6% of deaths), A Jersey barrier could do the same without sacrificing the lives of the primary vehicle's occupants.

Look at the median barrier on the Broken Arrow Expressway eastbound past Sheridan, and all the impact points there.  Most of those represent accidents the driver was able to walk away from because the forces were dispersed over time and distance along the barrier.
Now substitute a cable barrier where all of that force is concentrated at the point of impact by the vehicle becoming snared in the cables, and those points become fatality markers.

Looking at it from an economic standpoint, most impacts to Jersey barriers dont require repairs, whereas impacts to cable barriers almost always require dangerous and traffic-disrupting repairs -- and we'll end up having to do them all the time.  Cable barriers are cheaper in the short-term, but the required maintenance quickly cancels out any long-term savings.

I know this discussion was intended to illustrate that Cable Barriers are a bad idea for motorcyclists, but it's painfully apparent from the practical, economic and life-safety standpoints that it's not a well thought-out plan for motorists in general.

We should be pushing for Jersey (F-Shape) Barriers or nothing.

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.

[AMP]

Reply from the AMA Legislative Branch

"Thank you for using the "Contact Us" feature at www.AMADirectlink.com to alert us to the Oklahoma Department of Transportation project to install cable barriers.

We have expressed our concern to state DOTs in the past on this issue; the answer is usually the same – no answer or that other barriers 'cost more.'  While we understand that cost is an issue, so are human lives.

If you learn any additional information on this topic, please forward it directly to me at iszauter@ama-cycle.org.

Thanks again for contacting us and for your interest in motorcycle safety."

Sincerely,

Legislative Affairs Specialist
American Motorcyclist Association
13515 Yarmouth Drive
Pickerington, OH 43147-8214
1 (800) AMA-JOIN
1 (614) 856-1900, ext. 1125
rights. riding. racing.

[buckeye]

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

A sampling of some statements that have me doing some head-scratching:

"...when a vehicle glances a wall (like a Jersey Barrier) it's energy is deflected and the vehicle may leave the median as it slows. When a vehicle hits cables, more energy is absorbed faster as the vehicle is "caught" in the cables.  Since you're coming to a complete sudden stop rather than being slowed, the G-forces are greater and you are less likely to survive (since your "glancing blow" now becomes a "head on") but your vehicle is less likely to hit another vehicle"  (this doesn't jive with the physics I was taught in school)

"Look at the median barrier on the Broken Arrow Expressway eastbound past Sheridan, and all the impact points there. Most of those represent accidents the driver was able to walk away from because the forces were dispersed over time and distance along the barrier."  (assuming that would not be the case with cables, I guess)

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.

Since we're essentially dealing with death, let's make this clear - there's not an endless source of money or other resources to eliminate death or the risk of death, unfortunate though that is.  When it comes down to it, The Man has to decide how many deaths he can prevent having a set amount of resources available.  Can anybody say for certain that the concrete is more expensive to install and maintain?  Seems to me that cable would be more expensive in the long run, but that's just a guess.

The ratio of motorcycle riders and/or fatal accidents to automotive is not a valid consideration?  I think cannon_fodder hit the nail on the head: "Motor Cycles account for 3% of fatalities each year in Oklahoma, yet we should triple (or more) the cost to accommodate motorcycles?"  See the rest of his post for a bunch of rational thinking, apart from a little camel silliness.

This thread seems to have started with one premise: "That looks like it would hurt if you ran into it."