"Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Equipment and On Road Behaviour, Laws and Rules. Cycling Promotion and Advocacy

"Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby WestcoastPete » Thu Dec 13, 2012 1:31 pm

http://theage.drive.com.au/motor-news/c ... 2baxl.html

Motorcyclists would be able to legally weave through traffic at red lights under a plan being recommended by Victorian parliamentary inquiry designed to improve road safety.

Among dozens of recommendations from the state's Road Safety Committee, one is for more research into filtering - where riders pass between stationary cars to get to the front of the queue - with a view to making it a legal in Victoria.

Motorcycling Australia, the Victorian Motorcycle Council and road safety lawyers at Maurice Blackburn backed the push to allow riders to "filter" through traffic gaps when stopped at lights, saying there were dual benefits of decreasing congestion and increasing driver awareness of motorcyclists on the roads.

The report is critical of current data collection. "There are serious and ongoing issues with the collection, use and dissemination of motorcycle trauma data in Victoria. The cumulative effect of these issues is that they undermine informed decision making on road safety for motorcyclists, and therefore it is not possible to accurately assess motorcycle trauma in Victoria."

Advertisement
As a result the group recommends an independent office of road safety data be set up.

A star-rating rating system for safety equipment has also been called for covering boots, gloves, jackets, pants and armour. The panel said it should be established within two years, and be fully functioning within three years.

Off-road motorbikes should be treated the same as on-road riding by VicRoads and the Transport Accident Commission, the committee said.
User avatar
WestcoastPete
 
Posts: 862
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 4:59 pm
Location: Peoples Republic of Coburg, Victoria

by BNA » Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:23 pm

BNA
 

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby il padrone » Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:23 pm

Umm.... to the best of my knowledge, it is legal ???

There is no rule that I have seen in the Victorian Road Rules that prohibits it. Maybe the police fine them on the basis of driving dangerously. There is precious little distinction in the rules that apply to a bicycle rider and that for other drivers.

Note: riding between moving lines of traffic (something some moto riders like to do) is definitely illegal, for motos and for cyclists.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18161
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby r2160 » Thu Dec 13, 2012 2:59 pm

In NSW, Rule 141 specifically states that drivers must not overtake on the left of vehicles. It also specifically EXCLUDES bicycles from this rule

cheers
Glenn
-----------
"Pain is temporary. It may last a minute, or an hour, or a day, or a year, but eventually it will subside and something else will take its place. If I quit, however, it lasts forever" Lance Armstrong
r2160
 
Posts: 1070
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 4:01 pm
Location: Bass Hill, NSW

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby skull » Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:42 pm

I always thought motorbikes could filter at lights.


Sent from my not iDevice using Tapatalk 2
User avatar
skull
 
Posts: 1657
Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2007 9:48 pm

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby il padrone » Thu Dec 13, 2012 3:57 pm

r2160 wrote:In NSW, Rule 141 specifically states that drivers must not overtake on the left of vehicles. It also specifically EXCLUDES bicycles from this rule

....and thus motorbikes may filter on the right of vehicles, subject to room* (that may mean they are on the left of the vehicles in the next lane). The rule you quote mostly applies to roads that are not multi-lane. Where there are lanes then the driver in the left lane may pass right lane traffic that is traveling slower.

* BTW, this is what I will do in preference while riding my bicycle at many intersections. Avoids the gutter-trap, the passenger-dooring and the left-hook or left-stall.
Riding bikes in traffic - what seems dangerous is usually safe; what seems safe is often more dangerous.
User avatar
il padrone
 
Posts: 18161
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2008 11:57 pm
Location: Heading for home.

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby wellington_street » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:54 pm

Yep, so soon as you hit the straddle the lane line or encroach on the neighbouring lane it is illegal. I would prefer if the law was tightened up in either direction to eliminate ambiguity.

I don't see any safety benefit to filtering, it's all about reducing travel time for motorcyclists. A motorcyclist queued in traffic in primary position in the lane is as visible as a motorcyclist can possibly be. Any action where you go out of the motorist's line of sight by passing them to the left or right in the same lane makes you less visible.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Percrime » Thu Dec 13, 2012 8:51 pm

wellington_street wrote:I don't see any safety benefit to filtering, it's all about reducing travel time for motorcyclists. A motorcyclist queued in traffic in primary position in the lane is as visible as a motorcyclist can possibly be. Any action where you go out of the motorist's line of sight by passing them to the left or right in the same lane makes you less visible.


Oh I has to respond to this. Just today city link said that 75% of the abundant crashes they experience were rear enders. Rear enders would be the exact accident that a "motorcyclist queued in traffic in primary position in the lane is as visible as a motorcyclist can possibly be" would experience. So er.. not very unlikely. And the exact accident that filtering dodges.

Its been established in a whole bunch of studies I cannot be stuffed going and looking for that motorists are less likely to see a motorcyclist (or cyclist) than one would expect. Because they are not looking for such rare objects in car world . (and apparently are not looking for trains at level crossings either but I digress) And so one might expect that the motorcyclist is rather more vulnerable than even the 75% number would indicate. I helped pick up a mate once who got driven over by the motorist behind. Who said "Who is going to pay for this.. thats what I want to know" Me.. "Why you.... you blithering idiot" Motorist .."But thats not fair. The last time this happened I had to pay"

So yes ... lane filtering .. when you make the calls is HUGELY safer than sitting in the primary position. I have been rear ended exactly once on a motorcycle . At 100 kph. By a car that just had not noticed me in front of it. Broke my hip. WHen he hit me the second time while I was sliding down the road. When I went to get up.. his radiator was in the way and I had to crawl out from under his car. So I has some experience.

Also sitting in traffic. IN stopped traffic. Wearing 30 Kg of leather and helmet. On a 40 degree day. Is not cool

it's all about reducing travel time for motorcyclist
Well no. Not all. BUT .. er its not actually a bad thing.
Percrime
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Mulger bill » Thu Dec 13, 2012 9:58 pm

So, how inflamatory is that headline? :roll:

Comments in the article should be interesting in a masochistic kinda way...
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25554
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby zero » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:37 pm

Percrime wrote:
wellington_street wrote:I don't see any safety benefit to filtering, it's all about reducing travel time for motorcyclists. A motorcyclist queued in traffic in primary position in the lane is as visible as a motorcyclist can possibly be. Any action where you go out of the motorist's line of sight by passing them to the left or right in the same lane makes you less visible.


Oh I has to respond to this. Just today city link said that 75% of the abundant crashes they experience were rear enders. Rear enders would be the exact accident that a "motorcyclist queued in traffic in primary position in the lane is as visible as a motorcyclist can possibly be" would experience. So er.. not very unlikely. And the exact accident that filtering dodges.



The largest category of rear enders for motorcycles, is motorcyclists rear ending other vehicles.

Ignoring the type of vehicle performing the rear ender - the largest category of rear enders is on vehicles turning right. Second largest is turning left. Next is the vehicle trapped directly behind those. None of those are solvable by filtering (ie you can't reliably filter to escape from being behind a stationary vehicle with 60km/hr traffic in the other lane). Being rear ended behind common garden variety filterable stopped traffic is a relatively minor risk, and the conditions of the traffic someone might filter through has extremely variable safety concerns, as does the issue of having to enter (and thus obstruct) the pedestrian crossing to regain a lane controlling position afterwards.

IMO the motorcyclists know that this is a safety negative proposal, they just also know that car drivers can't rationalise the various risks so its a strong debating position.
zero
 
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 1:54 pm

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby jham66 » Fri Dec 14, 2012 5:19 am

I was told once when speaking to a fellow motorcyclist (when I used to have one), that as soon as a car stops it is no longer a car, but rather an obstacle... which thus allowed him to filter at the lights.

One of the road rules that I was told made it illegal to filter at the lights is "overtaking too close to another vehicle" in two lanes of traffic you will be fined with this rule and the "overtaking to the left" rule simultaneously. In fact if they like, they could lump you with a whole heap of fines.......
Image
jham66
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 10:10 pm

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Percrime » Fri Dec 14, 2012 6:20 am

zero wrote:The largest category of rear enders for motorcycles, is motorcyclists rear ending other vehicles.

I have never seen that statistic.. never actually seen a motorcycle rear end anything.. tho I have seen video.. but er.. so?
I have never rearended anyone on a motorcycle (touch wood) I dont see what the hell one type of accident has to do with another at all
zero wrote:Ignoring the type of vehicle performing the rear ender - the largest category of rear enders is on vehicles turning right. Second largest is turning left. Next is the vehicle trapped directly behind those. None of those are solvable by filtering (ie you can't reliably filter to escape from being behind a stationary vehicle with 60km/hr traffic in the other lane).


Sure you can. You know..you look ahead ... judge the flow of traffic and move appropriately. Its easy enough on a pushy.. its way easier when I can twitch my right wrist and be doing 60

[/quote]
zero wrote: Being rear ended behind common garden variety filterable stopped traffic is a relatively minor risk, and the conditions of the traffic someone might filter through has extremely variable safety concerns, as does the issue of having to enter (and thus obstruct) the pedestrian crossing to regain a lane controlling position afterwards.

Are you sure you ride... anything?
zero wrote:IMO the motorcyclists know that this is a safety negative proposal, they just also know that car drivers can't rationalise the various risks so its a strong debating position.


Bwahhhhahaaaaa. Funny.
Percrime
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Mulger bill » Fri Dec 14, 2012 7:43 am

Mulger bill wrote:So, how inflamatory is that headline? :roll:

Comments in the article should be interesting in a masochistic kinda way...



Wasn't wrong. You can tell the free people from the caged with zero difficulty.
...whatever the road rules, self-preservation is the absolute priority for a cyclist when mixing it with motorised traffic.
London Boy 29/12/2011
User avatar
Mulger bill
Super Mod
Super Mod
 
Posts: 25554
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2006 2:41 pm
Location: Sunbury Vic

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Percrime » Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:30 am

A little bit on the absurd 'safety negative' claim

The EU MAIDS report showed that there were 6.5 times the number of motorcycle accidents for riders who were stationary in queued traffic compared to those who filtered through. This entirely fits in with my experience both in research and anecdotally Which does include a lot of time lanesplitting in various parts of the world. Its entirely legal in the UK btw.

http://www.maids-study.eu/

A Belgian study indicates that increased use of motorcycles, and increased adoption of filtering, could result in a 40% reduction in traffic congestion for all road users.
http://www.gizmag.com/motorcycles-reduce-congestion/21420/

The report being commented on says in part "On the basis of [the Inquiry's] analysis of the Victorian Coroners Court case files and police crash reports ... the incidence of filtering in terms of Victorian fatalities is extremely low."

Thanking the TAC get real about rider safety facebook page and Rob Salvatore who put so much work into it all .
Percrime
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Marty Moose » Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:37 am

I think its a great idea thumbs up.

Sent from my MB526 using Tapatalk 2
Marty Moose
 
Posts: 1405
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: W.A

Re:

Postby Percrime » Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:42 am

skull wrote:I always thought motorbikes could filter at lights.


Sent from my not iDevice using Tapatalk 2


Its not specifically illegal at least in Victoria. And I personally have never been ticketed. However overtaking on the left is illegal and plenty have been ticketed for either overtaking on the left. failing to indicate when changing lanes (er... moving across the white line) or dangerous overtaking.
Percrime
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Xplora » Fri Dec 14, 2012 8:59 am

jham66 wrote:One of the road rules that I was told made it illegal to filter at the lights is "overtaking too close to another vehicle" in two lanes of traffic you will be fined with this rule and the "overtaking to the left" rule simultaneously..

Won't happen, because apparently close shaves by car drivers on cyclists don't mean anything to a lot of cops :idea: :idea: :idea:
Xplora
 
Posts: 5583
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:33 pm
Location: TL;DR

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby wellington_street » Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:49 am

Percrime wrote:Well no. Not all. BUT .. er its not actually a bad thing.


I didn't say it was and I'd be quite happy for the road rules to be tightened to make it explicitly legal. I'm just not interested in pretending its about safety.

I had a particular objection to this claim in the OP's article:

increasing driver awareness of motorcyclists on the roads


as there's no way that moving out of the line of traffic can increase driver awareness - being right in front of them in primary position is the most visible position you can be.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Percrime » Fri Dec 14, 2012 10:59 am

If they see motorcyclists going past em while they are stuck in traffic, and hear them.. often... eventually they will be able to recognise one :twisted:

Such is the theory anyway. THe motorcycle I was rear ended in at 100 on the tullamarine freeway was bright orange. I have my doubts that some people are capable of even making good land fill.
Percrime
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby wellington_street » Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:12 am

Percrime wrote:A little bit on the absurd 'safety negative' claim

The EU MAIDS report showed that there were 6.5 times the number of motorcycle accidents for riders who were stationary in queued traffic compared to those who filtered through. This entirely fits in with my experience both in research and anecdotally Which does include a lot of time lanesplitting in various parts of the world. Its entirely legal in the UK btw.


Can you post some excerpts as I cannot access the report without registering. Or post a direct link to the report.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Percrime » Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:16 am

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/roadsafety_library/publications/maids_report_1_2_september_2004.pdf

THere is actually a later version .. I have somewhere I think. but digging it out would be actual work
Percrime
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby wellington_street » Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:48 am

Percrime wrote:http://ec.europa.eu/transport/roadsafety_library/publications/maids_report_1_2_september_2004.pdf

There is actually a later version .. I have somewhere I think. but digging it out would be actual work


The actual data for anyone who cares:

Pre-crash action | # of crashes | Percentage of total crashes
Stopped in traffic, speed is zero | 26 | 2.8%
Filtering | 4 | 0.4%

(Note there are two separate entries for filtering which have been aggregated to get the data above)

Hardly a sample size which can claim that queuing with regular traffic is a safety issue. the report itself makes no comment at all on the benefits or otherwise of lane filtering.

I'm not aware of any research which shows that lane filtering increases safety but would very much like to read some if it can be posted.
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby Percrime » Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:55 am

Its statistically significant data. Total accidents 1844 But .. no I cant be stuffed any more. So... feel free to ignore statistically significant highly regarded studies and wait until someone else does the research and finds you another statistically significant highly regarded study for you to critique and ignore while bemoaning the inability of anyone to find you a statistically significant highly regarded study.

Perhaps you could read the just released report. It addresses this very issue. At length

I shall not throw meaningless terms like chi squared test into the conversation lest I confuse anyone

Oh and it was no trouble. You are welcome. No need for such effusive thanks
Percrime
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2009 8:41 am

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby wellington_street » Fri Dec 14, 2012 12:08 pm

Percrime wrote:Perhaps you could read the just released report. It addresses this very issue. At length


Link?
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby nescius » Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Percrime wrote:http://ec.europa.eu/transport/roadsafety_library/publications/maids_report_1_2_september_2004.pdf

THere is actually a later version .. I have somewhere I think. but digging it out would be actual work


2009 version is here - http://www.maids-study.eu/pdf/MAIDS2.pdf (I think the link should work without having to register).

I think it's a great idea too, mind you I do filter fairly often anyway regardless of the legality. At the times I ride the most common accidents I see are rear enders, so I'd rather just remove the risk of it happening to me. I would also much rather be out in front and well away from traffic, much better than being sandwiched between cars.
Giant Reign 3 | Trek 8000 | Trek Madone 4.5 | Look 695 SR ipack | Fuji Track 1.1
User avatar
nescius
 
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Canberra

Re: "Call to allow motorcyclists to weave at lights"

Postby wellington_street » Fri Dec 14, 2012 2:00 pm

nescius wrote:
Percrime wrote:http://ec.europa.eu/transport/roadsafety_library/publications/maids_report_1_2_september_2004.pdf

THere is actually a later version .. I have somewhere I think. but digging it out would be actual work


2009 version is here - http://www.maids-study.eu/pdf/MAIDS2.pdf (I think the link should work without having to register).


Ta.

Tables 5.7 and 5.12 are of particular interest.

Table 5.7 covers the precipitating event - it says that 26/2.8% of crashes happened when the motorcyclists was stopped in traffic with a speed of zero (it makes no reference as to whether this is at the rear of a queue, the middle or the front).

Table 5.12 covers post-precipitating event but still pre-crash. it says that only 6 / 0.7% of crashes then occured when the motorcyclist was stopped in traffic. This is compared to 5 / 0.5% for filtering.

Can anyone clarify this?

It says to me that the only 0.7% of crashes actually occurred when the motorcyclist was stopped in traffic. Another 2.1% of crashes occurred after the motorcyclists was stopped in traffic but then made another movement - i.e. these crashes are not rear-enders where the motorcyclist is actually stopped.

Have I interpreted that right?
wellington_street
 
Posts: 942
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 12:25 pm

Next

Return to Cycling Safety and Advocacy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users



Popular Bike Shops
Torpedo 7 Torpedo7 AU
Ground Effect Ground Effect NZ
Chain Reaction Cycles CRC UK
Wiggle Wiggle UK
Ebay Ebay AU



InTouch with BNA
“Bicycles BNA Twitter
“Bicycles BNA Facebook
“Google+ BNA Google+
“Bicycles BNA Newsletter