The future of riding... Adventure bikes? and the War on Crashing

[Sadlsor]

The argument is presented in the context of modern bike electronics, safety features and onboard "black boxes." Some in Saskatchewan or SGI (?) may be familiar with the concept, as in go faster and pay higher premiums.
Can technology save motorcycle riders from ourselves?
This ADVrider article is about four months old, and some of the comments are worth reading, as much or more than the article.

https://www.advrider.com/the-war-on-crashing/

 

[jodog]

Can technology save motorcycle riders from ourselves?

Can technology disable other drivers' cell phones or prevent teenagers from driving? I might be interested in that tech. A self steering moto? I don't think so. I'll be responsible for starting, stopping, and steering my own bike thank you very much. Last thing I want if for my bike to "transform" into a facsimile of Arnold and try to take over the world.

 

[Sadlsor]

@jodog that sentiment is echoed in many of the comments.
But not all... interesting conversation, and fortunately for me -- I don't have to agree with everyone, ...or anyone.

 

[drrod]

I have often said that if they took all the money that "safety" dictates you have to spend on a vehicle, and put it toward driving and riding training, that it would do a lot more good. Never happen though. Something about privilege vs rights I imagine.

 

[Upt' North]

If we go back to the 60's and 70's motorcycles were bereft of rider safety aids (?) as were many motor cars.Then technology and clever folk found out how to make riding and driving safer for us individuals.
ABS is the big one I suppose, but it is now almost impossible to buy motorcycles or motor cars without at least ABS and TC. Cars have obviously moved on since then and it was always going to be the case that motorcycles would catch up. That's all that's happening.
If we didn't buy bikes loaded with tech then I spose they wouldn't be made but it's a fact that motorcyclists do, if you speak to the average BMW rider they won't complain about the adaptive suspension or the central locking, they'll say life is not worth living without it.
Enjoy the freedom of riding what you like whilst you can, it won't last.
Upt.

 

[Gerhard]

I have often said that if they took all the money that "safety" dictates you have to spend on a vehicle, and put it toward driving and riding training

If you look at injury and death statistics resulting from accidents today and compare them to 50 years ago you would think the money is well spent.

 

[SMSW]

We don't need speed limiting tech on bikes. More and more municipalities are using speed cameras to slow down traffic and save pedestrians lives. California recently passed a state wide authorization to use these cameras. The numbers of reduced pedestrian deaths (after vs before speed camera use) makes this a hard argument to fight. Will we see speed cams on the interstate? Probably not, but expecting toll roads to not take advantage of computing average speed between entering and exiting might become a pipe dream.

As far as bikes self steering to avoid accidents, that will be years away. Cars (Teslas) cannot even see semi tractor trailers and other self driving cars miss pedestrians (seeing them...these cars manage to remove them from being a road hazard by taking them out). By the time most of the points of the article become routine on bikes, many of us will no longer be riding.

When I first tried skydiving, I went through an hour's verbal instruction, we practiced a parachute landing fall by jumping off a platform onto the (soft) ground, and went up in a plane for a $20 static line jump. After 3 of those the static line went away. Today beginning divers have to do 10 tandem jumps @ $200 each - they are strapped to an instructor (talk about the monkey on your back).

We can rail against technology that enhances safety, but in the end its a losing argument.

 

[Andrew Shadow]

Can technology disable other drivers' cell phones ......?

Yes, it would appear so, and it has existed for a while.
Our Provincial licensing agency was offering (I don't know if they still do) an app that anyone can download to their phone free-of-charge. This app disables the phone whenever it detects that it is being driven. I don't know the particulars, or what tech is involved, but speed and G-force related I would guess. It is offered for use on a voluntary basis.

There are many apps that will do this that are available for download.

Can technology ...... prevent teenagers from driving?

Driving is a privilege, not a right. As such, the age that someone needs to be in order to be granted the privilege of driving is a matter a change to an existing law. I can't see that happening to often however, seen to be to much political risk involved most likely.

 

[kiltman]

Some insurance companies in Ontario encourage you to upload an app on your phone to monitor your driving over a three month period…much like a black box scenario. The app would send back the data to the insurance company and it would analyze it and then determine if you qualified for a discount or not. You were able to turn the app off if you were going to be a passenger or riding a motorcycle. I guess at the time motorcycle riding didn’t conform with the algorithms that driving a car would.

At the moment, given my budget to spend on motorcycles is very limited I like to avoid any bike with a lot of electronics, as they are costly to repair if they break down. My recent acquisition, 2007 VStrom is an are bones unit that doesn’t have ABS. I’m ok with that.

 

[Larry Fine]

If planes crashed as often as cars, would the solution be to make planes that can handle crashing better?

They would train pilots better. That's what should be done with cars; it should be harder to get licensed.

 

[drrod]

If you look at injury and death statistics resulting from accidents today and compare them to 50 years ago you would think the money is well spent.

It is true that deaths are down per million passenger mile. That is good. However, we don't know what the numbers would be if there had been a similar amount of money invested in training.

 

[Gerhard]

It is true that deaths are down per million passenger mile. That is good. However, we don't know what the numbers would be if there had been a similar amount of money invested in training.

Just take a look at the number of accidents involving serious vehicle damage and then compare injury and deaths. The passenger compartments in cars seem to stay pretty much intact in even serious accidents today, in the1970s the engine would often end up in the passenger compartment.

 

[Larry Fine]

. . . in the1970s the engine would often end up in the passenger compartment.

And not always on purpose. (Think mid-engine Corvair)

 

[jodog]

Yes, it would appear so, and it has existed for a while.
Our Provincial licensing agency was offering (I don't know if they still do) an app that anyone can download to their phone free-of-charge. This app disables the phone whenever it detects that it is being driven.

I think you missed my intent there. Can I download an app that will prevent YOUR phone from working. That's the ticket.

 

[drrod]

Just take a look at the number of accidents involving serious vehicle damage and then compare injury and deaths. The passenger compartments in cars seem to stay pretty much intact in even serious accidents today, in the1970s the engine would often end up in the passenger compartment.

There is no denying that the crash worthiness of vehicles is many fold better than in the 60's. The point I was trying to make (badly apparently) is that, to use your thinking a bit......where would the engine be if there was no collision because people were actually paying attention and knew how to drive due to better training a stricter licensing (there are very few "accidents")?
eg.
Why do people think you need lane departure warning systems if you take your responsibility behind the wheel seriously?

 

[Andrew Shadow]

I think you missed my intent there. Can I download an app that will prevent YOUR phone from working. That's the ticket.

I understood what you meant. I was simply making the point that disabling technology already exists. I wouldn't be surprised when the day came that it will be included on every phone whether a person wants it or not, and eventually always active whether a person wants it or not, because doing things in the name of SAFETY seems to trump everything else now whether it makes sense or not.

 

[ST1100Y]

Some insurance companies in Ontario encourage you to upload an app on your phone to monitor your driving over a three month period…much like a black box scenario.

Yeah... the fully transparent citizen... inside his always online vehicle... the wet dream of data mining corps...
Already existing with OnStar, now even brought to the EC with the mandatory(!) eCall embedded in every new car...

And that's the sales argument, all vehicles are embedded, they can talk to each other, hence no accidents happening... in theory... until a Tesla (again) homes into a fire truck...
(you wouldn't believe how often those Teslas completely disregard priority, run yield and stop signs, pull out exits, etc...)

OTOH every new safety feature has a proven concept: a boost in driver ignorance...

 

[SMSW]

Why do people think you need lane departure warning systems if you take your responsibility behind the wheel seriously?

It's more a matter of people's concentration wandering. Stuff happens, despite people's best intentions or attention. People get tired behind the wheel, there are lots of reasons proponents can come up with that have nothing to do w/ personal responsibility.

 

[ST Gui]

Can technology disable other drivers' cell phones

??

prevent teenagers from driving?

That's what car keys and parents are for. Tech has its place but it bothers me that so many parents use it to take the place of parenting.

Until we find the perfect answer that applies to everyone but us I want more jackbooted thugs eschewing rapists and murderers for donuts and writing copious traffic tickets. As long as it applies to everyone but us.