Kawasaki Sportsbike Riders Club - Australia - Online Forum

we all know how much we hate these things...and how the guvmint/Vic roads said they are there to separate traffic, protect us etc etc....yeah right

didnt work today ....that driver would still be alive if they had

i wouldnt say thats the wire ropes fault.

trucks make pretty light work of armco too.

if it wasnt that gantry, couldve been a pole somwhere else.

RIP truckie.

WRB is designed for cars. It simply doesn't work for anything else.

WRB are not designed just for cars - http://brifen.com.au/index.php?option=c ... r&Itemid=8

What this photo doesn't show is how far back the truck veered off the road, it may actually determine whether or not the truck veered off before or after the WRB started. If like in NSW they put them up just before poles and bridge piers on major roars.

WRB's are very cost effective way of stopping traffic having head a head on. No motorcyclist has ever been killed from a WRB jumping out in front of them.

Nick

I saw a car run into a wire barrier once. The barrier safely took the speed off the car, didn't push the car back onto the road and no one was hurt. It worked well. I know a lot of us hate wire barriers but if we run into one it is generally our fault, I would rather that than the armco barrier that just forces the car back into the middle of the road when I am coming in the opposite direction.

Some interesting reading for those that can be bothered:
http://www.monash.edu.au/muarc/reports/atsb201.pdf
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/esv/es ... 0095-O.pdf

The second one makes for better reading.

http://www.autotrader.co.uk/EDITORIAL/B ... 41596.html

Thanks for the literature aardvark!

Did the mentioned study ever commence? seeing as it was from 2000....

Naked Twin wrote:WRB are not designed just for cars

Yeah would have to agree Nick, saw a segment on cabl TV a while back where they showed trucks testing WRB obviously looking at the Pic above it is not going to work in every instance, I am still dead against it as from a motorcyclist point of view it has the potential cut you in half & take limbs off... & yes it has happened before.
The UK had the right Idea... http://www.autoblog.com/2007/12/28/uk-m ... -rope-bar/

Aarkvark/ Rob, there is no doubt that a concrete barrier or even the motorcycle "friendly" armco would be much better for motorcyclists that come crash into these barriers. I think everyone who not only rides but a majority of cars and trucks would prefer concrete barriers. However what the reports fail to give data on and what we need to consider is the cost to benefit ratio.

Let me explain - WRB's are cheap to install and maintain. Concrete barriers are massively more expensive (at about $700 per lineal metre for a standard 1.2m high barrier).

Now consider that motorcyclists make up less then 0.2% of all kilometres traveled by a motor vehicle per year. In short we are a pimple on an elephant yet we want to be protected. Now what are we prepared to sacrifice to ensure that 0.2% of the population is protected (more then this ride but as a percentage of time spent this is correct). I doubt too many police officers want to give up their hard earned cash so that they don't have to scrape up a motorcyclist off crash barrier who was most likely riding above their ability.

Imagine all BMW car owners wanted to be compensated by the government as they couldn't drive their cars over speed humps, we would say get stuffed.

It is a commercial reality that to protect the minority by spending big $ there just isn't the cost to benefit ration that justifies it

Nick

Naked Twin wrote:However what the reports fail to give data on and what we need to consider is the cost to benefit ratio.

Oh, I'm fully away of the reasons why we have WRB instead of numerous other types of barrier, and to be honest, I'm not against them as a safety measure. I'm also the first person to jump on the "be responsible for your own actions" bandwagon. However, I'm against the installation of WRB in certain areas - like on bends.

Having said that, I've seen the result of motorcyclists hitting armco and concrete barrier. The end result is generally the same, just a lot less messy.

They will probably never have a barrier that makes everyone happy.
Minorities rule except in the case of motorcyclists

Concrete, wire, rubber!!! Nothing will stop one of these big bastards out of control
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pw3odVTVNfA

What has been overlooked with the above crash is that it happened very near to the Wellington Rd bridge....poor schmuk was probably so busy looking for the faulty greed cameras.......

We make both Steel Road barriers (often referred to as Armco) plus wire rope barriers as well. Wire rope is typically designed to be used on Freeways to provide a barrier which slows a vehicle down enough to stop them from crossing on to the other side of the road. Usually it works pretty well but obviously trucks can get through in some circumstances as can any car. In that case I doubt whether a steel barrier would've done much. The wire rope probably would have stopped the truck from crossing right across but it depends on whether the anchor at the start of the string held up, typically they do.

Are wire barriers any more dangerous than Steel. Overall the evidence in tests we've had done says not really. The injuries are different but what's worse a broken back/neck form hitting steel or losing an arm or leg from hitting wire rope.

In the end it really doesn't matter what you hit when you come off, it's all going to end badly.

Naked Twin wrote:.............

What this photo doesn't show is how far back the truck veered off the road, it may actually determine whether or not the truck veered off before or after the WRB started. If like in NSW they put them up just before poles and bridge piers on major roars.
................

WRB is down the middle of most of that freeway ..not just at bridges poles and signs
I drove it today...there is roughly (a guess) 400-500m of WRB torn out (and at the moment its just heaped in the middle of the freeway with repair work happening)

my original point of this is.... our so called road expert Vicroads convinced the guvmint that its is an effective safety barrier for ALL ...repeat ALL road users
that is cars, trucks (of any size) and bikes. Yes it costs a lot less than concrete, not much less than armco but as we have seen, it is terribly ineffective (result 1 dead)
We alos know what it does to riders who collide with it (but thats not the point of this)

I have personally seen WRB fail when a bus slipped in diesel in the rain near a local park (it tore out 100m of WRB and spread it over the road
the bus ended up in the park !)

whatever the cause of the truck running off the road (thats one for the Coroner), an effective barrier would have prevented the collision with the pylon

Smitty infortunately the picture offers little detail apart from the end result thus we can realistically offer little as to what would have been effective. Reality the current crash concrete barrier used on most bridges in Australia and used as general design around Australia has a major flaw. That is it is shaped like a triangle (okay that is an exaggeration) but they are thicker at the bottom and taper as they go up. Problem with this, well when a truck or heavy enough vehicle hits it with enough momentum they become a ramp. I have witnessed the effective of a truck hitting a concrete barrier (poorly designed granted) that launched a fully laded 40' container across two lanes of traffic and take out the light pole. Depsite it being outside Sydney airport thankfully no one was injured.

The only effective way to stop the truck hitting the pylon is there being no pylon. We have to ask though how much do you want to spend to look after the MAJORITY? In simple terms we could divert all cash to an aids cure but other things will suffer.

Simple question what are you prepared to give to ensure we have adequate crash protection. Note Adequate crash protection has to be over 2mn high and approximately 600mm thick at about or a $1000+ per lineal metre.

Nick