Front Numberplates are officially dead.

Front Numberplates for motorcycles are gone, taken off the National agenda
for action. It's over. The ignorant finger of blame has been withdrawn.

I am pleased to inform you that the National Road Safety
Action Plan 2007 and 2008 was approved today by the
Australian Transport Council. Release of the new Plan was
announced in a joint media statement by Ministers Lloyd and Vaile
(http://www.ministers.dotars.gov.au/jl/releases/2006/October/L130_2006.htm)
and the document can be accessed directly
from the ATC website at the following address:
http://www.atcouncil.gov.au/documents/nrss_actionplan_0708.pdf.

The NRSS AP document is about 4Mb to download.

Riveting reading.

This particular NRSS AP is the best I have seen. There is evidence of
open minds and thoughtful inquiry. It is not all agreeable, but much
more reasonable.

Reason and common sense have come forward. We need to give recognition
to this, encourage it, give praise to the NRSS Panel members.

I am pleased that common sense has prevailed and the silly proposal has
finally been dropped.

Guy Stanford
MCC of NSW

 

WooHoo!

If Shane's brain ever returns from it's cabbage-like state he'll be very
disappointed.

 

But on Page 28 they say
"Enhance speed limit enforcement through legislative or
regulatory change to require clear identifi cation of all motor
vehicles (front and rear number plates or other identifi cation
technology)."

And they refer to the study from the Uni in SA that states 5km/hr over
the limit doubles the crash risk, wasn't this paper found wanting under
scrutiny?

 

why is there so much opposition to having front plates on a bike?

Kev

 

Because with a front plate, speed-cams can get them in both directions.

 

Because all motorcyclists will get speeding fines. Proof of my assertion
is that I have not seen one that doesn't speed.

 

In aus.motorcycles on Sat, 14 Oct 2006 06:48:29 +1000

Because it's not about safety. The amount of money spent on it to date
is ridiculous (and the amount spent to make it happen if they ever found
a way to do it ditto).

Now if that money had been spent on decent road safety for motorcycles
then maybe there might be an improvement.

Spend it on this excuse for road safety and there are two results -
one is that the money is wasted and the other is that the idea that
road safety is about speed is reinforced.

Sure, speed can be a factor. But it's not the only factor and with
all the increased enforcement of same the result has been no
measurable improvement that can be shown to be caused by the
enforcement rather than by the other initiatives. (And the other
initiatives can be shown to have an effect by the changes in crash
type and timing.)

After all, as far as motorcycles are concerned the big killers are
car drivers not keeping due lookout, and the speeds of the majority of
such cases are under the urban speed limit.

Zebee
- leaving the crosspost in, but won't in future.

 

Because they were removed due to safety concerns some 25 years ago.

Motorcycles are not currently designed to accommodate them.

The cost to retrofit all motorcycles with front plates outweighs the
benefits available.

Many motorcycles can not be fitted with plates safely.

Traffic enforcement authorities can easily aim cameras at the rear of
vehicles to avoid the "need" for front plates.

No other country in the world uses them and therefore requiring them in the
future would require special models of bikes for Australia only
significantly increasing the cost of Australian spec motorcycles.

Boxer

 

Well if it were on my front guard it would have to be no more than 50mm
high to not have it embed into the fairing under full fork compression.

We can only guess at what the next stupid proposal will be. In the quest
for a perfection they may have to kill us all off after they find the
perfect citizen that does nothing wrong at all, then clone them.

OK that's a bit silly but consider a shock collar on all drivers that
activated when your vehicle exceeded the speed limit for any reason. It
would work and then nobody would speed but the majority of accidents
would still happen and maybe even increase when failing to overtake
safely. The roads, (better roads for Qld) being funded from speeding
fines would deteriorate even further.

Back to my motorcycle. There are very few of this make/model the road and
a picture of it would be easily recognisable. Would they be able to
supply one picture of my motorcycle avoiding a fine? If not why would I
have to deface this machine?
The system is basically corrupt because fines = money to revenue. If it
were all about road safety they would only have the points system and no
fine.

Al

 

Not all. My TT250A dirt bike would have no problems accommodating
a plate on the large front plastic area around the speedo for example.

While it might look a little weird at first, I can't really see it as
dangerous.

I'm thinking the right way of implementing it which would be ferpectly
safe and look not at all weird would be a large sticky car rego label
type thing.

Of course, correct, this just won't fit every make and model of bike.

 

Why don't they just turn all the cameras to point at the back end of a
vehicle?

 

As a car driver does a bike doing 10 to 20 over the limit really effect you?

Michael

 

Call *that* a motorcycle?

Al

 

Something along the lines of if 5km/h doubles the risk then what does 10km/h
do? Even if the progession is linear you reach some point where speed x is
guaranteed to kill you.
Also if 5km/h over doubles the risk, then by the same logic reducing it 5
km/h will be safer, therefore we should reduce all limits. Except that what
ever you reduce it to, another 5km/h will be safer again. The logical
conclusion being that only zero km/h is safe.
Except that the reality is that some people still die while not moving, and
others don't die while moving very quickly. So the whole argument is bunk.

 

No, it just means we have to interupt our already expedient journey for 5
seconds whenever a forward facing camera is on the road. Why bother with the
effort and expense when it won't really change anything.

 

Because the Governemnt picks and chooses its definition of 'speed' and
'speeding' when it suits.
Driving/riding over the limit, and driving/riding to fast for the conditions
are two entirely seperate concepts. However the govt bundles both into the
word speeding, and thinks that using camera to stop the first type of
speeding will somehow prevent the second type.
As long as this menatliy is maintained, road safety will always be an issue.

 

My ducat Monster has no front faring of any sort just a headlight, the front
guard being carbon fibre will not support a mounting bracket.

Boxer

 

No. See 'tongue-in-cheek' smiley above.

 

Bullshit. They don't think that speeding will prevent dangerous driving
or riding at all. They know plenty of sheep will vote for them if
they're seen to be doing something about road safety, regardless of the
impact of speeding fines on the road toll.

 

thats a subject that cuts right to the bone