| Member |
 Discussion Topic  |
|
aidanspa
 Advanced Member
1165 Posts
[Mentor]
Omaha, NE
USA
Harley-Davidson
Heritage Softail
|
 Posted - 12/11/2008 : 4:11 PM
|
The pilot portion of the MFS/MIC funded Motorcycle Crash Causation Study kicked off at various locations throughout Los Angeles on Monday. This story appeared December 10, 2008 in the LA Times blog.
MFS has contributed $2.8 million and MIC $200,000 so total MFS/MIC $3 million. The "federal government" is providing another $2 million.
This press release by MFS appeared Aug 14, 2008, and in it Busche calls for the study to begin as soon as possible.
The Motorcycle Crash Causation Study is being hailed as the first major crash causation study in 30 years, following the Hurt study in 1981.
Apparantly, the goal will be to collect reams of data from hundreds of crashes, and then "reverse engineer" to try and establish the causes, etc. The results aren't expected until 2013.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
biocoach
Senior Member
259 Posts
Falls Church, Va
USA
GAS GAS
280
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 4:28 PM
|
| MSF maybe? |
 |
|
|
tmonroe
Advanced Member
691 Posts
[Mentor]
Seattle, WA
USA
Kawasaki
ZX-10R
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 4:36 PM
|
quote:
The data will be compiled from LAPD accident reports and information recorded by the mechanical sensors and cameras already in place at the intersections earmarked for the study.
I will probably get accused of being a conspiracy theorist, but we've had the results of accident reports collected by police departments for years. I'd like to see a traffic accident study that is completely independent of any police organization. I harbor nothing but respect for police officers, but I can't help thinking that there may be some prejudice in police accident reporting. Collectively, I think this might be coloring our understanding of motorcycle crashes in general, and could effect our ability to understand the underlying causes.
I do like the idea of mechanical sensors and cameras. I do hope though that the raw information will be made available to the public alongside of the conclusions.
|
|
|
|
gymnast
Moderator
2211 Posts
[Mentor]
Meridian, Idaho
USA
Harley-Davidson
Sportster Sport
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 4:36 PM
|
My overall impression of the "study" is that they are going to spend a lot of money, collect a bunch of "stuff", throw it up against the wall, and see what sticks.
Without clearly stated research questions, a research design that is demonstrably reliable and valid, clearly stated protocols for the collection and analysis of the data, and several other considerations, the "study" is just another MSF-MIC press press release. I find it curious that the NHTSA is not prominently mentioned as the "initiator" of this "study" as well as being the party having overall responsibility and authority for getting this circus on the road as well as paying for for it. |
|
|
|
aidanspa
Advanced Member
1165 Posts
[Mentor]
Omaha, NE
USA
Harley-Davidson
Heritage Softail
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 4:55 PM
|
It occurred to me that since the Hurt report was the result of analyzing 900 motorcycle crashes and 3,600 motorcycle traffic accident reports in the LA area, I'm wondering how the results of this study (that we're helping to pay for) are going to differ in any meaningful way other than demographics. There are more older riders now, more riders that are professionals/white collar, there are more women riders, more riders with formal rider training, and more wearing helmets & carrying insurance, etc.
It seems to me that motorcycle riders today (on the whole) are no better educated in motorcycle safety than they were in 1981. MSF BRC teaches basic riding skills, but not safety skills. Riders are crashing and dying for the same reasons they were in 1981.
How is this new study going to positively affect the safety of motorcycle riders in 2013, when for the last 30 years since the Hurt report, the percentage of motorcycle crashes/fatalities have continued on an upward trend?
|
|
|
|
dhalen32
Moderator
547 Posts
[Mentor]
Omaha, NE
USA
Yamaha
FJR 1300
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 4:58 PM
|
Gymnast:
Isn't this the NHTSA study contract that was awarded without funding to a university in Oklahoma a few years ago? I thought it was hailed as a modern day "Hurt report". Or is it something else?
Dave
|
|
|
|
Axiom2000
Moderator
527 Posts
[Mentor]
Georgetown, Delaware
USA
BMW
R1200RT/ R1200C
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 5:07 PM
|
quote:
My overall impression of the "study" is that they are going to spend a lot of money, collect a bunch of "stuff", throw it up against the wall, and see what sticks.
Without clearly stated research questions, a research design that is demonstrably reliable and valid, clearly stated protocols for the collection and analysis of the data, and several other considerations, the "study" is just another MSF-MIC press press release. I find it curious that the NHTSA is not prominently mentioned as the "initiator" of this "study" as well as being the party having overall responsibility and authority for getting this circus on the road as well as paying for for it
Gymnast,
I was under the impression the study was to be done by the Oklahoma Transportation Center. A review of their web site would lead one to believe they are a credible research organization. Are you thinking they will be influenced my the MIC-MSF in some way as to not produce a viable report?
http://www.oktc.org/OTCv3/ |
|
|
|
gymnast
Moderator
2211 Posts
[Mentor]
Meridian, Idaho
USA
Harley-Davidson
Sportster Sport
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 5:31 PM
|
quote:
Originally posted by dhalen32
Gymnast:
Isn't this the NHTSA study contract that was awarded without funding to a university in Oklahoma a few years ago? I thought it was hailed as a modern day "Hurt report". Or is it something else?
Dave
This is, I believe, the same study and that considerable NHTSA funds have been put into it already with more to come. MSF was a "Johnny come lately" to the process and appears to be using the study for public relations purposes. A more cynical (realistic?) analysis is that the MSF-MIC is trying to control the study and "buy a result". |
|
|
|
Axiom2000
Moderator
527 Posts
[Mentor]
Georgetown, Delaware
USA
BMW
R1200RT/ R1200C
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 6:13 PM
|
quote:
This is, I believe, the same study and that considerable NHTSA funds have been put into it already with more to come. MSF was a "Johnny come lately" to the process and appears to be using the study for public relations purposes. A more cynical (realistic?) analysis is that the MSF-MIC is trying to control the study and "buy a result".
How do you think they will be able to "buy a result" from what is a creditable institution? I can see them using this for public relations but I would certainly like to know how they would be able to influence the outcome. |
|
|
|
gymnast
Moderator
2211 Posts
[Mentor]
Meridian, Idaho
USA
Harley-Davidson
Sportster Sport
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 8:55 PM
|
The short answer is that, in my opinion, by putting up money for the study, they have tainted it. Either NHTSA thinks that the study is worthwhile or it doesn't. If the NHTSA requires that the industry supported MSF put up money before in order to initiate the study, the relationship should be closely examined and the reasons for the study scrutinized.
The MSF is the same organization that sued Team Oregon over the ownership of words, terms, and nomenclature that for the most part existed before the MSF did and most of which was in the public domain. Some of those terms which were not in the public domain had been part of copyright protected works prior to the existence of the MSF. I do not accept your assumption that the research is being carried out by a creditable institution as regards this study. What motorcycle safety research has the institution done in the past?
I ask these questions, not to put you on the spot, but to place them in the open. Exactly what are the research questions to be answered by this study? |
|
|
|
Axiom2000
Moderator
527 Posts
[Mentor]
Georgetown, Delaware
USA
BMW
R1200RT/ R1200C
|
Posted - 12/11/2008 : 9:44 PM
|
Gymnast,
Not feeling on the spot at all, I only ask the question because, I think it obvious to anyone interested in motorcycle safety, there is a need for up to date research on motorcycle crashes. I had hoped this work once completed would be the thought of as an updated Hurt Report.
I noticed on the web site for the Oklahoma Transportation Center, they list information about their current projects. Perhaps once that site is updated to include this study, answers to your questions about methods and qualifications will be answered.
Unfortunately, it looks like we have to wait 5 years to find out.
|
|
|
|
dhalen32
Moderator
547 Posts
[Mentor]
Omaha, NE
USA
Yamaha
FJR 1300
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 6:58 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by gymnast
quote:
Originally posted by dhalen32
Gymnast:
Isn't this the NHTSA study contract that was awarded without funding to a university in Oklahoma a few years ago? I thought it was hailed as a modern day "Hurt report". Or is it something else?
Dave
This is, I believe, the same study and that considerable NHTSA funds have been put into it already with more to come. MSF was a "Johnny come lately" to the process and appears to be using the study for public relations purposes. A more cynical (realistic?) analysis is that the MSF-MIC is trying to control the study and "buy a result".
Gymnast:
I know you are not a big fan of the MSF but I believe that when the government (NHTSA) decided to award a contract for this new crash causation study it came with strings attached. I believe that they only partially funded it and required that the study not commence until the balance of the funding was contributed by motorcyclists, manufacturers and other private sources. I'm pretty sure I was solicited by both the AMA and the MSF and in most of the major moto magazines to contribute to this effort.
Since the contract award winner does not seem to meet your standards for conducting this research who or whom do you suggest would be better equipped to do this?
Dave
|
|
|
|
gymnast
Moderator
2211 Posts
[Mentor]
Meridian, Idaho
USA
Harley-Davidson
Sportster Sport
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 9:18 AM
|
Excellent Question Dave, however without seeing a copy of the original RFP sent out by the NHTSA I have no idea of of how to answer you. If it is the AMA and the MSF who want to do the study, they should just do it without using the taxpayers money.
What is the purpose of this study? What are the research questions? Why was the MSF and the AMA seeking your support for this "study"? Is "this study" a needed piece of scientific research or a "neat idea" because a "lot more riders are being injured and killed" and "something needs to be done?
As pointed out at the top by aidanspa, $5,000,000 is the current funding for this study to "collect reams of data" from "hundreds of crashes" and "reverse engineer" the data to "establish the causes".
Is this a serious undertaking? Or a very expensive, half baked, PR stunt?
|
|
|
|
dhalen32
Moderator
547 Posts
[Mentor]
Omaha, NE
USA
Yamaha
FJR 1300
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 10:10 AM
|
quote:
Originally posted by gymnast
Excellent Question Dave, however without seeing a copy of the original RFP sent out by the NHTSA I have no idea of of how to answer you. If it is the AMA and the MSF who want to do the study, they should just do it without using the taxpayers money.
What is the purpose of this study? What are the research questions? Why was the MSF and the AMA seeking your support for this "study"? Is "this study" a needed piece of scientific research or a "neat idea" because a "lot more riders are being injured and killed" and "something needs to be done?
As pointed out at the top by aidanspa, $5,000,000 is the current funding for this study to "collect reams of data" from "hundreds of crashes" and "reverse engineer" the data to "establish the causes".
Is this a serious undertaking? Or a very expensive, half baked, PR stunt?
Gymnast:
I am quoting from memory here on the timeline but I first started reading about a call for "new Hurt study" in the motorcycling magazines that I read. The reasoning was that the origianl was done so long ago that it was believed to be not as representative of the current situation due to increased traffic density, bike design, tire quality, etc.
Then I read that the government had announced that it was seeking bids to do a new study. After some time it was announced that the study had been awarded to a university in Oklahoma that specializes in traffic safety. However, it was only 50% taxpayer funded and that private funding would be required or the project would not even be started. It was a "pre-condition" that had to be met before commencing the study. The talking heads questioned "why Oklahoma?" in addition to the unusual funding condition.
Some time passed and then the MSF announced, late last year or early this year, that they woould provide the additional funding in order to get the study going. In total, I'm thinking that I have been reading about this for the past 3 - 4 years.
I have never read that the AMA nor the MSF have been pushing for the study. I recognize that both organizations could have pushed NHTSA, via their lobbying arms, to commission the study however.
I'm also under the impression that the study is to be conducted using the same methodology as Dr. Hurt and his team used out in Southern California 30 years ago. What started this thread sounds like some sort of preliminary activity. That's why I asked my original question about whether this was the "new Hurt study".
I'm not quite as suspicious as you so I'm looking forward to an updated Hurt report and don't have a problem with the project's genesis nor it's funding source. Particularly since the funding sources have been disclosed up front. As you know I'm not a "Moonie". :o)
Dave
|
|
|
|
aidanspa
Advanced Member
1165 Posts
[Mentor]
Omaha, NE
USA
Harley-Davidson
Heritage Softail
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 10:24 AM
|
I'm enjoying the input on this thread. Would any or all of you mind responding to my post of 12/11/2008 : 4:55 PM? I'm wondering what new data could possibly be gathered in this study that wasn't part of the Hurt study regarding crash causation.
The demographics will certainly be different, but are motorcyclists crashing and dying for any different reasons now than they were 27 years ago?
If the answer is "no", then what good was the Hurt report in helping to make motorcycling safer? And what good will this report be for improving safety after 2013? |
|
|
|
gymnast
Moderator
2211 Posts
[Mentor]
Meridian, Idaho
USA
Harley-Davidson
Sportster Sport
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 11:05 AM
|
This "New Hurt Study" is one of the 80 or so recommendations to come out of the "NAMS" study (National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety) that resulted from collaboration of NHTSA and MSF. I attended the Phoenix NAMS session which I found to be a cross between a "dog and pony show", "a convention of non qualified so called experts with a self interested agenda" and "a small group of people who actually had their act together". I had seen similar meetings thirty odd years before, one of the outcomes the outcome of which was the founding of the MSF.
Perhaps someone could post a link to the recommendations made in the NAMS study. I was the guy at the Phoenix NAMS meeting that made a pitch (during an open session) for some study and rider training development related to riding with a passenger and braking considerations when carrying a passenger in particular.
A general take on the most common agenda of the most vocal agenda driven participants can be summarized as "Anything is better than mandatory helmet use" and "MSF based initial rider training is the answer to the "problem". There seemed to be a general lack of knowledge of the historical progression of motorcycle safety efforts in the USA among almost all of the participants ("Official" and observer alike), and perhaps they thought they were inventing a "new wheel" |
|
|
|
Axiom2000
Moderator
527 Posts
[Mentor]
Georgetown, Delaware
USA
BMW
R1200RT/ R1200C
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 11:07 AM
|
Aidanspa,
I don't think the study in and of itself will do anything to reduce crashes. It is what learned people will do with the information that can make a difference. I don't think the new study will reflect any new or radically different information from the Hurt report, but who knows. The Hurt study is outdated, people were not being maimed or killed in the numbers we see today when the Hurt Report was issued.
Perhaps responsible people motivated to make necessary changes will use this new data and make a difference. We can only hope.
I have always believed you can't manage anything you can't measure hopefully this will be the yardstick by which meaningful changes can occur
Are you suggesting the study is a waste of time and $? If so and if nothing is ever done with the information other than interesting reading material, unfortunately you may be correct. |
|
|
|
aidanspa
Advanced Member
1165 Posts
[Mentor]
Omaha, NE
USA
Harley-Davidson
Heritage Softail
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 11:30 AM
|
I appreciate you guys' feedback. Disheartening & frustrating to say the least. I can only imagine what it was like to be directly involved in those meetings and to feel like there just aren't enough brick walls in the world to bang your head against.
This is the link for the NAMS recommendations summary. All NHTSA websites are currently down for scheduled maintenance, unfortunately.
This, however, is the NAMS Implementation Project website.
quote:
Welcome to the NAMS Implementation Project
If you have interest of any sort in Motorcycle Safety, then this is the place for you! This site exists for one primary purpose: to make certain the recommendations delivered by the National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety go beyond the written page. This site will serve as the Rallying Point for the many diverse individuals and entities who desire to contribute to motorcycle safety. So welcome to this gathering place where collaboration among peers is the norm!
|
|
|
|
DataDan
Junior Member
96 Posts
[Mentor]
Central Coast, CA
USA
Honda
Peer Review:
Blocked
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 11:51 AM
|
quote:
tmonroe wrote: I will probably get accused of being a conspiracy theorist, but we've had the results of accident reports collected by police departments for years. I'd like to see a traffic accident study that is completely independent of any police organization.
As aidanspa wrote, Hurt used 3600 police-generated crash reports in his study. He found that they weren't good for determining crash causes. But going through the report, I find that the police reports were cited for things like day-of-week, time, location, injury severity, age, license status, etc. IOW, a lot of data can be reliably collected that way, so the efforts of trained motorcycle investigators can be applied more productively to the crash causation and rider background investigations.
quote:
gymnast wrote: Without clearly stated research questions, a research design that is demonstrably reliable and valid, clearly stated protocols for the collection and analysis of the data, and several other considerations, the "study" is just another MSF-MIC press press release.
You imply that they aren't conducting their research professionally. Any evidence to support that? Do you regard Hurt's research as adequate in those respects? Do you have reason to believe that the OK team will be less professional?
quote:
aidanspa wrote: It seems to me that motorcycle riders today (on the whole) are no better educated in motorcycle safety than they were in 1981. MSF BRC teaches basic riding skills, but not safety skills. Riders are crashing and dying for the same reasons they were in 1981.
How is this new study going to positively affect the safety of motorcycle riders in 2013, when for the last 30 years since the Hurt report, the percentage of motorcycle crashes/fatalities have continued on an upward trend?
We don't actually know that riders are crashing and dying for the same reasons as in 1976-77 (the years crashes were investigated). There have been significant changes in bikes, riders, other vehicles, and the traffic environment in the past 30 years, so any effort to reduce motorcycle crashes and deaths would benefit from new research.
Training is much different than it was 30 years ago. In the 808 investigations of Hurt where rider training was reported, 743 were either self-taught or taught by friends and family, 20 had training from racing organizations, and 41 listed "School-Club M/C Course". Basically there was no MSF training back then, and it is now ubiquitous. For example, the fact that all licensed riders under age 21 here in California have received MSF training is a huge change.
Contrary to media reports about skyrocketing motorcycle death rate, the fatality rate per registered motorcycle is now well below its all-time highs of the '70s-'80s. (It would be nice to be able to make some statement about the rate per vehicle-mile, but the mileage estimates aren't reliable.)
quote:
gymnast wrote: MSF was a "Johnny come lately" to the process and appears to be using the study for public relations purposes. A more cynical (realistic?) analysis is that the MSF-MIC is trying to control the study and "buy a result".
Any evidence to back that up, or is it just personal prejudice? |
|
|
|
dhalen32
Moderator
547 Posts
[Mentor]
Omaha, NE
USA
Yamaha
FJR 1300
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 12:28 PM
|
Gymnast:
You said - "A general take on the most common agenda of the most vocal agenda driven participants can be summarized as "Anything is better than mandatory helmet use" and "MSF based initial rider training is the answer to the "problem". There seemed to be a general lack of knowledge of the historical progression of motorcycle safety efforts in the USA among almost all of the participants ("Official" and observer alike), and perhaps they thought they were inventing a "new wheel""
It sounds like yourself and a couple of other safety professionals were in a big room with a bunch of vocal ABATE folks! :o)
Whenever I testify in front of Nebraska's Unicameral the above statement is all I hear from my friends in ABATE. They have a done a pretty good job in morphing from A Brotherhood Against Totalitarian Enactments into American Bikers Aiming Towards Education. Their message strikes a responsive chord with most Americans who do not like being told what to do by their government. Frequently, the noise they generate drowns out more effective conversation.
Dave
|
|
|
|
gymnast
Moderator
2211 Posts
[Mentor]
Meridian, Idaho
USA
Harley-Davidson
Sportster Sport
|
Posted - 12/12/2008 : 1:44 PM
|
Data Dan,you make some good points and shine some light on part of the Hurt study methodology. I will ask you the same question about the MSF-NHTSA study that I asked earlier. What are the research questions etc? Perhaps you are privy to information that is not readily available. Your response to my query, if you know the answer, would be appreciated.
My second question is to ask, respectfully, if you have been or are connected to the study in any manner?
In response to your final question, my skepticism regarding the MSF is a product of observation of the MSF's industry and NHTSA (taxpayer) funded activities and methods since the inception of the MSF. The "Team Oregon Lawsuit" being the latest example of something causing skepticism.
Lastly, I have seen your posts regarding motorcycle crash data on various websites and forums and think that you are an asset to the motorcycle community and respect your highly knowledgeable contributions. |
|
|
|
Discussion Topic |
|
|
|
|
Most Recent Posts
|
Activity History
|
Safety Tips
Motorcycle Crash Causation Study