Riders are urged to take part in a major survey on attitudes to road safety strategies which has so far only received responses from four motorcyclists.
Dr João Canoquena of the University of Notre Dame Australia, says the final round of the survey now requires rider support to help balance the outcomes.
“There were only four people in the survey who nominated motorbike as the main means of transport to work, place of leisure or education,” João says.
“This small number limits the sorts of analyses one can conduct. I would like to have more motorcyclists in the sample.
“If this is so, I can then look at how the motorcyclists have answered the questions; what their thoughts are about the strategies I will be including such as RBT. I might also include wire barriers as I know they have caused some trouble to motorcyclists.
“If (riders) know of any other road safety strategies which have been controversial, please, let me know. I am working on the next version of the survey. It is not finalised yet. So, any suggestions are welcome.”
His project started with a pilot survey, following the analysis of 544 written public submissions to the former Australian Transport Council.
“The point the study seems to be making is that there are sentiments in the community that do not seem to be picked up by policy design,” he says.
“Those in charge of policy design do not seem to be aware that the negativity in the community has a wide range of nuances.
“It is not about people supporting or not a strategy. There is a wide range of emotions associated with some strategies, which may include disbelief, refutation, dissent etc.
“There are those who are not happy or resent certain policies, but will always be rather passive. There are others, however, who are starting to refuse certain policies. They will grow more disenchanted unless there is some sort of redress.”
A Brisbane magistrate has found a rider guilty of speeding, despite video evidence seeming to show he was the only one of four riders travelling together who was not speeding.
Steve, whose surname has been withheld, says the Pine Rivers Magistrate took more than three hours to view the video evidence, but declared he could not see the second rider, thinking he was just a bunch of leaves.
The Magistrate also said he could not discern the differences between the bikes, despite them being substantially different styles.
“No matter how many times we zoomed in and screened it, he said ‘I don’t see any evidence of a bike there’,” Steve says.
“My legal team was prepared for every argument, but not for the judge not seeing my bike. He thought I was a bunch of leaves.”
Police video
Steve sent us the police video which seems to show that he was the second rider travelling about 60km/h in a 60km/h zone.
The video was also referenced in our article last week about how police fine riders speeding in groups. Click here for our article.
The four friends were riding on Mt Glorious Rd heading east toward Samford village when police officer Senior Constable John Wilkins passed them in the opposite direction in a patrol car.
The video was subpoenaed from a police body camera.
It shows the varying speeds of each rider.
The officer then does a u-turn over solid double white lines and chases them down at speeds up to 130km/h, stopping only the first three riders. The fourth rider continues past.
Police pass rider 4 who was not stopped
The video shows the first rider at about 76km/h, then Steve at about 60 and rider three at 80km/h. The fourth rider is only seen after the u-turn.
However, it is difficult to know at what point the radar picks up the rider’s speed.
After the first rider goes past, the speed quickly drops to about 60km/h, but as Steve (rider 2) passes the car, the speed jumps up to 75km/h.
Steve believes that is the speed of rider 3 as it does not change even after he passes the car.
Steve claims he was booked for the third rider’s speed.
Speeding fine ‘mistakes’
He also says Wilkins made several other mistakes, apart from letting the fourth rider go.
“He wrote out all three tickets for the same speed; 76kmh in a 60kmh zone but then made a mistake with the third ticket which had a time 10 minutes later than the first two and has documented rider 2 travelling at 80km/h,” Steve says.
“The body camera is actually dated the day before at 10pm. How many mistakes are they going to allow?”
Steve says Wilkins mistakenly told the court rider 2 was doing 80km/h and the third rider was doing 79km/h. However, there is no evidence of another motorcycle after the one doing 80km/h and before the u-turn.
Also Wilkins is seen to be apparently turning off the radar antenna locking the display at 79km/h.
Steve has spent more than $5000 to reach the unsatisfying verdict.
He has now started a GoFundMe campaign to support his campaign to “expose the truth” and says he would do it again for the sake of justice.
Now you’ve seen the video, was rider 2 been correctly accused of speeding at 80km/h and is any rider guilty of speeding at 80km/h? Leave your comments below.
Riders who believe there is safety in numbers may be in for a shock when the whole group is pulled over by police and fined for speeding.
The issue was brought to our attention when three of a group of four Brisbane riders were recently pulled over and fined for speeding.
One of the riders decided to challenge the finebecause he believed he was not doing the same speed as the others.
His lawyer advised him “a group of motorcyclist travelling together can be reasonably considered as all travelling at the same speed, therefore the police only need to confirm one was speeding to be able to apply the same ticket to the rest of the group”.
The rider’s challenge was unsuccessful in Magistrates Court this week.
Queensland Police officer Senior Constable John Wilkins used an in-car radar to record the speed of three of the riders as they approached in the opposite direction to which he was travelling. He missed the fourth rider.
To back up his observations of each rider’s speed, he used a bodycam to record the vision of the riders and a partial view of their speed on the dashboard-mounted radar unit.
Proving the speeds of several riders in a group seems impossible, yet the Magistrate in this case accepted the police evidence.
The defendant, who has already spent $5500 on the matter, plans to take it further.
No safety in numbers
Many riders may have similar stories of numbers of riders copping the same speeding fine while others may have examples of only one rider being pulled out of a group for speeding.
Both scenarios seem unfair and unjust.
Except for fixed speed cameras, which can pick up individual number plates to issue fines, there does not appear to be any mobile equipment that can do the same.
In this case, the officer backs up his evidence with bodycam video.
We asked police in each state about their operations and policy.
Only Victoria, Queensland and South Australia replied, while the others refused to comment on operational procedures or “hypothetical situations”.
Victorian Police say that “under the right circumstances it is possible for police to intercept and issue speeding infringements to a large group of motorcyclists”.
However, they won’t say what those “right circumstances” are.
It seems police are simply willing to fine group riders and accept the chance that it may be challenged in court.
Police replies
Here are the replies from Queensland and SAPOL:
Queensland Police utilise multiple types of speed detection devices that are capable of accurately detecting motorists exceeding the speed limit. Police remind all road users to drive safely and not exceed the speed limit. A handheld laser speed detection device will enable accurate targeting of an individual vehicle travelling in a group of vehicles. A mobile radar will not allow the individual targeting of a vehicle travelling in a group of vehicles, however it does have a feature that will allow the device to display both the strongest signal returned and the fastest vehicle detected. With regards to both types of devices, it is incumbent upon the operator to make visual observations as part of a valid tracking history to confirm the speed detected is accurate. The observations of the officer are vital in supporting any prosecution.
SAPOL uses both hand-held laser and vehicle mounted radar devices to detect speeds, along with officers observations of vehicles. A laser devicecould be used to detect speed of a motor cycle rider in a group.The detection could be used to prove that other persons in the group were exceeding the speed limit, if they were observed by police as travelling parallel to each other.”
Most motorists hate covert speed detection by police, yet they seem to be finding more and more sneaky ways to cover themselves while operation radar units and speed cameras.
Gold Coast rider Gary Lynn confronted the cop photographed in the bushes above on the Nerang-Murwillumbah Rd last Sunday.
“Don’t they realise their presence on the roads will do more than hiding in bushes?” he asks.
“It’s blatant revenue-raising at its finest.”
Both sentiments are shared by many motorcyclists and drivers in multiple opinion polls.
Even the Queensland Police Union says unmarked and covert speed cameras should be banned as they do nothing more than raise government revenue.
We ask: “How would the officer in the bushes feel if he clocked a speeding rider on his hand-held TruCAM laser digital camera and the rider crashed and died further down he road?”
And how would the rider’s widow feel when she received the offence notice in the post a few days later knowing a police officer could have pulled over her speeding husband and saved his life?
It was followed by another post showing what a rider thought was a car parked in a private property with the boot up and a speed camera located inside. It could not be verified as a covert police camera.
Is covert detection legal?
Well, yes and no. It depends on the state and how the speed detection equipment is deployed.
We asked police in every state for their policies on covert speed detection and most replied.
Victoria Police say mobile speed cameras are “not deployed in a concealed way”, but didn’t answer questions about handheld devices and cops hiding in bushes.
South Australia Police say they make “no apologies about using covert, camouflaged cameras to detect dangerous road behaviour”.
WA Police basically told us it was none of our business: “We use various tools to assist in our traffic enforcement capabilities. We will not be providing details of specific tools or methodologies.”
NSW Police say they “use a range of enforcement strategies to assist in reducing road trauma”. But, like the WA cops, they say it’s none of our business.
“For operational reasons it would be inappropriate to discuss the guidelines surrounding these strategies. If riders and drivers observe the speed limits then they have nothing to be concerned about,” they say.
Queensland Police using covert TruCAM laser speed camera
Yet the Queensland police website clearly states: “It is not the policy of the Queensland Police Service to deliberately conceal speed cameras.”
Dissenting views
It’s not just motorists who don’t like covert speed detection devices.
Queensland Police Union president Ian Leavers says these “sneaky” devices do not reduce the road toll nor stop motorists from speeding.
“Getting a ticket in the mail up to a month after speeding when you can barely remember even where you were back then, has no effect and is quite rightly cynically viewed as revenue raising,” he said.
RACQ technical and safety policy spokesman Steve Spalding says they also prefer a visible police presence.
“Our members have repeatedly told us that over the years, they much prefer to see a police officer use a marked vehicle, not just for speeding, but for all of the other problem behaviours that we see on the road,” he says.
MUARC report
However, motorists, police unions and motoring groups are fighting a losing battle against covert speed detection.
Mobile speed cameras were originally introduced to reduce speed at black spots. NSW still has very prominently signed fixed and mobile speed cameras, Western Australia is now trialling more visible speed cameras and England is going all-out to make the cameras much more visible.
However, Queensland has removed the signs warning of mobile speed cameras and a report by Queensland’s auditor-general found they are not always deployed at the right time, in the right location, or in the “right mode” (not covert enough).
The report says only 16.3% of mobile deployment hours is covert because police want to avoid perceptions of revenue-raising.
It recommends that a high percentage of covert deployment would prompt a general deterrence to speeding.
Professor Cameron agrees: ”… if you’re trying to affect speeding all the time then the best idea is to make sure the cameras aren’t predictable or apparent and to operate them covertly,” the professor says. “The idea of being conspicuous is really in the wrong direction.”
Passing lanes make motorists safer with many speeding up to 125km/h to safely pass, yet police continue to set up speed traps in these safe sections of road.
Austroads has published a report that found passing lanes have many safety benefits, including perceived safety by motorists, safer operational conditions, and historical crash reductions.
That’s despite the fact that their research shows 85% of motorists break the speed limit to pass vehicles.
So why the speed traps in these lanes? Probably because police know they can “nab” a good quota of speeders.
Such a disingenuous practice penalises motorists who are actually being safe.
It’s not that motorists are speeding through these sections so they can continue to speed and represent a danger on the road.
In fact, the research shows the zones before and after overtaking lanes are made safer by the presence of these lanes.
Crash rates around passing lanes:
18.9% reduction in injury crashes in the passing lane;
10.% reduction 5km after the lane; and
17.6% reduction up to 2km before;
The last figure may be due to the presence of signage advising a passing lane is ahead.
In Australia, these signs are placed 3km before the overtaking lane, while in New Zealand they are 2km ahead.
Passing lane woes
We would also like to see trucks and vehicles towing trailers and caravans prevented from overtaking in these lanes unless there are no following vehicles.
Problems arise when trucks take the entire length of a passing lane to overtake another truck.
That can leave a trail of frustrated and annoyed motorists unable to pass the first truck which could lead to dangerous overtaking manoeuvres.
It’s not just trucks that cause problems, but motorists who try to pass but stay within the speed limit.
Slow vehicle overtaking
That’s because they are concerned police will have a speed trap in the lane.
If there were a requirement for vehicles in the “slow lane” to reduce their speed by 10km/h or an allowance for overtaking motorists to momentarily speed — as is already happening by 85% of users — more vehicles could pass.
That would lead to reduced risk-taking and road rage.
There are fines for this sort of behaviour. In Queensland, motorists can cop a $76 fine and two demerit points for driving in the right lane without overtaking in areas with 90km/h or higher speed limits, including passing lanes.
A rider is challenging a speeding fine he says is impossible because it claims he was doing 150% of the posted speed when he was riding uphill around a corner towing an 80kg trailer.
Gerard Chee, 61, of Bribie Island, says he can’t remember the last time he copped a speeding fine.
The incident was caught on a covert fixed speed camera on November 11, 2018, on the uphill section of Mt Mee north of the lookout.
Unlike many speed-alert apps and GPS devices, the new Australian Speedo Minder Pro app alerts riders when they are over the posted speed limit and until they slow down.
It also has a lot more adjustment to suit your needs.
App developer Steve Grealy, 60, of Adelaide says it took “nearly four years, quite a few thousands of dollars and even more thousands of hours work” to create Speedo Minder Pro.
It is now available on the Apple App Store and we have been trialling it with success for several weeks.
“The app integrates HERE.com mapping information for speed limits in 89 countries, plus more than 172,000 speed camera locations around the world,” says the firefighter and veteran rider.
“Speedo Minder Pro will be the best copilot a driver or rider could ever need or want to stay under the radar and avoid costly speeding fines.”
How Speedo Minder works
The app provides visual and audible alerts through your bluetooth intercom when you go over the speed limit.
There are similar alerts on many satnavs, but this app continues to alert you until you slow down and allows a lot more adjustment.
For example, you can select at what speed over the limit the alert activates and how frequently it beeps until you return within your set limit.
In fact, you can set a low-level warning for 0-5km/h (or mph) over and a high-level warning for 5-10km/h over.
If the beeps become annoying such as in a shopping centre carpark where the limit is 10km/h, you can mute the app for 30 seconds by tapping the Speed Limit circle or simply tapping the screen twice.
When your ride is finished, the app will automatically shut down after five minutes of being motionless or if you manually turn off the app or simply hit the phone’s lock button. This will also turn off the Location Services for the app.
Steve is also working on an Android version and one for the Apple watch which will deliver “Haptic” alerts or vibrations.
Steve says he developed the app because of the possibility of accidentally speeding and being caught.
“Driving a 22 tonne Fire Appliance under lights and sirens is even more exciting than riding a bike through the hills,” he says.
Steve points out that South Australia has the highest speeding fines in the country, and in recent years stopped signposting speed cameras, increased the number of fixed cameras and reduced over-speed tolerances.
In 2016-17, the state raised $144m in traffic infringements.
“Officially I adhere to the road safety line rather than the speed camera bashing, revenue raising whinging. However, with road use habits formed of bike riding and fire truck driving, I’d usually find myself driving towards the top end of the speed limits.
“About five years ago I got myself a GPS speedometer app and realised I was creeping over the limit all the time.
“The combination of all of the above resulted in me wanting to develop a driver’s co-pilot app that not only warned me when I was over the limit but one that would repeat that warning until I slowed down, which was something no GPS unit nor driver’s app provided.”
